User talk:EvergreenFir/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Wikipedia will lose credibility if your censorship of Swedish rape stats persists

It is not my intention to engage in editing wars but it is my right to ask why users such as yourself are trying to hide recent news reports from Sweden in favor of old data. I don't care if you wish to remove less mainstream references but you should not remove news reports on alarming increases in rapes of Swedish women. These are encyclopaedic facts.

I am shocked that:

1. You are a woman because your censorship of Sweden's being the 2nd highest country for rape in the world is negligent of a fact that demands attention in order to create the change that protects women there.

2. As a sociology graduate how can you in all good conscience, censor mainstream news reports about how Swedish women are afraid to leave their homes because of the violence perpetrated against them

3. As an assistant professor you should be ashamed of yourself for hiding recent research by 2 Swedish newspapers

4. You are American and sit comfortably in your safe country while Swedish women have to fight silently because hypocrites like you do not want the world to hear how "Sweden has become the rape capital of the Western world" to quote a recent news article.

Is it because the facts - which are encyclopaedic - oppose your personal ideologies?

I am a woman too but ashamed to have you in the same category. 41.13.194.161 (talk) 06:31, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

There's a lot I could rebut aand reply to, but I'm not sure you're interested in sincere dialog. If so, let me know. I'll just say it's very easy for the types of sources you suggest using to spin statistics. For example, [www.10news.one/shocking-statistics-1-in-8-swedish-women-will-be-raped/amp/ an improper use of annual crime rates] says Swedish women have a 1 in 8 lifetime chance of being a victim of rape. This article, however, cites experts explaining why the "rape capital" moniker is problematic. Here in the USA, for the record, the lifetime risk of sexual assault and rape for women is about 1 in 5, about 80% of whom were age 25 or less at first assault. The numbers for child sexual abuse are worse (1 in 4 girls, 1 in 6; same source). It would be incorrect to suggest I or anyone in the USA sits comfortably. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:02, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Don’t Stop Believing

Can u find a more specific genre than rock? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.9.249.231 (talk) 20:02, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Padlock Barnstar
	Thnx for protecting many of those pages edited by PianoManFolkRock socks. I didn't realize how persistent this person is. Jerm (talk) 17:18, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Jerm: Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 19:30, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

IP you blocked has returned to do similar nonsense

Hi - Special:Contributions/70.118.212.200, obsessed with editing pages to say that cancelled TV series are still running, has returned. You blocked them in December for a short period. Any chance of further action? Thanks. OsFish (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Just an update to say that another admin has blocked them, so no worries. OsFish (talk) 07:58, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@OsFish: Thanks and sorry for not replying immediately! EvergreenFir (talk) 19:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

RevDel

Any chance you could RevDel this? Thanks, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 00:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: Done! Thanks for reporting it. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift action. Much appreciated. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 01:05, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Blocked IP back again

EvergreenFir, you blocked 80.5.34.111 late on January 1 for 31 hours due to extensive vandalism at Strictly Come Dancing (series 11). They returned a few hours after their block expired on January 3 and vandalized that article some more. Do you think you could reinstate the block for a longer period, so the article can be left intact? Thank you for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:05, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done EvergreenFir (talk) 04:14, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Much appreciated. They returned from their block a little while ago to do more vandalism, about seven hours after your new block expired. Doesn't seem like they're here to work on the encyclopedia, though I hope a longer (or indefinite?) block would at least keep erroneous material out of the articles in question. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:39, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

BlueMoonset thanks for messaging. Blocked again EvergreenFir (talk) 04:03, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Please protect the Draft evasion article during the current war scare

Hello EvergreenFir, - Yesterday I thanked you for reverting a humongous nuisance edit from the Draft evasion article, and I am wondering if you can get the article protected during the current war scare.

The Draft evasion article was coasting along at approx. 400 pageviews / day. With the current events in Iran / Iraq, though, it has leapt up to 12-16,000 / day over the last four days.

Several years ago, I attempted to get it semi-protected but was turned down. With the amazing surge in pageviews, though, and the controversy surrounding the current war scare, vandalism by IP users is sure to occur, and in fact has occurred twice over the last three days. Just now, a third IP user added unnecessary padding.

I suspect the Draft evasion article is being viewed now largely by terrified young people and their parents, and not just in the U.S. Unlike many articles on the subject, it is objective and thoroughly sourced. It would be tragic if some clever vandal manages to distort viewers' understanding of the subject.

I do not have the time to monitor and edit WP on a daily basis. I wonder if you, with a lot of earned credibility here, would be willing to try to get the Draft evasion article protected at least from IP users for the duration of the war scare? I will look for your answer, if any, below. Thanks for listening! Best, - Babel41 (talk) 02:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Babel41: I will keep an eye on the page and if it gets out of hand I will semi-protect it. Page protections are "responsive" instead of "proactive", so I'll need to wait a bit. But I absolutely agree it has high risk for vandalism and disruptive editing. Many thanks for keeping an eye on the page! Let me ping Doug Weller who might be willing to add it to his watchlist as well. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:13, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Added. I agree it's not necessary right now. Doug Weller talk 14:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Dear EvergreenFir and Doug Weller, - I so appreciate your adding the article to your watchlists, and so will many others. Thank you! (P.S. A U.S. national commission on the draft is expected to release its report in March ... more controversy ahead.) Best, - Babel41 (talk) 04:55, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I added page views and section sizes to the TP. Mathglot (talk) 04:38, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Personal attacks and block evasion

Thank you for the block of 2600:387:B:982:0:0:0:1 (talk · contribs). Please consider something a lot more than 31 hours. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 05:29, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

• And disable use of their talk page. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 05:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Mongoloid

Hello, you recently left a comment on my page telling me to stop removing content from the Mongoloid that was original research, which I clearly explained contained statements, ideas, and words which weren't in the references given.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid#Finns_and_Sami

None of the references cited in this section contain the word "Mongoloid" and none of them make any reference at all to the racial origin of Finnic people. Their placement in here endorses the idea that a genetic haplogroup is connected to racial features of ancient populations and modern people in Asia and Europe, something that is not supported by any of the references in here and by modern science. That is pure original research and requires no "discussion" at the talk page. I am asking you to read the references in the article, use your search function to try and find the word "Mongoloid" within them and then respond to me with a reason why you think this section should not be deleted.

-Hunan201p (talk) 21:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

@Hunan201p: thank you for messaging and commenting on the article's talk page. While you may be absolutely right, it does need some discussion even if to get someone to say they agree. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:13, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

IPv6 block

Thank you for invoking the /64 rangeblock of the editor who was harrassing me. I am curious about the policy on /64 rangeblocks for IPv6. I would think that they should be standard operating procedure, given that devices are typically always provisioned a /64 range all to themselves. Is there some reason that you decided to issue the rangeblock, while @MSGJ: did not? Thanks again. Elizium23 (talk) 00:56, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, /64 blocks are common and you are right that they are often assigned to one device/modem (WP:IPV6). But it's fairly normal to block just one IP unless there's been disruption from the whole range. Some places (rare though they may be) do not assign one /64 to a device and sometimes the ranges are from public access points. I tend to use the rangeblocks a bit more than some, though. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:26, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

EvergreenFir, thanks! I appreciate the informative reply. Elizium23 (talk) 04:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

FYI

I just saw some of the ANI thread that also involved Leppaberry-123. I've opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LightFromABrightStar in case you have anything you want to add there. I'd never heard of the original LTA, but that was an interesting connection as well. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 20:05, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

@Deacon Vorbis: Thanks, I'll check it out! EvergreenFir (talk) 20:36, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Choices

I've chosen mellow over melodramatic so I'm not ignoring your question. I've decided to steer clear of that highly controversial topic. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:52, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Atsme: sounds good, friend. Appreciate you letting me know. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:59, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for providing vital information about the 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak! Timwi (talk) 02:25, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Praxdico

May want to revoke talk page access. S0091 (talk) 23:34, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@S0091: Done! Thank you for letting me know. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:38, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Silly kids! (Well, I hope anyway). S0091 (talk) 23:42, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspicious IP addresses

Hello EvergreenFir, I want to say thanks for your vigilance in guarding against probable sock accounts at the contested pages during the 7 day block of DerekHistorian and myself. It must take a lot of patience to manage all of our drama around here. Unfortunately, I have another suspicious IP user to inform you of. This IP reverted material that had previously been reverted by DerekHistorian, just hours after he and I were blocked. The contested page is interracial marriage, here is the history of that page and you can see the January 29 edit by user 24.247.60.2:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Interracial_marriage&action=history

I really hate to have to nag you with all these page histories but there does seem to be an IP sock puppet following DerekHistorian everywhere he goes. But since we're all about to be snowed in here in this country, I figured, "what the heck". Again, thank you very much for your helping me out around here. -- Hunan201p (talk) 22:20, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Is not

The one-year lockdown for the Sony Pictures Home Entertainment article not excessive? Would it not be better to act against the miscreants that are vandalising, rather than prevent the article from being cared for (an article which, apart from the deletion-reversion activity, has only been poorly attended)? I would shorten the lock-down, and/or create a mechansim by which edits can be suggested. You will never get all talented editors to have sufficient trust to log, and it makes no sense to stop their (our) part in forward progress because of one or a few other n'er-do-wells. Cheers. A former prof. 2601:246:C700:19D:B1B4:8009:201F:381E (talk) 15:07, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Choose to do a year again mostly because of the history on the page ([1]). IP and non-confirmed editors should be able to make a request by following the info at WP:ER. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:28, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Horse Eye Jack

Hello, I made an ANI-notice for User:Horse Eye Jack. You can find it here. Your input would be appreciated. Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 13:24, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I have nothing to do with the user pj masks s4

I am new to wkipedia create my account for 2 days, it is not my fault that the name of that user is similar to mine--Pj masks season 4 (talk) 17:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello EvergreenFir,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

• There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
• A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
• A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
• A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

And now?

Hello there. At Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RRArchive403#User:Horse_Eye_Jack_reported_by_User:CaradhrasAiguo_(Result:_no_violation), you advised those, who opposed Horse Eye Jack's actions, that if there's a need for admin intervention, WP:ANI is the place to detail the issues. And so I did. The result was, in my view, not completely satisfying. One uninvolved editor stepped in, all kinds of rules were appealed to and/or dismissed, with or without sound reasoning. Unfortunately, no administrator came around to make any sort of judgement, and all the discussion lead to was the archive. What is the next step to take? Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 09:53, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Block evasion?

Hi EvergreenFir, I think 102.254.36.118 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is the same editor as 102.130.110.192 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) who you recently blocked due to block evasion. Both IPs are from South Africa and both editing similar articles, such as Sandy Cheeks. Can you take a look? S0091 (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Roger Joseph Boscovich

Uninvolved editor here. Think you can semi-protect Roger Joseph Boscovich for 48 hours or something to force the users involved in the dispute there to discuss their objections on the talk page? So far they haven't done so. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:04, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, EvergreenFir. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Bobherry Talk Edits 01:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

EvergreenFir lack of knowledge

I was wondering why you edit statements about cosmology when you don't have any stated education in it. You seem like the totally wrong person to comment on the subject or delete anyone's thoughts. Can you expand on the subject? Thenewbigbang (talk) 10:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@Thenewbigbang: Wikipedia just cites, summarizes, and paraphrases professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary. We do not allow (much less rely on) an editor's personal knowledge beyond their ability to regurgitate some other source.

Article talk pages are for improvements based on the aforementioned types of sources and the site's policies -- not any editor's claims of knowledge nor original research. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:31, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@Thenewbigbang: Ian Thomson is correct. No editor need be an expert on a topic to edit on it. We just summarize and cite existing reliable sources. And we are not a forum for editors/users to discuss the topics generally. Please use Twitter or Reddit for that. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:32, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm not interested in editing anything. I'm not here to battle conventionalism. I'm here to explain our universe based on the laws of physics. The big bang theory starts out breaking the first law by stating nothing existed before the event anf if someone says "that isn't what it says", they need need to be checked into a hospital. The big bang also breaks the second law of thermodynamics by assuming a cloud of gas and dust creates fusion with the weakest force in the universe. Really? If it was that easy, why couldn't we do it here? Now, I will explain our universe following the laws. Everything was already here when the big bang happened. There. Get it? Why state the universe was born a mere 13.8 billion years ago? That's an eyeblink. It was here. All the matter to make the galaxies was here. All the dark matter was here. It was just two objects colliding in existing, static space. The first law totally followed. Einstein couldn't have said it better himself. Now, the second law of thermodynamics. All the galaxies in my theory began their lives in the plasma state. They have cooled from the very first second because they are shrapnel from a collision between two gargantuan objects at an astronomical speed. So instead of close has and dust magically gaining heat breaking the second law, my theory follows it, again, perfectly. So, I won't bother Wiki any more. I've found a website that believes me. I know the whole world is a victim of conventionalism just as it was when the Earth was the center of the universe. I get it. The only problem is that countless scientists with great careers have to deal with a theory that doesn't work. I know because I read about it. I'm not saying it to irritate people. I'm not saying the world is flat and we didn't go to the moon. I am explaining the universe the way it works, by law. There is no other way to do it, is there? Thenewbigbang (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

By the way. My name is Michael Pollock. Just Google my name followed by "universe" and you will be directed to my nearly 3000 answers with 250,000 views. Everything you don't want to figure out is there. Have at it. Thenewbigbang (talk) 22:43, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

@Thenewbigband: You said, "I'm not interested in editing anything. ... I'm here to explain our universe based on the laws of physics." That is not Wikipedia is for. It is an encyclopedia and users are its editors. I am glad you found other forums to disucss this, but Wikipedia is not one of them. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

...So...You post alot on Quora? GMG^talk 23:34, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Sky Broadband IPs

Thank you for blocking 2a02:c7f:1476:6200::/64. They've been persistent. 2A02:C7F:149D:6100:* and 176.249.92.210, also to be found in the Lunar Jim history, seem to be the same bored young person. I thought about reporting them at AIV, but it's not easy to sufficiently warn the shifting IPv6s. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 03:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

@BlackcurrantTea: Unfortunately the /42 range appears too broad. If the 2A02:C7F:149D:6100::/64 or 176.249.92.210 begin to edit again, let me know. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:40, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I'll take your word on the /42; IPv6 is still fairly opaque to me. Some experiments with the {{IP range calculator}} template may help, and I've bookmarked the Mediawiki page about calculating them. For now I have Lunar Jim on my watchlist. Thanks again. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 09:55, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Kashmiris

Hey EvergreenFir, the edit[2] by User:Emraanmugloo was actually right, though they didn't explained the changes. But anyways, कॉशिर लुख is plural while कॉशुर लुख is singular. Here we are talking about whole ethnicity, so without any doubt plural form has to be included.ML ⁹¹¹ 18:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@My Lord: Thank you for the clarification! EvergreenFir (talk) 20:35, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

2606:A000:1129:CE97:5C84:5E9F:2B52:679D

According to filter logsuser:2606:A000:1129:CE97:5C84:5E9F:2B52:679D is IP hopping with user:2606:A000:1014:238:C3E:C854:D28C:FDE with intent to vandalize. It won't let me report to AIV because they are already range blocked from a specific page. CLCStudent (talk) 19:40, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

She just triggered the filter after her final warning. CLCStudent (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: blocked them. thanks for report.  EvergreenFir (talk) 19:47, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! CLCStudent (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

non-english sources

Since you put me on discretionary sanctions, I'd like to ask you: Is there a new policy in Wikipedia, that allows only references to sources in English? --Raphael1 15:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@Raphael1: No. Non-English sources are allowed but, if an English version or equivalent is available, they are preferred. The policy is at WP:NONENG. EvergreenFir (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Okay, so what's wrong with my edit, that has been reverted here? --Raphael1 16:05, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@Raphael1: Just to be clear, you are not under any discretionary sanctions. I only have notified you of the discretionary sanctions about American Politics (see WP:AWARE).

As for this edit, the website puri.sm is in English. The reason I reverted was that there does not appear to be any editorial oversight, which is a minimum requirement for WP:RS. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Long jump

I noticed the page protection you placed on Long jump, however I feel you enforced the incorrect version. The current version eliminates the provision for sources, notations for Altitude and most importantly places an artificial limit on which country's national records are included in the article. The previous version had all of those beneficial additional elements. Trackinfo (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

I thought the information removal was a clear cut case of vandalism, but, apparently I was mistaken. Good luck pleading your case. —Locke Cole • t • c 23:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you so much for making kids TV articles great again! Because of people like you, these types of articles almost never look like a kid scribbled stupidly false information into them.

CatScratch12345 (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Another vandal account

You've blocked Vanda!_Account_No._1, Vanda!_Account_No._3 seems to be another vandal account, currently vandalising random pages. Please block this account too.   ApChrKey   ^Talk 20:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Looks like Materialscientist got it! Thanks for the alert. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:24, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Re: Apologies

Don't worry about that, it happens often. I know IP users are known for vandalism and disruption as I've once been a registered user too. But that guy has been adding additional unsourced information for quite a long time now. I Am Weasel airdates debate has been on since 2011 and I was one of the researchers back then who didn't find any clue about the exact last date (check the talk page). I've been watching the article for vandalism and disputes ever since. Best regards. 170.244.29.52 (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk page access

Back in November you blocked Special:Contributions/2A02:C7F:C8B:7500:0:0:0:0/64 but they have been editing user talk pages disruptively. Can you revoke talk page access? Binksternet (talk) 13:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Binksternet:  Done Thanks for letting me know. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying User:IagoQnsi of inappropriate tagging of established users as "single-purpose accounts"

I spent a bunch of time investigating who tagged all those clearly-established users on the talk page of Spanish flu as "single-purpose accounts", found it to be User:IagoQnsi, found which edits it was, and collected the contributions of those mis-tagged users. Then, when I finally publish that edit... only to find that you beat me to it. :-D Nice job.

And then, after removing the inappropriate tag for User:Yungeditor, all of a sudden, that user starts acting inappropriately and deleted a clearly-legitimate comment. I left a message on that user's talk page, but before I could revert the change, you did it already. Dang, you're on top of things.

Thanks for your work. That was difficult and tedious for me to do my part, though. Shouldn't there be admins patrolling these things? BirdValiant (talk) 00:46, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@BirdValiant: Thank you for looking over that talk page and cleaning it up. I hope more admins will start following it and watching over it. It seems to be a mess with all the external recruiting. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:22, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

IPv6 math

Regarding the WP:ANI thread about the /32 block, I think you meant to say 2^96 addresses. 128 bits minus 32 in the mask gives 96 bits, and they're all power-of-2. Elizium23 (talk) 06:41, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

@Elizium23: at first I thought you were correct that I'd messed up the number, but they're really the same! I just converted to scientific notation it turns out. 79000 trillion trillion sounds bigger than 2^96 though. :) EvergreenFir (talk) 06:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Aha, good call there. Within a rather large rounding margin, though. Elizium23 (talk) 07:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Spanish flu and WP:GS/COVID19

Just wanted to say that I support your decision to cover the article under the COVID-19 General Sanctions. Good call. El_C 03:11, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the words of support. im complete amenable to alterations or removal if that's what other admins think is appropriate. I can see how some view it as a stretch; I agree that it wouldn't apply to the entirety of the topic, jjust the overlap. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Fer sure. These trying times call for decisive action, on Wikipedia, too. Thank you for doing your part. El_C 04:27, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hello, EvergreenFir. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- FlightTime (open channel) 00:42, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 16:12, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Selfstudier's behavior at Talk:Gaza War (2008–09)

This user has, in addition to making repeatedly insulting and combative posts on the talk page, insisted on edit-warring over a tag applied to indicate an active an ongoing discussion about NPOV. This, along with bullying behavior from Nableezy, who have serially reverted all recent attempted changes to the this page, made any improvements to this article nigh impossible and discussion an absolute nightmare. Is there another solution here other than ANI? Wikieditor19920 (talk) 18:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, it is Wikieditor19920 that has a habit of adding article-wide tags when discussions don't go their way.[3] [4] [5] in addition to the mentioned article. This is what happened the last time I saw them make such a complaint to an admin page: [6]. O3000 (talk) 19:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

There is an active discussion with an equal number of editors arguing both sides at the referenced page (about 3-3). The tag applied, NPOV, indicates this ongoing discussion, and serves to notify other editors of this discussion. There is currently no consensus that either criteria for removal has been met: 1) that the issue has been resolved or 2) there is no issue it at all. It is disruptive to repeatedly remove it absent 1) or 2), and counterproductive, since tags help bring additional opinions into the talk page. When Selfstudier was reverted on removal of the tag, he moved it to a limited section of the article when it clearly applies to the article broadly (The content under discussion is present in the lead and several sections of the article). What I ask here is that policy be followed and {{u|Selfstudier} do the right thing. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 20:16, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

What the hell does this even mean?

You sent me a message, but I have no idea what you're talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.227.215.190 (talk) 03:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I've responded on their talk page. Doug Weller talk 07:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 17:23, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Sex differences in human physiology

Sorry, I must have edit conflicted with you on the undo on this article. Feel free to remove my warning to the user if you wish. Meters (talk) 06:23, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Fair is fair

It's only fair to say that I was wrong about your RfA. You're doing a great job as an admin. I'm sorry I didn't support. TY for all you do. — Ched (talk) 16:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ched: Thank you for the kind words! I greatly appreciate it. :) EvergreenFir (talk) 18:32, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Re: 120.29.67.231

Hi, I would like to request if the block for this anon vandal can also be extended to his user talk page. The vandal continues to post inappropriate edits to his talk page as seen here, here and here. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 06:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Could you check if Iliaa10, who recently made a disruptive edit to Albanian Armed Forces, is a sockpuppet of the user that also made disruptive edits to Kosovo Security Force and List of equipment of the Albanian Armed Forces. If yes, would you consider applying protection to Albanian Armed Forces until the vandalism subsides? Thanks. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for your comments at this thread. I realise it's all academic now, but since you asked me a question directly: I am on the RAC of the Vegan Society. This means that I provide advice to the Vegan Society on academic/research matters; in practice, this means I'm sometimes asked to do peer reviews, contribute short pieces for the society's website, and speak at events. I have never been paid by the Vegan Society, or received any kind of funding (directly or indirectly) from them. You mentioned in the thread that I should use a COI template on my userpage. I'm not really sure what that means, but I have added a note about this issue. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

@J Milburn: Thanks for the reply! I appreciate the clarification on the Vegan Society thing. As for the COI template, I have one at User:EvergreenFir#COI_declarations, for example. But that statement you posted looks fine as well. Just use caution when editing on topics you are close to. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thanks - I try to, and, generally (e.g., at FAC), other editors have been very supportive. This is the first time I've run into problem a problem like this. Hoping it will be the last! Josh Milburn (talk) 17:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

Please cease your opposition of the Cabal. If you continue to oppose the Cabal, as you did at WP:AN, you may be eliminated from existence as punishment for your thoughtcrime. 

Spectrum {{UV}} 2604:2000:8FC0:4:68BA:3B32:8613:8B6D (talk) 03:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Everyone knows there is no cabal. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Was my first April fools on wikipedia and a flop anyway. Oh well. Back to GS/COVID enforcement.  EvergreenFir (talk) 04:57, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

No worries, I thought it was OK as these things go, so don't be too discouraged. Now more than ever I think an escape from the events of the day is needed. Spectrum {{UV}} 2604:2000:8FC0:4:68BA:3B32:8613:8B6D (talk) 05:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

My apologies. I accidentally undid you there. Ignore the autonotice., already undone.. Meters (talk) 04:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I was just going to see what it was you had posted to start this, and I blew it. I so don't want to get pulled into April Fools arguments ,on either side. Meters (talk) 04:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Meters: no worries. Was my first attempt anyway. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I do not regret removing your joke post but I also have no interest in arguing about the matter. You are a great editor. Let's move on. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen328: sounds good. Thank you for the post. :) EvergreenFir (talk) 05:45, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

• Don't let the old fuddy duddies keep you down. The world could use more fun and happiness, not less. Thank you. PackMecEng (talk) 17:57, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Hello EF, I woke up this morning with the thought that it is hard to know how the stresses of these times are affecting our fellow editors. I apologize if my posts at AN added to yours. I agree with the message above that you are an excellent editor. Best regards MarnetteD|Talk 16:17, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: Thank you and likewise. I know everyone's stressed and I realized my temporarily hurt feelings weren't what matters in this situation. And, unfortunately, the warnings about COVID-related April Fools was prescient and warranted. I appreciate the stroopwafels! EvergreenFir (talk) 20:10, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. My sweet tooth was acting up so one of the stroopwafels (unpictured) has a bite taken out of it :-D MarnetteD|Talk 20:13, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I’ve been on the fringe of some April Fool’s tomfoolery myself... read and be entertained. Ah, we were so young and innocent four years ago... this led to this, memorialized here. Montanabw^(talk) 00:00, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

An observation re Gaza war

Now that the ANI seems done with, I wanted to make some comments:

More specifically, the first intervention you made whereby you redacted a comment I made here, I assume based on the theory that it was a personal attack. This comment was made immediately in response to an edit that also included a personal attack but you chose not to redact that. While I am sure it was not your intention, in practice, your intervention exacerbated the situation.

You then closed the "second RFC" that I created with the statement that it was about the same sentence as the first. That this is not the case is primae facie evident by examination of the questions. Had you also closed the first (non-neutral, ill-posed and of no value in resolving the questions or the tagging) and set a new one altogether then that would have been a helpful intervention.

Finally, your reversion of my edits following closure of the second RFC have no basis since they had nothing to do with the first RFC, a properly sourced edit should not be reverted in general and I fail to see how either edit could be described either as "pointy" or "inappropriate". To begin with, I was refraining from editing them into the article while the RFC (mine, not the first) was running and secondly I had already announced that I would be editing them in when it was closed, which is what I did.

I'm not going to do anything about it, I just wanted, now that the fuss has died down, to say these few things that I had refrained from mentioning while there was a live discussion at ANI and which I considered would only be a distraction had I raised them there.

Thanks for listening. Selfstudier (talk) 10:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect glyph

I am not sure why you reverted my edit on the Sardinia page. Can't you see that’s an incorrect glyph for the Greek letter phi (φ)? I just replaced it with the normal phi character. What was there before, and is back there now since you restored it, is a special phi glyph, not the normal Greek character. I mean, you’re an admin, which makes you all-powerful, so if it’s so important to you that a weird glyph be there, you can have it. But I’ve been a professional linguist all my life, and I’m in my seventies, so I think I know what I’m doing. Plus, I’ve made tens of thousands of valuable contributions to the Wikipedia over a good dozen years. Pasquale (talk) 20:43, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

And, by the way, there’s another problem with the Greek characters in the same Etymology section, which I won’t bother fixing now, given your propensity for reverting. The Greek name for the island, which occurs three times in that section, should have an acute accent over the ω. If you studied Classical Greek, then you would know that an acute accent over a final vowel automatically turns to grave before another word (as in: ἡ Σαρδὼ πάλαι). But, if the word occurs in isolation or before punctuation, the accent is acute, not grave. Pasquale (talk) 21:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pasquale: Sorry about that! The revert was for some tomfoolery in the Climate section. I've restored your edit for (Αργυρόφλεψ). The revert was definitely not related to your edit; it was my mistake that I did not notice it when undoing the other editors' disruption. Please feel free to make the omega-related edit (I am quite unfamiliar with Greek other than a few of the glyphs). EvergreenFir (talk) 22:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Oops! I totally understand. Sorry for the lecturing tone. Pasquale (talk) 22:08, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pasquale: No worries. I know it can be very frustrating, especially because Wikipedia just says "you were reverted" without details. Thank you for reaching out EvergreenFir (talk) 22:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Stalking and monitoring by BirdValiant

I'm an American that has neutral views towards countries that America views as adversaries. I denounce any wild accusation that I may be a communist infiltrator. Second, many articles relating to China all have an Anti-Chinese political bias to it that are regarded as fact with citations from news articles without any verifiable proof. I'm amused that BirdValiant has taken an immense interest in stalking me and would like to have actions taken against me. As a user you have no right to prevent me from using this website or the right of others.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yungeditor (talk • contribs) 03:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@Yungeditor: can't say I was expecting this type of tone. I've not looked into it yet, but has someone called you a communist infiltrator? Also, you are mistaken: editing is a privilege, not a right, and can be revoked through many methods. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Could you take a look at Yungeditor's recent edits relating to the Chinese government

Hello. During the Spanish Flu RFC, where many users were being tagged as single-purpose accounts, one of the users tagged was User:Yungeditor; this user, however, deleted several votes during that RFC without any explanation. I watch the user's talk page after the incident, and noticed that another user, Horse Eye Jack, reverted Yungeditor's recent edits on the Uyghurs page. I then looked at Yungeditor's other recent edits and saw that they very clearly appear to be biased in favor of the Chinese government: removal of a large section and well-sourced section of the Xi Jinping article, addition of largely-unsourced pro-Chinese-government rhetoric, removal of Wiki-links for Xinjiang re-education camps, etc. Many of the user's contributions are mis-labelled and mis-tagged as minor edits.

I have reverted those other edits which I deemed to be out-of-line, but I think that more action may be needed. I hope you can take a look at the situation. Thanks. BirdValiant (talk) 03:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@BirdValiant: thank you for commenting. I've blocked the user as WP:NOTHERE. You can view the rationale on their user talk page. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:41, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: Thanks for your extensive investigation. In hindsight, I probably should've compiled at least some of those diffs for you, instead of just making you do all the work. On the other hand, I guess it's good that you saw everything for yourself so that you could come to your own conclusion. Also, I didn't even bother to look at older edits, so thanks for taking the time to do that.

I should also probably add that I do not remember ever calling anyone an "infiltrator" of any kind. I also consider that the notion that I was "stalking" YungEditor is incorrect, because I had noticed a pattern of disruptive behavior which was also noticed by several other users; WP:HA#NOT

Anyway, thanks again for all your hard work. BirdValiant (talk) 06:30, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Ketamine

I don't care at all about ketamine lol. That's not a page that interests me. So if it has misinformation I don't mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MountainTraveler (talk • contribs) 22:13, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@MountainTraveler: Cool beans. As long as you stop making edits that are unsourced or counter to the provided sources. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:14, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

This is a mistake...

You templated a discussion here to prevent discussion on the reliability of a YouTube video as a source. For only one editor was this the main concern of the discussion. Please remove the template and make an appropriate statement instead, thankyou. ~ R.T.G 22:25, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

No. Please see your user talk page. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) RTG, the discussion is closed and you have been topic banned. That is not up to debate. El_C 22:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)And now you have taken it upon yourself to topic ban me. Only one editor saw this as a discussion about the validity of the video rather than the necessity of coverage of the topic. I was in response. I am not causing the disruption. That editor posted to ANI that I was edit warring for one revert, out of two edits to the article ever, over perhaps two weeks. You posted your personal opinion to the ANI thread, which you expected to be self explanatory. When I provided an argument that I was in fact following the requested guideline, which is not the same as WP:RS it should be noted, you templated the thread instantly, and went around templating all related discussion and topic banning me. I told the editor you are playing bully for that they did not know what they were talking about when they didn't. They were insistent, and claimed that assertion to be a personal attack. I pointed out that they did in fact make an error. They brought it to ANI. You are playing bully. Well bully for you then. ~ R.T.G 22:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to ask for a review of the topic ban. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:37, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, I reviewed it. And I support its application. El_C 22:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You participated in the discussion. You know very well that statement is an abuse of your position. I've no interest in further discussion with either of you. Reactionary application is obviously gathering on you El C. Good luck with that. ~ R.T.G 22:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@RTG: at the present moment, I am the uninvolved admin overseeing your contributions — you cannot wish me away. And you must refrain from innuendo. I won't warn you about that again. El_C 22:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Fringes edits by an "account on mission”

Hello, I got awareness of fringe edits by Hunan201p (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Hunan201p) promotion racist ideas of “blonde haired and blue eyed” warriors in East Asia. His used references do not support these claims and only mention unknown origin in the case of the Xianbei. More fringe are his edits on blonde (hair) or Genghis Khan (also see talkpage). I think many edits of Hunan violate WP:SCIRS and WP:WEIGHT. Additionally some things about him remember me on the long term vandal Tirgil34 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Tirgil34). I mean blonde or red haired turks are his main target, as seemingly Hunan. Anyway, someone should watch this user carefully. Best regards.38.121.43.208 (talk) 15:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I would recommend filing at WP:SPI if you think there is sockpuppetry happening. As for the edits on Blonde (hair), I can look but I am not an expert by any means. If Hunan is using reliable sources, then it should be discussed on the article's talk page. I am going to ping Doug Weller who has some more experience in this realm. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:00, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I looked and couldn't see anything familiar. Doug Weller talk 18:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear EvergreenFir: I would like to point out that this IP user is likely WorldCreaterFighter, a notorious sockmaster, based on his edit history regarding me and various subjects WorldCreaterFighter is known to obsessively edit, such as Austroasiatic languages. Multiple active sockpuppet investigations involve his name as I type this. - Hunan201p (talk) 01:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Topic ban from COVID

I made only two edits to that page ever. I discussed the issue on another page only when it was brought to ANI. The template says I can appeal to you directly. If RexxS doesn't ask me about YouTube videos, they aren't going to hear any more about it. There was nobody else involved. RexxS was not interested in improving/removing the YouTube source, but other editors were. I may have found a source which helps us achieve that, which was not easy. If RexxS starts an inconsequential argument with me or I feel like doing the same with them, I will report directly to this page before even responding... There is no point in me apologising to RexxS because it was at the point of claiming I understood their complaint that they lost it, so better to let them alone. Though I think the handling is a bit abrupt to say the least, I would consider you with some trust otherwise, so I am asking you to remove the ban on my understanding and see if I can behave myself... Does that constitute a resolution? ~ R.T.G 01:25, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) A bit of friendly advice for you, RTG: I took a cursory glance at your talk page after seeing you pop up on WP:GS/COVID and WP:ANI. Put simply, in my experience, editors that continuously edit disruptively without engaging in the BRD cycle tend to find themselves, more often than not, blocked outright, especially when edit warring is involved. I strongly urge you to reconsider your approach to editing if you wish to edit constructively on this project, especially when there have been numerous other editors that have already asked you to as well. If you haven't noticed already, the project as a whole has astonishingly low tolerance for disruptive editing and edit warring, and rightfully so. OhKayeSierra (talk) 03:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@RTG: I feel like the entire issue is being missed. The primary source of disruption was your behavior on the article's talk page, which you edited more than twice. You were not wrong that WP:MEDRS was a guideline and thus not ironclad, but what was most baffling was your unwillingness or inability to understand why that video was not remotely appropriate as a source. This would have resolved differently if "well, okay, let's find some other better sources" was the conclusion.

But it appears you were stuck on the Youtube issue as well as whether or not any medical doctor would be an "expert source" on general pathology. All that would have been fine, if a bit tendentious, but you went on to continue this line of argument on ANI and multiple user's talk pages. That multiple editors (your peers) from different areas of specialty and experience were disagreeing with you should have been the clue that even if you didn't understand why, you were not in the majority, acting against consensus, and possible "wrong".

What prompted me to give the t-ban was your behavior immediately following the ANI closure. You were not dropping the stick. You behavior toward El C was poor. You were warned by Acroterion to stop but you did not and they blocked you for it. Now, immediately after your block expired, you decide to antagonize El C further ([7]).

I am not convinced by any means that you will cease this pattern of disruption and thus I will not overturn the t-ban. If you want, and only with your blessing, I will copy-paste an appeal for you to WP:AN for review by editors and admins totally uninvolved with this. That is up to you, but you have the right.

Despite all this, and given these difficult times with SARS CoV19, I hope you and your loved ones are well. I know that others (myself as well) have been stressed from this and it sometimes spills over to Wikipedia. If that is the case here, consider the t-ban a request from fellow editors to take a break from this stressful and distressing topic. If not, I hope you are well nonetheless. Let me know if you'd like me to post on AN. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not a medical doctor, it's a general surgeon. The general surgeon was describing the pathology of this unusual pneumonia. He only studied for something like 10 years to be a general surgeon. Yes I can see he is "The Worlds No1 Slimming surgeon". I don't like that myself. I have had extreme difficulty finding a source for this.

You can put a halt on me Evergreen, but you can't tell me not to disagree with untrue claims like edit warring. That's the hinge here. Honestly, I have no interest in this fussy nonsense.

Where I live is one of the lowest uptakes of the virus for a city anywhere so far and the streets are deserted so we have yet to see. What is stressing me about it, is an accessible description of the mechanics of the virus. As an asthmatic who is generally interested in breathing issues, I found the understanding of the two types of alveolar, and how the virus is attacking them, quite helpful, and am stunned there is no reasonable descriptions of that on or off the site in conjuction with this event. Respiratory problems with inflammation can be helped so greatly with mental technique, whereas in the reverse, inexplicable asthma attacks can result in death in extreme cases, so I do feel it is important to try and cover that in the pathology in a simple way.

You can believe what you like about YouTube videos, but in the last month I myself have edited portraits of Donald Trumps sisters portrait and Mary Poppins portrait, high profile articles, both sourced from YouTube videos, before and after I changed them. It is indeed circumstantial to a case by case basis. If the focus was the content first, the YouTube video would have quickly become irrelevant. Even I have found an imperfect, but useful source on SARS from, from which the mechanics can be gleaned, published on PubMEd, but it requires a deep study as medical texts tend to do. If that is not going to be the focus of further debate, all you are going to get form me is contention, naturally, so in the face of the crowd, no thanks.

The virus does a certain thing. Let's help to fight it, not each other, or else no. I tried as best I could. Everyone has already got the gist of the spread of the disease. Now tell them how it works and how to prepare and survive it, or prevent that as you wish. I shouldn't need an ordeal to get that focus. ~ R.T.G 06:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Partial blocks are great

[8] Doug Weller talk 19:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

re: 190.251.4.13

Hi, I noticed several edit summaries of edits made by this (190.251.4.13) IP address. These edits, 1, 2, 3, and 4 seem to make similar violations to one that previously prompted you to post a warning on the user’s talk page. I don’t know how to take action, but I thought leaving this to you might result in something. Thanks. Starkenborgher (talk) 05:00, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@Starkenborgher: handled it. Thank you for reporting! EvergreenFir (talk) 05:08, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Removing pictures

Hello EvergreenFir, you removed two pictures today that were posted by an anonymous IP address to the Paola Longoria and Samantha Salas articles citing vandalism. The pictures were of the people in question, although I'm not sure of the providence of the images. So, I'm not sure why you removed them, because they don't seem to be obvious examples of vandalism to me, but perhaps I'm mistaken. Some clarification would be welcome. Thanks. --Trb333 (talk) 15:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@Trb333: I'll fix that. Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 17:47, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: No problem. Thanks. Hope all's well. --Trb333 (talk) 21:02, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding user You've gone incognito

I can see this user User:You've_gone_incognito was banned and even used multiple accounts (sockpuppeting). Now, he's using an IP [9] and reverting one of my edits, he even called me a dimwit. The way he did it made me sure it was him. Please see if he's actually a sockpuppet and deal with it. Editing is ok, but why abuse someone? (125.99.220.154 (talk) 11:06, 29 April 2020 (UTC))

Not sure if they are the same person, but the IP editor is certainly being abusive in their language. I've blocked them for that. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Deserved

	"Sunflower Award"
	Your work as an admin is not being graded, But it certainly is much appreciated, To know that you see with vision that's clear, A shining light of integrity we tend to hold dear. Thank you for all you do! Atsme Talk 📧 18:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

@Atsme: Thank you! :) EvergreenFir (talk) 01:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery

Talk:Shooting_of_Ahmaud_Arbery#BLP, Concerned about recent revert see comment. --Kwwhit5531 (talk) 18:53, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Your revert on Mansplaining

Hello. You have reverted an edit I made on Mansplaining, without telling me what i did wrong. In my edit, i removed several invalid criticisms of the concept, including one that comes from Ann Widdecombe. I'm honestly not sure if the sources citing these critiques of the concept are deemed reliable or not, but i question the rationale behind taking a criticism of a feminist concept from a reactionary politician seriously. I mean reliable sources might quote Donald Trump's "criticism" of CNN, but it's still not real criticism, but rather partisan bullshit. CNN could make an interview with a climate denier, and it still wouldn't be acceptable as a "criticism" of the scientific consensus on climate change. This isn't Conservapedia, so why should we give voice to the likes of Ann Widdecombe? 46.97.170.78 (talk) 12:08, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Certain reactions (or a sample of them) can be appropriate for articles like mansplaining. She is a notable figure and her opinion is a decent example of the opposition to the term. But the main reasons for the revert were that (1) you need consensus to remove long-standing material and (2) "invalid criticisms" is your personal opinion which we cannot base our decisions on. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Ann Widdecombe is a reactionary, anti feminist, post truth politician. The argument in her "criticism" os that "women are more equal than ever", which is an unsubstantiated claim. Ultimately this is not criticism of the concept of mansplaining, it's merely her asserting her political views. Something like that may be appropriate on her own article, along with criticism of her views, but here, it's only an attempt to further push an anti feminist POV, on an already biased article. I made a second attempt at editing, this time ONLY removing the Ann Widdecombe part. I do admit i was a bit carried away with my first attempt. This edit was approved by User:Nithin, yet it was reverted again, and i got an edit war warning. 46.97.170.78 (talk) 05:48, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll repeat what i said on talk:mansplaining "I do agree with you on the fact that the edit warring claim by User:Binksternet is nonsensical (just look at the page history), i do agree with your second edit (the one that i approved) not because its anti-feminist, but because her argument doesn't make sense and is confusing when read. However, i don't agree with your first edit, it seems like you were removing any real criticism of mansplaining." Nithin^talk 00:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

You've gone incognito

Greetings. You've gone incognito has apologised for "harrassing" Debresser(?) at UTRS 305449 and requested restoration of TPA. May I do so? --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 19:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I just saw the thread about banning. I'll look for more information about that. I did not see reference on his (?) talk page. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 20:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra: my block was for this REVDELed edit. Personally, given the objectively horrible comment, I would oppose reinstating talk page access. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. That took my breath away when I saw it. There is also a mention of socking. They've not been blocked very long even w/o socking. Maybe a Standard Offer decline. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 20:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Julio Anguita

An editing war is going on here, 10 minutes ago. Best regards. ✍ A.WagnerC (talk) 18:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

@A.WagnerC: Blocked IP and semi protected the page. Thanks for messaging! EvergreenFir (talk) 18:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

IP block durations

Hi,

Since you noted "continuation after previous block" in the block log for 198.190.234.6, did you mean to block them for a longer duration than 31 hours (previous block was for 2 weeks)? The previous block was probably set for a longer duration because the same user had clearly been disruptively using that IP address for more than a month before they first blocked it.

Similarly, your block on 188.33.84.184 was for 72 hours when the previous block was for 2 weeks. I can't speak for Materialscientist, but I'm guessing that they decided to go with a longer duration initially because the same page that the IP has commonly edited was semi-protected earlier by another admin (log: [10]) before the first IP block was initially applied, so they were likely warned on another IP for similar edits in the past. 2601:1C0:1:B78C:299D:6738:9545:43A1 (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Good catches. With the backlog at AIV, I was going rather quickly. I'll update those blocks. Cheers EvergreenFir (talk) 19:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Question.

Are this insults allowed or normal thing in Wikipedia? Here. Sent a report to the 3RR regarding this, dont know if the other editor could be warned.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: No, absolutely not allowed. I've issued a "only warning" to that user for their comments. There is some leeway with new users (or new accounts since I cannot really be sure if they user is new). C.Fred is also talking with that user. Hopefully they will learn and improve, but if they do not they will likely be blocked. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

It is posible to protect the Article at least, or my User/Talk page.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: I did protect the article. If the comments/abuse continues I can protect your talk page too (temporarily). Hopefully this will be resolved. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I really dont want to experience another wave of insults like the last ones, could you protect my talk page for 48 hours.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Let me get a "second opinion" if you don't mind. C.Fred? Is this something that is done upon request? EvergreenFir (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Best case is that the offending user straightens up and flies right, so no action is needed. Since it's only one user, I don't think talk page protection is warranted. The next step would be a partial- or site-block of the offending user. —C.Fred (talk) 18:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: I have redacted the personal attacks from your talk page. If there is another occurrence, please let me or EvergreenFir know. I'll certainly be glad to address it. If neither of us is online, you can also ask for help (again) at ANI. Feel free to link back to this comment if you have to do that. —C.Fred (talk) 18:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

OK.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Yapperbot (talk) 09:32, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

acid attack

Why is the neutrality disputed banner on the acid attack displayed when the article appears perfectly sourced? is it purely b/c of several so-called men's rights activists in the talk page who are upset an article about what is globally, as a whole, a gender-based act of violence isn't all about men? --73.31.14.14 (talk) 04:58, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know? Check the article talk page to see what's disputed.  EvergreenFir (talk) 06:08, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Nothing is disputed, just MRA's complaining in the talk page and you're the person on the talk page who was responding to them, hence why I'm asking you. --73.31.14.14 (talk) 07:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I removed the tag after I looked at the article and the page history. The person who added it disappeared after three edits within 20 minutes, two to the talk page and one to the article, all advocating the view that the majority of victims are men. (It's mentioned in the article as being the case in some countries.) BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look at it. --73.31.14.14 (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Khusro khan (Hamir Rabari)

The original name of khusro khan is Hamir Rabari.how can Wikipedia change it as a nassiruddin??? Hamir Rabari was h hindu from somnath veraval .Gujarati vishvkosh and saurashtra no itihas also agree with it. And tarikh e farishta book, tarikhe e firozshahi also agree with that khusro khan's origin place is Gujarat particular kathiyavar (somnath) and khusro khan was captured during somnath aattck by khilji empire. Him original name was Hamir Rabari after Muslim convoratation him name was Hamir to Hasan. And khilji attack on somnath that is true. Please improve mistakes and add name of Hamir Rabari of somnath in Wikipedia of khusro khan. Gujarat vishvkosh (talk) 21:55, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Gujarat vishvkosh: Please provide reliable sources to support the changes you are requesting. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism Alert!

Anthonyg3281 is causing vandalism to the Shimmer and Shine Article! Please block him permanently for the article's safety, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julie Tirock (talk • contribs) 21:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Julie Tirock: That user's edits do not appear to be vandalism. The show does appear to be complete. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:11, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Another cartoon/children's show IP

I noticed you seemed to be collecting them. 94.173.182.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) has taken up the hobby of changing dates and being otherwise unhelpful. There are a few exceptions here and there (e.g. fixing a wikilink), but of the edits I've checked, the majority are not improvements. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 01:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@BlackcurrantTea: that's a decent block history on that ip. Ferret blocked for 6 months for the same behavior. That block expired May 4 and the user seemed to pick up where they left off. IP appears static based on history. I've blocked for a year.  Thanks for reporting it! EvergreenFir (talk) 05:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome! Thanks for blocking it. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 05:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't remember this LTA specifically but the edits look vaguely familiar. good block either way. -- ferret (talk) 11:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Offensive revision

Hello, I just reverted an edit containing a racial slur targeting the subject of the article. I have given the user a level four warning (even though they had no prior warnings). However, I felt that it would probably be worth asking an administrator to delete the revision, as it is extremely offensive. I saw you were in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests and was wondering if it would be possible for you to delete the revision to Kimberly Gardner that I reverted (I think it could be deleted under the category "Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material" on Wikipedia:Revision deletion). I'm not providing the link to the revision to prevent it from gaining more publicity, but it's recent in the edit history. I've never requested this before so hopefully I'm doing it right. Thanks! --GalaxyDog^{talk • contribs} 22:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@GalaxyDog: Thank you for the message! I have REVDELLED the edit. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response, have a great day! :) --GalaxyDog^{talk • contribs} 22:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

EvergreenFir, what about the two revisions I reverted here? I'm not sure if this is treated the same, as it's not targeting a specific person, but I thought it would be good to ask just in case, as it still uses offensive language. --GalaxyDog^{talk • contribs} 23:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@GalaxyDog: done! EvergreenFir (talk) 03:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again! --GalaxyDog^{talk • contribs} 12:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Wasn't sure where else to put it

so Zzuuzz wouldn't be the first admin to see it. Can you revdel the edits?:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lehman_Alternative_Community_School&oldid=410465870

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lehman_Alternative_Community_School&oldid=414555781

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lehman_Alternative_Community_School&oldid=419745875

Diff of first revision that has it: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lehman_Alternative_Community_School&diff=prev&oldid=410465870

Diff of first that doesn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lehman_Alternative_Community_School&diff=next&oldid=419745875 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.180.16.185 (talk) 18:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I do not see anything that meets the WP:REVDEL criteria. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

It's a person's actual name, so drawing attention to the fact that the Blue Barette Bam account is associated with the high-profile main page vandalism without revdeleting those edits is WP:OUTING, and Zzuuzz did that by changing the account labeled as the master in the SPI case to Blue Barette Bam even though that was an old one not made for anything to do with that YouTuber who hadn't even established her online identity at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.140.173 (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I'll REVDEL the name as a potential OUTING. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

You guys are wrong. Widget's Wild Ride and Attack of the 50-foot Fleegle Aired on August 28, 2006. And Who needs school? and Magic Tricks aired on September 19, 2006 That’s the rule. That it is the real airdate. Look at them!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1007:B0AB:E24D:64E0:F006:D2EA:BA0E (talk) 01:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Friendly reminder

You recently posted to my talk page a "warning" about making "personal attacks" on other editors. I obviously recognize this as a mistake and I realize it wasn't intended for me. Just wanted to point out your mistake and I'll take it down for you later if you don't see this in time. Thanks. SJMccarthy (talk) 04:19, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

This is a baltent personal attack and I have seen blocks handed out for far less. The warning was proper and EF is to be commended for posting it. MarnetteD|Talk 04:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh, no. That's not a personal attacks any more than that editor was attacking me. It was good advice. SJMccarthy (talk) 04:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@SJMccarthy: what was my mistake? EvergreenFir (talk) 04:57, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

You sent me a warning when obviously you meant to send it to the other editor that was casting aspersions, soapboxing, and overall making disruptive comments about me on an unrelated talk page. SJMccarthy (talk) 06:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@SJMccarthy: you are mistaken. Stop with the baloney. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:53, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

It's clear that you were mistaken in your embarrassing slip-up. I totally understand that sometimes editors make really laughable mistakes! I'll let this one slide, friend. Just don't keep goofing up! (Kidding). Have a fantastic morning! SJMccarthy (talk) 11:36, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

That actually was a personal attack you made. Don't do that. Civility is one of the fundamental policies of Wikipedia. Comment on edits, not editors. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

A Chilean IP

179.8.156.129 is making the same familiar changes to Creative Galaxy, among others. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 15:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

They're back as 179.8.155.131. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 01:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 07:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 07:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:03, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:16, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 09:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bengal tiger on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello EvergreenFir,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources

• A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
• Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
• A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
• Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Gender identity on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Joe Biden

Sorry accidentally said minor edit: changed it now. This is properly sourced. Wikieditor575 (talk) 18:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@Wikieditor575: Thank you for replying and letting me know. I see MrX noted the WP:1RR restriction on that page as well. Joe Biden is a page that draws a lot of contentious editing and, as a result, we have added some restrictions to it. Your edits were in good faith, but now that they have been undone, please use Talk:Joe Biden to discuss them. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ishirō Honda on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Propaganda on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Propaganda on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

96.61.172.140

96.61.172.140, whom you warned last month, has returned, and is once again making unsourced edits to a variety of children's TV shows. Perhaps they need some time on the naughty step to think about what they've done. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 19:42, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@BlackcurrantTea: Blocked! EvergreenFir (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

[[Category:Children's shows that would like people to stop messing about with them]] says "thanks!" BlackcurrantTea (talk) 22:13, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Svoboda (political party) on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Periodic table on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Frank Sinatra on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi prof!

Wikipedia community usually use languages and writtern format or just allow for simple edit templates? AlexanderAlex1995 (talk) 19:40, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Roman numerals on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Jshpinar sock?

[11] New genre-twiddle-only account, someone who's already familiar with genre/sourcing disputes, many of the same targets as Jshpinar; nearly WP:DUCK, except not making the same edits to those articles as the master. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: Yeah, took me aback for a moment too. I'd say block as likely Jshpinar, but certainly the same as 80sMotorHead (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) ([12] vs [13]). EvergreenFir (talk) 14:42, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: There it is! Definitely Jshpinar: [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]). EvergreenFir (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, tagged and blocked! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:14, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Notice of ANI that mentions you in passing

Greetings, FYI I filed a request at WP:ANI titled "CIR-based community-imposed site ban re: RTG". In providing a basis for my request I mentioned you and your prior dealings with this editor. Your input at ANI is optional, i.e., invited but not specifically requested. Thanks for reading. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:ALTBalaji on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Arameans on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Talk Page protection.

Hello, Evergreenfir, could my Talk page be protected? Look at this, once again the same Sockpuppets are attacking my page.Mr.User200 (talk) 14:35, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

This attacks continues Here.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:02, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Tyson Foods on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox broadcasting network on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Molossians on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:33, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:National Rally on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:The King: Eternal Monarch on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Kenosha riot

Wondering why you deleted from Jacob article. The article is all about the Jacob Blake protests. Lightburst (talk) 02:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Never mind. I see the like above protest section. Thanks Lightburst (talk) 02:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

What to do with multiple Single-purpose accounts appearing on a talk page?

Hello EvergreenFir. Several months ago, you helped me with the removal of badly-placed single-purpose account tags during a talk-page discussion on Xi Jinping, which then led you to put the kibosh on someone. Well, I believe that I actually have encountered a bunch of single-purpose accounts, which I have pointed out at the bottom of Talk:Ayurveda#Quackery here. I'm wondering what, if anything, should be done about this.

I'm coming to you because you're disinterested in the subject as far as I can tell, and because you seem to know what to do in these situations. Actually, to be perfectly honest, I basically just want knowledgeable people such as yourself to be aware of this developing situation because, frankly, I find dealing with this whole pseudoscience stuff to be tedious and boring. BirdValiant (talk) 05:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

As an update, Ayurveda now has extended confirmed protection and Talk:Ayurveda now has autoconfirmed protection for 48 hours. Discussion on the stream of SPIs is occurring on the Administrator's noticeboard Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Talk:Ayurveda. So, I guess that there's not much else to be done for the moment. BirdValiant (talk) 15:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@BirdValiant: Sorry I wasn't able to help immediately. I will check out the ANI post. Hope things have been handled. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

No worries. By the time I woke up the following morning, I saw that the page protections had gone up and that all hands were on deck. So I didn't feel the need to badger you about it. It'd probably be good to keep an eye on it, though, since there is some Twitter canvassing going on. BirdValiant (talk) 01:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for dealing with that nasty user and the quick revdels. I was actually halfway through leaving a message on your talk page asking if you could block that account, but when I went to copy a link to the contribution log, I saw you had already blocked them. Thank you for the quick action and for everything else you do. Aoi (青い) (talk) 07:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Message to Createangelos "Your exit summary about the vehicle was fine until your thought it appropriate to suggest he was committing a crime"

Subtle point. I'm trying to remember what my exit summary even said. Both references (witness and police union statement) said the same thing about getting into a vehicle. For some reason I appended the full quote from Police Union to my exit summary; I do see that we have no idea where it comes from or who said it. In that sense it does amount to speculation about a criminal act. Anyway, I don't know if my change "his vehicle" -> "a vehicle" was reverted or not. The word "his" occurs elsewhere in the article, I think I was testing the waters for more experienced editors to think about it. Anyway given that you know how to change an exit summary you probably understand more about Wikipedia than I do, so I'm not complaining. By the way, I'm curious about the witness statements that describe him arriving in the same vehicle. On another issue, I'm pretty sure that any police charges about sexual assault and theft misunderstand the reln'ship of Blake and one of his partners. If he'd stolen a bank card in the past and withdrawn 500 dollars twice, who had given him the PIN number. And how is it assault to accuse a woman of being unfaithful and leave. In that sense the ownership of the car could be indeterminate, bought by one of Mr. Blake's partners but without full permission to use it unless he agrees to bring the kids along etc etc. In other words, even with all the evidence in the sources there is no credible assertion of criminal conduct. Createangelos (talk) 00:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't know if my change "his vehicle" -> "a vehicle" was reverted or not.. I reverted it along with a cite to a poor secondary source for this, (The National Review) quoting a poor primary source (the police union) that claimed that it was undisputed that the vehicle was not his and several other “facts” that are in dispute. When has a police union not supported police? And your edit summary did suggest a crime. Please be careful in a WP:BLP. O3000 (talk) 00:40, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Tom Wolf

Thank you. I just brought this to three noticeboards, requesting a rangeblock, page protection and possibly rev/deletion as far back as necessary. Any or all of the above. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

already did the first two! I'll inspect for revdel material. Thank you for reporting! EvergreenFir (talk) 03:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! My lord, so many good folk enjoy the simultaneous gifts of malice and persistence. Also dimness. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:58, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

All done for now! Thanks again for reporting. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020 on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Jayasurya Mailsamy

Hey, since you deleted and salted Draft:Jayasurya Mailsamy (blogger), would you be willing to salt Draft:Jayasurya Mayilsamy (blogger) as well? It's another target of that particular LTA as a slight typo of the name they were originally going for. Thanks, Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 18:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nathan2055: Sure! Thanks for pointing it out. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:29, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for your help! Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 19:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

dr. bacon

Robotnik has been unfinished. Do you know when this will be done?71.223.84.150 (talk) 23:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Article titles on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request

diff Thanks, Zindor (talk) 23:27, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit the White People article to include my information

Please take a look at the talk page for the White People article and include the information from the court cases/the Census bureau regarding South Asians into the article. I am the same user that updated the Talk page, my provider changed my IP address recently.

The information to be added is under "We need to update the article to reflect the fact that South Asians were also classified as "White" by the US Census, until 1977, when Indian-Americans petitioned to have this changed to "Asian" in order to receive minority benefits stemming from low-interest SBA Loans."

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:142:101:20C0:D1EB:83C5:E3A1:DA03 (talk) 05:36, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Drive by late response

In response to this, I don't align with any particular POV, especially political or religious. I can't even remember the first time I voted in a general election - hell, not just general but in any election beyond who has to take out the trash tonight. I'm pretty sure I cast my first vote for Bill Clinton, and I vaguely remember being a fan of JFK but only because I just loved John-John - I was much too young to have such a memory. I am a citizen of the US but I am also a permanent resident of Bonaire, a Dutch special municipality, and I live/have lived under different systems of government. I have been criticized for being a pragmatist, which some have associated with being cold-hearted. I don't see myself as cold-hearted but more as a realist, and I've just come to terms with that reality in the last few minutes. And that is why I was inspired to come here and share that realization with you. It's bizarre. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

RevDel-request

Hi EvergreenFir, could you please remove revisions 978854539 and 979042734 for the page Nawal El Saadawi? There was no source added mentioning these names and if the people concerned are okay with publishing the names. Thanks in advance, Laurier (talk) 12:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Done per WP:BLPNAME and out of an abundance of caution given the person's political stances and possible negative attention due to them. EvergreenFir (talk) 15:08, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Laurier (talk) 19:30, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Stefan Molyneux

I think your reference to "revilement and reverence" is off-base. You say "He is polarising to the point of revilement and reverence."[19] Who is expressing "reverence"? I do not think I have expressed "reverence". It is reliably sourced that Molyneux says "I have always opposed the idea of racial superiority/inferiority." This is a question of what should be in an article and what should not be in an article. If you are saying I'm expressing "reverence" that would not only be gratuitous but irrelevant to the topic of discussion. It is not my concern whether Molyneux is or isn't a racist. If we are going to have an article on a person we should include various facets of the person. "Revilement and reverence" would be extraneous considerations. Bus stop (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@Bus stop: That statement was not directed at anyone in particular. He, like other polarizing figures such as Jordan Peterson or Shaun King, have devoted followers and sworn opponents. I apologize if you took exception to that sentence, but I did not mean it in reference to anyone specific. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:08, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hungarian irredentism on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Katrina Karkazis on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Antifa (United States) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 27 September 2020 (UTC)