Misplaced Pages

User talk:The Wordsmith: 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 20:39, 16 May 2017 editCecil B Pimento (talk | contribs)7 edits →SRS - clarification: just saying← Previous edit Latest revision as of 01:02, 10 January 2025 edit undoSDZeroBot (talk | contribs)Bots708,170 edits Nomination of Imakuni? for deletion at AfD 
(685 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<span style="position:fixed;top:50px;left:-0px;z-index:100">]</span>
{{User:The Wordsmith/Articles}}
{{Archive basics {{Archive basics
|archive = User talk:The Wordsmith/Archive %(counter)d |archive = User talk:The Wordsmith/Archive %(counter)d
|counter = 8 |counter = 11
|headerlevel = 2 |headerlevel = 2
|maxarchivesize = 120K |maxarchivesize = 150K
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} |archiveheader = {{Aan}}
}}<!-- 14:52 May 19, 2016 (UTC), The Wordsmith added ] --> }}<!-- 14:52 May 19, 2016 (UTC), The Wordsmith added ] -->
<!--<CENTER>{{User:Harej/Forever|text1=]|text2=FOREVER|image=Bathrobecabalicon.png}}</CENTER>
{{User:The Wordsmith/Articles}}
]
<CENTER>{{User:Harej/Forever|text1=WIKIPEDIA|text2=FOREVER}}</CENTER>
-->
{|align="right"
{|align="left"
|- |-
|{{archives}}
|]

|-
<!--|]-->
|-
|{{archive box|]<br>]<br>]<br>]<br>]<br>]<br>]<br>]}}
|-
|
|- |-
|{{User Wikipedian For|year=2005|month=3|day=4}} |{{User Wikipedian For|year=2005|month=3|day=4}}
|-
|{{User:The Wordsmith/Status}}
|} |}


{{User:The Wordsmith/Backlog}}


{{cot|reason=Contentious Topics awareness templates}}
{{cquote|<big>In light of the following considerations:
{{Contentious topics/aware|9/11|a-i|aa2|ab|acu|ap|blp|cc|covid|e-e|gc|gg|gmo|ipa|irp|ps|r-i}}
{{cob}}
{{Clear}}


<!-- =====DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE===== -->


== A TARDIS for you ==
* That the core principles of the policy on biographies of living people—in particular, neutrality and verifiability—have been set forth by the Wikimedia Foundation as a mandate for all projects;


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
* That the policy on biographies of living people, and this Committee's ruling in the Badlydrawnjeff case, call for the removal of poorly sourced and controversial content, and places the burden of demonstrating compliance on those who wish to see the content included;
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | A rouge TARDIS (or the closest thing I could find on Commons), for having made a closure so ] that its effects travelled through time and were being challenged you even issued it.<br/>. . .<br/>But to be serious, I appreciate that you undertook to close, and closed so thoughtfully, such a large and complex discussion even as it was getting international attention and pushback. Someone had to do it; the discussion was open for so long as to suggest no-one ''wanted'' to do it; I appreciate you doing it. ] (]) 16:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
|}


:{{yo|-sche|CommunityNotesContributor|Chetsford|starship.paint}} Thank you for the kind words, I'm just glad the discussion is finished and we can move on (at least until the next challenge). I'm sure co-closers {{u|Tamzin}} and {{u|Theleekycauldron}} feel the same way. If you've got any recommendations for something more fun to read than that RFC (admittedly not a high bar) I could use a palate cleanser. Otherwise I think I'll pick up ] again. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
* That unsourced biographies of living people may contain seemingly innocuous statements which are actually damaging, but there is no way to determine whether they do without providing sources;


::''The Hobbit'' sounds like a great palate cleanser! I was reading his ''Sea-Bell'' the other day and learning about the neat words Tolkien coined or resurrected in that and other writings (which might interest you, as a wordsmith, if you don't know them already), like '']'' and '']''. :o ] (]) 21:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
* That Misplaced Pages, through the founding principle of "Ignore All Rules", has traditionally given administrators wide discretion to enforce policies and principles using their own best judgment; and


::You are welcome, the Wordsmith.... '']''. ''']] (])''' 01:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
* That administrators have been instructed to aggressively enforce the policy on biographies of living people.
:::Thanks, I just bought it for my Kindle. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 00:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
::::{{yo|Starship.paint}} Thanks for the recommendation, it made excellent beach/pool-side reading. I haven't finished it yet, but I hope to sometime this weekend. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::You’re welcome! Interesting to have ‘horror’ story reading at the beach! ''']] (])''' 05:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::''Amaze'' <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)


== A barnstar for you! ==


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
The Committee has determined that:
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Admin's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for all the work you've done at SPI the past couple days! <b>]</b> (] • ] • ]) 02:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
|}


== Question ==


Hey, I have a special interest in improving articles with the 'written with advertisement like language' tag, or similar tags, especially corporate articles written in business talk instead of encyclopedic language. Do you know how I can find a list of such articles, or if there is a wikiproject focused on that? ''']'''] 23:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
* The deletions carried out by Rdm2376, Scott MacDonald, and various other administrators are a reasonable exercise of administrative discretion to enforce the policy on biographies of living people.


:{{tps}} As far as I'm aware, there isn't a WikiProject dedicated to that specifically, but ] sounds like what you're looking for. There's 22,000 articles in the category so you shouldn't have a lack of things to do. ] ] 00:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
* The administrators who carried out these actions are commended for their efforts to enforce policy and uphold the quality of the encyclopedia, but are urged to conduct future activities in a less chaotic manner.
::Thanks! Maybe I'll make a wikiproject eventually ;) ''']'''] 19:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:::Just to clarify, there is ] that might be of interest though it doesn't focus specifically on promotional articles. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 19:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:That sounds like a great idea, and Clovermoss is right about that category. Fixing promotional articles is a great way to dive in and make a difference. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)


== policy question ==
* The administrators who interfered with these actions are reminded that the enforcement of the policy on biographies of living people takes precedence over mere procedural concerns.


Hey wordsmith. Hope all is well. I have a question relating to a case I'm involved in. Can a topic ban ever be justified because of a perceived lack of experience and/or policy knowledge? Per ARBPIA, an editor must be EC to edit in certain topics, however, is it up to an admin to determine, even after an editor reached EC, whether that editor has enough experience to be able to edit in that topic? <span style="background:#636363;border:solid#636363 1x;border-radius:15px;">''']''']</span> 21:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
</big>}}


:I've just gotten back from a vacation, but it seems like this issue was hashed out elsewhere. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)


== Sockpuppetry ==


Hi, about this SPI case you handled: ]. You had temp blocked 2407:D000:F:0:0:0:0:0/48, 92.40.0.0/16 (?) but these still appear to be quite active with the sock network and disrupting quite a lot of pages. Can the block be extended here again?


Thanks ] (]) 13:29, 5 August 2024 (UTC)


:Can you share a few examples of the disruptive edits from this range after the block expired? I'll check to see if there would be any collateral damage, too. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 15:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
::Well here is the (needs PP for socking), mere hours after a previous IP sock was reverted. Others that I recently reverted include , , , , , , , . are from the sock network.]
::From the range, these include: , , , . The 'census update' edits from the range are also likely the same sock. ] (]) 07:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
:::I'm not seeing much risk in blocking the IPv6 range for a longer time, so I'll softblock that one. For the IPv4, it looks like there would be a ton of collateral damage there so it would be a bad idea to block the whole thing. What I can do instead is break it into smaller ranges that exclude most of the legitimate edits, I can do ] and ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 15:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)


== Question regarding SPI ==


Hi, I see that you've noted that sockpuppetry was a strong possibility in the recent report of AraxesTheThief, but without technical evidence (as CU was declined), you can't be confident to place a block. Can I rerequest CU on that basis, as declining it may potentially let long-term sockpuppetry pass, which you've noted as a strong possibility? ] (]) 06:27, 9 August 2024 (UTC)


:Unfortunately that's not possible. All the known socks are already stale, so the Checkuser tool won't be able to provide any evidence which is why they already declined it. If there's future sock-like activity from that account or others, a new SPI can be opened and the new behavioral evidence can be evaluated as well. Or if their edits are disruptive, that can be handled through the normal channels. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 13:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
::Oh okay. We'll have to wait and see then. Thank you for the explanation. It wasn't clear to me that CU wouldn't be useful either way. Wish you a great Friyay. ] (]) 13:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
:::Sadly the Checkuser tool is more limited than a lot of people think it is. Unless there's another account to compare it to that's edited en.wiki in the last 90 days, the tool is unlikely to show anything except maybe sleepers. After 90 days, IP data for logged-in accounts is generally discarded by WMF policy. For those, behavioral evidence is all we have to go on and we need to be confident in our findings to avoid blocking an innocent editor. Sometimes that unfortunately will result in illegitimate users avoiding blocks, but in my experience they often slip up and give us enough evidence to block sooner or later. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 15:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)


== Wisdom-inc ==


Thanks for closing the Wisdom-inc SPI. He is still active today on one of the reported IP ranges - ] ] (]) 21:09, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
<!-- =====DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE===== -->


==Thomas Hope==
== The Rambling Man ==
I am happy to see you changed ] into US. A foolish mistake by a nitwit.] (]) 05:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC) Perhaps you can change ''born in 1704'' very childish.] (]) 05:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC) Also the category ''1799 deaths'' is a mistake.] (]) 06:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)


:I have no idea what this is about. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 20:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello,


Sorry, it is about ].] (]) 08:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
As you were the administrator who closed the AE proceedings and issued the warning to TRM, I'd like to draw your attention to some recent issues that I believe should be addressed. In no less than 24 hours from your closure, it appears that TRM has continued to engage in inappropriate behavior. He has made personal attacks towards myself, including: , , , and equating my warning and block to .


:Oh, that was reverting a sockpuppet who was adding inaccuracies into articles (especially around estimated dates of birth/death). If you're willing to take responsibility for the edits, you're welcome to make the changes again. Though since Henry Hope's son (also named Henry Hope) was born in Massachusetts, it seems like him moving to the US is correct. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
TRM's uncivil behavior has extended to DYK when another editor asked him a question and he responded in a belittling fashion: . It was followed up with: and


==Massive disruption==
Finally, TRM has made insults towards some of the arbitration committee candidates: and
Hi, can you have a look at these IP ranges? I think they belong to ] as they originated from the same geographical location(Pakistan) and have an obsession with manipulating the result of a page move discussion on ] just like the last range that you blocked.


*]
I am asking that you take a look at TRM's behavior and action it as appropriate. <span style="font-family: Palatino;"> ] • ]</span> 00:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
*]
*]
*]
*] <span style="font-family:'forte'">] <b>(])</b></span> 03:39, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
*Also if possible, can you please semi protect the ] too? <span style="font-family:'forte'">] <b>(])</b></span> 03:55, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
*:I've applied semiprotection to the talkpage. Those IP edits are probably Anujror or a similar sock drawer, but they seem to be one-offs. Blocking them would probably not have any effect as he's probably already moved on, and it looks like there are a bunch of legitimate users on those ranges. Protection is usually the better option in cases like this. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 00:43, 14 August 2024 (UTC)


== ''The Signpost'': 14 August 2024 ==
:{{tps}} Some of these diffs are just allegations of administrator misconduct. While I believe they are incorrect allegations, we shouldn't bar any editor from reporting someone to ANI due to a mere allegation being deemed "belittling". On the other hand, some of the DYK comments and the constant addition of "Of course, if that's deemed "belittling", my unreserved apologies." to the end of his comments are an actual issue. ~ ]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">]</sup> 00:54, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:::I have no objection to anyone raising a question about another's conduct. However, I do object to the manner in which it's conveyed. <span style="font-family: Palatino;"> ] • ]</span> 01:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
In light of the current AN case, I consider it to be wholly inappropriate for you to be even commenting on {{u|The Rambling Man}} at the moment, {{u|Mike V}}, let alone trying to engage someone who is directly linked to the AN case. Why not grow a pair of bollocks and apologise for the way you've behaved rather than try and stir up some more shit? '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 01:03, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:I don't see how my comment is inappropriate. You and others have encourage me to seek input from other admins in regards to TRM and here I am doing just that. I do object to your and again I ask that you stop interacting with me in this fashion. <span style="font-family: Palatino;"> ] • ]</span> 01:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
::I object to your refusal to say sorry, {{u|Mike V}}, but we don't always get what we want, do we? '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 01:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
::I've also done no such thing than to ask you to "seek input from other admins in regards to TRM" -- diff please? Your comment here to the AN filer is inappropriate inasmuch that this is an active case and your silence there is deafening. Rather than man-up and go there to say sorry, you're continuing to grind your pathetic axe elsewhere. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 01:25, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:::That was in reference to your . <span style="font-family: Palatino;"> ] • ]</span> 01:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
::::Then your referencing is wrong: read RexxS's post again and you'll see that nowhere does he say: "seek input from other admins in regards to TRM". Try again? '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 06:37, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
::::As a side note, Mike V responded at AN before initiating this thread. ~ ]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">]</sup> 01:52, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:::::Ignorance is bliss. It was a nothing comment which could've been written differently. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 06:41, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-08-14}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 11--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 22:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
Thank you all for commenting. I've reviewed the diffs, and I believe that the appropriate venue, if anyone believes the Arbcom sanctions have been violated, is ]. The rest of the bickering about Mike is more suited to AN. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 14:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1240033127 -->
:]. <span style="font-family: Palatino;"> ] • ]</span> 15:07, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


== CaseofGoliath SPI ==
FWIW, and I understand you find me unpalatable, thank you for redirecting Mike to an appropriate venue. This isn't over by a long way it seems. ] (]) 19:07, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


Hi The Wordsmith, did you review the evidence I sent to the en-paid queue regarding Elianaisaac? Link ]. ] (]) 17:49, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
:You're welcome. Just because I'm not terribly fond of you (and I'm certainly not alone in that) doesn't mean we get to suspend our administrator standards for accountability. Indeed, it could be argues that the time our standards matter most is when dealing with someone we don't get along with. That being said, you also need to cool it for a while. Your constant (paraphrased) "see you in a week if anyone finds this belittling" is not helping the situation, and arguably ]y. The best thing for you would be to find something unrelated to write about, and not continue to prod, lest the boomerang come back around again (*groan*).


:I directed Mike to the right venue, just like I directed you to AN when you took issue with my previous AE close. Fairness is important (and as much as you assumed AN would do nothing, it seems I was right on that being the right place for you to go). <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 19:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC) :I don't have access to that queue, but whoever does is free to take action independently of SPI if they determine it is warranted. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 17:55, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
::Ok. I wasn't sure if you had access of not. Because it was an open SPI with a CU request, I ''think'' they left it up to the CU to review (got a standard response a couple weeks ago before the check) but I will double check. I will be opening up a new one for new socks I found anyway but was waiting until the weekend in case I came across others and might include Elianaisaac again depending on the response I get. Thanks for all the work you do, The Wordsmith. ] (]) 18:10, 15 August 2024 (UTC)


==Christine-dark==
::No need to reiterate that I'm unpopular. That's belittling, remember? And it may have escaped your attention but I do more in the mainspace '''every day''' than Mike does every year. So asking me to go and find something else to do is also belittling and trivialises my contributions and motivation. But you're ok, you're not going to be blocked for that. My issue with "belittling" is exemplified perfectly by Mike's abject inability to see the reality in most of my discussion points, moreover a failure to see any kind of historical context. It's a serious knee-jerk failing. Your recent comment "{{xt|I think the best thing to do would be to give him some breathing room and time to think. This pressure on him is certainly not helping.}}" is very charitable, but Mike V had 13 days to respond to me about my concerns over his original warning to me. He did no such thing, and as of now, still hasn't. He's accused me of lying twice. He's not doing the things he's been elected to do properly, he's not representing WMF the way they would want him to, and just running away is a simple indication that he needs to be restored to a normal editor until such a time he can handle the position(s) he's in properly. ] (]) 19:35, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
::{{U|Black Kite}} this whole "when he has time" thing is a little bizarre, see above, 13 days to respond to me and nothing, still nothing in the face of heaps of evidence I provided at the time plus numerous editors asking him to respond. The AGF is wearing really thin. ] (]) 19:45, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


CU is positive and so is behavioral evidence. Hope you can block as soon as possible. ] (]) 02:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
:::I understand your concern. For what its worth, I believe that Arbcom restriction was poorly worded in a way that is too subjective to be useful. There is probably a better way to phrase it that leaves less room for "creative" interpretations. Maybe something in the old Giano civility parole? But anyway, one thing I've noticed is that in situations like these, the pitchfork brigade rushes to grab their pitchforks as usual, everybody gets swept up in the fervor, and then we're caught in a months-long Arbitration case that everybody hates and nobody can end swiftly (I think you probably are familiar with this situation too). It will be much easier on the community if we can all cool off and approach it with a level head. There is precedent for the Community holding a discussion about an advanced permission holder (historically an RFC/U, but we can manage without that), coming to a consensus, and then the Committee desysopping by motion. If the community truly believes that removing tools to be the best option, then the second path is going to be far less divisive and quicker than the first. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 19:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


:Unfortunately SPI is extremely backlogged at the moment. Somebody will get to it as quickly as we can, but if there's vandalism or urgent disruption then the normal venues like ] are also available and usually have a faster response time. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 04:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
::::Yes, and I'm much less concerned over Mike being desysopped and de-functionaried than I am over making sure his error in citing me for an IBAN infringement is overturned. That's all I asked from day 1, and I guess it's probably the blue touchpaper that's caused all the rest of it. If Mike didn't like being challenged on that and couldn't retract from his position, I suppose the rest was inevitable given he went on a vendetta to get me. ] (]) 19:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – September 2024 ==
:::::I'm also looking into precedent for redacting log entries. I'm not sure if there is one, but given the community's strong feeling I'm certain the warning will be overturned with little hassle. Thus far I think I've treated you fairly (please point out if I haven't), I'm just asking for a little patience. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 19:55, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


] from the past month (August 2024).
::::::I have no issue at all with you or your actions. Indeed I was mildly disappointed that you held me in such low regard as I'm not sure we've interacted much at all. Any way, I have patience, just not for when all venues for discussion are rapidly closed down when outstanding issues persist. That's all. ] (]) 20:00, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
:::::::I don't dislike you as a person. I think you do a lot of excellent and thankless work. I take issue with the way you express yourself, which is often unnecessarily harsh. I understand why you're so passionate and emphatic about getting it right, but if you want help from competent people (indeed, if you want others to stick around long enough to be competent in understanding how the main page works), the carrot sometimes works better than the stick. I watchlist ] and ], have for a while, but the way you speak to people dissuades me from jumping in. I'm sure others feel the same. If you would tone down the language, I'd be happy to stick around long enough to learn the finer points and I'm sure others would too. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 20:07, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">


] '''Administrator changes'''
::::::::Accepted, but ironically the Arbcom sanctions have made the task of keeping the main page 100 times more challenging, and has actually opened the lid on the fact that many, many admins are not actually competent enough to edit the encyclopedia, or simply not interested in doing so. I was hauled away by a band of individuals who dislike me personally for my style (over the last 11 years) and of course, no consideration at all was given to the positive contributions. I suppose once you hit around 140,000 edits, if 1,000 of them are shitty, (i.e. less than 1%) you still get shown the door. Perhaps like eBay where anyone with a seller rating of less than 100% is a fraud. Anyway, I took my meds and I kept trying to keep the place clean and tidy, then Mike V misinterprets a question to the Arbcom candidates as an IBAN violation, and we're stoking up the fires once again. I regret becoming so escalated, but it's 100% down to Mike V and his false accusations and refusal to retract them. I should be the better man, sure, but being accused of lying, twice, is like being spat in the face, twice, especially after 11 years of service. ] (]) 20:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:] ]


] '''Interface administrator changes'''
{{od}} I do understand where you're coming from. The Arbcom case was...well, terrible for everyone and should have been kept within the community. An RFC/U might have been able to sort it all out adequately. There's been a lot of poor behavior on all sides, and now we're in this situation where things can only escalate. How about this: I'm going to continue trying calm things down, I'm going to continue working out the best way to take care of your log entry within policy (and maybe a dash of ]), and then when I have some free time I'll come help out with small things in the Main Page area while you show me the ropes. Is that acceptable? <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 20:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:] ]
:I'd be delighted. Although there are nuances between each of the separate sections, it's all about the primary goal of keeping errors off and interest on! ] (]) 20:36, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
::After this saga I'm taking the weekend away from Misplaced Pages, but as promised I'll start poking around the MP areas on Monday. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 22:48, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:::I wouldn't. ] ;) '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 23:11, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


</div>
*{{ping|The Rambling Man}} Any suggestions on where to get started with Main Page maintenance? <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 15:25, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">


]
===Just a quick one===
You've just struck through Mike V's IBAN infringement warning in totality, and I have no issue with that at all, but you might be well advised to let the other party know that too. After all Mike's interpretation was a tit-for-tat, and if I didn't "tit", then the other wouldn't have "tat"ed, so if it's okay with you, please let them know. Cheers. ] (]) 22:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
:Good idea. I have so noted on the editor's user talk. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 22:37, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
::<small>In case you don't know, I got in trouble for saying ''tit'' , so watch it. ''']]''' 00:21, 17 December 2016 (UTC)</small>
:::{{Ping|EEng}} Well, maybe you shouldn't have been such a ] then. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 00:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)


] '''Oversighter changes'''
== HughD sock editting ==
:] ]
{{archivetop}}
The Wordsmith, I’m writing to ask for ask for your input. About 6 months back you imposed a 6 month block on HughD as well as an indefinite topic ban ]. I was one of the most vocal editors complaining about HughD’s behavior ]. I believe HughD is sock editing two articles I’m involved with as a form of harassment thus I wanted to state my case and ask for advice.


] '''CheckUser changes'''
The two articles are ] and ]. In both cases, we saw a series of IP edits by IP addresses in the Chicago area] ] ] ] (a quick look at HughD’s user page and it’s clear he is a Chicago based editor). In both cases the IP editor switched to Amazon Technologies IPs from around the world.] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] after I requested a sock investigation ]. I didn’t realize checkuser can’t be used to match IP addresses to users so the investigation didn’t proceed.
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}


</div>
IP involvement with the Corvette article started in November (and I didn’t notice for 2-3 weeks). The Eddie Eagle involvement started about 3 days after my second edit to the article. In addition to being suspicious IP addresses the edits follow a pattern that was typical of HughD.
</div>


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
The Corvette article edits are generally annoyance/harassment types and follow a pattern that was typical of HughD in such cases (I can provide example diffs). Starting in November we see a series of requests for references or other tagging for minor/non-existent issues with the article. The edit summaries are similar to the verb-subject phrasing HughD used. Each IP address was used only once and for one article only but some of the edits were timed relatively close together.
* Following an ], there is a new ]: ], which {{tq|applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past}}.
* A ] is open to discuss whether ] should be adopted as a ].


] '''Arbitration'''
The Eddie Eagle edits are more like the edits HughD tried to add to political topics (and were part of why he was banned from that subject area after a time). Typically, we have a quote from a source, often with hyperlinks to the name of the newspaper, journal etc, basically a bit of peacocking. They we have a disparaging quote taken from the article and move on to the next source. Effort to put thing into context doesn't matter. All that is important is to add negative information.
* Following a ], ] (the topic and interaction bans on ], respectively) were repealed.
* ] of the ] ("{{noping|Cinderella157}} German history topic ban") was ] for a period of six months.
* The arbitration case ] is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.


] '''Miscellaneous'''
Based on the patterns of behavior, text and edit summaries, the Chicago based IP addresses (followed by using Amazon to mask the IP locations) I believe that this is HughD and he is targeting articles I’m interested in because of my involvement with the complaints that lead to is topic blocks etc. Do you have any suggestions for dealing with this issue? I’m sorry this is as long as it is but I would be happy to provide some example edits to illustrate the similarities between HughD’s behavior and what we are seeing out of the IPs. If nothing else would it be possible to get both articles semi-protected for several months? Do you have suggestions for putting together a more solid case to deal with the sock editing? Thanks, <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small>
* Editors can now enter into ], an alternative for informal '']'' arrangements, to have a ] reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
* A ] is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. ]


----
I'll spend some time looking at the diffs. If they're convincing enough I may just block per ], or if its more borderline it might be easiest if I requested Checkuser assistance. I should be able to have a more firm answer for you tomorrow. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 07:26, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 18:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1242830842 -->


== ''The Signpost'': 4 September 2024 ==
: Thanks, I can find a series of digs for you if it will help. In this case Hugh didn't previously work on these articles but the edit pattern is consistent with his actions at other articles. ] (]) 14:58, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
::I've done a spot check of the IP contributions. Inconclusive as to whether the edit summaries are similar enough to make an ID, and from looking I don't see how those IPs are being terribly disruptive. The few that were tagging might be a slight annoyance, but a number of the contributions seem to be filling out information on existing refs. Can you point to two or thre that show significant disruption needing semiprotection? Also, Hugh's block expires sometime in the next few days. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 16:30, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-09-04}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 12--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 13:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
Wordsmith, I believe HughD is still sock editing and using Amazon proxies to mask his edits. At this point his block has been lifted but the edits started while the block was in effect. Two recent Amazon IP's have appeared at relatively low traffic article talk pagess I recently commented on ], ].
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1243735654 -->


== Re. future sockpuppet cases ==
35.165.116.166 is using typical HughD boiler plate comments. We have high praise for those whom he agrees with,
:(IP)''"Thank you for your prodigious research"'' ]
:(HughD)''"Thank you for your astonishingly prodigious contributions"'' ].
:(IP)''"Exclusion of the proposed content is grossly non-neutral. "],
:(HughD)''"Thank you for your contribution. The article is grossly non-neutral..." ]


Hello; given you closed the sockpuppet case I had opened , for future reference, what is the threshold of evidence needed to support a finding of IP addresses being used as sockpuppets? The timing and nature of the IPs' actions seemed quite suspicious to me, even though there weren't many instances to point to.
Note the use of "our" when describing Wiki articles or projects
:(IP)''"Our policy of due weight compels inclusion of the noteworthy..." ],
:(HughD)''"as per our project's guideline WP:SIZERULE", ]
:(HughD)''"our project's due weight policy", ]
:(HughD)''"the basis of our project's due weight policy", ]
:(HughD)''"We agree our article's coverage of " ].
:(HughD)''"Our article may not demonize", ]
:(HughD)''"Our article should not say ", ]
:(HughD)''"I know you will agree that our first priority in our project is neutrally conveying " ]


(Also sorry about all the edits). ] 21:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
In the GM Chapter 11 posting ] IP 35.165 uses a typical HughD practice of including many (excessive) hyperlinks in a talk post. ].


:The timing is questionable, but not enough by itself. As far as the thresholds for evidence, "more likely than not" is usually enough to at least open an SPI case for either an account or an IP. In addition, the sock or IP needs to actually be doing something forbidden in ], rather than something allowed in ] or ]. Administrators will do their own investigation or ask you for more evidence if needed, but for a positive conclusion the standard is {{tq|obvious beyond a reasonable doubt that sockpuppetry is occurring}}. Essentially, if there's another reasonable explanation then we generally need to ] in the absence of technical evidence.
Finally, IP 13.112 specifically references a previous edit of mine]. HughD was involved in the talk discussion related to that edit.]
:One other thing that filers don't often ask themselves before opening a case is "What is actually being gained by sockpuppetry here?" In this case, it was two minor rephrasings of a small amount of text, switching from a paraphrase to a quote. It doesn't seem controversial at all, especially in comparison to many of the other contested edits on that page. The IP also has a history of edits, which doesn't have any real overlap with Superb Owl. If he had (for example) been warned for edit warring or approached ] before the IP started editing, that would be much stronger evidence. As it stands, the more likely explanation is that two people have a similar opinion on how that information should be presented. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 22:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
::Got it; appreciate the explanation. My rationale at the time was: I had thought the pattern of both IPs (cosmetic edits on random articles, but substantive edits seemingly only on the Electoral fraud or similarly politically charged articles) could be an obfuscation attempt. And I thought they would have something to gain from these edits, as we have devoted a lot of time to disputing phrasing in the article where differences seem relatively minor. ] 13:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)


== SPI Asphonixm ==
We have a whole series of single purpose IP accounts that seem only interested in the articles I'm editing. They started with Chicago related IPs (HughD's location) then switched to Amazon proxies, ]. We see similar posting and now a specific reference to 2015 edit HughD commented on. I think it's clear this is Hugh and he was editing while blocked. No, the edits for the moment aren't overly disruptive but block evasion is block evasion. Also, if these topics are at all covered by his indef block on post 1932 political topics then it's again a violation. Sorry for the length. Thanks, ] (]) 04:30, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, could you please review on my recent ]? If you don't have the time to do so, could you at least check whether the report was correctly opened? I'm a bit worried because I messed up the previous one, which was malformed and not properly opened. Thank you. ] (]) 07:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
*Sorry, for got about another example of a random IP (Amazon based) showing up after I commented on an article. I commented on the GM Street Car Conspiracy article on Jan 2nd (it had been dead for a while) ]. Short time later we have '''14(!)''' new, Amazon IP editors show up. Typical HughD, tag many things in the article and dump a long list of references in the talk page (he did the same with the Pinto article). Here are the users, note all are single purpose accounts using Amazon IPs. Since I haven't taken the bate we see no continuing edits ], ], ], ],], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]. ] (]) 04:47, 25 January 2017 (UTC)


:I don't have time to fully review the case right now, but it looks like it was opened properly. For the previous one, it was missing the {{tl|SPI case status}} template. That template automatically adds it to the categories that put it on the SPI dashboards.
*One more that I didn't add earlier, here is another Amazon IP editing an climate change article. The edit is minor but notice that the article has very little traffic and HughD pushed for GA status before he was blocked.]. Again, I don't think this is just a coincidence. ] (]) 13:19, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
:Personally I think filing SPI cases by hand is too fiddly and unreliable, but it's a complex process so it has to be. ] has a module that fills in the case request for you; I use that so I don't have to deal with all the manual bits. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)


== Arbitration case opened ==
::Seems like much stronger evidence than you presented the first time. I'll contact a Checkuser to see what the available options are. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 14:56, 25 January 2017 (UTC)


You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. '''Please add your evidence by October 10, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see ]. For the Arbitration Committee, ]&nbsp;] 12:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)


== ''The Signpost'': 26 September 2024 ==
And it continues: ]. Again an Amazon IP editor just happens to joint a backwater article I'm editing. This one also has HughD type language. From the IP editor:
:''Thank you for your patient efforts to address the neutrality and completeness deficiencies of this article. The above offered advice on this talk page from our colleague offers a way forward''
The quote ends with my HughD hyperbole. As examples of similar phrasing from HughD (in addition to the "thank yous above):
:], "''Our colleague had a good idea. Why don't you add it? Hugh (talk) 21:01, 26 April 2015 ''", ''"I see that in reaction to our new colleague's attempt at a contribution, you are scrambling, including moving all mention of heroin out of the "History" section. May I ask, is that an attempt to immunize content... Hugh (talk) 21:59, 26 April 2015 "''
:], ''" It is hoped these two sentences will clarify some not uncommon misreads of WP:IRS and so will promote collegiality at article talk pages. Thank you your support of this reasonable measured and helpful clarification of our project's guidelines for identifying reliable sources from news organizations. Hugh (talk) 04:45, 19 April 2016 (UTC)"''
:], In two subsequent replies, "''This content was recently restored by our colleague Srich32977. This content is discussed here at article talk, above. ... Hugh 15:48, 1 July 2015''", "''As you know, our colleague Srich32977 and I disagree with you about the neutrality and reliability of Al Jazeera, and in any case, may I humbly repeat Srich32977's earlier salient point, ... Hugh 16:47, 1 July 2015"''
:]: "'' May I ask, do I understand you deleted a neutral, relevant, well-sourced contribution from a colleague, including all four new sources, because you felt it was over-cited? Hugh (talk) 23:57, 3 May 2016"'', "''Sorry, I'm confused. Please explain how you feel WP:COATRACK applies here in justifying your deletion of a neutral, relevant, well-sourced contribution from a colleague. Thank you. Hugh (talk) 23:57, 3 May 2016"'', "''I am confused by your strenuous objection to mention of Lyndon B. Johnson, sufficient to delete a neutral, relevant, well-sourced contribution from a colleague. ... Hugh (talk) 00:40, 4 May 2016"'', "''If you deleted a neutral, relevant, well-sourced contribution from a colleague because it gave undue weight to US President ...Hugh (talk) 04:42, 4 May 2016 "'', "''of a neutral, relevant, well-sourced contribution from a colleague. Thank you. Hugh (talk) 01:23, 4 May 2016"''.
A few more "colleague" examples here ].


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-09-26}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 13--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 20:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
The IP editor is pushing for the inclusion of gun politics. I would assume that is covered by HughD's indef US politics block as well as the issue that the IP activity started when the block was active.
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1247736176 -->


== RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review ==
*I would like to ask that HughD be blocked as a sock.


Hi there! The trial of the <strong>RfA discussion-only period</strong> passed at ] has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at ''']'''. Cheers, and happy editing! ] (]) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
I also found these where, yet again, an Amazon IP just happens to visit three different very low traffic articles I have edited, some articles with low traffic but several years since I was there. Dec 29th ], Dec 30th ], Dec 29th ]. The IP editor has clearly dug back through my history.
<!-- Message sent by User:Theleekycauldron@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_adminship/2024_review/Mailing_list&oldid=1223231383 -->


== Draft refund for ] ==
Sorry to make this so long. ] (]) 02:00, 3 February 2017 (UTC)


Hello, you closed ].
The IP editor is at it again. Here we have an Amazon IP tagging the General Motors article with requests to fix the lead. When asked what was wrong the reply was boiler plat gibberish. ] The gibberish included HughDisms like thanking editors who agree with him. Note the total lack of actionable suggestions. Note this request isn't a violation of HughD's topic bans but one has to wonder why he wouldn't want to log into his account.


I'm requesting a DRAFT of this article restored to ] for further development and the addition of new citations to establish notability of the trophy. Will move to article space only upon significant improvement to the article and ensuring it meets GNG.
More troubling is an Amazon IP who just happened to joint a talk page I'm involved ]. So the IP is trying to add crime discussions to a firearms article. That would be firearms politics and thus a violation of HughD's post 1932 US politics topic ban. The IP editor again shows behavior that is similar to HughD's disruptive RfCs over the past two years (If needed I can generate a list of diffs this evening). Can we please note that these IPs clearly appear to be HughD socks and thus we can delete the entries as SOCKs avoiding a topic block. Thanks. ] (]) 15:00, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


Significant coverage of this trophy exists that was not discussed in any previous AFD:
:{{ping|Springee}} I've spoken with a Checkuser, and they're going through and putting rangeblocks in place as we speak. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 16:03, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


*
::The Wordsmith, what is the basis for blocking this editor? Please also see ]. Unless this editor is banned I don't see why personal attacks on him are relevant to an RFC. Is he a banned editor? ] (]) 18:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
:: Thank you! Can you make sure they block the IP address associated with the recent GM edits as well, 13.112.65.233. Thanks ] (]) 18:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
:::For the record, I don't see anywhere that The Wordsmith has confirmed that this IP editor or editors is the same person as HughD. Am I mistaken? ] (]) 01:40, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Felsic2}} There are two issues in place here. The first is that the IP is from a webhost, which has now been blocked per our usual policies. The second is that the behavioral evidence linking the IP with HughD is extremely strong. Aside from the pattern of pages he's been editing, certain grammatical quirks that HughD uses are unmistakably present. While I'm not a Checkuser myself, I'm fairly experienced in sniffing out socks and I'd say they're they same person beyond reasonable doubt, per ].
::::::1) Is it a requirement for a user to sign in to their account name to edit?
::::::2) Is HughD a banned editor? {{ping|Springee}} is saying that the mention of a mass shooting in a gun article is squarely within HughD's ban on American political topics. However that is such a broad definition that it would include vast swaths of Misplaced Pages articles. I think he is stretching it too far.
::::::3) My concern is that Springee is "criminalizing" otherwise acceptable behaviour, reverting useful contributions, and being more disruptive than HughD and/or the IP. ] (]) 18:54, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
:::::::Felsic2, it seems as though you are trying to derail any sock investigation as a way to gain support for the IP editor who has agreed with you on a number of occasions. For example, trying to cast aspersions on my recent sock investigation request here ]. To answer the above question (and apologies to the owner of this talk page), first, no it isn't a requirement but there are limits. When an IP editor constantly changes addresses, even after the old addresses are blocked and when an proxy address votes in a RfC after previously commenting on the talk page with a different address, it becomes a problem. Second, HughD isn't currently edit blocked but he is topic blocked and some of these edits are in gray or out right banned areas. Also the IP editing started when HughD was edit blocked thus block evasion. Third, this isn't just something only I'm concerned with but since the IP editor has followed me to many articles I have just concern. Other also are concerned. Look at the number of editors who struck the IP's remarks from the M&P15 talk page. You seemed to note an issue with the IP editor here when the IP ignored your question for specific changes vs boiler plate BS ]. ] (]) 12:14, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
::::::::Thanks for your comments. I'd like to hear what The Wordsmith has to say. ] (]) 19:57, 8 March 2017 (UTC)


Thanks, ] (]) 06:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::I'm waiting for the SPI to be concluded before commenting extensively, but the fact that the IP began editing while HughD was blocked, and that the IP seems to be stalking Springee's edits, is a significant problem. Assuming that the IP is HughD, which I believe is the case, getting dinged for block evasion generally resets the clock. In addition, blocked users do not have the privilege of commenting on Talk pages. When an editor evades and comments, their remarks can be removed. However, that being said, the best thing to do would be to temporarily pause things while the SPI is ongoing. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 20:04, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
::::::::::I agree that further actions, including deleting or striking out comments, should be paused until the SPI reaches a conclusion. I'm not aware that HughD is blocked. ] (]) 23:29, 8 March 2017 (UTC)


:{{Done}} <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 18:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
*The Wordsmith, an IP that is likely HughD is still editing the GM article talk page even today ]. This is another Amazon web host. Would you please block it. Thank you ] (]) 16:47, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
:: And a new Amazon IP address. ] The IP is also running around thanking those who agreed with his pov. This was another common Hugh behavior. Would you please semi protect the topic? ] (]) 18:00, 3 March 2017 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – October 2024 ==
:::Give me a specific list of articles that are affected, and I'll apply semiprotection. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 19:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
::::Thanks. Recently it has been these two threads, ], and ] as well as the associated talk pages. As yet further evidence that the same editor is behind the large number of Amazon proxy edits, note that 34.207.97.139, the IP that replaced the previously blocked IP at the M&P-15 article (linked above) corrected part of 13.112.65.233's post on the GM talk page. Here is an earlier example (currently not blocked) of an Amazon IP editing both the GM chapter 11 page and the Smith and Wesson M&P15 page ]. I think it's clear this is a single user who has been making these edits over the past few months. This started when HughD was still edit blocked and a few of the topics either blaitantly are probably are violations of his climate change and post 1932 politics (broadly interpreted) topic band. Additionally it is clear this IP editor is trying to be obnoxious and stir up trouble. Here are current examples of improper RFC notification] and potential canvasing ], ]. Do you have a suggestion for how we might get this behavior officially attached to HughD's account so that in the future it would be easier to deal with additional IP sock edits by this user? Thank you ] (]) 04:16, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
100% wack a mole with this one... yet another IP ] ] (]) 19:14, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
And another one... ] ] (]) 17:12, 6 March 2017 (UTC)


] from the past month (September 2024).
Returned now with a Chicago based IP ] ] (]) 18:26, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
And a new Amazon IP ]. The material added is clearly political since it involves the 2016 election. ] (]) 17:08, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
{{archivebottom}}


]
== ] ==


] '''Administrator changes'''
I request that the protection on that article be removed now. It has gone idle as far as publicity goes.--] (]) 20:22, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
*{{Done}} I'll give it a chance. Please remember to seek consensus for all changes that may be controversial, and keep in mind our policy on ]. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 21:51, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
::Did not seek any consensus... blanked entire sections. {{tl|Minnow}}. ] ] 23:28, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
:::{{ping|EvergreenFir}} Well, that didn't work out as well as I'd hoped. Reapplied the semiprotection for six months. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 14:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
*] are a proposed new process for selecting administrators, offering an alternative to ] (RfA). The first trial election will take place in October 2024, with ] from October 8 to 14, a ] from October 22 to 24, and ] from October 25 to 31. For questions or to help out, please visit the talk page at ].
* Following ], the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion ] to ]. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
* A ] is open to discuss whether there is a consensus to have an ] process.


] '''Arbitration'''
== Thank you for the close, but... ==
* The arbitration case '']'' has been closed.
* An arbitration case regarding ] has been opened.
* Editors are invited to ''']''' to serve on the 2024 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission until ''23:59 October 8, 2024 (UTC)''.


] '''Miscellaneous'''
Would you mind making the change exactly as I indicated in my last post?
* If you are interested in stopping spammers, please put ] and ] on your watchlist, and help out when you can.

Simply striking the IBAN rather than removing it outright still leaves my name in there, and leaves me open to the same abuse I've been putting up with for the last week. I've already emailed an uninvolved admin about talking to the user who has been abusing me over it, but I'd still rather my name be removed entirely so that "Ctrl+F"ing my name wouldn't bring it up.

No rational Wikipedian would read it after your amendment as implying that I am under a restriction for my disruptive behaviour, but the same was true before your amendment, and I've given up assuming other Wikipedians will behave rationally when they are trying to find an excuse to disagree with me.

] (<small>]]</small>) 21:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

:I'm not sure what the convention is for partially overturning a community sanction, and if it is possible to just remove that portion. I'll look into it, and I'll see what I can do about accommodating your request. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 22:10, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
::For what it's worth, the previous discussion in 2015 basically answered your question. I asked for a change in the wording, one other user suggested a further change to the wording (based on reasoning that "instigated" is just a more neutral word for "fabricated"), a few other users supported, and the wording was altered accordingly. The change was more radical than the one I asked for last week.
::That said, if the 2013 wording were restored, I might not have a problem. Assuming good faith on the part of the user who instigated the recent discussion, then if they knew that the 2013 incident was a fabrication (read: that I had never violated the ban -- an admin had been tricked into thinking I had) I might have never thought it necessary to ask for the wording to be changed.
::Now, if the admin I emailed (Boing, for what it's worth) agrees to talk the user in question out of repeatedly trying to game my IBANs to shut me up or shut me out of community discussions, the whole issue may be moot, but I really would rather never have to deal with this again, and the user in question isn't the first one to try.
::] (<small>]]</small>) 09:11, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

:::{{done}} <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 15:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

== Arbitration==
As you where present in the discussion concerning and the placing of a category indicating descent, could you kindly join in ]. More the merrier. Thank you. Regards, ] (]) 22:34, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

== Schooloutcomes RFC closure ==

There is a draft in your email. I'd appreciate it if you would take a look and give feedback.

Cheers, ] (]) 00:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

== RFC closed ==

I have put up the closing statement at ]. It is awaiting your countersignature. ] (]) 00:13, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

== Administrators' newsletter – March 2017 ==

] from the past month (February 2017).

] '''Administrator changes''' {{anchor|adminchanges}}
:] ] • ] • ]
:] ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ]

] '''Guideline and policy news''' {{anchor|guidelinepolicy}}
:* A ] has redefined how articles on schools are ]. Specifically, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist.
:* AfDs that receive little participation ] like an expired ], following a ].
:* ], ], ] and ] are our newest stewards, following the ].
:* The 2017 appointees for the ] are ], ], ], ] and ]. They will serve for approximately 1 year.

] '''Technical news''' {{anchor|technical}}
:* A ] shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Misplaced Pages have enabled ]. If you haven't already enabled it please consider ].
:* ] should be deployed to the English Misplaced Pages soon. This will extend the current ] by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
:* A ] will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.


---- ----
{{center|{{Flatlist| {{center|{{flatlist|
*] * ]
*] * ]
*]}}}} * ]
}}}}
<!-- <!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)</small>}} -->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 16:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:MusikAnimal@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=767990571 --> <!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1248355798 -->


==Peter Middlebrook==
== Checkuser/networking experience? ==
Thank you for your sensible action on the AfD for ], and particularly for the note on the AfD page + page protection. I think that should probably handle the disruption. Apologies (also to {{u|Izno}}) if my SPI report was a little bit of a mess. The 1 week timeline at AfD puts some time pressure, but I should've at least requested CU. I'll try to do better next time! ] (]) 08:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)


:No worries, SPI is a complicated process even for what should be a pretty straightforward case. You didn't do anything wrong with it! Your filing was fine (better than a lot that I see) and had all the evidence available. I think those accounts are either socks and or were canvassed by the article subject or someone very interested in them, but since the CU was negative the 1-2 edits from each don't give me enough behavioral evidence to prove it. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 15:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
An editor ] for editing from the IP address: 127.0.0.1 while his/her account was blocked. It is not technically possible for anyone to edit from this address without direct access to the wikipedia servers. If you have a chance and you're familiar with checkuser and/or networking can you look into it? ] (]) 20:04, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
:On the advice of Doug Weller I have posted this incident to ] ] (]) 20:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


== SPI investigation clarity ==
== Precious ==


Hi! Wondering if my earlier report on ] before the last user's report was too detailed - it's the first one I'd submitted and felt like I might have overdone it! Thanks, ]<sup>]</sup> 07:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
{{user precious|header="the carrot sometimes works better than the stick"|thanks=for quality articles such as ] and ], for uploading images, for trying to mediate - lighthearted and reflected - even without a cabal, - wikidragon, repeating (6 March 2010):}} --] (]) 18:39, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


:No, I think your report had the right amount of detail. It gave the evidence I needed without me having to spend ages digging up evidence on my own. If all SPIs were that well done, there probably wouldn't be such a backlog at SPI. <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 16:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
== Closed sock investigation ==


:: Ah, good to know! It took me a lot of time so it makes sense why there's such a backlog. Thanks for the feedback, appreciate it! ]<sup>]</sup> 22:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
The Wordsmith, I wanted to know if you have any suggestions as to how I might proceed. The SPI was closed as more or less stale or perhaps not a problem ]. I've asked the closing check user to reconsider based on the recent disruptive behavior. ] Is there an official way to request a reconsideration? Even with intervention I suspect HughD will continue to pester but at least with an official ruling it might be easier to get action taken to deal with the disruptions. Thanks ] (]) 23:25, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
: The socks return. ], ] Despite the evidence the SPI admin simply closed the investigation. Do you have any suggestions? Would an ARE be appropriate in this case? ] (]) 22:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
::I was surprised it got closed without investigating. I'm talking to a sockpuppetry specialist who might be able to give a more definitive answer on whether they're the same person. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 00:18, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
:::Thank you! ] (]) 00:31, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
::::Things are being handled. The conclusive determination and evidence will be up sometime tomorrow. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 01:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
::::: Have you heard any updates? Thanks. ] (]) 13:15, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


== ''The Signpost'': 19 October 2024 ==
::::::Yes, there was a slight delay due to real life schedules. It hasn't been forgotten, I got an update this morning. A thorough investigation like this one can't be rushed. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 16:01, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-10-19}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 14--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 11:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
:::::::Understood and thank you for making sure it gets due consideration. ] (]) 18:49, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1252022219 -->


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
*Sadly the only hint the IP has taken is that Amazon based proxies will be blocked right away. He appears to be sticking to Chicago based IPs now. In the last few days we have three new ones ], ], ] ] (]) 20:15, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
::After a thorough investigation, we've determined that these IPs are the same person and likely HughD. However, there isn't strong enough evidence to mark it as confirmed. So, the investigation is being closed. My advice to you is that if the IP is stalking your contribs and being disruptive, to treat them as any other stalking and disruptive IP would be. I'm sorry that I can't be more help, but I have to go where the available evidence takes me. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 16:04, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
:::As I noted before, I will restore edits reverted by Springee solely for being performed by an IP he alleges to be banned. ] (]) 16:51, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
::::I'm sorry you feel it is wise to support disruptive IPs.
:::The Wordsmith, is there a way to increase the strength of the case. The new batch of IPs are all Chicago area based (same location as HughD) and we have more "HughD" phrasing in the edits over the last few days. Alternatively, can the IP editor be declared disruptive and thus even if the IP isn't ruled HughD, the edits can be treated as vandalism/sock and we can go from there? Also, can the results of the investigation be added to the HughD sock investigation page? ] If other contextual evidence comes up it would be good to have the existing evidence etc in a single location. Thanks ] (]) 17:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


Hello,
::::The only way to increase the strength of the case is to have technical evidence, i.e. if HughD starts editing again. Since he's been inactive for so long, his IP data was purged after 90 days and there's nothing technical tying Hugh to the IP editor. And sure, the IP can be declared disruptive. If he's disrupting things to the point of being block or ban worthy, that can be handled through the normal channels like ]. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 17:50, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
:::::Thanks. Do you think the editor has been disruptive enough for a block at ANI? Certainly if this were ruled to be HughD we would have several grounds on which to block. As an IP we have someone who has edited tendentiously as well as is likely a sock. Would that make a sufficient case to request a block? Of course blocking a single IP is pointless in this case. Would a ruling allow editors to remove posts as vandalism? ] (]) 17:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
::::::Personally, I don't see it accomplishing much, as many of these events are stale. If its disruptive in the future, then report just like we do with anyone else. That's really all I can say on the matter, and I'm not planning on handling this personally until the end of time. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 17:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
::::::In my opinion, undoing good quality edits just because of a feud is disruptive. I haven't seen any edits made by the editor that are grounds for sanctions, in and of themselves. ] (]) 18:04, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
::::::::The edits aren't quality but you support them because they support a POV you are advocating/pushing.
:::::::OK. I'm sorry that we can't do more but I understand the concerns about sanctioning a user who hasn't logged in recently. I was worried that as the IP keeps shifting it's kind of pointless to block. I will request page protection again. Thanks for all of your help! ] (]) 18:08, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
:::::::::What was so disruptive about all these edits? ] (]) 18:27, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
:::::::::I also find it odd that you are accusing the editor of hounding you, but then you've been following him around. If you don't want to deal with him, then following his edits is a bad way of doing that. ] (]) 20:28, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


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 ''''''.
== The Barnstar of Diplomacy ==


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | {{#ifeq:alt|alt|]|]}}


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diplomacy'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | After watching you navigate the recent discussion at ], build a consensus among editors that at first appeared diametrically opposed to one another, and civilly close a contentious discussion I am thoroughly impressed and grateful for your time, skill, and dedication. It is my distinct pleasure to present you a well earned '''Barnstar of Diplomacy'''. Thank you for all you do, ] (]) 03:38, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
|}
:Thanks from me too. ] (]) 08:58, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
: Yes. look for carrot above ;) --] (]) 10:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


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


Kind Regards,
I do not disagree with the substance of your close and am not challenging it, but might it not have been better to let someone who wasn't involved so deeply in the discussion make the call on whether there was consensus? Mainly only slightly miffed I didn't have time to shift my position myself after , which pretty much hit all the notes I wanted to see hit. ] <sup>(])</sup> 11:17, 13 March 2017 (UTC).


]
:I understand your position, but a participant in the appeal closing it is fairly commonplace, and very few admins are actually willing to close something like this. The whole discussion needed to be put out of its misery with decisive action, or it would have continued to circle the drain and cause increasing bitterness and resentment on all sides. You shifting your position was actually one of the major factors I considered in determining that consensus now existed, since all the criteria under which you would support an unblock were unambiguously met. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 13:43, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
==You've got mail!==
<!-- 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 -->
{{you've got mail|subject=|ts=17:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)}}
] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 17:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


==Notice of noticeboard discussion==
== Sunday March 26: ] ==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.&nbsp;The thread is ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:AN-notice--> ] (]) 22:08, 1 November 2024 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – November 2024 ==
{|style="{{divstylesiaaa}}{{border-radius|8px}}"
|-
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%; padding: .4em;"|Sunday March 26: ]
|-
| style="padding-left: .6em;" |
]
]


] from the past month (October 2024).
On the last Sunday of every month, the Boardroom at hosts Action Equals History — a unique opportunity for New Yorkers to learn hands-on in a technology training/workshop session about the mechanics, practices and benefits of Misplaced Pages and the Wikimedia projects. This is an opportunity for all to gather, share and work collectively towards a more robust account of history.


]
For this month, and following on the recent ] campaign, we'll focus on building better ] tools for a variety of different thematic campaigns, and user-testing them with the community. Towards a goal of advancing these tools for wider use with diverse local groups.


] '''Administrator changes'''
*''']'''
:] {{hlist|class=inline
:*'''Date:''' Sunday March 26
|]
:*'''Time:''' 2:00 am - 6:00 pm
}}
:* '''Location:''' . 20 West 29th Street, Manhattan.
:] {{hlist|class=inline
:*<big>'''RSVP:''' or ]</big>
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --] (]) 05:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
:] ]
|}
<small>(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from ].)</small>
<!-- Message sent by User:Pharos@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/NYC/Invite_list&oldid=771350100 -->


] '''Oversighter changes'''
== Administrators' newsletter – April 2017 ==
:] ]

] from the past month (March 2017).

] '''Administrator changes'''
:] ]
:] ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ]


] '''Guideline and policy news''' ] '''Guideline and policy news'''
* Following a ], the ] proposal that went for a trial to refine the ] (RfA) process has been discontinued.
:* Following a discussion on the backlog of , ] to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on ].
* Following a ], ] is adopted as a policy.
:* The ] grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following ].
:*An ] has closed with consensus to allow ] of files. The implementation process is ].
:*After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant ], ] to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.


] '''Technical news''' ] '''Technical news'''
* Mass deletions done with the ] tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. {{phab|T366068}}
:* After a ], moved pages will soon be ] similar to ] and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.

:* ] have been deployed. This extends the current ] by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
] '''Arbitration'''
* {{noping|RoySmith}}, {{noping|Barkeep49}} and {{noping|Cyberpower678}} have been appointed to the ] for the ]. {{noping|ThadeusOfNazereth}} and {{noping|Dr vulpes}} are reserve commissioners.
* Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate from 3 November 2024 until 12 November 2024 to stand in the ].
* The Arbitration Committee is ] for roles such as clerks, access to the COI queue, checkuser, and oversight.
] '''Miscellaneous'''
* An ] is happening in November 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{tl|Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. ]


---- ----
{{center|{{flatlist| {{center|{{flatlist|
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
}}}} }}}}
<!-- <!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 10:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)</small>}} -->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:MusikAnimal@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=773119711 --> <!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1254686817 -->


== ''The Signpost'': 6 November 2024 ==
== Drama ==
Are you just begging to see the drama unfold? I implemented a reasonable solution with the backing of ] that improves the project. Reverting that is silly and really just trying to help ignite the drama.--v/r - ]] 18:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-11-06}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 15--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 08:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
:Posting a diff to an opposer pinging someone else who opposed, and a short statement saying they were canvassed (which does seem to be the case, if a very minor form of it) is not a personal attack. It is attacking the legitimacy of the !vote, not the person. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 19:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1255531917 -->
::I'm not going to bother with this as any further reverting on my part isn't going to help deescalate the situation at all. But, I do firmly disagree with you. Tagging someone you're speaking about in a conversation is a courtesy. It is not canvassing. And accusing someone of canvassing when it's not is a PA.--v/r - ]] 19:07, 10 April 2017 (UTC)


== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==
== David D. Hertz ==


Hello,
Hi Wordsmith, Looks like you deleted this page for a speedy deletion request, after it had been contested. Please advise. BTW, I was actually in the middle of editing to add maintenance tags to it. Thanks. -- ] (]) 19:47, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
:I just dropped a note on your talkpage. You did not actually contest the G11 tag that was placed (unambiguous promotion). You contested A7, saying that a claim of importance was made. That's great, but an article making a claim of importance still meets G11 criteria if it is blatantly promotional, which it was. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 19:55, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
::I respectfully disagree. ] reads "If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text that complies with neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion." -- ] (]) 20:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
:::{{tps}} ''Preferable'' isn't definitive. That's why we have ]. Aside from that, as {{u|The Wordsmith}} pointed out, you removed a tag as a declined A7 when it was tagged as G11. In any case, you've been asked by numerous editors to stop assessing speedies, so you may want to consider that for the time being.<span style=font-size:11px>] <span style="color:#9090C0;letter-spacing:-2px;font-size:9px">❯❯❯</span>]</span> 20:04, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
:::{{ping|IsaacSt}}If a subject is notable" is an important distinction that needs to be made. While a claim of importance was made, and it could arguable be credible, notability has no been established. That clause is intended to mean that if there is a topic who clearly and obviously meets our notability guidelines, for example a ] company, but the article is just written with a PR-like tone, it should be rewritten. That argument doesn't work where the BLP subject is unlikely to meet the GNG at all. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 20:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)


I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
== April 19: ] ==


Take the survey ''''''.
{|style="{{divstylesiaaa}}{{border-radius|8px}}"
|-
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%; padding: .4em;"|Wednesday April 19, 7pm: ]
|-
| style="padding-left: .6em;" |
]
]


Kind Regards,
You are invited to join the ] community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening ] (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at gallery by 14th Street / ] in Manhattan.


]
We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Misplaced Pages editors and new participants.


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming ]s, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities.
<!-- 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_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->


==You've got mail!==
We welcome the participation of our friends from the ] movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.
{{You've got mail|subject=|ts=15:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)}}
] (]) 15:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)


== ''The Signpost'': 18 November 2024 ==
After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-11-18}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 16--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 23:44, 18 November 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
*Wednesday April 19 '''] (] or )'''.
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1258243105 -->
::''7:00pm - 9:00 pm at gallery, 137 West 14th Street''


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
We especially encourage folks to add your <big>]</big> to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --] (]) 18:30, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
|}
<small>(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from ].)</small>
<!-- Message sent by User:Pharos@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/NYC/Invite_list&oldid=771599097 -->


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
== Followup ==
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
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.


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>] (]) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
Following AE ruling you made, I was wondering if you consider acceptable behavior? Note the labeling of other editors and gratuitous Nazi comparisons that serve no purpose other than to inflame. ] (]) 22:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
:Serendipitously, there's also , with some more examples of the same kind of behavior. ] (]) 01:05, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
::Your first diff is unacceptable, but nearly six weeks old. I'm reviewing the thread you posted. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 02:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
:::What's the issue with the first example being 6 weeks old? You now have several examples over several months, including the original complaint, which as you can imagine, was not the first. This unacceptable behavior has been going on for years. You said you were going to do something about it if it happened again. It did. ] (]) 02:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
::::Sorry for the late reply, I've been busy this weekend and haven't checked in. The issue is that blocks and sanctions are intended to be preventative, not punitive. An old diff can help to establish a pattern of ongoing disruption, but a one-off diff six weeks old where the issue did not persist proves that the issue is not ongoing, and thus issuing a sanction would be the very definition of punitive. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 14:12, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
:::::How many diffs of similar behavior would you need? Over what timeframe? I can give you practically as many as you like going back years. There is an ongoing problem. This was mentioned in the AE you closed with "You go back to editing your articles, and I keep track of the people I would have sanctioned. If I see those names again with fresh examples, then the banhammer comes down". ] (]) 19:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
:::::Here's a little of the sort of ongoing problem other editors have to deal with. Note how it's rife with personal attacks, generalizations about whole groups of editors, a whole list of irrelevant stuff inserted for no other reason than to provoke, etc. This time there is no Nazi comparison that I can see, but I have plenty examples of those if you're interested. To be fair, I don't think you are in fact interested so feel free to tell me to get lost. You won't be the first admin to decline to take action against this ongoing abuse. ] (]) 20:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
::::::I'm not sure how old anything is, but I have warned Nishidani in the past about his condescending behavior. Even on the ANI thread, he states that the people who are "against" him are not interested in truth but are nationalistic pov pushers. It is unacceptable that he can continue to insult others with almost every edit of his. In many cases, his insults are lost in his paragraphs of words, which is a shame. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 20:25, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Could you please tell me explicitly that you're not interested in pursuing any evidence relating to this issue so I can move it from my followup list to my disappointments list and move on? ] (]) 01:15, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
:Sorry, this thread slipped my mind. I'll enforce our policies, if you bring evidence of ongoing disruption and incivility. There's nothing I can do with weeks and months-old diffs without evidence that it is continuing, and that a sanction is necessary to prevent more disruption. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 14:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
::You closed an AE with a warning about certain behavior, declining to take action at the time but saying you would if it happened again. It happened again. I supplied a diff of similar (probably even worse) behavior after that AE and the warning you issued. Now there's a new hurdle. It's obvious this guy can get away with constantly treating other editors like shit, I just wish the admins would be more honest about why they allow it. Anyway, thanks for your time, I won't be bothering you again with this. ] (]) 18:13, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


</div>
== Before... ==
</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 -->


== A barnstar for you! ==
...you close the latest I/P AE request, you may want to familiarise yourself with one of the recent threads related to this. With particular attention to the comments by Kingsindian. There is a longterm issue of POV-editing with particular editors in the I/P area which he (Kings) has clearly laid out and the latest issue is just symptomatic of the wider problem. AE etc are generally very bad at handling long-term POV-pushing across articles, and given this particular editors editing, a 'warning' is largely pointless as it does nothing to address the underlying push in pro-Israel/anti-Palestine material. ] (]) 14:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
:I'll review the links you presented, but I have no intention of closing the thread just yet. I want to see more opinions from administrators first. If you have evidence that this editor is a habitual problem, then please present it on the AE and I'm open to stronger measures if the evidence warrants it. The case as it was presented was a simple 1RR issue, not something more long-term, so that's what I based my opinion on. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 14:59, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
== OTD maintenance ==
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Tireless Contributor Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for your tireless contribution at ]. ] (]) 12:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
|}


:Thank you! <span style="font-family:Papyrus, Courier New">]</span><sup><span style="font-family:Papyrus"><small>'']''</small></span></sup> 19:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your edits on ]. Please be advised that when you take out articles for maintenance reasons, that you stick them in the Ineligible section, otherwise nobody will remember that they used to be here and vet them again a year from now. Regards, <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">—''']''' <small>{]}</small></span> 03:52, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
:Got it, thanks. I'm still learning the ropes of Main Page stuff. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 13:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – December 2024 ==
==Disambiguation link notification for May 2==


] from the past month (November 2024).
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (&nbsp;|&nbsp;). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>


]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 09:49, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


] '''Administrator changes'''
== Administrators' newsletter – May 2017 ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''Interface administrator changes'''
] from the past month (April 2017).
:] {{hlist|class=inline
]
|]
] '''Administrator changes'''
|]
:] ] • ] • ] • ]
}}
:] ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ]
:] ]

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


] '''Guideline and policy news''' ] '''Guideline and policy news'''
* Following ], the ] has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the ] within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
:*] has clarified that ] should be emptied upon deletion, but redlinked user categories should not be removed if re-added by the user.
* Following a ], a new speedy deletion criterion, ], has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
:*] regarding proposed changes to the COI policy. Changes so far have included ] that adding a link on a Misplaced Pages forum to a job posting is not a violation of the ].


] '''Technical news''' ] '''Technical news'''
* Technical volunteers can now register for the ], which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.
:*You can now see a list of all autoblocks at ].
:*There is a new ] for adding archives to dead links. Administrators are able to restrict ability to use the tool, and have additional permissions when changing URL and domain data.
:*], ] and ] can now ] when granting ]. <small>(], ])</small>


] '''Miscellaneous''' ] '''Arbitration'''
* The arbitration case '']'' (formerly titled '']'') has been closed.
:*Following ], the ] page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an ] of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
* An arbitration case titled '']'' has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.


---- ----
{{center|{{flatlist| {{center|{{flatlist|
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
}}}} }}}}<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!--
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1259680487 -->
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:MusikAnimal@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=778357646 -->


== ''The Signpost'': 12 December 2024 ==
== Prince Philip ==


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-12-12}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 17, manually published--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 21:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC) </div></div>
First off, thank you for placing full-protection on the log. Two minor bugaboos, though: you forgot to add ] to the article and you forgot to provide a rationale for the full protection (presumably the death rumors?) <span style="border:1px solid;background:#800080">]]]</span> 04:00, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Bri@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1262352523 -->
:], is this really the appropriate protection level, given only a single edit before the protection? Partly playing devil's advocate here, but I'm not entirely sure. ] (]) 05:21, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
:: I concur with Brianga. I think mop only is an overreaction to a single IP vandal edit. Surely a-conf or x-conf would have sufficed unless there was a contrary indication by a vandal. Per ]: ''allowed in situations where blatant vandalism or disruption is occurring and at a '''level of frequency''' that requires its use in order to stop it''. ] <sup>]</sup> 06:05, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
::You're correct, semi would have been the better level. I meant to do that, but it looks like I selected the wrong option. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 17:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
:::From looking at the social media reaction to the big Buckingham Palace meeting, I actually think you did the right thing by full-protecting. Had you not, there would have been massive IP editing claiming (unsubstantiatedly) that Philip had died. <span style="border:1px solid;background:#800080">]]]</span> 14:02, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Purplebackpack89}}, ] prevents IP editing while still allowing registered users a few days old and a couple of edits. ] is also available - 30 days and 500 edits (prevents 99% of vandals). Full protection is not applied preemptively as it restrains good faith editors from making genuine edits. In high profile cases where even experienced editors get into edit wars (Trump's inauguration comes to mind), then full protection is sparingly applied. Anyway, The Wordsmith, it's no big deal - everyone makes mistakes and oversights. ] <sup>]</sup> 10:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


== ''The Signpost'': 24 December 2024 ==
== Hello Wordsmith - Would you be willing to comment on an RFC? ==


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-12-24}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 18--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 00:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
Hi,
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1263792399 -->


==HammerHead (company) deletion==
There is a minor disagreement over at ] Would you be willing to take a look? Cheers! ] (]) 19:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello Wordsmith, regarding the deletion at ], what was the argument that tipped you in favour of deletion? The last comment did say {{tqq|If SRAM Corporation#Hammerhead exists it remains a reasonable target,..}} and it does exist. The only delete vote was based on the nom which was about a gaming company and a different target.<span style="font-family:Segoe Script">]</span><span style="font-size:115%">]</span> 05:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
== Sunday May 21: ] + ] ==


] from the past month (December 2024).
{|style="{{divstylesiaaa}}{{border-radius|8px}}"
|-
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%; padding: .4em;"|Sunday May 21, 10:30 am - 4:30pm: ]
|-
| style="padding-left: .6em;" |
]


<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
The ''']''' is the ]'s first ], being hosted on '''Sunday May 21, 2017''' in ] at The Met Fifth Avenue in New York City.
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">


] '''Administrator changes'''
The Met is excited to make available over 375,000 images of public domain artworks for contribution to Misplaced Pages and Wikimedia Commons from the museum’s collection spanning 5,000 years of art. The event is an opportunity for Wikimedia communities to engage The Met's diverse collection onsite and remotely. The event is a key marker too of The Metropolitan Museum of Art's first Wikimedian-in-Residence program, with resident Richard Knipel (]), along with Wikimedia NYC. We invite you to help enhance Wikimedia communities and platforms with open access images from The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
:] ]
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
The event requires pre-registration. To register, 1) please via The Met's website and 2) add your Misplaced Pages username to the ] on the wikimeetup page. Please check-in with museum staff when you arrive at the Thomas J. Watson Library within the museum.
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]
:] ]


</div>
We also welcome remote participation for the global <big>]</big> (15 May - 30 June, 2017), you can sign up there at ]. --] (]) 16:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
|}
]
<small>(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from ].)</small>

<!-- Message sent by User:Pharos@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/NYC/Invite_list&oldid=776211309 -->
] '''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 ] (]) 15:47, 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 -->

== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ], to which you have , is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or if it should be ].


The discussion will take place at ''']''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
== SRS - clarification ==


To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit ]. Delivered by '']'' (]) 01:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)<!-- User:SDZeroBot/AfD notifier/template -->
Why did you strike your comment? I did not canvass anyone - as a matter of fact, you were the only person I notified and that was only because no one was commenting. The only canvassing occurring is on behalf of Koncorde - he has gotten Mark Bernstein and Art W to come over the page in an effort to support his position. I want to do this the right way. I feel because I am an IP editor, my opinion is being brushed into the trash unnecessarily. '''I have no bad intentions - only to have SRS listed as the sources support.''' ] (]) 16:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
:Why did you notify me? I don't think I've edited that article before, nor participated in previous discussions about that subreddit. And yes, I did see apparant canvassing from the other side as well. In a dispute where both sides appear to be doing something improper, its best to not allow myself to be canvassed into participating in the content dispute. <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">]</span><sup>]</sup> 18:01, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
:For the record, I was brought to the discussion by . Lot of people watch this page; I doubt I will be the only one. Congratulations, you played yourself.--] (]) 18:25, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
:: {{reply|Jorm}} People might say the same about a guy who marries a girl who used to be a guy. Just saying. ] (]) 20:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:02, 10 January 2025

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

This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 19 years, 10 months and 8 days.
Immediate requests      Purge Entries
Candidates for speedy deletion 4
Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages 0
Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations 0
Requests for unblock 37
Misplaced Pages semi-protected edit requests 25
Misplaced Pages extended-confirmed-protected edit requests 47
Misplaced Pages template-protected edit requests 9
Misplaced Pages fully protected edit requests 1
Misplaced Pages conflict of interest edit requests 64
Requested RD1 redactions 5
Open sockpuppet investigations 38
Click here to locate other admin backlogs
Contentious Topics awareness templates
This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: He should not be given alerts for those areas.


A TARDIS for you

A rouge TARDIS (or the closest thing I could find on Commons), for having made a closure so Rouge that its effects travelled through time and were being challenged before you even issued it.
. . .
But to be serious, I appreciate that you undertook to close, and closed so thoughtfully, such a large and complex discussion even as it was getting international attention and pushback. Someone had to do it; the discussion was open for so long as to suggest no-one wanted to do it; I appreciate you doing it. -sche (talk) 16:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
@-sche, CommunityNotesContributor, Chetsford, and Starship.paint: Thank you for the kind words, I'm just glad the discussion is finished and we can move on (at least until the next challenge). I'm sure co-closers Tamzin and Theleekycauldron feel the same way. If you've got any recommendations for something more fun to read than that RFC (admittedly not a high bar) I could use a palate cleanser. Otherwise I think I'll pick up The Hobbit again. The Wordsmith 18:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
The Hobbit sounds like a great palate cleanser! I was reading his Sea-Bell the other day and learning about the neat words Tolkien coined or resurrected in that and other writings (which might interest you, as a wordsmith, if you don't know them already), like ruel-bone and wikt:eucatastrophe. :o -sche (talk) 21:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
You are welcome, the Wordsmith.... Project Hail Mary. starship.paint (RUN) 01:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, I just bought it for my Kindle. The Wordsmith 00:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Thanks for the recommendation, it made excellent beach/pool-side reading. I haven't finished it yet, but I hope to sometime this weekend. The Wordsmith 18:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
You’re welcome! Interesting to have ‘horror’ story reading at the beach! starship.paint (RUN) 05:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Amaze The Wordsmith 18:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for all the work you've done at SPI the past couple days! Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Question

Hey, I have a special interest in improving articles with the 'written with advertisement like language' tag, or similar tags, especially corporate articles written in business talk instead of encyclopedic language. Do you know how I can find a list of such articles, or if there is a wikiproject focused on that? JoeJShmo 23:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) As far as I'm aware, there isn't a WikiProject dedicated to that specifically, but Category:Articles with a promotional tone sounds like what you're looking for. There's 22,000 articles in the category so you shouldn't have a lack of things to do. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! Maybe I'll make a wikiproject eventually ;) JoeJShmo 19:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Just to clarify, there is WikiProject Cleanup that might be of interest though it doesn't focus specifically on promotional articles. The Wordsmith 19:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
That sounds like a great idea, and Clovermoss is right about that category. Fixing promotional articles is a great way to dive in and make a difference. The Wordsmith 18:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

policy question

Hey wordsmith. Hope all is well. I have a question relating to a case I'm involved in. Can a topic ban ever be justified because of a perceived lack of experience and/or policy knowledge? Per ARBPIA, an editor must be EC to edit in certain topics, however, is it up to an admin to determine, even after an editor reached EC, whether that editor has enough experience to be able to edit in that topic? JoeJShmo 21:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I've just gotten back from a vacation, but it seems like this issue was hashed out elsewhere. The Wordsmith 18:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Hi, about this SPI case you handled: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/PakistanHistorian/Archive#24 June 2024. You had temp blocked 2407:D000:F:0:0:0:0:0/48, 92.40.0.0/16 (?) but these still appear to be quite active with the sock network and disrupting quite a lot of pages. Can the block be extended here again?

Thanks Gotitbro (talk) 13:29, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Can you share a few examples of the disruptive edits from this range after the block expired? I'll check to see if there would be any collateral damage, too. The Wordsmith 15:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Well here is the latest one (needs PP for socking), mere hours after a previous IP sock was reverted. Others that I recently reverted include , , , , , , , .
From the 92.40.194.0/23 range, these include: , , , . The 'census update' edits from the range are also likely the same sock. Gotitbro (talk) 07:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm not seeing much risk in blocking the IPv6 range for a longer time, so I'll softblock that one. For the IPv4, it looks like there would be a ton of collateral damage there so it would be a bad idea to block the whole thing. What I can do instead is break it into smaller ranges that exclude most of the legitimate edits, I can do Special:Contributions/92.40.194.0/25 and Special:Contributions/92.40.195.0/24. The Wordsmith 15:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Question regarding SPI

Hi, I see that you've noted that sockpuppetry was a strong possibility in the recent report of AraxesTheThief, but without technical evidence (as CU was declined), you can't be confident to place a block. Can I rerequest CU on that basis, as declining it may potentially let long-term sockpuppetry pass, which you've noted as a strong possibility? Aintabli (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately that's not possible. All the known socks are already stale, so the Checkuser tool won't be able to provide any evidence which is why they already declined it. If there's future sock-like activity from that account or others, a new SPI can be opened and the new behavioral evidence can be evaluated as well. Or if their edits are disruptive, that can be handled through the normal channels. The Wordsmith 13:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Oh okay. We'll have to wait and see then. Thank you for the explanation. It wasn't clear to me that CU wouldn't be useful either way. Wish you a great Friyay. Aintabli (talk) 13:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Sadly the Checkuser tool is more limited than a lot of people think it is. Unless there's another account to compare it to that's edited en.wiki in the last 90 days, the tool is unlikely to show anything except maybe sleepers. After 90 days, IP data for logged-in accounts is generally discarded by WMF policy. For those, behavioral evidence is all we have to go on and we need to be confident in our findings to avoid blocking an innocent editor. Sometimes that unfortunately will result in illegitimate users avoiding blocks, but in my experience they often slip up and give us enough evidence to block sooner or later. The Wordsmith 15:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Wisdom-inc

Thanks for closing the Wisdom-inc SPI. He is still active today on one of the reported IP ranges - Special:Contributions/143.58.176.0/24 10mmsocket (talk) 21:09, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Thomas Hope

I am happy to see you changed Great Britain into US. A foolish mistake by a nitwit.Taksen (talk) 05:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC) Perhaps you can change born in 1704 very childish.Taksen (talk) 05:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC) Also the category 1799 deaths is a mistake.Taksen (talk) 06:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea what this is about. The Wordsmith 20:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, it is about Thomas Hope (banker, born 1704).Taksen (talk) 08:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh, that was reverting a sockpuppet who was adding inaccuracies into articles (especially around estimated dates of birth/death). If you're willing to take responsibility for the edits, you're welcome to make the changes again. Though since Henry Hope's son (also named Henry Hope) was born in Massachusetts, it seems like him moving to the US is correct. The Wordsmith 18:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Massive disruption

Hi, can you have a look at these IP ranges? I think they belong to Anujror as they originated from the same geographical location(Pakistan) and have an obsession with manipulating the result of a page move discussion on Talk:Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty just like the last range that you blocked.

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

CaseofGoliath SPI

Hi The Wordsmith, did you review the evidence I sent to the en-paid queue regarding Elianaisaac? Link WP:Sockpuppet investigations/TheCaseOfGoliath/Archive. S0091 (talk) 17:49, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't have access to that queue, but whoever does is free to take action independently of SPI if they determine it is warranted. The Wordsmith 17:55, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Ok. I wasn't sure if you had access of not. Because it was an open SPI with a CU request, I think they left it up to the CU to review (got a standard response a couple weeks ago before the check) but I will double check. I will be opening up a new one for new socks I found anyway but was waiting until the weekend in case I came across others and might include Elianaisaac again depending on the response I get. Thanks for all the work you do, The Wordsmith. S0091 (talk) 18:10, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Christine-dark

CU is positive and so is behavioral evidence. Hope you can block as soon as possible. Capitals00 (talk) 02:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately SPI is extremely backlogged at the moment. Somebody will get to it as quickly as we can, but if there's vandalism or urgent disruption then the normal venues like WP:AIV are also available and usually have a faster response time. The Wordsmith 04:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

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

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Re. future sockpuppet cases

Hello; given you closed the sockpuppet case I had opened , for future reference, what is the threshold of evidence needed to support a finding of IP addresses being used as sockpuppets? The timing and nature of the IPs' actions seemed quite suspicious to me, even though there weren't many instances to point to.

(Also sorry about all the edits). JSwift49 21:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

The timing is questionable, but not enough by itself. As far as the thresholds for evidence, "more likely than not" is usually enough to at least open an SPI case for either an account or an IP. In addition, the sock or IP needs to actually be doing something forbidden in WP:BADSOCK, rather than something allowed in WP:GOODSOCK or WP:EWLO. Administrators will do their own investigation or ask you for more evidence if needed, but for a positive conclusion the standard is obvious beyond a reasonable doubt that sockpuppetry is occurring. Essentially, if there's another reasonable explanation then we generally need to WP:AGF in the absence of technical evidence.
One other thing that filers don't often ask themselves before opening a case is "What is actually being gained by sockpuppetry here?" In this case, it was two minor rephrasings of a small amount of text, switching from a paraphrase to a quote. It doesn't seem controversial at all, especially in comparison to many of the other contested edits on that page. The IP also has a history of edits, which doesn't have any real overlap with Superb Owl. If he had (for example) been warned for edit warring or approached WP:3RR before the IP started editing, that would be much stronger evidence. As it stands, the more likely explanation is that two people have a similar opinion on how that information should be presented. The Wordsmith 22:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Got it; appreciate the explanation. My rationale at the time was: I had thought the pattern of both IPs (cosmetic edits on random articles, but substantive edits seemingly only on the Electoral fraud or similarly politically charged articles) could be an obfuscation attempt. And I thought they would have something to gain from these edits, as we have devoted a lot of time to disputing phrasing in the article where differences seem relatively minor. JSwift49 13:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

SPI Asphonixm

Hi, could you please review on my recent SPI report on Asphonixm? If you don't have the time to do so, could you at least check whether the report was correctly opened? I'm a bit worried because I messed up the previous one, which was malformed and not properly opened. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 07:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't have time to fully review the case right now, but it looks like it was opened properly. For the previous one, it was missing the {{SPI case status}} template. That template automatically adds it to the categories that put it on the SPI dashboards.
Personally I think filing SPI cases by hand is too fiddly and unreliable, but it's a complex process so it has to be. WP:TWINKLE has a module that fills in the case request for you; I use that so I don't have to deal with all the manual bits. The Wordsmith 18:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 10, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 12:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Draft refund for Mayor's Cup (Missouri–South Carolina)

Hello, you closed Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Mayor's_Cup_(Missouri–South_Carolina).

I'm requesting a DRAFT of this article restored to Draft:Mayor's Cup (Missouri–South Carolina) for further development and the addition of new citations to establish notability of the trophy. Will move to article space only upon significant improvement to the article and ensuring it meets GNG.

Significant coverage of this trophy exists that was not discussed in any previous AFD:

Thanks, PK-WIKI (talk) 06:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done The Wordsmith 18:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Peter Middlebrook

Thank you for your sensible action on the AfD for Peter Middlebrook, and particularly for the note on the AfD page + page protection. I think that should probably handle the disruption. Apologies (also to Izno) if my SPI report was a little bit of a mess. The 1 week timeline at AfD puts some time pressure, but I should've at least requested CU. I'll try to do better next time! Russ Woodroofe (talk) 08:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

No worries, SPI is a complicated process even for what should be a pretty straightforward case. You didn't do anything wrong with it! Your filing was fine (better than a lot that I see) and had all the evidence available. I think those accounts are either socks and or were canvassed by the article subject or someone very interested in them, but since the CU was negative the 1-2 edits from each don't give me enough behavioral evidence to prove it. The Wordsmith 15:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

SPI investigation clarity

Hi! Wondering if my earlier report on Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Geminiwebchickenwing/Archive before the last user's report was too detailed - it's the first one I'd submitted and felt like I might have overdone it! Thanks, originalmess 07:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

No, I think your report had the right amount of detail. It gave the evidence I needed without me having to spend ages digging up evidence on my own. If all SPIs were that well done, there probably wouldn't be such a backlog at SPI. The Wordsmith 16:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Ah, good to know! It took me a lot of time so it makes sense why there's such a backlog. Thanks for the feedback, appreciate it! originalmess 22:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:16, 19 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) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Min968_unban_request. Thank you. Yamla (talk) 22:08, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, The Wordsmith. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:45, 18 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.

Spicy (talk) 15:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 November 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:44, 18 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) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for your tireless contribution at WP:SPI. Maliner (talk) 12:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! The Wordsmith 19:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
readded
removed

Interface administrator changes

added
readded Pppery

CheckUser changes

readded

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

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

The Signpost: 12 December 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

HammerHead (company) deletion

Hello Wordsmith, regarding the deletion at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 18#HammerHead (company), what was the argument that tipped you in favour of deletion? The last comment did say If SRAM Corporation#Hammerhead exists it remains a reasonable target,.. and it does exist. The only delete vote was based on the nom which was about a gaming company and a different target. Jay 💬 05:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

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

Administrator changes

added Sennecaster
readded
removed

CheckUser changes

added
readded Worm That Turned
removed Ferret

Oversight changes

added
readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

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

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of Imakuni? for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Imakuni?, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Imakuni? (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)