Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 05:45, 22 January 2025

Archives
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
edit

You missed

… the master of Abu4real1995: Joseph4real1995. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 13:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

No, I blocked the account, and then unblocked it following an unblock request. PhilKnight (talk) 13:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, after the unblock request was accepted, they’ve gone to nominate articles that I created (possibly because I filed the SPI). I don’t think that that sort of editing is considered as good-faith editing; it is disruptive at best. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 11:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I have re-blocked them. PhilKnight (talk) 16:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Assistance

"I am writing to request assistance regarding recent edits to the "Lovely Runner" article. editor Paper90ll has repeatedly removed information regarding Lovely Runner achievment at the Asia Artist Awards. Despite these reversions, the user continued to rollback the changes and tagging me Ultraviolet Rollback. I would appreciate guidance on how to resolve this ongoing dispute and ensure that the article accurately reflects the subject matter." Puchicatos (talk) 13:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

@PhilKnight As I had reply to Aoidh at their talk page on the same cross-posted topic. It's truly lovely to have WP:ASPERSIONS and WP:PERSONALATTACKS to start 2025. On Lovely Runner, my edit that removed "Material that fails verification be removed" per WP:VERIFY with "WP:VERIFY, WP:OR, WP:SYNTH" in the edit summary however so lovely we have this edit by our dear editor that apparently by following VERIFY, OR, SYNTH was ASPERSIONS as "WP:BITE WP:FAITH"??? On the same article, the inline citation 48 nor 49 doesn't explicity stated that it's awarded for Lovely Runner either, further evidencing that my edit was aligned with Misplaced Pages's policies. On List of awards and nominations received by Byeon Woo-seok, believed to be related to this discussion which our dear editor couldn't give me any acceptable neutral explanation to restore their preferred layout and also likely related to this edit reverting their incorrect updates to the Infobox's count by going against the documentation. In addition, rather perplexing that it was such a thing to discuss first for non-controversial edits when the edits made were per WP:BOLD and didn't requires WP:CONSENSUS. Lastly, where exactly was the ASPERSIONSly the WP:3RR violations and/or "edit warring" violation on either articles??? I would pretty much like you as an administrator to give me an reasonable explanation on such behaviour otherwise this behaviour would continue by going around administrator's talk page and cross-posting the same topic. — 🎉🎆 Paper9oll 🎆🎉 (🔔 • 📝) 13:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I agree with Aoidh's comments. PhilKnight (talk) 18:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Tuwintuwin/Archive

Hello, PhilKnight,

I saw that you closed this SPI case but the main sockmaster, Tuwintuwin, wasn't blocked at all. Was this an oversight? Just wondering as I've run into their editing this evening. Liz 08:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I just saw that they were indefinitely blocked but were unblocked only 3 days later! Liz 08:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Arjayay and DH85868993 keeps reverting my edits.

Hello. First of all, I wanted to say I'm really sorry for my wrongdoings. Second, the two users keep reverting my edits for "Nurburgring". I put the correct info for the Nordscheliefe section, but the two keep reverting it. Click this link and you will see that my info is correct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsLi7HgSuhI Anyway, please stop them from putting wrong data. Thank you, and again, I'm sorry. 2603:8000:99F0:93A0:9932:FB79:1D30:444B (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

You should use the talk page - Talk:Nürburgring - to establish consensus, and not edit war. PhilKnight (talk) 18:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you. And again, I'm sorry. 2603:8000:99F0:93A0:9932:FB79:1D30:444B (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello!!!

I was wondering how to archive stuff? And can you also mentor me as en wiki is different from simple en wiki? Cactus🌵 08:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi Cactusisme, you seem to have figured out how to archive stuff based on your user talk page. I don't mentor users, I suggest you find someone at Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters. PhilKnight (talk) 11:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thanks!! Cactus🌵 11:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

How about the bot? Cactus🌵 11:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand the question "How about the bot?" PhilKnight (talk) 11:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

@PhilKnight Archiving bot Cactus🌵 11:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I have never used an archiving bot, so I am not the right person to ask. PhilKnight (talk) 11:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Anyone you know who uses it? Cactus🌵 11:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Looking at Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters Rosguill uses archivebot and is currently accepting adoptees. You could try them. PhilKnight (talk) 12:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

ok Cactus🌵 12:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Edit warring on Battle of Sidi Brahim

M.Bitton who you recently blocked continues to engage in edit warring on other articles, particularly on Battle of Sidi Brahim where he is persistently disrupting Robinvp11's contributions. He is also being hostile on the talk page, which shows that he is treating editing as a battleground. Surely this warrants a stricter block? 185.165.190.128 (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I know of at least one highly disruptive sock (obsessed with me and certain articles, such as Dominican Restoration War and Dominican War of Independence) who is from the same geolocation as you. For the rest, the article's talk page speaks for itself. M.Bitton (talk) 00:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Looking further in the socking, it looks like Norprobr and Phạm Văn Rạng could well be one and the same. M.Bitton (talk) 00:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't see evidence of serious edit warring. The sock puppet investigations will be actioned by other admins. PhilKnight (talk) 05:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Since the IP is hiding behind a proxy (blocked by Bbb23), then they could be any of my usual stalkers (hard to tell from a single comment). M.Bitton (talk) 12:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

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

Administrator changes

Sennecaster

• Daniel
• Hog Farm

• BozMo
• Ferret
• John M Wolfson
• MaxSem
• Panyd
• Tide rolls
• Titoxd

CheckUser changes

• Daniel
• Elli
• Liz
• ScottishFinnishRadish
• Theleekycauldron

Worm That Turned

Ferret

[REDACTED] Oversight changes

• Daniel
• Elli
• Liz
• ScottishFinnishRadish
• Theleekycauldron

Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, Misplaced Pages:Notability (species) was adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• Following the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: CaptainEek, Daniel, Elli, KrakatoaKatie, Liz, Primefac, ScottishFinnishRadish, Theleekycauldron, Worm That Turned.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Happy New Year!

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025!  ♦ Maliner (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Help to block sockpupperty

Hi admin can you remove User:Kibbutz1967 this account was an sockpuppet of User:Mesbmr6710 Stratospheric78 (talk) 04:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

At least I'm not vandalism like you Kibbutz1967 (talk) 05:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

vandals? Even you are still used your bias results,vandals Majapahit-Sundanese conflict,even the Sack of Singapore? Stratospheric78 (talk) 05:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

when? Kibbutz1967 (talk) 05:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

25 December 2024 why you still forget about it huh? Stratospheric78 (talk) 05:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't mind if you gonna tried many bias results in many article about Konfrontasi and tried to make many battles in Malay-Portuguese conflict Stratospheric78 (talk) 05:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

and? Kibbutz1967 (talk) 05:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

bro tried to be ligma, now even you still want to make many battles but still get removed by the administration now Stratospheric78 (talk) 05:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

who ligma? Kibbutz1967 (talk) 05:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

That's the old account, why should it be leveraged again? And again, what's wrong with the account now, what's the point? Kibbutz1967 (talk) 05:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't care if you still tried to conviced many wikipedian admin about those edits it was your old account,and those admin still tried to block you, even your block still not expired if those admins was blocked you Stratospheric78 (talk) 05:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I created a new account Kibbutz1967 (talk) 05:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

well goodbye if those admin still wanted to block your account they will searched your account even your new account to blocked it Stratospheric78 (talk) 05:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

and those block was not have the expired date if you still tried to make many account Stratospheric78 (talk) 05:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

why do you have to be busy managing my account? Kibbutz1967 (talk) 05:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Requesting Ed Kramer redirect change

(Thank you for letting me know of SlimVirgin's decease; I hadn't noticed this, although I see now that it's hard to miss. If she was your friend, I'm sorry for your sake about her passing, which was certainly a loss to Misplaced Pages.)

I wrote to her with my request because she was listed as the one who protected this redirect. I write to you in hopes that you will pick up my request.

You can see why I am requesting this change, by visiting Edward Kramer (disambiguation). Edward A. Kramer, a computer graphics pioneer referred to in the literature as Ed Kramer, is a new article. The redirect Ed Kramer points only to Edward E. Kramer, a convicted child molester.

That will be disconcerting to those who run across "Ed Kramer" in the computer graphics literature (or in person) and consult Misplaced Pages to learn more about him.

I would have attempted to modify the redirect had it not been protected, so that it would point to Edward Kramer (disambiguation). I do not yet know how to modify an unprotected redirect page, but I would hope to figure it out, should you be so kind as to unprotect it.

Alternatively, you might modify the page yourself to point to Edward Kramer (disambiguation), while retaining its current protection; at your preference.

Thank you for your consideration.

Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 16:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi Larry, thanks for your note, I have changed the redirect to the disambiguation page. Please check that I have done this correctly. Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 16:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Perfect & thank you! Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 16:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Mediation

Hey PhilKnight, I’m sure we talked a lot at one point way back when! Reaching out to alert you of a chat I’ve started with User:Arcticocean about the current state of dispute resolution on Misplaced Pages. If you’re interested in the conversation and taking part (it will make it over to the idea lab eventually), the discussion is over at his talk page. Steven Crossin 21:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Murder of Jo Cox

Could you lose this, thanks. ♦IanMacM♦ 14:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

 Done. PhilKnight (talk) 15:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

About Janessian

Hello, @PhilKnight, I am Nelson. I am one of the guys who encountered the newcomer Janessian. He once again went to revert the edits on one of my articles and essentially it was a similar pattern of reverting with similar reasons. I am not sure if he had done anything to your pages as of now, but I hope to find a solution. I also spoke to @JBW about the matter. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 13:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Some questions

== Some questions == User:PhilKnight You are right, it was a mistake to insist even though the sources I have are correct and reliable. But there is something I want to ask here. If I waited 4 days for objections on the talk page and no objections were received, do I have the right to edit? If I do not have this right, what else can be done and if I have this right, is it considered wrong to withdraw my edit? Asafviki ( Asafviki (talk) 21:17, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

If you wait 4 days and no-one objects, it would be reasonable to edit. If however, you are reverted, you should discuss the edit on the talk page and not edit war. PhilKnight (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

So what should I do if the person who took it back doesn't want to argue in any way, and says things like "I don't have to answer you", "leave my talk page alone", even though I wrote to them on their talk page? Asafviki (talk) 17:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

You should be posting on the article talk page, not the user's talk page. If an editor is reverting and refusing to discuss, you could file a report at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. PhilKnight (talk) 23:24, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Question

Im new here to wikipedia. How can i edit semi-protected pages? Amin Beqiri (talk) 18:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

If you do not have the proper permissions yet, you can use WP:EDITREQUEST... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:00, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

My account needs to be 4 days old and have 10 edits, of course Amin Beqiri (talk) 19:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

In that case, there are plenty of articles that need a little (or more) help, you could try Special:Random to find a couple. - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

I can do test edits in[REDACTED] sandbox Amin Beqiri (talk) 19:18, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Isonomia01

You told them not to remove an unblock review while blocked, but.. . Doug Weller talk 15:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I see that Jpgordon has restored them and disabled the bot. PhilKnight (talk) 16:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

@PhilKnight Good. They must have known it was being archived. I guess I should have disabled the bot myself but restoring archived stuff is not something I like to do, having made a mess once! Doug Weller talk 16:36, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Help with blocking IP-hopping climate vandal?

Hi, Phil. I am asking for help because I see that you blocked a similar vandal last August.

There are two IP ranges that have been adding unsourced edits to climate boxes for many months: first one and second one. Both of those ranges geolocate to the same university in California. The ranges have been exclusively used to perform climate box edits for more than a year, on hundreds of pages, with many instances of mysterious unsourced changes to some of the values.

The community has done spot reversions and have given warnings (see, e.g., User talk:131.179.133.44). That individual IP address was blocked for 72 hours on January 10, which gave us a respite. I spent hours cleaning up hundreds of pages of unsourced/dubious edits.

Sadly, the first IP range seems to have re-activated their vandalism today. If you think it's justified, could you possibly make a long-term block for both of the IP ranges? The risk of blocking a helpful user appears to be low, given the lack of any constructive edit in these ranges over the last year.

I'm not sure if it's relevant to your decision, but from behavioral evidence, the IP vandal might be evading a permanent block for Aaghdam1722, who has edited many of the same pages in the same way.

Thanks for any help! — hike395 (talk) 05:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! — hike395 (talk) 05:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)