Misplaced Pages

User talk:Bishonen: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] 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 18:14, 2 August 2009 editJohn Vandenberg (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users68,507 edits →Hello: reply to Cirt← Previous edit Latest revision as of 12:15, 21 January 2025 edit undoEkdalian (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers9,214 edits →Kind attention: Bishonen and admins active here: thanksTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{bots|deny=all}}
{{vacation3|]|start=25 July 2009|end=2 August 2009}}
<br>
<br>
<br>


<div style="position:fixed; bottom:16px; left:16px; z-index:2;">]</div>
==Block==
{{archives|box-width=275px |style=background-color:#e8e6fe|image=File:Interior view of Stockholm Public Library.jpg|image-size=225px}}
I've lain low with regard to Jimbo Wales' block of me, because I wanted first to wait and see if the matter might work itself out if I gave it a few weeks (see ). I've been working at Misplaced Pages for five years, mainly writing content—you can consult Raul654 for the quality of my work, if you like—and I guess I had a notion that some value might accrue to that, but it seems I was mistaken. I'm taking an indefinite break, not just because Jimbo Wales has called me a "toxic personality"—a quite remarkably ''personal'' attack, from which he had to be pried loose in a meanly unapologetic statement. And not just because of the demeaning way he blocked me: without warning; without discussion; in retaliation and punitively; blocking a user with five years of squeaky clean block log under her bra; blocking a user vulnerably asleep and thereby incapable of self-defence; blocking without care for context ( ); and blocking in a hurry.
<br>And he blocked me under the banner of holding himself , yet. No, it wasn't just that, but because other issues have been piling up, making me mull over whether this is a good place to be: compare , and .
<br>I'll save people a question: what made me expect satisfaction, even an apology, from Jimbo Wales? Well, I didn't really, for it was not, in my view of ''his'' personality, to be expected. But I've become aware that he has—in secret corners of the project—in non-transparent places—received some major criticism for his block of me, and I guess I figured he might have the grace to admit to me and/or others that the block was problematic and that it demonstrated extra low rather than extra high standards. No soap, though. Indeed perhaps you and I had a culture clash, Mr Wales: California versus Northern Europe. Hasta luego, all my friends. Probably I'll return one day, even though it seems so un-tempting right now; but I understand that people do. ] | ] 19:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC).
:Crap. Well, do what's best for you and what you enjoy, many thanks for all your contributions and your sense of fun which was much appreciated. Sad, ], ] 20:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
:Very sorry about this. And Giano, too. Who is going to finish the encyclopedia now? Sandstein and Jimbo will have to work overtime now. --] (]) 22:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


{{-}}
I never thought such a situation could ever arise. ^^;; --] (]) 23:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
== October music ==
{{User QAIbox
| image = Dahlias, Elisengarten, Aachen.jpg
| image_upright = 1.1
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
You may remember ], my ] as ]. ] was unusual: last compositions and eternal light, with ] mentioned in story and music. --] (]) 12:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
:Beautiful, ]. ] &#124; ] 21:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC).
:: Thank you! I made Leif Segerstam my ] story today. -] (]) 08:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:: ] is about a composer and choir conductor, listen to his . - ] was about a Bach cantata. As this place works, it's on the Main page ''now'' because of the date. I sort of like it because today is the birth date of my grandfather who loved and grew dahlias like those pictured. --] (]) 14:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:: Happy whatever you celebrate today, - more who died, more to come, and they made the world ]. Greetings from Madrid where I took the pic of assorted ] in 2016. --] (]) 16:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)


==User:151.124.106.64==
Return as soon as possible. ] (]) 23:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I've extended your block on this account. This is yet another incarnation of a multiple sock that has been repeatedly reappearing over may months. The now expired short protection on my talk page was to stop previous attacks from other SPAs obviously linked to this. If you are not happy with my action, please feel free to do as you see fit ] - ] 08:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
: I think she could use a wikibreak, she's been under a lot of stress :-/ --] (]) 23:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks, ], your block length is fine. However, did you notice I hardblocked them (in my second block)? I ticked "Apply block to logged-in users from this IP address", because after checking the IP's contributions, I realised that the attack on you on your page had to come from some way you had disobliged them — say, blocked them — ''not'' in the form of this IP but in some other incarnation — likely an account, or more than one account. Your longer block is not a hardblock. Should it be? ] &#124; ] 11:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC).
::Sorry, missed that, hard blocked now. There are some giveaways with this vandal in that their other edits follow a pattern, notably references to Samuel Claesson ] - ] 12:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)


== Macrobiotic Diet ==
:California vs. Northern Europe? Seems more like ] vs. ]'s Ingemar. CEO's have no place at volunteer projects, and the CEO personality has no place outside of a reality television show.
:In my own look through history, people get obsessed with the letter over the word, the word over the sentence, when they're afraid, when they're stressed, when they don't understand. "I don't know what's going on here, but that one said 'shit!'" is the attitude of the puzzled authoritarian. It's the reflexive attitude of the person whose action confesses instantly that there is coercion but not control. Well, the idea that there would be ''either one'' in such a place, in such a case, is laughable, and can only be proof that we're looking at a neolithic mindset. ] (]) 11:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
::Misplaced Pages, degenerated as it may be with all its committees, behavioral guidelines, and pettifogging patrollers, is still a social experiment in taming the neolithic mindset. Largely failed in that respect, in my opinion. Or rather, it has contributed much to the development of the ''elaborate'' neolithism that dominates nine out of ten disputes these days. Enough of that. Bottom line: fscking crap. ] (]) 14:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


Firstly, neither of those comments about Bon Courage were "attacks". If you read their talk page, you'll find it is littered with other people complaining about their editing warring.
]Bishonen, see this garden? It's like your contributions over the years to this project—rich, colourful, deep, multifaceted. Mr Wales was wrong to block you. Please don't give that incident false dignity by reacting to it. You're strong and it will pass soon. Badge of honour, if you ask me. So please, if you ''must'' take a break, make it short, will you? We need you. ] ] 16:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


Secondly, neither was my editing "disruptive".
*Bah, humbug. :-( ] (]) 20:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
::Being a Californian of Northern European descent, it's certainly my hope that there needn't be any cultural clash between those two places. I can assure you that Signior Wales's actions are not representative of California. As for this Californian: He hopes you'll be back before too long and values your contributions. ] ] 10:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
::*Upon my return to civilization, I am disgusted at the way you have been treated - and even more disgusted that not one Arb had to the common decency or guts to publicly stand up and defend you! What a bunch of cowardly little shits they are. ] (]) 21:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


The Misplaced Pages has strict policies, which surely you as an admin must be aware off including; a) the removal of any content that is not supported by references, b) NPOV/bias, c) discussion on the talk page,
: Uh, Bishonen made a small error here: if she's writing about Wales, he's not from California, but from the American South (born in Alabama, lives in Florida). And while we Oregonians aren't all that fond of Californians (well, at least officially), there's nothing in a Californian mind-set which explains, let alone justifies, what happened here. -- ] (]) 18:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


all of which I was engaged in, at an intelligent & informed level, while Bon courage was just grinding their POV & reverting, & offering zero engagemnt.
== You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association ==


You have no grounds to enact such an onerous punishment.
The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are - suggestions welcome.


Thank you. ] (]) 19:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
If you wish to be elected, please notify me . If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them


:Oh, I see. There's a whole load of material on the internet about you abusing your admin powers, and blocking people based on "non-existant personal attacks" - precisely as you have done to me, so I guess I am wasting my time appealing to reason with you?
Please put all discussion .] (]) 10:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
:If you care at all about 'accuracy' on the Misplaced Pages, you've allowed the other party to turn the lede into nonsensical rubbish, absolutely contrary to facts.
:They were, precisely I stated, just gaming the system to gain control over the topic. ] (]) 19:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
::You think neither "a pattern of wasting other people's time and energy for them" nor "a pattern of contention & mendacious interactions with others" nor "I am just the latest victim that they think they can pick on" are attacks? What does '''' mean in your opinion? Or ''''? I disagree that a block from two pages, out of the whole of Misplaced Pages, is a particularly onerous sanction for the amount of disruption and ] you've been doing. But you can request unblock from an uninvolved administrator by placing <nowiki>{{unblock|your reason here}}</nowiki> on your talkpage. ] &#124; ] 20:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC).
:::Of course they are not attacks. Look at Bon courage's talk page for evidence. They're just a statement of facts. For a previous victim of Psychology guy and them, see
:::Same players, same game. Neither providing citations, neither have any knowledge of the topic they are controlling.
:::And if what I wrote was an attack, then why isn't this an outright threat?
:::"''It won't work, and if you keep it up you will probably be removed from the Project, which likes to protect itself from this unwelcome crap. Bon courage (talk) 18:03, 24 June 2024''"
:::They threatened this user, then they started making an identical threats to me, gaming the system to control the page.
:::Look at my edits, and what am I doing? I am asking them for citations they can't or won't provide.
:::I've read the rules and policies and are they clear, e.g. NPOV, no citations equal removal, etc.
:::I am following the rules, they are not, and you are rewarding them. ]
:::(]) 22:26, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
::::If you really think so, {{u|Not a similar account name}}, why don't you request unblock, which I have several times explained how to do? Or you could complain about my admin abuse at the ] noticeboard. Don't forget to mention the {{tq|'whole load of material on the internet about me abusing my admin powers and blocking people based on "non-existant personal attacks"'}}. ] &#124; ] 23:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC).
:::::@] or even ] ] ] 09:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
::@] There's a whole lot of stuff on the Internet accusing good Admins from people whining about their blocks, including me. All nonsense. ] ] 09:21, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Not a similar account name, it is incorrect to assume other editors have no knowledge in this topic area; it is also not true that sources were not provided to you (I provided several good ones on the talk-page). I have been reading books on fad diets and dietetics for over 20 years. Off-site I am in regular contact with food historians and have exchanged much research. You argued on the talk-page without providing any good ] that the macrobiotic diet is a traditional diet. It isn't and no food historian would claim that. As I explained in a message on your talk-page, the best thing to do is to wait until your block expires and not attack other editors or get aggressive like this. If you have other interests, edit another topic area. ] (]) 18:38, 15 October 2024 (UTC)


== Editing warring user ==
== What do you do with a problem like a toxic asset "CEO?" ==


{{no ping|Iimitlessyou}} has been edit warring and editing tendentiously on ], to exclude the prosecution arguments from the article.
Here is a new question and suggestion:
#Civility is the quality of behaving in a way that allows for civilization
#Civility is that which allows the civil society to function
#Civility has nothing to do with taboo or politeness, everything to do with the social group functioning politically.
:If these statements are true, and I think they cannot be doubted (borrowed from other users), then blocking a productive (building relationships and content) user is uncivil, while calling someone a twelve headed gastropod is not. Calling someone a miniature scat is irrelevant compared to blocking someone who builds and enables building.
:Bishonen is well known as a defender of the blocked, as a questioner of the received wisdom of blocking. Such a person is inevitably going to annoy and inevitably going to be invaluable, as long as she uses rational argument and evidence. In all of her defenses of the rapidly blocked, she has proven her cases. She has been, in these cases, working tirelessly and thanklessly to keep the project functioning, to put the brakes on mob rule.
:Bishonen has also been one to coordinate efforts and social interactions between editors. She has argued against power, which, of course, will antagonize the proponents of power, but it is also invariably an important position in keeping a multifocal and open project functioning. It is vital for the "civil" side of Misplaced Pages that there be no log jam of power brokers. Nor has she done so with inflammatory language or off-wiki tools, as many others have done.
It therefore seems to me fairly clear that Bishonen is a force for and of civility and civil construction at Misplaced Pages.
:Blocking people with whom one disagrees is a long time taboo at Misplaced Pages. No one is supposed to do this. From the earliest moment of the project's creation, people were supposed to seek the uninvolved before doing something like blocking. However, when a person uses a term like "toxic personality" (n.b. "personality," not "edit," not "action," not "words"), that establishes that the block is performed out of malice or anger. It is a violation of the blocking policy.
:Supposing that there are different standards of behavior for different users at Misplaced Pages is to suppose that there are special people. Such a belief puts the lie to the very founding impulses of the project, where all contributions were to be seen as equal. If some contributions are to be weighted more than others, then, indeed, there are holy and unholy users, and yet there is no way of telling who those people are. To my knowledge, there has never been a process at Misplaced Pages for selecting such a person, as selections of administrators carry no such warnings.
:If there is no special status inherent or adherent, then Jimbo's block of Bishonen is administrative abuse and a breech of WP:CIV.
Therefore: should an RfAr be opened on Jimbo Wales to seek his demotion? Is there no other way to solve these fundamental misunderstandings? Can Jimbo no other way give up the illusion of "god king" and "CEO" and other such concepts of infallibility? Can there no other way be an apology and a measure to prevent more such Alexander Haig-like command? ] (]) 16:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


* is their first revert, removing a summary of the prosecutions argument.
== an audience with the king ==
* they reverted me a second time, calling me "completely biased" and a "pro prosecution editor" who is "adding debunked information"
{{section|One-on-one with Jimbo Wales}}
Over at ], Giano suggests that you still care about this block from Jimbo, and above he complains that Arbs have done nothing. That isn't quite true, as Casliber did mention his "dismay" over at ], and Jimbo did clarify that he did not intend to label you as a toxic personality. However calls for an RFAR, or a desysop, are terribly premature. You have both been around for long enough to know that dispute resolution starts with a one-on-one discussion. I am guessing you meant to start that with post, however there are a lot of bystanders on both user talk pages, so I recommend that you two have a discussion on a separate page somewhere in userspace, either your own or you can use my userspace if you wish for me to exercise some control over unhelpful heckling. I would rather not become involved, but I will ask Jimbo to engage with you, ''if'' you are willing to have a one-on-one discussion with him. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 23:25, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
:Thank you for your suggestion, John. I will have a discussion with Jimbo if he's willing. However, since you mention it, I should point out right away that I'm unimpressed by Casliber's intervention (however well-intentioned) and by Jimbo's "clarification". I'll explain why if the occasion arises. A new subpage in my own space would be appropriate; I can't believe heckling would be a problem, once I explain to the too-helpful that the audience is supposed to be with the king, not the courtiers. ] | ] 23:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC).
::I have taken the liberty of changing the tongue-in-cheek heading for a more direct one. This is not a moment for cuteness.--] (]) 01:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:: ]. I would prefer that the original section name was preserved to put this in the right light of the accused, but I have added it as a hidden section name for now, as there is an incoming link. --<span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 01:57, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:::: …and I’ve switched ’em back. I think the original section heading gets right to the heart of this issue — that this was a ] ]. Best wishes, Bish — ] 08:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Who ''is'' the "toxic personality" Mr Wales referred to, then? ] ] 03:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
::::That is a question for him to answer; I am just endeavouring to set up a forum for Bishonen and him to chat in the hope it will allow these lingering questions to be answered. See also where Jimbo acknowledges that his use of "toxic personalities" was not ideal. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 04:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::Swift pointed out that the ancient Athenians argued that it was acceptable to say whatever one wished about whichever politician one liked. Call Themistocles a name, and you are alright. However, call Athens evil, and you will be hung. Call mankind bad, and you will be executed. It is better to lash an individual than a class. Well, speaking of "personalities" at all smacks of ]. I want to know how anyone is ''qualified'' to speak of anyone else's '''personality''' or even the "personalities" (i.e. the virtual realities of discourse symbols that we call "users") other than that according to just some dude. I.e. if Jimbo is just some dude with an opinion, not held to any higher standard and not afforded any higher power, then he can think, for example, that I'm toxic or corrupting or diseased or venereal and I won't care -- he's some dude, and some dude will always have an opinion. However, Jimbo was simultaneously announcing that there were super-ordinary standards for expression and then betraying those by passing judgment on unspecified "personalities." Furthermore, we have no reason to believe that he has any longer any credible reason to have extraordinary authority. Such authority would either have to come from being well informed or extremely wise or extremely prudent, and not only are the facts against that, here, ''history'' argues that he is less and less any of those things. I don't know what sort of cloud he came out of to make such an announcement, but I don't think it was a ]. ] (]) 11:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


At that point I placed a warning on their talk page (they blanked it) and I opened a dialogue (pinging them) on the article talk page which they ignored: They have completely ignored my request for discussion on the talk page: ]
←Please pardon my interruption, but I noticed that Jimbo asked on his talk page if there was a sub-page for discussion a few hours ago. I know it's absolutely none of my business, but I'm only hoping that something can be worked out where we wouldn't lose a great editor and great administrator. If this is all being handled privately, please feel free to just delete my post. I honestly hope that any disagreements can be resolved all the way around. Thank you for your time and use of your Talk Page Bish. All my best, — <small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>]</b> : ]</span></small> 19:30, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
::So, um, if there isn't, then, uh, where on Misplaced Pages ''would'' Jimbo like to take part in dispute resolution? Seeing as he's deeply committed to Misplaced Pages to the point that Misplaced Pages need only hear his name to agree to his decisions, trusting that they are made with the best interests of all of Misplaced Pages at heart, I presume he would only want to use Misplaced Pages and wouldn't favor some off-wiki venue, like IRC or another website. Patience is a virtue, but one would rather not let the stale turn <s>toxic</s> worse. ] (]) 17:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


*They ignored that, and proceeded to revert me again and called me a biased "pro prosecution editor".
] has been created. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 21:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
*They reverted me a forth time for .


I reverted them 3 times and attempted to discuss, they reverted me 4.
== Do we want change? ==


I've tried to explain that the article is supposed to reflect the ], and this includes the prosecution case, but they seem to interpret this as "biased" against the menendez brothers who murdered their parents. Also note the editors heavy editing of the Netflix series article.
I've started a ball rolling here ] all comments welcome - whatever their view! ] (]) 07:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


] (]) 03:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)


:Note I've taken this to the ] where evidence they fabricated quotes is posted. ] (]) 11:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
== Your problem ==
] hitting the floor deeply, before a weekend camping trip.]]
Bishonen dear, this is rather delicate, but I feel someone should mention it. I have noticed of late that you seem to have a problem - it's ..er...talking to yourself . Perhaps a longer Wikibreak is called for, somewhere nice, relaxing and soothing. Might I suggest my own establishment ] permanent and temprorary cures guaranteed from $500,000 per weak. All credit cards accepted or cheques to my Cayman Island account. ] (]) 17:56, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
::Oh just in case you get a reply, you may find ] helpful. ] (]) 19:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
:::I like it. Is "hit the floor" a literal translation of 'curtsy'? --] (]) 21:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
::::I sincerely hope not! I have just been looking for images ] and discovered the "Texas dip." It has to be either a wind up or a bizarre sexual position because I can't beleive that has ever been practiced in any court, I'm sure it's anatomically imposible as described there: "''The "Texas Dip" is an extreme curtsey performed by a Texan debutante when formally introduced at the International Debutante Ball in the Waldorf-Astoria. The young women slowly lower their forehead to the floor by crossing their ankles, then bending their knees and sinking. The escort's hand is held during the dip. When they get close to the floor their head is turned down towards the gown and floor. The rising is made as an awakening.''" Oh the Americans, you can't help but love 'em can you? ] (]) 22:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::Going native ay? Was there a lot of tap dancing in Italian courts? --] (]) 23:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
:::I think they actually ''hit'' the floor. After all, the chamberlain hits it to tell 'em the king is acoming, and he hits it to tell 'em where to stand. I figure this is like dog training. After all that advice about ''not baring their teeth and snarling,'' it's got to be something like a stomp. ] (]) 13:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
::::Good theory, but with all of that floor stamping, it must surely have been deafening. Plus, the phrase "hit the floor deeply"? is odd in that context. Hit the floor "Hard", yes - "with deep feeling", maybe..... --] (]) 16:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
::It is becoming quite clear JC that you do not move in exaulted circles, in fact I suspect you may never even have witnessed the "Texas Dip." I realise Buckingham palace is not what it was, but please do not mick the behaviour at the Quirinal. I expect though there is quite a bit ot tap dancing and Texas dipping going on at the ] though these days. ] (]) 16:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
:::So, when the Italian guys in my neighborhood tell me that I need to pay up or they'll slowly break my leg, they're offering to take me to a royal party? ] (]) 16:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
:::It is to my deep shame that the closest I've come to the Texas dip is ], but I do thank your God, despite the recent expenses row, we don't have to endure the soap operas of ]. --] (]) 16:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


::Sorry, {{u|Zenomonoz}}, I had a go at it, but I'm afraid I just don't have to bandwidth to research all that at the moment. Even the first revert diff you give (while Iimitlessyou's edit summary certainly makes a bad impression) records so many changes, and so many sources, that I found it pretty unmanageable. ] &#124; ] 19:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC).
:Actually, I have a ] in my mouth right now. ] (]) 16:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
::That's it. I am going to get a ]. Back after lunch... ] <sup>]</sup> 16:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC) :::No worries, it's handled. Feel free to blank my discussion here. ] (]) 20:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
:::*I survey this page: No wonder you dreadful people are where you are, lowly, vulgar, common editors, while I am invited to take Dom Perignon and canapes with Jimbo and the Arbcom - I know that the cocktail stick should be discretely placed in the handbag and not used to impale one's enemies - I also know that in the presence of ones betters one smiles and slowly breaks one's leg - a choice you will happily make when I catch up with you in RL. As for Signor Berlusconi, had poor dear ] not been so cruelly disposed of, I would be the current "La regina d'Italia" - and beleive me, you would all be hitting the floor super pronto. ] (]) 18:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
::::*Lady Catherine, may I be so bold as to suggest that now one is in one's incorporeal state, one may sip whatsoever one wishes, with whomsoever one chooses whenever one chooses? Given that, it seems odd to see you quaffing the odd bottle with the lay-judiciary and a man with no razor. --] (]) 19:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::EEEUUUUW. Texas dipping sounds like something that Lady Catherine should ''not'' be exposed to. Or can we all relax in the knowledge that it is some new type of poker? ] ] 13:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
::::The joys of nicotine without the perils of paralyzed cillia. Oh, sure, one's face gets eaten away by ], but most of us don't have much in the way of a face to begin with. Meanwhile, the nicotine boosts memory and... other stuff... like... where the city of Copenhagen is. :-) ] (]) 13:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
:I don't want to mess up the Evidence, below, but I '''found a picture of the Civility Patrol admin. corp!''' It took some doing, too, as the flash can induce panic. ] ] (]) 14:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


== WMF, Editor Privacy, Courts, and India ==
== Evidence ==
'''Evidence regarding views that blocking is inappropriate for provoked single instances of incivility, possibly provoked, without attempting to discuss with uncivil editor'''


Hi Bish,
I see you have been asked for evidence. Feel free to use as evidence, if you wish. I believe Geogre would not be averse to you citing ]; I know there are other links which may prove useful, I will link here if my fuzzy little brain spits them out. ]<sup>]</sup> 12:41, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
* "Punitive blocks for incivility are bullshit, and discussing matters with the editor is always preferred." Me, Jan 2007. ]<sup>]</sup> 12:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
* "We shouldn't go around blocking people who are beneficial to the 'pedia." Radiant, Jan 2007.
* More comments on blocking for incivility by Radiant
* Many of the comments, as well as the deletion nomination rationale, at the discussion concerning WP:PAIN which preceded the current WQA, discussion located at ]
*# "I'm now convinced that Civility Warnings, Cooling Off Blocks, etc. are a mugs game." Lar, Jan 2007
* ], where the only mention of civility is at ], which cites blocking criteria as "when his or her conduct severely disrupts the project" and clarifies this to be "persistent gross incivility"' no other mention of incivility is made ''at all''.
* ] "Enforcement of the civility policy ... it's not a terribly helpful one." and "For those who insist that one cannot ignore uncivil users: Why not, pray? "
*] "Occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with adminship; administrators are not expected to be perfect."
*The oft quoted ] has "A pattern of incivility is disruptive and unacceptable, and may result in blocks if it rises to the level of harassment or egregious personal attacks. A single act of incivility can also cross the line if it is severe enough: for instance, extreme verbal abuse or profanity directed at another contributor, or a threat against another person can all result in blocks without consideration of a pattern." There's no specific definition of 'civility' other than a description of the effects. "Even during heated debates, editors should behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously, in order to keep the focus on improving the encyclopedia and to help maintain a pleasant work environment." How nice. Nothing there about blocking without warning. "This policy is not a weapon to use against other contributors. To insist that an editor be sanctioned for an '''isolated, minor offense''', or to treat constructive criticism as an attack, is itself disruptive, and may result in warnings or even blocks if repeated."--] (]) 13:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
*The blocking policy hits the nail: "cooling-off" blocking is forbidden, and so is punitive blocking. The onus is on the blocking admin to explain, when queried, why a block is necessary to prevent damage to the project; that onus is encapsulated in ]'s policy on communication. It's as simple as that. Shoot now, explain later is fast becoming outmoded, and a good thing that is for the sake of the project. Senior admins need to be setting an example. ] ] 13:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
*Ah woe. A flash of irritation at a time when a close friend appears to have just been driven from WP, and a nagging insensitive follower of the rulebook is descibed by a term which is not terribly stong in some cultures, but perhaps a deadly insult in others. Followed six hours after the event by a 3 hour block for "Incivility unbecoming an admin" Sadly, punitive actions to make examples of admins have a history of unwanted effects, and had it been anyone else a warning would have been properly considered the appropriate action, a necessary precursor to any block. As it is, this has engendered bad feeling and wasted hours if not days of wikitime. Including mine, when I should be contemplating orchids. There must be a moral there. Ideally both blocker and blockee would concede that they've been rather naughty, and agree to make that an end of it. Just my tuppenceworth. . . ], ] 14:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
***I am without standing, but may I only say this: I was reminded of what I've seen at AN/I. Someone shows up there, saying, "X has been mean to me, and he called me a craphound." A naive admin goes and blocks the person who used the dirty word, but the more experienced ones go and actually ''investigate'' and frequently come back saying, "You know, you were being awful. You were trying to insert junk, and you were past three reverts, and you were trying to get outside websites to bus in to win the argument. UserY shouldn't have called you a craphound, but it was understandable. You will be blocked if you don't start conforming to policy." Reacting to a dirty word is the mark of someone who is either too foolish or too naive or too indifferent to understand what is going on in a situation, and that's a bad, bad way to get civil interactions. ] (]) 14:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
****↑This guy is smart↑ Everyone should listen to Utgard Loki. Someone should frame the above post and hang it on the wall beside Jimbo's desk. ] (]) 16:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
*My view may be a given, but I'll state it. Blocking is a last resort, not a warning shot. Blocking stops conversation, and Misplaced Pages is nothing but conversation surrounding articles (and, hopefully the conversation is about the articles). As for "civility" and its rank among our concerns, let me quote a famous person, Sigmund Freud: "The first man to hurl an insult instead of a stone, that man was the father of civilization." Insult and opprobrium are ''part of civilization.'' Violence -- including exclusion, coercion, and intimidation -- is not. What Jimbo is calling "civility" is a question of language, and specifically of "]". In language, profanity functions, surprisingly, ''not to offend'', but to indicate the emotional state of the speaker. ''Obscenity'' is supposed to offend, but in contemporary English it is rare. To ''offend,'' we usually go to something extended. "You should go to the sperm bank, because there people will like the fact that you're jerking off" is something I wrote to someone years ago ''to offend.'' My mood was coldly furious, and I wanted to wound. In general discourse, though, "You're a piece of shit, you know that?" is not designed to make the other person feel shock of offense: it's designed to say, "You have made my so angry that my next step is to violence." Online, where real violence is impossible, people move this language up and use it sooner, because the consequences do not exist. However, ''this is functional language designed to ensure civil interactions by communicating degrees of emotional freight and warning.'' It is not "offensive": it's admonitory. Blocking over something like that, then, is, if you'll excuse me, insane. It's stepping into a situation at the height of the frustration and looking at the person who ''cares the most'' and blocking that person. The "bad words" are signal words, and they're social signals that the other person needs to moderate behavior, but when a block comes in, the message is to validate the bad behavior. When Jimbo ''blocks an experienced administrator who has been pushed to her limits,'' he is saying, and user:Daedalus was quick to interpret it this way, that Deadalus should go on acting that way, because there are no consequences, and that process farming and whinging are winning ways. There is much, much more to say, but I fear I've gone too long and started to be specific. ] (]) 12:04, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


Have you been following the ANI saga? If not, you can read a summary at ].
]
<br>
*Thank you little users. Appreciate! ] with obvious enjoyment.''] ] '']'' 20:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC).


So, the latest update in the case involves the Court ] until Misplaced Pages deletes the page on the case, created by {{U|Valereee}}, a week ago! More importantly, in the same hearing, WMF's lawyer to provide the details of the unknown "authors" who have/had edited the page on ANI, to the Court in a "sealed cover".
* ] '']'' 11:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC).


Given the whimsical nature of Courts — not just in India —, there is always a probability of unsealing at a later date and hence, shouldn't such a step require making the broader community aware on how WMF plans to approach similar lawsuits in what is the most populous (and probably among the most litigatious) country in the world? Undoubtedly, WMF is not governed by the consensus of editors on how it approaches Courts and silence is strategic but perhaps some discussion will do good?
:: Is it then? Well as a soap opera It has rather lost my attention - have you noticed the way paint hardens and acquires a sheen and gloss as it dries, utterly fascinating, I could watch it all day. However, I digress, back to the dull side of life - so what was the outcome of the great Wales/Bishonen clearing of the air? - Is it you that has the "toxic personality", or someone else. Perhaps it is ]? I seem to remember Wales dismissing and trivialising his complaints as he was driven from the project. It seems you are to be trivialised too. Not really good enough is it? I would be bloody angry if he had called me a "toxic personality", but of course he didn't - it was you. Sorry, can't stop chatting here all day, the undercoat has just dried and I have found this long-lasting specialised paint that only takes 36 hours to dry, it has a secret micro-porous recipe and is only available from good hardware sho.............. ] (]) 21:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


I want your opinions on the broader locus before I take this to one of the centralized discussion boards. Talk-page stalkers and watchers, feel free to join the discussion! ] (]) 12:59, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Let us just pretend that a warning was, in fact, channeled prior to the (singular) offense having been committed (i.e. powers of telepathy and precognition, somehow!); and let us also pretend that Mister Wales can act as just any ordinary administrator without his blocks carrying any special and extraordinary significance.


:I'm not sure how to interpret that tweet. Maybe it means something, maybe not. Perhaps ''The Hindu'' will have commented on it by this time tomorrow. ] (]) 14:27, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Because not pretending that makes the chippie sad...
:A little more: ''"''" ] (]) 14:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
]
Which, hopefully, can still be remedied with extrahard petting!
]
Whoa, where didn't I come from? ] 10:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


== Administrator Elections: Discussion phase ==
Without question, Bishonen is one of my top four or five favorite people on WP. Among the reasons I like her is a practical, common sense approach rather than being a "policy wonk". Also her block of ] (then a sitting arbitrator) was a pretty gutsy thing to do. Regarding the incident at issue, I fully concur with the insult handed out at the editor, though I would have added another choice adjective or two for a full-flavor experience. HOWEVER… not everyone who heard about the insult knew about the past behavior of that editor. As was evident from the responses, the discussion quickly turned on the question of user A (an admin) intimidating and insulting user B (an editor) from a position of superior power. If no action had been taken, many people would have concluded that admins are free in general to abuse and threaten good-faith editors. Which in fact DOES happen frequently enough to adversely affect the user experience on Misplaced Pages. True, there is the question of fairness, when much worse behavior by admins goes unpunished or is punished much less severely (e.g., only a 1-hour block on admin Scarian for his lengthy hate-filled tirade, spammed across several WP pages, against ].) However, fairness and justice are always elusive concepts. In short, it is my opinion that while worse admin conduct often goes unpunished regrettably, this three-hour block by Wales was right or at least not grievously wrong. Sorry. --] (]) 03:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
:Can someone please advise me: a block should never be imposed to prove "a principle"—that is my intuitive understanding, but it may be wrong. Can someone who knows more about the rules of blocking confirm that this is correct? ] ] 08:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
::You're not wrong. Every consensus-built project page I've ever read about blocks on en.Misplaced Pages is very straightforward about this. Blocks are technical steps which are meant only to be preventative, to stop edits from a named account or IP from doing later harm to the project. Hence, there has to be a good faith notion that there's a meaningful likelihood of later harm, meaning the technical step of the block is needed to stop it from happening. There may be disagreement over the likelihood, or whether what could happen is even harm, but policy abiding blocks can never be punitive, or "cool down," or set to such a short time that they're clearly meant only to note unhappiness over some behaviour. Anything else calls for a warning, a ban (which is not at all the same thing as a block), RFC or arbcom outcome of some kind. ] (]) 12:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


<div style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; padding:10px 15px">
== I'm Right: I'm Always Right, and I Was Right Again ==
<div style="padding: 0 0 0.5em; vertical-align: middle; font-size:130%"> '''] |''' <span style="font-size:85%">Discussion phase</span>
</div>
<div style="display:flex; align-items:center;">
<div>
The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:
*October 22–24 - Discussion phase
*October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
*November 1–? - Scrutineering phase


During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a ]. You may discuss the candidates at ].
It's rough, when you think you're talking to a person, and it turns out you're not.
] I mean, there you are, ready for logic, and you find that it's just Gumbo, or Jumbo, or some Spoonerism thereof. It's like watching an interview with W. Bush. ] (]) 20:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the ] software to vote, which uses a ]. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The ] are different from those at RFA.
== temporary fencing quickly erected ==


Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the ]. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no ] ("crat chats").
Privatemusings created ] with a copy of the messages that Jimmy removed from his userpage. From the edit summary of that removal it is obvious that Jimmy wishes to continue discussing this with you, and part of the agreement was that it would be a one-on-one discussion, so I have redirected and protected ], and left privatemusings a note about this. Do what you will with the page from here, and sorry for interfering with your userspace. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 06:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
:As that wandering-off-topic discussion was primarily about "bad words", I suggest redirecting to ], where they can add their views somewhere it might be useful, rather than intrusive. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 15:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


Any questions or issues can be asked on the ]. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
== Admins who curse ==
</div>
<div style="clear: right; float: right; width: 18em; margin: 0.5em 0 0.5em 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em; border: 1px solid #aaa; background-color: #eee;">
<div>]</div>
<p>
</div>
''I’m sorry if I offend you. But I don’t swear just for the hell of it. You see, I figure that language is a poor enough means of communication as it is. So we ought to use all the words we’ve got. Besides, there are damned few words that everybody understands.''
<div style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;">
</p>
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please ].</div>
<p style="text-align: right;">
—&nbsp;From '']'',<br />by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee
</p>
</div> </div>
] (]) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
Admins are people too. I cannot agree with the blanket statement that "admins who curse at people should be blocked for 3 hours (or more) for doing it, and should be at serious risk for losing their adminship". It cuts across well-established policy, as Gwen has pointed out above, and it is increasingly the practice by admins to use a more conciliatory approach with established editors. Such an approach might include an examination of the underlying context, a strong suggestion to consider either a unilateral or bilateral apology and perhaps a self-striking-through of the text at issue. This type of approach is implicit in the New Admin School's excellent section on dispute resolution, and in positive responses by RfA candidates to recent questions on this matter. Incivility, ruffled feathers, heated off-the-cuff comments: we're all human, and I see no reason to hold admins and other experienced editors to different standards. If a curse-word occasionally pops up, it should be treated as an opportunity by admins to promote healing and harmony. Blocking, I believe, is normally appropriate only for intransigent, repeat offenders who refuse to engage in productive dialogue about the matter and who are likely to cause damage to the project. Leadership by example would be most welcome. ] ] 06:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrator_elections/Newsletter_list&oldid=1252510059 -->
:Alternatively we could make it very clear that Misplaced Pages has a warrior caste with a strong codex of honour including no swearing. You become a member by fighting vandals and optionally doing some gnoming, then you advance to adminship. And a content creators caste with more liberties but no promotion path. Content-creating admins like Bishonen are only suffered under a grandfather clause. If they can't follow a brainless military code of honour they must give up their tools or will be shown the door.
:Further reading for members of the warrior caste who are confused by the previous paragraph: ]. ] ] 08:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:: nb: you can often spot the wannabe-warrior-caste-types by their sigs; look for an abundance of mark-up and styling of the colours-and-borders-and-background variety wrapped around some ludicrous user name. If their, sig, user name, and general demeanor are all about attention-seeking, you may have landed one. Cheers, ] 09:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC) <small>Gack; (not intended to impugn humourous alternative accounts that may be derived from ], of course;) — rather, the sort all so common on simple:wp and oh-so-focused on the Whack-a-Vandal or the Great-Sock-Hunt games here on teh encyclopaedia that any idiot can edit. Cheers, <span style="text-transform: lowercase;">] 10:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)</span></small>
:It reminds me of the blinkered, superficial focus of some fundamentalist religions. Some words are "bad", and some words are "ok", and your motive, spirit, and intent behind the "ok" words can be absolutely horrible, but it would only be wrong if you used the "bad" word. The result of this is vindictive, mean-spirited, and hurtful people who will insult you by calling you a "little turd" instead of a little shit, who will damn you by saying "darn you" instead, and who will mock and humiliate homosexuals by calling them the ok word "gay" and not the "bad" word "fag". But they will think this is all within the bounds of reason, because they have only used acceptable, non-cursing language. I remember being allowed to shout terrible things at my older brother when angry, and it was always ok, until I used a curse word. Surely the whole point should have been to not be shouting at him at all, or to not be wishing to wound him, or to not be angry? It pains me to see this attitude actually being enforced on Misplaced Pages. Encouraging a shallow, meaningless, and trifling concern with "words", and wholesale ignoring a much more sinister, bitter, and damaging spirit hiding in the shadows. ]\<sup>]</sup> 09:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::As I said, above, ''we need to shout,'' as humans in a civilization. Now, we can do so stupidly without bad words, like the admin who wrote on the talk page of an article, "If you don't speak English, don't edit here!" We can do so cleverly without using the forbidden seven, as has been my wont and Bishonen's '''and Giano's.''' We can modulate, using the simple profane as an attention getting message that is embedded in a full argument, which is a perfect use of profane words. We can smile politely all day and conduct secret trials. We can adopt ''the habit of some people'' and ''say absolutely nothing at all, but merely block and then put in nine words in a block summary.'' The last of these is the most barbaric, the least civilized, the most totalitarian. Otherwise, we're off with the worst of the Taliban mullahs. ] (]) 10:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
Well, ]. Though I think that if you're going to swear, at least reserve it for when it's really really important, so like once in a wiki-career or so; or, unless it's ] ;-) --] (]) 00:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC) <small>''You looked anyway, didn't you?''</small>


Hello,
== Toxic shit ==


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.
Bishonen, I just wanted to offer you my 2¢, which is a decidedly outside view by a decidedly uninvolved regular editor. I’ve heard about this dispute on the grapevine for a while now, and just looked at ]. You and Jimbo seem to have gotten into a vicious circle here, where you are both trying to save face. He is quite right, administrators, who are *supposed* to be held to a high standard of conduct, should not call someone a “little shit”. I, frankly, couldn’t care less what language ''anyone'' uses, but… (you know all the arguments so there’s no use repeating it). And Jimbo was quite right to block you. He made an example out of you. A very small, short block, but a symbolic example nonetheless. <small>And, after dealing with KC, below, I might add that while what Jimbo did wasn’t in accordance to the rules of blocking, we all know that admins dish out three-hour-long “gentle taps” to editors all the time, so let’s be “real” here and not spin our wheels in a rut of our own making because of the *principle* of the thing. ] (]) 16:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)</small>


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
Jimbo, however, made a huge error in writing “toxic personality”. For a hard-working admin who exercises good faith—and since the words came from such a notable person as Jimbo—such words were deeply, ''deeply'' cutting. I see that Jimbo clarified “toxic personality” as having been meant as “toxic behavior”. Too little, too late.


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
I encourage you to drop this. Frankly, the words uttered from the tips of Jimbo's fingers strike me as having been an forgivable error. However, his failure to offer you an unconditional retraction and unconditional, profuse apology speaks, I think, more to ''his'' shortcomings. He seems to not understand how hurtful those words were to a well-meaning, hard-working volunteer such as yourself. He appears to be all wrapped up in trying to make his point about how inappropriate it is to have administrators flouting rules of conduct. Your dropping it at this juncture will reflect well on you. I wouldn’t be surprised too, that after a few days to a few weeks after you drop it, Jimbo might reflect on how showing magnanimity to volunteer followers wears exceedingly well on leaders and he might make an overture to you. At least, I hope he will. ] (]) 15:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:Blocking ] expressly forbids blocking to "make an example" and any admin who did so would be up before ArbCom in short order, if not de-sysopped by Jimbo. As your entire "the block was ok" argument hinges on your severe misunderstanding of the blocking policy, your entire post is moot. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 15:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:It's true the block strayed from policy, given the background, there was no way a three hour block filled any technical need to stop harm to the project. I may raise eyebrows by saying this, but had the block been for longer, say 3 days, it would have been within policy as to the technical goal of a block, though likely not supported by consensus as to any harm it was stopping. At the very least, civility blocks must follow warnings and a ''pattern'' of incivility. Even then, some wonder whether civility blocks are even helpful when made on the accounts of good faith, long term content contributors. This said, I agree that admins should stay wholly professional in how they word things, but folks do slip up now and then, each in their sundry ways. A friendly but stern warning from Jimmy would have been enough. ] (]) 15:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::Agree completely with Gwen; except as regards the 3-day block: no harm was imminent or indicated. '''My''' post was specifically adressing Greg L's complete misunderstanding of the blocking policy; it was he who used "make an example" to characterize Jimmy's block of Bishonen, saying Jimbo was "quite right to block you. He made an example out of you. A very small, short block, but a symbolic example". This is horrible reasoning; no block is to "make an example". ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::KC, only to clarify, a three day block would have fit the technical (software) goal of stopping harm, but only ''had'' there been harm to begin with. ] (]) 16:15, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Ah, then we have no disagreement at all. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::Maybe I should have come out and said the block strayed from policy in at least two ways, but I wasn't keen on rubbing it in, still not. ] (]) 16:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::::Rubbing it in? I was trying to correct a complete misunderstanding of the blocking policy. As admins, we are charged with explaining policy and educating those who are ignorant, or confused, about our policies. I don't think a second voice confirming what our policy says would be ''rubbing it in''. One puppy's opinion. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::::I didn't say you were rubbing it in (but I'm sorry if you took it that way, it's not at all what I meant). I was saying I didn't want to rub it in ''to Jimmy'', how thoroughly he strayed from the blocking policy. He's already said he won't block anyone for six months. I know other editors have other worries about other things he's said since the block, but I've come here only to comment on the block itself. ] (]) 16:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::Ah, thanks for clarifying - but I believe you are mistaken. Jimmy only said he wouldn't block for six months if Bishonen explicitly repeats, word-for-word, a statement Jimmy has given her. Its conditional, you see. Unless he didn't mean to say that, in which case he really needs to rephrase completely. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::Oh. Ok, I could be mistaken, he said ''Therefore, I pledge not to block anyone for 6 months as a good faith gesture to you. In return, I want you to...'' Since he made an unconditional pledge in a stand alone, complete sentence, I didn't take the next sentence as a bargain that went with the pledge, but maybe it was. ] (]) 16:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::You may well be right. It is unclear enough that I am uncertain, and at least one other admin has publicly agreed and said it sounds like "either an ultimatum or a horse trade". Pending clarification, I cannot presume to know for certain. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::<edit conflict, hope this helps to clarify> Gwen, I agree that the pledge itself was unconditional, but then what he wanted "in return" was backed by the implicit threat that a failure to deliver would be "incompatible with fundamental principles of Misplaced Pages". The latter statement remains in the latest version, as I read it. Most unfortunate, but clearly against blocking policy as I think we agree. . ], ] 16:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Yes. Having read what must be over a thousand of Jimmy's posts for over 5 years, I ''think'' he's made the pledge but KC did get me wondering. ] (]) 17:01, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::Well, all three of us have been here a while, not sure its worth mentioning (unless for page stalkers who are curious?) ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 17:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::Again, only speaking for myself, only noting I've read lots of his posts, which make me think, maybe wrongly, that I understand the meaning behind his syntax. ] (]) 18:01, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::: As all three of us have been here around 5 years, and 2/3 of us think his meaning is at least unclear, then I suggest there is a problem with phrasing. On the chance that the 1/3 of us who is tentatively confident she understands what is intended, may I gently suggest that if 5 years of careful reading of Jimmy's posts are necessary background to understanding his meaning in this one, then that is far too obscure a subset of the human population to call his post in any way ''clear''. Either way, it requires clarification from He Who Wrote it. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 18:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::::KC, I wasn't comparing myself to anyone, I was only speaking for myself. As I've said maybe thrice now, I may have misunderstood what Jimmy said. Moreover, I came here only to comment on the block itself, which I have done. ] (]) 19:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::* KillerChihuahua: I know all about blocks. I also understand human nature. Admins are people and they come in all sorts of flavors. Some are wise and mature. Others are immature dicks. And admins hand out blocks. So let’s look a bit more at blocks. They are meant to be *protective* and not *punitive*. It’s kind of a gray area ain’t it? Administrators hand out unjust blocks all the time with utter impunity and hide behind the apron strings of “protective” whenever they do so. Moreover, admins often have a severe double standard and will block regular editors for minor lipping off to admins that wouldn’t get on anyone’s radar screen if it was directed to a regular editor. Check out my block log. All five are for lipping off to admins. Take note of my first one. I twice reverted an edit made by Connelley himself. His remedy? A three-hour block, accompanied by this edit summary: “edit warring at g-force - gentle tap”. So I don’t buy into your implicit argument that Jimbo is not allowed to dish out a little bit of “correction” given that admins do it all the time. We all know what is really going on here. Jimbo gave Bishonen a “gentle tap.” But because it was Jimbo, it’s all blown out of proportion.<p>I hope you chose your next post with care, KillerChihuahua, for your message point of “I disagree with one part of Greg L’s post so the entire message is moot”-argument has given me some insight here in your style, which doesn’t impress. ] (]) 16:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::You know "all about" blocks, yet you argue that an expressly forbidden reason to block can be used to legitimize a block? Uh, no.
::: Perhaps I was unclear: your entire post, '''since it hinges on that argument''', is '''rendered''' moot by the falsity of said argument. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
:::* You are entitled to your opinion, which amounts to “Keep making a holy stink about this Bishonen/Jimbo thing” because of your principles. You missed the point of my post by being blinded by your intransigence. I will no longer respond to you. Goodbye. ] (]) 16:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::You're wrong about my opinion. Dont quit your day job; you're not a good mind reader. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Regarding your "small" comment above, you're wrong again. You were blocked for edit warring, which is clearly stated in the blocking comment. That Connelly called your block a "gentle tap" does not obviate this. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 16:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
:I don't believe William M. Connolley is one who's block reasoning should be imitated by anyone. If Jimbo is following the example set by that particular admin, we are all in trouble. ] (]) 17:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


Kind Regards,
Jumpers, it's too bad you've (apparently) decided to continue your ''retirement'', Bishonen. I suppose, life goes on. ] (]) 22:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


]
*So, according to the subpage, Jimbo blocked Bishonen because it is policy that you should block people for saying dirty words, and the good that came of his block is that it established that policy. I.e. it was policy because he thought it. It ''had been policy'' because it was his idea. The ''usefulness'' of the block was that he did it, and that set proof for everyone else.
*Well, for all the people who think that Jimbo is something more than an administrator, or who believe that he possesses wisdom, despite his overt lack of prudence, this should not allow you to heave a sigh of relief. Indeed, this subpage has made your lives '''''much, much, much more complicated.'''''
*Now your divine leader has, by ''fiat,'' created policy without the intervention of pesky administrators or policy review, and he's going to leave it to you to figure out what it means. Let me give you some things you'll need to settle for yourselves, ok?
*#Are all dirty words the same? Does a "shit" get the same block as a "fuck?"
*#Are all dirty words the same in context? Does it require the word to be used as an adjective or verb, or can it be an exclamation? Does, "Oh, fuck me! I made a terrible mistake" get 3 hours, while, "Fuck you, you twerp" get 4 hours?
*#Will there be a list of words that people may and may not say, so that people can be sure, in advance, when they are allowed to express their anger or frustration and when they are not, and how?
*#If there is a list, will it be the American FCC's famous ], or will Misplaced Pages avoid ] and use the BBC's list? Or will a person get blocked for using a word disallowed by the national broadcaster of the IP address of the account he or she is using?
*#If there are differences, will it matter where the person ''receiving'' the comment is? Does it matter that calling a British person an "ass" is calling him a donkey, while calling an American an "ass" is calling him a rectum?
*#Now that you have sorted out the exact weight and penalty of each word, will you also get at the synonyms for profane terms so that clever wordsmiths do not avoid the letter of the law and may be blocked for saying, "Intercourse your mother, you unstoppable masturbator?"
*Be aware that you have a brand new day of blocking ahead of you, an exciting time when you will get to block lots and lots of people, and perhaps even yourselves, for all sorts of words. I'm sure that you will have a good time discussing the words and how bad they are. After all, you don't want "process wonks" to question you. No doubt they're up to no good. ] (]) 02:08, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
* Civility is not a naughty words filter. There are numerous ways to be uncivil while using clean words. ] <sup>]</sup> 02:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
*:Good point, Jehochman. Try 'splaining that to the "god king". ] (]) 03:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
::Usage of the ''Preview'' button, is helpful when considering using 'colorful words' in one's responses. ] (]) 15:03, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
== I've not followed the affair ==
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 -->


== Administrator Elections: Voting phase ==
except its minimal outline but here's my advice anyway: extract some vague lesson? Which I believe would be an idea that although at the end of the day surface things don't count for much, still it takes so little to change surface things that, if they are taken to count for much by another, simply change em (maybe a surface thing that ultimately doesn't account for much, anyway...). ----- Sorry, Bishonen, it's late and I've been up a long time. Anyway, good luck...and congratulations/thanks for all your help with this open-access encyclopedia's really great/fun/rewarding project. ----- Oh, and the other option is just to come back and be yourself? The poor guy gets so many reverberations from having blocked you, he'd be hesitant to block again for a mere word or three. Anyway, it seems you're a real asset and are/would be sorely missed. (If this post makes zero sense, just treat it as some random collection of words: albeit sent you with good intentions.) -- Just me here now 05:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


<div style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; padding:10px 15px">
== This is just sad. ==
<div style="padding: 0 0 0.5em; vertical-align: middle; font-size:130%"> '''] | <span style="font-size:85%">Voting phase</span>'''
</div>
<div style="display:flex; align-items:center;">
<div>
The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at ].


As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:
I just read that pernicious page referenced above, which resulted in four otherwise-uninvolved housecats being awakened from slumber by the sound of their human yelling at her monitor--"NO, that was NOT what she SAID..." and "ARRGH are you even LISTENING?" and similar rhetorical devices. When even I, dense as I am in matters of logic and philosophy, can pick out the garish flaws in an opposing point...well, they've gotta be sticking out there like a sore thumb, is my point. I have never seen two people conduct a conversation so completely at cross-purposes to each other, and since Jimbo's line of questioning repeats consistently three points which you have already disproven--that you allegedly think you were right to cuss at Daedalus, that you think all admins should be allowed to cuss at will, and that you believe policy should be adapted to encompass that ability--
*October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
I would say your assertions are much better-supported. (And that's to say nothing of yet another most-beloved Wiki-principle: AGF, anyone? The assumptions made about your opinions--assumptions which, I repeat, you had already debunked several times--show an expectation of spectacularly BAD faith. Per those assumptions, you are a defender of profanity and personal attacks, you advocate rude treatment and unkindness based solely on rank, and you believe that rude behavior should be specifically codified and advocated by policy. I can think of only, perhaps, a few malicious trolls who would cop to supporting any given ONE of those three tenets; certainly, as a good-faith contributor and (dare I say it?) a da...er, da...um, a ''doggone'' good admin, I cannot imagine even an alternate universe in which you actually believed a word of that mess.) Personally, I believe the block was per WP:IDONTLIKEIT, pure and simple, and no matter how many times the concept of "civility" is invoked, it will not justify the block that was given--except to those who view "civility" through the same lens as Jimbo, and those people would require no justification, since they would have already supported the block. And around and around and around...
*November 1–? - Scrutineering phase


In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone ] will have a week to use the ] software to vote, which uses a ]. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The ] are different from those at RFA.
Okay, then; enough about my opinions of Jimbo's opinions on that page. You will be missed; come back soon, and in the meantime, be well. The encyclopedia will haz a sad without you.] 22:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the ]. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no ] ("crat chats").
== One last try then ==


Any questions or issues can be asked on the ]. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
And I think this would be best on that page.
</div>
<div>]</div>
</div>
<div style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;">
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please ].</div>
</div>
] (]) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Robertsky@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrator_elections/Newsletter_list&oldid=1253182481 -->


== Kefas Brand ==
Can you explain to me why you think current policy allows admins to engage in personal attacks, indeed to curse at users and not be blocked for it?--] (]) 23:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
:Ye gods, Jimmy, she never said she thought that. Would you stop this "when did you stop beating your wife" line of questioning? She '''never''' said that she thought that, she never '''indicated''' she thought that, and your obtuse persistence in repeating the question only makes you look extremely dense, or else hostile and manipulative. If such is not your intent then I advise striking this accusation masquerading as a question. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 06:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


Hey Bishonen, Long time no see!, Hope you're well,
Jimbo, I know your on line. Why do you think continuing this "feud" is doing[REDACTED] any good? ] (]) 00:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


So in July 2024 you protected ], ] has now been created and I didn't know whether I should CSD or AFD it as don't know what the content was before, Gut instinct says CSD but I've had CSDs declined before because "the content is different" so just thought I'd ask you first, Thanks, Warm Regards, –]<sup>]</sup> 16:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
I for one genuinely question the sanity of anybody who continues to want to contribute content to an encyclopedia headed in any manner by someone who could pursue this topic with such small-minded, petty, un-nuanced and to my mind unintelligent views as Jimbo has demonstrated during the course of this discussion. Abandoning this project is the best response. &mdash;] (]) 01:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
:The content is in fact different, ], so I guess AfD is the better fit; ] was very short and barebones, with a characteristic tabloid emphasis on the subject's romantic relationship and little other content. Lousy sourcing in both cases, though - seems to be all highly promotional interviews + press releases. BTW, Davey, might you have seen a new article for ] also turn up somewhere? The original articles for the brothers were closely connected, as you can see from my note at both AfD's. ] &#124; ] 18:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC).
::See the last on my talk page. I have been asked what I am planning to do about something and what I would be willing to give up. The question is whether people are ''willing to give.'' They need to feel a sense that they're giving to some people (in my case, the world... until a -bot comes to put a banner at the top saying that the article is worthless because it has no footnotes, and, despite being written by an expert in the field and containing numerous references to exact sources in ''words'' in the ''sentences'', no one should read it) (or to the workers at Misplaced Pages, in the case of people like Bish, who seems to care about people). They need to have a sense of giving something of use. They need to have a sense that what they're giving will be gotten. Take any of those three away, or, in my case, all three, and there is no reason to give. ] (]) 01:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
::Ah okay and nope not seen that yet, I came across this via Simple Misplaced Pages ( and tried moving the article here to Kefas and then found out it was protected etc
::*I gave up trying to discuss anything long ago with J Wales - he wants Misplaced Pages to be only one way - his way. All debate with him his futile. However, he cannot be allowed to have it all his own way because we are the ones creating the project. From what I can see, he now travels the world proclaiming what a fantastic idea Misplaced Pages was (indeed it was and is) and has lost touch with what is happening on the ground floor. It seems, any editors proving themselves too prolific or intelligent becomes a threat to the inner circle over which Wales presides. His discussions with Bishone proves that, his method is that if one says something loud enough and often enough it becomes true, and on J Wales' Misplaced Pages that does seem to be true. ] (]) 09:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
::I'm guessing they've given up with here and will try Simple instead –]<sup>]</sup> 19:31, 30 October 2024 (UTC)


== A barnstar for you! ==
'Tis alwasy best, to practice usage of the ''Preview button'', when formulating responses. Avoiding usage of 'colorful words & phrases', helps. ] (]) 15:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
:I don't think anyone is so unconscious.
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
:In fact, if I get in the mood for a final post or something, I promise to write
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar'''
::::<span style="font-size: larger;"><span style="text-decoration: blink;">COMING SOON</span> '''The ''Handy'' Chart for Converting ''Cussing'' to ''Expletive''''':</span>
|-
::::::::'''BEING'''
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you! <b><span style= "font-family: Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#00C000"> ]] <sup>(])</sup></span></b> 20:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
::::''An Useful Way to Translate the Dirty Word You Want to Say into a Word that Means the Same or Worse, Guaranteed, but without blocking''
|}
:It'll be a chart. You look in the first column and find "little shit," for example, and then, in the second column, you see that you should, instead, say "toxic personality." Instead of getting a three hour block, you'll have people lining up to tell you how wonderful you are. ] (]) 17:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
::I eagerly await the fucking chart. &mdash;] (]) 19:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC) :Hey, what a fine star! Thank ''you''! ] &#124; ] 20:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC).
::Thank you for being so proactive at blocking that user IP. I appreciate your work. <b><span style= "font-family: Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#00C000"> ]] <sup>(])</sup></span></b> 20:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
:::For "fucking," substitute "drama," and vice versa. For ''successful'' administrators who ''model the best possible behavior,'' it's the preferred term. It ''means less,'' it's true, than "fucking," but it gets a person into the circle of Friendso'Jim. ] (]) 19:55, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
:Why are the letters so large? ] (]) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


==My guess...==
*My favourite piece of incivility is a line uttered quickly by Helen Mirren to one of her subordinates in ''State of play'', a film in current release: "Fuck you very ''much.''" ] ] 09:29, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
: Is that a certain friend of ours does not in fact have years of experience of editing on behalf of other people, nor even of any kind of editing. If they had, they would by now know of the COI guideline, the sockpuppetry policy, etc etc, and would not have come along shouting out that they were flouting them. The stuff they posted was obviously AI generated, and was all about trying to make themself seem impressive, by being an experienced and professional editor, not some newby who doesn't know what they are doing. Anyway, it was pretty well obvious from the start that a block would almost certainly be arriving sooner or later.
:This one sighs and faces a wall,
: Is all that so obvious that I might as well tell you that grass is green? Maybe, but I just felt like saying it anyway.
:'That is not what I meant, that is not it at all.'
::''Difficile est satiram non scribere'', but you guys managed. ] (]) 10:55, 5 July 2009 (UTC) : Give my regards to 'zilla. ] (]) 23:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hi, ]. Cornered themselves, didn't they? They lied ] or they lied ], or both. And, as you say, the rotting LLM smell is unmistakable in both texts. Anyway, I've asked {{u|Girth Summit}}, on whose page I found them, for a CU; that may bring further clarity. ] &#124; ] 00:27, 2 November 2024 (UTC).
::: Aah, "James". Very rarely I still get someone calling me that, and it seems really strange. Considering all the years when I used that pseudonym, it's remarkable how completely disaccustomed to it I've become. ] (]) 10:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
::::I do know it's not even your real name! But in my book it's your Misplaced Pages name, you'll just have to grin and bear it. Or, well, I'll switch to "Jim" if you like. ] &#124; ] 10:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC).
:::::Welcome in pocket, little ]! ] ] ] 10:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC).
:::::: What do you mean "little"? I've never said on Misplaced Pages that I'm little, so if I am then that's a violation of ], and if I'm not then it's a lie. ] (]) 23:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::: Pint-size James! ] ] ] 02:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC).


:::It's an odd one. I tend to agree with JBW (Jimbo II perhaps?) that the creation of a userpage like that isn't something an experienced spammer would do. On the other hand, they were editing from a clean proxy of some sort, which suggests to me that they were taking steps to cover their steps, so perhaps aren't as clueless as that userpage might suggest. Some sort of experiment to see how we'd react? Someone just messing around? Anyway, nothing more to do as far as I can see. ]] 12:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
== FAC review ==


== ''Scheisst'' ==
I mentioned your expertise . Hope I got it right! ] ] 10:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


''ist wie Scheisst macht''. ] (]) 14:28, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
== Dunno if you'll see this, but... ==
:Hmm. Deep Fried Dutch? ] &#124; ] 14:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC).
]
I've not been around for a while, and when I come back what do I find? More drama created by the autocrat of all the wikipedias - still, a block from his nibs is a badge of honour in my opinion. I hope you are keeping well, and remember Noël Coward's advice to just try to rise above it. Best wishes, ] (]) 13:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC)


== NOTHERE user ==
:Second that. Rise above it, like cream! Like balloons floating over the arctic ice! Like smoke from a fire! Like... um... like other floaty things! ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 20:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi Bishonen, could you take a look at this user {{noping|Powerinhand}}. He is making nonconstructive, tendentious edits promoting religious, caste and regional supremacy - , . He also created which seems to be promoting religious supremacy tacitly, by including surnames which are not exclusive to Sikhs (Malhotra and Uppal) and claiming that they are Sikh in origin, even though the adoption of those names precede the creation of Sikhism.
::Well... ] | ] 21:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC).


It seems pretty clear that they're NOTHERE. ] (]) 13:44, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Hrm, not crashed yet. Floundering, I'll grant. We shall see. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 21:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


:To add, incomprehensible tangents on peoples' talk pages: , , . ] (]) 13:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)


::This is a new user, ]. (Well, putatively. Hard to believe a user who creates a category page and shows awareness of WP alphabet soup as in ], and other signs of experience, is really new, but even so.) Much better IMO if you first warn them and explain what the problem is. ] &#124; ] 13:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC).
::Floundering? I ''beg'' your pardon? Did you click on the diff? (Please scroll way down, it's a silly diff.) ] | ] 22:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC).
:::I'm sure KC meant co-floundering, safe in the knowledge that you would never flounder alone ;-) ] (]) 22:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC) :::Alright, will do. Thanks for the advice. ] (]) 14:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Blocked and tagged. They have a very idiosyncratic use of edit summaries, so you can report them ] when they pop up again.-- ]<sup>]</sup> 20:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Spoiling for a Flounder block, are we, Privatemusings? There's nothing like the life of danger, after all! Say it! ] ] Come on, you know you want to! ] | ] 22:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC).
:::fortunately I've slept with Jimbo, so I'm ok :-) ] (]) 23:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC) :::::Thanks @]. Will do. ] (]) 20:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Thank you very much, my little ]. Admittedly, it would have been more fun if they had answered my question on their page. ("My sockmaster is Truthfindervert, and yes, it's blocked, thanks for asking.") That never happens with my "Whose sock are you?" posts, but I won't give up hope that some day it will. ] &#124; ] 20:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC).
::::Dif? Image? Ebay auction? I'm afraid this is unverified. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 23:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


== are you around right now? == == The Admin's Barnstar ==


{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
Hey Bish,
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Admin's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | ] :) - <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">] <small>(])</small></span> 22:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
|}


I don't know if you remember me from the good old days - I'm ]. I've got a bit of a project I'm looking a little help with, probably half an hour of your time, but I saw that your userpage is blanked right now. You've got some recent edits, but are you on a break or anything? Let me know if you've got the time/inclination to be a second set of eyes for me on something.


* Did 'shonen do something useful for once? ]&thinsp;] 06:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC).
Cheers,
]<sup>'']</sup> 13:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


== ] ==
:I'm on a break ], sorry, A Train. A dramafest. I blanked my page in protest against what I consider shabby treatment by ]. I won't necessarily edit any more, we shall see how the drama pans out. About your project: it's not the half-hour, as such, that I begrudge you... but... I'm just too stressed right now. Sorry again, and for replying so late. Best wishes. ] | ] 10:20, 18 July 2009 (UTC).


Look familiar? ] (]) 19:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Bish, don't you worry, I completely understand. Drop me a note when you're back, I've been meaning to spend more time on the project. Hope to see Bishzilla back before long, too. ]<sup>'']</sup> 08:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


:]. In that case, would you mind moving the now present article to the salted title? My quick overview of the sources shows that it is probably the COMMONNAME. Not that I have any skin in the game, is what brought this to my attention in the NPP queue. Kindly, ] (]) 21:53, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
== ArbCom and Jimbo's bloody brilliant block ==
::Thanks, ]. Yes, I will. The new article is not the same as the old one, which means I don't want to prevent it from being created. I'm just now typing up an explanation to the creator, who of course only used the (unnecessary) disambiguator because they were unable to create the straightforward title ]. (It would have been better to simply ask me, but these things happen with new users.) And, considering the various maneouvres to get the subject into Misplaced Pages (compare higher up on my page), I will definitely ask them about COI also. ] &#124; ] 22:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC).
:::Hello @] I had come to message you about this subject and the issues relvoving around his article. I have not been long on Misplaced Pages and do not know much for I am still learning how to use Misplaced Pages. So I do not wanted to seek your permission and know is it okay to contact the subject via social media and consult about the ongoing. Because if these are paid promotions like stated I’m just wondering why a 23 year old will adamantly pay and pay and pay just to get on Misplaced Pages. On the other hand it could be true as stated by many editors but also could be wrong. On the hand again I believe most concerns raised could be based off of feelings and emotions by various editors. So kindly I’d like to know is it okay. I’m seeking your permission being you have had encounters with that subject previously. my English May not be so good for im not from an English speaking country but I am learning And Misplaced Pages is playing a great contribution so you could pardon my grama or tense. Thanks ] (]) 11:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
::::No, {{u|Idrisskunle}}, I don't advise you to contact the subject on social media to tell them their biography is up for deletion. Even if your intentions are good, it would surely result in ] — perhaps the subject's fans, perhaps the subject himself — coming here and opining at the Article for deletion discussion. AfD discussions, if they are going to be fair, must be conducted by actual[REDACTED] editors, not by people drawn here via social media. Compare also . Thank you. ] &#124; ] 12:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC).
::::: @] thanks, I have understood that that’s why I wanted to inquire from you before anything I’m greatful for your response. According to my analysis I found the articles more of interviews where by if one is interviewed they’d answer the question as it is. However that would appear promotional but for this case I look at exactly what the subject is promoting and found not. Also the sources are reliable being they are not blogs but mainstream news papers from Uganda which I think answers the question of not notable sources. Also other references mention the subjects works. Personally I don’t know the criteria considered by Misplaced Pages to be worthy but I find no problem with the article and the references. Probably there is poor sourcing yes whereby I think being a new article it would have been granted more time to be enriched with more sources. That is what I think. But also I am Learning a lot from this specific article being I am forcused on becoming a better editor and contributor on Misplaced Pages so any guidance I totally welcome it.
:::::once again thanks for your response im greatful. ] (]) 12:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)


== Ah well ==
While I can understand your want for ArbCom to deal with your problem, I really think this is going to be a waste of time. I just can't see any chance the committee's going to be willing to look at a single admin action, particularly because it seems they continue to labour under the myth of Jimbo as some ordinary admin. (Never mind the fact that he can prevent an Arb from taking a seat on the committee or fire an Arb at whim, or that the last time someone undid an admin action of his, he was temporarily desysopped. Just a normal admin, indeed. Not even sure the committee members themselves believe such nonsense, but I think they feel bound to support the idea, anyway.) I suspect that any move to check Jimbo will have to come from the community at large. Anyway, I'm bothering to make this note on your talk page just to say I think you won't get what you want here, but that I continue to think you rock and hope to see you contributing more in the future, as unpleasant as that can be (I just got off a two-week enforced Wikibreak because of frustration about how things are going here). Here's hoping to see you around. ] ] 03:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
:::If the ArbCom are wise, they will accept this case. To let so much bad feeling and confusion fester on would be destructive. ] (]) 07:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Thanks, Homestar Runner. Though... even if it comes from the community at large, it has to start somewhere, you know? Man, that's a great comment you've written, I wish it was somewhere the committee could see it. Like round about maybe. Anyway, glad to see you back, I was concerned about your break. ] | ] 18:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC).
:::::I'm OK. Thanks for your concerns, though. It's always good to see that people care. I may be cutting back at Misplaced Pages just to deal with real life, but I'm sure I'll be here at least some. I know what you mean about how it's got to start somewhere, and I'm not sure where that would be. Incidentally, in response to both you and Giano I'm not sure I can see the committee being able/willing to solve these bad feelings and confusion even if they were to accept it. As usual, I haven't really got any good ideas for how to fix this sort of thing. Maybe I should just go proofread an article. ] ] 02:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


I tried.
== Regarding your comment on ARBr ==


Thank you for your swift action. 🇺🇦&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;🇺🇦 00:51, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case&diff=303341535&oldid=303339394 I interpret the summary and the last sentence as an personal attack on Jimbo, and would like to ask you to retract that statement. <sub>→]]</sub> 15:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
:Not much you can do with a pure troll, ]. And note the username also! Didn't exactly fit the supposed opinions, did it? ] &#124; ] 00:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC).
::*You obviously have not been attacked enough in your obviously short life AzaToth. ] (]) 15:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Can you explain what you mean by that statement? <sub>→]]</sub> 15:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC) ::Not much at all. Since I am not an admin I use militant kindness to allow them to find and use up the rope. It gives full evidence to those who can take action, and prevent harm. 🇺🇦&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;🇺🇦 00:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)


== Block evading ==
I've got information from fellow wikipedians that the statement is an old american folk saying (]), which I've had never heard about; I'm sorry if I offended you in any regards. <sub>→]]</sub> 15:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
::::@Toth - Sucking eggs is a rather easy thing for anyone to do, however, for person's of a certain vintage for instance, your Grandmother, it is generally considered that they have become more adept at the skill than others - Have you really never heard the expression? - now retract your baseless accusation of Personal attacks please. --] (]) 15:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::Yes, I have never heard about that expression at all before; Also, it was implicit I retracted the accusation in my comment above, but if you want ,i do it explict here as well; Bishonen, sorry for the accusation of personal attack, please ignore it. <sub>→]]</sub> 15:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Come now, Joop! Please refer to ! ] | ] 15:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC).
:I am shamed - I've started a new article as ]. (also see here Aza? I think we're on the safe side of civil with that one too) --] (]) 16:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
If you think about it, children today aren't allowed to collect bird's eggs, what with the planet coming to an end, being green and Prince Charles and so forth. So it's not suprising younger people don't know it.] (]) 15:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


The IP that you banned for vandalism across many demographics pages in Latin America is back to making the same changes on another IP address ] ] (]) 12:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
== Offer to mediate ==


:] seems to be related to the ip ] (]) 12:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello Bishonen. Please see my offer to formally mediate your dispute with Jimmy ]. Regards, ''']<sup>See ] or ]</sup>''' 14:08, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
:Blocked both. Thank you. ] &#124; ] 13:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC).
::Having read Bishonen and Jimbo's exclusive talk page, where they discuss their differences and his responses on his page, I would say all attempts at reconciliation have been met and made. 10 out of 10 Ryan for effort in this matter, but neither party is prepared to concede one inch of ground, as far as this matter is concerned. There is also another small matter, perhaps it is just me, I find something sinister and menacing in his choice of words, cannot quite put my finger on it, but I know what I mean. Probably a language and cultural difference I expect. Just I can't quite get it out of my head somehow. So I think it is best to let the ArbCom sort it out rather than drag you and even more people into the mess. ] (]) 16:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
:PS, please take any further information to ANI, , rather than to my page. ] &#124; ] 13:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC).
:::Giano is mistaken. I am ready to concede a lot. I believe that reasonable people can find a mutually satisfactory solution if they work on it. A public discussion page is not the best place to do that, and Ryan will be a trusted and neutral person to help us work out a solution that works for everyone. In email, Bishonen has suggested that what would work for her would be for someone to work out a statement for the block log that she and I can both agree to, and I hope she'll accept Ryan as a person to help us try that. It strikes me as virtually certain that I'm willing to simply freely give Bishonen a lot more than she would get out of an actual ArbCom case, and I hope she agrees. (If she has a problem with Ryan for some reason, I'm happy to talk about others who might help us.)--] (]) 20:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
::::In commercial disputes we occasionally have each side select a mediator, then those two mediators select a third. The decision of the three mediators is then binding or influential. On the arbitration request thread I posted what I thought might be a reasonable settlement. You both are free to read or ignore my prattling. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


== Email ==
* FWIW, I'll be happy to assist in any way with this. Jehochman's suggestion has considerable merit, IMO. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 20:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


{{You've got mail}} ] (]) 07:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
* Please see my note on the page. ] (]) 00:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


== Violation of 3RR in spite of being aware of ] ==
==Misunderstanding==
Jimbo, please stop saying I've suggested we work out a statement for the block log. I have not. You must have completely misunderstood me. ] | ] 21:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC).
:What, again? Give it up Bishonen, he seems to have some kind of breakage wherein he decides you've said something, and no amount of telling him otherwise penetrates. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 13:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi Bishonen, {{noping|CharlesWain}} has violated 3RR in the article on ] in spite of an article talk page discussion initiated by me, just after I posted some relevant messages on their user talk page! Would request you to take necessary action. Thanks & Regards. ] (]) 10:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==


:They have not. You should also avoid edit warring. - ] (]) 10:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello bishonen. I've gone ahead and filed a request for mediation which will be accepted should both you and Jimbo agree to the request. I've added a number of issues to discuss during the mediation, but please feel free to add more should you think of any. As it stands now, me and ] will be acting as mediators. Should this be a problem, we can certainly look at other mediators to take over the role. Regards, ''']<sup>See ] or ]</sup>''' 09:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
:Why did you use <nowiki>{{noping|}}</nowiki> template while complaining about me here? If 3 revert is considered as ] violation then you have done the same by making three reverts since your very first revert is itself reverting this edit. ] (]) 10:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::Yes, CharlesWain has made three reverts AFAICS, ], as I think you yourself have also done. Consecutive edits count as one revert, and violating 3RR means making ''more'' than three reverts. You guys are both edit warring; please use the talkpage. And, Ekdalian, I have to agree that using the <nowiki>{{noping}}</nowiki> template here was not appropriate. ] &#124; ] 11:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC).
:::Noted. Thanks & Regards. ] (]) 11:06, 11 November 2024 (UTC)


== Hmmmm ==
"What, again? Give it up Bishonen, he seems to have some kind of breakage wherein he decides you've said something, and no amount of telling him otherwise penetrates." ] (]) 12:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


I don't know whether making a joke about ARB would make you laugh or cause an appearance by Bishzilla (rwoar).
Personally, I think they're missing out on your obvious experience. ❤️ ] (]) 22:30, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
:Well, I was disappointed and admittedly (in my vanity) surprised. Perhaps I was missled by ] into thinking it would be easy! :-) But I'm sure everybody acted in the best faith, so no jokes. ] &#124; ] 09:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC).


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
(''Crossposted to the mediation page.'')<br>
Sorry, Ryan, I'm not trying to be difficult or make some sort of point here, but I do not agree. I have tried to discuss and communicate with Jimbo already--note, ''not'' only on my subpage ], but by now also on the arb's mailing list. I'm completely frustrated and stressed out by these attempts. We both do our best, no doubt, but I've never had so much difficulty in communicating and arguing with somebody before. Surely this whole thing can't depend on me performing that feat? And what the blazes is so wrong with the arbs opening a case? Presumably the community looks to them for guidance on this--not to me. (I am, whatever Rlevse says, after all a "Jane User", although Jimbo is by no means a "Joe Admin".) The arbs have already proposed a number of suggestions for how to frame a case--for the scope--on the RFAR page. Also, if there's is something magically repugnant about an "arbitration case" about Jimbo, NYBrad has said he's proposing to deal with the matter by a motion instead, and what's wrong with ''that''? ] | ] 14:47, 27 July 2009 (UTC).


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
:I've asked you a question about that . ] (]) 17:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
::I belive that question has already been answered, on the MedCom mailing list. I'm beginning to believe that my fellow mediators, cheerful optimists that they are, are in this case greatly overestimating any possibility a mediation could be of use here. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 18:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-text">
:::I'm not sure if we are referring to the same question. As to being an optimist, ''guilty as charged.'' However, I've stated reasons on the Arb case page why I think mediation should be tried. In any case, Bishonen is not privy to the MedCom list and I would like to hear her answer. ] (]) 18:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
::::Point taken; I thought you were saying you could see ''no'' arguments against; not that you were specifically interested in ''her'' reasons. My error. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 19:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)poi
:::::Actually, ''if'' the mediators managed to convey it to Jimbo that a Founder with a very plausibly (not to say necessarily) perceived honesty problem is not in anybody's best interest, especially not in his and not in Misplaced Pages's, then I think such a mediation could have a chance. ] ] 19:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
::::::"If" being the operative word, and to convey something, the other party must be open to actually listening to what is being said. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 19:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
==Request for mediation not accepted==

{| class="messagebox" style="width:90%"
</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->

== just so you know... ==

Despite their 31 hr block Qalnor is continuing their attacks against Doug . ] (]) 21:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
:: <small> sorry for repeating myself sorry for repeating myself ] (]) 22:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC) </small>
:I did revert their edit, but I'm not sure if this was the correct thing to do. ] (]) 22:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
::And it looks like they reverted back to their version with the attack. ] (]) 22:02, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Yeah, I know, thanks, ]. I have to go to bed; hopefully Yamla will deal with it if it recurs (it's gone at the moment). That page is too fluid for me altogether; I tried over and over to fix various formatting errors, only to be edit conflicted. I'm a slow little old lady. Good night. And now I'm being edit conflicted on my own page too. Come on, guys. ] &#124; ] 22:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC).
::::I've got it. --] (]) 22:11, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
::::{{tq|I'm a slow little old lady.}} No one says that about you as far as you know. ] (]) 22:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

== Past disagreements ==

We've had disagreements both here- and not too long ago. The latter in particular, because the user reported was initially believed to have no connection to the sock-master, but after my report which detailed significant new developments, was deemed as having a "possible indicator of sockpuppetry". The sockmaster had multiple socks who were almost unblocked and "let go" by admins, where I had to take drastic steps to ensure that didn't happen. Given these 2 disagreements barely a few months ago, I think you being an uninvolved administrator is tenous, at best. I hope we can resolve this here, because I do not wish to take a monstrously confusing SPI case to A/E and divert focus. ] (]) 11:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
:], I've done what I intend to do about that ]. I've no further comment. ] &#124; ] 11:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC).

== I'm always coming to you for advice ==

The editor VaudevillianScientist is becoming increasingly upset that I and several other experienced editors in good standing support the deletion of "their" new article . That editor has bludgeoned the discussion (not a huge problem given that they feel highly invested), they have canvassed for like-minded opinions on and off enWP (see ), and things are getting increasingly out of hand and a bit too personal. I advised them to restrict their comments to content/topic, and to not comment about other editors, but they have unfortunately escalated to a bad-faith attempt to out me , in which I am referred to as "Leonid." That name almost certainly refers to ], who in January 2022 I was accused of being in a guffaw-inducing joe-job by one of ]'s many, many socks (see ). Needless to say I am not Schneider, and I invite any CU to determine that independently.

Being upset that one's article is at AfD is one thing, but attempting to out an "opponent" is something much more serious. I am however uncertain how best to proceed, especially with the AfD still active. Should I just proceed to ANI right now, wait for the AfD to end, or seek another remedy? Thanks in advance for anything you (or passing jaguars) suggest. ] (]) 19:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
: Note: they have just now replaced "Leonid" with my WP username. But the outing attempt was real, although false, and it remains in the article history. ] (]) 19:23, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
::What a business. It's appropriate to block for outing, but I can't find any principle for ''how long'' such a block should be. Maybe indefinite? I've given them a month, but I'm just guessing. Any opinion, little talkpage stalkers? Meanwhile, I haven't revision deleted their post - would you like me to? My thinking is that a) it might encourage a Streisand effect, and b) since you repeat the name here, I suppose you're not that upset over it. Let me know if I'm wrong.

::Meanwhile, their canvassing is also a serious problem. But I'll leave the closing admin to deal with that. ] &#124; ] 22:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC).
:::For the outing alone, assuming it is a first offense, a month is reasonable. My feelings on it are slightly mitigated by the fact that OP is clear that they've missed the mark and that is not who they are at all, otherwise this would be a matter for the OS team. Malicious outing to try and gain the upper hand in a content dispute is not something we should just look past, even if is is done ineptly.
:::While they are blocked is a good opportunity to discuss the other points like canvassing so they can better avoid further blocks in the future, or at least can't say they weren't advised about it. ] ] 22:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
::::It's probably too late to do this now, but attempted outing should be treated the same as outing. Now we all know that JoJo's real name is ''not'' Leonid. – ] 23:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Thanks, guys. I'll consider the canvassing (and the bludgeoning) after I've slept. I wish to lodge a complaint: there's a howling blizzard outside. Not sure I'll even be able to go out tomorrow. ] &#124; ] 23:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC).
:::I am less angry at the identity that was falsely assigned to me than the fact that the editor ''intentionally'' attempted to out me in the first place. It's a stark example of bad-faith editing. Regarding a potential revdel, although I would prefer that post to be removed I will certainly defer to your post-sleep/blizzard judgement (or to that of any passing admin), as I am sure you have more experience than me in these matters. ] (]) 00:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
::::In that case, I've revdel'd. ], do you wish to oversight? ] &#124; ] 03:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
:::::Done. – ] 14:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::Thanks. ] &#124; ] 14:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC).

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar'''
|- |-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | For dealing with a nasty case of racist, anti-semitic vandalism. ] ] ] 05:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
|]
|A ] to which you were are a party was ] and has been delisted.<br>You can find more information on the case subpage, ].</center><br>
::''For the Mediation Committee,'' ''']''' 21:40, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
|} |}
*Oh, wow, thank you, ]. "Dealing with" sounds so masterful; I mainly messed it up. Relieved I got it right in the end. The credit goes to ]! ] &#124; ] 10:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
<small><center>This message delivered by ], an automated bot account ] by the ] to perform case management.<br>If you have questions about this bot, please ].</small></center>
*:@] Well, in the end, you did your best, teamwork happened, and everything turned out well. Good job all around! {{smiley}} ] ] ] 19:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

== Your view on Mauryan Map ==

Hello, there is currently a discussion about the Maurya Empire map on the article, reputed users like Fowler&Fowler and Joshua Jonathan have been ignoring our sources and in my view, POV pushing, they have been coming up with excuses , which obviously violate Wiki guidelines on arguments. They have been doing disruptive edits, as of now, they have or tried to remove the Maurya Empire's maximum extent map (by Joshua Jonathan) and then Fowler followed up with "he did the right thing", we have provided dozen articles and books by reliable sources, they have been ignoring them and claiming our sources are not tur. Their map with holes is based on very vague sources. Don't mean to personal attack anyone, but your contributions will be appreciated. @] ] (]) 13:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
:I'm afraid this is some ways above my paygrade. Too specialized for me. ] &#124; ] 13:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
::understandable, but do look out there for disruptive edits please. ] (]) 14:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

== November music ==
{{User QAIbox
| image = Apple tree in field, detail, Ehrenbach.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
greetings from a trip -- ] (]) 17:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:Aw, ]. November doesn't look like that where I am — it's all darkness and sleet and melting snow from the recent howling blizzard. (''Defiantly:'') But I like it like that! We're Northerners, Bishzilla and I! ] &#124; ] 20:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC).
:: Where I live, it's also the exception. - I uploaded pics of a trip (to the warmth) that was a 10-day celebration of a 16 November event, but the day was also when a dear friend died. We sang ] at his funeral yesterday, and it was good. --] (]) 19:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

==You've got mail!==
{{You've got mail|subject=|ts=04:02, 26 November 2024 (UTC)}}
<span style="padding:2px 5px;border-radius:5px;font-family:Arial black;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:-1px">] <span style=color:red>F</span> ]</span> 04:02, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
:Replied and actioned. ] &#124; ] 09:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC).

== My topic ban ==

You have currently topic banned me from India related edits.

And reasons you have provided are "Orignal research" and "Removing templates"

1) removing the Afd template was a mistake as I was editing in mobile.

2) original research - I have done nothing as of original research on any article (that is currently active)

3) edit warring - @] has been removing mentions of Gupta Empire and Magadha from Gupta Empire article, just because HE thinks it's not accurate.

He also vandalised a page I created "List of wars involving Magadha", he removed the classical Magadhan Polities section completely and added a "contradictory" tag (POV PUSHING)

He then warned me for vandalism and edit warring while he should be the one to be warned (for vandalising my page and gupta Empire).

4)bad faith - all I told is AirShip to actually read the book (he just read the title of the book and then said my argument is wrong, he should have been more cooperative). ] (]) 06:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:Topic ban immediately violated . ] (]) 10:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
::That topic box was started before my topic ban ] (]) 10:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:::What are you talking about? You definitely violated your tban right there, ]. Please read ] more carefully. Your ban is in force, and it applies to discussions or suggestions about the topic anywhere on Misplaced Pages, also including edit summaries '''and your own user and talk pages'''. Don't talk about India, Pakistan or Afghanistan anywhere on Misplaced Pages! The only exceptions are "asking for necessary clarifications about the scope of the ban" and "appealing the ban". What you have written above, and also below my ban notice on your own page, addressing me, can be taken as appealing the ban, so that part is all right. Though there's no need to write the same things twice - let's keep it here, on my page. (I will answer the specific points you make later, I'm a little short of time.) But after you were banned, you immediately went back to older posts by Doug Weller and Garudam on your own page and started arguing with them. '''That is not allowed''', as it can't be called "appealing your ban", so don't do it any more. If somebody should come to your page and try to engage you in conversation involving India, Pakistan or Afghanistan, please simply tell them you can't discuss it because you're under a ban.
:::When I see you went to ] and started talking about Magadha and the Gupta Empire, I'm starting to wonder if you read ] at all, as I urged you to?? If you violate the ban again, you will be blocked. ] &#124; ] 10:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC).
::::I started that topic box before my topic ban, I will be more careful now on.
::::But please do clarify on Garudam and AirShip issue.
::::I don't think I did any thing Bad Faith or Original Research. Infact Garudam has been vandalising my page and disrupting gupta empire by his pov. ] (]) 10:58, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:*'''Vandalism/Disruptive edits'''
:- Garudam removed an entire section from my article without any consensus. ]]]
:-Garudam removed mentions of Magadha from Gupta Empire article. ]]</nowiki>
:-All i did was remove/revert these disruptive edits, but for some reason i am the one disrupting?
:*'''Bad Faith'''
:- ], no idea how this is bad faith.
:*'''Original Research'''
:-Magadhan Empire article wasnt created by me.
:- All my other articles were deleted for other reasons (unfinished or already covered somewhere else).
:- Even my current article ] is getting called 'original research'.
:@] my defence. ] (]) 10:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi again, {{u|JingJongPascal}}. I've taken a fresh look at the "contradictory" template question, that you and Gurudam argued about , and also at your supposed assumption of bad faith in the . The template removal instance is really too complex to sanction you for, and, as Doug Weller has recently posted on your page, his belief that you'd assumed bad faith was at least partly based on a misunderstanding. These two things weren't very big deals to begin with, either, and I wish I had left them out. I've crossed them out on your page and in the log.

As for edit warring, which you mention, I don't think that was even in question in my T-ban notice - I don't see it there.

The other points, however — disruptive editing, canvassing discussions, original research, and battleground editing — were big deals, and remain so. Removing the AfD template from an article you had created yourself is a classically bad thing, but not as weighty, as it was one event, and you blame your mobile for it. (Not sure how that works, but never mind.)

Original research is a very important no-no, and since you deny doing any, I'll spend some time on it. Firstly, please read the policy ] to make sure you know what it is. And secondly, it's not particularly interesting if what you did is "currently active" or not. A number of the articles you created were based on original research, and the fact that they have now been turned into redirects, deleted, or draftified is no thanks to you; it has been done by other people and on these people's initiative. Examples: ] (redirected; discussed at the NOR noticeboard ), ] (deleted after ]), ] (unsourced, created by you directly in article space, moved to draft by another editor), ] (also created directly in article space and moved to draft by another editor), ] (deleted after ]), ] (deleted after ]).

All these articles were created by you, and the problem with them was poor or no sourcing and egregious original research. Note also ] from {{u|Vanamonde93}}. ] &#124; ] 20:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC).
:also do drafts count in topic ban? as its not mentioned in WP:TBAN ] (]) 09:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
::I'm glad you asked. Yes, the ban does apply to drafts. None of the examples given at ] are drafts, right, but the ban covers all pages on Misplaced Pages. "Unless clearly and unambiguously specified otherwise, a topic ban covers all ''pages'' (not only articles) broadly related to the topic, as well as the ''parts of other pages'' that are related to the topic, as encapsulated in the phrase "]"." And it covers "discussions or suggestions about weather-related topics anywhere on Misplaced Pages". If you want to work on drafts in the ] area, you have to keep them off Misplaced Pages. I'll come back to a couple of other questions later. ] &#124; ] 10:16, 2 December 2024 (UTC).
:::Garudam has been disrupting my page as we speak
:::and yet he gave me a edit warning.
:::Please do something, he did it without any consensus. ] (]) 08:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
::::? Sorry, but what "my page" is that? I don't see Garudam editing your userpage or your talkpage. The last 9 hours they seem to have been busy editing ], a page they created themselves. Also, ], I remind you that you're not supposed to discuss pages in the ARBIPA topic area anywhere on Misplaced Pages - not even on my page, except to ask questions about, or appeal, the topic ban itself. Is the above post part of your ban appeal? ] &#124; ] 09:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC).
:::::Yes it is, it is about the disruptive edits.
:::::Garudam warned me of disruptive edits but he is the one doing it. I don't think I deserve a topic ban, see ], before my topic ban he kept removing an section he's doing it now too without any consensus and then edit warned me. ] (]) 11:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::], I'm not sure what you mean by saying Garudam "edit warned" you? Anyway, this complaint about another editor and what they did ''after you were T-banned'' doesn't look to me like it's related to an appeal of your ban; you have strayed from that on to general discussion of an ] article and of another user's editing there, which is not allowed. Also, they don't need consensus to make a bold edit (you also don't have consensus; it's just the two of you arguing on the talkpage). See ]. If their edit is reverted, which has so far not happened, then they'd need consensus to put it back.

::::::You'd much better focus on other areas now, and on showing you can edit well away from ], which you're ''banned'' from. You have appealed to me now; I will not lift the ban; did you read the information about ban appeals in my ban notice? What you can do after appealing to me is described . You can appeal either at the ] ("AN") or the ] ("AE"). Or, theoretically, at the ] ("ARCA"), but I wouldn't recommend that, as it's run by the Arbitration Committee which is glacially slow. You'd better choose between AE, where your appeal will be decided by uninvolved admins, and AN, where it will be decided by the community of editors. Take a look at the noticeboards to see how they function, and think carefully about which one you prefer. I have not imposed a limit for how soon you can appeal, but my advice would be to wait at least a few months, and to edit well and constructively in other areas while you wait, as that will give your appeal a better chance. Note also that you can freely edit all topics at our ] projects; you're only topic banned at the English Misplaced Pages. Ask if anything of this is unclear to you. ] &#124; ] 14:57, 4 December 2024 (UTC).
:::::::look at my talk page , "November 2024".
:::::::You tbanned me for "disruptive edits" and "original research" could you provide evidence for disruptive edits. ] (]) 15:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::::(] padding by...) JJP, may I suggest that you carefully and fully read Bishonen's post immediately above yours. Then read it again. Your response to it is a classic example of what is known on Misplaced Pages as ], and that behavior will absolutely, positively do you no good. Indeed, if you keep it up it will likely get you blocked for an extended period, if not indefinitely. Stop complaining about the other editor. Just stop. No matter how mad you are, no matter how upset you are, no matter how unfairly/unjustly you might feel you are being treated, just STOP. Now. My advice to you is to edit some other topic, or edit a Misplaced Pages in another language. ] (]) 19:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::Thanks, ], you're very right. It's all right for ] to ask for examples of disruptive editing and original research, though, as those were some of my reasons for banning them. JingJong, here are some examples. (DE and OR can blend into each other, so some of the below items are examples of both.)
::*You added an extremely bad main source for your article ] (later moved to ]) ], only a few minutes before you submitted the draft to AfC. The source is A. K. Mozumdar's ''Chaulukyas of Gujarat''. Or A. K. Majumdar, as you write it; perhaps both transcriptions are correct, I don't know, but it's clearly the same person. It's still very much used in the article. As a source for history, that's absurd. Our article, under the name ], describes the writer as "an ] spiritual writer and teacher associated with the ] in the United States." He may be an admirable writer in his field, I couldn't say, but he's obviously not remotely a historian, or a reliable source for history. This gives rise to concern over your competence to edit historical articles in this area.
::*Editing against consensus ]. Note Remsense's edit summary.
::*Original research: ] of ] (now a disambiguation page). Compare ].
::*], you change the area drastically in the infobox, are reverted, then ]. What is the article reader supposed to make of those wildly varying figures? You realise they can't see your edit summaries, I hope. Also, can you remember your source for ] in another article?
::*] to ] is not in the cited source, at least I can't find it (and clearly the experienced editor TompaDompa couldn't either, as they reverted you).
::*Creating a multitude of non-viable and poorly sourced articles is also disruptive, as I have mentioned above.
:*I also want to say I was sorry to see ], JingJongPascal. I hope you're getting help. ] &#124; ] 21:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC).
:*:Don't worry @], most of that is humour! ] (]) 06:50, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
:*:I wouldn't say that the Mughal Empire one was disruptive, as the sources were present in the article themselves, but I can agree on the "Indian Empire". ] (]) 06:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

== December music ==
{{User QAIbox
| image = Ehrenbach, snow on grass melting.jpg
| image_upright = 1.3
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
I agree with your post for Simon, - perhaps sign it or it looks as if I wrote it which I don't deserve ;) -- ] (]) 09:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:Yeah. I wrote it up for an e-mail, and then, when it turned out he didn't have wikimail, pasted it in as was. It does have an e-mail signature! Altogether an illustration that I shouldn't post when I'm half asleep. ] &#124; ] 11:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC).
:: Listen today to the (new) ] --] (]) 10:26, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:::On the heckelphone! Thanks, ]. ] &#124; ] 11:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC).
:::: Listen today to ]'s 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the ] when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with ], because he was on my ] this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --] (]) 16:12, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: I come to fix the cellist's name, with ] and new pics - look for red birds --] (]) 17:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: Today is ]. --] (]) 16:05, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: Thank you for your refreshing seasonal message! - ] it's another great woman, soprano ], and I found a 1963 Christmas Oratorio detail. 10 years earlier than that cycle, Bach wrote ] for the 1724 season, based on seven songs, - my focus this year. Expect three stories for the three days they celebrated in Leipzig ;) - Enjoy the season! Refreshment in the melting snow, and I picked icicles for a January image, bzzt ;) --] (]) 21:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

== Seeking assist on ] ==

Hey there. Needing urgent assist with this IP address in ], which has persisted with ] and personal attacks. I for one believe such attitudes are simply ] for contributing objectively on WP.

Seeking your kind attention. Thanks. ] (]) 11:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

:Hi @], this issue is being discussed in another user talk page already: https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Cullen328 . I was first being attacked by this user as he accused me for being a disruptive person when I was just stating facts with citations from CTBUH. ] (]) 12:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
::Hi ], do take note that this is one of the many instances of ] by said IP address, going against ]. 12:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC) ] (]) 12:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Instead of accusing the other Wiki editors, why are you still refusing to answer my questions on the main discussion page as of now? Aren't we supposed to discuss on the talk page? ] (]) 12:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
*Why are you moving this from ]'s talk to mine, ]? Please don't canvass admins at random. I'm afraid I don't in any case have the time for it. ] &#124; ] 13:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC).

== Métis Nation British Columbia ==

I saw you'd blocked some of the IP's. Thanks for that. I've also semi-protected the page for a couple of weeks as this is ongoing. Cheers ] (solidly non-human), ], ] 15:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:Thanks, ]. There was a note at ]. Nice IPv6 range, wasn't it? You may have noticed it had done ''nothing'' on Misplaced Pages other than persistently vandalizing that particular article. How's it going? It's pretty cold and dark here (Stockholm) this time of year, but I have a feeling it's probably seriously moreso where you are. ] &#124; ] 16:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC).
::They have been at that article for a while. It's not bad here ({{cvt|-25|C}}), warmer than normal and less snow than usual. We have ] from 1 December to about 12 January. No sun for us. How cold is Stockholm at this time of year? ] (solidly non-human), ], ] 16:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Oh.. now I'm ashamed to mention our paltry temperature. It's only -5° C. But there's a biting wind from the north! ] &#124; ] 19:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC).
::::The wind is always a killer at subzero temperatures. ] (solidly non-human), ], ] 22:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

== Revert ==

I'm sorry but I don't understand your revert here at all:

Is this asking to corroborate it with more reliable sources per ]? Or is it referring to "Avoid stating opinions as facts."?
You pointed out citing it alone in the edit summary is not sufficient . But it makes sense otherwise if there is no citation in article.
You also said it is redundant, but I don't understand why? It's added in a section referring to conflicts and as a military leader. ] (]) 05:28, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:Please discuss issues relating to the article at its talk page, ]. However, while we are here, the description "brilliant military general" is not suitable for Misplaced Pages. See ] and ]. ] (]) 08:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

:Please take it to article talk per Johnuniq. ] &#124; ] 10:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC).

==Io Saturnalia!==

{| style="border:2px ; background-color: #FF0000;"
|rowspan="2" valign="right" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: left; height: 1.1em;" | '''Io, ]!'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. ] (]) 14:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
|}

== Season's Greetings ==
{| style="border:2px ; background-color: #FFF7E6;"
|rowspan="2" valign="right" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: left; height: 1.1em;" | '''Season's Greetings'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! The '']'' (1563) by ] is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. ] (]) 17:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
|}
==Continued hounding despite your warning==
{{Ping|Qalb alasid}} has been following my edits for a while now. Last time he reverted my blanking of promotional content from the userpage of a self promotional SPA which led to you for battle ground conduct as they did so only to now they have reverted my ] of ] ,] ,] and issued me a frivolous warning for disruptive editing . Additionally, they have also closed a merge discussion initiated by me on ] and edited ] where I am one of the main contributors. There is a pattern of ] me here and seemingly oppose anything I do. - ] (]) 04:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hi, ]. I agree Qalb's warning was pretty frivolous. If you don't like a change of an article to a redirect, {{u|Qalb alasid}}, it's easily reverted (as I see you did). Reverting is enough; no need to issue warnings to experienced users about something like that. If either of you feels strongly enough, your next step should be discussion on talk. For the rest of your examples, Ratnahastin, I don't really think the overall picture rises to harassment or hounding. ] &#124; ] 14:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC).
::Thank you, @]. @] - I am not following or hounding you – please assume good faith.
::For the record, I have been involved in backlogged merge proposals since September 29, 2024. .
::Regarding the 3 articles cleared, I found it a bit odd that these articles, which have been around for a few years, were cleared without discussion. The content within these articles were not merged into the redirects either. Blanking the article without rationale appears to be disruptive – why did you feel the need to do so? Perhaps you can continue that conversation on the respective article's talk page. As per ], "Illegitimate blanking of valid content without reason is considered vandalism, a form of disruptive editing. Other forms of blank-and-redirect, although not vandalism, are still undesirable."
::Based on ], "fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Misplaced Pages policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles," shows that I am acting within the rights as a user. In fact, the same policy also states, "Using dispute resolution can itself constitute hounding if it involves persistently making frivolous or meritless complaints about another editor." Which leads me to ask, @], is accusing someone of hounding and following assuming bad faith? ] (]) 19:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Oh, gee. You're both assuming bad faith AFAIC. Why don't you just both try to avoid each other and dial down the reporting and complaining and (this is for you, {{u|Qalb alasid}}) ]-quoting? Just a suggestion. ]. ] &#124; ] 21:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC).

== Thank you for granting the selfblock ==

Made getting ready for my exams and finishing some major papers so much easier for my ADHD addled brain. ] (]) 23:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)<br>
:Very glad to hear it! ] &#124; ] 04:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC).
::] Merry Christmas, young clown! ] ] ] 04:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC).
== Happy holidays! ==
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:golden; background-color:#fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]
'''Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025! ♦ ] (]) 13:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
</div>

== Hope you are doing well ==
]
I am finding myself poking at this project more and more, these past few weeks, and wanted to wish you well for the holidays. You've always been one of the good ones, in my book. ] <small><small>]</small></small> 16:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hi, ], very nice to see you back! Bishzilla rotates at ya! ] &#124; ] 22:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC).

==Merry Christmas!==
{| style="border:1px solid 3px; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}}; padding: 5px;"
|rowspan="2" valign="center" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: center; height: 1.1em;" | '''A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!'''
|rowspan="2" valign="centre" padding: 5px;" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|-
|style="vertical-align:top; border-top:1px solid gray"|
<br />
<big>Have a great Christmas, and may 2025 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!</big>
<br />
<br />
<big>Cheers</big>
<br />
<br />
<big>] (]) 08:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)</big>
|}

==Joyous Season==
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:green; background-color:lightyellow; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] ]{{Center|]}}

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! {{smiley|christmas}} Whether you celebrate ], ], ], ], ] or your hemisphere's ], this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. ] (]) 16:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC) <br />

<small>Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{]:]}} to your fellow editors' talk pages</small>.
{{clear}}
</div>

] (]) 16:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

== Season's Greetings ==

{| style="border:2px ; background-color: #FFF7E6;"
|rowspan="2" valign="right" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: left; height: 1.1em;" | '''Season's Greetings'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | <blockquote>When he took up his hat to go, he gave one long look round the library. Then he turned ... (and Saxon took advantage of this to wag his way in and join the party), and said, "It's a rare privilege, the free entry of a book chamber like this. I'm hoping ... that you are not insensible of it." </blockquote>

(Text on page 17 illustrated in the ] in ]'s ''Mary's Meadow and Other Tales of Fields and Flowers'', illustrated by ], London: G. Bell and Sons, 1915.)

]] 04:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
|}

== Happy Holidays! ==

<div style="border: 3px solid #01902a; background-color:#fff; text-align:left; padding:2px;"><div style="border: 2px solid red; background-color:#fff; text-align:left; padding:6px;" class="plainlinks">]

] (]) is wishing you a ] ]! This greeting (and season) promotes ] and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

''Spread the cheer by adding {{tls|Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''
</div></div> ] (]) 08:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 4px solid #FFD700;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2px 2px 0 2px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" |
----
'''Hello Bishonen, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this ]. Spread the ] by wishing another user a ] and a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. <br />Happy editing,'''<br />
- ] (]) 01:17, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

''{{resize|96%|Spread the love by adding {{tls|Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.}}''
|}

== Happy Holidays ==

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:red; background-color:#fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]


] (]) is wishing you ]! This greeting (and season) promotes ] and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! <br />

''Spread the cheer by adding {{tls|Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''
</div>] (]) 14:10, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

== Happy Holidays ==

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">]]]{{Center|]}}
'''Hello Bishonen:''' Enjoy the ''']'''&#32;and ''']''' if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Misplaced Pages. Cheers, ] (]) 15:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
]{{paragraph break}}
</div>
<div style="padding-left: 2em; margin-top: 1em; font-size: 88%; font-style: italic">Spread the WikiLove; use {{tls|Season's Greetings}} to send this message</div>{{-}} ] (]) 15:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

== I was responding to an edit summary I saw from User:Doug Weller ==

]. I was hitching up the dogs and I put a quick block on it, intending to give it a longer look when I returned. I didn't intend to add a second notice, just forgot to hit the correct toggle. I acted hastily in removing TPA, I'll concede. ] (]) 11:24, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:I looked at my admin stats and I'm still at 174 total blocks; I'm way inexperienced at that aspect of the work. Happy to be corrected by somebody who has been in deeper kimchi than I. ] (]) 11:31, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::Kimchi. Hehe. ] &#124; ] 14:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC).

== Happy New Year, Bishonen! ==
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">
]]
{{Paragraph break}}
{{Center|{{resize|179%|''''']!'''''}}}}
'''Bishonen''',<br />Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable ], and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
<br />] (]) 01:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)<br /><br />
</div>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;''{{resize|88%|Send New Year cheer by adding {{tls|Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.}}''
{{clear}}<!-- From template:Happy New Year fireworks --> ] (]) 01:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

== January music ==
{{User QAIbox
| image = Ehrenbach icicles.jpg
| image_upright = 1.3
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
Happy new year 2025, opened with ] that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). - I saw ] by Rimsky-Korsakov, - see ]. -- ] (]) 17:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

], my ] 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. ] will be my story tomorrow. --] (]) 21:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

My ] is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. Did you watch Masilo talk and dance? --] (]) 09:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Today a violinist from Turkey, ], whom you can watch playing Schubert chamber music --] (]) 22:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

... and today, ], ], in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author ]. --] (]) 18:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Today, between many who just died, ] on his 45th birthday who was good for ] mentioning a Verdi opera in 2018, - you can see his work in the trailer of another one that I saw, and my talk page has a third (but by a different director). 2025 pics, finally. --] (]) 18:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Today I have ] (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with ] who became GA yesterday, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --] (]) 19:47, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==

] from the past month (December 2024).

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

] '''Administrator changes'''
:] ]
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}

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

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

] '''Oversight changes'''
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]

</div>
</div>

] '''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'''
* 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'''
* 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}}.

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

----
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 15:46, 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 -->

== Dev0745: accept fait accompli, or indef? ==

Hi Bish! Odd situation here. I've noticed that {{checkuser|Dev0745}}'s edits, since my TBAN of them and your block of them ], have essentially all been violations of that TBAN. However, all the edits I've checked are pretty far-flung from politically controversial things, mostly about fauna of the Indian subcontinent, although some about ethnography. So part of me thinks, this is the TBAN equivalent of what I call an ], and I should just accept the ''fait accompli'' and narrow their ban to India/Pakistan <em>politics</em> instead of the whole region. I don't love rewarding TBAN violations, but a ban, like a block, should be preventative of something.{{pb}}<em>On the other hand</em>, we have ], which could be read as pro-India boosterism, and which was reverted by ] as source misrepresentation. Source misrepresentation was the most egregious issue leading to the TBAN in the first place, and Dev memorably insisted ] that it was okay because there was no specific policy against it. I haven't looked deep enough at this specific case to determine whether Dev was right or wrong and, if the latter, whether it was a plausible good-faith error, but I think this is a strange bimodal situation where there's a good case for relaxing the ban, and a good case for indeffing for ban violations, and not much case for anything in between, given that you already blocked Dev the once and that they have two earlier blocks for other reasons. Do you have any insight here? Pings also @] (previous block), @] (previous TBAN), and @] (general expertise). <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">&#91;]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 21:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:Paradoxical, isn't it? I really don't mind an edit about tigers, though. I'd go with narrowing the ban. Abecedare would know what's best to do, I'm sure, but they haven't edited at all for three weeks, and not very amply since August. ] &#124; ] 21:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC).
::I took a quick look and the edits seem fairly innocuous. Gnomish with many images thrown in. Perhaps we should ask Dev0745 what they're up to. Why all their edits, while benign, since the topic ban are violations? Narrowing the ban is fine with me as well but I'm curious to see what they have to say.] <small>(])</small> 02:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::That sounds like a good idea. @]: Could you please read the above and then answer RegentsPark's question? To be clear, we're not asking you to defend the edits you've been making in general; we all agree that they mostly look constructive. Rather, we're trying to understand how this came to happen. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">&#91;]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 05:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hey all. I reverted this edit NOT because I thought it was any sort of {{tq|boosterism}}; but this revision was not an improvement. Since then, I reverted a few more of their edits because they were poorly written. ] (]) 08:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

I have just tried to edit page which are not directly related to topic of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan but related to Asia. ] (]) 08:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

:@]: well, to be clear, that is still a violation of your topic ban. Indian animals are a part of India. That said, the three of us admins are in agreement that your edits about South Asian fauna have generally been fine, and there's no point in enforcing the ban here if you're causing no harm. So I am going to loosen the ban. I am going to change it to a ban from '''politics, religion, and culture in India and Pakistan'''. I want to be clear, that includes some of the articles you've been editing about tribes. You need to stop editing about ethnic and social groups in India, because that's too close to what I initially banned you for. But the edits about Indian animals, and anything else about India that isn't politics or religion or culture, you can keep doing that. Does that make sense? <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">&#91;]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 09:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

::As you wish. ] (]) 12:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

== Quick question ==

Hello,

I do not want to be accused of gaming the system, but a great deal of my edits recently are denials of ESp requests. I do not think those count as edits- is there a chance I might be accused of gaming the system? (]) &#124; (PS: Have a good day) 00:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, {{u|3OpenEyes}}. They count as edits — everything you publish is an edit — but I don't see how your contributions could be regarded as gaming the ] requirement of at least 500 edits. The edits you make aren't semi-automated or pointless or anything like that, which is what we look for when we suspect gaming. You clearly give pretty much every request individual consideration, and answering one of those requests is a useful action. I don't think you have anything to worry about.-- ] &#124; ] 07:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks. I just wanted to make sure-especially when half of the requests are "add citation" (]) &#124; (PS: Have a good day) 11:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::Sorry, I'm going to sound stupid, but does utilizing user scripts such as Terasail's Edit Request Tool count as semi-automated? (]) &#124; (PS: Have a good day) 12:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

== Bhjbggoonnv SPI ==

Hi,

I tried to make an SPI but as an IP user I was unfortunately not able to so I came here instead. I strongly believe is using a new account ever since you implemented a ban for this editor. New account was created only days after Bhjbggoonnv was banned and one of its first edits was to vote Keep the article which was created by which was very suspicious. I discovered also many other blatant give aways showing they are operated by the same individual.

Both accounts edited ] which is a very obscure article: - . In the latter edit, OrebroVi adds a wikilink to ], whose mention was first added by Bhjbggoonnv. This an article Bhjbggoonnv . OrebroVi also made identical edits to this on who created this think tank and this edit is identical to the initial edit on Martin Kramer, and they all added the label Islamophobic.


On ], they as they were attempting to cite the ] as a source. It just so happens that Bhjbggoonnv created said article.
== Support ==


There are major resemblances in terms of language they use. On ], both accounts have made similar edits and used identical edit summaries like "Referenced addition": - . Both accounts have used this exact edit summary dozens of times each.
I want to offer you my sympathy and support.


On the ] article, which is again a very obscure article, both accounts also made very similar edits and again used "Referenced addition": -
This is not support for any particular behaviour, in particular not support for behaviour you've said is not ok, but support for you as a person.


One final example on ] where both accounts made both added Israel as an opponent of the group but were they reverted both times: -
I'm sorry that you're in this unfortunate situation, I realize it's very difficult for you, and I feel for you.


I found more examples of similarity but I think this is quite enough to show a definitive proof of the connection between Bhjbggoonnv and OrebroVi.
Jimbo is also in a difficult situation. The extra attention you've received by virtue of having been blocked by Jimbo is extra attention that he receives on a regular basis. I can hardly imagine what that's like but I'm sure it isn't easy.


It would be much appreciated if you would take a look. ] (]) 15:51, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Jimbo seems to have been missing the point that some behaviour may be prohibited and yet, if the behaviour does occur, a block may not be the best response. Judgement needs to be used in each situation, and most often some other response is better than a block: e.g. page protection, warning, reminder, advice, mediation, defusing, diplomacy, use of humour, or doing nothing. This point may be much easier to accept when stated by someone other than the person who was blocked. It may not be a matter of blocking being prohibited in a defined set of situations, but of use of good judgement.
: A very extensive comparison of the editing history of the two accounts has left me without any doubt that this is the same person. I have blocked the sockpuppet indefinitely. I'm also inclined to make the bock on the original account indefinite, but I thought I would consult you, Bishonen, rather than doing it unilaterally. What do you think? ] (]) 23:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
::Sorry, ], my new computer is messing with me. I do agree, and I note {{u|Vanamonde93}} has now CU-blocked Bhjbggoonnv. And thank you for the information, IP 86.xxx, much appreciated. I was not indeed ignoring you on purpose. ] &#124; ] 09:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC).


== Own block ==
It seems possible to me that there is a misunderstanding over the definition of the word "personalities". Jimbo could perhaps have been using sense 9 here "a disparaging or offensive statement referring to a particular person: ''The political debate deteriorated into personalities''".


I've read ], and I accept the conditions. Please block me. Thank you very much! ] (]) 15:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm sorry that all this has happened and I hope it's all resolved to everyone's satisfaction soon. I hope this message from me doesn't make things more difficult for you in any way. Email me if you feel like it (though I may not be available until the weekend). <span style="color:Orangered; font-size:15pt;">☺</span>] (]) 21:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
:Blocked for two weeks, hope you feel better soon. ] &#124; ] 16:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC).
==Spider6man==
Have a look at their and edits after they were unblocked , I think they are ].- ] (]) 16:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, ]. Four blocks in three weeks is certainly alarming. As soon as one block expires, it's a matter of hours before the next has to be applied. Now they have just been blocked for a month by {{u|Doug Weller}}; if there's more disruption after that, I'd definitely recommend an indef. ] &#124; ] 19:45, 16 January 2025 (UTC).


== Something you may want to look into ==
:Thanks, Coppertwig, I appreciate your message very much. I have thought of the sense of "personalities" that you suggest.. but it's perhaps a bit strange that if that was what Jimbo meant, he seems to be himself quite unaware of having meant it--the phrase itself allows for that definition, but his ''responses'' about the phrase, to Casliber and to me, don't really allow for it at all. Also, there is a third, quite different, possibility ... I'll think about sharing that one by e-mail. Regards, ] | ] 19:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC).


See ] and ]. Almost all edits reverted (those not tagged were often manually reverted when I checked them), and the editor seems determined to push a racist, right-wing POV since April of '22. ] <small><small>]</small></small> 18:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
== Hello ==
:Wow. Indeffed. Hello there, ]. ] &#124; ] 20:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC).
::You are as decisive, swift and efficient (and gorgeous) as always. ] <small><small>]</small></small> 21:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)


== Hi ==
Saw your RfM up at MedCom between you and Jimbo. I'm sorry to see that you declined the request (personally, I don't think mediation was the best option anyway, so whatever). This dovetails with a previous exchange we've had (the only one, I think) a few days ago (or weeks -- I have a fuzzy brain) regarding the sockpuppet tag placed on ]'s page. You had reverted the tag, which, given the knowledge that folks were in-the-know, I apologize for (I hadn't known).


If I should shut up then you have my permission to tell me that. ] (]) 18:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
IIRC, that exchange took place ''before'' the RFAR (and the subsequent attempt at an RfM). Particularly since, coming here, I took a look at your talk page (the chipmunks kinda distracted me ;-) ), where both Utgard and Geogre are talking together, which at first gave me the impression that there were more people talking until I saw the sigs. I was wondering if you made Jimbo aware of this offsite? It wasn't clarified here on your talk that they were the same people. ] (]) 04:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
:I don't actually think you're helping, no. If I had a penny for every time I've seen the statement "reblocks are cheap", I'd be a moderately wealthy woman. It's completely untrue; reblocks are very expensive, in terms of time, effort, and patience. And here you are with the variant "it's easy to reinstate the topic ban". No, it isn't easy, it's hard. Therefore, I need certain undertakings before I lift this ban, and your telling Mark what you think he should say simply makes anything he does say less credible. ] &#124; ] 20:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC).
::OK, thank you. Sometimes I am too optimistic, sometimes I am not optimistic enough; it is difficult to find the balance. I do think that it ''should'' be easy to reblock/retopicban, but not everything is as it should be of course. ] (]) 21:43, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


== Oh God ==
:Uh... did I make ''Jimbo'' aware of it? No, indeed. Jimbo doesn't usually take any interest in such ordinary admin stuff, and would probably be in a state of permanent exhaustion if he did, with the size en.wikipedia is now. Do you yourself make Jimbo aware of all your admin stuff..? Surely not. Did you perhaps mean, did I make an arbitrator aware of it? No; I knew several of them already knew. Of course I was also myself aware of the rather simple reason why Geogre needed one work account and one home account. Do you have any complaint about the way the two accounts were used? I mean, was the impression you received harmful in any way? That would be what "abusive sock", or indeed "sock", means. ] | ] 14:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC).


These four years are going to be so much worse than the first four years. I thought maybe you were unfairly paraphrasing, but nope.... ] (]) 22:20, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:: Geogre - a wiki-friend of yours, whom you knew owned and operated both accounts, was using both his accounts to support your position, and in your user space - and you didn't consider that the person with whom you were in dispute, had a need to know? ]&nbsp;<sup><span style="font-style:italic">(]&nbsp;|&nbsp;])</span></sup> 15:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
:No, sadly. This is the most extreme example I've seen, but there's lesser trouble surrounding ]'s name which at least is actually subject to executive orders, unlike international waters (just wait 'til hurricane season though). I've seen some BLP trouble too concerning Mark Milley, and doubtless there are others I haven't seen. Pretty much anything on the culture war agenda is likely to flare up. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 22:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::If I were you, FT2, I would leave well alone the subject of why people were not openly told that UL was Geogre - it is not usually necessary to tell people what is generally comsidered to be already known to them. This whole case has been allowed to pass with the minimum of accusations, mud flinging and presentation of unpallatable facts. Durova called and Misplaced Pages sacrificed, against my better judgement I have allowed this to pass, but beleive me, please do, beleive me, there is nothing I would like more than to fling some mud. So in the interest of the project fuck off from this page and shut the fuck up! ] (]) 17:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
::Now ] has had to be protected '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 22:28, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::: It's a good job you're not me. The question - to Bishonen - is unchanged. ]&nbsp;<sup><span style="font-style:italic">(]&nbsp;|&nbsp;])</span></sup> 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
:{{ec}} And when I wrote my comment, I hadn't even read the person's posts on their own talkpage (which showed to satisfaction that no, they weren't trolling, they were simply... putting us right). Now I'm wondering if the people who recommended a page-block at ] had read that stuff on their own page. Hmm. You know, once upon a time, I p-blocked somebody from their own talkpage - from that only, not anything else — because they were using it to insult people. That was fun, especially when they took me to ANI, hehe. Maybe I should do it for this guy too? ] &#124; ] 22:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC).
::::FT2 makes a very good point here. The person involved in the dispute, and indeed the public reading the dispute taking place on the page, had a right to know that the dispute was being subverted by an individual using multiple accounts inappropriately. Bishonen, perhaps you should release Jimbo from the pledge he made about using the blocking tool. It's highly unlikely he would ever use it to block you again, and it appears that he made the pledge under a false impression regarding how many people supported you. ''']''' (]) 17:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
::I gave him the ANI option. In any case, I filled out the CT paperwork in case somebody, somewhere, takes exception. I hope the raw jingoism settles down after a couple of days, to be replaced by earnest policy-based sealioning. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 22:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Have you asked Jimbo whether he knew that Geogre = Loki at that time? <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 18:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


== Kind attention: Bishonen and admins active here ==
:::And whatever else is true or not true, Giano you don't get to speak to anyone like that. No one does. ] (]) 17:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
::::RxS - apparently, Giano does - he just did. ''']''' (]) 17:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
::Guys, I've left Giano a note - let's not get bogged down by the perceived incivility here. Xave and FT2 have important questions that need answering. ''']<sup>See ] or ]</sup>''' 18:11, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


Hi Bishonen.. you must be doing great! A comparatively new user, who has hardly encountered me while editing, has brought baseless allegations against me at ]! The user doesn't demand any ban or block, but wants a warning to be issued! I am not sure, but can smell meatpuppetry, since the user hardly interacted with me but has come up with pretty old comments by Sitush without context! I would like to hear from you or other admins active on this talk page! Thanks & Regards. ] (]) 07:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


:Thanks Bishonen for your comments! I would like to keep you informed that Sitush is referring to my response at a time when Nobita's sock was driving a discussion and I had filed an SPI! Therefore, I was delaying the discussion in order to eliminate the sock from the same. Sitush has been quoted out of context! Thanks & Regards. ] (]) 12:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Do be quiet, Giacomo. It's totally inappropriate for FT2 to attack me on my page, but then nobody's going to take it seriously. He's embarrasssing himself, not me, so don't let yourself be baited. As for you, Cirt, I'm astonished to see you coming out of the woodwork. Are you actually watching this page? You making a hostile appearance on it isn't ''quite'' as inappropriate as FT2 doing it, but not far off. Why don't you go ask Jimbo how interested ''he'' is in how many people support me? (And if you do a count, you might be interested to note that I have archived those supporters once, before the page started filling up again.) Geogre, by the way, is a valuable supporter—for anybody, about anything—''not'' by way of filling up a headcount, but because of his logic and his eloquence. If you have an itch to discuss this matter, FT2 and Cirt, perhaps you'd like to do it on some appropriate RFAR page? Isn't that a good idea? You'd get much more attention there than here, and you're surely not ashamed of the points you make, or of your ] background with me and with Geogre? Are you? ] | ] 18:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC).

Latest revision as of 12:15, 21 January 2025


Platinum Goddess of Misplaced Pages. Cold and hard, but also beautiful and priceless.
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12
Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18
Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21
Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24
Archive 25Archive 26

October music

story · music · places

You may remember Maryvonne Le Dizès, my story today as on 28 August. Some September music was unusual: last compositions and eternal light, with Ligeti mentioned in story and music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Beautiful, Gerda. Bishonen | tålk 21:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC).
Thank you! I made Leif Segerstam my big story today. -Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
My story today is about a composer and choir conductor, listen to his Lamento. - My story on 13 October was about a Bach cantata. As this place works, it's on the Main page now because of the date. I sort of like it because today is the birth date of my grandfather who loved and grew dahlias like those pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
Happy whatever you celebrate today, - more who died, more to come, and they made the world richer. Greetings from Madrid where I took the pic of assorted Cucurbita in 2016. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

User:151.124.106.64

I've extended your block on this account. This is yet another incarnation of a multiple sock that has been repeatedly reappearing over may months. The now expired short protection on my talk page was to stop previous attacks from other SPAs obviously linked to this. If you are not happy with my action, please feel free to do as you see fit Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Jim, your block length is fine. However, did you notice I hardblocked them (in my second block)? I ticked "Apply block to logged-in users from this IP address", because after checking the IP's contributions, I realised that the attack on you on your page had to come from some way you had disobliged them — say, blocked them — not in the form of this IP but in some other incarnation — likely an account, or more than one account. Your longer block is not a hardblock. Should it be? Bishonen | tålk 11:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC).
Sorry, missed that, hard blocked now. There are some giveaways with this vandal in that their other edits follow a pattern, notably references to Samuel Claesson Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Macrobiotic Diet

Firstly, neither of those comments about Bon Courage were "attacks". If you read their talk page, you'll find it is littered with other people complaining about their editing warring.

Secondly, neither was my editing "disruptive".

The Misplaced Pages has strict policies, which surely you as an admin must be aware off including; a) the removal of any content that is not supported by references, b) NPOV/bias, c) discussion on the talk page,

all of which I was engaged in, at an intelligent & informed level, while Bon courage was just grinding their POV & reverting, & offering zero engagemnt.

You have no grounds to enact such an onerous punishment.

Thank you. Not a similar account name (talk) 19:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I see. There's a whole load of material on the internet about you abusing your admin powers, and blocking people based on "non-existant personal attacks" - precisely as you have done to me, so I guess I am wasting my time appealing to reason with you?
If you care at all about 'accuracy' on the Misplaced Pages, you've allowed the other party to turn the lede into nonsensical rubbish, absolutely contrary to facts.
They were, precisely I stated, just gaming the system to gain control over the topic. Not a similar account name (talk) 19:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
You think neither "a pattern of wasting other people's time and energy for them" nor "a pattern of contention & mendacious interactions with others" nor "I am just the latest victim that they think they can pick on" are attacks? What does mendacious mean in your opinion? Or pick on? I disagree that a block from two pages, out of the whole of Misplaced Pages, is a particularly onerous sanction for the amount of disruption and battlegrund editing you've been doing. But you can request unblock from an uninvolved administrator by placing {{unblock|your reason here}} on your talkpage. Bishonen | tålk 20:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC).
Of course they are not attacks. Look at Bon courage's talk page for evidence. They're just a statement of facts. For a previous victim of Psychology guy and them, see
Same players, same game. Neither providing citations, neither have any knowledge of the topic they are controlling.
And if what I wrote was an attack, then why isn't this an outright threat?
"It won't work, and if you keep it up you will probably be removed from the Project, which likes to protect itself from this unwelcome crap. Bon courage (talk) 18:03, 24 June 2024"
They threatened this user, then they started making an identical threats to me, gaming the system to control the page.
Look at my edits, and what am I doing? I am asking them for citations they can't or won't provide.
I've read the rules and policies and are they clear, e.g. NPOV, no citations equal removal, etc.
I am following the rules, they are not, and you are rewarding them. Not a similar account name
(talk) 22:26, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
If you really think so, Not a similar account name, why don't you request unblock, which I have several times explained how to do? Or you could complain about my admin abuse at the WP:ANI noticeboard. Don't forget to mention the 'whole load of material on the internet about me abusing my admin powers and blocking people based on "non-existant personal attacks"'. Bishonen | tålk 23:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC).
@Bishonen or even Misplaced Pages:Administrative action review Doug Weller talk 09:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
@Not a similar account name There's a whole lot of stuff on the Internet accusing good Admins from people whining about their blocks, including me. All nonsense. Doug Weller talk 09:21, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Not a similar account name, it is incorrect to assume other editors have no knowledge in this topic area; it is also not true that sources were not provided to you (I provided several good ones on the talk-page). I have been reading books on fad diets and dietetics for over 20 years. Off-site I am in regular contact with food historians and have exchanged much research. You argued on the talk-page without providing any good WP:RS that the macrobiotic diet is a traditional diet. It isn't and no food historian would claim that. As I explained in a message on your talk-page, the best thing to do is to wait until your block expires and not attack other editors or get aggressive like this. If you have other interests, edit another topic area. Psychologist Guy (talk) 18:38, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Editing warring user

Iimitlessyou has been edit warring and editing tendentiously on Lyle and Erik Menendez, to exclude the prosecution arguments from the article.

  • here is their first revert, removing a summary of the prosecutions argument.
  • here they reverted me a second time, calling me "completely biased" and a "pro prosecution editor" who is "adding debunked information"

At that point I placed a warning on their talk page (they blanked it) and I opened a dialogue (pinging them) on the article talk page which they ignored: They have completely ignored my request for discussion on the talk page: Talk:Lyle and Erik Menendez#Dispute over edits/lead by Iimitlessyou

  • They ignored that, and proceeded to revert me again here and called me a biased "pro prosecution editor".
  • They reverted me a forth time for "biased edits".

I reverted them 3 times and attempted to discuss, they reverted me 4.

I've tried to explain that the article is supposed to reflect the WP:RS, and this includes the prosecution case, but they seem to interpret this as "biased" against the menendez brothers who murdered their parents. Also note the editors heavy editing of the Netflix series article.

Zenomonoz (talk) 03:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Note I've taken this to the Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard where evidence they fabricated quotes is posted. Zenomonoz (talk) 11:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, Zenomonoz, I had a go at it, but I'm afraid I just don't have to bandwidth to research all that at the moment. Even the first revert diff you give (while Iimitlessyou's edit summary certainly makes a bad impression) records so many changes, and so many sources, that I found it pretty unmanageable. Bishonen | tålk 19:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC).
No worries, it's handled. Feel free to blank my discussion here. Zenomonoz (talk) 20:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

WMF, Editor Privacy, Courts, and India

Hi Bish,

Have you been following the ANI saga? If not, you can read a summary at this month's Signpost.

So, the latest update in the case involves the Court threatening to not hear WMF until Misplaced Pages deletes the page on the case, created by Valereee, a week ago! More importantly, in the same hearing, WMF's lawyer appears to have agreed to provide the details of the unknown "authors" who have/had edited the page on ANI, to the Court in a "sealed cover".

Given the whimsical nature of Courts — not just in India —, there is always a probability of unsealing at a later date and hence, shouldn't such a step require making the broader community aware on how WMF plans to approach similar lawsuits in what is the most populous (and probably among the most litigatious) country in the world? Undoubtedly, WMF is not governed by the consensus of editors on how it approaches Courts and silence is strategic but perhaps some discussion will do good?

I want your opinions on the broader locus before I take this to one of the centralized discussion boards. Talk-page stalkers and watchers, feel free to join the discussion! TrangaBellam (talk) 12:59, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to interpret that tweet. Maybe it means something, maybe not. Perhaps The Hindu will have commented on it by this time tomorrow. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:27, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
A little more: "The bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela were presiding over an application filed by Misplaced Pages seeking permission to file relevant documents in a sealed cover. Misplaced Pages, represented by Advocate Sibal, expressed concerns over the consequence of releasing the name of the author. The court, however, observed that the company was accusing a journalist (ANI) of being a state-sponsored agent and suggested that the author of the content should defend their statements." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 22–24 - Discussion phase
  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Misplaced Pages:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Misplaced Pages:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Kefas Brand

Hey Bishonen, Long time no see!, Hope you're well,

So in July 2024 you protected Kefas Brand, Rodney Kefas Namisi has now been created and I didn't know whether I should CSD or AFD it as don't know what the content was before, Gut instinct says CSD but I've had CSDs declined before because "the content is different" so just thought I'd ask you first, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010 16:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

The content is in fact different, Davey2010, so I guess AfD is the better fit; Kefas Brand was very short and barebones, with a characteristic tabloid emphasis on the subject's romantic relationship and little other content. Lousy sourcing in both cases, though - seems to be all highly promotional interviews + press releases. BTW, Davey, might you have seen a new article for Kefas's brother Arnold also turn up somewhere? The original articles for the brothers were closely connected, as you can see from my note at both AfD's. Bishonen | tålk 18:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC).
Ah okay and nope not seen that yet, I came across this via Simple Misplaced Pages (https://simple.wikipedia.org/Kefas_Brand and tried moving the article here to Kefas and then found out it was protected etc
I'm guessing they've given up with here and will try Simple instead –Davey2010 19:31, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thank you! Dillard421♂♂ 20:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Hey, what a fine star! Thank you! Bishonen | tålk 20:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC).
Thank you for being so proactive at blocking that user IP. I appreciate your work. Dillard421♂♂ 20:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

My guess...

Is that a certain friend of ours does not in fact have years of experience of editing on behalf of other people, nor even of any kind of editing. If they had, they would by now know of the COI guideline, the sockpuppetry policy, etc etc, and would not have come along shouting out that they were flouting them. The stuff they posted was obviously AI generated, and was all about trying to make themself seem impressive, by being an experienced and professional editor, not some newby who doesn't know what they are doing. Anyway, it was pretty well obvious from the start that a block would almost certainly be arriving sooner or later.
Is all that so obvious that I might as well tell you that grass is green? Maybe, but I just felt like saying it anyway.
Give my regards to 'zilla. JBW (talk) 23:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi, James. Cornered themselves, didn't they? They lied here or they lied here, or both. And, as you say, the rotting LLM smell is unmistakable in both texts. Anyway, I've asked Girth Summit, on whose page I found them, for a CU; that may bring further clarity. Bishonen | tålk 00:27, 2 November 2024 (UTC).
Aah, "James". Very rarely I still get someone calling me that, and it seems really strange. Considering all the years when I used that pseudonym, it's remarkable how completely disaccustomed to it I've become. JBW (talk) 10:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
I do know it's not even your real name! But in my book it's your Misplaced Pages name, you'll just have to grin and bear it. Or, well, I'll switch to "Jim" if you like. Bishonen | tålk 10:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC).
Welcome in pocket, little James! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 10:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC).
What do you mean "little"? I've never said on Misplaced Pages that I'm little, so if I am then that's a violation of WP:OUTING, and if I'm not then it's a lie. JBW (talk) 23:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Pint-size James! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 02:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC).
It's an odd one. I tend to agree with JBW (Jimbo II perhaps?) that the creation of a userpage like that isn't something an experienced spammer would do. On the other hand, they were editing from a clean proxy of some sort, which suggests to me that they were taking steps to cover their steps, so perhaps aren't as clueless as that userpage might suggest. Some sort of experiment to see how we'd react? Someone just messing around? Anyway, nothing more to do as far as I can see. Girth Summit (blether) 12:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Scheisst

ist wie Scheisst macht. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:28, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Hmm. Deep Fried Dutch? Bishonen | tålk 14:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC).

NOTHERE user

Hi Bishonen, could you take a look at this user Powerinhand. He is making nonconstructive, tendentious edits promoting religious, caste and regional supremacy - here he added POV irredentist views claiming Haryana is South Punjab; it is a common viewpoint among Punjabi nationalists that Haryana is part of Greater Punjab along with the random "who" tag, more POV pushing by unfairly removing a figure's religious identity. He also created an article which seems to be promoting religious supremacy tacitly, by including surnames which are not exclusive to Sikhs (Malhotra and Uppal) and claiming that they are Sikh in origin, even though the adoption of those names precede the creation of Sikhism.

It seems pretty clear that they're NOTHERE. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 13:44, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

To add, incomprehensible tangents on peoples' talk pages: , , . Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 13:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
This is a new user, Southasianhistorian8. (Well, putatively. Hard to believe a user who creates a category page and shows awareness of WP alphabet soup as in this edit summary, and other signs of experience, is really new, but even so.) Much better IMO if you first warn them and explain what the problem is. Bishonen | tålk 13:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC).
Alright, will do. Thanks for the advice. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 14:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Blocked and tagged. They have a very idiosyncratic use of edit summaries, so you can report them here when they pop up again.-- Ponyo 20:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks @Ponyo. Will do. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 20:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you very much, my little Ponyo. Admittedly, it would have been more fun if they had answered my question on their page. ("My sockmaster is Truthfindervert, and yes, it's blocked, thanks for asking.") That never happens with my "Whose sock are you?" posts, but I won't give up hope that some day it will. Bishonen | tålk 20:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC).

The Admin's Barnstar

The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you very much :) - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 22:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)


Kefas Brand (film actor)

Look familiar? Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I guess it doesn't look all the familiar. In that case, would you mind moving the now present article to the salted title? My quick overview of the sources shows that it is probably the COMMONNAME. Not that I have any skin in the game, the move and then blanked redirect page is what brought this to my attention in the NPP queue. Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:53, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, Bobby Cohn. Yes, I will. The new article is not the same as the old one, which means I don't want to prevent it from being created. I'm just now typing up an explanation to the creator, who of course only used the (unnecessary) disambiguator because they were unable to create the straightforward title Kefas Brand. (It would have been better to simply ask me, but these things happen with new users.) And, considering the various maneouvres to get the subject into Misplaced Pages (compare this section higher up on my page), I will definitely ask them about COI also. Bishonen | tålk 22:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC).
Hello @Bishonen I had come to message you about this subject and the issues relvoving around his article. I have not been long on Misplaced Pages and do not know much for I am still learning how to use Misplaced Pages. So I do not wanted to seek your permission and know is it okay to contact the subject via social media and consult about the ongoing. Because if these are paid promotions like stated I’m just wondering why a 23 year old will adamantly pay and pay and pay just to get on Misplaced Pages. On the other hand it could be true as stated by many editors but also could be wrong. On the hand again I believe most concerns raised could be based off of feelings and emotions by various editors. So kindly I’d like to know is it okay. I’m seeking your permission being you have had encounters with that subject previously. my English May not be so good for im not from an English speaking country but I am learning And Misplaced Pages is playing a great contribution so you could pardon my grama or tense. Thanks Idrisskunle (talk) 11:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
No, Idrisskunle, I don't advise you to contact the subject on social media to tell them their biography is up for deletion. Even if your intentions are good, it would surely result in meatpuppets — perhaps the subject's fans, perhaps the subject himself — coming here and opining at the Article for deletion discussion. AfD discussions, if they are going to be fair, must be conducted by actual[REDACTED] editors, not by people drawn here via social media. Compare also this guideline. Thank you. Bishonen | tålk 12:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC).
@Bishonen thanks, I have understood that that’s why I wanted to inquire from you before anything I’m greatful for your response. According to my analysis I found the articles more of interviews where by if one is interviewed they’d answer the question as it is. However that would appear promotional but for this case I look at exactly what the subject is promoting and found not. Also the sources are reliable being they are not blogs but mainstream news papers from Uganda which I think answers the question of not notable sources. Also other references mention the subjects works. Personally I don’t know the criteria considered by Misplaced Pages to be worthy but I find no problem with the article and the references. Probably there is poor sourcing yes whereby I think being a new article it would have been granted more time to be enriched with more sources. That is what I think. But also I am Learning a lot from this specific article being I am forcused on becoming a better editor and contributor on Misplaced Pages so any guidance I totally welcome it.
once again thanks for your response im greatful. Idrisskunle (talk) 12:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah well

I tried.

Thank you for your swift action. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Faddle 🇺🇦 00:51, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Not much you can do with a pure troll, Timtrent. And note the username also! Didn't exactly fit the supposed opinions, did it? Bishonen | tålk 00:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC).
Not much at all. Since I am not an admin I use militant kindness to allow them to find and use up the rope. It gives full evidence to those who can take action, and prevent harm. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Faddle 🇺🇦 00:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Block evading

The IP that you banned for vandalism across many demographics pages in Latin America is back to making the same changes on another IP address 2A02:8440:250C:AAA4:5C9D:4864:F7C3:27F5 ElMexicanotres (talk) 12:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Ydududu seems to be related to the ip ElMexicanotres (talk) 12:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Blocked both. Thank you. Bishonen | tålk 13:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC).
PS, please take any further information to ANI, here, rather than to my page. Bishonen | tålk 13:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC).

Email

Hello, Bishonen. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Ekdalian (talk) 07:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Violation of 3RR in spite of being aware of WP:GS/CASTE

Hi Bishonen, CharlesWain has violated 3RR in the article on Guha (surname) in spite of an article talk page discussion initiated by me, just after I posted some relevant messages on their user talk page! Would request you to take necessary action. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 10:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

They have not. You should also avoid edit warring. - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Why did you use {{noping|}} template while complaining about me here? If 3 revert is considered as WP:3RR violation then you have done the same by making three reverts since your very first revert is itself reverting this months old edit. CharlesWain (talk) 10:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, CharlesWain has made three reverts AFAICS, Ekdalian, as I think you yourself have also done. Consecutive edits count as one revert, and violating 3RR means making more than three reverts. You guys are both edit warring; please use the talkpage. And, Ekdalian, I have to agree that using the {{noping}} template here was not appropriate. Bishonen | tålk 11:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC).
Noted. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 11:06, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Hmmmm

I don't know whether making a joke about ARB would make you laugh or cause an appearance by Bishzilla (rwoar). Personally, I think they're missing out on your obvious experience. ❤️ Knitsey (talk) 22:30, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, I was disappointed and admittedly (in my vanity) surprised. Perhaps I was missled by this comment into thinking it would be easy! :-) But I'm sure everybody acted in the best faith, so no jokes. Bishonen | tålk 09:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC).

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

just so you know...

Despite their 31 hr block Qalnor is continuing their attacks against Doug continuing their attacks against Doug. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

sorry for repeating myself sorry for repeating myself JoJo Anthrax (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
I did revert their edit, but I'm not sure if this was the correct thing to do. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 22:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
And it looks like they reverted back to their version with the attack. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 22:02, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, I know, thanks, JoJo. I have to go to bed; hopefully Yamla will deal with it if it recurs (it's gone at the moment). That page is too fluid for me altogether; I tried over and over to fix various formatting errors, only to be edit conflicted. I'm a slow little old lady. Good night. And now I'm being edit conflicted on my own page too. Come on, guys. Bishonen | tålk 22:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC).
I've got it. --Yamla (talk) 22:11, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm a slow little old lady. No one says that about you as far as you know. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 22:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Past disagreements

We've had disagreements both here- and here not too long ago. The latter in particular, because the user reported was initially believed to have no connection to the sock-master, but after my report which detailed significant new developments, was deemed as having a "possible indicator of sockpuppetry". The sockmaster had multiple socks who were almost unblocked and "let go" by admins, where I had to take drastic steps to ensure that didn't happen. Given these 2 disagreements barely a few months ago, I think you being an uninvolved administrator is tenous, at best. I hope we can resolve this here, because I do not wish to take a monstrously confusing SPI case to A/E and divert focus. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 11:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Southasianhistorian8, I've done what I intend to do about that here. I've no further comment. Bishonen | tålk 11:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC).

I'm always coming to you for advice

The editor VaudevillianScientist is becoming increasingly upset that I and several other experienced editors in good standing support the deletion of "their" new article here. That editor has bludgeoned the discussion (not a huge problem given that they feel highly invested), they have canvassed for like-minded opinions on and off enWP (see here), and things are getting increasingly out of hand and a bit too personal. I advised them here to restrict their comments to content/topic, and to not comment about other editors, but they have unfortunately escalated to a bad-faith attempt to out me here, in which I am referred to as "Leonid." That name almost certainly refers to Leonid Schneider, who in January 2022 I was accused of being in a guffaw-inducing joe-job by one of Ariel Fernandez's many, many socks (see this SPI discussion). Needless to say I am not Schneider, and I invite any CU to determine that independently.

Being upset that one's article is at AfD is one thing, but attempting to out an "opponent" is something much more serious. I am however uncertain how best to proceed, especially with the AfD still active. Should I just proceed to ANI right now, wait for the AfD to end, or seek another remedy? Thanks in advance for anything you (or passing jaguars) suggest. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 19:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: they have just now replaced "Leonid" with my WP username. But the outing attempt was real, although false, and it remains in the article history. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 19:23, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
What a business. It's appropriate to block for outing, but I can't find any principle for how long such a block should be. Maybe indefinite? I've given them a month, but I'm just guessing. Any opinion, little talkpage stalkers? Meanwhile, I haven't revision deleted their post - would you like me to? My thinking is that a) it might encourage a Streisand effect, and b) since you repeat the name here, I suppose you're not that upset over it. Let me know if I'm wrong.
Meanwhile, their canvassing is also a serious problem. But I'll leave the closing admin to deal with that. Bishonen | tålk 22:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC).
For the outing alone, assuming it is a first offense, a month is reasonable. My feelings on it are slightly mitigated by the fact that OP is clear that they've missed the mark and that is not who they are at all, otherwise this would be a matter for the OS team. Malicious outing to try and gain the upper hand in a content dispute is not something we should just look past, even if is is done ineptly.
While they are blocked is a good opportunity to discuss the other points like canvassing so they can better avoid further blocks in the future, or at least can't say they weren't advised about it. Just Step Sideways 22:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
It's probably too late to do this now, but attempted outing should be treated the same as outing. Now we all know that JoJo's real name is not Leonid. – bradv 23:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, guys. I'll consider the canvassing (and the bludgeoning) after I've slept. I wish to lodge a complaint: there's a howling blizzard outside. Not sure I'll even be able to go out tomorrow. Bishonen | tålk 23:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC).
I am less angry at the identity that was falsely assigned to me than the fact that the editor intentionally attempted to out me in the first place. It's a stark example of bad-faith editing. Regarding a potential revdel, although I would prefer that post to be removed I will certainly defer to your post-sleep/blizzard judgement (or to that of any passing admin), as I am sure you have more experience than me in these matters. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 00:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
In that case, I've revdel'd. Bradv, do you wish to oversight? Bishonen | tålk 03:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
Done. – bradv 14:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. Bishonen | tålk 14:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC).

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For dealing with a nasty case of racist, anti-semitic vandalism. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Your view on Mauryan Map

Hello, there is currently a discussion about the Maurya Empire map on the article, reputed users like Fowler&Fowler and Joshua Jonathan have been ignoring our sources and in my view, POV pushing, they have been coming up with excuses , which obviously violate Wiki guidelines on arguments. They have been doing disruptive edits, as of now, they have or tried to remove the Maurya Empire's maximum extent map (by Joshua Jonathan) and then Fowler followed up with "he did the right thing", we have provided dozen articles and books by reliable sources, they have been ignoring them and claiming our sources are not tur. Their map with holes is based on very vague sources. Don't mean to personal attack anyone, but your contributions will be appreciated. @Bishonen JingJongPascal (talk) 13:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid this is some ways above my paygrade. Too specialized for me. Bishonen | tålk 13:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
understandable, but do look out there for disruptive edits please. JingJongPascal (talk) 14:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

November music

story · music · places

greetings from a trip -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Aw, Gerda. November doesn't look like that where I am — it's all darkness and sleet and melting snow from the recent howling blizzard. (Defiantly:) But I like it like that! We're Northerners, Bishzilla and I! Bishonen | tålk 20:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC).
Where I live, it's also the exception. - I uploaded pics of a trip (to the warmth) that was a 10-day celebration of a 16 November event, but the day was also when a dear friend died. We sang Hevenu shalom aleichem at his funeral yesterday, and it was good. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Bishonen. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 04:02, 26 November 2024 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

C F A 04:02, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Replied and actioned. Bishonen | tålk 09:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC).

My topic ban

You have currently topic banned me from India related edits.

And reasons you have provided are "Orignal research" and "Removing templates"

1) removing the Afd template was a mistake as I was editing in mobile.

2) original research - I have done nothing as of original research on any article (that is currently active)

3) edit warring - @Garudam has been removing mentions of Gupta Empire and Magadha from Gupta Empire article, just because HE thinks it's not accurate.

He also vandalised a page I created "List of wars involving Magadha", he removed the classical Magadhan Polities section completely and added a "contradictory" tag (POV PUSHING)

He then warned me for vandalism and edit warring while he should be the one to be warned (for vandalising my page and gupta Empire).

4)bad faith - all I told is AirShip to actually read the book (he just read the title of the book and then said my argument is wrong, he should have been more cooperative). JingJongPascal (talk) 06:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Topic ban immediately violated here. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
That topic box was started before my topic ban JingJongPascal (talk) 10:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
What are you talking about? You definitely violated your tban right there, JingJongPascal. Please read WP:TBAN more carefully. Your ban is in force, and it applies to discussions or suggestions about the topic anywhere on Misplaced Pages, also including edit summaries and your own user and talk pages. Don't talk about India, Pakistan or Afghanistan anywhere on Misplaced Pages! The only exceptions are "asking for necessary clarifications about the scope of the ban" and "appealing the ban". What you have written above, and also below my ban notice on your own page, addressing me, can be taken as appealing the ban, so that part is all right. Though there's no need to write the same things twice - let's keep it here, on my page. (I will answer the specific points you make later, I'm a little short of time.) But after you were banned, you immediately went back to older posts by Doug Weller and Garudam on your own page and started arguing with them. That is not allowed, as it can't be called "appealing your ban", so don't do it any more. If somebody should come to your page and try to engage you in conversation involving India, Pakistan or Afghanistan, please simply tell them you can't discuss it because you're under a ban.
When I see you went to User talk:PadFoot2008 and started talking about Magadha and the Gupta Empire, I'm starting to wonder if you read WP:TBAN at all, as I urged you to?? If you violate the ban again, you will be blocked. Bishonen | tålk 10:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC).
I started that topic box before my topic ban, I will be more careful now on.
But please do clarify on Garudam and AirShip issue.
I don't think I did any thing Bad Faith or Original Research. Infact Garudam has been vandalising my page and disrupting gupta empire by his pov. JingJongPascal (talk) 10:58, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Vandalism/Disruptive edits
- Garudam removed an entire section from my article without any consensus. ]]
-Garudam removed mentions of Magadha from Gupta Empire article. ]]
-All i did was remove/revert these disruptive edits, but for some reason i am the one disrupting?
  • Bad Faith
- User talk:AirshipJungleman29#Magadhan Empire, no idea how this is bad faith.
  • Original Research
-Magadhan Empire article wasnt created by me.
- All my other articles were deleted for other reasons (unfinished or already covered somewhere else).
- Even my current article List of wars involving Magadha is getting called 'original research'.
@Bishonen my defence. JingJongPascal (talk) 10:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi again, JingJongPascal. I've taken a fresh look at the "contradictory" template question, that you and Gurudam argued about here, and also at your supposed assumption of bad faith in the discussion here. The template removal instance is really too complex to sanction you for, and, as Doug Weller has recently posted on your page, his belief that you'd assumed bad faith was at least partly based on a misunderstanding. These two things weren't very big deals to begin with, either, and I wish I had left them out. I've crossed them out on your page and in the log.

As for edit warring, which you mention, I don't think that was even in question in my T-ban notice - I don't see it there.

The other points, however — disruptive editing, canvassing discussions, original research, and battleground editing — were big deals, and remain so. Removing the AfD template from an article you had created yourself is a classically bad thing, but not as weighty, as it was one event, and you blame your mobile for it. (Not sure how that works, but never mind.)

Original research is a very important no-no, and since you deny doing any, I'll spend some time on it. Firstly, please read the policy Misplaced Pages:No original research to make sure you know what it is. And secondly, it's not particularly interesting if what you did is "currently active" or not. A number of the articles you created were based on original research, and the fact that they have now been turned into redirects, deleted, or draftified is no thanks to you; it has been done by other people and on these people's initiative. Examples: List of wars involving Gujarat (redirected; discussed at the NOR noticeboard here), History of India as a political entity (deleted after AfD discussion), List of Indian Uprising battles (unsourced, created by you directly in article space, moved to draft by another editor), List of Hindu-Buddhist states (also created directly in article space and moved to draft by another editor), Principality of Pataliputra (deleted after AfD discussion), Foreign relations of the Magadhan Empire (deleted after AfD discussion).

All these articles were created by you, and the problem with them was poor or no sourcing and egregious original research. Note also this original research warning from Vanamonde93. Bishonen | tålk 20:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC).

also do drafts count in topic ban? as its not mentioned in WP:TBAN JingJongPascal (talk) 09:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm glad you asked. Yes, the ban does apply to drafts. None of the examples given at WP:TBAN are drafts, right, but the ban covers all pages on Misplaced Pages. "Unless clearly and unambiguously specified otherwise, a topic ban covers all pages (not only articles) broadly related to the topic, as well as the parts of other pages that are related to the topic, as encapsulated in the phrase "broadly construed"." And it covers "discussions or suggestions about weather-related topics anywhere on Misplaced Pages". If you want to work on drafts in the WP:ARBIPA area, you have to keep them off Misplaced Pages. I'll come back to a couple of other questions later. Bishonen | tålk 10:16, 2 December 2024 (UTC).
Garudam has been disrupting my page as we speak
and yet he gave me a edit warning.
Please do something, he did it without any consensus. JingJongPascal (talk) 08:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
? Sorry, but what "my page" is that? I don't see Garudam editing your userpage or your talkpage. The last 9 hours they seem to have been busy editing First battle of Eran, a page they created themselves. Also, JingJongPascal, I remind you that you're not supposed to discuss pages in the ARBIPA topic area anywhere on Misplaced Pages - not even on my page, except to ask questions about, or appeal, the topic ban itself. Is the above post part of your ban appeal? Bishonen | tålk 09:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC).
Yes it is, it is about the disruptive edits.
Garudam warned me of disruptive edits but he is the one doing it. I don't think I deserve a topic ban, see List of wars involving Magadha, before my topic ban he kept removing an section he's doing it now too without any consensus and then edit warned me. JingJongPascal (talk) 11:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
JingJongPascal, I'm not sure what you mean by saying Garudam "edit warned" you? Anyway, this complaint about another editor and what they did after you were T-banned doesn't look to me like it's related to an appeal of your ban; you have strayed from that on to general discussion of an ARBIPA article and of another user's editing there, which is not allowed. Also, they don't need consensus to make a bold edit (you also don't have consensus; it's just the two of you arguing on the talkpage). See WP:BOLD. If their edit is reverted, which has so far not happened, then they'd need consensus to put it back.
You'd much better focus on other areas now, and on showing you can edit well away from ARBIPA, which you're banned from. You have appealed to me now; I will not lift the ban; did you read the information about ban appeals in my ban notice? What you can do after appealing to me is described here. You can appeal either at the administrators' noticeboard ("AN") or the arbitration enforcement noticeboard ("AE"). Or, theoretically, at the request for amendment ("ARCA"), but I wouldn't recommend that, as it's run by the Arbitration Committee which is glacially slow. You'd better choose between AE, where your appeal will be decided by uninvolved admins, and AN, where it will be decided by the community of editors. Take a look at the noticeboards to see how they function, and think carefully about which one you prefer. I have not imposed a limit for how soon you can appeal, but my advice would be to wait at least a few months, and to edit well and constructively in other areas while you wait, as that will give your appeal a better chance. Note also that you can freely edit all topics at our SISTER projects; you're only topic banned at the English Misplaced Pages. Ask if anything of this is unclear to you. Bishonen | tålk 14:57, 4 December 2024 (UTC).
look at my talk page , "November 2024".
You tbanned me for "disruptive edits" and "original research" could you provide evidence for disruptive edits. JingJongPascal (talk) 15:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
(uninvolved jaguar padding by...) JJP, may I suggest that you carefully and fully read Bishonen's post immediately above yours. Then read it again. Your response to it is a classic example of what is known on Misplaced Pages as I Didn't Hear That, and that behavior will absolutely, positively do you no good. Indeed, if you keep it up it will likely get you blocked for an extended period, if not indefinitely. Stop complaining about the other editor. Just stop. No matter how mad you are, no matter how upset you are, no matter how unfairly/unjustly you might feel you are being treated, just STOP. Now. My advice to you is to edit some other topic, or edit a Misplaced Pages in another language. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 19:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, JoJo, you're very right. It's all right for JingJongPascal to ask for examples of disruptive editing and original research, though, as those were some of my reasons for banning them. JingJong, here are some examples. (DE and OR can blend into each other, so some of the below items are examples of both.)
  • You added an extremely bad main source for your article List of wars involving Gujarat (later moved to Kingdom of Gujarat) here, only a few minutes before you submitted the draft to AfC. The source is A. K. Mozumdar's Chaulukyas of Gujarat. Or A. K. Majumdar, as you write it; perhaps both transcriptions are correct, I don't know, but it's clearly the same person. It's still very much used in the article. As a source for history, that's absurd. Our article, under the name A. K. Mozumdar, describes the writer as "an Indian American spiritual writer and teacher associated with the New Thought Movement in the United States." He may be an admirable writer in his field, I couldn't say, but he's obviously not remotely a historian, or a reliable source for history. This gives rise to concern over your competence to edit historical articles in this area.
  • Editing against consensus here. Note Remsense's edit summary.
  • Original research: this version of Indian Empire (now a disambiguation page). Compare Vanamonde93's warning.
  • Here, you change the area drastically in the infobox, are reverted, then change it again to something completely different. What is the article reader supposed to make of those wildly varying figures? You realise they can't see your edit summaries, I hope. Also, can you remember your source for this addition of an area with a surprisingly even number in another article?
  • This addition to List of largest empires is not in the cited source, at least I can't find it (and clearly the experienced editor TompaDompa couldn't either, as they reverted you).
  • Creating a multitude of non-viable and poorly sourced articles is also disruptive, as I have mentioned above.

December music

story · music · places

I agree with your post for Simon, - perhaps sign it or it looks as if I wrote it which I don't deserve ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. I wrote it up for an e-mail, and then, when it turned out he didn't have wikimail, pasted it in as was. It does have an e-mail signature! Altogether an illustration that I shouldn't post when I'm half asleep. Bishonen | tålk 11:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC).
Listen today to the (new) Perplexities after Escher --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:26, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
On the heckelphone! Thanks, Gerda. Bishonen | tålk 11:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC).
Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the 2020 DYK set when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:12, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
I come to fix the cellist's name, with a 10-years-old DYK and new pics - look for red birds --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Today is a woman poet's centenary. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:05, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your refreshing seasonal message! - Today it's another great woman, soprano Sigrid Kehl, and I found a 1963 Christmas Oratorio detail. 10 years earlier than that cycle, Bach wrote seven cantatas for the 1724 season, based on seven songs, - my focus this year. Expect three stories for the three days they celebrated in Leipzig ;) - Enjoy the season! Refreshment in the melting snow, and I picked icicles for a January image, bzzt ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Seeking assist on WP:ANI

Hey there. Needing urgent assist with this IP address in this ANI case, which has persisted with WP:ASPERSIONS and personal attacks. I for one believe such attitudes are simply WP:NOTHERE for contributing objectively on WP.

Seeking your kind attention. Thanks. hundenvonPG (talk) 11:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bishonen, this issue is being discussed in another user talk page already: https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Cullen328 . I was first being attacked by this user as he accused me for being a disruptive person when I was just stating facts with citations from CTBUH. 155.69.184.1 (talk) 12:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Bishonen, do take note that this is one of the many instances of WP:HOUNDING by said IP address, going against WP:CIVIL. 12:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC) hundenvonPG (talk) 12:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Instead of accusing the other Wiki editors, why are you still refusing to answer my questions on the main discussion page as of now? Aren't we supposed to discuss on the talk page? 155.69.184.1 (talk) 12:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Métis Nation British Columbia

I saw you'd blocked some of the IP's. Thanks for that. I've also semi-protected the page for a couple of weeks as this is ongoing. Cheers CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, CambridgeBayWeather. There was a note at WP:AIV. Nice IPv6 range, wasn't it? You may have noticed it had done nothing on Misplaced Pages other than persistently vandalizing that particular article. How's it going? It's pretty cold and dark here (Stockholm) this time of year, but I have a feeling it's probably seriously moreso where you are. Bishonen | tålk 16:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC).
They have been at that article for a while. It's not bad here (−25 °C (−13 °F)), warmer than normal and less snow than usual. We have polar night from 1 December to about 12 January. No sun for us. How cold is Stockholm at this time of year? CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 16:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Oh.. now I'm ashamed to mention our paltry temperature. It's only -5° C. But there's a biting wind from the north! Bishonen | tålk 19:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC).
The wind is always a killer at subzero temperatures. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 22:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Revert

I'm sorry but I don't understand your revert here at all:

Is this asking to corroborate it with more reliable sources per WP:WIKIVOICE? Or is it referring to "Avoid stating opinions as facts."? You pointed out citing it alone in the edit summary is not sufficient . But it makes sense otherwise if there is no citation in article. You also said it is redundant, but I don't understand why? It's added in a section referring to conflicts and as a military leader. Noorullah (talk) 05:28, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Please discuss issues relating to the article at its talk page, Talk:Alauddin Khalji. However, while we are here, the description "brilliant military general" is not suitable for Misplaced Pages. See WP:PEACOCK and WP:WIKIVOICE. Johnuniq (talk) 08:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Please take it to article talk per Johnuniq. Bishonen | tålk 10:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC).

Io Saturnalia!

Io, Saturnalia!
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Season's Greetings
Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! The Adoration of the Magi in the Snow (1563) by Pieter Bruegel the Elder is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Continued hounding despite your warning

@Qalb alasid: has been following my edits for a while now. Last time he reverted my blanking of promotional content from the userpage of a self promotional SPA which led to you warning them for battle ground conduct as they did so only to provoke me now they have reverted my WP:BLAR of Hinduism in Belize ,Hinduism in Barbados ,Hinduism in Brunei and issued me a frivolous warning for disruptive editing . Additionally, they have also closed a merge discussion initiated by me on BAPS Shri Swaminarayan mandir (Robbinsville, New Jersey) and edited Swaminarayan Akshardham (Robbinsville, New Jersey) where I am one of the main contributors. There is a pattern of WP:FOLLOWING me here and seemingly oppose anything I do. - Ratnahastin (talk) 04:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Ratnahastin. I agree Qalb's warning was pretty frivolous. If you don't like a change of an article to a redirect, Qalb alasid, it's easily reverted (as I see you did). Reverting is enough; no need to issue warnings to experienced users about something like that. If either of you feels strongly enough, your next step should be discussion on talk. For the rest of your examples, Ratnahastin, I don't really think the overall picture rises to harassment or hounding. Bishonen | tålk 14:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC).
Thank you, @Bishonen. @Ratnahastin - I am not following or hounding you – please assume good faith.
For the record, I have been involved in backlogged merge proposals since September 29, 2024. .
Regarding the 3 articles cleared, I found it a bit odd that these articles, which have been around for a few years, were cleared without discussion. The content within these articles were not merged into the redirects either. Blanking the article without rationale appears to be disruptive – why did you feel the need to do so? Perhaps you can continue that conversation on the respective article's talk page. As per WP:BLAR, "Illegitimate blanking of valid content without reason is considered vandalism, a form of disruptive editing. Other forms of blank-and-redirect, although not vandalism, are still undesirable."
Based on WP:Harassment, "fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Misplaced Pages policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles," shows that I am acting within the rights as a user. In fact, the same policy also states, "Using dispute resolution can itself constitute hounding if it involves persistently making frivolous or meritless complaints about another editor." Which leads me to ask, @Bishonen, is accusing someone of hounding and following assuming bad faith? Qalb alasid (talk) 19:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Oh, gee. You're both assuming bad faith AFAIC. Why don't you just both try to avoid each other and dial down the reporting and complaining and (this is for you, Qalb alasid) PAG-quoting? Just a suggestion. Misplaced Pages is not about winning. Bishonen | tålk 21:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC).

Thank you for granting the selfblock

Made getting ready for my exams and finishing some major papers so much easier for my ADHD addled brain. Insanityclown1 (talk) 23:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Very glad to hear it! Bishonen | tålk 04:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC).
Merry Christmas, young clown! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 04:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC).

Happy holidays!

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025!  ♦ Maliner (talk) 13:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Hope you are doing well

I am finding myself poking at this project more and more, these past few weeks, and wanted to wish you well for the holidays. You've always been one of the good ones, in my book. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Hammerpants, very nice to see you back! Bishzilla rotates at ya! Bishonen | tålk 22:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC).

Merry Christmas!

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!


Have a great Christmas, and may 2025 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!

Cheers

SchroCat (talk) 08:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Joyous Season

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Season's Greetings

When he took up his hat to go, he gave one long look round the library. Then he turned ... (and Saxon took advantage of this to wag his way in and join the party), and said, "It's a rare privilege, the free entry of a book chamber like this. I'm hoping ... that you are not insensible of it."

(Text on page 17 illustrated in the frontispiece in Juliana Horatia Ewing's Mary's Meadow and Other Tales of Fields and Flowers, illustrated by Mary Wheelhouse, London: G. Bell and Sons, 1915.)

Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Ekdalian (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Ekdalian (talk) 08:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Bishonen, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025.
Happy editing,
- Ratnahastin (talk) 01:17, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Happy Holidays


LukeEmily (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

LukeEmily (talk) 14:10, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Hello Bishonen: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Misplaced Pages. Cheers, Abishe (talk) 15:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Abishe (talk) 15:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I was responding to an edit summary I saw from User:Doug Weller

User_talk:Daniel_Case#I_think_this_needs_full_protect. I was hitching up the dogs and I put a quick block on it, intending to give it a longer look when I returned. I didn't intend to add a second notice, just forgot to hit the correct toggle. I acted hastily in removing TPA, I'll concede. BusterD (talk) 11:24, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

I looked at my admin stats and I'm still at 174 total blocks; I'm way inexperienced at that aspect of the work. Happy to be corrected by somebody who has been in deeper kimchi than I. BusterD (talk) 11:31, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Kimchi. Hehe. Bishonen | tålk 14:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC).

Happy New Year, Bishonen!

Happy New Year!

Bishonen,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
Dympies (talk) 01:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Dympies (talk) 01:07, 1 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 has). - I saw a lovely opera by Rimsky-Korsakov, - see here. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Liebster Immanuel, Herzog der Frommen, BWV 123, my story today 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. Dada Masilo will be my story tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. Did you watch Masilo talk and dance? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Today a violinist from Turkey, Ayla Erduran, whom you can watch playing Schubert chamber music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

... and today, pictured on the Main page, Tosca, in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author Brian Boulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Today, between many who just died, Tobias Kratzer on his 45th birthday who was good for an unusual DYK mentioning a Verdi opera in 2018, - you can see his work in the trailer of another one that I saw, and my talk page has a third (but by a different director). 2025 pics, finally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Today I have a composer (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with another who became GA yesterday, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:47, 20 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

[REDACTED] 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) 15:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Dev0745: accept fait accompli, or indef?

Hi Bish! Odd situation here. I've noticed that Dev0745 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)'s edits, since my TBAN of them and your block of them in 2023, have essentially all been violations of that TBAN. However, all the edits I've checked are pretty far-flung from politically controversial things, mostly about fauna of the Indian subcontinent, although some about ethnography. So part of me thinks, this is the TBAN equivalent of what I call an adverse possession unblock, and I should just accept the fait accompli and narrow their ban to India/Pakistan politics instead of the whole region. I don't love rewarding TBAN violations, but a ban, like a block, should be preventative of something.

On the other hand, we have this edit, which could be read as pro-India boosterism, and which was reverted by BhagyaMani as source misrepresentation. Source misrepresentation was the most egregious issue leading to the TBAN in the first place, and Dev memorably insisted at AN that it was okay because there was no specific policy against it. I haven't looked deep enough at this specific case to determine whether Dev was right or wrong and, if the latter, whether it was a plausible good-faith error, but I think this is a strange bimodal situation where there's a good case for relaxing the ban, and a good case for indeffing for ban violations, and not much case for anything in between, given that you already blocked Dev the once and that they have two earlier blocks for other reasons. Do you have any insight here? Pings also @RegentsPark (previous block), @El_C (previous TBAN), and @Abecedare (general expertise). -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 21:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Paradoxical, isn't it? I really don't mind an edit about tigers, though. I'd go with narrowing the ban. Abecedare would know what's best to do, I'm sure, but they haven't edited at all for three weeks, and not very amply since August. Bishonen | tålk 21:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC).
I took a quick look and the edits seem fairly innocuous. Gnomish with many images thrown in. Perhaps we should ask Dev0745 what they're up to. Why all their edits, while benign, since the topic ban are violations? Narrowing the ban is fine with me as well but I'm curious to see what they have to say.RegentsPark (comment) 02:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
That sounds like a good idea. @Dev0745: Could you please read the above and then answer RegentsPark's question? To be clear, we're not asking you to defend the edits you've been making in general; we all agree that they mostly look constructive. Rather, we're trying to understand how this came to happen. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 05:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Hey all. I reverted this edit NOT because I thought it was any sort of boosterism; but this revision was not an improvement. Since then, I reverted a few more of their edits because they were poorly written. BhagyaMani (talk) 08:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

I have just tried to edit page which are not directly related to topic of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan but related to Asia. Dev0745 (talk) 08:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

@Dev0745: well, to be clear, that is still a violation of your topic ban. Indian animals are a part of India. That said, the three of us admins are in agreement that your edits about South Asian fauna have generally been fine, and there's no point in enforcing the ban here if you're causing no harm. So I am going to loosen the ban. I am going to change it to a ban from politics, religion, and culture in India and Pakistan. I want to be clear, that includes some of the articles you've been editing about tribes. You need to stop editing about ethnic and social groups in India, because that's too close to what I initially banned you for. But the edits about Indian animals, and anything else about India that isn't politics or religion or culture, you can keep doing that. Does that make sense? -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 09:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
As you wish. Dev0745 (talk) 12:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Quick question

Hello,

I do not want to be accused of gaming the system, but a great deal of my edits recently are denials of ESp requests. I do not think those count as edits- is there a chance I might be accused of gaming the system? (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 00:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, 3OpenEyes. They count as edits — everything you publish is an edit — but I don't see how your contributions could be regarded as gaming the Extended confirmed protection requirement of at least 500 edits. The edits you make aren't semi-automated or pointless or anything like that, which is what we look for when we suspect gaming. You clearly give pretty much every request individual consideration, and answering one of those requests is a useful action. I don't think you have anything to worry about.-- Bishonen | tålk 07:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks. I just wanted to make sure-especially when half of the requests are "add citation" (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 11:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm going to sound stupid, but does utilizing user scripts such as Terasail's Edit Request Tool count as semi-automated? (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 12:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Bhjbggoonnv SPI

Hi,

I tried to make an SPI but as an IP user I was unfortunately not able to so I came here instead. I strongly believe Bhjbggoonnv is using a new account ever since you implemented a ban for this editor. New account OrebroVi was created only days after Bhjbggoonnv was banned and one of its first edits was to vote Keep the article Faris Al-Hammadi which was created by Bhjbggoonnv which was very suspicious. I discovered also many other blatant give aways showing they are operated by the same individual.

Both accounts edited Martin Kramer which is a very obscure article: Bhjbggoonnv - OrebroVi. In the latter edit, OrebroVi adds a wikilink to Middle East Forum, whose mention was first added by Bhjbggoonnv. This an article Bhjbggoonnv edit warred on. OrebroVi also made identical edits to this on Daniel Pipes who created this think tank and this edit is identical to the initial edit on Martin Kramer, and they all added the label Islamophobic.

On Quranic studies, they edit warred as they were attempting to cite the Yaqeen Institute as a source. It just so happens that Bhjbggoonnv created said article.

There are major resemblances in terms of language they use. On Islamism, both accounts have made similar edits and used identical edit summaries like "Referenced addition": Bhjbggoonnv - OrebroVi. Both accounts have used this exact edit summary dozens of times each.

On the Pilegesh article, which is again a very obscure article, both accounts also made very similar edits and again used "Referenced addition": Bhjbggoonnv - OrebroVi

One final example on Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham where both accounts made both added Israel as an opponent of the group but were they reverted both times: Bhjbggoonnv - OrebroVi

I found more examples of similarity but I think this is quite enough to show a definitive proof of the connection between Bhjbggoonnv and OrebroVi.

It would be much appreciated if you would take a look. 86.187.239.124 (talk) 15:51, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

A very extensive comparison of the editing history of the two accounts has left me without any doubt that this is the same person. I have blocked the sockpuppet indefinitely. I'm also inclined to make the bock on the original account indefinite, but I thought I would consult you, Bishonen, rather than doing it unilaterally. What do you think? JBW (talk) 23:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, JBW, my new computer is messing with me. I do agree, and I note Vanamonde93 has now CU-blocked Bhjbggoonnv. And thank you for the information, IP 86.xxx, much appreciated. I was not indeed ignoring you on purpose. Bishonen | tålk 09:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC).

Own block

I've read User:Bishonen/Self-requested blocks, and I accept the conditions. Please block me. Thank you very much! MathKeduor7 (talk) 15:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Blocked for two weeks, hope you feel better soon. Bishonen | tålk 16:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC).

Spider6man

Have a look at their block log and edits after they were unblocked , I think they are WP:NOTHERE.- Ratnahastin (talk) 16:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Ratnahastin. Four blocks in three weeks is certainly alarming. As soon as one block expires, it's a matter of hours before the next has to be applied. Now they have just been blocked for a month by Doug Weller; if there's more disruption after that, I'd definitely recommend an indef. Bishonen | tålk 19:45, 16 January 2025 (UTC).

Something you may want to look into

See Special:Contributions/Jkwon55 and User talk:Jkwon55#January 2025. Almost all edits reverted (those not tagged were often manually reverted when I checked them), and the editor seems determined to push a racist, right-wing POV since April of '22. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Wow. Indeffed. Hello there, Mr Hammerpants. Bishonen | tålk 20:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC).
You are as decisive, swift and efficient (and gorgeous) as always. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi

If I should shut up then you have my permission to tell me that. Polygnotus (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't actually think you're helping, no. If I had a penny for every time I've seen the statement "reblocks are cheap", I'd be a moderately wealthy woman. It's completely untrue; reblocks are very expensive, in terms of time, effort, and patience. And here you are with the variant "it's easy to reinstate the topic ban". No, it isn't easy, it's hard. Therefore, I need certain undertakings before I lift this ban, and your telling Mark what you think he should say simply makes anything he does say less credible. Bishonen | tålk 20:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC).
OK, thank you. Sometimes I am too optimistic, sometimes I am not optimistic enough; it is difficult to find the balance. I do think that it should be easy to reblock/retopicban, but not everything is as it should be of course. Polygnotus (talk) 21:43, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh God

These four years are going to be so much worse than the first four years. I thought maybe you were unfairly paraphrasing, but nope.... Floquenbeam (talk) 22:20, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

No, sadly. This is the most extreme example I've seen, but there's lesser trouble surrounding Denali's name which at least is actually subject to executive orders, unlike international waters (just wait 'til hurricane season though). I've seen some BLP trouble too concerning Mark Milley, and doubtless there are others I haven't seen. Pretty much anything on the culture war agenda is likely to flare up. Acroterion (talk) 22:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Now Panama Canal has had to be protected Acroterion (talk) 22:28, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
(edit conflict) And when I wrote my comment, I hadn't even read the person's posts on their own talkpage (which showed to satisfaction that no, they weren't trolling, they were simply... putting us right). Now I'm wondering if the people who recommended a page-block at WP:XRV had read that stuff on their own page. Hmm. You know, once upon a time, I p-blocked somebody from their own talkpage - from that only, not anything else — because they were using it to insult people. That was fun, especially when they took me to ANI, hehe. Maybe I should do it for this guy too? Bishonen | tålk 22:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC).
I gave him the ANI option. In any case, I filled out the CT paperwork in case somebody, somewhere, takes exception. I hope the raw jingoism settles down after a couple of days, to be replaced by earnest policy-based sealioning. Acroterion (talk) 22:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Kind attention: Bishonen and admins active here

Hi Bishonen.. you must be doing great! A comparatively new user, who has hardly encountered me while editing, has brought baseless allegations against me at WP:AE! The user doesn't demand any ban or block, but wants a warning to be issued! I am not sure, but can smell meatpuppetry, since the user hardly interacted with me but has come up with pretty old comments by Sitush without context! I would like to hear from you or other admins active on this talk page! Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 07:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Bishonen for your comments! I would like to keep you informed that Sitush is referring to my response at a time when Nobita's sock was driving a discussion and I had filed an SPI! Therefore, I was delaying the discussion in order to eliminate the sock from the same. Sitush has been quoted out of context! Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 12:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
User talk:Bishonen: Difference between revisions Add topic