Revision as of 17:13, 2 August 2016 editRitchie333 (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators125,336 edits →Bohemian Rhapsody: !nosign! misheard lyrics← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:24, 2 August 2016 edit undoRitchie333 (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators125,336 edits →Abusing checkuser: censorshipNext edit → | ||
Line 395: | Line 395: | ||
:::::Oh ], if you have empathy for others and see their POV, you don't pick up so many enemies. Looks like the power has gone to your head. ] ] ] 16:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC) | :::::Oh ], if you have empathy for others and see their POV, you don't pick up so many enemies. Looks like the power has gone to your head. ] ] ] 16:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC) | ||
::::::Call your attitude what you want, it looks like you're advocating applying a ]. --] <sup>]</sup> 16:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC) | ::::::Call your attitude what you want, it looks like you're advocating applying a ]. --] <sup>]</sup> 16:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC) | ||
I notice you . Please do not comment on this discussion further. ] ] ] 17:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
== michele abeles == | == michele abeles == |
Revision as of 17:24, 2 August 2016
Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page. |
This is Ritchie333's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138Auto-archiving period: 28 days |
If you leave a message on this talk page, I'll respond here. You may want to watch this page to catch the response. Click here for a tutorial in watching pages. Please avoid using talkback messages if you can - if I've messaged you recently I'll either be watching your page or otherwise keeping an eye on it. |
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
I roll my eyes
At all the socking (wooah-oah)
They all need blocking (wooah-oah)
Page protection too
When they return (when they return)
They are so fickle (wooah-oah)
Had to install Twinkle (wooah-oah)
Any 'dmin will do
(from José and his Amazing Technicolor Comic-Sans signature)
Creating a page that is protected pre-emptively
Hi,
I am e-mailing regarding creating a Misplaced Pages page. Our organisation, a multi-award winning charity, works on sensitive issues such as Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG)and Counter-terrorism and therefore requires pre-emptive page protection rather than create a page and then request page protection.
I have been informed that the official position of Misplaced Pages is that you never do preemptive protection. However, I was also told that there have been some rare circumstances where it has been done. I was told by the Misplaced Pages information team that we don't quite fit those circumstances but rather than simply turn us down they pointed us to the place where protection is requested.
I was also told by the Misplaced Pages information team that as a technical matter they don't think there is a way to create protection ab initio. However, if one of your editors with expertise in protection policy is sympathetic to our request, we can coordinate with them and ensure that the protection is added within minutes of the initial creation.
Kind regards,
JAN Trust — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.30.202 (talk) 05:30, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I have no idea which article you're talking about, as and the only edit from this IP is to this talk page, there's not much I can go on. Ritchie333 11:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- The simple answer is no. We do not protect a page pre-emptively because the creators feel it involves "sensitive issues". We do not protect any page upon creation, nor "within minutes of creation". We do not protect a page simply because its creators request it. Protection is used only if it turns out to be needed because of inappropriate edits, and then only for long enough to stop the inappropriate edits. If your charity "requires" such protection, then you should not be contemplating a Misplaced Pages page. Sorry. --MelanieN (talk) 15:46, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Melanie. I will let the Director of our organization know.
Ritchie - We have not yet created our page on Misplaced Pages. I was asking whether or not you could enact page protection pre-emptively (either before we create our page or immediately after). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.30.202 (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
- The best thing to do is to create the article as a draft first - CLICK HERE to go to the Article Wizard and follow the instructions carefully towards creating a new article. Be sure you have the appropriate reliable sources for the organisation, such as news reports in local (or even better, national) sources. A dedicated piece in BBC News would be ideal. When you have created the draft and are happy with it, you can submit it for an experienced reviewer to look at. If you get any stability problems with the article, you can file a request at Requests for Page Protection, but it won't be accepted unless there is clear evidence of excessive disruption. On a similar note, I had to protect Violence at UEFA Euro 2016 because some Russian Nationalist IPs took exception to the content, but I couldn't do it until after the article had been created. Ritchie333 19:27, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
- Additional comment: In order to create an article, you will have to register a username. Don't use "JAN Trust" as your username; see Misplaced Pages:Username policy. You can't use the name of an organization as your username, for several reasons. If you want you could use something like "John at JAN Trust", which makes it clear that you are one individual and not the whole organisation. Or use anything that makes sense to you. It's probably best not to use your real first and last names. --MelanieN (talk) 21:06, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Ritchie for your help. Another question - If we were to create a page, does Misplaced Pages alert you every time your page is edited and if so how (for example, by e-mail?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.30.202 (talk) 08:27, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- See here for my answer. --NeilN 19:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Whitehall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Downing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
A7 for Purnima Hembram
How does "She has participated in 2015 Asian Athletics Championships" count as a credible assertion of importance or significance? I don't really see the point of the essay you linked. You didn't comment on my talk page comment. PamD 15:46, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Since the 2015 Asian Athletics Championships is a bluelink, that's enough. As for WP:HOLE, the point is something like this; if the article had said "Purnima Hembram is an Indian athlete" and nothing else, then it's harder to save the article. In any case, since I tend to defer Indian subjects to other people, I just left it with the BLPPROD on, which is enough. Aside from copyvios and libel, Misplaced Pages is not a contest to see how quickly we can delete other people's work. Chill. Ritchie333 15:52, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks
for your support in this astonishing situation. (If I dare,) I just want to know whether this is the usual way of admins greeting people who're (yet) new to meta-chatter on en.wiki. Frankly, I had plans to write a handful of articles on Siberian topics, but, as of now, I ain't sure of my pushing through without facing further accusations. You don't like {{talkback}}? Me neither. :) Regards, Qweedsa (talk) 21:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- I think Kudpung was just having a bit of a grump about the state of RfA, rather than anything specifically to do with you. I have stated my view that your question was innocuous and that's been left at that. I wouldn't worry about comments like this; I find ignoring them and getting on with content (such as my long-haul project to get every street on the British Monopoly board to GA status) is the best thing to do. The encyclopedia ain't going to write itself! Ritchie333 10:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Mlpearc
To continue tolerating this editor's nonsense is unreasonable. You seemed to support the idea that he is a chronic edit war-starter and merits a block (per the comment you left on my talk page). Here are some recent examples of his ridiculous disruption 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Furthermore, he characterizes this change as "controversial and defamatory" which is an outright lie. When a year of birth is already present in the article and I insert a date as well, Mlpearc reverts, completely mischaracterizes it and then uses his action to build an agenda for himself to misrepresent me. That aside, he has no cause to revert such edits. All he should be allowed to do is put a "citation needed" tag next to it. The problem with this editor is that he will revert any added content from me without a citation; I don't know if he does this to other editors, but Mlpearc's abuse is unbearable and he is impossible to communicate with on a reasonable or civil level. Also, when he pretends to be using some kind of guideline to justify his changes, he's not even doing so properly as evidenced in these edits 1, 2, 3 where he just erases the presence of one's name from an infobox if there's no WL; the correct way to do this is insert a number "including" only those who have their own Wiki page. Iistal (talk) 21:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Iistal: Blanking your talk page continuously does not negate the dialogs placed there, just so you know. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:18, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Iistal: Let me backtrack a second. Firstly, while I might have warned Mlpearc about skirting close to WP:3RR on some article, I have never blocked him - in general I find blocking established editors to be risky with a danger of having a net rise in disruption (after the blocked editor's friends turn up to complain vociferously), and it's best to "talk before you block".
- The other problem is that while Mlpearc tends to just hit a button on Twinkle and revert, which isn't a very good way of communicating, he seems to be acting correctly in accordance with the biographies of living persons policy on every diff you listed above. Our policy is that any contentious information (and dates of birth are contentious - if you ask a woman directly how old she is you're likely to get a slap!) must be cited inline at the time it is added. If the dates of birth and family relationships are not in the article, there may be privacy-based reasons for them. Perhaps things would have been better if Mlpearc had calmly explained BLP in depth to you, and we could have avoided some silly edit wars, but as far as adherence to policy I'm afraid he's spot on in this case. Sorry. Ritchie333 10:58, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
References
- User:Jimbo Wales (16 May 2006). "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information". English Misplaced Pages mailing list. Retrieved 6 July 2016.
There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative "I heard it somewhere" pseudo information is to be tagged with a "needs a cite" tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons.
{{cite web}}
:|author=
has generic name (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter:|1=
(help)
Michele Abeles
Hi ritchie333, thank you for kind and thoughtful response to my question about the page created for me. I really am flattered that someone took the time to add me to wikipedia. I understand the complexity of deleting my page within the realm of wikipedia. My wish not to be included is more a push against the internet at large. Before I continue talking more- could you let me know I am writing the correct person in the correct area of wikipedia?! thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ma343678 (talk • contribs) 01:42, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Ma343678: It depends what you're looking for. If you have general complaints about biographies, then the BLP noticeboard is the place to report them, though I've already reported this article there so that's covered. If you have a specific complaint about your article, such as something being factually incorrect (we can only write about what we read in the press and books, and they do sometimes get it wrong), the best thing to do is start a conversation on Talk:Michele Abeles and explain what's wrong. If you just want to ask general questions about Misplaced Pages works, this talk page is okay for those (if I'm not around to answer, there are a bunch of regulars here who drop in to answer things every now and again).
- The advice I have received from people who have an article on Misplaced Pages about themselves or their business is to ignore it and assume it is harmless, which it probably is. Most small biographies aren't allowed to have any strongly negative or confrontational information unless it has been excessively documented in the broadsheet press or books, and even then we err on the side of caution (Christopher Jefferies, notoriously arrested on a murder charge with no evidence and picked apart by the gutter press despite being completely innocent, has no standalone article on Misplaced Pages). Ritchie333 11:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Pall Mall, London
On 6 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pall Mall, London, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that London's Pall Mall owes its name to a 17th-century ball game similar to croquet? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pall Mall, London. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pall Mall, London), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Congrats! Hope the nomination process wasn't too much of a drag. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Come here with a bad pun like that, Mr 123, and expect to be clubbed. Ritchie333 14:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, "Kensitas"! (the noo). Martinevans123 (talk) 14:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- I miss you, master of the bad pun lines, - with The Quixotic Potato gone for a long vacation, Ritchie, you and Montanabw are my sole sources of expected humor, - and now I come here and find more serius bizines ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, "Kensitas"! (the noo). Martinevans123 (talk) 14:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Come here with a bad pun like that, Mr 123, and expect to be clubbed. Ritchie333 14:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Jazz in der Kirche
Gerda, if you pick through the nuclear warfare below this message, you will find an unloved stub - I don't know how you are on jazz or if Mönchengladbach is a nice place to visit, but if you could expand Jazz in der Kirche even a little, I think both myself and Dr. Blofeld would be eternally grateful and share a DYK barnstar with you. Ritchie333 13:02, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- There's now more jazz in churches. I translated most of the German, - now it's lacking sources, of course, which needs to change before any DYK. It seems to be biennial and in several churches, - correct me when I'm wrong. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- That's great Gerda, thankyou. The problem I had with analysing sources was using creative search queries, and "Jazz in der Kirche" appears to be a general term outside of the original festival, which meant many false positives when I looked at it. Hopefully, by taking the German keywords now in the article, we may be able to edge a bit closer to DYK. Ritchie333 09:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Ritchie, Did you get the document I sent over to you yesterday - 22 news reports on Jazz in der Kirche. All in German, so I have only a little idea of the content, but they look useful enough for Gerda to have a look through. - SchroCat (talk) 09:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- I did, but I struggled to parse it into citations for the article and my head hurt. I've just forwarded to Gerda to see if that will be useful. Ritchie333 09:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- LOL - they look as if they should be useful (to someone who speaks German, obviously). - SchroCat (talk) 09:48, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- I did, but I struggled to parse it into citations for the article and my head hurt. I've just forwarded to Gerda to see if that will be useful. Ritchie333 09:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- It is general, for whatever jazz performed at church. I think just adding the town's name will edge closer. wonder if you can find specific churches (which should have articles). - Unfortunately I don't see interior images of those churches, which might show some atmosphere. - The name should be translated, but I don't know what's best: Jazz at Church, Jazz in the Church (that's literal), Jazz in Churches? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Well, as precedent (eg: see Kattenstoet, Oktoberfest), if something is what Germans call a "Eigenname" and what the English call a "proper noun", then I would say per WP:COMMONNAME we should use the German (ie: Jazz in der Kirche, Mönchengladbach), unless there is a better-known translation in English, which in this case there isn't. We need to give the article a title that people expect to find, and without an official or de-facto English translation, we don't have it. Still, if the smoking hot and talented beyond belief Barbara Dennerlein has played there, this has got to be worth saving. Ritchie333 10:00, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Sure we should use the German, but I would still try a translation in brackets. I didn't translate Rheingau Musik Festival, but readers may not know Kirchen. - Thanks for the documents, - I see in 2011 news that it had to be interrupted (when? will read more), due to a lack of sponsoring, but think we don't need to report all ups and downs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:14, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, those were the latest news, and the current website of the town doesn't know the festival any more. We probably have to rely on other sources for 2016 - which may be the first after 2008 - and drop the link which causes 404 anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- The closer I look the more I see that the festival took place exactly three times and is not expected to be revived. What should we do? This link still has it, but may show how up-to-date the DB is ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'd put the festival in the past tense, and just document what we have. I think we have enough to keep an article, or possibly redirect somewhere. But thanks for all you have done so far on this up until this point. Ritchie333 11:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Sounds perfect! Unless... I don't know, you get the sense that if cats were that size, they'd give up begging for breakfast and just eat you? ;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 22:21, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'd put the festival in the past tense, and just document what we have. I think we have enough to keep an article, or possibly redirect somewhere. But thanks for all you have done so far on this up until this point. Ritchie333 11:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Well, as precedent (eg: see Kattenstoet, Oktoberfest), if something is what Germans call a "Eigenname" and what the English call a "proper noun", then I would say per WP:COMMONNAME we should use the German (ie: Jazz in der Kirche, Mönchengladbach), unless there is a better-known translation in English, which in this case there isn't. We need to give the article a title that people expect to find, and without an official or de-facto English translation, we don't have it. Still, if the smoking hot and talented beyond belief Barbara Dennerlein has played there, this has got to be worth saving. Ritchie333 10:00, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Ritchie, Did you get the document I sent over to you yesterday - 22 news reports on Jazz in der Kirche. All in German, so I have only a little idea of the content, but they look useful enough for Gerda to have a look through. - SchroCat (talk) 09:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- That's great Gerda, thankyou. The problem I had with analysing sources was using creative search queries, and "Jazz in der Kirche" appears to be a general term outside of the original festival, which meant many false positives when I looked at it. Hopefully, by taking the German keywords now in the article, we may be able to edge a bit closer to DYK. Ritchie333 09:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Observing this discussion, I have started a page for Ealing Jazz Festival which may benefit from parallel development. Andrew D. (talk) 11:47, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Meri Hasraton Mein
Please read Amika Shail.Xx236 (talk) 12:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Xx236: I was hoping to get another London street article to GA next on my "todo" list, but in the meantime I see four news hits on this artist, so it should be relatively easy to retrospectively source and improve to stop the BLP PROD. I see other editors have told you stop biting newbies, so the next time I see you filing an obviously bad speedy (not a borderline case), I will be starting a thread on ANI requesting you be banned from New Page Patrol. (Also pinging @Kudpung: for a second opinion). Ritchie333 13:06, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- IN cases of repeated sub-standard patrolling (I'm generalising here) it is not necessary to involve the the peanut gallery. A couple of polite requests to desist - with a link to WP:DE together with a reminder that blocks are preventative rather than punitive - should do the trick. If it doesn't, then that's what admins have the block button for, and it doesn't always need a community consensus. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Cassianto
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I am a little surprised by your message. It was I who was accused of something, I don't think it unreasonable for me to ask about it. Considering I was the one being talked about I fail to see how I "inserted" myself. I suppose I could have opened another thread, but it was rather relevant don't you think? If another admin had responded to the comment I likely would not have. HighInBC 15:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I have moved my request to another thread. As for the watchlist, it is not why I went there. I went there to ask for the accusation to be substantiated, only to find another persona asking the very same thing. HighInBC 15:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
I have given you a word instead of a block more times than I can count, I generally get abuse as a response. As for your e-mail, if you think I violated the expectations of an editor or an administrator I welcome you to gather evidence and present it against me at the relevant forum. Frankly if any of your accusations against me had any merit I think you would have done that already. You already know from past discussions I disagree with your interpretation of that incident so I will not reiterate that here. If you really do wish to discuss the e-mail issue yet again you are welcome on my talk page. I am having a very reasonable discussion with Ritchie333 and I prefer to keep it separate from discussions in which we have already determined we do not agree on. HighInBC 19:15, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
With respect I disagree. I also think that an interaction ban will fail the laugh test, look at my talk page archives and you will see that Cassianto has no objection to talking at length with me when it suits him. I have been polite and patient with this user. You have provided me with a pile of diffs where I am explaining Misplaced Pages policy in a polite fashion. I have at worst exposed a bit of cheek on occasion to a user who does not hesitate to show naked hostility. I have gone out of my way for weeks now to not be the admin that deals with Cassianto. Look here: User_talk:HighInBC/Archive 78#SMcCandlish where I outright refuse to be the one to deal with their one of their more recent tiffs with another user. I have been taking a very intentional break for a long time now mostly due to the level of abuse I get when I do respond. I am one of 6 administrators who has felt the need to block Cassianto. I have done 2 out of 10 of their blocks, 20%. I am also responsible for 1 out of 5 of their unblocking, also 20%(me directly unblocking, I also supported unblocking for at least one of their unblocks). You say my way of communicating does not work, but none of the many admins who have dealt with Cassianto have gotten them to change their behaviour. If you pay close attention you will see that Cassianto is not exactly avoiding me. They have quoted me out of context to support positions they know I do not support, they have accused me of abusing my admin tools. That is just in the last couple of days. You stepped in here when I asked about that abuse of admins tools. WP:ADMINACCT says I need to take that sort of accusation seriously, but you rebuked me for that. If anyone ever makes such an accusation against you I hope that you follow up on it. I don't think your view will enjoy consensus if put to the test. That being said I am really sick of the whole situation. Perhaps admin #7 or admin #8 will be more suitable for the task. HighInBC 20:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC) HighInBC, As I pointed out to you before, you couldn't take action against Cassianto in the Mcandlish matter, given how of a tendentious troll he has been recently. Any action you took against Cassianto would have been flipped fairly quickly once the diffs were lain out at ANI. (There are a stack of edits where Mcandlish has been trying to bait people recently and this pointless and pointy nonsense from this evening is just the latest. If anyone needs a word in their ear to find a different toy to play with, it is the baiter... – SchroCat (talk) 21:47, 6 July 2016 (UTC) Yes, Chillum has a clear grudge against Cassianto which is getting disruptive. It seems have extended to me now. I noticed Chillum of all people deleted Jazz in der Kirche which I started and didn't even have a chance to be expanded. Has an article on de:Jazz in der Kirche. Again seems a very strange cooincidence that Chillum was the one who deleted it. I would guess as revenge for me opposing his Canadian "friend" at RFA ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Well it had existed for a few years, I'm sure you could have waited another couple of hours until it was expanded. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
I really did not expect you to accuse me of bad faith Ritchie. Whatever disagreements we have about how things should be managed I did not expect you to accuse me of abusively using my tools. That article had no substantive edits since 2011 and its entire contents could be written on a fortune cookie slip. It was the textbook definition of A7 and I immediately welcomed the author to recreate it and I offered the text to them. If you want to see dastardly deeds hard enough you will see them. It really hurts to think that you would believe I am some guy getting his jollies deleting articles. How many people do you think I am in a feud with? I am taking a wiki-break, I am sick of making an honest effort and getting kicked in the teeth for it. HighInBC 21:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
|
Why admins should create content.
Just letting you know that I have dropped a link or two to this, including on my own RfA criteria. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks. I wrote that essay (and indeed most of the others) to save saying the same thing again and again, so hopefully this will make it resonate with a few more people. Ritchie333 07:20, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Page removal
Can you please fully remove the page 'https://en.wikipedia.org/Darien_Joseph_(Personality)' from Misplaced Pages itself. Or retitled the page and delete all information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markjeeditor (talk • contribs) 10:23, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I've received a similar request on my talk page and have answered.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:21, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Letterboxtv Muffled 11:25, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- All under-18s involved in Darien Joseph, please read Disappearance of Martin Allen and some of the Independent sources related to it. If that doesn't explain why putting your autobiography in full view on one of the world's biggest websites is a terminally stupid idea, nothing will. (Although as you are now asking for it to be deleted, I think that has been taken on board). Ritchie333 11:31, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Letterboxtv Muffled 11:25, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Peace
I don't know what's got into everybody today, but there is far too much anger and bitterness bouncing around on this usually merry talk page. Whatever it is, please let's just get it out of our system now, and focus on articles. I've got a bit more of the Survey of London to mine through on Pentonville Road, and perhaps it's time to GA review another one of Gerda Arendt's Bach cantatas, if she has any on the pile. What about everyone else? Ritchie333 14:38, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Not a lot. Just gotta work out when TfL started running services up the East Coast Main Line Muffled 14:58, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- No Bach cantata open for GA, Sainsf cleared them all! But I always need help, see red links on my user page, + blue DYK noms. Any articles for GA and FA can go to here, if the addition of an infobox is not regarded as an attack but a way to make information accessible to different kinds of readers. I successfully wrote an article and got it reviewed for DYK the same day, - that's what we are here for. I also enjoy praising people precious, today a user who served as admin for more than ten years! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Now a Bach cantata is open as GAN, - only it's not ready yet: Was willst du dich betrüben, BWV 107 ("Why do you want to distress yourself", useful). I was improving last year but didn't quite manage then. I'll say here when I'm done. Going to sing today parts of Elijah for a farewell service, about the angels and several more, - another article for improvement ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:00, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Ping: you can look now if you like. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'd like to suggest on this neutral ground a peace deal to end the socalled infobox wars: no revert of a stable infobox, - could be so simple and easy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- I got a bit distracted by listening to The Snow Goose (a suite based around the story of the same name), having but the review's done now. Ritchie333 17:13, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Page protection
Hi Ritchie - just letting you know you can remove the protection of Janatha Garage. I just blocked the main editor causing the disruption as a confirmed sock account.--Jezebel's Ponyo 22:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Ponyo: Charles Turing broke something like 10RR on that article, and should consider himself lucky he did not get blocked. Given the traffic on the article, and the lack of a clear consensus in talk (I can't see an obvious agreement from Cyphoidbomb, the other participant there), I think I would need assurance from Charles that he will not edit war again (and will receive a block if he does) before I'd be comfortable unprotecting. Ritchie333 08:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- I had made a statement in WP:AN/EW and in my talk page User talk:Charles Turing#Edit-warring.--Charles Turing (talk) 08:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Well I can't say fairer than that, so the article is now unlocked. Happy editing! Ritchie333 10:21, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight
On 11 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Wikipedian of the Year Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight has cited cultural anthropologist Margaret Mead as an influence on her writing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
The DYK project (nominate) 12:36, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/Annette Lyon
You are invited to join the discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/Annette Lyon. Some matters were brought up by another user that have delayed the nomination from moving forward. Just a courtesy notice for you in case you're interested in the matter. North America 13:50, 11 July 2016 (UTC)Template:Z48
Your GA nomination of Whitehall
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Whitehall you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 09:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Pink Floyd: Live at Pompeii
With regard to your reversion of my edit, the article infobox lists the film as a French / Belgian / West German co-production. This is supported by the given BFI reference and by IMDb, so I believe the categorisation is appropriate. Jellyman (talk) 10:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Could I have a piece of apple pie... without the crust? Without the crust... Muffled 10:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Jellyman: IMDB is not generally a reliable source as anyone can add anything. While the BFI tends to be about as authoritative as it can get, I've got no idea how a film with an English band and a Scottish director shot in Paris and Naples can be considered German. So classifying it as a "West German film" is misleading - it's not exactly Das Boot, is it? Ritchie333 11:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- I understand your point, but films are normally classified under the country that financed the production, rather than filming locations, nationalities of personnel etc. The article itself lists one of the countries as West Germany in the infobox, with the BFI source. The article is categorised under French and Belgian films on this basis, why not the third country? I think I'll put something on the article talk page to see if anyone else has a view. Jellyman (talk) 11:29, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Good call, it does seem to be a bit odd and worth a talk page discussion to see if anyone can come up with a source backing it up and explaining. Ritchie333 12:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- I understand your point, but films are normally classified under the country that financed the production, rather than filming locations, nationalities of personnel etc. The article itself lists one of the countries as West Germany in the infobox, with the BFI source. The article is categorised under French and Belgian films on this basis, why not the third country? I think I'll put something on the article talk page to see if anyone else has a view. Jellyman (talk) 11:29, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Jellyman: IMDB is not generally a reliable source as anyone can add anything. While the BFI tends to be about as authoritative as it can get, I've got no idea how a film with an English band and a Scottish director shot in Paris and Naples can be considered German. So classifying it as a "West German film" is misleading - it's not exactly Das Boot, is it? Ritchie333 11:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Pentonville Road
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pentonville Road you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Whitehall
The article Whitehall you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Whitehall for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 11:41, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Dr. Blofeld: I don't suppose you're old enough to remember "The Worm That Turned" by the Two Ronnies? Well after the news that pretty much every major political party is going to be run by a woman, along with a major EU country that's been run by one for ages, and the US thinking about putting one in too (for gawd's sake I don't care what Clinton has done - SHE'S STILL NOT TRUMP), it looks like that comedy series was strangely prophetic. So when we're relegated to getting blue rinse at the local hairdressers dressed up in our frocks and pinnies, don't say I didn't warn you! Ritchie333 12:48, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Pentonville Road
The article Pentonville Road you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pentonville Road for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 15:02, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Tehran Imam Khomeini Airport - Edit War
Hello!
I noticed that you temporarily banned the editing for Tehran Imam Khomeini Airport a couple of days ago in order to stop the "edit war". The war has yet not ended and it still results in a number of confusing reverts and edits. I kindly wonder if you have any chance to watch that page again and take any necessarily actions to stop the behaviour. Thanks in advance. Best Regards, AminC99 (talk) 22:38, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- @AminC99: Just had a look. Revert, revert, revert. Full protected for three days. Ritchie333 19:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- The page should be protected a little longer than 3 days. The edit wars are just going to continue when the protection expires. TravelLover37 (talk) 17:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- I have never seen an article full-protected longer than three days, except perhaps the Main page. I've put a note on the talk page explaining the situation, and I think from now on we're going to have to upgrade to blocks. We can't keep pages locked forever because of fighting. Ritchie333 17:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- The page should be protected a little longer than 3 days. The edit wars are just going to continue when the protection expires. TravelLover37 (talk) 17:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1RR
Hi Ritchie - thanks for your updated text on the thread. Lugnuts 18:12, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Pentonville Road
On 14 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pentonville Road, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the perpetrators of a major burglary were caught after discussing it in a Pentonville Road pub? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pentonville Road. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pentonville Road), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Congrats! That was my fastest from review to appearing in a long time, DYK? My fastest from writing to in a queue was 10 minutes, Cecil Aronowitz, - in the good old days ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- That was a surprise. Mind you, it seems surprises are all the rage right now. Ritchie333 07:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yesterday's concert had all highlights:
- Always more work ;) - For several weeks now, we have concluded every rehearsal by the last peaceful one! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Peace much needed. I began a new one, Bells of Beyond, today on my father's birthday, ringing the bells also for Kevin with whom I argued (Ethics of Dissensus, it's where "Talk before you block" came up the first time), but full of hope. - Thank you for your initiative for Martin, - I sent him blessings when the Welsh team lost), - just too lazy to go further, and knowing the feeling too well that to appeal a senseless restriction makes no sense itself, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
- That was a surprise. Mind you, it seems surprises are all the rage right now. Ritchie333 07:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
A7
Why did you say that "A7 doesn ot apply to hospitals at >? I see no such provision in WP:CSD, and not reason not to treat them as any other organization. Have i overlook some discussion of the issue? DGG ( talk ) 09:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- In the past, I have treated hospitals as public buildings, whereas A7 tends to be reserved more for private organisations which are far easier to set up, and too numerous for any to be automatically of encyclopedic importance. I have expanded at least two hospital articles, William Harvey Hospital and Farnham Hospital as did you know nominations that have hit the main page (1, 2), so I would say it's definitely worth considering. I seem to recall somebody being concerned that Epsom Hospital would be sent to AfD, but RHaworth (who is more "on the ball" with speedies than any admin I know) asserted that it would probably stand a good chance of surviving a deletion debate. Ritchie333 09:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- You're comparing chalk and cheese. Even the smallest NHS hospitals in Britain are major public institutions; small-town hospitals in the US are private businesses with no more inherent notability than the local hardware store. ‑ Iridescent 09:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't know that, and I'm surprised to hear that's the case - do hospitals in the US get no public funding whatsoever? Ritchie333 09:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- The big urban ones with attached medical schools might get public grants, as might unprofitable institutions which are the only source of healthcare in their area and thus an essential public good, and all hospitals indirectly get some government funding via Medicare/Medicaid subsidizing of medical bills and assorted subsidies for military and ex-military patients, but there's no American equivalent to the NHS; a hospital is a business just like any other (or a charity subsisting on donations), only the 'customers' are generally paying via insurance. There's a brief summary of the situation at Public hospital#United States. ‑ Iridescent 09:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Even so, I would have expected there would be some sort of regulatory body that means the bar to setting up a hospital in the first place is substantial enough that just having the facilities in place is enough to be at least locally significant. Something like the The Shipman Inquiry, I would guess. FWIW there are a couple of other classes of things I find myself pausing on before hitting the delete button - FM radio stations (where there is a reliable source confirming an active licence) and British shopping malls (I just did a quick spot check and even things like Fremlin Walk and County Square are on here.) Ritchie333 10:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hospitals are regulated and inspected by the state authorities, but if "regulated and regularly inspected by state authorities" were a notability criterion Charlie's Kebab Van, Droitwich would have its own Misplaced Pages page. I would argue that hospitals fall into the same exception by which we don't delete rail stations, in that it can always be presumed that there will be significant press coverage of even the most obscure, but that's certainly not written into policy anywhere. ‑ Iridescent 10:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hospitals in the U.S. are certainly not all notable, and there is no presumption of notability. I would probably have declined A7 in this case since some of the information in the article could be taken as a claim of significance. However, it does not meet notability criteria and I could not find any additional sources in a search - no news articles, nothing about its history or local significance. I am going to PROD it. MelanieN alt (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Oops. User:DGG beat me to it. I do believe that PROD is the appropriate way to deal with this article. MelanieN alt (talk) 17:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hospitals in the U.S. are certainly not all notable, and there is no presumption of notability. I would probably have declined A7 in this case since some of the information in the article could be taken as a claim of significance. However, it does not meet notability criteria and I could not find any additional sources in a search - no news articles, nothing about its history or local significance. I am going to PROD it. MelanieN alt (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hospitals are regulated and inspected by the state authorities, but if "regulated and regularly inspected by state authorities" were a notability criterion Charlie's Kebab Van, Droitwich would have its own Misplaced Pages page. I would argue that hospitals fall into the same exception by which we don't delete rail stations, in that it can always be presumed that there will be significant press coverage of even the most obscure, but that's certainly not written into policy anywhere. ‑ Iridescent 10:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Even so, I would have expected there would be some sort of regulatory body that means the bar to setting up a hospital in the first place is substantial enough that just having the facilities in place is enough to be at least locally significant. Something like the The Shipman Inquiry, I would guess. FWIW there are a couple of other classes of things I find myself pausing on before hitting the delete button - FM radio stations (where there is a reliable source confirming an active licence) and British shopping malls (I just did a quick spot check and even things like Fremlin Walk and County Square are on here.) Ritchie333 10:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- The big urban ones with attached medical schools might get public grants, as might unprofitable institutions which are the only source of healthcare in their area and thus an essential public good, and all hospitals indirectly get some government funding via Medicare/Medicaid subsidizing of medical bills and assorted subsidies for military and ex-military patients, but there's no American equivalent to the NHS; a hospital is a business just like any other (or a charity subsisting on donations), only the 'customers' are generally paying via insurance. There's a brief summary of the situation at Public hospital#United States. ‑ Iridescent 09:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't know that, and I'm surprised to hear that's the case - do hospitals in the US get no public funding whatsoever? Ritchie333 09:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- You're comparing chalk and cheese. Even the smallest NHS hospitals in Britain are major public institutions; small-town hospitals in the US are private businesses with no more inherent notability than the local hardware store. ‑ Iridescent 09:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
"Personalized Message"
Over the past several years, you've made it clear that you're not a fan of my edits. However your complaints ( and ) on ANI about me correctly leaving a templated message upon nomination of an article for CSD have reached a new low and in my opinion are defacto proof that you are holding a grudge against me. Given this bias, I would appreciate it if you would refrain from interacting with me including commenting on my actions going forward unless they directly involve you. Toddst1 (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think I've ever noticed any of your edits before - what articles have you worked on that I might have done as well? In any instance, my principles of leaving a personal message instead of a template are strongly rooted in real-world experience, generally involving people who don't use Misplaced Pages much and don't have a strong opinion about it. Ritchie333 10:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Re
Xin chào, làm sao có thể gỡ quyền Hành chính viên và Kiểm định viên vậy bạn?
Hello, how remove powers Bureaucrat and CheckUser? ㅡ ManlyBoys 00:32, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) @ManlyBoys: I'm not sure Ritchie (nor anyone else you've left this message) will know what you're talking about - are you talking about the user rights "Bureaucrat" and "CheckUser"? These permissions get applied and removed by bureaucrats or ArbCom -- samtar 10:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Tôi không nói được tiếng Anh, ý của tôi hỏi bạn là ai có quyền gỡ công cụ Hành chính viên và Kiểm định viên? có phải là Tiếp viên ở Meta hay không? Cảm ơn ㅡ ManlyBoys 11:23, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- @ManlyBoys: Tôi không nói được tiếng Việt nên tôi dịch - tiếc là thông điệp của bạn đã không dịch rất tốt. Bạn có thể yêu cầu một Meta Steward như họ có xu hướng nói nhiều thứ tiếng, và có thể giúp truy vấn của bạn
- I do not speak Vietnamese so I am translating - unfortunately your message did not translate very well. You can ask a Meta Steward as they tend to speak more languages, and can help with your query
- -- samtar 11:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Tôi không nói được tiếng Anh, ý của tôi hỏi bạn là ai có quyền gỡ công cụ Hành chính viên và Kiểm định viên? có phải là Tiếp viên ở Meta hay không? Cảm ơn ㅡ ManlyBoys 11:23, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Wesley Spartan
Hi Ritchie. Hope you are doing well. I saw you declined the CSD for this page, but the reason why I nominated it for A7 is because A. The creator of the page was the person himself (I had a look on google to see if this person was really notable and it came up with a Twitter account with the same name as the account who created the article and B. Most, if not all the sources listed have no mention of this person. There is no indication that this person is notable. Should i take this to AfD or retag it? Thanks! Class455fan1 (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Class455fan1: Yup, send it to AfD. I think I suggested as much in the edit summary, but then got sidetracked with a bit of copyediting. With these sorts of articles, sometimes the subject can still be notable, which is difficult for African BLPs anyway, and if its an autobiography, it can get more than they bargained for. Ritchie333 12:19, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Ritchie333. I have sent it to AfD now. Class455fan1 (talk) 12:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, I've changed my mind and speedied it per A7, as I didn't clock that the subject was 19 years old, I somehow misread he was in his 40s, which makes the claim of importance orders of magnitude less credible. Ritchie333 12:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Ritchie333. I have sent it to AfD now. Class455fan1 (talk) 12:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Deletions
Thanks for catching Robert Smith (Medal of Honor) -- Checking the source, this is indeed the Medal of Honor, the highest US military award--those who received it are always notable. See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide. DGG ( talk ) 17:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Regarding that - I noticed that the tagger (who really should not be doing NPP) had A7'ed it only four minutes after it was created. I commented on that on his talk page, and I wanted to link to an essay about not tagging new pages within minutes of their creation. I thought there was such an essay but I couldn't find it. Are you aware of any such essay? If not, should we write one? --MelanieN (talk) 16:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- There's Misplaced Pages:Field guide to proper speedy deletion as a basic guide, then a section on treating newbies at NPP which says "Please do not be too hasty with certain speedy deletions ... Research has shown that writers unfamiliar with Misplaced Pages guidelines should be accorded at least 10 to 15 minutes to fix the article before it is nominated for speedy deletion". If you have a G3, G10, or G12, then yes speedy immediately, but for everything else, just chill out and find a cat to cuddle. We have a template,
{{Uw-hasty}}
that you can put on over-eager taggers. Ritchie333 16:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)- Thanks, that "hasty" template looks useful. --MelanieN (talk) 19:08, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- There's Misplaced Pages:Field guide to proper speedy deletion as a basic guide, then a section on treating newbies at NPP which says "Please do not be too hasty with certain speedy deletions ... Research has shown that writers unfamiliar with Misplaced Pages guidelines should be accorded at least 10 to 15 minutes to fix the article before it is nominated for speedy deletion". If you have a G3, G10, or G12, then yes speedy immediately, but for everything else, just chill out and find a cat to cuddle. We have a template,
A kitten for you! - deletion of Zoolz
Hi Ritchie333, thought you might like to know, there is a still active afd on the above article - Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Zoolz. ps. luv your kitty pics:)
Coolabahapple (talk) 20:22, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Coolabahapple: I've closed the AfD. Also, check out User:Ritchie333/Userbox Suede. Ritchie333 07:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- thanks, userbox is very cute:), maybe we need an essay "Time to cuddle a kitten"? (although it might then be inundated with kitty pics, mea culpa at WP:WIK and Misplaced Pages:WikiCat) Coolabahapple (talk) 08:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- We've got Misplaced Pages:Time to take the dog for a walk, but perhaps there needs to be something for cat lovers. Ritchie333 13:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- thanks, userbox is very cute:), maybe we need an essay "Time to cuddle a kitten"? (although it might then be inundated with kitty pics, mea culpa at WP:WIK and Misplaced Pages:WikiCat) Coolabahapple (talk) 08:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Deletion of talk page section
Hello Ritchie. The block you recently gave me has expired. May I remove the section? According to WP:BLANKING, it says that "A number of important matters may not be removed by the user—they are part of the wider community's processes:
Declined unblock requests regarding a currently active block," etc.
However, the block is expired. Does that mean I can remove the block in addition to the unblock request? Dat GuyContribs 15:54, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- @DatGuy: I think technically you can now remove it; however I would personally recommend ignoring it and just moving on, as it shows you are mature and have learned from mistakes. Ritchie333 16:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
RFA
Could you undelete my RFA please? If it's incorrectly formatted, please let me know how to correct that. Nevertheless, I am qualified for the position, being one of the pioneer Misplaced Pages editors. JoeM (talk) 17:36, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
- You need to read the instructions at WP:RFA carefully, that will show you how to create a properly formatted one. However, since you edit-warred with Floquenbeam to transclude it, and you have copyvio warnings on your talk page, I would strongly advise against it - you are almost certain to get a WP:NOTNOW close within 12 hours. Ritchie333 17:58, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
- Not to mention blatant WP:BLP and WP:POLEMIC violations. --NeilN 18:09, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Jet Blue Mint
https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:JetBlue#Merge_proposal
This should be closed and made a merge. 3-1 favors it. Logic also favors it. If someone took a tremendous effort and expanded it, such as including traffic data and how Jet Blue was losing premium passengers and how the Jet Blue seat is revolutionary (if it actually is), then maybe I might be swayed. But the current article is just two things, that Jet Blue offers flat bed seats on a few flights and there's a lot of promotional material in the article, such that it is like an ad. Admiral James T Kirk (talk) 04:58, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Dammit Jim, I'm an admin not a scientist ... no wait, that's something else. I think the discussion at WT:DYK also concluded a merge was appropriate, so I've closed this. Ritchie333 09:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Looks like someone is edit warring about the merge. That person did behavior that causes a block. Admiral James T Kirk (talk) 02:06, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
PROS
About deletion: PROS. I am trying to became writer and I was trying to make all missing profile of : Houston companies list
Because I don't know anything , most of mine article send for speedy deletion. Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Houston-media (talk • contribs) 18:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Houston-media: The last article there is written in a way too promotional fashion, e.g
provides enterprise revenue and profit realization software solutions
. It needs to neutrally document what the company does and why it's important, not a sales brochure.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:47, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Abusing checkuser
Regarding that ani. Posting here as well. Apparently, some experienced editors have found a nice loophole on how to ban any editor they wish. Your ISP uses a certain range of ip addresses. For instance mine uses several ranges, one being 89.164.xxx.xxx. Apparently, the only thing that is needed to block a person is to accuse him of being a sock of someone who uses the same ISP. Then they both will have the same ip prefix and appear they are the same person. I still haven't figured out the way they find ip behind a username. However, requesting cu until a suitable candidate is found can work, especially if a suitable candidate had used several isps. I come from Croatia where User:Asdisis is that candidate. There are only a few isps in Croatia so it's not hard to ban a lot of people as socks. Here's how to ban someone. The discussion . The user that you want to ban . The repeated cu requests outside spi . Other cases that I had caught -> My case: I'm being forbidden to post sources: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.164.143.178 (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2016 (UTC) In fact, I know one way to get someone's ip. Cu editors can see it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.164.143.178 (talk) 15:33, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the message - not sure what to say about the content other than mention of Djokovic's parents should be limited to what role (if any) they encouraged him to play professional tennis. checkuser abuse is nothing new to Misplaced Pages - see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sockpuppet investigation block, and all it involves is looking up the IP address and user agent sent via a browser requests (since that's all that can possibly be stored), which are reasonably trivial for genuinely disruptive socks to fake. The whole fiasco around this is worth a Wikipediocracy blog post; previous entries , have touched on this, but I think a fuller exploration of this is justified. @Stanistani:, @Scott: I'm not sure if I've got time but if I put together a skeleton of a WO blog post, can somebody else finish it? Ritchie333 09:04, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- I wonder why someone would consider sharing an IP range or ISP as a reason to suspect one's the same person, though. Almost always ISPs and ranges are used by several people. On TV Tropes, where I do have access to a CheckUser like function, we always rely on behavioural evidence in such cases, if there is none then we don't block.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- The cases that I had referenced were done solely on cu. With Croatia being a small country with only a few isps it isn't hard to block anyone. 213.202.111.38 (talk) 12:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank's for the reply. I didn't point you to the rfc. I just noticed a similar case there. I didn't know cu are being abused widely. I know only of my case where 4-5 Serbian editors are banning a lot of people. I didn't quite understand "all it involves is looking up the IP address"...213.202.111.38 (talk) 12:11, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think Mike V is being malicious or nasty, merely having worked in Checkuser for so long, his judgment is being called into question a few too many times for my liking. This is (yet another) reason why why admins should create content, or at least do anything creative to give their mind a rest, because continual "police" work seems to self-corrupting over time as part of human nature. See the Milgram experiment and Stanford prison experiment. Ritchie333 07:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Any active admin is going to have their judgment questioned for all sorts of reasons. For example, your judgment was poor in opening that ANI thread and in your subsequent posts. The longer an admin serves, the longer this list becomes. --NeilN 16:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oh Neil .... Neil .... orange peel, if you have empathy for others and see their POV, you don't pick up so many enemies. Looks like the power has gone to your head. Ritchie333 16:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Call your attitude what you want, it looks like you're advocating applying a different set of rules for your friends. --NeilN 16:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Oh Neil .... Neil .... orange peel, if you have empathy for others and see their POV, you don't pick up so many enemies. Looks like the power has gone to your head. Ritchie333 16:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Any active admin is going to have their judgment questioned for all sorts of reasons. For example, your judgment was poor in opening that ANI thread and in your subsequent posts. The longer an admin serves, the longer this list becomes. --NeilN 16:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think Mike V is being malicious or nasty, merely having worked in Checkuser for so long, his judgment is being called into question a few too many times for my liking. This is (yet another) reason why why admins should create content, or at least do anything creative to give their mind a rest, because continual "police" work seems to self-corrupting over time as part of human nature. See the Milgram experiment and Stanford prison experiment. Ritchie333 07:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- I wonder why someone would consider sharing an IP range or ISP as a reason to suspect one's the same person, though. Almost always ISPs and ranges are used by several people. On TV Tropes, where I do have access to a CheckUser like function, we always rely on behavioural evidence in such cases, if there is none then we don't block.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
I notice you censored a viewpoint you don't like. Please do not comment on this discussion further. Ritchie333 17:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
michele abeles
hi ritchie333, I would love to be in touch with the person who wrote the article. I find communication on[REDACTED] very confusing which has prohibited me following up.
If she/he works at the guggenheim, they can track down my contact information or contact my gallery 47 canal.
At the very least I would like to have the way my work is described changed. It is incorrect in summary and I am the authority on my work. I would do this myself but at the moment it will take me too long to figure out how.
thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ma343678 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) @Ma343678: ...the artist is never the best judge of their own work... Muffled 07:55, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Ma343678: The article was created by @Mlynch345:, who is an Associate Manager at the Guggenheim. This page (advertising the editathon where your article was created) gives an office contact address and phone number that might be useful. Ritchie333 07:50, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Mr. Evans
G'day from Oz; I have no opinion of the situation that MartinEvans123 currently finds himself in, I have spent the last 10-20 minutes reading a bit about it. I recall him in a vague way as a good editor, and he is definitely not on my mental list of Misplaced Pages fuck-knuckles. Anyway, I just wanted to draw your attention to this, which is what prompted my recent interest. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 05:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Lipsquid: Martinevans123 is not banned, although if he has now retired I wouldn't be surprised. Please could you strike that comment? Ritchie333 09:11, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Martin responded nicely to blessings and flowers and Kafka (his talk, "the story of a man arrested and prosecuted by a remote, inaccessible authority, with the nature of his crime revealed neither to him nor to the reader"), why should he retire? I didn't ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- I will modify it. Mr. Evans was caught red-handed, admitted his error and apologized. It is nothing like an innocent man who was wrongly prosecuted. He wrote good prose, but was pompous and non-collaborative to the point of being disruptive. Lipsquid (talk) 14:53, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Whom are you telling your point of view? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Whom owns this talk page? I was asked to respond here. No wonder you got along with Martin... I changed the post on flight 370 from banned to blocked. That was my error, I did not intentionally mislead. Lipsquid (talk) 15:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- FFS: To whom are you- or Who owns- this talkpage. Presumably, the WMF :p Muffled 15:13, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Heh, Touche! Lipsquid (talk) 15:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry if I was unclear. The indenting told me it was a reply to me, but I couldn't relate to it, so asked if it was perhaps for someone else. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- No Worries, sorry that my indenting made it unclear. Was just responding inline quickly and trying to keep some visible order. Best! Lipsquid (talk) 16:11, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry if I was unclear. The indenting told me it was a reply to me, but I couldn't relate to it, so asked if it was perhaps for someone else. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Heh, Touche! Lipsquid (talk) 15:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- FFS: To whom are you- or Who owns- this talkpage. Presumably, the WMF :p Muffled 15:13, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Whom owns this talk page? I was asked to respond here. No wonder you got along with Martin... I changed the post on flight 370 from banned to blocked. That was my error, I did not intentionally mislead. Lipsquid (talk) 15:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Whom are you telling your point of view? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- I will modify it. Mr. Evans was caught red-handed, admitted his error and apologized. It is nothing like an innocent man who was wrongly prosecuted. He wrote good prose, but was pompous and non-collaborative to the point of being disruptive. Lipsquid (talk) 14:53, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Martin responded nicely to blessings and flowers and Kafka (his talk, "the story of a man arrested and prosecuted by a remote, inaccessible authority, with the nature of his crime revealed neither to him nor to the reader"), why should he retire? I didn't ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Fine. - EEng, thank you for the image, - would you find one for "Gerda and her infobox flash mob" (as mentioned in an edit summary on the talk of Gustav Holst) also? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- (we can only be thankful nobody asked EEng to dish up an image of a "fuck-knuckle"....) Ritchie333 07:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- ... or Talk:Dr. Young's Ideal Rectal Dilators, for that matter. EEng 08:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- (we can only be thankful nobody asked EEng to dish up an image of a "fuck-knuckle"....) Ritchie333 07:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Fine. - EEng, thank you for the image, - would you find one for "Gerda and her infobox flash mob" (as mentioned in an edit summary on the talk of Gustav Holst) also? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Bohemian Rhapsody
Ritchie, I know you know your music, so I'd like to draw your attention to a discussion on the "Bohemian Rhapsody" page about the genre. An IP recently removed a sourced genre and replaced it with an unsourced genre of rock opera, which I reverted because we had sources for all the existing genres. My revert was itself then reverted. I say rock opera is not a genre, it's a type of album (for example Tommy, Quadrophenia which I know you will know well from your work on The Who). It doesn't apply accurately to Bohemian Rhapsody, which is a song with operatic elements in it (which is something quite different). My research has found articles which support this (http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/11/the-who-made-the-best-rock-opera-ever-but-its-not-the-one-you-think/248431/ "The mere undertaking of such an album—which typically sprawls to a double or triple set—is enough to fire the imagination of anyone in search of a recording that's more than a mere collection of songs" and this http://uk.ign.com/articles/top-14-greatest-rock-operasconcept-albums-of-all-time) which clearly state that a rock opera is akin to a concept album and is not an indivdual song. Please let me know your thoughts on the Talk page. Thanks. Rodericksilly (talk) 15:02, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- I have dropped my 2c on the talk page as requested. Ritchie333 17:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)