| Revision as of 12:57, 11 September 2020 editXeno (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Administrators103,386 edits →Archiving unaddressed discussions after three days: WP:DRN← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:41, 11 September 2020 edit undoJG66 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users56,495 edits →Archiving unaddressed discussions after three days: rNext edit → | ||
| Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
| :You (disruptively - and twice!) reverted a bot archiving a large number of discussions, not just your own. If you want help, speak to me. ]] 12:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | :You (disruptively - and twice!) reverted a bot archiving a large number of discussions, not just your own. If you want help, speak to me. ]] 12:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
| :{{u|JG66}}: ] in question strikes me as something that would be better handled at ]. –]] 12:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | :{{u|JG66}}: ] in question strikes me as something that would be better handled at ]. –]] 12:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
| ::{{u|xeno}}, thank you for the suggestion, and {{u|GiantSnowman}}, further to our discussion elsewhere. 'Fraid to say, I just see ] as yet another area that I'm completely unfamiliar with and looks so time-consuming to engage with. I say this after trying to get the issue addressed here and after having had what I considered a pretty solid case against the same user similarly ignored at AN/3RR last year. The editor's had past form at this noticeboard for ] on the same band's articles (eg, ]; seems to think information can remain unsourced for years; and insists that tacit acceptance of this outweighs key policies. (PaleCloudedWhite's opening statement at that linked AN/I discussion is uncannily spot on, btw, with regard to my experience of this user's approach both in 2019 and over the last week or so.) Yet here ''I am'', having to do all the work, just to get this behaviour and these latest policy violations addressed. | |||
| ::I'm tempted instead to just handle each album article in its own right. At ], it's stated: "Remove the template when you add a citation for a statement." Carliertwo reverted my edit(s), removing the tag, but did not add a source. I can open RfCs for specific examples of original research and puffery, I guess. I'd be happy to ping you both as and when but, really, this is pretty draining and stupid when all I'm trying to do is impose some basic principles that would never be challenged at any other music act's articles. ] (]) 14:40, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:41, 11 September 2020
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Administrators' noticeboard page. |
|
 | This is not the page to report problems to administrators, or discuss administrative issues.
This page is for discussion of the Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard page (and some of its subpages, including /Incidents).
|
 | This noticeboard has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
 Archives | |||||||||||||||||
Index
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 8 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
New proposal
I have made a new proposal regarding WP:ANI at Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(proposals)#Make_future_WP:ANI_threads_individual_pages,_like_WP:AFD Ed6767 talk! 01:58, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- I'd like that. It was rejected before. Maybe now is the time. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:15, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Kevin Deutsch article editathon
Courtesy link: Talk:Kevin Deutsch § The Rolling Stone correction to their Kevin Deutsch story
Needs admin attention to deal with problematic user snowfire. FTIIIOhfive (talk) 03:03, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
- And you're warned for personal attacks. Acroterion (talk) 03:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
- Added a courtesy link to the discussion in question. There appear to be more personal attacks with
But especially not that hater snowfire!
in Talk:Kevin Deutsch#White privilege among these editors. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:18, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Yeah we don't want to keep going. Let's just compromise like we agreed. Harassment not going to happen. LaneyJfromHoward (talk) 04:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Here’s the ANI discussion: and the SPI investigation: Result: five socks blocked, including the OP here (FTIIIOhfive) and the commenter above (LaneyJfromHoward). -- MelanieN (talk) 08:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Protection of Cavoodle page
Hi there, I'm not sure if this is possible but would we be able to protect the 'Cavoodle' page please. It keeps getting vandalised and redirected to the 'cross breed' page. Although they are not recognised by a number of kennel clubs, they are recognised as a designer breed. For example the are searched for on Google about five time the number of times people search for a 'Norwegian Lundehund' which has it's own page that does not receive vandalism. There are a couple of bad eggs which have nothing better to do with their time than to vandalise pages they disagree with but I don't think they should be able to vandalise pages to give themselves a little sense of power. Leo — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoRussoLeo (talk • contribs) 13:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
- LeoRussoLeo, this sort of request should be made at Misplaced Pages:Requests for Page Protection. GeneralNotability (talk) 13:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoRussoLeo (talk • contribs) 13:27, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
- For the record, there is a consensus against this, so if necessary the redirect will be the version protected. Primefac (talk) 15:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
- Primefac, ha - now I remember why this is so familiar, I temp-blocked LRL as one of my first SPI clerk tasks! Shame on me for forgetting about that. Might end up needing that indef after all... GeneralNotability (talk) 15:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Archiving unaddressed discussions after three days
After I reverted a bot archiving a report I filed here three days ago and that hasn't been addressed by an admin, GiantSnowman has reverted me. Why is this, and why can't a report remain on this noticeboard for ... I don't know, a week, until it has received some attention from a non-involved editor or admin? JG66 (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- You (disruptively - and twice!) reverted a bot archiving a large number of discussions, not just your own. If you want help, speak to me. GiantSnowman 12:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- JG66: The incidents thread in question strikes me as something that would be better handled at WP:DRN. –xeno 12:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- xeno, thank you for the suggestion, and GiantSnowman, further to our discussion elsewhere. 'Fraid to say, I just see WP:DRN as yet another area that I'm completely unfamiliar with and looks so time-consuming to engage with. I say this after trying to get the issue addressed here and after having had what I considered a pretty solid case against the same user similarly ignored at AN/3RR last year. The editor's had past form at this noticeboard for WP:NPOV on the same band's articles (eg, in January 2017; seems to think information can remain unsourced for years; and insists that tacit acceptance of this outweighs key policies. (PaleCloudedWhite's opening statement at that linked AN/I discussion is uncannily spot on, btw, with regard to my experience of this user's approach both in 2019 and over the last week or so.) Yet here I am, having to do all the work, just to get this behaviour and these latest policy violations addressed.
- I'm tempted instead to just handle each album article in its own right. At Template:Citation needed#Uses, it's stated: "Remove the template when you add a citation for a statement." Carliertwo reverted my edit(s), removing the tag, but did not add a source. I can open RfCs for specific examples of original research and puffery, I guess. I'd be happy to ping you both as and when but, really, this is pretty draining and stupid when all I'm trying to do is impose some basic principles that would never be challenged at any other music act's articles. JG66 (talk) 14:40, 11 September 2020 (UTC)