User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 67

Archive 60

←

Archive 65

Archive 66

Archive 67

Archive 68

Archive 69

Archive 70

I could use some help.

So a user named Andrzejbanas claims that adding instrumental to a track listing is trivial. He's been reverting my edits surrounding Electric Wizard's Come My Fanatics... album, even when I sourced the AllMusic review (which explicitly mentioned Tracks 4 and 6 of the album being instrumentals) in the recording section of the article. I don't know what's going on, but he seriously needs to be talked to because he seriously does not know how to read. ULTRA-DARKNESS^{:) 2 CHAT} 16:55, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, lets try to work together to come to an agreement then, because in my experience, Andrzejbanas has been a good, experienced, sensible editor, so I'm sure we can work something out. In all honesty, I've always kind of wondered if policy/guidelines supported putting "(instrumental)" next to instrumental song, as I see it done frequently, but not necessarily always. Personally, I like adding it, I think its helpful information to the reader. But that's not necessarily how we decide what goes into an encyclopedia either. Do either of you know of any prior consensus on the matter? If not, we (or I) can start a neutral discussion up on it at WP:ALBUMS too. Sergecross73 msg me 17:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

My keyboard is being silly right now, but I've been unable to discuss this. Normally I'd solve things with the talk page. But I have no knowledge of whether instrumental is part of the WP:MOS for albums. Since it's often included, I believe it is but I'm not 100% sure. ULTRA-DARKNESS^{:) 2 CHAT} 17:16, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) FWIW I am supportive of adding it myself. I understand that he is probably particularly defensive of this because he submitted this to GAN. If a reviewer were to say something about that, I think he might change it (I've reviewed one of his before). dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:40, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Hey UltraDark. Sorry if I was making the pages a bit unfriendly. I apologize. I personally don't like identifying tracks as instrumental or not unless we have prose suggesting its importance, otherwise, we'd be tracking every hip hop album articles as skits, etc. I've glanced over the manual of style for albums and there is no real world one or another whether this is considered something we should include or not. Perhaps we could move the conversation there? I'd like to get some firm solution to it. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:14, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I started a discussion at WT:ALBUMS FYI. Sergecross73 msg me 16:35, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).

Administrator changes

Justlettersandnumbers • L235

Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

Oversight changes

Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
• There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.

Technical news

• Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
• Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
• The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
• Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
• Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

HEUL (again)

Recently I made an edit to Template:KiKi KaiKai series that corrects the name for the series (as the series began as KiKi KaiKai and not this Pocky & Rocky stuff). HÊÚL, being the mature individual after all, has the genius idea of reporting me to five other admins because he didn't agree with my edit. No discussion on my talk page, no reverted edits, nothing. The best part is that he complains that I didn't source my single edit yet he hasn't sourced his contributions ever since he started editing anything related to Square Enix or Taito or whatever. Namcokid47 (talk) 14:23, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

1) You did not correct anything since the series is called Pocky & Rocky everywhere in the world but in Japan. You just acted on original research to oblige your point againt me (I had show you sources where the series is called Pocky & Rocky). 2) I sourced all my edits. I will not revert you anymore and will not be blocked to satisfy you. I will act by the game's rules by now and the first thing you did (so mature) was run to your "daddy". HÊÚL. (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I've provided some sources to my claims on your talk page. Give 'em a read. Also, besides the IGN link, all of those sources are not reliable; since when was TV Tropes a reliable source? Namcokid47 (talk) 14:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Just the last one of your "sources" call the series KiKi KaiKai but calls it Pocky & Rocky too. Wired and Inner Circle are more reliable than Bonus Stage. HÊÚL. (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Is there a reason you’re not discussing on the respective talk page, and if necessary, neutrally contacting WT:VG for more input, like I’ve told you is the correct avenue for solving video game disputes? Not sure why you’re hand picking people to participate, that’s certainly not what you’ve been told endlessly. Sergecross73 msg me 14:46, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I just "hand picked" people who contributed to the template before he did his edit without discussing it and based in nothing but his own claims. HÊÚL. (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

That’s WP:CANVASSing. Don’t do that. It really feels like you’re being purposefully difficult here. I’m giving you a last chance to handle this correctly before I block you for disruptive editing. Final chance - have you paid attention to a word I’ve said? Sergecross73 msg me 14:53, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

You have been on this site for twelve years. How do you not know this stuff by now? If your edits are unsourced, someone will revert them, which in this case happened to be me. This entire ordeal could have been prevented by you sourcing your claims. Instead of doing that, you've attacked other editors and have been blocked many, many times. Namcokid47 (talk) 14:56, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

"Canvassing is notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way". I did not do it in any way. And you know what? This is exactly what this guy do everytime he runs to you. How many times did you warned him? He never discussed on talk pages, just keeping reverting things not done by him. How many times you said him to use the talk pages? Even when I act the right way you hide him behind your back. Now you come with this "final chance" talk. Really? What did I do this time? PS: Sorry just delete his nonsense. HÊÚL. (talk) 15:04, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Now again: my edits were not unsourced. HÊÚL. (talk) 15:06, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, this is how things go every time because you’re not following protocol every time. You’re not understanding the discussion here. I’m not trying to argue the merits of your argument, I’m arguing that you need to present your argument the right way. Are you going to or not? Sergecross73 msg me 15:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

What argument do you need me to present this time? HÊÚL. (talk) 15:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Re-read my first comment in this discussion. Have you done this or not? Sergecross73 msg me 15:18, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes I re-read it. HÊÚL. (talk) 15:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay. And have you done what I’ve said in that comment? Sergecross73 msg me 15:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I do not understand. Are you wanting me to do it now? HÊÚL. (talk) 15:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

If you want to make a change that is being contested now, you need to discuss it now, and the change is only made if you have consensus in your favor. If you don’t want to discuss now, then that’s fine, but without a consensus in your favor or even slightest effort to start a talk page discussion at the correct place, you forfeit any right for your edit to be retained. Basically, either you open up the discussion I’ve instructed you to make, or you drop it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Do you see what I said? "the change is only made if you have consensus in your favor" He did not have consensus and did it. Without using the talk page. "without a consensus in your favor or even slightest effort to start a talk page discussion at the correct place, you forfeit any right for your edit to be retained" You are just saying that I could revert him because he did not do what you are just telling me to do. If he did not had "a consensus in his favor or even slightest effort to start a talk page discussion at the correct place" he "forfeits any right for his edit to be retained" It was exactly what I was talking about. You are telling me but it not works this way to him. If I go there and revert him because he did not do what you just said that I have to do you will block me. And then the wrong guy will be me. It is a lose/lose situation. HÊÚL. (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

No one has linked me to any particular dispute, so I have no idea who did what. The only thing I’ve been linked to is that template, which only shows like one edit, zero reverts, in the last few days. That’s not even indicative of a dispute at all. Is there something I’m not being linked to or something? Regardless, both of you need to be following WP:BRD and WP:BURDEN. Sergecross73 msg me 15:40, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes zero reverts. Because if I reverted him he would come here (as he did anyway) to accuse me of something. HÊÚL. (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Per WP:BRD, you’re usually fine with 1 revert, as long as you can control yourself with just one. But anyways, if that’s all there is, there’s no violation for either of you yet. Either one of you should follow my instructions though, as it’s clear you two don’t see eye to eye and this will require a discussion to settle. Sergecross73 msg me 16:08, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at Template talk:KiKi KaiKai series#KiKi KaiKai VS Pocky & Rocky. Hopefully this will settle things. Namcokid47 (talk) 16:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Smash characters

I remembered you redirected Lucina (Fire Emblem) a while back. Well an IP created Lucina (Fire Emblem Awakening), Ike (Fire Emblem), and Greninja. Not saying you should delete them, because they look like they have potential, but more of an FYI and you may want to move the Lucina article to Lucina (Fire Emblem). I am unable to do the move. TarkusAB^talk 12:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Ugh, people keep trying to publish my draft as their own. I’ve deleted it, but published mine at the correct location. I wanted to wait a little longer to be safe, but there seems to be interest in working on it so I’ll do this for now and try to develop it further. Thanks for letting me know. Sergecross73 msg me 14:49, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Pretty sure the same user is also responsible for the Corrin (Fire Emblem), and Dark Samus articles, but they're all kind of a mess, as are Ike and Greninja at the moment. I did what I could for Corrin, but they're all going to need some serious TLC to be up to snuff, especially in the grammar department. Mind giving them a once-over for cleanup? (Also, might want to revert the image on Shulk's article. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 17:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I'll try to take a look at them, but I've got my concerns that some even meet the notability requirements. Corrin, Dark Samus, and Greninja (especially the latter, per WP:POKEMON - basically the definition of a unnecessary spinout.) Sergecross73 msg me 18:43, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I've at least gone in and done what I can to fix all the poor spelling and grammar and remove some unnecessary details (save Ike, who's currently locked), but I'll leave it to you to decide if what's there is still usable from a notability perspective. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 19:31, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I came here to know what's going on of the huge amount of edit. I created four of them, not the Dark Samus, it doesn't mean that someone creating smash character that he/she is the same user as in editor into new user (also I'm not the same IP at the past on Lucina edits thing) because the Smash community is growing and people are getting hype for a newly released character on Nintendo Direct but thanks for the fixes and apologize for poorly grammar. 49.148.190.135 (talk) 23:28, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

DC Comics imprints template

Can you help me? There is an user that keeps reverting all the links to the List of DC Comics imprints even when the imprint has its own article. This seems just disruptive and without any motivation. I am trying to hard to not edit war with him but I can not refrain myself from maintain the template without wrong doing. Reading his talk page I noticed that he recieved two warnings for edit war in January, one in February, one in March, one in April, one in May, two in August and one in September and two disruptive editing warnings (one in April and one in May). HÊÚL. (talk) 22:06, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

I can try, but step one would be, have you tried talking to them directly about it yet? I can’t tell, you haven’t given me their name yet. Sergecross73 msg me 00:38, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

It is just one. His user name is Spshu. HÊÚL. (talk) 01:35, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay. And have you attempted to discuss with them anywhere? If so, can you link it to me? Sergecross73 msg me 14:22, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

check on Corrin (Fire Emblem) ‎

I added some reception on this article I mentioned and published legit references on reception, does it helps it on the notability of the article? hoping you to check it. thank you so much. 49.148.190.135 (talk) 13:33, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

I've checked it over. Yes, the content you've added is actually reception-type info, and yes, you've used reliable sources this time. It helps notability, but it probably wouldn't be enough to save it from deletion if someone were to nominate it. (I'm not saying I'm going to nominate it or encourage anyone to nominate it or anything. My time is becoming limited and that's not really what I want to focus my time on right now, but if someone did, you'd probably need more to save it.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Serge, this is IP and Fairystale are socks of indefinitely blocked user Raymondskie99. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Raymondskie99. He's very active, constantly creating new accounts and switching IP address, and been blocked tonnes of times for blanking articles and vandalism. Constantly obsessed with creating bad Smash character articles and replacing the images. If you just go through all the Smash Ultimate character articles and look through the contribution history, you'll see numerous new blocked editors all with similar behaviour. It's just Raymondskie99. --The1337gamer (talk) 06:48, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Would you be willing to do a sweep on this? -- ferret (talk) 12:47, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I haven’t generally edited much with Smash related stuff (it’s alread crowded with editors). Yesterday I was getting the feeling he was this other guy I had dealt with a few months back, who kept copy/pasting publishing my then-incomplete Lucina draft and then wrecking havoc on it. In retrospect, it’s probably that was Raymond too. (Forget his name, but he was indeffed eventually anyways for vandalism.) Anyways, I was trying to be patient with the editor before, but now that I know it’s a sock, most recently created smash characters and Fire Emblem characters except for Lucina and Marth probably need to be redirected. Sergecross73 msg me 12:55, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I've quickly put together a list of socks that I've found over the last few weeks: User:The1337gamer/sandbox/Raymondskie99. I first spotted them when kept changing lots of video game character images and removing maintenance tags from VG articles. I know there are more than I have listed so if I have time after work later, I may try looking for more socks and setting up a custom watchlist. --The1337gamer (talk) 13:01, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I’ll help when I can too. FYI, looking over your list, the editor I was referring to above was Riosk, so it looks like I have been dealing with this guy before. Sergecross73 msg me 13:03, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Ah I never encountered this person before so I was unaware of them when I reviewed the Greninja article during my NPP rounds. Kinda glad I brought it up now on the Discord chat when I noticed it on 10/6. If there is anything I can do or if I notice anything out of the norm for VG stuff via NPP I'll let y'all know. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 13:20, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

• Hastethanwoman is  Confirmed to Fairystale, Jesterplay, Hastan55, Rokoh43, Rejens69. Riosk69, Abnormal-ako, Adoloscene, Yehey-yehey, Yehey222 are  Confirmed to each other and very  Likely to everyone else. Jaschachan, Jokoh76, Jigjolly, and Arnold-Oma are very  Likely to everyone else. I think Hastethanwoman was the only one who wasn't already blocked. They're all more-or-less confirmed to each other, but they sometimes use a different IP range on the same ISP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:47, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

List of Square Enix franchises

Sorry if I keep bothering you, but there's some conflict at List of Square Enix franchises again. 146.164.80.48 and 146.164.80.49 (I assume are the same person hopping onto different IP addresses) are trying to prove that Hat Trick Hero S, a port of Taito's Hat Trick Hero '95, is a sequel in itself and isn't a port. I've asked him/her three times to show me a source proving this, yet he/she refuses to show me, paraphrases my edit summaries, and is making a big deal out of just showing me a source. He/she thinks it's my job to find the source and not him/her, which goes against WP:BURDEN. I've been following WP:BRD as best as I could as you've asked me to do before. Thanks. Namcokid47 (talk) 17:15, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

This silliness needs to end. IP came to me, you went to Serge. Full protected the article. Use the talk page or I'm blocking both of you. -- ferret (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at 146.164.80.49's talk page. We will talk this out. Namcokid47 (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I’m all for helping and providing guidance, but it feels like most of the time you guys are skipping the first step - starting a talk page discussion - and you shouldn’t need help with that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:45, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

He said that he's going to start a discussion at my talk page but instead he prefered to use Ad hominem rather than backing up his edits with reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.164.80.49 (talk) 19:18, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

You’ll have to point to something more specific, as I’m not particularly seeing it. You both could probably stand to comment less on each other, and more on the content dispute itself though... Sergecross73 msg me 00:37, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

He's pointing to this discussion right here. I've asked him several times to show me a reliable source and he practically refuses to show me one, now resorted to name calling. At this point I'm about to throw in the towel and just give up. Namcokid47 (talk) 02:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Well to be fair Namcokid47 you believe Hat Trick Hero S is a port of Hat Trick Hero '95 which if true wouldn't be listed as a latest release on the table. The IP feels your avoiding their request for a reliable source identifying Hat Trick Hero S as a port while they feel they have shown you the proof it isn't a 100% port and why they feel it should be counted as the latest release on the table. I agree the everyone should remain WP:CIVIL at all times. So in a sense while the burden of finding a reliable source to add Hat Trick Hero S as the latest release falls upon the IP. The burden falls upon you to keep Hat Trick Hero '95 as the latest release. Just as I have tagged Taito Power Goal as needing more sources if you look at this revision of Taito Power Goal the claim that Hat Trick Hero S is a port is also unsourced. While the IP did wrong in coming to Serge's page instead of going to WT:VG like I mentioned the 2nd step should have been linking the discussion at the article's talk page I started over at WT:VG first and asking more experienced editors in this matter for assistance which still hasn't been done. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 09:56, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Erase ferret talk discussion

I deleted this because I want to be Forget by @Ferret: and forgiving of what I did. I am not a Troll, I understand what I do is not good. But I don’t want be blocked. Frapril (talk) 00:18, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

If you don’t want to be blocked, stop deleting others comments. Final warning. Sergecross73 msg me 00:19, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Would this be a good time to mention I rarely forget interactions and that the contribution history permanently records things? :P -- ferret (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I thought you were a ferret, not an elephant. This user left me a message but I don't understand what they're asking. At some point I (we, some of us) need to rethink the relationship between List of Mystery Case Files games and Mystery Case Files. At least a dozen separate articles are now merged and we don't have to deal with them. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

@Drmies: Trunks are kinda like a weasel. I'm feeling charitable so I'm going to try to untangle some of this mess. -- ferret (talk) 15:42, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate that. That first batch of mergers and redirects gave me a headache. Trying to edit the prose gave me a migraine. Drmies (talk) 15:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Sonic '06 lead section

Hello again, Serge. While I've been a bit busy lately, I've been doing a checkup of the Sonic articles. For the lead section in the 2006 video game, I'm thinking about rewriting parts of it using Battlefield Earth (film) (an FA) as a model. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:23, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Hey Sjones, long time no see. I don’t oppose per se, but I don’t see any issues with the current version either, which is more or less what it was when it passed its FA. TheJoebro64 wrote most of the current iteration, I just maintain it from vandalism and slow quality degradation over time. You could always work with him on it too, he’s still active and has learned the ways of Wikipedia quite well. Sergecross73 msg me 21:41, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Template:Nintendo franchises

No vandalism or edit warring this time, just wanted to let you know that Kururin has enough entries to warrant itself being in the franchise template, see Kuru Kuru Kururin, Kururin Paradise and Kururin Squash!. Thanks for trimming down that template though. Namcokid47 (talk) 17:40, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, it technically meets the lowest of the requirements, I just try to cut down on the obscure entry bloat that is constantly accumulating, and felt that was one that isn’t very prominent or commonly mentioned as a “Nintendo Franchise”. But I won’t push further on it if you don’t agree. Sergecross73 msg me 21:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

I understand, I just wanted to let you know. Thank you for your contributions to help trim down this template. Namcokid47 (talk) 02:26, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Isn't there supposed to be a WP:FLAGBIO regulation for esports team pages?

Months ago, the flags weren't on the esports team pages, but lately, people have been adding the flags back to the pages. Aren't the people doing this violating WP:FLAGBIO. I haven't been following the esports stuff that much lately, but I'm not sure why people are doing this. It's already bad enough that a Piranha Plant out of all things made it into the new Smash, but it's really bad when people don't know the WP:FLAGBIO rule. But yeah, I'm confused. ULTRA-DARKNESS^{:) 2 CHAT} 18:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, the problem with esports on Wikipedia boils down to that many of the experienced editors, myself included, don’t have much interest in editing esports articles. The only time experienced editors seem to intervene or edit them is when someone starts a discussion at WP:VG. So in general, if you see polices/guidelines not being followed, chances are, you’re correct, and it’s editors that don’t know or care about the standards. Sergecross73 msg me 00:58, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Administrator changes

Sir Sputnik

Kudpung • Liz • Lourdes

Everyking • Jackmcbarn

Interface administrator changes

Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes

AGK • Ivanvector • Stwalkerster • TonyBallioni

Oversight changes

Amorymeltzer • Oshwah • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93

Keilana

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
• A village pump discussion has been ongoing about whether the proposed deletion policy (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether pending changes protection should be applied automatically to today's featured article (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.

Technical news

• Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
• A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
• The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
• The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:19, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Bitch Lasagna

Hi, after what I saw what you wrote about invalid reasoning, I changed my vote to a Redirect. I also stated that since you are a Wikipedia administrator that you are the authority on this matter. Davidgoodheart (talk) 00:14, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reconsidering your AFD stance. Technically, I was merely participating as an editor, not an Admin, on that AFD, and you, or anyone else, are allowed to disagree with me. But that said, you made the right choice with your stance change. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 17:48, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

You are very welcome! And also about Rob Young (broadcaster), I have now read what you said and have changed my wording as well. And I promise there will be no more WP:ITSNOTABLE from me! Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:09, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 11:15, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I have now read do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken, and that it is not good to pipe links, which I didn't know about before. Now that I know I won't do that again. Davidgoodheart (talk) 03:32, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Wild 9

Honestly, I'm as much in the dark on that point as you. "disillusionment with Sega of America's Saturn strategy" is the exact wording Sega Saturn Magazine used; unfortunately, they don't actually quote Perry or elaborate any further. I'm hoping eventually I (or someone) will come across something that makes this clearer, but I figured a vague explanation was better than nothing.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:38, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay, that’s all I needed to know. I agree, it’s good info to have in there. Maybe clarification will come (and even if it doesn’t, one can imagine with the Saturn anyways.) Sergecross73 msg me 23:11, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Sega Wii accessories listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sega Wii accessories. Since you had some involvement with the Sega Wii accessories redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 01:23, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Untitled Yoshi game listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Untitled Yoshi game. Since you had some involvement with the Untitled Yoshi game redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 18:52, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sergecross73. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

A user named DengarDengarDengar is making drafts for fake games.

Two things, this page seriously needs to be deleted and protected Draft:Skylanders: Invade Russia. The game is not real. Second is that the user needs to be blocked for this. According to his contributions, he only came on here to mess with articles. Can you please deal with this? ULTRA-DARKNESS^{:) 2 CHAT} 18:04, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Is this illegal? I thought that as long as it was never published there was no harm. dannymusiceditor ^oops 19:00, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Hoax article deleted, vandalism edits reverted, user blocked. Nothing more to see here. -- ferret (talk) 19:16, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

- Ferret - Thanks!

- Danny - Drafte certainly have more leniency when it comes to notability, but they’re still not immune to blatant WP:NOT-type stuff. Blatant hoaxes/vandalism, attack pages, things that are never going to develop into a constructive article (“List of potatoes found in Maynard James Keenan’s refrigerator”, etc). I would have deleted this draft as well as long as I could confirm it’s a hoax, which it is. Sergecross73 msg me 20:18, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Makes more sense to do so now that you can clearly see he's a vandal anyway. If one were to create one of these with {{humor}}, would it fall under the same rules? dannymusiceditor ^oops 02:35, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Drafts are for incubating articles, not humor pages. I'd have deleted this regardless of what tags it had. -- ferret (talk) 02:37, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I honestly have no idea what the standards are for the “humor” articles, I’ve never dabbled in any of that. I feel like they’re more likely to be written in userspace drafts, which people seem to be less likely to stumbled upon to begin with. Sergecross73 msg me 02:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks guys. dannymusiceditor ^oops 05:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)