Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:11, 21 October 2024

I used to be called Beeblebrox. I'm fine with it if anyone still calls me that, or Beebs, or whatever.

tracks of previous discussions

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 Archive 39 Archive 40 Archive 41 Archive 42 Archive 43 Archive 44 Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48 Archive 49 Archive 50 Archive 51

• 3 bot-reported usernames for administrator attention
• 0 user-reported usernames for administrator attention
• 5 bot-generated requests for intervention against vandalism
• 4 user-generated requests for intervention against vandalism
• 22 sockpuppet investigations
• 7 Candidates for speedy deletion
• 4 Fully protected edit requests
• 2 Candidates for history merging
• 1 requests for RD1 redaction
• 65 elapsed requested moves
• 2 Pages at move review
• 21 requested closures
• 18 requests for unblock
• 0 Wikipedians looking for help from administrators
• 9 Copyright problems

• recent changes
• purge this page
• view or discuss this template

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).

Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.

−

Replaceable non-free use File:Fuad Shukr handout.png

Thanks for uploading File:Fuad Shukr handout.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Misplaced Pages. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 09:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Could Greg page be blanked too?

I noticed an admin blanked a page of a similar user who did something similar with populating Misplaced Pages with family genealogy junk with junk sources. Special:Diff/1064051435. Do you think Greghenderson2006's user page qualifies for this blanking too or maybe even deletion? Graywalls (talk) 20:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I actually just undid the blanking of RAN's talk page because I don't see an actual legitimate reason for having blanked it. Users can have almost anything they want on their user page, blocked or not. If there was any indication that the content on Greg's userpage was part of ongoing disruption from him I would fully support it, but at the monent I don't see any reason to do so. Just Step Sideways 21:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

September 2024

One of your statements got crossposted to the user talk page of someone globally locked for unspecified sockpuppetry. I found them in the history of Macdonald triad where there has been other suspicious activity recently, chiefly this standalone edit:

I'm on my sock hunter arc RN... So, should I report this, and if so, where? Biohistorian15 (talk) 14:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not at all sure than one edit from over a month ago is going to be found compelling at WP:SPI, but if you are convinced it is a slam dunk, Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Daner's Creek would be the correct venue for reporting it. Just Step Sideways 21:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. The edit just seemed very strange to me. Especially because it was their only one. Biohistorian15 (talk) 21:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

indef-blocked user pages

WRT - if the user is indefinitely blocked for violations of Misplaced Pages policies, and they're not coming back after however many years, we're distributing their user page content because of ... some sort of a memorial? A little shrine to Misplaced Pages abuse? :) But more seriously, if we're not even telling other users that this happened, we're not doing this history right. There isn't even a {{blocked}} template anywhere on there. --Joy (talk) 06:42, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

As I stated when reverting, I am not aware of any precedent or guidance that supports this action. If you can point me to where it says we do that I'll happily revert, but I'm pretty darn sure it is not standard procedure to blank user pages. If you'd like to change that feel free to propose it at the appropriate venue. Just Step Sideways 19:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

On the other hand I have revoked his talk page access, as it has been six years of him editing the talk page without filing an appeal. Just Step Sideways 19:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm just trying to follow some of the basic tenets of encyclopedia - it should describe things as they are. Leaving the userspace writings of an indefinitely blocked user verbatim creates the false impression in whoever sees that - that this user is still just another user, in good standing.

This is something I would see either blanked or marked.

Blanking is mentioned as remedy for inappropriate content in WP:UP - obviously to what extent this content is inappropriate is moot, and I don't mind your revert if you think it isn't.

Marking is why we have templates like {{uw-blockindef}} etc. I don't know offhand how to measure how often this is done, as the templates are not transcluded but substituted, but it is mentioned as something normal by WP:BP. --Joy (talk) 20:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I just noticed now that the marking exists at User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), thanks. Still a bit odd to have all that at the user page itself, but hey. --Joy (talk) 20:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

BTW, WP:UP#GOALS says Excessive unrelated content includes ... information ... not closely related to Misplaced Pages's goals. So if a user's been indef-blocked, 100KB of their user page content can hardly be considered closely related to Misplaced Pages's goals. --Joy (talk) 20:53, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Blocking templates are normally placed on the talk page of the user who is blocked, to inform them why they are blocked and instruct them on how to appeal, and the user is perfectly free to remove such notices as well. None of this is any sort of new policy by any means.

Nobody brought up the user page as a problem in the discussion that led to the block, and you haven't really indicated which parts of it are a problem now, it seems more like you are concerned that there is not a notice letting everyone know he is blocked. We moved away from doing that in most cases, again, quite some time ago.

There is a gadget in your preferences that will strikeout the usernames of blocked users, and also a script, User:PleaseStand/userinfo.js that shows user rights, account age, block status, and most recent edit. I find both quite helpful for quickly getting a base reading on who I'm talking to. Just Step Sideways 20:57, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

The entire blob is the problem, such as it were, because the user pages are meant to have a purpose, to help us collaborate (WP:UP), and I don't quite see how an effectively immutable snapshot of a user page of an indefinitely blocked user can achieve such a purpose. But, again, whatever, not a huge deal.

Anyway, why did we move away from notices about user status in most cases quite some time ago, where is that documented?

I actually notice when someone is blocked in the user popups, so I myself don't have a problem noticing this, it's the other readers and editors who might not have that. --Joy (talk) 15:12, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

UTRS request

I don't have a particularly strong feeling either way about blanking the user page. However, I am puzzled by your removing of talk page access. I can see no reason at all for doing that. The blocking policy says "editing of the user's talk page should be disabled only in cases of continued abuse of their user talk page, or when the user has engaged in serious threats, accusations, or attempts at outing that must be prevented from re-occurring"; none of that comes anywhere near to applying in this case. The reason you gave on the user talk page was "While we do allow blocked users some latitude on their own talk page, just coming by to delete things off your talk page without even attempting to get unblocked over such a long period of time just seems unproductive and frankly, unhealthy". "Just seems unproductive"? Maybe, but so what? Is it disrupting the project? Is it offensive? "Just seems ... unhealthy"? I find it difficult to see this as meaning any more than that you personally don't like it. Why should your opinions as to what is or is not healthy be imposed on an editor? Both your message on that user's talk page and your message above refer to the fact that he has not requested an unblock; well, now he has, at UTRS. Is there any good policy-compliant reason why talk page access should not be restored? JBW (talk) 21:30, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

I left a detailed note on the UTRS request just now. Just Step Sideways 22:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

And just for clarity's sake, see also the above section titled "Could Greg page be blanked too?" regarding the blanking issue. This is why it concerned me as setting a precedent. Just Step Sideways 22:02, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Revision deletion

Hi, could you delete this revision, it contains a phone number. Thanks. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 06:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)  Done --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:08, 23 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 💬 12:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment about your ANI close

I'm not sure if it should have been closed at all, it doesn't seem like there was much of a conclusion to it (and yes sure, you're an admin, but it didn't read like you were advising them as an admin, but instead summarizing it - but maybe that's just me), but if you're going to close it you should at least mention that the OP was page blocked because of their hostile edit summaries? – 2804:F1...EA:6CE2 (talk) 04:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Assuming we're talking about this, that seems like a sperate issue from their .... unlikely accusations. Just Step Sideways 21:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Hm, fine. I just had both forgotten that you were an admin (before editing my message to acknowledge you are) and read it as if it was a summarization closure - from that point of view it seemed insufficient to just give advice that the discussion (that ended days before) didn't give and not mention the boomerang block. Sorry. – 2804:F1...92:375B (talk) 05:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

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

Administrator changes

• Asilvering
• Significa liberdade

• Good Olfactory
• Hesperian
• I JethroBT
• TommyBoy
• Woody

CheckUser changes

• Barkeep49
• Izno

• Doug Weller
• Spicy

Guideline and policy news

• Administrator elections are a proposed new process for selecting administrators, offering an alternative to requests for adminship (RfA). The first trial election will take place in October 2024, with candidate sign-up from October 8 to 14, a discussion phase from October 22 to 24, and SecurePoll voting from October 25 to 31. For questions or to help out, please visit the talk page at Misplaced Pages talk:Administrator elections.
• Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether there is a consensus to have an administrator recall process.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Historical elections has been closed.
• An arbitration case regarding Backlash to diversity and inclusion has been opened.
• Editors are invited to nominate themselves to serve on the 2024 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission until 23:59 October 8, 2024 (UTC).

Miscellaneous

• If you are interested in stopping spammers, please put MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist on your watchlist, and help out when you can.

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Need a help need copies of deleted articles

I need 2 pages Dalit Dastak and National Dastak.I found your name in the list of Misplaced Pages administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles hence requesting you. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done Now at User:Pharaoh of the Wizards/Dalit Dastak and User:Pharaoh of the Wizards/National Dastak. Just Step Sideways 20:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your prompt response.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

File:Fuad Shukr handout.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Fuad Shukr handout.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Forced Islamization of the Samaritans"

Hello

I wrote yesterday a new article "Forced Islamization of the Samaritans", i find out today that it qas deleted completely, i don't understand why. Can you explain it to me please? Enhazaam (talk) 06:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Enhazaam: Did you check the deletion log? There are some blue links in the entry: try them. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Could you please explain the connection to the Israel-Arab conflict? Enhazaam (talk) 10:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Enhazaam:, that kind of article would take an experienced editor a lot of work just to maintain neutrality and faithful adherence to reliable sources. You may have achieved that; I can't see what you wrote. But unfortunately it does not matter because topics associated with the Israel-Arab conflict have been placed under restrictions by the arbitration committee as a result of previous disruption. The link in the log takes you to the relevant page—WP:CT/A-I (or, 'Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict'). The restriction that applied to you, unfortunately, is that only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area. You are not, so you cannot. SerialNumber54129 11:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello

I fail to see how the Samaritans have anything to do with the Israeli-Arab conflict. They are ethno-religious people who have been persecuted for centuries. I simply wrote an article about the known fact, that they were persecuted and forced into Islam following the Levant being conquered by the Arabs.

The Israeli-Arab conflict is not an issue related to this part of history. Enhazaam (talk) 12:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, neither I nor the person who nominated the article for deletion have accused you of acting with bad faith or malice. However, the defined scope of this contentious topic designation instructs users that it is to be broadly interpreted, and in light of that I think it is a reasonable position that the forced Islamization of a group of Hebrew people dwelling within the borders of historical Israel is subject to the WP:CTOP rules placed by the Arbitration Committee. Just Step Sideways 19:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your clarification on the subject. Enhazaam (talk) 11:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello

I'm sorry to open this again. It's just I put a lot of work into the article... Will I be able to republish the article at some point? When will that be possible? I just want to be sure, so that I don't work for nothing... Thank you Just Step Sideways in advance. Enhazaam (talk) 11:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Hypothetically you can re-create it as soon as your account is extended-confirmed. However I would also note that shortly before it was deleted it was tagged for WP:NPOV issues as well. My suggestion would be that when the time comes, I could undelte it and draftify it for you so that could be worked out first. Just Step Sideways 19:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

That would be very kind of you. Thank you! Enhazaam (talk) 14:33, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

• For the benefit of any other confused British or Irish stumbling on this topic - it was about the Samaritans, not The Samaritans. Cabayi (talk) 11:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Soft deletion

Hello, JSS,

I see you are becoming active in closing AFDs. If a discussion just has a deletion nomination and one editor arguing for Deletion, our regular closers close these discussions as "Soft Deletions" per WP:NOQUORUM. This is due to the low participation in the discussion and this closure allows for restoration of the article at a later time should an editor wish to work on the article and improve it. This doesn't happen with a straight Deletion closure. Our biggest problem in AFDLand these days is low participation in most discussions and a Soft Deletion acknowledges that fact.

If you use XFDcloser, which I hope you do, you'll notice that you can check a box to make the deletion a Soft Delete. Please consider doing this in the future if you agree with the policy I linked to. Thank you. Liz 23:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

I've been using it when there seems to be a compelling reason to do so. It is a shame that so many AFDs seem to either attract either way too many comments or almost none at all. Just Step Sideways 23:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh, and realizing the utility of XFD closer is exactly what led to me getting active in this again. It's so easy now. Just Step Sideways 23:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Closing Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag (2nd nomination) was never going to be a walk in the park. The creating editor (autobiographer) deserved a consensus, and I believe that she now has one. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Faddle 🇺🇦 07:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I was bored and thought "I'll close some AFDs" and of course that was the last one open for the day because nobody wanted to deal with it. Just Step Sideways 17:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Otherways

Hello, JSS,

Unfortunately, this article isn't eligible for Soft Deletion as it either was PROD'd in 2019. Soft Deletions are like PRODs, articles are only eligible for a Soft Deletion if a) they haven't been PROD'd or to AFD before and b) there are no Keep votes. It's important to review the article page history. So, I think this AFD will have to be closed as a straight Delete. I hope my earlier message wasn't confusing.

Thank you for helping out at AFDLand, we can always use a few more discussion closers! Liz 23:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Well dammit, I have to admit I did not check the talk page before choosing that option. That's entirely on me. Just Step Sideways 23:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Twinkle Works

Thank you for helping me get Twinkle on my account. Apologies again for the ANI post. Thanks, TeaLoverHistoryGuy (talk) 23:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Anytime, it's a great tool that I've been using for a very long time. Just Step Sideways 01:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Wikipediocracy-related conduct and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Sincerely, Dilettante 19:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)