This is an archive of past discussions with User:Rsjaffe. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello Rsjaffe/Archives,
New Page Review queue January to March 2024
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Hello and welcome to the April 2024 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing.
Election results: In our December 2023 coordinator election, Zippybonzo stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki and Miniapolis were reelected coordinators, and Wracking was newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC).
Drive: 46 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 32 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 289 articles totaling 626,729 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: 23 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 18 claimed at least one copy-edit and between them, they copy-edited 100,293 words in 32 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 53 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive, 34 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 300 articles totaling 587,828 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 14 to 20 April. Barnstars will be awarded here.
Progress report: As of 23:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 109 requests since 1 January 20He24, and the backlog stands at 2,480 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
User:Serious Modi
Hello. I recently had issues with this user, so I was on their talk page to communicate my concerns. Well I noticed you told them of your concerns [1]. I have also notice you said, something like, they should not edit on Wikipedia until they responded to your concerns. So, I don't know if they communicated with you or not. However, they are still editing (see their contributions page). I don't if this is still a concern for you or not. Just wanted to let you know. Regards, ----Steve Quinn (talk) 17:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, Rsjaffe. Yes, I'm an official representative of Elnur Huseynov and we really want to make changes on every article that related to him. As we know Wikipedia doesn't consider itself as Tabloid or any other Yellow pages, and Elnur as a public person would like to see correct information about him on every digital platform. Currently articles about him include false information or information that is not welcomed by the person it's about. As we can see Google based its search upon Wikipedia information which is not complimenting for the artist. What do you advise in this case? Thank you! Stasreuth (talk) 22:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to the June 2024 newsletter, a quarterly-ish digest of Guild activities since April. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Wanted: new Guild coordinators! If you value and enjoy the GOCE, why not help out behind the scenes? Nominations for our mid-year coordinator election are now open until 23:59 on 15 June (UTC). Self-nominations are welcome. Voting commences at 00:01 on 16 June and continues until 23:50 on 30 June. Results will be announced at the election page.
Blitz: Nine of the fourteen editors who signed up for the April 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 55,853 words comprising twenty articles. Barnstars awarded are available here.
Drive: 58 editors signed up for our May 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive and 33 of those completed at least one copy edit. 251 articles and 475,952 words were copy edited. Barnstars awarded are here.
Progress report: As of 05:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC) , GOCE copyeditors have completed 161 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 2,779 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Benny Blanco Bio
i read that he said that he is Puerto Rican and Colombian descent somewhere and not Jewish and if he is Jewish then has he done bar mitzvah's recently or celebrates Hanukkah and is there any proof that his family is Jewish because like I said I looked into Google and it says otherwise so do your homework first before assuming that he's Jewish if that's all the proof that you have. CapCage11 (talk) 00:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Please add a reference to substantiate that. An article about him that states that, for example. Google is not a reliable source. — rsjaffe🗣️04:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
See the paragraph that was deleted in Special:Diff/1235353580 starting with “The first application…” and compare it to the first paragraph in [2]. It starts with close paraphrasing then has some blatant copies, e.g. the sentence beginning “A series of scholars—among them Said, Sayegh, Rodinson, Jabbour, Abu-Lughod and Abu-Laban, Hilal, El-Messiri, and Sayigh—have all employed the framework…” — rsjaffe🗣️18:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
then has some blatant copies, e.g. the sentence beginning “A series of scholars—among them Said, Sayegh, Rodinson, Jabbour, Abu-Lughod and Abu-Laban, Hilal, El-Messiri, and Sayigh—have all employed the framework…”
this sentence was in the note not the main text, and is supposed to be quoting from the source, does that count as copyvio ? Stephan rostie (talk) 18:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Information icon Hello, I'm Rsjaffe. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Ravinder Kumar seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:22, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
You deleted my article about 'Ravinder Kumar.' There wasn't any article there before, just some internal links that I was keeping. You deleted that as well. Please restore it as it was. I want to reach people with the best quality. The article I am writing is about a social worker who I have seen helping people. Shouldn't we write about such people? RivRAVINDER (talk) 06:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
You hijacked a preexisting disambiguation page. If the person you’re writing about meets the notability requirement, you can start writing a new article. See the notice I left about hijacking articles for more info. — rsjaffe🗣️11:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Requesting authorization to update the Lally School Wikipedia page
You have a conflict of interest but are not a paid editor, given your position at the school. You can edit the page directly but you must follow the WP:NPOV policy and need to have appropriate sources for your edits, which generally have to be third-party independent sources, not the school’s own writing. See WP:PRIMARY for rules about using the school’s own website as a source. — rsjaffe🗣️06:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
hello, I am wondering why you deleted my recent updates to the page. I am the founder of Dock Street. The information I added and corrected is factually correct and only effected the period during which I was active. Jdwareone (talk) 20:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
I understand, but I am the primary source of much of the information - this was my life and work I am referencing. I'm not sure how I can document a fact such as where we bought a piece of brewing equipment almost 35 years ago. This was all pre-internet days. I am aware of the conflict of interest policy, but again, I was the founder and president of the company from 1985 intil it was sold in 1998. I am also the person who reacquired it in 2000 before giving it to the current owner. Jdwareone (talk) 23:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia strongly limits the use of primary sources. See WP:PRIMARY. In particular, Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material. — rsjaffe🗣️23:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
I have done a careful revision and have found sources to cite. I have not attempted to publish it yet. In a few cases, I would also be deleting current citations and replacing them with older citations that are more accurate or complete. Is this OK? I will also be adding new citations. Jdwareone (talk) 22:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Yes, it would. Thanks for the effort in updating the article. I know what we require is difficult, particularly for those who have first-hand experience in the topic, but it is how we maintain the accuracy and integrity of the encyclopedia. As an involved person, it's easy to not write in a neutral point of view. Be careful that you don't include judgemental language (positive or negative). I find that scrutinizing and/or minimizing adjectives and adverbs helps greatly in that effort. I'll try to review it after it is written and address any issues I see.— rsjaffe🗣️22:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed Mox Eden to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as Lead Coordinator, and Miniapolis and Wracking returned as assistant coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here.
Blitz: 13 of the 24 editors who signed up for the June 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 169,404 words comprising 41 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 38 of the 59 editors who signed up for the July 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 482,133 words comprising 293 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: 10 of the 15 editors who signed up for the August 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 71,294 words comprising 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive:Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive.
Progress report: As of 05:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 233 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,824 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hi @Rsjaffe, I added a publication section on Niall J. English's page. I might have accidently removed something, I am sorry about that. Also, I wanted to ask someone, does publications require citations as well? I believe I have seen a fair amount of academics' pages, and a lot of them don't have citations to their publication. Also, can I add it again, if there is no issue with adding the section? Kindly, guide me in this regard. Thanks. Tac91 (talk) 23:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Generally don’t need citations for publications as it’s easy enough to confirm without a citation. Yes, I deleted your edit because it deleted another section that should have remained. I would only put in notable publications. I don’t know if there’s any rule about publications list in a biography, but I definitely would avoid adding a lot of them. — rsjaffe🗣️23:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Just saw your edits. Each publication should at least include the journal, issue and pages, and probably best to include author list. In short, should look like references in a scientific publication. — rsjaffe🗣️01:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Could you please stop removing my entry, do you have a bias?
necrophilia is described as having a sexual fascination with corpses. The quote I provided says he wants to "f**k her dead body". His fascination to write this is quite famous now and a part of history. If you read other content in the necrophilia sections this belongs here by definition Unless you have a heavy bias towards this celebrity and don't think necrophilia of women is necrophilia, could you stop removing my entry. Injusticewtf (talk) 19:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Injusticewtf, I only removed it the first time and requested you add a reference, since that is a controversial issue regarding a living person (see WP:BLP). Any removals after that were done by other editors, and I suggest you discuss this with them. Also, please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Stating Unless you have a heavy bias towards this celebrity and don't think necrophilia of women is necrophilia is highly inappropriate. People are probably concerned about the WP:BLP policy, which sets a high standard for stating negative things about living people. Please discuss the deletions with them, collegially.
Thank you for choosing to run in the October 2024 administrator elections. This bulletin contains some important information about the next stages of the election process.
We are currently in the SecurePoll setup phase. Your candidate subpage will remain closed to questions and discussion. However, this is an excellent opportunity for you to recruit nominators (if you want them) and have them place their nomination statements, and a good time for you to answer the standard three questions, if you have not done so already. We recommend you spend the SecurePoll setup phase from October 15–21 getting your candidate page polished and ready for the next phase.
The discussion phase will take place from October 22–24. Your candidate subpage will open to the public and they will be permitted to discuss you and ask you formal questions, in the same style as a request for adminship (RfA). Please make sure you are around on those dates to answer the formal questions in a timely manner.
On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. Anyone can see who has voted, but not who they voted for. You are permitted and encouraged to vote in the election, including voting for yourself. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see your tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RfA.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, you must have received at least 70% support, calculated as support ÷ (support + oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("'crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation as a candidate, and best of luck.
You're receiving this message because you are a candidate in the October 2024 administrator elections.
Hello there. As we're preparing to move from one stage to the next, this is just a quick note from one member of the test group to another, wishing you well in the process of this new alternative to RfA. It seems that there are more of us in this group than some in the community anticipated, so i hope that doesn't make the experience any the worse for all of us. Whatever our individual results, i thank you, along with the rest, for stepping up and testing this process; happy days, ~ LindsayHello07:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in a research
Hello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
SilverLocust has passed the baton to me and, after a few moments of enjoyment, I am passing it on to you! Congrats on winning your election and make sure to pass a baton on to the next admin once you're done! Sincerely, ThadeusOfNazereth :)
Shiny new tools might be used to mete out justice, mercy or a dose of reality. Let us commit to not losing our cool when using them. Our only armor is the entire community's trust. We wear it for each other, each new contributor, and each new generation to come. May you ever be the community's champion. BusterD (talk) 14:18, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Please in the future don't do such single-handed deletions without notifying the page editors. It was wikilinked, hence there was some purpose. A typo in the title must be handled more cleverly. People make typos all the time.
I didn't delete any content. I should, however, have fixed the spelling on any incoming links to point to the correct one. Was this an incoming link? — rsjaffe🗣️01:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
When you are deleting a page, you have to fix the links that you have broken. It is good that only one page was affected. But what if you delete a page that links to a dozen of other ones? Now can people possibly know what was correct title? They will probably get rid of the redlink and the information is lost. --Altenmann>talk01:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Sophie1043 has reintroduced the copyright violation on Jay Hopson. They seem to be a single-purpose account; there's an entirely separate issue with them edit-warring to reinsert non-neutral language and they're never used a talk page. I'm involved or I'd consider a block. Mackensen(talk)02:23, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Blocked and rev-del'd. I also think there's some competence issue as they keep on reintroducing the old rev-del request template in their edits. — rsjaffe🗣️02:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, much appreciated. It's not the last college football coach article that I'd expect that kind of behavior, but pretty close. Mackensen(talk)03:01, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm shocked at how few people passed the 70% support level. There's a number of those who didn't pass who would make fine admins, in my opinion. Be interested in some retrospective analysis of this new process. — rsjaffe🗣️21:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
congrats! Yeah, the outcome was kind of unexpected, but I'm just glad that my vote didn't go to waste with you. —usernamekiran (talk)22:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! That was my primary goal in becoming an admin, improving responsiveness. I wish all the copyright revdels were so easy. I just punted one revdel request as being way beyond my paygrade: Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Ruben_I_complex_copyvio_case.
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Ok, I’ve undeleted it. I’m trying to track down who requested deletion so they know, too, but am currently unable to do so. — rsjaffe🗣️05:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed that a recently blocked user removed their notice, is that allowed whilst it's still active? I've seen it once or twice before and thought that was a no-no? Blue-Sonnet (talk) 09:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification also, I shall endeavour to never get blocked and have the opportunity to put that into practice! Blue-Sonnet (talk) 04:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi, you declined my Wikipedia Article. Please help
I think you declined my article, I just wanted to know why?
I'm doing this article as a part of my task from my employer. It's totally a work not just a paid-to-create article.
@Ruelsky311 (talk page watcher) I just looked at the page history of the draft, and it looks like Rsjaffe just moved the draft from your userpage to a sandbox. There was no decline involved.
you deleted my page Ballinagar Gaa could you undelete the page or give me access to view a copy of the deleted page so i can see what the issues were that caused it to be deleted Budisgood (talk) 20:09, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Because it was submitted for review under articles for creation. Submitting a nonsense article was the problem. — rsjaffe🗣️05:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Testing the AfC system is not vandalism. Expecting a new user to understand that experimenting in their sandbox is not okay in specific cases is a very high bar, and that bar is still not WP:VANDALISM. CMD (talk) 05:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Ok, I see your point that it was user experimenting. I’ll put it back but remove the article submission header. Thanks. — rsjaffe🗣️05:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hello Rsjaffe, I see what you’re doing with the bit. Great job so far and thank you for volunteering. But I am questioning the block on ScifaxEditor for username policy violation. Users like OxervEditor or even WikipediaEditor11 and every other usernames that have WikipediaEditor in them were not blocked for a username policy violation. In my opinion, this is not a violation. Want to discuss? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:25, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
Sure. The person stated they were from “Scifax Technology and Publishing Private Limited” and wrote a promotional article on the company. I blocked because I interpreted the username to be a role account for the company. Was that incorrect? — rsjaffe🗣️07:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
Usernames are not allowed on Wikipedia if they only contain the names of companies, organizations, websites,… blah blah blah Emphasis mine. This username does not contain only the name of the organisation. Hence I’d consider the block incorrect. Actually, I have seen so many of these from the queue and didn’t report. For this case, the user kindly told us that they’re from Scifax, they literally disclosed it. Maybe a deletion of the promotional material they created and a warning would have sufficed, IMO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
I took that from Usernames that are solely the names of posts, positions, roles, or job titles within organizations, such as Secretary of the XYZ Foundation, are not permitted, as such posts or positions may be transferred or held by different persons at different times. is that incorrect in this case? I’ll happily unblock if I interpreted that incorrectly. — rsjaffe🗣️07:55, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
I think you did honestly, reason being the editors I mentioned above would have been blocked on this basis if that applies to this context. Also being that Editorofthewiki would have been blocked for a username policy violation. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
I wasn’t saying they should rather be blocked for promo, I was only saying if they should be blocked at all then it should be when they edit promotionally. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
Small thanks
Hey, thanks for doing the deletions on my now-unneeded userspace pages. I know it's a small thing, but wanted to let you know you are appreciated!
Hello Rsjaffe, I would like to appeal for my page back as I aim confused as to how my page has anything to do with advertising or any kind of propaganda all I mention was my artist name a bit about me and my album and some external link. if you check again you would see nothing at any point relating to advertising my music. I do not wish to go back and fourth all im kindly asking for is for you to help me un delete it and approve it please thank you. XRAYNEOFFICIAL (talk) 19:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
"Promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc.
A Wikipedia article is formed from secondary independent sources, which your article had none of. Not everyone is suitable for including in Wikipedia. A person has to be notable. See WP:GNG for a start to understanding notability.
We also strongly discourage people from writing about themselves. If you are notable enough for inclusion, someone else will know of you and write an article.
I suggest if you think you are notable, you can restart your article in your user sandbox (User:XRAYNEOFFICIAL/sandbox), using secondary sources like newspaper articles. If you are able to get something going like that, I can pick out the userbox from the deleted article and give it to you to add. The rest of the deleted article is not coming back. — rsjaffe🗣️20:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi Rsjaffe, User Moeletsi24 has added copyrighted content to said page repeatedly even after 2 warnings. Could I ask you to take a look and consider a preventative block until they respond to the talk page messages? Thanks Nobody (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Not all the bot reports are the issue - things like very long name without spaces picks up problems that we wouldn't have found otherwise. Some of the reports are actually better at identifying vandals! Secretlondon (talk) 21:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
That's what I figured. Then, yesterday, someone with a long name was indeffed for the name. I think that name was marginally trollish but not too bad. That's why I posted on this name, as I didn't want this person to get whacked for it. — rsjaffe🗣️00:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Erroneous G5s
Hi Rsjaffe. I hope adminship is suiting you well. We all wind up making a few silly mistakes early on, so please don't take this as that much of a big deal, but FYI you made five G5 deletions last month that would only have been true if I or Ookap were sockpuppets, which I assume is not what you meant to say. [3][4][5][6][7] I see how it happened: After Ookap and I tagged these five users as impostors, the LTA behind them self-tagged other userpages of theirs the same way, and then CFA tagged all of the userpages for G5, presumably not noticing that some had actually been tagged by me and Ookap. An understandable mistake, but still a reminder to be a bit more cautious, so here is a small Trout for the both of you to share. :) Could you please restore the five pages? Thanks. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 23:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
@Tamzin. Yikes! Fortunately I find trout tasty, particularly when smoked. I undeleted and reverted the CSD tags. Thanks for telling me. — rsjaffe🗣️23:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Pagal Premi, a redirect to Eskay Movies#Released, seems obviously not created in error. The initial edit was mistakenly nowiki'ed, but that had been fixed long before deletion.
Draft:Live From Nashville 1: "we don't need two identical copies" is not a valid basis for speedy deletion. There is a criterion for duplicates of existing articles, WP:A10, but it only applies to recently created articles that are not plausible redirects. Drafts that duplicate an article and are not being used for drafting can just be redirected to the article (if there isn't a need for a history merge for attribution). Additionally, this edit in the article's history indicates that the page history needs to be preserved for attribution.
Tatuus F4-T-421 is an alternative hyphenation that is in use per a Google search, and is not obviously an error. E.g., "T-421" is in two references in the article's lead (2 and 4).
Effects of Hurricane Milton in Florida was an invalid R2. A page is eligible for speedy deletion only if all its history is eligible for speedy deletion. WP:BLARing an article into a redirect to draftspace does not make it eligible for speedy deletion; instead, the republished article should be unblanked (consistent with WP:DRAFTOBJECT) and the draft merged back in for attribution. (It was draftified as "no sources" then the author republished it with a source, albeit in the form of a bare link.)
Thank you for the review. I appreciate getting feedback on my work, particularly as I am new to this.
Pagal Premi was created by a sockpuppet after the master was blocked and deleted on that criterion, not due to the error. I have added it back as a valid redirect.
Draft:Live From Nashville 1 I added back, but we're going to need to talk more about it, or I need to be referred to something that discusses this type of issue, as I'm a bit lost as to what needs to be preserved for attribution.
I deleted Line 4 (Coimbatore Metro) because the sole author blanked the page. The CSD tag was added by a second person after the page was blanked, and I deleted on the basis of the blanking. I've left that deleted, but will undelete if you still disagree.
Effects of Hurricane Milton in Florida was an odd one, and now I see the issue. Instead of moving into draftspace it was blanked and redirected to a draftspace version. This one I now understand.
The hurricane draft still needed to be merged back from draftspace into mainspace, but I've taken care of that (and will warn the user who edit-warred against the draft objection). And SilverLocust is right on Line 4: G7 only applies to a redirect-from-pagemove if the mover [was] the only substantive contributor to the page[ ] before the move. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 03:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
As to Draft:Live From Nashville 1 (where the "1" really means "draft 2"), since Myrealnamm copied and pasted a change made by Savingatlasfl from that draft to the other version (saying "see that page's history for attribution"), Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia calls for preserving the page history for attribution. (Though it's a pretty small change.)
But my more general comment is that there isn't some technical reason that additional drafts need to be deleted because they are duplicative. If no longer needed, they can be redirected indefinitely per the footnote in WP:G13 or deleted after 6 months if abandoned without redirecting. But G6 isn't an all-purpose basis for deletion that, for example, expands WP:A10 into other namespaces or expands WP:G13 to drafts that are not needed where 6 months haven't elapsed. I'd just redirect it to Live From Nashville. SilverLocust💬05:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Ah - now I see what happened with the undelete. Whew - I was trying to figure out how I might have misclicked a CSD for any reason, I'd forgotten I tagged it yesterday as part of the sock cleanup. Ravensfire (talk) 03:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
I've been doing that but must have missed one. Could you point me to the one I missed so I can refresh my memory and figure out what happened? Thanks. — rsjaffe🗣️17:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm unsure of whether issues with off-site canvassing should go to the AN or ANI, but there has been active attempts to canvass off-site to the 15.ai AfD. The AfD was posted on 4chan's /mlp/ board the day it went up. I do not know if this is something I should bring to AN or ANI or neither?
You'd only do something more if you believe action needs to be taken against a user.
The problem with reporting a User to AN/I is that it includes off-wiki information (WP:OUTING), so you cannot publicly post that information, which means that any AN/I discussion remains "hypothetical" without specific facts and doesn't normally fix the issue reported. In extraordinary situations you could think about reporting via confidential means (email) to arb committee if you think it is very serious and action needs to be taken against a Wikipedia user, but this sort of thing normally doesn't get raised to that level. — rsjaffe🗣️03:51, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Cheers, I wasn't sure whether it should or shouldn't be brought to the AN/ANI after someone had asked me to notify them if it ended up in AN/ANI over the off-site stuff, so figured I'd just ask an admin. Brocade River Poems (She/They)03:57, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
You could also ask another admin if you want. I'm pretty new at this.
But, in general, I'd focus on on-wiki behavior. And recognize that the person closing the AfD will know about the canvassing, given the notice on the page. — rsjaffe🗣️04:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm the person being accused by Brocade of being canvassed/sockpuppeted. What's conveniently interesting is that she left out the fact that the alleged 4chan post that started the off-wiki canvassing had a total of two posts on it, neither in support of keeping the article. [8] I certainly never saw this post when I decided to post my opinion, as I don't even use 4chan. I found this very link from her own talk page. Tacotron2 (talk) 04:07, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
You're not being accused of anything. I included your name in an active SPI investigation because of the timing of your return. Again, I tagged you as an SPA because a majority of your major edits were 15.ai related and 15.ai adjacent and your name is literally the technology which inspired 15.ai. This conversation has little and else to do with you and more to do with the literal proxy IP Address that commented, as well as other strange activity. Whatever happens with you is wholly up to the SPI Investigation. Secondly, it doesn't matter how many posts the thread had, it shows that someone is attempting to canvass and considering that a known multi-account abuser confessed to the existence of a Discord server filled with individuals whom they have discussed 15.ai with in the past, and who as recently as one or two weeks ago was actively abusing another new account at 15.ai to disrupt consensus building, it is beyond obvious that there is off-site disruption. This is beyond exhausting. Brocade River Poems (She/They)04:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
"This conversation has little and else to do with you" You created a literal investigation against me and got an admin to look into it. Your behavior, not just toward me, is concerning, especially with the newfound evidence I posted in that investigation page. Tacotron2 (talk) 04:21, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
To both of you: Do not litigate anything about the sockpuppet investigation here. This is counterproductive. I am only providing advice about managing canvassing during an AfD.
That discussion is already veering away from the merits of the article under review. You both have expressed your views already. That's enough for now. — rsjaffe🗣️04:42, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
The person who solicits other people inappropriately may be subject to administrative review if the behavior is severe enough. The annotation on your !vote is only there to help the closer assess the !vote, and your comments after that annotation should be sufficient to properly inform the closer. — rsjaffe🗣️04:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you no longer want this newsletter, you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist.
Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure nearly everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor to be a Guild coordinator (with their permission, of course) until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June.
Drive: In our September Backlog Elimination Drive, 67 editors signed up, 39 completed at least one copy edit, and between them they edited 682,696 words comprising 507 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: The October Copy Editing Blitz saw 16 editors sign-up, 15 of whom completed at least one copy edit. They edited 76,776 words comprising 35 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: In our November Backlog Elimination Drive, 432,320 words in 151 articles were copy edited. Of the 54 users who signed up, 33 copy edited at least one article. Barnstars awarded are posted here.
Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 15 December (UTC) and will end on 21 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 22:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 333 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,401 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.
To stop receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please don't delete move redirects as WP:G7 without checking that the moved page (the target of the redirect) was never edited by anyone else – nor without checking for incoming redirects that need to be fixed. Same issue as here. This caused every redirect to the article now at ITA Award for Best Actress Popular Drama to become broken (at which point the broken redirects tend to get deleted by another admin not checking whether they should be fixed). SilverLocust💬04:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Aargh! Thanks. Thought I had figured that issue out. I had been going very slowly on the redirects, but obviously didn’t internalize the whole message. Looks like you reverted the move that left the redirect. Is that what you did? — rsjaffe🗣️04:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
I believe you have revoked my edit to a soccer player’s page. The statement I added is a widely accepted idea in the game at the minute, with lots of sources which I can attest to. Could I kindly ask why this was noted as vandalism? Swagmaster547 (talk) 23:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
I think we've made a bit of a mess here. This user created article-like content on their userpage, which I draftified to Draft:Parasocial relationship. Then they recreated the same userpage content, which you draftified to Draft:Parasocial Relationships. Now they have also created User:Yfd456/sandbox with the same content. Three places with the same thing... I think we need to nuke two of them so that only one remains. --Drm310🍁 (talk) 20:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
I see that discussion, but I don’t see where the author responded to your question. Leaving the sandbox as is would make it easier for a novice editor to find it, so I’m reluctant to delete it (as were you) without clear instructions from them, in which case it’d be a U1 CSD. — rsjaffe🗣️21:14, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
The author changed their name (Taymallah Belkadri ---> Salah Talah).I asked whether they wanted their two pages to be deleted (Can you please elaborate on what you're asking for? Do you wish to delete these two pages you've created (this and that) or are you asking for something else?),and they responded saying they would want them deleted (The first one is correct @TheWikiToby. I wanna delete those pages.) TheWikiToby (talk) 21:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Hey, good to see you putting your shiny new mop to use. When you block proxies (including VPNs and similar), make sure you tick the box that says "block logged in users on this IP address". :) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?00:18, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi. I came across thisseries of edits where you removed a red link following R2 deletion of a redirect to an article that had been draftified. I'd like to offer a reminder that such red links should only be removed when they point to non-notable topics for which proper articles are unlikely to ever be created. Also, in navboxes, it's extremely rare, if at all, that a red linked item should simply be unlinked. Either the inclusion is appropriate, in which case it should be left as a link, or it is not, in which case the entire entry should be removed.
In this specific case, the link would have needed updating anyway, as it was later re-created as a redirect to a different topic. But I'm also raising the issue more generally. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:57, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Just because an account has been compromised does not mean you should be linking to the page that posted their password in the block summary. Primefac (talk) 09:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
I figured that, since the account would be globally locked, that the password would no longer be of any use and only show evidence for my actions. Will omit next time. Thanks. — rsjaffe🗣️15:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello Rsjaffe: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, user-Rsjaffe
Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
Hi--you just beat me to blocking it. With such user names, I don't block from the talk page but I go directly to the block function and revoke TPA, so we won't have a user talk page with that awful name (I'm going to delete that page right now). Similar with the actual edit--if you roll it back, the user name shows up in the edit summary (I'm going to revdelete that, and their user name). Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
The history of Chodes shows they've been at it before, and that revdelete has been used a number of times. I semi-protected the article. Right now I'm running some other checks--this is a returning customer. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Objection to the Speedy Deletion of the Page "الهكر العربي - Arab Hacking"
I would like to submit an objection to the nomination for the speedy deletion of the user page "الهكر العربي - Arab Hacking" according to section G11 of the speedy deletion criteria. I believe there has been a misunderstanding in this case.
The page that was created is not promotional in any way. The information included is accurate and relates to my activities and technical projects that I share in the fields of ethical hacking and cybersecurity. The page was created to document this area of knowledge and contribute to raising technical and community awareness, not for personal or commercial promotion.
The use of the name "الهكر العربي - Arab Hacking" is not intended for self-promotion or for any commercial activity, but is simply the account name I use on various platforms to represent my tech channel that provides educational content in the fields of technology and cybersecurity. I never intended to use the page for promotional purposes; rather, it aims only to present information in an encyclopedic manner regarding the activities I am involved in.
I kindly ask you to reconsider this nomination, as the content does not align with the promotional or advertising standards set by Wikipedia's policies.
Hi Rory, you recently rejected the article for the Angeliki Fund. I wanted to edit the post so that it meets the requirements. The instructions were to contact you instead of creating a new post. I would appreciate it if you can point me how to do that as there is no active link to edit the article. Thank you. Niksnakeeyes (talk) 10:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
The draft was deleted because it was promotional, not encyclopedic, so you should start over rather than revising the old draft. However, I caution you to carefully review how and why articles are written, as the Angeliki Fund may not be suitable for an article in Wikipedia.
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
