Misplaced Pages

User talk:Hammersoft: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:52, 24 February 2021 editGerda Arendt (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers381,882 edits →Precious anniversary: ty← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:54, 8 January 2025 edit undoHammersoft (talk | contribs)Administrators91,242 edits rm 2024Tag: Replaced 
Line 6: Line 6:
<!-- -28 with site notice, 15 without --> <!-- -28 with site notice, 15 without -->
<!-- {{User:Hammersoft/NotFreeAnymore}} --> <!-- {{User:Hammersoft/NotFreeAnymore}} -->
{{Navbox
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="text-align: left">
| bodyclass = plainlinks
<div class="NavHead"> Old content</div>
| name = User toolbox
<div class="NavContent">
| title = Old content from this page
*
| state = {{{state|collapsed}}}
*
| navbar = {{{navbar|}}}
*
| listclass = hlist
*
| group1 = Prior to
*
| list1 =
*
* :
* :
* :
* :
* :
* :
* :
* :
:
</div>
:
</div>
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
}}

{{TOCright}} {{TOCright}}


Line 31: Line 41:
<!-- No, not above this line, AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE ---> <!-- No, not above this line, AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE --->


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
== Talk page of deleted article ==
Thank you for acting on ]. This is just to let you know that the article's talk page is still around. Best, ] (]) 13:23, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
* {{ping|Modussiccandi}} Yep, working on cleaning up the mess. I wanted to bag and tag the articles first. --] (]) 13:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Hammersoft, do you think it's worth adding their site to the blacklist? They're definitely a persistent spammer. ] (]) 17:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
* {{ping|Pahunkat}} Not as yet. ] is a last ditch measure to prevent continued spamming. Right now, their socks have all been bagged and tagged. Further, their page creations and drafts have all been deleted and salted. Let's see if this puts a lid on it, and we'll go from there. --] (]) 17:56, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Hammersoft! Thanks for clearing up this mess :-) ] (]) 17:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2021 == ] from the past month (December 2024).

<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">


] from the past month (December 2020).
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}
] '''Administrator changes''' ] '''Administrator changes'''
:] ] :] ]
:] {{hlist|class=inline
:] ] • ] • ] • ]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


{{Col-2}}
]
] '''CheckUser changes''' ] '''CheckUser changes'''
:] ] • ] • ] • ] :] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]
:] ]

</div>
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
]


] '''Oversight changes''' ] '''Oversight changes'''
:] ] • ] • ] :] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
:] ] |]
|]
{{Col-end}}
}}
:] ]


</div>
] '''Guideline and policy news'''
</div>
:*] ] (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a ].


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
* Following ], ] was adopted as a ].
* A ] is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
] '''Technical news''' ] '''Technical news'''
* The Nuke feature also now ] to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.
:* You can now put pages on your watchlist ].


] '''Arbitration''' ] '''Arbitration'''
* Following the ], the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: {{noping|CaptainEek}}, {{noping|Daniel}}, {{noping|Elli}}, {{noping|KrakatoaKatie}}, {{noping|Liz}}, {{noping|Primefac}}, {{noping|ScottishFinnishRadish}}, {{noping|Theleekycauldron}}, {{noping|Worm That Turned}}.
:*By ], ] have been temporarily ] {{tq|for all pages relating to the ] (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)}}. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
:* Following the ], the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: {{Noping|Barkeep49}}, {{Noping|BDD}}, {{Noping|Bradv}}, {{Noping|CaptainEek}}, {{Noping|L235}}, {{Noping|Maxim}}, {{Noping|Primefac}}.

----
{{Center|{{Flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 00:07, 5 January 2021 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Mz7@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=996253833 -->

==Admin==
That's good news, nice to see unanimity too! All the best: ''] ]''<small> 08:25, 5 January 2021 (UTC).</small><br />
* Thank you! I was as astonished as I possibly could be. --] (]) 14:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Congrats on the promotion!!! I thoroughly enjoy watching the wonders of the wikipedia editing process when you and ] collaborate on article improvements. ] (]) 21:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
* Thank you for the congrats. However, as you are well aware, the remainder of your comment is facetious. Please stop. Thank you, --] (]) 21:47, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
* Replying to the non-logged-in editor: Didn't you mean "congrats on the '''''de''motion'''"? {{smiley}} ]/<small><small>(])/(]) 🎄</small></small> 22:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
:* Phew! For a I thought you might have been talking about a ]. --] (]) 22:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)<p>

==Lil Kei==
Hey I lost touch I was blocked by a user for only editing my article I didn’t have time to learn about anyone else ] (]) 07:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
* Responded on your original account at ]. --] (]) 13:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

== A kitten for you! ==

]
Thank you for looking into my block req :)

-- <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue;">]</span> <span style="color:orange">☮</span> 03:24 AM January 7, 2021 03:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both;"/>

== Corey Worthington Comment ==
<small>]</small><br />
Just wanted to acknowledge your comment on the Corey Worthington draft. I was aware of the previous AfDs, but not aware of the discussion you linked to, so I appreciate that. However, both of the things share a common element in that the discussion and all of the AfDs are from over a decade ago. As such, it's probably a time for a revisit. Typically when I review drafts I look for reasons to accept, our standard is simply "likely to pass an AfD", so I find looking for any reason to publish a page is the best approach. However, in consideration of the previous AfDs I approached this draft differently. I in fact attempted to find reasons not to accept it. However, I think a compelling enough arguement can be made that there is ] coverage to put away any ] concerns. For example, there was coverage around him in 2017 on whether there would be a 10 year reunion party that was covered by prominent media outlets such as Vice and the Herald Sun. And then coverage again in 2018 by the Sydney Morning Herald about him being on Australian Ninja Warrior that goes beyond just the routine "he'll be on this show" sort of bit. Again, I'd love if you can help me find a reason for this not to come to mainspace, but I'm just not seeing it. ] (]) 03:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
* I do think that if it goes to mainspace in its current form, it is very likely to go AfD, and not without good reason. Many of the sources that are on the draft were from back at the time of that party, and fail to sustain notability as pointed out in the multiple AfDs. I'd also like to point out that is from a press release website. I.e., it's likely written by the subject themselves or by someone acting on their behalf. This is not a ]. Also, the 10th reunion party didn't happen and Worthington likely wasn't involved. I don't see how that makes him notable on the face of it. That there continues to be some places that are writing about him might help sustain it. Also a movie "rumored" to have been "based" on his actions isn't much of a support for notability. If it truly were based on his actions, it would be well known as the studio would have paid for the rights from him to make the movie. "Inspired" is the word that is used in the reference, and the draft should be changed to reflect that. I don't think being a contestant on the Ninja Warrior show makes him notable. Out of 80 top contestants on the four seasons, only three of them have articles on them (],],]) and those three are notable for other reasons, not for being on the show. Worthington appeared on one episode, and that's all. I don't think that makes him notable. I haven't investigated every reference. I am also mildly concerned that the account that created this draft appears to be a ]. There's a lot of problems here. --] (]) 03:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
*:{{u|Hammersoft}}, Yeah that's all fine by me. I'm just going to let it sit. I think another reviewer will probably push it through eventually and they can have it. I have zero interest in defending that page in an AfD. ] (]) 05:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

== Administrators' newsletter – February 2021 ==

] from the past month (January 2021).
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}
] '''Administrator changes'''
:] ]
:] ] • ] • ] • ]

{{Col-2}}
]
] '''CheckUser changes'''
:] ] • ]

] '''Oversight changes'''
:] ] • ]
{{Col-end}}

] '''Arbitration'''
:*The ] authorized for ] were ] to cover {{tq|post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people}}, replacing the 1932 cutoff.


] '''Miscellaneous''' ] '''Miscellaneous'''
* A ] is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. ]
:*Voting in the ] will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The ] of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically to vote.
:*Misplaced Pages has now been around for ], and recently saw its billionth edit!


---- ----
{{Center|{{Flatlist| {{center|{{flatlist|
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
}}}}<!-- }}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 19:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)</small>}} -->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 15:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Amorymeltzer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1004110745 --> <!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1266956718 -->


== Live event photos == == January music ==

Hi Hammersoft. Perhaps you can help me sort something out? If I take a photo at a live event (e.g. a concert, public appearance), then it seems for that the photo should be OK (for the most part) to upload to Misplaced Pages/Commons under a free license of my choosing, right? What if, however, the photo I take is of a live video feed of the event (e.g. footage of a performace shown on video screens or monitors)? In other words, I'm in attendance and the event and video footage of the event is also being shown live within the same venue. Would such a photo be considered a derivative work? For reference, I'm asking about this because of ] and I'm trying to figure out whether that file should be treated as non-free content. -- ] (]) 07:18, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
*I've commented there. --] (]) 15:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
*:Thank you. -- ] (]) 22:24, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

== Possible COI ==

Hi Hammersoft. I'm wondering if you'd mind taking a look at ]? Brevity isn't one of my strong points and I just want to make sure I'm not overwhelming this new editor. You seem to have had success in the past helping editors who might have found themselves in a similar situation; so, maybe you could offer some advice to this one as well. Their now removed quasi-COI declaration from their user talk page seems to imply there might also be some PAID issues which need clarification. There were also a bunch of images uploaded to Misplaced Pages ] which I tagged with npd which have just been reuploaded as ], which might also indicate some connection (note the watermark removal). It seems this editor means well, but might not be aware of the hole they might be digging for themselves; so, I guess I'm trying to help them sort things out before they dig too deep. -- ] (]) 23:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

:Just for reference, I stumbled upon this via ]. — ] (]) 00:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:* It is a clear COI. But, that said, this isn't a for profit company trying to advertise its products. It's almost like they are a Wikipedian in residence. Even so, they need to comply with ] and I would place the standard warning template on their talk pages to that effect. I would also carefully watch their edits to make sure they are neutral. They should be making them to the respective talk pages. --] (]) 17:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
::*Thanks for taking a look. They haven't responded to my latest post yet on their user talk page, or the posts on the article talk page yet. Perhaps it will be easier to figure out a plan to help them once they do that. If they can be convinced to declare and stick to their current account (if they were using more than one), then the rest shouldn't be to hard to do. -- ] (]) 22:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:::* One can hope. --] (]) 00:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

== ] ==
Thank you Hammersoft! I corrected the draft page. Could you please approve it? ] (]) 10:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
* Responding on your talk page to keep conversation together. --] (]) 13:54, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

== Beagle 2 SOFT landing ==
If Beagle 2 hadn't made a soft landing on Mars, then it would have been splattered all over the surface! The ] from the MRO show otherwise. I've re-edited the ] article to reflect this fact. If you think the article should read 'the third nation to successfully operate a lander on Mars', then maybe that edit would be more helpful. There again, this calls into doubt the success Mars 3 as both it and Beagle obtained data but failed to successfully transmit anything useful. You know the procedure by now, so make your intentions known at the article's ] first.
:] (]) 05:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

== Rip wikipedia notability ==

Hi I feel Sad today when I see your wiki admins are getting paid for those articles who are not notable and who have done anti national works if you think to become a software developer or app is notable than everyone is notable have a look on ] this guy pay admins to get page up and start getting verified on social media (Very sad) and when someone talk about it they automatically get banned 😆😆😆 RIP notability and wikipedia. K hope you will check this and if you want us to trust wikipedia have a close look and see about it. ] (]) 20:45, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
* {{ping|Pibotindia}} I'm very unclear about what it is you are asking me to do, or claiming has happened. As can be seen from the , it wasn't started by any administrator. It's hard to see how any claim that administrators were paid to get this article on Misplaced Pages. An administrator did approve the draft, thus moving it to article space, but still there's no evidence to suggest {{ping|Fences and windows}} was paid for this. Please note that ], making serious accusations without providing proving evidence is considered a personal attack. Undisclosed paid editing, which you are claiming Fences and windows has done, is a serious breach of ]. Please stop making this accusation without providing strong evidence supporting this claim. Thank you, --] (]) 20:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok if these are not paid why those accounts are getting banned who talk on this page why those are getting banned who sayd delete this promotional page? Have any answer ] (]) 20:59, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

This fench is paid administrators 😂😂😂😂 my account is going ban soon because now I talk about the zeyan 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 ] (]) 21:00, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
* {{ping|Pibotindia}} Would you care to highlight what accounts you think have been banned because they talked about ]? --] (]) 21:01, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
:Forget about it, Hammersoft--it's just a sock. ] (]) 21:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
:* Yeah, just trying to understand the situation a little better. He's obviously on about something. I just don't know what. --] (]) 21:09, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
::I opened ] after another account recreated Hums4r's deleted autobio, possibly as a setup. This other SPI is related: ], which Pibotindia may be connected to - and which explains the animosity towards Hums4r. I first got involved when I responded to last month. I've stopped trying to mentor him as there's far too much drama involved and I felt I was being used as a shield rather than for advice. There's clearly a lot of rivalry, COIs, and sockpuppetry in articles related to Kashmir at the moment, but I'm not sure what exactly is going on. There's a about this. I don't know why you've been dragged into this, but I'd appreciate your views and commenting at ANI about this comment being left here. I'll drop at note at SPI too. ]<span style="background-color:white; color:#808080;">&amp;</span>] 02:07, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
* I think Hums4r needs to do as you suggested; name the accounts they believe to be a problem. I think it's incumbent on Hums4r to act. --] (]) 14:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
:*{{u|Hammersoft}} I did that, i named all of them, i even put up a warning on my user page, but i was blocked. they plotted an conspiracy against me and they succeeded, they all belong to kashmir and they have been trying to use wikipedia for their promotional works and it all started when i started reporting them. They are dragging all my mentors into it just because these mentors helped me. Fences and windows and TheAafi are being dragged into this for absolutely no reason, They completely impersonated my act's to make everything look as if it was me doing sockpuppetry so that they could get me blocked. They first started by targetting my article's (Zeyan Shafiq) and (Stalwart Esports). they registered an SPI case against me, even when the CU didn't show it was me, they blocked me on basis of same geographical location. i appealed as well (https://utrs-beta.wmflabs.org/public/appeal/view?hash=be616eaac191f3c950758d94acfe7fc2) but it got declined as well, i emailed as well but no response. i did everything. Even Fences and windows thinks that i used him as a shield when i never intended to do that, i always asked for his help to learn more on wikipedia. i even wrote to him on his talk page explaining things using friend's mobile but it was removed as well. I don't have a platform to prove myself, i get blocked automatically, I am not trying to do something disruptive by creating new accounts, i am just trying to prove myself. I don't care even if the article (Zeyan Shafiq) or (Stalwart Esports) both get deleted because focusing too much on these article's ruined my relationship with all my mentors, please help me with the unban, i am assuring that i won't even ever touch any topic related to kashmiri people because it is all too much drama and hectic. I have always admitted to all my faults on wikipedia and i never kept them hidden. i have always been honest. i don't deserve this. I don't know who to appeal and where to appeal to prove myself. This will be removed as well i think, but if you see this please help me please tell me what should i do. ] (]) 18:31, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

{{-}}

== Precious anniversary ==
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Three}} - Thank you for your comment in the arbcase request. I better don't go, thinking that "inept" might just be a factual description, no insult. I see ]. --] (]) 08:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
* {{ping|Gerda Arendt}} It is easy to become cynical :/ Paraphrasing, and with apologies to ], "Rage, RAGE against the dying of the optimism!" The stage ArbCom is setting, should they accept this case, is that at the first sign of trouble an administrator will have a case opened about them. Given that it is impossible to avoid sanctions if a case is named after you (and yes, based on a study covering years of ArbCom cases, that is true), an admin is pretty much doomed if anyone brings said administrator to ArbCom. Yes, RexxS has been decidedly uncivil. Yes, RexxS has threatened the use of tools while involved. But, not one bit of effort (that I can find) has been made to approach RexxS regarding these issues. It's 0 to 100 in 0.1 seconds. That's a very dangerous precedent, and a very chilling moment for all administrators. To me, like with your situation linked above, this is blatantly obvious. It is not so to others, and perhaps we are blinded by our own perceptions. --] (]) 12:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
*: Thank you, and I have no language problems with any of that ;) - in my linked case, I'd love to approach the editor in question but am banned from his talk, and can't speak up for the other because I have been warned about proxy-editing for a blocked user, - how about uninvolved you? --] (]) 12:30, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
::* {{ping|Gerda Arendt}} I am having a look. I don't want you to think I'm ignoring this. --] (]) 14:12, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
::*: Thank you, appreciated. Drmies looked but didn't see it all first. He replied on my talk. --] (]) 15:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)\
::::* I left a comment on FS' talk page regarding this. See ]. I am continuing to investigate. It appears this might not have been isolated. There are other issues as well. --] (]) 15:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
::::* {{ping|Gerda Arendt}} I've left a strongly worded message on FS' talk page. After looking into this over the last couple of hours, the situation is rather grim, to say the least. --] (]) 17:04, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox {{User QAIbox
| image = Hellebore, Lorch.jpg | image = Ehrenbach icicles.jpg
| image_upright = 0.9 | image_upright = 0.8
| bold = ] · ] · ]
| normal = Hellebore, Lorch
}} }}
:::::: Thank you for having done that for us. I saw something coming when ] appeared on my watchlist again and again, with a talk page growing to a few times what the article was initially. I said I don't want to be between the fighters (which included ]), - and perhaps that was too easy. --] (]) 17:18, 23 February 2021 (UTC) Happy new year 2025, opened with ] that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page had it). My ] is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. -- ] (]) 14:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::* Sometimes there are situations where it's best to let someone else step in, if they are available and willing. I had the time. I wish I had it back :) but I had the time. --] (]) 17:20, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
| image = Helleborus orientalis. Lenteroos 04.JPG
| image_upright = 0.9
| normal = Helleborus orientalis
}}
:::::::: yes, flower as promised - the wild one is pictured by me, the flower of the month of February, and the other - of course not by me - was TFP on 17 February. I am happy that the user whom you helped first on my request - remember? right after your RfA - is still with us and sent me a gorgeous pic from Alaska. --] (]) 19:01, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
::::::::* Do you mean Tsistunagiska? Whomever it was, we desperately need more coverage in Alaska. I've done a couple of articles on things Alaska, and could greatly use some help if they are local. --] (]) 19:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
::::::::*: go ask, yes, look for Alaska on my talk, piped name to ARoseWolf which is the translation I believe - it says "spotty involvement" on the talk --] (]) 19:45, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
*:{{tps}} {{rto|Hammersoft|Gerda Arendt}} but that is the stage we are going to set in general, quoting ]: "at least one thread at a community forum such as AN or ANI that closed within the last 6 months where the closing statement indicates that there was consensus that the administrator behaved inappropriately". "t least one" .. one strike is enough. " community forum such as AN or ANI" .. ] is also a community forum, albeit rather obscure, an AfD? "he closing statement indicates ... behaved inappropriately" .. ] is enough. ] <sup>] ]</sup> 07:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
::* {{ping|Beetstra}} Yep. Chilling indeed. I'll possibly make a comment on that RfC later. I see...so many problems. It might be hard to succinctly make a statement. --] (]) 14:12, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
::*:Hammersoft, just wanted to say I found your flow chart and comments at the desysop RfA illuminating. Thanks! ] (]) 12:02, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
::*:* That's very kind of you! I was quite surprised...4 other people did a 'thank' on it as well. I didn't expect that! --] (]) 12:14, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
::*:*: Hammersoft, I thank you for your clarification on the requested arb case (as explained also above). This wouldn't be the first time that I tell Newyorkbrad that he is the only arb representing me. I bet you know the ultimate guide to arbitration, - if not, see my talk, also about picking your battles. --] (]) 12:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

== Regarding content deletion ==

Hello ],

I think, I mistakenly deleted discussion copy. I was trying to clean up ] article since it was rejected. Got advice to request a deletion and start fresh writeup instead of editing exiting one.

Thank you for restoring previous content.

Thanks,
]

] (]) 15:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
* I'm not clear if you're asking a question? If you are, could you rephrase? Thanks, --] (]) 17:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

== Feedback sought ==

Hi Hammersoft. I was just reading your ]. I've tried to make clear that I'm voting to accept the case because of concerns beyond the GS template situation. That situation comes nowhere close to being sufficient for a case. Obviously given your concern I haven't been successful. I would welcome any feedback you have about how I could have made my thinking and intentions more clear. Best, ] (]) 18:20, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
* Barkeep, thanks for your comment. The problem that I have is to my knowledge there has been absolutely no attempt to raise issues with RexxS' behavior with regards to ]. Accepting this case provides an extremely chilling precedent for all administrators. All it will now take is a simple allegation, and that's it. An administrator will be dragged before ArbCom. That is deeply disturbing, and effectively voids ]. ArbCom does not have the power to void policy. That power is with the community.
* I am also very cognizant that this case ''will'' be named with RexxS in the title. This will provide a basis for cognitive anchoring. I've long argued this is abusive towards participants in cases, as there is no possible way for a person such as RexxS to get a fair hearing. Indeed, I did a study of cases from 2009 to 2015. Across 46 title named cases, such as RexxS would be, a title named party received 11 times more sanctions than non-titled named parties. Further, no title named party ever escaped an ArbCom case without sanctions against them.
* There is no possibility of RexxS getting a fair hearing here, and the deliberate breach of ] policy is abusive by ArbCom. I am ''not'' suggesting RexxS did nothing wrong. Rather, what ArbCom is doing is disgustingly wrong and violates established policy.
* {{ping|RexxS}}; asking you to comment here as to your perception of the veracity of the above intro statement in the first bullet. RexxS, I know this is all stressful for you, and I'm sorry for dragging you into another conversation. A simple yes/no (yes, there have been attempts, no there haven't been) response on that point is all that I am hoping for. --] (]) 18:36, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
** It's okay, I'm used to dealing with stress{{snd}} not always successfully of course{{snd}} but I can give you a reply. An example of where I received criticism for my admin actions was the Citation bot affair (ironically in an ANI thread I started myself for review), but I believe my position was eventually fully vindicated. Even so, I did learn from that. It's also a clear example of how such criticism can be perniciously manipulated to support a later complaint by the "mud-throwing" mechanism. Any active administrator or long-term editor will have made "enemies" over time, which is why it's so difficult for long-standing editors to successfully run for adminship, and why experienced admins like Kudpung and BrownHairedGirl got such a raw deal when dragged before ArbCom. If ArbCom want to review my administrative actions seriously and dispassionately, I'm willing to discuss and try to learn any lessons. But if they want to simply provide a forum for everybody who has ever disagreed with me to sling mud, and then take on the role of civility police, it's not a game I'm willing to play. --] (]) 19:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
*:On case naming, I raised that point on list a few days back (when I was leaning towards declining this case) but for now there isn't enough support on the committee to reconsider that practice. As for the attempts to previously resolve, thanks for the extra thoughts. I'll just say, for myself, that I viewed some of the noticeboard/talk page discussions as past attempts to resolve this issue. I think given that ArbCom is the only place that can remove sysop that ArbCom needs to consider cases where "many small things add up" and not just "here's one large mistake" as reasons to take a case. Of course taking a case doesn't mean that desysop (or even any sanction at all) will or should be the right solution. Again I appreciate hearing your thinking and hope my thinking was of some value to you. Best, ] (]) 19:33, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

== Advice, please. ==

Since you are familiar with Francis Schonken, I hope you won’t mind me asking for advice about the best way to move forward to resolve an ]. Full disclosure: I had a similar experience with FS on another article and my solution at that time ]. Will you please point me to a better approach? ] (]) 00:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
* There's an essay at ]. It's not policy or guideline, but it's good advice. You made a change to the guideline, you were reverted, you then should have initiated discussion on the talk page of the guideline and invited editors (via ping) who disagreed with your edit to join the conversation. That way, a discussion can ensue that would hopefully arrive at a consensus. Further, the page where the revert was made remains in its original form until there's a consensus to change it. Sometimes this can be a bit trying on your patience. I've waited for over a month sometimes before I've gone ahead and continued a change that was reverted after I started discussion. As an example of this in action, I made a change at ]. This was reverted a couple of days later by another editor. Discussion continued at ], where I am waiting for a response right now. And so it goes. Also, be careful to avoid carrying on conversations in edit summaries. Edit summaries are useful to describe what is being done in a particular edit, but are poor tools for communication. See ] for more on this. Hope this helps, --] (]) 00:45, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
:*Thank you. In the future I will resort to talk pages more quickly. With regard to my immediate problem of an impasse resulting from Francis Schonken not engaging on the WP:Redlink talk page, should I (a) do nothing, wait a few weeks, and then restore my edits, (b) ping FS again after a few more days, say it appears he/she is no longer objecting, and then wait a couple weeks and (if FS does not re-engage) restore my edits, or (c) something else? ] (]) 01:36, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
::* Not a bad course of action, but do ping them again prior to making the change to give them a chance to respond. I would do the same for Walter Görlitz too. --] (]) 01:39, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate your help. ] (]) 02:49, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:54, 8 January 2025

    User toolbox for Hammersoft
    General
    Skin customizations
    Requests / Investigations
    History
    Admin history
    Bureaucrat history
    Steward history
    Actions
    Old content from this page
    Prior to
    6 April 2011
    11 July 2011
    23 September 2011
    minor
    20 February 2012
    23 January 2013
    29 April 2014
    5 January 2015
    4 January 2016
    4 January 2017
    1 January 2018
    1 January 2019
    1 January 2020
    1 January 2021
    1 January 2022
    1 January 2023
    1 January 2024
    1 January 2025


    Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

    News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).

    Administrator changes

    added Sennecaster
    readded
    removed

    CheckUser changes

    added
    readded Worm That Turned
    removed Ferret

    Oversight changes

    added
    readded Worm That Turned

    Guideline and policy news

    Technical news

    • The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

    Arbitration

    Miscellaneous

    Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

    January music

    story · music · places

    Happy new year 2025, opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page had it). My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)