User talk:RickinBaltimore - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Henia Perlman (talk | contribs) at 23:09, 2 July 2017 (→Henia: taking you up on your offer to answer her questions. Thank you.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:09, 2 July 2017 by Henia Perlman (talk | contribs) (→Henia: taking you up on your offer to answer her questions. Thank you.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 19 as User talk:RickinBaltimore/Archive 18 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

Archives

Fanto

Hi Ricky, On the 20th April 2017 you removed the page Fanto due to a lack of third party articles. Can you confirm that an article now discovered cover fantasy tennis, written by fantasy football portal is sufficient?

In June 2017, Fantasy Sports Bloggers, Fantasy Football Portal published an article explaining how Fantasy Tennis worked. In the article they used Fanto’s point scoring system to help educate their readers on how Fantasy Wimbledon 2017 can be played. ‘

Many thanks

Eiffel Software

It's not clear to me why you deleted "Eiffel Software". The page had been there for (I think) a long time, the company that it talks about has existed for over 30 years (1985), the notoriety is clear, and it was referenced from several others on Misplaced Pages, e.g. Eiffel (programming language. It must have been an error.

I recreated a page with the information I have. I probably did not do it the right way since I am not a Misplaced Pages expert; you are welcome to restore the original page which I think was OK. Feedback welcome. Thanks. Santa barbarians (talk) 10:39, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Beis Shabani

Why you deleted my page, when now in 2017 i ll be back again as a artist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beisshabani234 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Creating an autobiography is something we highly discourage. Also, until you clearly meet our notability guidelines through independent reliable sources you should not have this article recreated. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:27, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

-- But it says is acceptable editing biography about yourself.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beisshabani234 (talk • contribs) 09:25, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Let me quote WP:AUTO - "Writing an autobiography on Misplaced Pages is an example of conflict of interest editing and is strongly discouraged. Editing a biography about yourself is acceptable only if you are removing unambiguous vandalism or clear-cut and serious violations of our biography of living persons policy." This does not count for creating an article. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:11, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Henry B. Fried

Could you please restore this article. I had checked it for notability and copyvio after the banned user created it. --Racklever (talk) 17:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I can sure thing, give me a few moments. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:07, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

please make sure you update the page and add citations for notability, as the page could be nominated at Afd. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:09, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I understood that the purpose of CSD-G5 was so that a blocked user cannot have the satisfaction of seeing their work preserved in the encyclopedia. I checked all the new Novonium sockpuppet article creations to see if any other editor had made a substantial contribution - found one definite case where I added a talk page note, and two others which I just passed by. In a case like the above it might be better to userfy the article to Racklever's userspace and let him/her create a new article based on the same sources. I don't believe that the article created by the sockpuppet should survive - and I see it has now been deleted again. PamD 18:32, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I just saw that. If Racklever wants, I can userfy a draft for them. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:35, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Islamic Political Science Mafia

I'm pretty sure the Islamic Political Science Mafia that you blocked is block evading, using 79.76.95.187. Yintan 18:07, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, rather obvious one. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Dragon Burn

Please send me the deleted article material so I may improve it. Ellesaye (talk) 22:54, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Here you go. Let me know if you need anything else. RickinBaltimore (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Why have you deleted my article?

Why did you delete my article, without even warning me? I've been working on it for 6 months! You mention copyright infringement, but if you look at the history you'll see this issue was raised and resolved over 6 months ago. MisterMcHugh (talk) 13:45, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

You were warned on your talk page about this actually prior to the deletion. This was over a month ago, but at the time of the deletion a large portion of the article was a direct copy and paste from http://doverdlc.blogspot.ca/2014/04/what-is-dlc-what-does-dlc-do.html. Before any deletion I may made for a copyright violation, I check to see whether there is a violation in place. The page was largely copied from the above website, which resulted in the deletion. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:08, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Why have you ignored the history of this article, I ignored your warning as I assumed it must have been mistaken, as this issue had already been resolved, as I've already stated, why don't you have a look at the history before you delete? I would direct you to the history in question, but I cannot, because you've deleted the article. As best I can recall, I resolved the issue, as I am the owner of the original content, as instructed by Diannaa here:

Did you even look at the thread relating to the work I've been doing on this here? https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Mistermchugh

″"If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Misplaced Pages to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials."

I followed these instructions, added the necessary permissions to the blog, which you can see at the bottom: "The text of this webpage is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)."

As a result, the request to delete was revoked, until you came along a rehashed the whole thing, only after I've spent hours working on it over several months. MisterMcHugh (talk) 10:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

June 2017

Are you joking ? deleting my article ? what is your point ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabioddss (talk • contribs) 14:55, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The point is a few things actually. Number one, please read over WP:AUTO, as autobiographies are STRONGLY discouraged. Secondly, your article showed nothing on how you meet our guidelines for notability, which is a necessity. Finally, there were no reliable sources of any kind to show how you could be notable. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Declined G13

You declined a G13 with the comment that the creator made edits in Feb. The Feb edit appears to be a page move from userspace to draft space by a reviewer using the reviewing scrip. The creater is a blocked editor who has not edited it for over 6 months. Please take a look and reconsider. thanks Legacypac (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Actually I was looking at the edits here: and here: . Both were done February of this year, which was why I declined the G13. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

ok can you just call me blind sorry. Legacypac (talk) 09:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

It's all good, no problem. It happens! RickinBaltimore (talk) 10:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Michael Christo

Rick can I please have the contents of my page returned back to me Draft:1.61 London - and could you point me in the right direction to get this approved - I want to rewrite and make the necessary changes

Sure thing, I'll be at a computer to do so shortly. RickinBaltimore (talk) 10:11, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Rick - new to this so any pointers on it that would be great and i will amend the article. Can you please let me know when the link is active so i can start adjusting. thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Christo (talk • contribs) 10:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok I've placed the text at User:Michael Christo/sandbox for you to work on. The issue for deletion was that it was advertising for the building, rather than an encyclopedic article. For a better idea of how the page should look, look over Charles Center or 20 Fenchurch Street for examples of how these articles are written from a neutral, non-advertising viewpoint. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Uhh...

Regarding this, whatever is going on on the article may be a content dispute, but this is almost certainly the same talk page vandal from yesterday see User:Onel5969's talk page history. TimothyJosephWood 13:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

You know putting 2 & 2 together I SHOULD have figured that out. I knew the report wasn't legit though, so I got that going for me, which is kind of nice. Thanks for the heads up. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:23, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Looks they are IP hopping as well, even after page protection. No blocks handed out yet that I saw though. Thoughts? RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:25, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Not really sure. Looks like my report yesterday just sat around until it was removed as stale. I'm no expert in range blocks, and maybe it might help to find someone who is in case this becomes "a thing". And its really up to One5969 whether they want to try a short semi of their talk page to dissuade them. I guess for now we wait. TimothyJosephWood 13:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Ben Bradley

Noticed that you deleted Ben Bradley (politician), but this was created before Ben Bradley was changed from being an article about a fictional character to one about the politician. Am I right in thinking that Ben Bradley should have been deleted, and Ben Bradley (politician) then moved to Ben Bradley? Edwardx (talk) 21:34, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Bit of a farm here

Hi Rick. Sorry, this tme of month agan :) In May you deleted Entripy and blocked User:Entripy. they changed their username (correctly, of course) to User:Lisa.Evans, who reproduced the same article. Also, User:WriteLisaEvans was created, which I mentioned here, and this account also produced Draft:Entripy Custom Clothing. Further to all this (!) User:Lisa.Evans has (probably in good faith) been spamming the contents of the article on her talk and at the Teahouse. It's a bit of a Full House I'm afraid. Thanks for any help. Cheers, — O Fortuna 16:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Oops- didn't see you were off for a week. Hope you booked paid leave :p have a good one. — O Fortuna 10:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Tis back, and I'm wondering if it's been handled? RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome back to the madhouse :) actually I'm not sure it has- having said that, I don't think any of those accounts have edited since 12th. Stricly there's two Lisa Evanses running around I guess. But most importantly, there's been no Entripy-related spam. — O Fortuna 14:03, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Awesome, off to trying to create and fix articles on the wonderfulness that is BaltimoreLink. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Borobi (mascot)

Did you try reading the article? The mascot is real, the article is utter total bullshit. If the mascot is worth mentioning, it can be done in the parent article. Please revert your edits. 91.155.195.247 (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

This is what happens when you come back from vacation and your mind isn't all here. I've made it a redirect to the Commonwealth Games article and will expand that section a bit. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:07, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me why I quit editing Misplaced Pages though. That'll hold me another year or two before I relapse again. 91.155.195.247 (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, Henia didn't mean to delete

Thank you for your understanding.Henia Perlman (talk) 23:54, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Kulaperry

Could you compare the current version of this draft to the one you deleted a few weeks ago? How likely is it that the author is yet another a sockpuppet? Thanks in advance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:45, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Looks like a duck to me I'd suggest a SPI filing. Looking at the text though it's certainly duckish. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Typo garbles at Talk:Henia Perlman

Hi RickinBaltimore,

I normally wouldn't bother you or anyone for a typo, but because Henia is not a native speaker, and one of the garbles was a doozy, would you mind taking another look at your kind hand-edited message at User talk:Henia_Perlman#June 2017 3? See word #5 "pernot" and (minor:) 'her' instead of 'here' in 2nd sentence. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 05:43, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

What in the world? I fixed it. I have NO idea how I typed that poorly. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:39, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

RE: BaltimoreLink Help

Hi RickinBaltimore,

Thanks for your message about BaltimoreLink! Yes, I have been chipping away at making edits due to the new system, and you are definitely right about it being a lot of work! I've been wondering for awhile why there hasn't been many contributors, but it must be due to it being so new and overwhelming. So far, I've only moved pages of routes that were entirely replaced by a route (i.e. CityLink Red and CityLink Lime, and several LocalLink routes) to their new designation. I am trying to keep as much of the old articles in tact and relevant as possible. You may have also seen on the MTA NavBox that I have created a new section for CityLink routes (very primative information) with just CL Red and Lime linked. The navbox also features the new LocalLink routes with the old route number in parenthesis. For routes that are completely different (and simply crazy complicated!) I put a notification box on the top stating the information needs to be updated to reflect changes to the system. I would love to help out with the editing - let me know if you have any ideas! Thanks, Scott218 (talk) 15:23, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I started in my sandboxes with the list of routes and CityLink Orange route. As I get time I'm adding to it, but this is a LOT of work. I did post for help with the Transit wikiproject and the Baltimore Task Force. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused

I nominated Kummanady for A10, because the version that I saw looks an awful lot like some kind of attempted smear via slang that was derivative of Kummanam Rajasekharan. But... the version that I saw before tagging had actual Malay in it, and... just isn't the version that was in the single revision of it prior to my tagging. Then I see you deleted it earlier A7, G11, which is odd, since it shouldn't categorically qualify for A7. Then I'm looking around for a mirror of what it might have been and I find a cached version, similar in meaning to the article I saw, but also not A7 eligible. I'm confused. TimothyJosephWood 17:54, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I could have sworn I got that for G10 as an attack page (which it pretty much was). I believe someone else added the A7 tag right before I deleted it (and I just deleted the NEW version again as a G10, because it's an attack page on a public figure). RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:56, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I still feel like I just saw a glitch in the matrix or something. Because the version I nomd A10 was identical to the version in the revision after I nominated it. But after I nominated it, the version that was in the revision prior was different, without the Malay. Illuminati. TimothyJosephWood 18:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Oooh. I'll bet I know what happened. I'll bet I opened the previous version before you deleted it, and then tabbed over to it after you deleted it, but also after it was recreated, so when curator tried to curate the old article, it just applied it to the new one. TimothyJosephWood 18:07, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Inception level editing right there. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, had something similar happen the other day, I moved an article, and a second later at the same time Oshwah deleted it, but deleted it under the previous name, so the delete followed the move, but by the time I followed the move screen through to the article, it had been recreated under the name I moved it to with completely different content and no history. TimothyJosephWood 18:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Shhh, that's the illuminati. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:20, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Doe Boy

I do not understand why deleted my page I was working on. I did not even have it go live, it was simply in my sandbox. I am writing this on behalf of Doe Boy, I am his Brand/Marketing Manager. Can you please assist me in recovering that article? I was no where near finished and had content to add/delete. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben RBMG (talk • contribs) 01:25, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

The page was removed as advertising for Doe Boy, not as an encyclopedic article. Also, Doe Boy doesn't appear to meet our general notability guidelines, which would end up being another reason for deletion. Finally, I would suggest reading over our conflict of interest policy as you have an admitted COI with the subject. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:26, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Blocking

Kudos for blocking that account which vandalized the page Ben Gummer. --Daffy123 (talk) 06:54, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Henia is accepting Rivertorch's Proposal

Good morning,

I tried to post my acceptance at administrator board, but it was closed.

It seems that there was a consensus with Rivertorch’s thoughtful proposal:

Henia agrees not to edit the article directly for a predetermined interval (at least the remainder of this month), instead proposing all of her changes on the talk page. If after the end of the month, more time is needed, I agree to review the situation.

I welcome the help of Carole and all editors with citations format, content relevancy, and conformity with wiki rules.

Thank you all for your time, patience, and Rivertorch for your kind intervention.

Have a great day! Henia Perlman (talk) 14:13, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Rachelle/Henia....

Rick, I noticed you weighed in at AN/I on the Henia/Rachelle thread so wanted to discuss this issue somewhere on-wiki, didn't know quite where that should be, am pinging @Rivertorch:, @CaroleHenson:, & @Ealdgyth: here as well.
A couple of things:

I am finding this editor's usage of two concurrent accounts to be very troubling. The editor has to use one or the other, otherwise, no matter their supposed intent, they are socking. I noticed that on the Wannsee Conference article, they did edits in May shortly one after the other from the two different accounts and they are continuing to do the same recently on Rivertorch's user talk and elsewhere. The timing between the usage of the two different accounts is very close together in some instances (see Editor Interaction Utility) - 5 minutes/52 minutes. Also, back in May this editor stated they would only use one account, that has obviously not been the case after that statement.
There wasn't a decision or agreement about this editor not editing The Holocaust or Talk:The Holocaust, was there? It initially seemed from the AN/I thread that a topic-ban or article/talkpage-ban was in the works but then the editor was blocked.
I honestly don't know what to do and what the best outcome for this editor might be. This editor seems to have good intent but more-experienced editors have been mentoring them quite a bit, spending a lot of time explaining Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines (especially on Talk:The Holocaust...), responding to their posts on The Holocaust talkpage and I am just not seeing that much of a discernible improvement.
I also find it somewhat odd that on June 25 this editor asks for help from an admin (as both Rachelle and Henia within 2 days of each other), asks for help from Rivertorch, but then on June 26 declines any help from Carole.

Thanks for listening. I thought about filing an AN/I report but I try to avoid those like the plague and, besides, I don't think an AN/I report is appropriate so soon after their block was lifted. And I would have posted this discussion to one of the editor's 2 known user talkpages but I am not convinced they would respond... Shearonink (talk) 16:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Actually an AN/I report would have been perfectly fine I think. My reason for the block was that Henia was continuing to make the same edits that they were repeatedly told by multiple editors (including an admin) not to make. This was a short block (31 hours), and I thought the matter was settled. I wasn't aware of the multiple accounts however, that is clear socking and I would agree one needs to be blocked. There's a lot more to be concerned about it appears, so please by all means go to AN/I with this. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

At this point, I'm done playing mentoring games. The editor has rejected the various mentoring offers, so as far as I'm concerned, they don't want to be considered a newbie editor and I don't need to worry about WP:BITE. Now, I don't generally bite anyway, but I'm not going to make allowances any more either. If someone wants to edit on such a high traffic article, they need to be aware that things could be rough because it isn't a training ground for editors. It's important that we do things right on such a high traffic article... which means sourcing, NPOV, etc. And no socking. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:20, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree - and a recent post that asks questions that have already been answered isn't helpful.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm starting to wonder if WP:CIR is starting to come into play here? RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I believe so, and has been suggested by someone else.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:40, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Shearonink Would you want to have a discussion at An/I started regarding this? It's starting to look like there might be a call for a block for CIR, but I would want more of a consensus on it. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:49, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

(e.c.) I think it may come to that—and soon—but I'd suggest giving it a little more time. In discussion on my talk page within the past 24 hours, I advised her to seek mentorship and she has done so (she asked ONUnicorn, who hasn't yet replied). I also reminded her that she had agreed not to edit The Holocaust for the time being, and she hasn't. Given those two points, I'm uncomfortable with the idea of seeing her blocked again just yet. However, I am troubled by what she has said, and not said, in response to some of my comments—there seems to be a disconnect, to put it mildly (some of it may stem from a language barrier)—and I can see no legitimate reason for the use of two accounts. It's your call, of course, but my two cents is that we should monitor things a bit longer. Rivertorch_WATER 17:05, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

She needs to stay on one account, period. While alt accounts are fine, having two accounts and using them the way she is is not. I will say that she did agree to not edit The Holocaust, then shortly thereafter started editing again. I think bringing this to AN/I still is a good idea, and including the comment about mentorship. She had other offers for mentoring before, see Ealdgyth above for example, so I honestly don't know if waiting for that should be done. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, she did specifically seek someone out this time and ask to be mentored. I've lost where she said it, but she said something implying that she wanted someone uninvolved as a mentor, which seems reasonable. And she hasn't edited The Holocaust since agreeing not to, or since her block expired. So I'm not clear why it has come to a head just now. If she does something else disruptive, especially if it's something she's been warned about, then sure, but I'm not seeing a new precipitating factor here. Rivertorch_WATER 17:30, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I see your point, Rivertorch, about wanting to give it a bit more time.

For what it's worth, though, she has sought out a lot of people to help her over the past month or so... and a lot of people have tried to help her, including Irondome, Mathglot, and Justlettersandnumbers. And, there have been the same kind of issues, with a number of people trying to help her on French wikipedia. She has a habit for asking for help, but very little follow-through on the suggestions. In fact, she seems to tire of people (or perhaps become overwhelmed) as soon as they begin to help.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

"... I've lost track where she said it, but..." :

The request was made here. Mathglot (talk) 18:29, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Ricki and Rivertorch, thank you. There was no malice in my using Rachelle and Henia, and I mentioned my 2 accounts right away. I did have issues in the past with Chrome and Safari, and I was happy to see that Carole was giving me a link to Henia thru Rachelle, that I used. My daughter who came back from out of town helped me out. I would like to cancel Rachelle, so I won't have any problems.

It seems to me that there is a rush to block me again (since somebody did ask, why now?). This morning, I posted a series of questions to Ealdgyth, one about fring scholarship, which I asked because Ealdgyth had mentioned that my proposed lead is from fringe scholars.

Ricki and Rivertorch, please go to Talk of Holocaust.

I was also accused of providing a lead without citation, and simultaneous comes a statement that a lead does not need citations.

Many offered to help, but I have been waiting for 2 weeks for Simon to tell me how to post a map. It seems to me, and it is my personal perception, that people wanted me to be busy learning how to pinge, and not editing the Holocaust article.

I also felt that I couldn't have Carole mentor me, because she made the request to block me, and I felt that I would be better with ONUnicor who was not involved at all with the issues.

The fringe source brings me to my addition about European Jewish refugees in Shanghai, that Ealdgyth reverted because U/W, despite the fact that I provided 2 or different very reliable sources to Carole.

Today, like half an hour ago, I found out that Ealdgyth added a statement on European Jewish refugees in Shanghai just with mention "Germany's Allies: add data and source". It seems somebody convinced him that the issue is not U/W.

Since Ealdgyth's addition, "Jews in Shanghai were confined, but despite German pressure, they were not killed", seemed very weird (you are confined to a house/prison and the European Jewish refugees of Shanghai were segregated in a ghetto), I checked Ealdgyth's source: Black 2016, p. 141. I clicked on Black, which brought me to Black, Edwin (2016). The Holocaust: History and Memory. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-02214-1. But, I found out that it was Jeremy Black, "the author of over 100 books" (wiki), who wrote only one book on Holocaust – Why choose his statement and not my sources with links to relevant articles in Wiki?

Again, I have had no malice in using 2 accounts, and I have always been open about it - I have always admitted that I am very slow.

I am trying to improve the Holocaust in good faith, because I am retired, and my students had difficulties with it. The article can be much better if many get involved and have time to respond/comment to new edits.

It's time I say it: I have felt, from the beginning, that some people do not want me to be involved at all in wiki French and English, and especially in Holocaust and Shoah. Thus, attempts to slow me down by "learning period", and complete blocking now.

I am doing my best to learn, and I am learning and listening.

I don't want the Holocaust to be another example for an "unstructured" wiki article (I am reading everything I can about wiki)

Ricki, Rivertorch, and the others who do believe that I am without malice,

thank you. I did notice sentences below my message, but they don't appear in clean version. Henia Perlman (talk) 19:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)...another ec, lol, yet *again*...but anyway...

Re to all of the above:

Thanks to everyone for responding, I've been following this situation from afar. I think I can count the individual AN/I reports I have filed since I started editing Misplaced Pages on one hand but it seems like it might possibly be time... I am going to keep an eye on their contributions and see what transpires today/tomorrow and go from there.
They haven't edited The Holocaust article since their block expired but "Henia" has posted on that article's talkpage.
I can't place an Official Warning on their talkpage about not using multiple accounts unless I file a SP/I though... The parent/oldest account is 'Rachelle Perlman' (started editing in 2015, 'Henia' started editing in 2016) but the editor seems to be using Rachelle more-recently. Not sure what to do about this aspect of their editing, but I will leave a note on Rachelle's user talk. I am also concerned about their statement that they were unable to use one of the accounts on a laptop etc...is it possible their account/s have been compromised somehow?
Rivertorch, as Mathglot says above they did ask for help from ONUnicorn with this edit at 15:19, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Re whatever is going on with this editor: By now I think it is one of the following:

language issue
CIR
trolling

but at this point, frankly?...I am beginning to not care. The end-result is the same - tying up time and resources without much meaningful improvement. Shearonink (talk) 18:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)So sorry, but it seems that while I was typing my long message, others posted their messages. It was very hard for me to type for such a long time. Here again my posting: ...

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Henia Perlman (talk • contribs) 19:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Please, do not post at Rachelle Perlman, because I only use firefox, which opens to Henia now. I am afraid to mess up if I try to open firefox, delete Henia, and log in as Rachelle.

And I think that some are using the use of my 2 accounts to have me block, when I have been using them without malice.

Please, please, repost to Henia's account.

Thank you. Henia Perlman (talk) 19:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Keeping in mind AGF, since Henia has indicated they are only going to use the Henia account, can the Rachelle account be blocked & a redirect or whatever left at the Rachelle user talk? And please forgive me for asking - I really can't remember - long day - but can the two accounts' contributions (or user talkpages or whatever) be merged? Shearonink (talk) 20:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

One. I'm female. FEMALE. I've mentioned this before. Two. The edit adding the information on Shanghai was without citations. So no... "Why choose his statement and not my sources with links to relevant articles in Wiki" does not apply because there were no sources. It also had encyclopedic tone issues. And other issues which I detailed here. And as for Jeremy Black (historian), I'm thinking someone who specializes in WWII and Cold War history is an acceptable source for information as basic as this. And I have not ever been for or against a block for you. If you don't want a mentor, I don't have time to keep replying and replying and replying to the same basic issues. A mentor would help you NOT feel unwelcome. To be honest, you've been extended quite a lot of help, much more than many newbies ever see. Believe it or not, I"m trying to improve the Holocaust article too. If you don't work with a mentor or accept and actually DO the help that has been extended to you, I can't keep being made to repeat the same things over and over. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Henia Perlman:, prepending previously forgotten ping, at Mathglot (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Henia, I made some suggestions to you which you have not followed up on, including how to ping, how to use talk page threads properly, how to wikilink, but they were only suggestions. They were meant to help you, so you don't inadvertently cause the disruption which you are unwittingly causing. You are free to ignore my advice, especially since you have not sought out any advice from me.

I predicted your reaction and what would happen, and I predicted that you would start to feel that people didn't like you, were out to get you, and didn't want you around or didn't understand your high-minded motivation to share your knowledge about the Holocaust with others here. Just like you have above. But you are mistaken. No one is out to get you, no one wants to make you stop editing here and at French wikipedia. People's motivations here are to protect the encyclopedia, and to avoid disruption and using up a lot of many editors' time. You are being very disruptive unintentionally, but as a new editor, you're not aware of it, so people's concern to protect the encyclopedia and avoid disruption may come across to you as "they do not want me to be involved at all". But here is another core Misplaced Pages principle you need to know, and the sooner the better because it is a VERY important one, and it is called, "Assume Good Faith". The guideline page about it, is here: WP:AGF. What it means, in your case, is for you to take a step back, and think about why someone might want to block you. Carole might. RickinBaltimore might. I might. This does not mean anyone is against you, or does not like you. There are legitimate reasons to block editors, for the protection of the encyclopedia, and you have already crossed that line numerous times. A lot of people have really been very patient with you, and are trying to keep you from getting blocked again. I hope you can see this.

I said you were at a fork in the road before and you are again, and you have a very serious decision to make. If you get blocked again, it will be for a longer period, and whether you do or don't get blocked is entirely under your control. If it happens, it will not be because somebody doesn't like you, but because they want to protect the encyclopedia. I know it's a little difficult, because you have gotten a lot of advice from all different sides, and you're free to ignore my advice. But here's my recommendation for you, and following that, my prediction:

My recommendation, is that you should now voluntarily renounce editing The Holocaust article and all articles closely related to it, as well as the talk pages of all such articles. You should find a mentor you trust, or perhaps several to split up the work. Starting now, you should seek assignment of editing tasks on non-controversial articles related to your field of interest. I or others can help you find such articles, and various WikiProjects are the place to start with that, as they have a backlog of things to do. After editing a few dozen articles of that sort for several months, you should make an application to an editor you trust, whether RickinBaltimore or someone else, and ask them to assess whether they think you are ready to edit at The Holocaust article or not. And follow their advice, regardless of the outcome.

My prediction is that if you don't agree to this, or to some similar proposal to onboard you to Misplaced Pages in a way that doesn't cause disruption, and you keep editing The Holocaust or using its talk page, is that you will eventually get blocked again, this time for a longer period. You will think that people are against you, maybe even me, but it won't be true. After your block expires, you will likely get one last chance, and if you continue on the same path, then you will probably get blocked indefinitely, which means you won't be able to edit Misplaced Pages at all, with the possible exception of your own talk page.

So there's the fork in the road, and there's the prediction that I hope doesn't come true. People are waiting to help you, but you must accept the help. Part of that, means accepting some advice you don't like, and I'm quite sure you won't like this advice. But it's well-meant, and it's intended to avoid your getting blocked again, which is the path you are on. Right now, you are driving towards a cliff, and your foot is on the accelerator. People are yelling at you, "Stop!" "Watch out, cliff!" "Turn the wheel!" "Hit the brakes!" But you don't see any cliff, and you think they all must be crazy, or trying to fool you. You still have time to avoid driving off the edge, but not a lot of time: if you keep doing what you are doing, the cliff is not far now, but you can always just merrily drive along and hope everybody is wrong. What are you going to do? Mathglot (talk) 21:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Just a wee word in Henia's defense:

...and I am just not seeing that much of a discernible improvement...

No doubt that's true in some areas, but just a short while ago Henia was not able to maintain Talk page replies in the same section, nor manage indentation. Now she is doing both properly (perhaps not every time, but mostly). So, there is discernible improvement. Whether it's of the desired scale or speed is a separate question, but she has clearly demonstrated that she can take instruction and learn from it. So that, at least, is no longer at issue. Mathglot (talk) 22:40, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Henia Perlman, I think that this all got blown up again because you were using two different accounts - and that looked particularly bad after having been blocked. I see that you are using Henia Perlman and if there are no attempts to use other accounts or IP accounts, you should be fine from that perspective.

Right now, I don't see that an action is going to be taken. But, your activity will be monitored by someone that appears to be an administrator to ensure that the actions are constructive and result in meaningful improvement.

I know that my comments may not carry the same weight as others, but: There are very helpful comments on this talk page. I truly do wish you the very best, and it is really in your hands whether you succeed at this point. –CaroleHenson (talk) 23:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Henia has decided not to edit any articles in Wiki.

I have carefully read your comments, and asked another person to be my mentor, and watch my behavior.

I welcome the monitoring of my actions in the Talk of the articles by an administrator, mentioned by Carole. I also asked a prospective mentor to do the same.

I will use the Talk page of the articles in a constructive and respectful manner, and I am ready to accept the fact that the editors will not follow up with my suggestions - for me, it will also be a way to actively learn the ropes of wiki.

Thank you. Henia Perlman (talk) 00:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Henia Perlman, Regarding the potential administrator watching what you are doing, I am referring to this post and the fact that for the moment taking this to WP:ANI is on hold. The key point that I saw was that edits should not be "tying up time and resources without much meaningful improvement."

I am not sure if the person you recently contacted mentors new users (vs. new administrators), but the request was clear and focused. I hope it works out.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:27, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

@Henia Perlman: Henia has decided not to edit any articles in Wiki.

Henia, here I am again, one last time. In my opinion, this will not work out for you. In order to learn how to ice skate you have to actually get out on the ice and fall down a few times.

Restricting yourself to talk pages of controversial articles is allowable, but will not help you and imho will eventually get you blocked permanently. I hope I am wrong about this.This approach is wrong for you in two ways:

It gives you no practice in editing live articles. This is what you desperately need, now; actual editing on live articles. I and others can recommend some that you will find interesting.
It exposes you to topics and editors on the talk page of a controversial topic that attracts an unusually high amount of strife and trolls; this is exactly where you don't want to be. Seasoned editors are carefully watching this talk page for the slightest slip-up, much more so than on the average article. and you are much more likely to suffer a block from your talk page activity here than in some other anodyne area of the encyclopedia. Plus, you have already exhausted the patience of several editors there. This is a very tough environment for a new editor to learn Misplaced Pages practices. Please do not attempt it.

Won't you at least consider my alternative proposal for you? I feel certain that this would work out for you, if only you would agree to it. This is my last try to reach out to you. I sincerely hope you feel the good will I am sending your way, and that you will consider my proposal for you. All the best, Mathglot (talk) 01:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Well this is certainly a lot to wake up to. Henla, the other editors here have given you a lot of really good advice. I do see a lot of promise if you stick to editing, just PLEASE take one of these editors on as a mentor. While talk pages are a good place to communicate, as stated above, in some of the most heavily watched and controversial topics, editors have a very short leash due to bad-faith editors causing issues (which I assure you, I do not think you are in the slightest). Please take the time to reach out to one of these helpful people to assist you. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:47, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I have now a mentor, who was not involved in my issues.

I have always mentioned that I have 2 accounts, and Rachelle was the one I used with my laptop. Now, I am only using Henia - there was no malice.

Thank you.Henia Perlman (talk) 16:03, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Henia I wish you the absolute best of luck then, and if you have any questions feel free to ask me as well. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:36, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

G5

At Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Roy MacLeod it was decided to try to rescue as many as possible, not delete them--and to delete those not notable via afd, not speedy. I am going to re-create the articles you have deleted if I think there is a prospect of viability, and for most of them I do. I have not yet decided if I am going to actually undelete as a starting point. DGG ( talk ) 16:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) But @DGG:, Envale is a sock puppet who was creating articles in contravention of Novonium's block, so these articles should surely be deleted unless anyone else has already made substantial edits (which I take to mean adding content, not just cleaning up). They could be re-created, better, afterwards. PamD 19:11, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
Right, but this group of articles was brought to AfD and a decision was reached. In this case, editing content means filling in the omitted material the ed didn;t know to include, or refused to bothehr including. . See User:Winged Blades of Godric's close at the AfD. DGG ( talk ) 00:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC) No admin can decide to ignore consensus at an afd. DGG ( talk ) 00:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
- FWIW, I was not aware of the AfD discussion. That's my mistake. DGG, if you wish go ahead and undelete, I'm not going to be around much tonight or tomorrow. RickinBaltimore (talk) 01:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Henia Perlman requests your help

You mentioned that I can ask you questions.

1. In order for me to go forward, I need to better understand the details of the block requested by Carole Henson. I think that I should have been given more time to contest the block couldn't contest the block. It went very fast and I have physical disabilities.

When I posted about European refugees in Shanghai, I noticed too late that I didn't put citations, and added one. I think that at that time, I accepted Simon/Irondome's his offer to mentor me. But I didn't hear from him for a longtime, after I asked him to help me format a citation and post a map.

When Carole told me that she would format my Shanghai citation, I immediately sent her the material, but I think that 5 minutes later she made a request to block me.

Why the rush? Why not try first mediation? (I am reading wiki rules)

2. Why the rush by some to block me again, when it was clear that I didn't maliciously use two accounts.

3. It seems to me that there was a personal attack by Simon/Irondome, when he stated that I am selfish, and he didn't criticized the content of my statements. What to do about that?

4. I have reread Mathglot's suggestions (I thank him for his persistence) and my mentor's advices, and I will practice with my mentor editing other articles.

5. I read that there can be disruptive behavior also in talk page, if there is discussion going on in Talk of the article. There is none for the moment, and Ealdgyth did state that nobody is discussing his edits.

I would like to continue to post in the Talk page (like I did today, providing Carole reliable sources), in order not to degrade wikipedia' "reliability as a reference source" - that's my clear intention.

Is it ok for me to submit citations that Ealdgyth couldn't find in the Talk of the article, with mention of relevant results?

Is it ok for me to discuss citations that do not look reflecting the content of the reference, following Ealdgyth's criteria?

Is it ok for me to make constructive suggestions, based on wiki rules?

I would appreciate your answers.

Please, also clarify/specify how my behavior can be disruptive or can lead to a block, when I use the Talk page.

Again: my intent is to ensure wikipedia' "reliability as a reference source"and to work well with others.

Thank you again for offering to answer my questions. Henia Perlman (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

"Fantasy Tennis".