User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 89
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 85 | ← | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 | Archive 91 | → | Archive 95 |
Baffling redirect campaign on Eurovision song articles
Hey Serge. In December last year, the editor Sims2aholic8 began a discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision about the plethora of stub articles for Eurovision entries. The discussion had two editors who agreed about redirecting the least notable among them (certainly not all tagged as stubs) and one, BabbaQ, who disagreed. Since then, it appears Sims2aholic8 has taken this as carte blanche to redirect every single Eurovision song article that is a stub, including songs that reached number one in European countries! I'm actually still a little stunned to be blunt with you. Examples: [1], [2], [3], [4], a song that reached number 3 in Germany and charted in at least 10 countries, [5]... and this is just the tip of the iceberg. I've asked the user to stop, but there's evidence they've begun an edit war in re-reverting to restore a redirect so I am very concerned. Also very concerned at how far this goes. It's been going on since at least February and that's as far back as I looked. God knows how long it would take to go through and restore the links and check every article Simsaholic has redirected simply because it's categorised as a stub. I will never understand users who think stub = should be redirected. What do you think? If you agree, please comment at their talk page as well. This should be halted because the user has proven they can't differentiate between what's a notable stub and what's not. And they just tried to do a blanket nomination of the 20 or so articles I restored. I think this needs urgent action from an admin... Ss112 07:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- I'm additionally worried about some of these Eurovision editors, Serge... one of them said "Normally not even three reverts are considered edit warring". Yikes. I may be wrong, but some of them seem to be thinking that a blanket/one-size-fits-all redirecting approach is "okay" because "those articles can just be restored anyway". Ss112 14:26, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with what you're saying - I think that there are some pretty poor interpretations going on here related to NSONGS, edit warring, etc. but I believe hashing it out at AFD is the best way to move forward if they're being stubborn on said stances. I think taking a beating at AFD (which is the expected result if you ask me) is a better way to handle it than my intervention. Sergecross73 msg me 15:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sims2aholic8 reverted the only two editors (once each) that I saw who reverted their bold redirecting of these songs. I'm concerned about the attitudes of some of these Eurovision-focused editors going forward, and that's not what's at AfD. They seem to think mass redirection of songs, including some that went to number one, is okay because some of those articles are stubs and "nobody's edited them in years" or the songs have apparently "fallen off people's radars". Combined with the editor Jochem van Hees focusing on my tone instead of this problem and arguing that because BRD is not a policy editors should not attempt to follow it, it does not bode well at all. I'm confused as to how no admin has questioned Sims2aholic8 thus far, and I'm personally very concerned about Jochem thinking somebody needs to go to three reverts for it to be edit warring or "as long as it doesn't last too long". Surely somebody who has more sway than I should correct that...? Jochem also seems to be saying if an editor sincerely disagreed with an article being reverted, AfD does not have to be the next step. Taken altogether it's painting a picture that I don't like. Ss112 15:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- I just find it baffling that Sims does all of these redirects based on a very weak consensus. I also question why he made all of these excessive redirects of obviously notable songs that have charted in several countries. It is disruptive. Anyways, good that Ss112 noticed it and stopped it before it got even worse.BabbaQ (talk) 16:27, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed, I agree with both of you. Charting on multiple national charts is usually a pretty safe bet for notability. Here's my thoughts. If these AFDs generally close as keep, and they still keep doing this sort of stuff, I'll intervene, because at that point it'll be a bit more of blatant example of disruption, where I'm more comfortable with making unilateral decisions. That said, you don't need to wait for me - I won't get in your way if you guys want to take it to ANI. In fact, I'd probably say I generally agree with you and just wanted to give it more time, if I was directly asked for my stance. Sergecross73 msg me 18:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think it's worth the stress of an ANI thread (at least yet), as Sims has said they will not take the other articles I restored to AfD nor will they interfere with any future ones I restore (at least that's what I think they were saying), and Jochem has now said on the Eurovision WikiProject talk page that the mass redirection should stop as well, as there is no longer a consensus for it. Personally I'm satisfied at this stage, and I think even if it did continue in some form a word from you would be preferred and hopefully enough over going to ANI. I just hope more editors notice this has happened (besides BabbaQ and myself, I've alerted another editor) and go through and help restore them and the links to them, as I was tired after sifting through Sims's edits from this month alone. Ss112 18:24, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed, I agree with both of you. Charting on multiple national charts is usually a pretty safe bet for notability. Here's my thoughts. If these AFDs generally close as keep, and they still keep doing this sort of stuff, I'll intervene, because at that point it'll be a bit more of blatant example of disruption, where I'm more comfortable with making unilateral decisions. That said, you don't need to wait for me - I won't get in your way if you guys want to take it to ANI. In fact, I'd probably say I generally agree with you and just wanted to give it more time, if I was directly asked for my stance. Sergecross73 msg me 18:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- I just find it baffling that Sims does all of these redirects based on a very weak consensus. I also question why he made all of these excessive redirects of obviously notable songs that have charted in several countries. It is disruptive. Anyways, good that Ss112 noticed it and stopped it before it got even worse.BabbaQ (talk) 16:27, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sims2aholic8 reverted the only two editors (once each) that I saw who reverted their bold redirecting of these songs. I'm concerned about the attitudes of some of these Eurovision-focused editors going forward, and that's not what's at AfD. They seem to think mass redirection of songs, including some that went to number one, is okay because some of those articles are stubs and "nobody's edited them in years" or the songs have apparently "fallen off people's radars". Combined with the editor Jochem van Hees focusing on my tone instead of this problem and arguing that because BRD is not a policy editors should not attempt to follow it, it does not bode well at all. I'm confused as to how no admin has questioned Sims2aholic8 thus far, and I'm personally very concerned about Jochem thinking somebody needs to go to three reverts for it to be edit warring or "as long as it doesn't last too long". Surely somebody who has more sway than I should correct that...? Jochem also seems to be saying if an editor sincerely disagreed with an article being reverted, AfD does not have to be the next step. Taken altogether it's painting a picture that I don't like. Ss112 15:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with what you're saying - I think that there are some pretty poor interpretations going on here related to NSONGS, edit warring, etc. but I believe hashing it out at AFD is the best way to move forward if they're being stubborn on said stances. I think taking a beating at AFD (which is the expected result if you ask me) is a better way to handle it than my intervention. Sergecross73 msg me 15:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Question regarding sockpuppeting and making a new account
Hello Serge!
I used to have an account on Wikipedia when I was a child and I made very unacceptable and immature violations of Wikipedia's fundamentals that lead me to getting banned off the website (and of course one of those which did include a sockpuppet). Since then, I have and I do aim on trying to improve certain pages that I have high interest in, but I do not usually do that often as I am not really active that much.
I know this is brief and all, but I would hope to receive some sort of answer in regards to this, so thank you in advance. 71.59.205.114 (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hello there. I think WP:CLEANSTART covers what you want to know. Sergecross73 msg me 22:07, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, thank you for letting me know!! I will be checking that out sometime soon. 71.59.205.114 (talk) 22:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Editor is a contributor to a website and their only edits are adding links to said website
Hey Serge. The user Brownypaul is an editor who is a contributor to the website Wall of Sound and whose sole existence on Wikipedia is to add links on Wikipedia to the website in a bid to increase its traffic. The editor Metalcub was blocked pretty recently for doing the same. Even if they declare a conflict of interest, I feel it's kinda gross to allow them to exist here solely to benefit a website they have a vested interest in. Should they be blocked? I don't understand why multiple editors are so concerned about promoting this website. Ss112 14:57, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Warned, as it is a COI/PROMOTION issue. That said, at least he's not very prolific so far. It was like 10 edits since 2017 or something. Still not okay, but I just mean to damage is relatively minimal. Sergecross73 msg me 17:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Serge, it's not Paul's first rodeo. CUPIDICAE💕 17:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Good to know, I didn't realize that. If they've been warned before then I won't cut them any more slack moving forward. Sergecross73 msg me 18:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Brownypaul's been blocked by Widr now. @Praxidicae: I don't even remember that user. Thanks for unearthing that. He said to Primefac, "My intention is not to self-promote, but to update pages with relevant, new information as it comes into us, usually hours before anyone else." Sounds like a load of BS to me—this sounds like "our site gets scoops, so I feel compelled to insert more links on Wikipedia to drive traffic to a website I contribute to". Ss112 20:59, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's pretty much what every COI/PROMOTION editor says in their defense, more or less. Sergecross73 msg me 21:19, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Brownypaul's been blocked by Widr now. @Praxidicae: I don't even remember that user. Thanks for unearthing that. He said to Primefac, "My intention is not to self-promote, but to update pages with relevant, new information as it comes into us, usually hours before anyone else." Sounds like a load of BS to me—this sounds like "our site gets scoops, so I feel compelled to insert more links on Wikipedia to drive traffic to a website I contribute to". Ss112 20:59, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Good to know, I didn't realize that. If they've been warned before then I won't cut them any more slack moving forward. Sergecross73 msg me 18:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Serge, it's not Paul's first rodeo. CUPIDICAE💕 17:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Tim96144 again
It's like he wants to tip people off or desperately wants attention. Now using 220.132.167.11. Once again edited Nogizaka46 (lest we forget his sock user name Nogi4646), expanded an article for a dance song from a redirect and restored one of his old edits to Obsessed with You that he made using Nogi4646. Ss112 12:56, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- When will he learn? Blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 13:30, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've done another sweep for Tim, the following confirmed to past accounts: Alicecountry. -- ferret (talk) 16:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
I think, at some point, continuing to respond encourages them to keep trying to get the WP:LASTWORD. I remerged the article a week ago. There's plenty of people in the discussion to ping if someone tries to do an out-of-process change against the consensus (again). Axem Titanium (talk) 22:38, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.
Technical news
- Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the
deletelogentryanddeletedhistoryrights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928) - When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)
Arbitration
- Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings has been updated to reflect current practice following a motion.
- A arbitration case regarding Skepticism and coordinated editing has been closed.
- A arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been opened.
Miscellaneous
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines has closed, and the results were that 56.98% of voters supported the guidelines. The results of this vote mean the Wikimedia Foundation Board will now review the guidelines.
Sims2aholic8 back redirecting Eurovision articles
Hi Serge. I've just been alerted by @Nascar9919: that Sims2aholic8 has redirected a bunch of 2021 Eurovision song articles despite agreeing there is no longer a consensus to do this. They laid low for like a week and then started back up last night. All 20 or so of the AfDs closed as keep several days ago. I'd prefer not to go to ANI. Would you be able to have a word to this user to just stop redirecting Eurovision articles, even if they're stubs, even if they didn't chart, altogether? User talk:Sims2aholic8#Stop redirecting every Eurovision song article that is a stub and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision#A discussion with three editors is not carte blanche to redirect every stub Eurovision song article. @BabbaQ: for posterity. Ss112 03:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Can confirm- they’ve been on a months long campaign on redirecting stub articles. There is no longer a consensus to be doing such a thing. Now, they’re still doing it (to newer songs, 2020-2021). Could you please ask them to stop? Thanks. Nascar9919 (talk) 03:39, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've given them a final warning. Sergecross73 msg me 03:40, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks Serge. I think they redirected a bunch of 2020 articles because Eurovision was cancelled that year due to COVID and replaced with a television special showcasing the songs that were going to be entrants. Consequently a few of them failed to gain the attention they ordinarily would have if there had been the usual three televised Eurovision programs (Semi-finals 1 and 2, and the final). Even if some of these articles have one source and may not hold up at AfD, Sims going back on their word and continuing on is definitely disruptive. Also can't believe somebody would seem so adamant about "wanting to move on" and saying "I'm done", acknowledging there is no consensus, pausing for a few days, then continue on as if they had never said anything. Ss112 03:46, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Vesign
The Vesign spammer is back on 2409:4051:2E8E:FE8A:0:0:7209:1D02 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) with a few edits (already reverted) and several filter log entries. Currently no external links or other contribution from the /64. Certes (talk) 10:56, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- ...and Draft:The Vesign is back, courtesy of new editor Writer95375. Certes (talk) 17:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Blocked IP, warned editor. Sergecross73 msg me 18:52, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Editor checkuser blocked, along with TheVesign 91. Also confirmed to already blocked and obvious VESIGN by Cullen328. There's probably more but this range seems to be completely stuffed with promo editors, not all of them in relation to Vesign. I suspect Nindia24 is not the oldest account for this COI/spam farm but I don't have time to research too deeply. -- ferret (talk) 22:35, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I was on the fence on if I should be more aggressive on that one. Sergecross73 msg me 22:37, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Editor checkuser blocked, along with TheVesign 91. Also confirmed to already blocked and obvious VESIGN by Cullen328. There's probably more but this range seems to be completely stuffed with promo editors, not all of them in relation to Vesign. I suspect Nindia24 is not the oldest account for this COI/spam farm but I don't have time to research too deeply. -- ferret (talk) 22:35, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Blocked IP, warned editor. Sergecross73 msg me 18:52, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Now on 2409:4051:2019:F025:0:0:1FF1:A5 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) (reverted). An abuse filter (probably 752) is spotting but not preventing some of the edits. Certes (talk) 17:25, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 17:34, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Draft:The Vesign is here again, from Editor 7598143 (not to be confused with Writer95375) and 2409:4051:387:6795:0:0:173F:90B1 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Does this qualify for tagging under any CSD? Re-creation doesn't apply, as previous attempts were deleted summarily rather than at AfD. Certes (talk) 12:37, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
- I deleted it. It's clearly the same person(s) as before trying to use Wikipedia as a promotional tool. Sergecross73 msg me 12:47, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ditto Draft:VESIGN (which I should have noticed earlier), and it's interesting to note that File:The-Vesign.png on Commons is the editor's own work. Certes (talk) 14:12, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
- Blocked Editor 7598143 and did some tagging to organize the case a bit more. Logo deleted from Commons by ACN. -- ferret (talk) 02:56, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'd forgotten about Changing00000. The image is back as File:Vesignlogo.png; tagged for speedy deletion from Commons. I wonder if we should give this editor very own page to avoid disturbing Serge. Certes (talk) 12:00, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Just run of the mill spammer, not worth an LTA page by any stretch. LTA pages kinda clash with WP:DENY anyway. -- ferret (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- And I'm not bothered in the least. I have an extremely high tolerance for blocking/protecting/deleting problematic editors like this. It's no bother at all, at worst, I'm just busy and will get to it later. Sergecross73 msg me 17:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. They're persistent: now we have Draft:THEVESIGN by Writer 8974192, who at least has a COI declaration. Certes (talk) 10:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- All gone for now. ✌️ Certes (talk) 14:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- I deleted the draft, and ferret blocked the editor. Thanks for notifying me if these. Please keep telling me if you keep seeing it. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- And I'm not bothered in the least. I have an extremely high tolerance for blocking/protecting/deleting problematic editors like this. It's no bother at all, at worst, I'm just busy and will get to it later. Sergecross73 msg me 17:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Just run of the mill spammer, not worth an LTA page by any stretch. LTA pages kinda clash with WP:DENY anyway. -- ferret (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'd forgotten about Changing00000. The image is back as File:Vesignlogo.png; tagged for speedy deletion from Commons. I wonder if we should give this editor very own page to avoid disturbing Serge. Certes (talk) 12:00, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Blocked Editor 7598143 and did some tagging to organize the case a bit more. Logo deleted from Commons by ACN. -- ferret (talk) 02:56, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ditto Draft:VESIGN (which I should have noticed earlier), and it's interesting to note that File:The-Vesign.png on Commons is the editor's own work. Certes (talk) 14:12, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
- I deleted it. It's clearly the same person(s) as before trying to use Wikipedia as a promotional tool. Sergecross73 msg me 12:47, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
- Now on 2409:4051:200B:D5BF:0:0:18D4:F8A5 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) (reverted). Interesting edit summary:
This is dead link so I can change here a link
. I've seen similar before: apparently it's OK to repurpose dead links for marketing purposes. Certes (talk) 11:35, 13 April 2022 (UTC)- I've dropped a broad /36 range block here for 1 month, Certes. -- ferret (talk) 13:59, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- I protected the one that keeps getting targeted repeatedly too. Sergecross73 msg me 15:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've dropped a broad /36 range block here for 1 month, Certes. -- ferret (talk) 13:59, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Marc Engelhard
As you've been so helpful with another case, perhaps you can advise me again. I see a lot of new mentions of Marc Engelhard (also available here and formerly here), mostly from these /64s 1 2 3 4 5 (examples). Here's a picture which I've removed from several articles but may not be around for long. I know non-notable people often deserve mentions but this does seem like a COATRACK issue. What do you think? Is there a better forum to raise this? Certes (talk) 12:40, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't mean to ignore this, totally was thinking ferret responses to this. Yes, to me, it appears someone is trying to violate WP:PROMO/WP:SPAM this photo, whether it be the photographer, or the person. Any unsourced mentions should be removed instantly on those grounds. The rest should be addressed as a PROMO issue. Sergecross73 msg me 11:08, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. I've removed the mentions; they were "sourced" to the subject's own YouTube channel. Most were tenuous, e.g. he got a name check in Boris Becker because both made appearances on the same radio channel. Certes (talk) 14:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've discussed the matter with an involved editor at User talk:Thorsten Feldmann. Certes (talk) 20:22, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
- No problem. Looks like you've got the right idea, but the editor seems unconvinced, so I chimed in as well. Sergecross73 msg me 21:14, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
Tim96144 back on an IP
Tim96144 is back using the Taiwanese IP 36.235.202.179 to update country music articles. Also, mentioned an extra detail in an email. Ss112 16:56, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 17:34, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Tim's back using the IP 211.38.23.17 (geolocates to South Korea, but he's either learned to IP-hop or could be on vacation, it's definitely him). Created an article and appears to have reverted one of your reverts on a country song here... Ss112 16:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, I kind of wondered when I got that revert notification. Blocked, reverted, etc. feel free to revert my reversions if you think anything should stay in place. They're mostly just WP:DENY reversions. Sergecross73 msg me 17:50, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- Tim's back using the IP 211.38.23.17 (geolocates to South Korea, but he's either learned to IP-hop or could be on vacation, it's definitely him). Created an article and appears to have reverted one of your reverts on a country song here... Ss112 16:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
New administrator activity requirement
The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.
Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
- Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
- Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period
Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
New Truck
I restored New Truck with a couple more sources. Even the sources that were there prior to my addition seemed to make it enough to pass WP:NSONG. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:18, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- That's fine, if you're doing it for the right reason. I reverted it due to being creating by a indeffed block evader, who got blocked because they kept creating WP:COPYVIO/WP:QUOTEFARM/poorly paraphrased articles. The editor either will not, or cannot, understand these concepts. If you wish to wade through their prose and restore content that doesn't offend these concepts, go for it, but I've been reverting per WP:EVADE and WP:DENY. Sergecross73 msg me 10:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
I CU-blocked your evader, and threw in User:Mofia2486 for free. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, I really appreciate it! Sergecross73 msg me 18:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- The ostrich can strike at any time, without warning. -- ferret (talk) 19:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi Serge, somewhat related – I just saw you (thankfully) protected Beautiful Lies (Yung Bleu and Kehlani song), which I redirected multiple times because of sockpuppeteer Rishabisajakepauler editing it. Could you possibly also protect the following articles, Up at Night (song), Up At Night (song), and Blue Water Road, please? As evidenced here, the sock keeps returning, and removing the redirects. AshMusique (talk) 19:44, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- @AshMusique: Does this look like Rishab? Ss112 01:31, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Serge, looks like Tim's learnt how to use an international proxy. No Australian would be typing in such broken English or randomly harassing me... let alone trying to recruit TenPoundHammer to create one of the articles they tried to start as Mofia2486 (or be calling you "disgusting"). Sad! Ss112 05:38, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- So get this... Tim (on Taiwanese IP 223.141.58.59) reverted my revert of Tim's message on TenPoundHammer's talk page, then 20 minutes later reverts themselves using 111.82.16.134. It appears Tim has used both of these ranges (223.141.58.59/16 and 111.82.16.134/16) to make edits to country music articles. Ss112 19:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- His original account pinged me today and I explained WP:STANDARDOFFER to him. It could be his was of showing that he's going to try that. Please let him attempt that.) Sergecross73 msg me 19:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- So get this... Tim (on Taiwanese IP 223.141.58.59) reverted my revert of Tim's message on TenPoundHammer's talk page, then 20 minutes later reverts themselves using 111.82.16.134. It appears Tim has used both of these ranges (223.141.58.59/16 and 111.82.16.134/16) to make edits to country music articles. Ss112 19:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
She Likes It
Probably related to the above; I re-targeted She Likes It to Russell Dickerson. The Russell Dickerson song is a single that's on the charts right now, so it's more likely to pass WP:NSONG in the coming months than is an album cut by Jason Aldean. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, it was created by one of his socks. I've just been reverting/restoring the redirects, so feel free to retarget. Sergecross73 msg me 19:56, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Mochi StarStrike
Just an FYI, I've left two warnings on this user's talk page, but I'm already convinced that WP:NOTHERE applies. This user has not made a single positive contribution and is using the site as social media. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Gave a final warning. Sergecross73 msg me 19:12, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- While it's disappointing when users would rather leave than improve, I can't help but laugh when they've edited their user page to add the retired banner first with "it had to happen", then "i no longer trust anyone on here", and finally "bye". --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- How bizarre. As much as I truly don't wish to drive anyone away, I'm always confused when people who barely started and contributed nothing make these "you're going to miss me when I'm gone" type posts... Sergecross73 msg me 20:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- While it's disappointing when users would rather leave than improve, I can't help but laugh when they've edited their user page to add the retired banner first with "it had to happen", then "i no longer trust anyone on here", and finally "bye". --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Dio discography
Someone keeps changing Dio's discography to claim that Holy Diver was certified double platinum by RIAA, when as you can cleary see here, it is certified platinum. The individual has used an IP address and two different accounts so far. I have left said person's revision on there for several hours because I know that person will just revert me. No one else appears to be watching the article, so I thought I would ask an admin for help. yawaraey (talk) 02:00, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Sonic the Hedgehog (1991)
Hey, saw your edit revert. Could you explain to me why you see contemporary Usenet posts and magazine articles as not 'reliable'? Multiple people on that forum were posting that they'd bought the game the previous day (June 11th) specifically from Electronics Boutique, and the article – from a weekly magazine – confirms the US release date was before the UK; i.e. before 24 June. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wazzok1 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- WP:USERG covers it for the most part. Sergecross73 msg me 21:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for that. That doesn't answer my question regarding the magazine article and UK release date, though. That's not user-generated. Wazzok1 (talk) 21:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- No, but unless I'm missing something, the only means of seeing these reliable sources is through an unreliable USERG source itself, which is a problem too. Feel free to start up a discussion on the articles talk page, but I think you'll find that you'll keep getting the same reaction to it... Sergecross73 msg me 21:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- The article was a separate citation linking directly to a scanned PDF of Games-X, Issue 11, 4–10 July 1991. You'll find the information on page 14. Light blue box in the lower left corner. Games-X
- Direct contemporary published evidence that the game was released on 24 June 1991 in the UK, and according to this, 'a week after its American launch'.
- I'll go ahead and start a discussion on the article's talk page itself, though. I can find zero contemporary evidence that this game released in any territory on June 23. Wazzok1 (talk) 21:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- No, but unless I'm missing something, the only means of seeing these reliable sources is through an unreliable USERG source itself, which is a problem too. Feel free to start up a discussion on the articles talk page, but I think you'll find that you'll keep getting the same reaction to it... Sergecross73 msg me 21:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for that. That doesn't answer my question regarding the magazine article and UK release date, though. That's not user-generated. Wazzok1 (talk) 21:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Sakura Wars 2: Thou Shalt Not Die § Title
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Sakura Wars 2: Thou Shalt Not Die § Title. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- I commented there. I also apologize for not commenting at the original discussion. I meant to but never got around to it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- No hard feelings. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Template editor refuses to revert their own edit
Hi Serge. Would you please be able to revert Paine Ellsworth's recent changes to Template:Infobox album that have been made without consensus? Based on one editor's request that the parameter "Released" be changed to "Release date" for future releases, they've now changed it to "Release date" to compensate for all release dates, and then doubled down on it by adding a non-breaking space to the parameter. Even without an extra line, adding a wide parameter title forces other text to be pushed over in the infobox and I'm sure there are editors who disagree with this. It should go without saying that such widely visible changes require consensus, and as I'm not a template editor I cannot revert them. Ss112 02:16, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- I was going to ping them for their thoughts, but I think they self-reverted? Sergecross73 msg me 02:30, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Vesign again
Writer42724 has produced Draft:THE VESIGN. Now this time the vesign complete 2 month on google! Certes (talk) 10:15, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Quack quack. -- ferret (talk) 11:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed. Block/deleted already. Sergecross73 msg me 13:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Does ZQT7128 look familiar? Also available on 2409:4051:4e98:ca41::7289:840f. Certes (talk) 12:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Blocked, deleted. Thank you for your continued help on this. Sergecross73 msg me 13:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I never threatened anyone
What's with the out of context posting by others?? Other editors went right off topic of what I was simply asking some admins to be more friendly towards the football project. I really don't understand why people are so aggravated. And wtf was this no prejudice towards opening a more comprehensive BOOMERANG discussion on Govvy if their documented threat is commonplace behavior for them.
Can you please remove that. I found what you posted there more offensive than anything. Govvy (talk) 17:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- You said if you're going down this route, this is going to be extremely dangerous for you. That sounds like a threat. You also called them a monkey. (???). If you'd prefer I replace "threat" with "inappropriate comments", I can do that. Otherwise, you should probably just be happy I closed the discussion without any action, as that discussion was...not trending well for you. Sergecross73 msg me 18:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
"Fire yell's a villager, running down the street, FIRE! The people come out to investigate, they all gather water in buckets, it took all night and into the morning, the village library had gone. All their rules that governed them, burned in the single moment, an act in one night."
"That day was argument upon argument of who done it, what will be done and who will scribe the laws back on parchment. A new library needed to be built, a new collection will need to be collected. The process could take years to restore what was lost. One elder said, "It needs to be exact of what we have lost", another "We can improve on what we had" So much was said, but what no one had noticed was that all the smoke had brought the rain, drenching what could be salvaged. Everything was lost.. One child, a little girl asked a simple yet profound question, "What have we learned from this." But not a soul provided an answer..."
Govvy (talk) 20:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hello. Please be more civil at AFD, don't call others names, and don't post inactionable threads at AN. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 20:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Did you not understand what I said from the little story above that I posted? It seems to me you haven't understood it as your reply is what, replying with wikipedia policy and guideline pages? That's not straight talking or even talking between the lines. Also there is nothing against posting in-actionable threads at AN notice board. You like rock right? Johnny Rotten was a very miss-understood character, a highly intelligence person. Yet in a very crass way, there is nothing wrong with being crass at times, its part of the character of who people are. For wikipedia to try and suppress that, well, I find that pathetic. Please don't fall into the trap like so many other admins, don't go down that path. Govvy (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- It was me trying to politely keep things moving. I'm not looking for advice on this. Earlier this year, your personal attack violations were so bad that it earned you a week-long block with talk page access revoked, so forgive me for thinking that you don't understand where to draw the line with this sort of conduct. Sergecross73 msg me 22:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Did you not understand what I said from the little story above that I posted? It seems to me you haven't understood it as your reply is what, replying with wikipedia policy and guideline pages? That's not straight talking or even talking between the lines. Also there is nothing against posting in-actionable threads at AN notice board. You like rock right? Johnny Rotten was a very miss-understood character, a highly intelligence person. Yet in a very crass way, there is nothing wrong with being crass at times, its part of the character of who people are. For wikipedia to try and suppress that, well, I find that pathetic. Please don't fall into the trap like so many other admins, don't go down that path. Govvy (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Question.
Hello. I'm new(ish) to editing Wikipedia. I'm wondering if you can help me. I'm drafting a few articles; the process is tedious because of reasons. Anyway that's besides the point. The point is that I'm using blockquotes to discipline and provide structure to a couple of articles I have as drafts on Wikipedia. What is Wikipedia's policy on blockquotes? Is there a specific number which are O.K.? What exact number would infringe copyright? Personally, I think copyrights are bogus; but, Wikipedia is not my personal blog where I can run athwart the law. Thanks.
SpicyMemes123 (talk) 01:50, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi there. So, WP:BLOCKQUOTE and WP:QUOTE give some guidance on this. There's no hard number limit on how long they can or can't be. It really comes down to how much is truly necessary to illustrate a point that can't be paraphrased to the same effect. Don't direct quote mundane stuff, and cut it off if it's something like an interview and the person starts veering off topic. Let me know if that helps or if you want me to keep going. Sergecross73 msg me 13:19, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response, Mr. Serge. The answer you've provided should suffice for now. :D
- SpicyMemes123 (talk) 00:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, a change has been made to the administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
- Following a discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, a change has been made to the bureaucrats inactivity policy.
Technical news
- The ability to undelete the associated talk page when undeleting a page has been added. This was the 11th wish of the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey.
- A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.
Arbitration
- Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.