Misplaced Pages

User talk:JzG: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:07, 27 March 2015 editOccultZone (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers224,089 edits →Request: re← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:48, 5 January 2025 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,451 edits →Administrators' newsletter – January 2025: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Administrator topicon|icon_nr=0}}
{{bots|deny=DPL bot}} {{bots|deny=DPL bot}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 5: Line 4:
| algo = old(7d) | algo = old(7d)
| archive = User talk:JzG/Archive %(counter)d | archive = User talk:JzG/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 107 | counter = 218
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 | minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 1 | minthreadsleft = 1
| maxarchivesize = 32K | maxarchivesize = 32K
}} }}
{{Misplaced Pages:TPS/banner}}
{{collapse top|Discretionary sanctions}}
{{Ds/aware|9/11|a-a|a-i|ab|acu|aerc|ap|at|os|b|blp|cam|cc|cid|e|ecig|fg|gc|gg|ggtf|gap|gmo|ipa|lr|lw|muh-im|old|pa|pr|ps|r-i|saq|sen|sci|tm|tpm|tt|we}}
{{collapse bottom}}
]
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=User talk:JzG/Archive index|mask=JzG/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes |target=User talk:JzG/Archive index|mask=User talk:JzG/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes
}} }}
{{Centralized discussion|width=30%}}
{{collapse top|Note to admins reviewing any of my admin actions (expand to read).}}
I am often busy in that "real life" of which you may have read.

Blocks are the most serious things we can do: they prevent users from interacting with Misplaced Pages. Block reviews are urgent. Unless I say otherwise in the block message on the user's talk page, I am happy for any uninvolved admin to unblock a user I have blocked, provided that there is good evidence that the problem that caused the block will not be repeated. All I ask is that you leave a courtesy note here and/or on ], and that you are open to re-blocking if I believe the problem is not resolved - in other words, you can undo the block, but if I strongly feel that the issue is still live, you re-block and we take it to the admin boards. The same applies in spades to blocks with talk page access revoked. You are free to restore talk page access of a user for whom I have revoked it, unless it's been imposed or restored following debate on the admin boards.

] also has my permission to undelete or unprotect any article I have deleted and/or salted, with the same request to leave a courtesy note, and I'll rarely complain if any uninvolved admin does this either, but there's usually ] about an undeletion so I would prefer to discuss it first - or ask DGG, two heads are always better than one. I may well add others in time, DGG is just one person with whom I frequently interact whose judgment I trust implicitly.

Any ] issue which requires you to undo an admin action of mine, go right ahead, but please post it immediately on ] or ] for review.

The usual definition of uninvolved applies: you're not currently in an argument with me, you're not part of the original dispute or an editor of the affected article... you know. Apply ]. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
----
{{Boxboxtop|}}
{{user admin}}
{{Looshpah III Userbox}}
{{User MAW800}}
{{User rouge}}
{{User Wikipedian for|year=2004|month=08|day=20|sc=y}}
{{User admin since|year=2006|month=01|day=17|sc=y}}
{{User:JzG/charlatans}}
{{Boxboxbottom}}
{{Archive box {{Archive box
| archivelist = <!-- /archivelist --> | archivelist = <!-- /archivelist -->
Line 45: Line 29:
| age = 7 | age = 7
}} }}
__TOC__
* In ], any compromise between a correct statement and a wrong statement is a wrong statement. Thanks, ].
* My ] is 53mKo (milli-]s).
* Sad now. ].
*
* {{twitter|vGuyUK|vGuyUK}} | {{twitter|SceptiGuy|SceptiGuy}}
; Obligatory disclaimer: I work for ] but nothing I say or do here is said or done on behalf of Dell. You knew that, right?
----
'''About me'''


]I am in my early fifties, British, have been married for over quarter of a century to the world's most tolerant woman, and have two adult children. I am an amateur baritone and professional nerd. I do not tolerate racism, or any kind of bigotry. I sometimes, to my chagrin, mention that I have been an admin for along time: some people think this is me invoking admin status in order to subdue dissent, actually it's just me as a middle aged parent of young adults saying "oh no, not this shit again". I am British, I have the British sense of humour (correctly spelled) and I absolutely ''do not'' have an accent, since I went to a ]. Everything I do or say could be wrong. I try always to be open to that possibility. If you think I am wrong, please just talk to me nicely, and it can all be sorted out like grown-ups. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:49, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
---- ----
;Smelling pistakes
'''RfC and other closes'''
:In addition to bone-deep burn scars on my left hand I now also have ], so my typing is particularly erratic right now. I have a spellcheck plugin but it can't handle larger text blocks. You're welcome to fix spelling errors without pinging me, but please don't change British to American spelling or indeed vice-versa.
----
{{wikibreak}}
== God Jul och Gott Nytt År! ==
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">
]
]
] is wishing you ]<br />Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's ] or ]<br />], ], ], ], ],<br />or the ],<br /> this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.
<br />
{{clear}}
</div>


== ]! Are you still out there? ==
I am am making a good faith best efforts attempt to close backlogged RfCs and other debates from ]. These are mainly backlogged because there is no obvious consensus, so any close will undoubtedly annoy someone. I invite review of any such close on ], where there are many more watchers than my talk page. I am happy to provide clarification of anything either here or on ANI, please ping me if it's at ANI - that exempts you from the ANI notice, IMO, and I prefer a ping to a talk page notice as the latter tends to spread discussion to multiple venues, which is a nightmare. Feel free to use "email this user" if I am not responding to a request (but remember I live in UTC, soon to be UTC-1). <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
<!-- ] 09:57, 15 January 2032 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1957773473}}
----and stale
Hi ]! I was going through some old ArbCom cases and ran into one where you had added some statements. I realized that I haven't spoken to you in quite some time, and I see that you haven't made any edits since May... That sucks! I don't want to see someone like you go! If anything, I hope that you're doing well and that you're happy and that you'll someday return here. I just wanted to leave you a message and let you know that I was thinking about you... Keep in touch. :-) ]<sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 23:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC)


:I hope it goes without saying, despite the fact that I'm saying it, that many of us feel the same way. Happy new year ]] 23:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
== FWIW ==


::We didn't cross paths very often lately, JzG, but we could really use you back. If you get the urge to return, please say "Yes!" <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
See the spanking-new ArbCom case just filed -- seems a bit too much, no? Cheers. ] (]) 21:21, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
: A bit premature, I'd say. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:01, 19 March 2015 (UTC) :::October JzG sighting at ]. Does my heart good. --] (]) 20:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
::::Lovely to hear from you! I have spent the past two-and-a-bit years working at incredibly high stress for a hospital. In that time I have retired around 80% of their legacy application and server estate, instituted architectural guidelines and piloted the process for demand review, reduced the measured risk burden by around 80%, instituted objective risk monitoring using ], and I've just proposed (and had accepted) a plan to remediate or mitigate most of the rest. I have, in short, been busy in that there real life of which you read, and that really wasn't going to fit in with having to be nice to people who sincerely believe that Ashlii Babbit was the real victim of the "legitimate political discourse" on Jan 6 2020.
::::I have a week's leave. I have 28 days to take before year end, having managed I think three days off this year so far (including weekends). And because I have an offshore team and an onshore customer, my working day can be 8am to 3am.
::::I thought I'd drop in :-) ''']''' <small>(] - ])</small> 18:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::Yikes, sounds like, umm..., a lot of responsibility. There will be plenty for you to do here when you are free! ] (]) 22:50, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::Glad you dropped by! ] (]) 02:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::Glad to hear you're OK - and busy, by the sounds of things! Hope you enjoy your break. ]] 11:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::If Guy doesn't look at ] real soon now, where Eddy is being accused of plagiarism, I may be forced to contact him on bookfarce. That would mean giving Guy my real name. He always forgets me. - ]the ] 16:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::::I try never to remember people's RW names unless they are "out" on Misplaced Pages. Even when they out themselves, this has led to huge problems, e.g. with a user whose identity was revealed by accident off-wiki, showing him to be the source of fact-washing his own side in Misplaced Pages disputes via a journalist. That ended badly for everyone. ''']''' <small>(] - ])</small> 16:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::::Very happy see the little JzG! ] ] ] 19:56, 27 October 2022 (UTC).
:::::Hah! Good to see you're still around! ] 20:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::This is a few months late, but welcome back! Wishing you well. ''']] (])''' 09:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
:Welcome indeed! Just came across your signature ]. It's always great to run in to another 'old-timer'. Hope you're well, ]&nbsp;<sup><b>(])</b></sup> 11:21, 23 May 2023 (UTC)


`
The case against me is vexatious indeed - I shall not contend against those who taste blood. The main complaint even includes my essays - so I wrote one which I hope you will appreciate ]. It would be fun to see how others react, indeed. Warm regards, ] (]) 04:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
: I could not understand what anybody could possibly object to in some of the essays, other than the fact that they describe the reaosns why they can't treat bullshit as fact, which some of them, at least, seem very determined to do. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 09:20, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
== Reminder ==


] from the past month (December 2024).
] The purpose of this message is to remind you that the consensus reached in the ] regarding BDD's ] of ] regarding the ] redirect, which you closed approximately two and a half hours ago, is still awaiting enactment. ] (]) 23:41, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
::I just came by to post this same reminder. Does your close mean that you will relist it, or that someone else should relist it? I'm not too familiar with the ins-and-outs of deletion reviews, but I see that you also closed ] and have already carried out the required action; perhaps you just missed the other one? ] (]) 00:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
::: Someone else needs to relist it, if people still want it listed. I'm not sufficiently familiar with the actual rationale to do that myself, and don't want to botch it up for you all. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 07:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
:::: What you just said doesn't make the least bit of sense. Either implement the consensus or revert your close and let someone else perform it properly. For the future: drive-by mass-closing of DRVs is ill-advised. Quality > quantity, etc. If you're not 'sufficiently familiar with the actual rationale' (what's that even mean?), what made you believe you were qualified to close the DRV in the first place? ] (]) 10:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
:::::Thanks, Guy. I am a bit puzzled why you would believe that there was consensus enough in the deletion review to close as "relist at Rfd" but then question whether "people still want it listed" - that is what you are supposed to have judged. I have the Rfd myself, as the logical interpretation of your "relist" closing comment. ] (]) 14:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
::::::: Basically, there was no consensus in the review. Good faith arguments were made for a relist, and thus a wider debate. The review debate was a stalemate. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 18:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
::::::::Sorry, I don't mean to badger you about this, I'd like to understand so that I'm not doing anything out of context. If there was no consensus in the review, shouldn't you have closed the review as "no consensus"? You closed it as "relist". Or did you mean to relist the deletion review? Man, this is a lot of headache for a redirect. ] (]) 19:01, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
::::::::: No problem. The review had no consensus but in as much as anything could be drawn from it ,it was the fact that a relist is unproblematic (which is often not the case - sometimes relisting after a review is pure disruption). So I guess "no consensus, no prejudice against relist" would be a better close. Do you want me to change it? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 09:22, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
::::::::::What are you talking about? No consensus?! Did you even read the discussion before closing it, or did you just look at the words in bold in front of people's statements and took a guess? You needn't answer, one look at your list of contributions is enough to know it was the latter, you only took 3 minutes to analyze the thing. I advise you to slow down a bit - don't close until you know what you're closing or you may find yourself deprived of the ability to close one day. Quality, not quantity. ] (]) 11:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
::::::::::: Of course I did (I often return two or three times to a thing before closing). My statement references comments made in the body. However, the text in bold is a significant indicator of the overall intent of the person !voting. I have been here a while, this is not exactly ''terra ingognita'' for me. Your route to challenge is ]. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
== Talk page for War in Afghanistan (2001–present) ==
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">


] '''Administrator changes'''
Thanks for close. <s>I was wonder if you could also move the talk page as it is still at ].</s><small>(Edit: talk page has been moved)</small> I assume for the close at MRV you meant "Overturn (as No-consensus)" instead of just plain "No-consensus" (see ]). And yes I'm pretty sure they your comment at request for close will be true especially as the sides seem at least to me to be talking past each other. ] (]) 00:01, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
:] ]
: That's about it, yes. I did click the box for talk page move, not sure why it didn't happen. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
:: No worries, happens. My guess it that you got the don't leave redirect instead of the move talk page button. I've made a similar mistake on another wiki before. I added a slightly clarification to your close and fixed the formatting at move review. Hope you don't mind. Feel free to remove my clarification and/or edit the bolded bit if you wish, especially if I made a mistake. It's likely that the log page will be archived soon and the headers removed as all the other reviews on the page are also closed. ] (]) 04:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
==Thank you, and a question==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
Thank you, enormously, for closing that incredibly attenuated RfC at ]. I and I'm sure every one of us involved appreciate it every much. I'm not quite sure I understand what the result is. I ''think'' it means that running times need to be cited by third-party sources and not by measurement or a DVR reading, according to ]. Is that correct, or am I misreading? Thank you for any clarification / information, and again thank you for taking the very considerable amount of time to read that long RfC discussion. With regards, --] (]) 03:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
|]
: Yes, exactly that. A reliable third party source is required. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 07:19, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
|]
::With respect to what Tenebrae is asking, that both is and isn't true. ] requires that everything be verifiable, but not that everything be cited. Tenebrae is insisting that ''every'' running time be cited, essentially because that's the way that ] does it. However, there are arguments as to why this is not practical, the main one being that episode times vary, and because of this {{tl|Infobox television}} does not ask for specific times, only an approximation, which every editor, except Tenebrae, agrees means that mandatory citing (which is beyond the requirements of ]) is not necessary. I agree with the aspect of your close that says we can't agree to ignore NOR, but that aspect of the discussion was ignored by everyone except Tenebrae. --] (]) 08:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
|]
::: You might want to re-read ]. I don't see any exception for approximations based on original research. Station schedules would have time slots, and that's as close as you're likely to get, as far as I can see. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
|]
::::NOR really isn't the issue. Tenebrae wants a citation for ''every'' running time, regardless of the source. Neither NOR or WP:V require citations for everything. --] (]) 11:34, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
|]
:::::Thank you for your response to my question, JzG. Again, all of us in the RfC appreciate all the time and effort you took. We know it wasn't easy.
}}
:::::], with all respect, please abide by the RfC's admin-closed decision. An admin is explaining directly to you that this is, indeed, an ] issue. I trust and hope you will not be inserting uncited claims of purported running times based on your personal observations. A DVR reading is not primary content of a television show, as the plot would be, any more so than a theater marquee is primary content of a movie. --] (]) 17:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
:] ]
:::::: I'm not interested in replaying the debate. If someone wants to start an RfC to discuss whether inline citation is required in the infobox or not, always assuming that the source of the figure is established from reliable independent sources, then that is a different question. The point at issue was, narrowly, are we allowed to use running time figures measured by individual editors directly. The answer is an unambiguous "no"< for the same reason that we would not allow such sources for the height of an actor or the size of a building. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 18:14, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
:] ]


</div>
:::::::Indeed. As you said, "A reliable third party source is required", one way or another. --] (]) 18:25, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
:::::::: And whether it's cited inline, noted in the text or whatever, is of no relevance tot he narrow question, so do beware of the trap of thinking that source necessarily equals inline cited source at the point of reference. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 18:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
]


] '''Oversight changes'''
:::::::::Understood. In any instance I mention this, I say only "third-party source required" and leave it at that. --] (]) 19:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]


</div>
::::::::::{{reply to|JzG}}I understand that you don't want to replay the debate, and I'm not asking you to do that. You have addressed my concerns by saying {{tq|If someone wants to start an RfC to discuss whether inline citation is required in the infobox or not, always assuming that the source of the figure is established from reliable independent sources, then that is a different question.}} Funnily enough, that's what Tenebrae was trying to achieve with the discussion. The first part of the RfC question was {{tq|Do TV-show running times in the ] require a ]}}, so it's not another question, it's the same one. Your close seems to concentrate on the second part of the question. --] (]) 02:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
</div>
::::::::::: I understand. The RfC had two questions packed together. The nature of one, meant that if the two were considered together, only one outcome is possible per policy. Feel free to unpack the separate question of inline citations. In fact, I positively encourage you to do so. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 09:24, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
::::::::::::Ironically, RfC respondents only addressed the issue of requirements for citations, not the OR issue, which is something I was trying to get across to Tenebrae, who now thinks that your close means that citations have to be supplied. I do understand what you're saying though. Thanks for your patience. --] (]) 09:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
Sorry for clogging up your talk page even further, but I'm afraid I don't see how your interpretation is compatible with policy. There are two types of information allowed on Misplaced Pages per ], ], etc.: information explicitly supported by reliable sources in the same article (although some leeway is given to the exact placement of citations, they must always be present somewhere in the same article), and information that Misplaced Pages editors are permitted to enter themselves (e.g. routine calculations). You've just stated that the latter is inapplicable here, so it must be the former... and yet you claim that citations may or may not be required? ] (]) 13:16, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
* 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'''
:I can't speak for JzG, obviously, but if something is cited in the article body, then it doesn't have to be cited in the infobox. That might be at least part of what was meant. Also, separately, just for accuracy's sake: One post says, "Tenebrae ... now thinks that your close means that citations have to be supplied." Actually, that's not really correct. I noted at 19:00, 20 March 2015, that I say only "third-party source required". All good.--] (]) 17:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
* Following the ], the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: {{noping|CaptainEek}}, {{noping|Daniel}}, {{noping|Elli}}, {{noping|KrakatoaKatie}}, {{noping|Liz}}, {{noping|Primefac}}, {{noping|ScottishFinnishRadish}}, {{noping|Theleekycauldron}}, {{noping|Worm That Turned}}.


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


----
You moved this without leaving a redirect, which has left behind a fantastic number of broken redirects, see ]. I stopped counting at 50. I suppose the simplest thing to do is restore ] as a redirect to the new title and let the bot sort out all the resulting double-redirects, though the number does seem considerable overkill. ] (]) 10:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
{{center|{{flatlist|
:{{reply to|JohnCD}} Six of the eight navboxes on the page linked to the old article and had to be corrected so the links would display correctly. These would be responsible for many broken links. Interestingly, as a rsesult of the move we now have ] and ]. --] (]) 12:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
* ]

* ]
== british ==
* ]

}}}}
yes hello
<!--

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

unobjectionable

"I have the British sense of humour (correctly spelled)"

that is certainly one widely-accepted spelling, though it's important to remember that the spelling of words usually reflects historical pronunciation (sometimes in languages other than English) and so in that sense is arbitrary.


"and I absolutely do not have an accent, since I went to a thousand-year-old school."

yes but unfortunately most dialects of english have undergone enormous change in the last few hundred years -- and many of the most commonly-spoken and highly-regarded british dialects are in fact much more 'recent', in a certain sense, than american dialects.

basically what i'm saying is that you should learn to speak like a person from the west country if you want historical english on your side.

thanks,
your friend,
in unity <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:02, 22 March 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Your point is answered by the second half of the sentence. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 18:26, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

==Carmen, Cebu==
Hi! Thanks for dealing with the revdel at ]. But I'm afraid you haven't gone back far enough; the first copyvio by user Frozenfire46 was added in revision 651017488 at 09:31, 12 March 2015, and the revdeletion should go back to that version, inclusive. Could you have another crack at it, or would you rather I restored the copyvio-revdel request? Many thanks either way, ] (]) 18:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
: Missed the crud below the line, didn't scroll down far enough to see it. I think it's fixed now? Let me know if not. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, perfect, fixed now! Thank you so much! ] (]) 22:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
::: Any time. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:17, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

== Kristina451's indef-block ==

Hi. What do you currently think about {{u|Kristina451}}'s indefinite block which you imposed on 4 March? She requested a (second) review of her block on the 10th, in which she answered a question from {{u|PhilKnight}} about the outing allegation. No one has touched her second block review request (now almost two weeks old). I also see that the SPI she filed against {{u|Sophie.grothendieck}} was closed several days ago. I'm currently leaning towards unblocking Kristina451 at this time, but I would like to hear from you first before taking any action. —&nbsp;]] <small>''(no&nbsp;relation to Jimbo)''</small> 06:22, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
:Isn't this one where oversight rights are needed to review the diffs? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 06:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
::I'm an Oversighter. After a more careful review of the suppressed info, I'm not totally convinced it could all have come from WHOIS, and I've posted a request for clarification on her talk page. —&nbsp;]] <small>''(no&nbsp;relation to Jimbo)''</small> 05:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
::: Thanks. It's messy. Feel free to unblock if you get a satisfactory explanation, I was only the first mop-wielder to pass by and I freely admit to knowing very little about the root of the dispute. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

== Please explain your action after the close of Griffin's AfD... ==

Deleting these links was inappropriate, so please revert. I have requested a review of the close. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">&#9775;</font>] 14:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
: Nothing was deleted. All I did was to stop them appearing in the link search results. I do that all the time, it helps when monitoring sites like whale.to which occasionally get proposed as sources by poeple who don't understand our sourcing policy. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 14:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
::Ok, thx. One more question - what harm is it for those links to be listed in the search results? Will it have any effect on my request to review the close? <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">&#9775;</font>] 14:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
::: No, no effect at all. The text is still in there, it's just that the MediaWiki software doesn't parse them as active links. Readers can still see what the source is and copy-paste into a browser window. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:47, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
::::Ok, thank you, Guy. (imaginary smiley emoji) <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">&#9775;</font>] 16:16, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

==Potential edit warring on the Strauss and Howe page==

It appears you've edited the same material more than 3 times at the Strauss Howe page in the last four days. I don't know if that technically qualifies as edit warring, but don't edit the same material again.

] (]) 03:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
: What a coincidence. So have you. And only one of us has taken it to the Talk page with a rationale (that would be me). <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

::I'll spare you the stop sign warning. But as of today, you've edited the same material on the Strauss Howe page four or five times in the last five days. This clearly meets the Misplaced Pages definition of edit warring. If you do it again we'll need to go to an admin page. Thank you. ] (]) 15:08, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
::: Odd that you seem to think your own edits are immune from this.Your reverts are running one ahead of mine (see ]). You are edit-warring for inclusion of self-published primary sources, see ] and ] for the kind of sources that Misplaced Pages requires. Any material (and especially links) that is challenged, can be removed, and should stay out until consensus is achieved for inclusion. If you check my edit history ({{admin|JzG}}) you'll see that I have a good deal of experience in issues of sourcing. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

::::Not true, your edit history on Strauss and Howe clearly meets edit warring and mine does not. Count them please. The Strauss and Howe books are not self-published -- so please stop eradicating them from Misplaced Pages.] (]) 15:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
::::: That is flat wrong. An edit war requires two or more participants. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

== Request ==

Greetings JzG.

Someone had told to me that you are good at judging the sock puppetry cases. Would you like to handle one of my case? Which might be very easy, though it has been mishandled twice.

Inform if you are free. Thanks. ] <small>(] • ] • ])</small> 16:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
: I might have been once upon a time, but these days I am just a nasty suspicious bastard. I don't mind having a look if you link me to the current discussion. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 17:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
:: and I put it up for review at ]. I am just putting the major evidence below, as the SPI and ANI had been bludgeoned by the editor.
<!--{{hat|Evidence}}
Most of this evidence I discovered today, for refuting Zhanzhao's claim that the sock was his brother. Apart from abusing accounts on 100 percent same namespaces, Zhanzhao has also abused them for bigger purposes. It took a few minutes to confirm that how Zhanzhao and DanS76 are not brothers, but one person.

:*"TALK", "possibly vandalism", " already summarized", "Removed POV language", "my 2 cents", "my defense", "properly attributed", "more accurate to", "Re-added", "overly detailed"..
:*Same ]. Zhanzhao was page move warring and edit warring with the former admin and indeffed editor, La goutte de pluie, by using multiple accounts.
:*Exactly same votes and choices in AfD,(, , ) deletion review,() ANI,( , ) RFC/UA () accepting own article submission, etc.

This is when he had made slightly more than 150 edits on other account. One wouldn't be convinced even if he claim that these two are ], because there's only one sock puppeteer operating these accounts.

*Looking at some of his self admission, it seems like he is expressing how these accounts had been used when he was hauling an editor to RFC/UA, ANI.

I also got to know that Zhanzhao retired DanS76 so that he could sock with other accounts. Sounds compelling.

;Other socks, TCKTKtool, 72.196.235.154, Resaltador.

*72 says "This article is about Rape in India", TCKTKtool says "This article is about Rape in India". Zhanzhao says "it IS about rape in india".
*TCKTKtool says "major news around the world".
:*Zhanzhao says "news agencies around the world".
*Resaltador, like Zhanzhao was blocked before for evading his block with , an IP that shows same geolocation as 72.196.235.154.
*Compare with (section title as summary)
*Mentioning the username only and
*Zhanzhao says "you're shutting people up everytime they say something", while Resaltador says that "OccultZone seems to attack anyone that disagrees".

Other similarities:

*Interest in "Suicide of.." articles "court case", "outcome", "church"
*"forgot to sign"
*Creation of 3 words userpage.
*Zhanzhao also types "talk" in upper case, like Resaltador, and DanS76.
*"NPOV issues"
*"to make it clear",
*Capital t of "talk"
*"to match".
*"childish"
*Edit summaries for discussion.
*"This is Misplaced Pages not.."
*Over-usage of slash(/)
*Considers others to have been "stalking" him.
*Refer articles, publications as 'piece'
*Starts messages with "Hi"
*Misuse of the word, "boomerang".
*"formatting"
*"Please do not remove", and other "Please do not"s
*"wrong section"
*Specific identification, "by IP".
*Misrepresents ] as ].
*"whitewashing", doesn't even end here. Zhanzhao had considered the edits on this same section as "an attempt to whitewash" similar to the IP. Wonder if IP went to read a buried conversation just for picking up this word and regard same edits as "whitewashing" like Zhanzhao.
*"headline"
{{hab}}-->
::Note that Zhanzhao had admitted to have grasped ] in his own words, when he was blocked for evading his block. Since 2010 he was abusing these accounts for socking. Thanks. ] <small>(] • ] • ])</small> 17:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
::: Seriously? Drop it. Negative CheckUser plus others commenting that it's unlikely. Go with edit warring if you want to address this. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 18:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
::::Okay thanks. ] <small>(] • ] • ])</small> 18:07, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:48, 5 January 2025

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
Discretionary sanctions
This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: He should not be given alerts for those areas.
Centralized discussion
Village pumps
policy
tech
proposals
idea lab
WMF
misc
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170
171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180
181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200
201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210
211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218


This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.
Smelling pistakes
In addition to bone-deep burn scars on my left hand I now also have C7 radiculopathy, so my typing is particularly erratic right now. I have a spellcheck plugin but it can't handle larger text blocks. You're welcome to fix spelling errors without pinging me, but please don't change British to American spelling or indeed vice-versa.
JzG is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

God Jul och Gott Nytt År!

Gråbergs Gråa Sång is wishing you the season's greetings.
Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's solstice or Christmas,
Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus,
or the Saturnalia,
this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.

JzG! Are you still out there?

Hi JzG! I was going through some old ArbCom cases and ran into one where you had added some statements. I realized that I haven't spoken to you in quite some time, and I see that you haven't made any edits since May... That sucks! I don't want to see someone like you go! If anything, I hope that you're doing well and that you're happy and that you'll someday return here. I just wanted to leave you a message and let you know that I was thinking about you... Keep in touch. :-) ~Oshwah~ 23:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I hope it goes without saying, despite the fact that I'm saying it, that many of us feel the same way. Happy new year Girth Summit (blether) 23:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
We didn't cross paths very often lately, JzG, but we could really use you back. If you get the urge to return, please say "Yes!" Liz 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
October JzG sighting at WP:RSN. Does my heart good. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Lovely to hear from you! I have spent the past two-and-a-bit years working at incredibly high stress for a hospital. In that time I have retired around 80% of their legacy application and server estate, instituted architectural guidelines and piloted the process for demand review, reduced the measured risk burden by around 80%, instituted objective risk monitoring using Tenable, and I've just proposed (and had accepted) a plan to remediate or mitigate most of the rest. I have, in short, been busy in that there real life of which you read, and that really wasn't going to fit in with having to be nice to people who sincerely believe that Ashlii Babbit was the real victim of the "legitimate political discourse" on Jan 6 2020.
I have a week's leave. I have 28 days to take before year end, having managed I think three days off this year so far (including weekends). And because I have an offshore team and an onshore customer, my working day can be 8am to 3am.
I thought I'd drop in :-) Guy (help! - typo?) 18:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Yikes, sounds like, umm..., a lot of responsibility. There will be plenty for you to do here when you are free! Johnuniq (talk) 22:50, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Glad you dropped by! Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Glad to hear you're OK - and busy, by the sounds of things! Hope you enjoy your break. Girth Summit (blether) 11:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
If Guy doesn't look at Talk:Alexander technique real soon now, where Eddy is being accused of plagiarism, I may be forced to contact him on bookfarce. That would mean giving Guy my real name. He always forgets me. - Roxy the dog 16:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
I try never to remember people's RW names unless they are "out" on Misplaced Pages. Even when they out themselves, this has led to huge problems, e.g. with a user whose identity was revealed by accident off-wiki, showing him to be the source of fact-washing his own side in Misplaced Pages disputes via a journalist. That ended badly for everyone. Guy (help! - typo?) 16:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Very happy see the little JzG! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 19:56, 27 October 2022 (UTC).
Hah! Good to see you're still around!  RasputinAXP  20:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
This is a few months late, but welcome back! Wishing you well. starship.paint (exalt) 09:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Welcome indeed! Just came across your signature here. It's always great to run in to another 'old-timer'. Hope you're well, Arbitrarily0  11:21, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

`

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

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

Administrator changes

added Sennecaster
readded
removed

CheckUser changes

added
readded Worm That Turned
removed Ferret

Oversight changes

added
readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

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

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

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