Revision as of 10:57, 31 October 2017 editYmblanter (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators269,089 edits →Please retract some statements← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:08, 31 October 2017 edit undoFram (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors247,327 edits →Please retract some statements: ReplyNext edit → | ||
Line 591: | Line 591: | ||
::::::::: No, I do not see the difference. You made an unnecessary (you can easily go on you Wikidata rant without it), false (I did check the edits before granting the bot flag, I checked them afterwards, and they were ok until the website they used changed urls and some references suddenly started to point out to the spam page) and offensive statement (which '''I read''' that I promote spam). You do not see any problems with this statement and believe it just expresses facts. After that you added another one, which I found even more offensive. Now you are adding more. Fine. I am probably not capable of acting as admin, all my admin actions must be reverted, and I am a piece of shit. I am fine with that. How many times should I tell you here that I find no pleasure and no interest discussing this issue with you? Start an ANI thread and do not forget to make a reference to this discussion, or, rather, my attempt at discussion since from your side it is a monologue.--] (]) 10:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC) | ::::::::: No, I do not see the difference. You made an unnecessary (you can easily go on you Wikidata rant without it), false (I did check the edits before granting the bot flag, I checked them afterwards, and they were ok until the website they used changed urls and some references suddenly started to point out to the spam page) and offensive statement (which '''I read''' that I promote spam). You do not see any problems with this statement and believe it just expresses facts. After that you added another one, which I found even more offensive. Now you are adding more. Fine. I am probably not capable of acting as admin, all my admin actions must be reverted, and I am a piece of shit. I am fine with that. How many times should I tell you here that I find no pleasure and no interest discussing this issue with you? Start an ANI thread and do not forget to make a reference to this discussion, or, rather, my attempt at discussion since from your side it is a monologue.--] (]) 10:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
:::::::::: After reading ], may be indeed you actions are not yet to that level. I am afraid this is the only thing I can give you.--] (]) 10:57, 31 October 2017 (UTC) | :::::::::: After reading ], may be indeed you actions are not yet to that level. I am afraid this is the only thing I can give you.--] (]) 10:57, 31 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
:::::::::::How gracious of you, "not yet at that level" of obsessive and potentially criminal actions! Anyway, no, I could not make my statement about Wikidata without refering to the bot approval. It is one thing that an editor is adding spam without anyone noticing it, it would simply show again the lack of oversight Wikidata has. It is a completely different thing when anyone can request a bot and get it approved without any indication of who they are (not as a person, but their wiki-credentials), no check of whether their source is in any way reliable, no concern whether they may be self-promoting (the username was a clue), ... This shows a more ingrained problem at Wikidata, a difference in culture. Even after the problems were pointed out, you maintained that the bot approval was policy-compliant, as if that was somehow an excuse or something we should just blindly accept (and like I said elsewhere, it wasn't even true since the bot approval policy at Wikidata requires a lot more than three test edits anyway). And then you started (and continue to) overreact quite badly. Anyway, it seems we are done here, I'll think about it and let you know if and when I start an ArbCom request (no sense going to ANI as they can't desysop anyway). ] (]) 11:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:08, 31 October 2017
If you leave a message here, I will answer it here. So check back later.If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. I will watch your page and reply as soon as I can.
Archives: 2011; 2012; 2013; 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
Donguz Formation
Hi Ymblanter! Donguz Formation was recently created and could use a couple of edits so it doesn't get speedy deleted. Do you have time to look at some Russian sources? --Tobias1984 (talk) 07:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
- I will have a look, but this is clearly not speedy deletion material. Added to the watchlist just in case.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Canada lists
// There are a number of problems with the Canadian historic places lists. They include:
- provincial lists are too long (some are over 1,000 entries) and need to be split
- lists are not sorted, and are not sortable even by municipality, due to the way the address was dumped
- don't use {{coord}}, so can't use {{GeoGroup}} for mapping
- references numbers (into the CRHP) are sometimes inaccurate, and need to be verified
- the same place may be multiply designated (federal/provincial/municipal, sometimes multiple federal)
- there are missing entries due to the way the data was retrieved
I have no easy ideas on how to address the last point, so am focusing on the other items. What I'm doing is a multi-step process:
- Fill out the municipality field in the {{HPC row}} templates and deleted the municipality (and redundant "Canada") from the address field (if no municipality is given, try going to the referenced CRHP entry to figure it out)
- Sort entries by municipality and count entries to figure out how to split the list. This is generally along the lines of counties or their equivalent (some Canadian counties have been supplanted by regional municipalities, see the Nova Scotia list for examples); you'll have to figure out which counties places are in
- Split the big list; I've not been explicitly seeking consensus, but if the history indicates it might be needed, best check for it. The remaining steps are then done to each sublist.
- Validate that the id numbers actually link to the proper CRHP listing. If they don't, find the right one by searching the CRHP (every listing I've seen with a wrong id was listed under a different one)
- Merge duplicated listings where possible (it isn't if there is more than one federal designation, for example, but provincial and municipal listings can be merged into those)
- Sort the list by primary alpha words (see the Nova Scotia or PEI lists for examples)
- Change references to {{HPC row}} to {{HPC rowt}}, which uses {{coord}}. This requires changing "lat" and "lon" to "latd" and "longd", and changing the sign on the longitude. (IMHO the last is lame, but the template was already in use on several lists before I took this on)
- Make sure municipality names are linked (I usually do this in conjunction with one of the other passes, and don't worry about redlinks)
- If the name field contains pipe links, add "namea" field containing just the name, otherwise the coordinate field gets screwed up
- Add {{GeoGroup}} and a locator map to the top of the list
I have done this for Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI (almost done), and am starting in on New Brunswick. Others have previously done work on the Canadian territory lists (Yukon, Northwest, Nunavut, all fairly modest in length), and those for British Columbia and Saskatchewan. This leaves Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec to do, where some splitting has been done, but little else.
Things this work does not do fix:
- making the list sortable by address, which would require adding sort keys to the municipality field so that the listings get sorted properly within municipality (see {{sort}})
- making the list properly sortable by name (I tried putting sort keys in the name field, and it caused problems with the coordinates)
Did I mention this is tedious work? Thanks for helping! Magic♪piano 20:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanations. I will have a look at Alberta tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:56, 22 August 20/13 (UTC)
Japan
Hi Ymblanter, in case you want to help: The Historic Sites of Japan need to be converted to use {{NHS Japan header}} and {{NHS Japan row}}. For now only the national part. I did a couple as examples. Multichill (talk) 15:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hello; Is it possible to do any conversion by ?bot? as seems to have been done for these Chinese ones? The format of the Japanese lists is intended to be internally similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- I guess this is more a question to @Multichill: than to me, but I guess if it were he would do the conversion himself without asking me. Let us wait what he answers. If the conversion is not possible, I volunteer to do at least some of the manual conversion (one-two lists per day).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- I tried converting with a bot, but didn't manage to do it without too much mess so I abandoned that. Multichill (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- I guess this is more a question to @Multichill: than to me, but I guess if it were he would do the conversion himself without asking me. Let us wait what he answers. If the conversion is not possible, I volunteer to do at least some of the manual conversion (one-two lists per day).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hello; Is it possible to do any conversion by ?bot? as seems to have been done for these Chinese ones? The format of the Japanese lists is intended to be internally similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Cleaning up the Belarus geographical mess
I'm getting unstuck in trying to compile a table of terminology for the Belarus geographical naming conventions. There appears to be a flood of new articles and stubs recently and it appears that English Misplaced Pages is now leading the way with transliteration/transcription norms (which, as we know, simply isn't Misplaced Pages's role). As the contributors don't seem to know what to do other than follow the current directives, we're ending up with orphaned pages and broken links absolutely everywhere.
My thoughts are to follow the Belarusian government standards for the English speaking world (which DON'T involve the irritating version of what is essentially Latinka), i.e. as laid out per this map and other official sites. What's good enough for the Belarus government should be good enough for us.
You can check the sad beginnings in my sandbox. Any constructive input from sensible Wikipedians would be appreciated.
I've left this message on Ezhiki and TaalVerbeteraar's pages as well. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- The beginning seems reasonable, thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Kirghiz Soviet Socialist Republic
Greetings. Any chance you could proof/source improve my Russian translation of the history and expand it further?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
protection in astra
Thank you User Ymblanter for providing protection to the article 'astra'. It was being harmed by continuous disruptive editing by an IP address who was citing youtube as a source.And a seasoned editor who was pushing his POV in complete disregard of the existing references from reliable sources. Much appreciated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.248.178.78 (talk • contribs)
- Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:44, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Provinces of Zambia Image Map
Template:Provinces of Zambia Image Map has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.Gonejackal (talk) 05:03, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
По преамбуле к статье Anne of Kiev
Здравствуйте! Почему вы при блокировке статьи https://en.wikipedia.org/Anne_of_Kiev оставили вариант "Anne of Kiev (born Kievan Rus', Ukrainian: Анна Ярославна; c. 1030 – 1075), Anna Yaroslavna, Anna of Rus also called Agnes" в преамбуле? Чем вам не понравилась версия "Anne (referred to "Anne of Kiev" by official Ukraine, and "Anne of Russia" by official Russia) (born Kievan Rus', Ukrainian: Анна Ярославна; Russian: Анна Ярославна;c. 1030 – 1075), Anna Yaroslavna, Anna of Rus also called Agnes"? 176.194.54.184 (talk) 16:34, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- WP:Wrong version is applicable in this case. Please argue your point at the talk page,--Ymblanter (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but can you let me clear which version is wrong? Current or removed and why? 176.194.54.184 (talk) 19:31, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- I just protected the last version (after checking it does not contain vandalism and BLP violations). It would be entirely inappropriate for me as administrator to take a side in a content dispute and then use the tools to enforce my side.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- OK, I understand. Thank you for explanation. 176.194.54.184 (talk) 19:39, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- I just protected the last version (after checking it does not contain vandalism and BLP violations). It would be entirely inappropriate for me as administrator to take a side in a content dispute and then use the tools to enforce my side.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but can you let me clear which version is wrong? Current or removed and why? 176.194.54.184 (talk) 19:31, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
I ask you take action against violators
Здравствуйте, Ярослав! Совет дали обратиться к Вам, так как говорите по-русски отлично и являетесь администратором, который может принять меры против нарушителей правил английской Википедии. На этой странице https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Dmitry_Medvedev&action=history пытаются выставить премьера-министра России Медведева в качестве коррупционера, и это в то время, когда официальная проверка МВД РФ опровергла ложь. Прошу принять меры против любого нарушителя, включая предупредить этого персонажа, который увлёкся рецидивом просто по полной программе. https://en.wikipedia.org/User:El_C (очевидно предположить, он ненавидит Россию, или власти, но Википедия - не политика, это энциклопедия). Благодарю, Ярослав! С надеждой на помощь против откровенного произвола. А это нарушителям, если хотят ознакомиться с моей просьбой: https://translate.google.ru/ 37.144.105.162 (talk) 04:31, 31 May 2017 (UTC).
- Доброе утро. В общем, он прав, хотя в каком-то виде фраза о том, что власти отрицают причастность премьер-министра к коррупции, в статье может присутствовать. Попробуйте найти компромиссную формулировку на странице обсуждения статьи.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:24, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Garngad railway station...
It's a stub because other than a not very useful Geograph photo, I could find very little information on this station. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- I am now looking for sources, because unfortunately I can not even find a proof that the station ever existed. If I can not find any, I will send the article to WP:AfD.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, Sadly archive.org doesn't have a c.1900 Bradshaw, which would be reasonably definitive. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- I think we are more or less fine with Garngad now, and you can use the source I found also for other defunct stations.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:22, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Ash Ketchum
Hi,
I just wanted to let you know that this article immediately saw continued disruption after your previous semi-protection expired. Would you mind assessing it once again and place another semi-protection if deemed necessary...? Thanks! 2601:1C0:4401:F360:3DB2:F0A8:EEA7:B25F (talk) 19:08, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:12, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Semi-protect
Can you semi-protect Selfish (Future song), Move Your Body (Sia song), All Around the World (Justin Bieber song), Attention (Charlie Puth song), Chained to the Rhythm, Kaleidoscope (EP), Good Grief (song), Latch (song), and Rewind (Devlin song) to persistent long-term abuse of Wikidesctruction vandal. 115.164.85.51 (talk) 08:21, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
- No, some of those should not be protected, and for others attention is needed. Pls nominate separately at WP:RFPP.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
I found two wins for Gary Player from two different sources
Hi I have found two wins for Gary Player with sources on his own personal website and on the PGA Tour website but some guy has decided to ask to block the page. I can provide sources for these events they should be added. Can you help me out please ?. Thank you 31.200.154.110 (talk) 07:52, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
- Please discuss this at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:25, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello about sarkes Mkrdichian jr
I received a message about deletion and curious to why and what we can do to make sure this doesn't occur please let me know. Thank you Jrgolf (talk) 11:57, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- We have the notability criteria, WP:N and WP:NGOLF, and he seems to fail both.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:02, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
correct, but he currently does and is labeled as a professional golfer. with stats that are public which some of the links have been added.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrgolf (talk • contribs)
- The article is at the AfD anyway; the best you can do is to bring the arguments there. So far, I have not been convinced.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Jrgolf: Per this edit at AFD this article looks to be an autobiography. If I nominated this for speedy deletion, do you think there is any chance that will get the article deleted?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
- It is probably easier to add this to the AfD page, so that it does not get relisted.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Jrgolf: Per this edit at AFD this article looks to be an autobiography. If I nominated this for speedy deletion, do you think there is any chance that will get the article deleted?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Somers, Wisconsin
Yes, your edit was vandalism. Deliberately introducing factual errors into Misplaced Pages is vandalism. The Town of Somers and the village of Somers are TWO SEPARATE PLACES. I've been discussing this with a couple of other editors; it's all explained there: User talk:RFD#Somers, Wisconsin, User talk:TheCatalyst31#Somers, Wisconsin. Now go fix your ignorant reverts. 32.218.41.31 (talk) 14:49, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Still, as soon as you continue introducing copyright violations, I will revert your edits. At some point, I am going to block your IP. That you call me a moron and a vandal does not really help.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:55, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Выставленный на удаление файл // A file nominated for deletion
Добрый день! Один файл, который я перенес из англовики на Склад, выставили на удаление за отсутствием сведений о копирайте. Не могли бы Вы глянуть удаленную страницу локального описания, и прислать мне на почту скрин, если там есть хотя бы какие-то зацепки?
P. S. Уже вбивал портрет в Google Images — запустивший изображение в интернет последний раз появлялся в Сети где-то в 2001 году, найти его рабочие контакты крайне проблематично, не говоря уже о том, чтобы выйти на связь. --Синкретик (talk) 10:57, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- Говорят только Image in public domain because it was published before 1923.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:08, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
IP unsourced edits
Sorry to bother you with this, but I have noticed for the past 1-2 weeks an IPs adding unsourced, unexplained, sometimes spurious information to nobility/royalty articles. Most times said edits consist of "X was named after their aunt/uncle/cousin/grandfather/grandmother/etc", additions of how these people felt, were perceived(beautiful), favored, or addition of unsourced information to referenced sentences.
I believe there are more IPs, but have not had the time to search. As for the disruptive editing, I am unsure what to do.
IPs:
- I blocked *45 for 24h, but I am afraid this is very little we can do at this stage. IPs need to bealt with separately, at least not before we suspect there is block evasion, and *245 has not even been warned.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Ymblanter. You have new messages at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for permissions.Message added 10:23, 24 June 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Truebil
Why was the page I created (Truebil) deleted? Frankly, I really liked the idea and would definitely want it to be known to the world. CarTrade is a similar company which has its wikipedia page, then why can't we have the truebil page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saksha Gupta (talk • contribs) 07:12, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
- May I please suggest that you read our notability policy.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:21, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
File:Stepwell, Ahmedabad.jpg
You placed a monument template on commons:File:Stepwell, Ahmedabad.jpg but I can't make a 100% ID from the description on List of State Protected Monuments in Gujarat. Can you please double check and either correct the template or add the picture to the list. Thanks. Agathoclea (talk) 20:22, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
- I have never been there, but the en.voy article says it is the Adalaj Step-Well in Adalaj. I will have a look now.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
- No, I am not qualified enough to say whether this is the same object as the monumend ID. I must have had a good reason to add the template in 2013, but now I of course do not remember what the reason was. If you do not know anything about the monument, it must be safer to remove the template from the file.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe that is an option. But it must belong somewhere. Once I have a bit of time on my hands maybe I can track down some Gujarati editors or at least speakers that could investigate. Agathoclea (talk) 12:54, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe that is an option. But it must belong somewhere. Once I have a bit of time on my hands maybe I can track down some Gujarati editors or at least speakers that could investigate. Agathoclea (talk) 12:54, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Jamala
The addition of the Armenian spelling is currently under 3rd party review. TimeForTruth (talk) 01:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Well, the consensus on the talk page was very clear, and I do not see why a third party review would be necessary.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:41, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- And especially when it is coming from a user with 62 edits, which naturally raises a question whether the user is here to build an encyclopedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:42, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Fortunately, your opinion as to weather or not it is needed does not matter. 3rd party review is available for these very reasons. I suggest you change the revert back until 3rd party review is finished. Also, the number of edits doesn't matter. This is not a video game where people are called "noobs" TimeForTruth (talk) 18:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Before suggesting nonsense, you could have at least make an attempt to read policies. I am pretty confident now that you are WP:NOTTHERE.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:19, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Fortunately, your opinion as to weather or not it is needed does not matter. 3rd party review is available for these very reasons. I suggest you change the revert back until 3rd party review is finished. Also, the number of edits doesn't matter. This is not a video game where people are called "noobs" TimeForTruth (talk) 18:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- And especially when it is coming from a user with 62 edits, which naturally raises a question whether the user is here to build an encyclopedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:42, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- And of course it is not under the third party review. Now I will block you.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
RfA
File:New Zealand TW-17.svg | Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. Cullen Let's discuss it 17:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC) |
July 2017
I did not make this change in bad faith, it was a mistake. Check the other articles I edited - if the name is related to that period, I do not change it. Ales sandro (talk) 21:16, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Given that your contribution here is generally unconstructive, and that you are clearly not here to build an encyclopedia, it was plausible to assume that you made it deliberately. Indeed, after inspecting your contributions more closely I discovered a couple of instances when you reverted yourself in similar situations, and this is why I unblocked you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:29, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
A barnstar for you! Tallahassle (talk) 20:29, 25 July 2017 (UTC) |
- Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Mistake in a block notice
I have just declined an unblock request at User talk:TimeForTruth. I was misled at first into thinking it was a time-limited block, as your block notice on that page says so, but the block which you placed is actually indefinite. You may like to correct the block notice. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:15, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. I am using a standard template {{blocked}}, I will see whether there are options for an indefinite block.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- {{Uw-block/doc/Block templates}} lists a bewildering range of different special purpose block notice templates, but it's good enough to stick to {{blocked}} (Which redirects to {{Uw-block}}) for time-limited blocks, and {{Uw-blockindef}} for indefinite blocks. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:23, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- {{Uw-block/doc/Block templates}} lists a bewildering range of different special purpose block notice templates, but it's good enough to stick to {{blocked}} (Which redirects to {{Uw-block}}) for time-limited blocks, and {{Uw-blockindef}} for indefinite blocks. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:23, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
ref on mediology
Hi there, first thank you for reviewing and correcting the translated article on Louise Merzeau. I saw that you took off this reference: from the article on Louise merzeau. I had added it because I think the common reader might want more information on the concept. Furthermore, even if Louise Merzeau is mentionned on the left hand side of the website with a link to her personnal website. I think this ref is useful, although it requests understanding French… --Nattes à chat (talk) 09:19, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- We have an article on mediology, and I would be certainly fine with adding this link there (if it is not there); the article is bluelinked in Louise Merzeau, so it should be no problem for anybody to just click there. On the other hand, I think in the article on Louise Merzeau we only should have references related to her (I would consider may be adding a ref to a redlink, but even that we do not usually do). French is not an issue here.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:30, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
References
- "Médiologie : Présentation". mediologie.org. Retrieved 2017-07-27.
International sanctions during the Ukrainian crisis
Please explain why did you revert my edit on this article? This is info from RS (i. e. the Bow Group report and Swissinfo). --S. Roix (talk) 09:18, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you have been two times reverted by different users (and you are a sock of another user being reverted just before you, trying to add the same text), usually it means it is time to go to the talk page and try to find consensus.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:21, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you mean Osterluzei who was the first to add the text on Swiss Economy Minister, I'm not his sock puppet; I just saw that his edit was reverted because he added it to the wrong section of the article, and re-added it to the proper section, alongside with an addition of my own. Ok, I will start a thread on Talk page, though neither Iryna nor you explained what exactly was wrong with these passages (Iryna for some reason called it POV-pushing, but this is just info from the sources). --S. Roix (talk) 09:34, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Page Protection Request
Hi,
I notice you have changed protection level of the Donald Trump article to extended confirmed on 28 January. I would like to request reducing the protection level to "autoconfirmed or confirmed access". I'm sure there are many editors who would like to improve the article of the current President of the United States but cannot because of this protection. Since it has been protected so long ago I don't think reducing the protection level will create many problems.
Thank you.--IntelligentName (talk) 19:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- @IntelligentName:, there is a blocked user who is a highly prolific sock creator and is interested in Trump. I therefeore believe that reducing protection would not be productive. However, you can try discussing at the talk page of the article and see if there is concensus among established users.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:13, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Disruptive edits at Silence (2016 film)
Hello, I am currently doing a GA review for the article Silence (2016 film). This page was protected several times, by you as well. How would you describe the disruptive edits that preceded the block? The reason I ask is I would like to know a bit more about the article's editing history before I proceed. Thanks.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 19:02, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Farang Rak Tham:, from what I see, there was an edit-warring around this edit, which was reverted by multiple editors in good standing. I saw a protection request at RFPP and protected the article. I never had it on my watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:26, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Did you feel enough rationale was given by the other editors who reverted those edits?--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Farang Rak Tham:, I do not know. If a editor gets reverted by multiple editors and does not start a talk page discussion, this is disruptive editing by definition. This is not my role as administrator to decide whether edit is right or wrong (with the exception of vandalism and BLP violations, which do not apply here).--Ymblanter (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- I see. Thank you. I had not noticed yet he had refused to talk.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 16:52, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Farang Rak Tham:, I do not know. If a editor gets reverted by multiple editors and does not start a talk page discussion, this is disruptive editing by definition. This is not my role as administrator to decide whether edit is right or wrong (with the exception of vandalism and BLP violations, which do not apply here).--Ymblanter (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Did you feel enough rationale was given by the other editors who reverted those edits?--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Indian annexation of Hyderabad
Indian annexation of Hyderabad (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Reduction in protection level: There was no disruptive editing here from IPs (me). Yes but two users have been reverting content added from reliable sources by IPs and some patriotic Indian users are nitpicking issues to avoid inclusion of information they do not like. Same request for Standstill agreement (India). You can check the content for self-assurance. 2405:204:3101:C36A:3361:DBA6:918C:97E1 (talk) 04:32, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you introduce edits and get reverted, and in particular if you get reverted by multiple users, and especially if they lare long-time users in good standing, you should go to the talk page and try to resolve the situation, and not just continue adding the material.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:19, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hello Ymblanter, the edit-warring continues at these two pages. The original IP hopper seems to have recruited another IP (a short IP, IPV4), who is making edits on behalf of the original one. His edits to Indian annexation of Hyderabad were mysteriously revdeled, presumably because they contained bits of email messages that he carelessly pasted in. I am afraid a longer term semi-protection is needed. Thanks, Kautilya3 (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hello Ymblanter, the edit-warring continues at these two pages. The original IP hopper seems to have recruited another IP (a short IP, IPV4), who is making edits on behalf of the original one. His edits to Indian annexation of Hyderabad were mysteriously revdeled, presumably because they contained bits of email messages that he carelessly pasted in. I am afraid a longer term semi-protection is needed. Thanks, Kautilya3 (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Galleries
May I please suggest that you read WP:GALLERY before persistently adding galleries of images to the articles where they are not really needed. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:45, 10 August 2017 (UTC) For the Assumption Cathedral the Gallery was unneccessary but a gallery of the 12th century frescoes at the Saint George Cathedral Staraya Ladoga would benefit the article
- One picture of frescoes was enough, we do not need the whole gallery unless someone would write a long section describing all the frescoes in detail.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:01, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
1. Editing Biography of a Living Person
Hi! I have tried to correct and edit the biography of a living person (https://en.wikipedia.org/Nitasha_Kaul) and it seems everytime I did it, you have cancelled the edit. This is odd for I followed every rule of Misplaced Pages and sourced the information from reliable forums (newspapers/official websites/magazines/journal articles). There is no COI. The current entry is factually incorrect (wrong place of birth, patchy old details, incomplete information) and hence I was rectifying this entry. What I wrote was all sourced (42 sources) and neutral. Kindly advise what you found to be "poorly sourced". In fact, it is current entry that is factually incorrect and poorly sourced. I await your reply and advice. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.191.62.48 (talk) 11:38, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- The entry is currently reliably sourced, and you just removed sourced info. Your edits were also not compatible with the Manual of style. Please start a talk page discussion, and outline point by point what you want to change, this will be a good starting point.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
European strategic intelligence and security centre
Добрый день. Как переименовать статью "European strategic intelligence and security centRE" в "European strategic intelligence and security centER"? Вроде как у них такое точное название - , а я такую опцию не нахожу. Спасибо. Divot (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 23:49, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks
Sorry I somehow missed that a link was in the intro. Lin4671 (talk) 07:26, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:19, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
SafeSquid
Hi! Could you please unblock the editing for the page - SafeSquid
Thanks in advance
Simplyme777843 (talk) 14:10, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- No, please use WP:AfC--Ymblanter (talk) 14:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Need your help in protection
Dear Mr. Blanter, as I don't have enough time to do it myself, I'm asking you to take protective measures against the following two vandals from Ukraine (, ), who are pushing unacceptable anti-Russian revisionist bias in different topics, removing the word 'Russia' as 'invented in the early 18th century', adding marginal views of nationalist radicals instead of those accepted by scholars, removing entire sentences and changing words which they label as "Russophilic dogwhistle", etc. Please take an eye on these users, as there are not enough editors interested in protecting the articles which these guys are trying to rewrite. Albergo Paradiso (talk) 20:13, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- The IP has two bad edits, which were promptly reverted, and I do not see much problems with their other edits. The user is indeed problematic but does not qualify for a block. The best course of action would be to engage at the talk page with them and explain WP:RS and that reliably sourced texts can not be removed at will.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Block request
Floyd2017 (talk · contribs), high level vandal. Valoem 19:38, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Protection request Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_page_protection#Floyd_Mayweather_Jr._vs._Conor_McGregor as well. Thanks. Valoem 19:41, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:41, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would recommend unprotecting the page now. I believe the main wave of vandalism should be over, unprotection may help this article be expanded. Valoem 13:59, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 14:14, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would recommend unprotecting the page now. I believe the main wave of vandalism should be over, unprotection may help this article be expanded. Valoem 13:59, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Mayweather vs McGregor International broadcasting
Hi,
I created the international broadcasting part of Mayweather McGregor. Please give access to my newest amendement.
Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcdefgh100 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- Please discuss at the talk page first; you may want {{Edit request}}--Ymblanter (talk) 20:49, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, you are autoconfirmed and can edit the page.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:50, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Stephane.dohet
Thank you for reverting the move that Renkin-Swalem did on List of municipalities of the Walloon Region. He did unfortunately many others. This user is notorious vandal on French Misplaced Pages. I tried to warn about him in Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations#Paraloux_and_Renkin-Swalem (I give there a long explanation) but perhaps it is not the right place... Speculoos (talk) 13:08, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Speculoos:: I have seen the message on Wikidata, but I am afraid there is very little I can do - they did not do anything blockable here, they are not (yet) eligible for a global lock, and I am not even sure the categories they added go counter the policies. I am afraid this is a complex case, may be a long post at WP:AN could help but do not expect much.
Visa policy of the Faroe Islands listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Visa policy of the Faroe Islands. Since you had some involvement with the Visa policy of the Faroe Islands redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Gerrit 23:58, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Northeast India
Regarding the protection of Northeast India, the issue is related to the presence of Dravidian people as early settlers in Assam/Northeast India. This is under discussion in Talk:Indo-Aryan_migration_to_Assam#Content_removal. I request that the presence of Dravidians be established first before it is inserted in articles in Misplaced Pages. Thanks! Chaipau (talk) 01:43, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- I have absolutely no interest in the content of the article, so, if I understand your request correctly, I am a wrong person to talk to.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:20, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
7 · 4 South and North Korea Joint Statement
Thank you for checking the article above. As you know about the history of Russia, and Russia is one of the major partner country of North Korea, Would you please let me know your opinion about the current North Korea issues and solution? Goodtiming8871 (talk) 10:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- My personal opinion is that Russia will not support any intervention since current instability is advantageous for Putin.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:47, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
A bowl of strawberries for you!
Thank you for your diligent work for reviewing the new Misplaced Pages articles. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC) |
- Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
An issue
Hi Ymblanter. Would you be willing to look at this issue related to "user:Psychonot" here? A WP:NOTHERE editorial pattern and in all likelihood someone's sock. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- This is not a profile I can block per WP:NOTTHERE, and even though sandbox edit are clearly to inflate the number of edits, they should probably be taken to ANI first.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:06, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah the sandbox edits are pretty much a dead giveaway. Content-wise, hes being disruptive on many fronts. Adding self-formulated/unsourced information and removing text without any reason are just some of these. The fact that he blankets his talk page after every single warning he gets, is another major point that attests to his zero-interest in constructive editing. That's why I described his editorial pattern as NOTHERE; sure, perhaps not textbook, but containing enough aspects of it in order for it to be categorized as one that's really harmful to the project. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- This is likely correct, but I believe the case is too complex for just one administrator to tke a decision and block the user. It should go to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:33, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ymblanter, Eperoton: The user in question (Psychonot) has also made disruptive edits such as, including statement about Rohingya refugees having babies under section titled "Irresponsibility". In addition to a lot of POV edits in Iran related topics, which have so far been reverted but have not entirely stopped. DA1 (talk) 02:57, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- As I suggested earlier, please take them to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:32, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ymblanter, Eperoton: The user in question (Psychonot) has also made disruptive edits such as, including statement about Rohingya refugees having babies under section titled "Irresponsibility". In addition to a lot of POV edits in Iran related topics, which have so far been reverted but have not entirely stopped. DA1 (talk) 02:57, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- This is likely correct, but I believe the case is too complex for just one administrator to tke a decision and block the user. It should go to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:33, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah the sandbox edits are pretty much a dead giveaway. Content-wise, hes being disruptive on many fronts. Adding self-formulated/unsourced information and removing text without any reason are just some of these. The fact that he blankets his talk page after every single warning he gets, is another major point that attests to his zero-interest in constructive editing. That's why I described his editorial pattern as NOTHERE; sure, perhaps not textbook, but containing enough aspects of it in order for it to be categorized as one that's really harmful to the project. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
RFP to be handled
Please deal with newly-requested WP:RFP and mine is shanghai, thanks!--117.136.44.234 (talk) 14:15, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Визовая политика.
Спасибо за статью о визовой политике Фарерских островов.
Если есть ресурс, может сможете оформить статьи для Ватикана, Монако, Сан-Марино. Статьи об этих государствах отсутствуют, потому что источники на итальянском и французском, а в этом мало кто разбирается. Norvikk (talk) 18:58, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Я посмотрю, но не сразу. Сначала у меня Гренландия.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Nice job clearing the backlogs that pop up at RfPP, AIV, and UAA. Hopefully somebody else will help you one day. RileyBugz投稿記録 16:02, 13 September 2017 (UTC) |
- Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @RileyBugz: "Hopefully somebody else will help you one day." Try CambridgeBayWeather, MelanieN, ... ;) Samsara 10:35, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
protection
why protection this page Monument to the Lion of Judah?--Meskel1 (talk) 18:12, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Because of the edit-warring and disruptive editing. Please seek consensus at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Ilirpedia
As the closer of the ANI thread, you may find this of interest: . Khirurg (talk) 19:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done, blocked for 3 months given the previous achievements.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you, appreciated. He clearly wasn't going to stop. Khirurg (talk) 20:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Still ranting about "Misplaced Pages censorship" even after his/her latest unblock request was declined. Dr. K. 17:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Somebody needs to revoke the talk page access but this obviously will not be me.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- No pressure Ymblanter. Thank you for your help in ending this disruption. Dr. K. 23:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Somebody needs to revoke the talk page access but this obviously will not be me.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Still ranting about "Misplaced Pages censorship" even after his/her latest unblock request was declined. Dr. K. 17:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you, appreciated. He clearly wasn't going to stop. Khirurg (talk) 20:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Tajikistani parliamentary election, 2015
A couple of points – I'm struggling to see how it's "clearly controversial" – the naming convention for election/referendum articles requires to demonym to be used, and Tajik is the common demonym. Also, all of the articles were moved and you've only moved one back so now there's inconsistency between the articles. Do you mind moving this one back to the Tajik title, or are you going to insist on an RM? Cheers, Number 57 14:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- I do not mind moving it back, but could you please first explain why Tajik is a common demonym? To me, it denotes ethnic Tajiks, whereas Tajikistani denotes all citizens of Tajikistan?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Tajik is what would normally be used when describing anyone from Tajikistan regardless of their ethnic group (as we use Spanish general election, 2016 despite Spain being home to Basques, Catalans, Galicians etc). See, for example, these stories on the BBC. The first one in particular uses Tajik to refer to multiple things related to the country. Number 57 15:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, good, I am not totally convinced but I will rename it back.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:32, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Tajik is what would normally be used when describing anyone from Tajikistan regardless of their ethnic group (as we use Spanish general election, 2016 despite Spain being home to Basques, Catalans, Galicians etc). See, for example, these stories on the BBC. The first one in particular uses Tajik to refer to multiple things related to the country. Number 57 15:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Liberty University Motto
You removed the LU motto and called it vandalism. It was changed a few weeks ago. This was announced during their convocation and is clearly marked on their website. "We The Champions" is LU's new motto.
- If you are able to reliably source this information you may return it to the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Check out their website on the top left, right next to their name. www.liberty.edu
- I am not going to take any content decisions except for reverting vandalism and BLP violations. Please go to the talk of the article and discuss it there.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks!
Hi Yaroslav, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 20:23, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at WP:AN regarding regarding inquiry about the deletion reason and state of an deleted article. The thread is "Deleted article check". Thank you. --Snaevar (talk) 08:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Rockefeller University
I only saw later that we protect-conflicted. Reverted everything to your earlier decision and cleaned up. Sorry. Samsara 10:35, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, it was ok for me to have it pc- and longer protected, but let us keep it like it is now and increase the level of protection if things go out of hand. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:38, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks
I wanted to silently thank you for your reply, but just then you removed it. I wanted to make sure you didn't think the thanks were for removing. Hence: thanks! (゚⊿゚) ---Sluzzelin talk 19:49, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
West Kazakhstan Region
Just made several edits to https://en.wikipedia.org/West_Kazakhstan_Region All of the information is from the translation of the Russian version of the page https://translate.google.com.au/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%25D0%2597%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BF%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B4%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE-%25D0%259A%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B7%25D0%25B0%25D1%2585%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BD%25D1%2581%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0%25D1%258F_%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B1%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D1%258C&edit-text=&act=url
- SW4NSQ4D 30-09-17
- Thank you. Have in mind however please that Misplaced Pages (including the Russian Misplaced Pages) can not be reliable source and can not be cited. I removed material cited to the Russian Misplaced Pages.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:08, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Comment on Wikidata
Hello. I figured I'd ask here, when talking about visibility of descriptions, did you drop the word "app"? Currently, the existing descriptions are already not shown on mobile web for English, I'm not sure if someone could be confused by that sentence. Have a nice rest of your day, Elitre (WMF) (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Forgot about this - could you clarify what you mean by "validation"? I can think of so many meanings that the only appropriate thing to do is just to ask right away! Elitre (WMF) (talk) 15:23, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Erica. I am not using mobile interface and apps myself, but people are excited (positively or negatively) about descriptions where they are shown on the English Misplaced Pages, so I was talking about those (I guess this means app). Concerning validation: My idea was that starti ng say from tomorrow descriptions are not shown on the English Misplaced Pages. However, they continue to exist on Wikidata (nobody is goring to remove them from Wikidata, and this would be considered vandalism). My idea was that the English Misplaced Pages users will create their own descriptions, but if a descriptions exists on Wikidata they will be show it at the moment they want to create a new description, and instead of creating a new one from scratch they could validate the existing one for usage on the English Misplaced Pages. As soon as it is validated it will be shown in the app. I hope this clarifies my idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
IP hopper you blocked is back
Hi,
The IP hopper you blocked is back again evading his block on IP 72.52.87.66. I have already reported the IP to ARV. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:18, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done, thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again, I think the IP hopper is back at this address now 85.154.83.2. He is not editing the same set of articles but a different article now. I have also created a page (User:Adamgerber80/Oman IP Hopper) to track the IPs which are associated with this editor. I think the editor is a long term offender whose account has been blocked in the past. You can see a pattern of articles which the editors edits(Pakistan and Indian defense related with a POV) and that most of the IP's are from Muscat, Oman. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- I am afraid you need to ask someone to apply a range block.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC) ARV?
- The editor is back at this IP 5.36.80.147. Should I report him to ARV? Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 22:57, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- ARV does not exist. It is probably better to open a sockpuppet investigation, or to add to the existing one.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:12, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- The editor is back at this IP 5.36.80.147. Should I report him to ARV? Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 22:57, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC) ARV?
- Okay. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- I am afraid you need to ask someone to apply a range block.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again, I think the IP hopper is back at this address now 85.154.83.2. He is not editing the same set of articles but a different article now. I have also created a page (User:Adamgerber80/Oman IP Hopper) to track the IPs which are associated with this editor. I think the editor is a long term offender whose account has been blocked in the past. You can see a pattern of articles which the editors edits(Pakistan and Indian defense related with a POV) and that most of the IP's are from Muscat, Oman. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Rambling Man AN close
Sorry for leaving a message after you'd posted the close-in-progress template—I had the edit window open and was finding a diff, so didn't see the intermediate edit. Feel free to remove it if you'd like. I was going to null edit there to say the same, but don't want to risk messing up your close with an edit conflict. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:44, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, I saw it, and I do not think it is going to affect the closing statement in any way. Thanks for leaving a message though.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Some baklava for you!
:) Asialalala (talk) 10:06, 1 October 2017 (UTC) |
- Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
hi - iam first time on wiki - i dont know how to send you a message:) so i write here: thank you for my site on wiki, i send you link to photos, i dont know how to use it:)) all the best. asia Asialalala (talk) 13:00, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will take care of this.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:03, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Question
First, thanks for answering the AN3 post on Cathry. I'm not sure if you've seen their response to your block notice on their talk page yet since you speak Russian. Russian is not one of my languages, but Google translate says something about skypochats, which a quick google shows it's pretty not safe for work content. I'm guessing that's just a weird quirk in Google translate (I know it's not great with Russian), but I'm curious what was actually intended meaning there. The amount of times I've had Russian speaking friends at work talk about lost in translation things never ceases to entertain. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:26, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- In Russian Misplaced Pages, and IRC cabal are actually using skype. She meant that (that someone from the Russian Misplaced Pages, where she is currently blocked for two weeks, hence the current activity here) contacted me off-wiki and asked to block her. She is plain wrong, I am not editing the Russian Misplaced Pages and never discuss such things off-wiki. As an adept of conspiracy theories, she will never believe this anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Wow, that's was not as mundane as I thought it would be. Hopefully you won't need to utilize it, but the aspersions principle we wrote at the GMO ArbCom was intended in part to deal with accusations like that to a degree. Thanks for being aware of situations a lot of us involved in this recent issue didn't know about. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- I guess she will be indefblocked pretty soon anyway. Casting aspersions is indeed not nice, but I was so many time accused in being pro-Russian, anti-Russian, pro-Ukrainian, anti-Ukrainian, pro-Armenian, pro-Azeri, being on a payroll by Putin, being on a payroll by Trump, etc, that I basically got used to it.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:41, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Wow, that's was not as mundane as I thought it would be. Hopefully you won't need to utilize it, but the aspersions principle we wrote at the GMO ArbCom was intended in part to deal with accusations like that to a degree. Thanks for being aware of situations a lot of us involved in this recent issue didn't know about. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Salting
Hi.
Would you please process the requests at Vicky Kadian (actor), and here? Thanks a lot. —usernamekiran(talk) 14:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- I do not have enough skills needed for SPA and stay clear of it unless I am very well familiar with the sockpuppet. My apologies.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Protection
Hi Ymblanter! a few days ago you put PC1 on Anzu Lawson due to persistent socking (at my request). The socks are now gaming autoconfirmed and getting their edits in anyway, see . So PC1 doesn't seem to be working any better than semi-prot would. Any ideas? I'd hate to put full protection on it but this serial promoter/copyviolator is pretty relentless. Thanks, Crow 15:41, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- I blocked the latest sock for 31h (and was close to blocking them indef per WP:NOTTHERE - if they continue uploading copyright violations, pls let me know). I guess for the time being we can leave it with pending changes, but if new sock appear I am afraid full protection would be the only option.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:47, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks! Crow 15:52, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Cara Delevingne
Hello! You semi-protected Cara Delevingne about a year ago. In the day and a half since that expired, nothing good has happened. Would you be willing to extend that protection? Some of those edits should probably be revdeled too. Rebbing 23:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done, protected indefinitely and revision-deleted some edits, thanks for making me aware of the problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:27, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
User talk:FUKKKING FAGGGIT
You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
- They formally filed an unblock request. This is an obvious nonsense, but it would not be appropriate for me to deal with it.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:06, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Fastjet Mozambique
Forgive me if I am missing the point, but I don't understand what the banner you seem to have put across this new article indicates? If it refers to some violation of copyright (I notice the words (→History: copyvio) ), then what bit are you referring to (I don't see it myself)? Second, if there is a violation, does this require the deletion of the entire page? Can we agree a way forward? Thank you. Carbonix (talk) 18:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, the paragraph I removed was copied verbatim from a source (Google gave two sources actually, both were press releases or smth of this sort). As far as I am concerned, the article is fine now and does not need to be deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:05, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, fine.... but for future reference, why did you not just delete the offending text? I cannot even go in to the 'Compare selected revisions' facility to check what you deleted! And the date of my edit is crossed out, which implies it didn't happen, which seems odd to me.... Thanks again; I haven't come across this before. Carbonix (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- I deleted it and then revision-deleted your edit, so that the text of the edit is not visible any more (except for administrators). This what we are required to do in case of copyright violations, see WP:COPYVIO.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:29, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you - I'll check it out so I have a firm grasp of the rules! Carbonix (talk) 18:35, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, please do.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:37, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you - I'll check it out so I have a firm grasp of the rules! Carbonix (talk) 18:35, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- I deleted it and then revision-deleted your edit, so that the text of the edit is not visible any more (except for administrators). This what we are required to do in case of copyright violations, see WP:COPYVIO.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:29, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, fine.... but for future reference, why did you not just delete the offending text? I cannot even go in to the 'Compare selected revisions' facility to check what you deleted! And the date of my edit is crossed out, which implies it didn't happen, which seems odd to me.... Thanks again; I haven't come across this before. Carbonix (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Protection of Blade Runner
Your page protection of Blade Runner 2049 appears to indicate preference against Prisonmonkeys and to choose to add two or three new contested sentences about the character "Joi" without consensus. Since the other editor does not appear to be making any progress toward getting consensus or continuing any useful Talk discussion, could the plot summary delete the 3 added short sentences on "Joi" which still do not have consensus. According the BRD, Prisonermonkeys is normally allowed to revert and request discussion before an edit addition is given protection status. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 20:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- No, I just protected on the last version. Please read WP:WRONGVERSION.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Helping with categories
Hi, thanks for helping with categories. Please could I ask you to follow the WP:CFD processes more fully? I know there are a few parent categories waiting to be deleted from the September 10 decision, listed at WP:CFDW. There is no hurry to fix these; they will automatically become empty once the follow-up nomination at CFD Oct 9 gets agreed (and a {{db-c1}} nomination for the India one, see ).
Also, please check for backlinks before de-listing categories after deletion. For example, you deleted Category:Portrayals of women & Category:Portrayals of men, but have not resolved the links to those pages from other categories, thus creating red links. Please see WP:CFDAI for recommended practice.
When deleting category redirects, it's also more helpful to use the deletion link within the category redirect template, rather than using C1 as the rationale, as the deletion link includes preloaded text which links to the new name.
I hope this is helpful, and that you will keep up your involvement. CFD could certainly do with additions to the regular "team".
Kind regards – Fayenatic London 20:42, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, thanks. This is indeed helpful, and I will take into account.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
User:Objective Historian
Objective Historian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) appears to be placing Arab(the ethnicity) into article(s) without proper sourcing or giving Arab ethnicity undue weight into the lead of articles. Would you be inclined to discussing this with them? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
I merely followed the example of others -- namely, placing Persian(the ethnicity) into article(s) without proper sourcing or giving Persian ethnicity undue weight into the lead of articles. Would you be inclined to discussing this with them? Thanks. Objective Historian (talk) 05:28, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- Per WP:MOS, ethnicity should not be in the lede, be it Arab or Persian.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:18, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- 50 edits in total. One of the first things he did was removing Persian from the lede of Al-Khwarizmi and al-Tabari. Mind you the Al-Khwarzmi page was fully protected until a few days ago, for the same reason. "Mr new editor" completely ignored that, as well as the talk page, where other "keenly interested people" have tried to remove the mention of him (al-Khwarizmi) being Persian from the article/lede. Though all these attempts have been unsuccessful, and the article had been protected until recently, he just hopped in and removed it. Cuz why not!
- The words of this "legit new user" are completely disproven by his editorial pattern. He removes sourced mentions of "Persian" from the ledes of articles ("undue weight"), yet he adds "Arab" to the lede of other articles, without sources/edit summaries Even Yosemite Sam would laugh at this nonsensical behavior.
- No need to be a rocket scientist to realize what this is all about. - LouisAragon (talk) 08:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, 28 edits. If they continue they are likely to be blocked.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- No need to be a rocket scientist to realize what this is all about. - LouisAragon (talk) 08:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanksgiving
Thank you for informing on the copyright problem. Surely I will make it correct within a few minutes. It is my request to copyedit or review the page for further development. with regards. Pinakpani (talk) 16:34, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. Once the copyvio is out of the article, I will remove the template and revision-delete the edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Pls review the page of Khairul Manazil what I have made. recently I have deleted the words violating copyright provisions and provided new references for it. thank you Pinakpani (talk) 06:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Great, thanks a lot.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Electoral Commission
Just in case you have pings turned off, or the software messed up, I've closed Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Electoral Commission, and ... (drumroll) ... tag, you're it. Please take a look at that page for a couple of comments I made in the close. Good luck. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you, I have seen it indeed before I went to bed. Looks like I have some work ahead of me.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:57, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Scomber indicus, Ymblanter.
Unfortunately Nick Moyes has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:
Copy vio concerns in a number of articles. I will reflag this and leave a message on the creator's talk page.
To reply, leave a comment on Nick Moyes's talk page.
Nick Moyes (talk) 15:13, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- To be honest, I can not see how it could be copyvio, however, fine with me.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- The second paragraph was copied from a blogspot page. The rest is fine, though. Primefac (talk) 16:20, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- I thought it was not copyrightable but now I double checked, and I see it is indeed likely (slightly) above the threshold.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- The second paragraph was copied from a blogspot page. The rest is fine, though. Primefac (talk) 16:20, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Revdel
I emailed Oversight, asking for help with all of today's edits at Kidz Bop. I think it's been over an hour with no response. Could you revdel those four edits? CityOfSilver 20:12, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done. Sometimes it takes several hours for oversighters to respond, I think they are less available on Saturday.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- I should have guessed. Thanks for the quick response. CityOfSilver 20:21, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- No problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry to keep pestering you but I just looked again and my edit summary there is looking like an ill-advised move on my part. Could that get deleted too? CityOfSilver 20:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- No, I am afraid this would be against the policy. The oversighters will in any case react to your e-mail, if they decide it is needed they will do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- However it's supposed to me is fine. Thanks again. CityOfSilver 21:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- No, I am afraid this would be against the policy. The oversighters will in any case react to your e-mail, if they decide it is needed they will do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry to keep pestering you but I just looked again and my edit summary there is looking like an ill-advised move on my part. Could that get deleted too? CityOfSilver 20:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- No problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- I should have guessed. Thanks for the quick response. CityOfSilver 20:21, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Persistent vandalism
Hello Ymblanter, IPs are consistently vandalizing article Gorkhaland and Indian Gorkha without proper information. Please semi-protect this articles indefinitely.--Shanaya1 (talk) 13:42, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- No, it is not going to happen. First, we only protect articles indefinitely if they were previously protected for finite periods of time, many times. Second, it looks much more like content dispute than like vandalism, and, to be honest, your own contribution is not that constructive.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- So what is the solution ?? IP 157.49.1.60 putting information out of nowhere. How to stop such IPs. At-least you can make it one month semi-protection or you can also make require "autoconfirmed" permission.--Shanaya1 (talk) 14:24, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- I see that you have been on Misplaced Pages for two weeks. May I please ask that you study our policies, particularly on article protection, but also WP:VAND, before making additional requests. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- Definitely I will read those policies, but right now please do something to stop this new IP.--Shanaya1 (talk) 14:30, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- If you do not like their edits does not yet mean they need to be "stopped".--Ymblanter (talk) 14:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- Definitely I will read those policies, but right now please do something to stop this new IP.--Shanaya1 (talk) 14:30, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- I see that you have been on Misplaced Pages for two weeks. May I please ask that you study our policies, particularly on article protection, but also WP:VAND, before making additional requests. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
- So what is the solution ?? IP 157.49.1.60 putting information out of nowhere. How to stop such IPs. At-least you can make it one month semi-protection or you can also make require "autoconfirmed" permission.--Shanaya1 (talk) 14:24, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for helping whilst I was away
Thanks for helping whilst I was away (for example). I am very grateful that you kept an eye on my talk page, etc.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Speedy renaming nominations
Oh, sorry for the mistake, will add them! Geregen2 (talk) 14:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, I will help you a bit.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done from Ternana down.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:43, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Gabor Szabo
Thank you. PaulCHebert (talk) 17:46, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Category deletion per CSD C1
Hello!
I have a small request: when deleting categories such as Category:Rape myths of Persephone that are empty following a category merge, would you kindly include a link to the target category and/or to the discussion page in the deletion reason, so that editors can trace what happened with the category? Without one of these links, the reason for the deletion becomes more obscure (especially to non-admins).
Thanks in advance! -- Black Falcon 03:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sure. The category move is shown anyway, and I though this would be sufficient in most cases, but I can indeed give a direct reference in the deletion reason, thanks for noticing.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Please retract some statements
In the heat of the moment, you yesterday made some unfounded accusations and added some unfortunate innuendo. Would you please retract your statements at AN about me stalking you and making a "fucking lie", your request to topic ban me from mentioning Wikidata, and the unfortunate choice of innuendo in "reminds me of" something "after which one user was indefblocked.", which if not intended to reflect on my fate was a totally unnecessary, chilling addition. Getting an action criticized is no fun, but it doesn't give us a free pass to retaliate with whatever attacks we like. Fram (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Look, you started by stating that I promote spam (in my capacity as Wikidata bureacrat). Before this gets retracted (crossing out + apologies), I do not see any basis for our further communication. Ever. Have a good day.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:04, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- I did not say that you promote spam, I said that you promoted a spambot, i.e. you granted a brand new editor the right to be a botop and you granted his spambot the right to add its spam to Wikidata (and through it to enwiki and perhaps other wikis). Quote: "their admins and bureaucrats promote spambots". This is what bureaucrats do, they "add the administrator, bureaucrat, account creator, reviewer, or bot user group to an account.", which is described in the section "Promotions and RfX closures". Fram (talk) 08:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, but you are also reading in my words what I did not say. To be honest, the last two days I find communication with you extremely unpleasant and even traumatic, and I would appreciate if you would relieve me of it. Otherwise I will have to file an ANI request.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- If you would explain what in your words I'm reading that you did not say, it would be helpful. if you would indicate what in my reply above is not sufficient or correct, it would also be helpful. You are of course free to file an ANI request, but if you don't retract your statements I will either file at ANI or directly at ArbCom (as admin behaviour ends up there anyway). I will not let me be accused of "stalking" out of the blue, without any evidence, and certainly not by an admin (who adds some more personal attacks and chilling statements). People can have disagreements, even heated ones, without slinging such mud at AN and hoping to get away with it without any problem. Pretending to be the victim may have seemed like a good tactic, but it didn't work when you tried it at AN and it won't work now. If it is stressful and traumatic for you, it is all of your own making. Fram (talk) 10:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Go to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- I see now that you had removed the section between your post here and my reply: . That's not a retraction though, that's just adding more insults without any indication that you see any problem with your statements. Fram (talk) 10:11, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Again, you made a number of statements which I read as false and offensive. In response, I made a number of statements which you read as offensive and possibly false, but I do not, and I actually did not mean to read them in a way you read them (for instance, as I previously made very clear, by referring to an infinite block of the user I did not mean you need to be infinitely blocked - quite the opposite, I do not think you should be blocked, however, I find it surprising that you make statements similar to what users have been blocked for and do not see any problem with these statements). You come to me asking that I "retract" statements you find offensive, because you find them offending. Fair enough. They might indeed have been unnecessary. In response, I ask you to "retract" your statement which came first and which I find offensive, and in any case unnecessary. And the whole thing actually started with this statement of yours. You refuse saying it is not offensive. Ok, fine. If you make zero effort trying to understand what I am saying, why should I spend my time trying to understand what you are saying? I have formed an opinion about you, but you probably should not care.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- You really can not see the difference between saying that you promoted a spambot, when you promoted (gave botstatus) to a bot which was spamming; and saying that I am stalking you, without any evidence of any actual stalking? How are you capable of acting as an admin if you are not able to see the difference between these situations and the lack of evidence for your (actually much more serious) accusation? Nevre mind the fact that I just noted your role in one problematic situation in a disucssion about the general issue (Wikidata on enwiki and in general), when you barged into an unrelated thread at AN, made your accusations, and asked for sanctions based upon it? You really can't see the difference? Fram (talk) 10:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- No, I do not see the difference. You made an unnecessary (you can easily go on you Wikidata rant without it), false (I did check the edits before granting the bot flag, I checked them afterwards, and they were ok until the website they used changed urls and some references suddenly started to point out to the spam page) and offensive statement (which I read that I promote spam). You do not see any problems with this statement and believe it just expresses facts. After that you added another one, which I found even more offensive. Now you are adding more. Fine. I am probably not capable of acting as admin, all my admin actions must be reverted, and I am a piece of shit. I am fine with that. How many times should I tell you here that I find no pleasure and no interest discussing this issue with you? Start an ANI thread and do not forget to make a reference to this discussion, or, rather, my attempt at discussion since from your side it is a monologue.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- After reading Stalking, may be indeed you actions are not yet to that level. I am afraid this is the only thing I can give you.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:57, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- How gracious of you, "not yet at that level" of obsessive and potentially criminal actions! Anyway, no, I could not make my statement about Wikidata without refering to the bot approval. It is one thing that an editor is adding spam without anyone noticing it, it would simply show again the lack of oversight Wikidata has. It is a completely different thing when anyone can request a bot and get it approved without any indication of who they are (not as a person, but their wiki-credentials), no check of whether their source is in any way reliable, no concern whether they may be self-promoting (the username was a clue), ... This shows a more ingrained problem at Wikidata, a difference in culture. Even after the problems were pointed out, you maintained that the bot approval was policy-compliant, as if that was somehow an excuse or something we should just blindly accept (and like I said elsewhere, it wasn't even true since the bot approval policy at Wikidata requires a lot more than three test edits anyway). And then you started (and continue to) overreact quite badly. Anyway, it seems we are done here, I'll think about it and let you know if and when I start an ArbCom request (no sense going to ANI as they can't desysop anyway). Fram (talk) 11:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- After reading Stalking, may be indeed you actions are not yet to that level. I am afraid this is the only thing I can give you.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:57, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- No, I do not see the difference. You made an unnecessary (you can easily go on you Wikidata rant without it), false (I did check the edits before granting the bot flag, I checked them afterwards, and they were ok until the website they used changed urls and some references suddenly started to point out to the spam page) and offensive statement (which I read that I promote spam). You do not see any problems with this statement and believe it just expresses facts. After that you added another one, which I found even more offensive. Now you are adding more. Fine. I am probably not capable of acting as admin, all my admin actions must be reverted, and I am a piece of shit. I am fine with that. How many times should I tell you here that I find no pleasure and no interest discussing this issue with you? Start an ANI thread and do not forget to make a reference to this discussion, or, rather, my attempt at discussion since from your side it is a monologue.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- You really can not see the difference between saying that you promoted a spambot, when you promoted (gave botstatus) to a bot which was spamming; and saying that I am stalking you, without any evidence of any actual stalking? How are you capable of acting as an admin if you are not able to see the difference between these situations and the lack of evidence for your (actually much more serious) accusation? Nevre mind the fact that I just noted your role in one problematic situation in a disucssion about the general issue (Wikidata on enwiki and in general), when you barged into an unrelated thread at AN, made your accusations, and asked for sanctions based upon it? You really can't see the difference? Fram (talk) 10:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Again, you made a number of statements which I read as false and offensive. In response, I made a number of statements which you read as offensive and possibly false, but I do not, and I actually did not mean to read them in a way you read them (for instance, as I previously made very clear, by referring to an infinite block of the user I did not mean you need to be infinitely blocked - quite the opposite, I do not think you should be blocked, however, I find it surprising that you make statements similar to what users have been blocked for and do not see any problem with these statements). You come to me asking that I "retract" statements you find offensive, because you find them offending. Fair enough. They might indeed have been unnecessary. In response, I ask you to "retract" your statement which came first and which I find offensive, and in any case unnecessary. And the whole thing actually started with this statement of yours. You refuse saying it is not offensive. Ok, fine. If you make zero effort trying to understand what I am saying, why should I spend my time trying to understand what you are saying? I have formed an opinion about you, but you probably should not care.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- I see now that you had removed the section between your post here and my reply: . That's not a retraction though, that's just adding more insults without any indication that you see any problem with your statements. Fram (talk) 10:11, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Go to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- If you would explain what in your words I'm reading that you did not say, it would be helpful. if you would indicate what in my reply above is not sufficient or correct, it would also be helpful. You are of course free to file an ANI request, but if you don't retract your statements I will either file at ANI or directly at ArbCom (as admin behaviour ends up there anyway). I will not let me be accused of "stalking" out of the blue, without any evidence, and certainly not by an admin (who adds some more personal attacks and chilling statements). People can have disagreements, even heated ones, without slinging such mud at AN and hoping to get away with it without any problem. Pretending to be the victim may have seemed like a good tactic, but it didn't work when you tried it at AN and it won't work now. If it is stressful and traumatic for you, it is all of your own making. Fram (talk) 10:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, but you are also reading in my words what I did not say. To be honest, the last two days I find communication with you extremely unpleasant and even traumatic, and I would appreciate if you would relieve me of it. Otherwise I will have to file an ANI request.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- I did not say that you promote spam, I said that you promoted a spambot, i.e. you granted a brand new editor the right to be a botop and you granted his spambot the right to add its spam to Wikidata (and through it to enwiki and perhaps other wikis). Quote: "their admins and bureaucrats promote spambots". This is what bureaucrats do, they "add the administrator, bureaucrat, account creator, reviewer, or bot user group to an account.", which is described in the section "Promotions and RfX closures". Fram (talk) 08:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)