Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jpgordon: 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 09:36, 1 May 2007 editWikiEditor2004 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users51,646 edits →Please check!← Previous edit Latest revision as of 01:59, 10 January 2025 edit undoBbb23 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators271,007 edits →Master?: argh 
Line 1: Line 1:
__NOTOC__ __NOTOC__
{{lowercase title}}
{| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite;"
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|-
|maxarchivesize = 250K
|This talk page is '''automatically archived''' by ]. Any sections older than '''14''' days are automatically archived to ''']'''. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
|counter = 11
|-
|algo = old(14d)
|}<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-14 DoUnreplied-Yes Target-User talk:Jpgordon/Archive 2--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE-->
|archive = User talk:Jpgordon/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{archive box|search=yes|auto=long}}


For older history, check as well as the archives:
#]
__TOC__




{{adminstats|jpgordon}}
== You asked a great question ==
{{Signpost-subscription}}


For older history, check as well as the archives.
You asked:
__TOC__

Do you think you're capable of writing it from a neutral point of view?

This is really the best question ever in Misplaced Pages. After all the basic NPOV policy require us to "write from the enemy POV" but no one actually does.

Here is what I do with my kids:

say we have many sweats and each of them wants more. I tell one: You split the heap into two and your brother will choose which half-heap he takes. This <b> guranties </b> a spilt right at the middle (quality and quantity) because each knows that an unfair split will work for his disdavntage.

In wikipedia w can do the same:

Two , 1 from each side, will be rquired to write an article.
A vote would be taken which article is more NPOV and that article wil stay for 6 month.


After 6 month updates will be allowed. This will guranty NPOV.

Best,
] 08:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
*This might work if the issues involved had two sides. They don't, in general; most issues, when properly examined, have multiple points of view to consider. Voting in no way guarantees NPOV, not even close. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 15:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

:::True, but currentt system failed in most ME articles (endless edit-wars) where there are usually two clear and opposing sides that need adult supervision on every edit. Maybe voting is not the solution but an edit behind the scene (i.e not availble to the viwing public - just to participating editors) and involvment of 3rd nutral party prior to "publication" will improve the situation. ] 06:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Might be interesting and useful, but it won't happen on Misplaced Pages. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 06:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::Too bad, because the endless fighting over tough ME issues such as ] makes good editors go away from these articles. (I don't count my self as such - I don't shy away because other push their POV) There are editors much better than me that avoid editing those articles and this is how it became even more POV. ] 13:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==

Could you please elaborate on why you declined this case? These people were on AIV the entire morning and now they're discussed at ANI . - ]|] 10:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
*Sure. The requester is himself a sockpuppeteer and a spammer -- or someone is a very very convincing liar. Answered on ANI. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 15:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

== Francisco Gil-White mediation ==

Hi Josh, thought you might like a heads-up on this. You may recall ], who repeatedly tried to spam links to http://www.hirhome.com to various Misplaced Pages articles - you tackled him about it on his user talk page (]) and on AN/I (]). He appears to have learned nothing from the experience and has now brought a mediation case, singling me out for some reason. See ]. Given your previous intervention in the matter, I've added you as an involved party. My response is at ]. Naturally I think the whole thing's a waste of time and I'm encouraging the mediator to dump it on the grounds of Ryan4's bad faith, but it would be helpful if you could add a comment or two so that we can have a record of where things stand. Unfortunately I don't think this will be the last we'll hear from the hirhome fan club - Ryan4 now appears to be coordinating with fellow hirhomers. -- ] 18:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
*Thanks. Waste. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 22:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
**Agreed, though knocking it firmly on the head will help in dealing with the hirhomers in future. Thanks for the comments. -- ] 22:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

==arbitration==
Hi there, I don't understand why my arbitration request for University of Wisconsin redirect was not accepted. The bad behavor of other parties is POV and ingoring facts backed by authoritative sources. ] 03:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
*Arbitration is not for content disputes. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 03:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Then what do you arbitrate? It is clearly indicated in wikipedia that arbitration is the last resort for dispute. Besides, this is not just content dispute. It is about violation of NPOV.] 03:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
*Which is also a content issue. See ]. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 04:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

== Tor nodes ==

I dunno how recent the blocks were, but recently I've run into at least 5 or 6 Tor nodes which you blocked in such a manner as to not allow logged-in editing; blocking policy as far as I can gather seems to encourage blocking them in a way that allows folks like me to edit through Tor. So in the future I guess I'd appreciate it if you didn't so block them? --] ] 04:16 ] ] (GMT)

== Erhnam ==

Point taken. I felt "Banned by a cabal of bigoted Jews, Brits, and assorted liberal zealots whom fill wikipedia full of lies and bias?" demanded some response, however you're right that it isn't worth the effort, and also right that I'm open to allegations of "taunting". Thanks. ] 15:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
*"Never wrestle with a pig. You get covered with mud, and the pig enjoys it." --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 03:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

==]==
I saw your message at ]. I agree that the article should be merged into ], since they are the same thing. For example, in ] countries, "jail" is a word in local languages, which if we go by this type of precedence, will result in yet different article! What do you think? Your message has not been replied since a long time. If you agree, I will go ahead and merge it. Please reply on my talk page.--] 20:24, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
:Ok! Will do in coming days.--] 20:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
:Hi! I have looked into the links referring to ], and many times they are referring to places for detention. I was disambiguating the links with ] for now, thinking to merge it later some time, but I realized that this distinction is made in many more articles which are not related to ] (], for example). In this case, I suggest that we create an article ], very much like ] but without "american" heritage, and merge Jail (American) to it. Then, we move current ] to ]. Is this a good idea?--] 20:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


==Jail and merging it== == Your signature ==
Hi! I think I have not done a clean job in merging/moving stuff. Can you do it for me? Here is what I did:
# Moved Jail to Jail (disambig)
# copy/pasted Jail (American) to Jail <- this is where I messed up :(


Could you fix your signature? Your talk page link has random box characters in them (which display "01D 122"). On another computer, it just comes as boxes. <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:15px"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> | ]) </span> 04:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Copy pasting has left the page without any history or talk page (which I have copy/pasted for now).


:I would've uploaded an image but Commons kept saying that my file name was too generic (yeah right). <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"> <span style="color:ForestGreen;font-size:15px"> ]</span> (<span style="color:#324c80">she/they</span> | ]) </span> 04:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Could you do me a favor and delete the article ] and move ]? This will, as far as I understand, merge the history and talk pages. I will then modify the (current ]) article again. Thanks! I am waiting for your response.--] 22:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
::Interesting that nobody has complained in the many years I've used those four unicode characters. Hey lurkers (do I have any lurkers? hello?), are my musical characters legible? ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 05:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:No problemo! It was just for facilitating previous editors.--] 19:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – December 2024 ==
'''I''' didn't file the request in the first place . Blame Newyorkbrad. (It may have been a mistake to give a clerk's hat to a real life lawyer. ;) ] 00:26, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


] from the past month (November 2024).
== {{user|75.109.91.52}} block review ==


]
Could you review the unblock request at the talk page? I don't know if this is an arbitration or checkuser issue, but the circumstances and reason for blocking are a little fuzzy. ] ] 20:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
*Abusive sockpuppetry. Checkuser block. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 21:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
**Good comment about "punishment", too. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 21:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


] '''Administrator changes'''
Thanks. ] is autoblocked because of ]. The checkuser block says don't undue ''any'' blocks that occur as a result of checkuser, so I assume autoblocks fall under this category. I'm not even sure that this is an autoblock since the IP's block isn't anonymous only. ] ] 18:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
:I just came over to ask the same thing about FoxAtomic. I told them I'd ask you to look at the block. <span style=" white-space: nowrap">— ]]</span> — 20:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
|]
::Take a look at the for that IP. It's been blocked for vandalism close to a dozen times in less than a year. I don't know why there's been so much vandalism from that IP; perhaps it's a compromised server. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 23:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''Interface administrator changes'''
I forgot about ] for a bit... this user does not appear to be a vandal, but apparently they can't edit. Would it make sense to reblock the IP, allowing already-registered users to edit, but disallowing account creation? ··]] 08:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
*I'll give it a try and see what happens. Usually, though, that just results in a pile of abuse. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 14:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
|]
|]
}}
:] ]


] '''CheckUser changes'''
== RE:JuWiki Checkuser ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
Thanks for looking at the case. I filed the request to see the whether it would be useful doing the checkuser. I filed as more of a formality, and highly doubting myself that it was a case of impersonation. Anyways, thanks for looking at it. ] 15:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
* Following ], the ] has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the ] within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
* Following a ], a new speedy deletion criterion, ], has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.


] '''Technical news'''
==Duck test==
* Technical volunteers can now register for the ], which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.
Hello. You refused a Request for CheckUser as "unnecessary, duck test". Would you mind clarifying what you meant? ] and ] have been accused of being new sockpuppets of a banned sockpuppeter ]. If they are, their contributions should be deleted and the accounts blocked. If they are not, other users should stop claiming they are. I hoped a CheckUser would make clear how we should react to them. Since I am not completely sure what you meant and I do not want to base my behavior on misinterpretation, I would be very grateful if you could explain your words here or on my talk page. Thank you in advance. ] 16:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
*Just as on your previous RFCU, you don't need a checkuser for this; I quote ''Please request admin action, not an unnecessary checkuser''. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 17:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::Thank you again. ] 17:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Hi I know for a fact that I am not VinceB, so what can I do to prove this? The issue here is that Tankred holds ultra nationalistic views about Slovakia (such as that it existed in 1100). Of course there are more than 1 hungarian alive who will take issue with attacks like that please at least give the benefit of the doubt and do the checkuser. I will explain this whole issue at length in email if you require. ] 19:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Please, refrain from personal attacks and address you case where it is suitable: at ], not here. ] 19:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


] '''Arbitration'''
==]==
* The arbitration case '']'' (formerly titled '']'') has been closed.
I ask you to reconsider... AIV declined to block Ciaranph for longer than a few hours and there may be more socks. ] 19:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
* An arbitration case titled '']'' has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.


----
== question about case you solved at ] ==
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1259680487 -->


== Galopindeschamps ==
Hi - I realize you're busy, so I'll try to be brief. This regards your "confirmed" determination at ].


You recently blocked sockpuppets of Budisgood. Now there is another brand new editor ] working on the . I am hesitant about another sockpuppet investigation. What do you think? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 19:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm a non-involved editor who showed up to help, responding to ].


:Oh hell yes. CU-blocked. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 19:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
I have no experience with RFCU procedure. Are there further steps we need to take to request blocking of the confirmed sockpuppet accounts, or is that part of the RFCU procedure that will happen on its own schedule?
::I reverted some of 'em, could you get the rest? (Gotta run.) ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 19:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Okay, I will take care of it. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 19:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)


What do you think of ]. To me it screams the same level of incompetence as Budisgood. See . <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 20:39, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
There have been complaints about ] on several noticeboards by more than one editor (as documented at the checkuser case). Your response is the first definitive action on any of those reports and much appreciated.


:Yup, and another range CU-blocked. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 21:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I have no agenda about this particular article and am not involved there myself - my only concern is to protect the editors of that page from the disruptive actions of ] and his sock accounts. He is a COI single purpose account and has caused a lot of disruption on the one article's talkpage, interfering with at least six good faith editors, as well as posting warnings and essays on editors' user and talk pages (including mine, from when I tried to assist in calming the situation). Here's an example of one of his disruptive essays: ; (he uses his user name sometimes, but also signs with "Veritas Longa" rather than his user name).


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
Please let me know if you plan to block the puppet accounts or what we would need to do to request that in the proper forum.


] from the past month (December 2024).
If you would be willing to warn ] to calm down his aggressive ways and edit more collaborativelty, that would certainly be appreciated as well.
When I tried to communicate with him, it quickly went beyond my ability to deal with his behavior so I had to back off, and the editors on that page are still struggling with his disruptions.


<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
Thanks for your help. --] ] 22:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
:Sorry, but once I've acted in my role as checkuser person, I really prefer not to do related administrative things like blocking and warning. You'll need to get someone else. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 01:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


] '''Administrator changes'''
::OK, no problem. Thanks for your reply. --] ] 02:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:] ]
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
== Short Strohs ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]
:] ]


</div>
Hi. Your comments on my talk page are perhaps <adjective here>, but also perhaps not <adjective here>. Tone down the comments, please, or someone (who knows?) is going to get sufficiently pissed off to leave mocking messages on your talk page, which would be a loss for Misplaced Pages (and a waste of your time.) Just because you have a keyboard doesn't mean you have to leave patronizing messages for every Tom, Dick and Harry -- at least, not here, where we try to keep things at a less ridiculous level. What's the point of sullying your own good name that way? ] 02:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
*Shrug. Take it as you will. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 04:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
]


] '''Oversight changes'''
== Check User ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
Could you please provide a reasoning for the rejection of the case for ProtectWomen and Karl Meier? Doesn't code ''D'' apply? Thanks --] 05:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]


</div>
: Thanks for replying back. The case is now closed and I now think that the two users are most probably not the same ;), but it was never my intention to harass. The bitter reaction and accusations of users: Proabivouac and Karl Meier made it appear so. --] 22:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
</div>


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
== Speedy Checkusers! ==
* 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'''
* 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.


] '''Arbitration'''
JP, thanks so much for the quick responses on the astounding 10 CU cases in one day! Do you know when the IP cases will be completed? '''<font color="#5B92E5" face="georgia">]</font>''' 15:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
* 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}}.
*As soon as someone feels like doing it. It's basically a volunteer job, as you know, and the tools are so weak that those IP cases are astonishingly and mind-numbinly tedious. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 15:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
**Whoo, thanks. ;) That's quite a few cases resolved. Largely thankless work, but a few people notice and definitely appreciate it. &ndash; <span style="font-family: Garamond">] (])</span> 01:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
: I am sorry but it is not good to decline without giving any reason when the report is file while giving proper reasoning. I am reffering to ]. This time we have given your difference even then decline? and it is even without writing a single word of reasoning? --- ] 17:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


] '''Miscellaneous'''
== Please check! ==
* A ] is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. ]


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


== User ==
Please check my IP, or User name or I dont know what, because some users think, that I am a sockpuppet of VinceB! ] asked this from you too. Please do it for mee! Give me the chance to prove that I dont lie!


@] Hi JPgordon, you recently unblocked this user ] and they claimed they had improved.. Well they dropped this on the talk page over a dispute claiming me and another editor are ''disruptively editing''...while they themself didn't actually read the discussion to see what the dispute was about. I'm not sure what would be done here, but giving you a headsup. ] (]) 18:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
I dont speak english so good, but this is what happened:


:Thanks for the heads up. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 18:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
I wrote into the Benyovszky Moritz article, about the origin of the family. You should know, that according to the article, 3 nations children claim him as their own (slovak, hungarian, and polish). This is the part when it's started to get interesting: to keep the articles neutrality I deleted that sentence which said that he was hungarian. Later, I found that the first sentence claims, that he was slovak. I deleted this to, and I said, that it wont bee a logic thing to claim that he was slovak (right in the first sentence), because it's against the articles other sections (nationality, origin). Still, ], and ] removes my edits. I already wrote them, but they refuse to answer. Please help my! What should I do? How can I ask a third neutral person to make decision about this? Is there any template to put into the article? And if there is, where? How can I protect the article?
::Ridiculous, I just pointed out how @] had been quoting an incomplete snippet and then misinterpreted the source, @] they are not presenting the full picture here, please do not judge my behaviour by this. ] (]) 04:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
2) I wrote to these users in several times, but theydidn't even answer to me.
:::I'm not. All I'm concerned about in your case has to do with what you were previously blocked for, not your editing disagreements. So I don't need this discussion here. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 06:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
3) I told them, that I am not a sockpuppet, and I just want to keep neutralit.
::::Understood, the discussion has been resolved now. ] (]) 07:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


== Master? ==
Thank you:] 08:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


Hey JP, I just blocked {{noping|S344556}} as a sock. They were created two minutes after {{U|Risker}} blocked {{noping|Smart Sarno 1}} whose unblock request you declined. S344556 posted a cheeseburger to your Talk page (I reverted it), apparently a reward for your decline (smile). Anyway, who's the master? No one tags anyone. There are some others recently as well, also untagged. Thanks.--] (]) 01:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Note: even if IP of user:VinceB and user:Pannonia does not match, it is still possible that user:Pannonia is a sockpuppet of user:VinceB - VinceB was known to use dynamic IP adress that was different almost every time and if he changed Internet provider then he could have completelly different IP. There is certainly same pattern of behaviour among these two users. ] 09:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:I didn't even need to check. It's a sock of Smart Sarno 1. ] (]) 01:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
::No, I meant who's Smart Sarno 1's master?--] (]) 01:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:59, 10 January 2025


Archiving icon
Archives
Index
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.



The Signpost
24 December 2024

For older history, check as well as the archives.

Your signature

Could you fix your signature? Your talk page link has random box characters in them (which display "01D 122"). On another computer, it just comes as boxes. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

I would've uploaded an image but Commons kept saying that my file name was too generic (yeah right). TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Interesting that nobody has complained in the many years I've used those four unicode characters. Hey lurkers (do I have any lurkers? hello?), are my musical characters legible? --jpgordon 05:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
readded
removed

Interface administrator changes

added
readded Pppery

CheckUser changes

readded

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Galopindeschamps

You recently blocked sockpuppets of Budisgood. Now there is another brand new editor user:Galopindeschamps working on the same articles as Budisgood. I am hesitant about another sockpuppet investigation. What do you think? The Banner talk 19:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh hell yes. CU-blocked. --jpgordon 19:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
I reverted some of 'em, could you get the rest? (Gotta run.) --jpgordon 19:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I will take care of it. The Banner talk 19:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

What do you think of user:Jetelasseraidesmots. To me it screams the same level of incompetence as Budisgood. See here. The Banner talk 20:39, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Yup, and another range CU-blocked. --jpgordon 21:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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)

User

@User:jpgordon Hi JPgordon, you recently unblocked this user User talk:Koshuri Sultan and they claimed they had improved.. Well they dropped this on the talk page over a dispute claiming me and another editor are disruptively editing...while they themself didn't actually read the discussion to see what the dispute was about. I'm not sure what would be done here, but giving you a headsup. Noorullah (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. --jpgordon 18:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Ridiculous, I just pointed out how @Noorullah21 had been quoting an incomplete snippet and then misinterpreted the source, @Jpgordon they are not presenting the full picture here, please do not judge my behaviour by this. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 04:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm not. All I'm concerned about in your case has to do with what you were previously blocked for, not your editing disagreements. So I don't need this discussion here. --jpgordon 06:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Understood, the discussion has been resolved now. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 07:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Master?

Hey JP, I just blocked S344556 as a sock. They were created two minutes after Risker blocked Smart Sarno 1 whose unblock request you declined. S344556 posted a cheeseburger to your Talk page (I reverted it), apparently a reward for your decline (smile). Anyway, who's the master? No one tags anyone. There are some others recently as well, also untagged. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I didn't even need to check. It's a sock of Smart Sarno 1. Risker (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
No, I meant who's Smart Sarno 1's master?--Bbb23 (talk) 01:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)