Jump to content

User talk:Ad Orientem/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15→Archive 20

SNL troll, again

Hi, Ad Orientem. See Special:Contributions/74.120.47.82. Same IP user evading the block you carried out at Special:Contributions/24.73.197.194. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 20:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Blocked x 3 months. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Restoring "The Moderate Party (Ireland)"

Hello, The page "The Moderate Party (Ireland)" was deleted in March, I feel unfairly.

It was listed in the page "List of political parties in the Republic of Ireland" page under the category of "Other unregistered parties", and yet part of the reasoning used to delete it was that the party is as yet unregistered. It was also stated that the party has not run any candidates in any elections, but parties have to begin before this is possible. The Moderate Party was formed at the party's inaugural meeting held on 8th February 2019. The party constitution was recognised at this meeting. A bank account has since been opened in the name of "The Moderate Party" to handle party accounts.

The fact the party only currently has one candidate listed (David Barrett) is irrelevent to it being a political party. The government of the Republic of Ireland recognise non-registered political parties. Indeed Wikipedia have a category for this on their above mentioned page.

Can you please reinstate the page as its absence weakens our democratic right to be listed. At the very least, The Moderate Party should be listed on the "List of political parties in the Republic of Ireland" page under the category of "Other unregistered parties".

Thank you for your attention to this. Regards, David Barrett Founder, The Moderate Party

Hi David. I have reviewed both the article (admins can see deleted pages) and the community discussion that resulted in its deletion. There was a clear consensus favoring deletion based on WP:PAG. The applicable guidelines for establishing encyclopedic notability in this case are WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Microparties often have difficulty meeting our standards for inclusion in the encyclopedia. If/when the party is listed on the national ballot with candidates for the general election that would be a strong indication of notability. I am very sorry that your party's article was deleted, but situations change and it is possible that at some point in the future it will meet our criteria for inclusion. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Follow up on Weinblatt AfD

Wouldn't this violate WP:FAKEARTICLE? Just wondering if I should blank it or not. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Tagged for CSD (U-5). -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Rama Arbitration Case

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Previous listing as a party

My apologies for the above section stating that you are a party. You are not, I made a mistake with the template. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries. I assumed it was a mistake. I did comment on the question of whether or not to open a case, which I opposed. But I am not going to involve myself further. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive user

Can you take a look at this user? He is always making revenge reverts without providing reason despite warnings. Shashank5988 (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Shashank5988. This does look like hounding/harassment. Do you have any idea who this might be? -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:18, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't know that and maybe he is avoiding communication because he is evading something? Don't know but WP:COMMUNICATE is important. Shashank5988 (talk) 15:23, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Ok I blocked the IP on May 5th and neither the account nor the IP have edited since. So this is not a question of immediate disruptive editing. However I am going to post a strongly worded warning on the accounts talk page. If this resumes let me know. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Caroline Bittencourt

Hi, this article Caroline Bittencourt has been up for deletion for seven days, so perhaps so can close the AFD now. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi David. The article was nominated on April 30 so the AfD has a couple more days to run. It's due for closure on Tuesday-Wednesday night. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your quick response. Please check out the latest comment at the AFD by an editor who says that it should be closed. Perhaps you should ping them as they don't understand why it hasn't closed yet. Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:52, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

I've closed the AfD as a Keep. It was a few hours early but consensus was clear. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:31, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, an editor called the people who wanted to keep the article "idjits". Is type of name calling accepted on Wikipedia? Davidgoodheart (talk) 22:33, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Where? -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:34, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

In the last comment made on the view history on the article Caroline Bittencourt. Davidgoodheart (talk) 22:41, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

I dropped a line on their talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:42, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:SNC-Lavalin affair

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:SNC-Lavalin affair. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
thanks for your note, I desperately need some help setting up few items on wikipedia. would you be kind to help me setting up with few basic steps? need to learn siting as well I have to add one item to another page. Rami Al Hatab (talk) 11:54, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Rami Al Hatab. Thank you for the barnstar. How can I help you? -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:18, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Semion Mogilevich

Hi, I have some questions about fugitive Semion Mogilevich. He was once a wanted fugitive which means the police didn't know where he was, so doesn't that mean that he disappeared or went missing because he was evading the law? Also when they say that he "lives freely" in Russia doesn't that mean the he lives under no contact information, such as no phone number, email, or address? Am I right about these two things? Davidgoodheart (talk) 07:19, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Davidgoodheart. Normally the term disappeared or missing for the purposes of the lists refers to disappeared and has not been found. Living openly in Russia means he is not hiding there and the authorities are not bothering him. -Ad Orientem (talk) 12:30, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Second opinion

I wanted a second opinion on Heavn. It was originally located at a disambiguated title but I moved it since there was nothing of the same name. Do you think it’s distinct enough from the word "Heaven"? Regards.—NØ 21:17, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

@MaranoFan... If it is the actual name of a notable album, and assuming there is no other notable topic with the same name/spelling, I am not seeing a problem. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:21, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for everything I'm going to use each and every bit of thing so that it can be helpful to me and my research but i will need someone to help me through that...please can you be that person?please! Alwaba Tom II (talk) 18:56, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Alwaba Tom II. More than happy to help out. What do you need? -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:29, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Re: WP:UAA

(insert snarky comment about how clueless admins are[sarcasm]) In terms that are less likely to get me slapped with a block, thanks for the quick reply and understanding. Have a wonderful weekend. Thanks, Kb03 (talk) 20:20, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't understand the term Daughter Account and thought you were reporting a sock as opposed to an alternate account created openly by the now blocked users. Anyways they are all handled. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Ad Orientem, Ok, thanks. Kb03 (talk) 21:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

SNL troll

Hi, Ad Orientem. See Special:Contributions/67.79.157.50. Same IP user again evading the block you carried out at Special:Contributions/24.73.197.194. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 13:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

IP blocked x 3 months. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:11, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Block question

You blocked 108.17.18.29 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) for 2 weeks on 11 March 2019, for block evasion. If all of the edits from the IP are from EditorE, please block it. wumbolo ^^^ 20:18, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

AfD closure: Richard D. Robinson (engineer)

Greetings. Just before you closed the AfD for Richard D. Robinson (engineer), I posted up a question about the possible existence of a diferrent Robinson, one who also teaches Materials Science and Engineering and has won the same award as the other one! I will not of course dispute the closing of the AfD but I want to press the issue about a potential confusion. How do you suggest we go about that? Thanks in advance. -The Gnome (talk) 18:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

I have reopened the discussion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:22, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Could you please remove the material added by Markus Pössel after the AfD was closed? This is a violation of the exhortation not to modify anything after the AfD is closed, of which perhaps that editor should be reninded, if not made aware. I believe we do not want to duplicate the discussion now taking place in the article's talk page in a (closed!) AfD page. -The Gnome (talk) 14:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:12, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Oops, sorry. Looks like I was misled by an older cached version in my browser, which still listed the AfD as unclosed. But since I added my comments about the issue raised erroneously by The Gnome on the talk page as well, no information is lost, as far as I can see. Markus Pössel (talk) 19:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
No worries. I assumed everything was done in good faith. Not a big deal. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:07, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Suspected IP sock of an IP you recently blocked

Hi. Not sure if there's an appropriate noticeboard for this situation; On Robert Plant and Band of Joy, 177.130.51.51 made a series of repeated attempts to make unconstructive edits and you thankfully banned the IP. The same edits are now being made by 189.89.243.14. I have issued the first couple of warnings for this month but it seems obvious to me that this is the same person (IMO) and they're simply trying to avoid the ban. I hope you don't mind that I came to you directly. Cheers. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 20:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Having a look... -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:01, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Fred Gandt. IP blocked and both pages protected x 1 month. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. You're fast :D Sorry again to bother you at home (as it were); please tell me if I should have reported this elsewhere. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 21:11, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
No worries. I have no problem with anyone coming here for help. But if you are dealing with a similar situation and your not sure who is available to help, WP:AIV is a good place to report vandalism and/or obvious (WP:DUCK) type socking. Also if a page is being targeted by multiple IPs or socks you can always request page protection at WP:RfPP. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:15, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you again. I will add this info to my list of things to know. I went ahead and asked "Should suspected IP socks be reported here?" since I couldn't figure out what to do from the policy/guideline info. I also found several questions regarding this issue in the talk page archives of Sockpuppet investigations and as such, wonder if perhaps this needs some clarification on the pages one might expected to find it? Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 21:46, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:19, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Count Iblis

Regarding this, is there anything that can be done about his frivolous time-wasting ITN noms? I complained about it in this ANI thread but it didn't go anywhere - the only response I got was, it's just a bit of fun. You and I are regulars at ITN and know better. It's not just that they are nearly always snow-closed and he never updates any of the articles, it's more the misleading and borderline BLP violating blurbs.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:36, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree, his nominations are often frivolous and time wasting. And then there are the pointed ones, like the one just closed. Time to drop a note on their talk page. I am getting close to requesting a TBan. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:41, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Rubbish. It’s a good suggestion (although I oppose it). There is nothing misleading about the nom at all. - SchroCat (talk) 22:22, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
"Judge orders Johnson to go on trial" is misleading. It was a magistrate sending the case up to a higher court, that's all. It's a typical Count Iblis exaggeration - see also "Russia threatens nuclear attack against Western targets."-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Optional_RfA_candidate_poll#Shut this down?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Optional_RfA_candidate_poll#Shut this down?. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:52, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

removed Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

removed Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
  • An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
  • An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

  • The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
  • Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Ichthus June 2019


ICHTHUS

June 2019
The Top 6 Articles
By Stalinsunnykvj

The sad news was the 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings. The Top 6 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:

    1. Louis XIV of France – a monarch of the House of Bourbon who reigned as King of France. He did say, "Every time I appoint someone to a vacant position, I make a hundred unhappy and one ungrateful."
    2. Mary, Queen of Scots – arrested for Reigning While Catholic (RWC), Mary was found guilty of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth I of England in 1586, and was beheaded the following year.
    3. Elizabeth I of England – The Virgin Queen, Elizabeth was the last of the five monarchs of the House of Tudor who ushered in the Elizabethan Era, reversed re-establishment of Roman Catholicism by her half-sister.
    4. Henry VIII of England – King of England, He was an accomplished musician, author, and poet; his known piece of music is "Pastime with Good Company". He is often reputed to have written "Greensleeves" but probably did not. He had six marriages.
    5. Martin Luther King Jr. –
      " There are three urgent and indeed great problems that we face not only in the United States of America but all over the world today. That is the problem of racism, the problem of poverty and the problem of war."
    6. Billy Ray Cyrus – Having released 12 studio albums and 44 singles since 1992, he is best known for his number one single "Achy Breaky Heart", which became the first single ever to achieve triple Platinum status in Australia.
Did You Know?
Nominated by Stalinsunnykvj

... that the first attempt to build the Holy Trinity Cathedral of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra resulted in the demolition of the nearly completed structure?

Featured article
Nominated by Stalinsunnykvj
Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral, Cork, Ireland
Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral, Cork, Ireland

Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral is a Gothic Revival three-spire cathedral in the city of Cork, Ireland. It belongs to the Church of Ireland and was completed in 1879. The cathedral is located on the south side of the River Lee, on ground that has been a place of worship since the 7th century, and is dedicated to Finbarr of Cork, patron saint of the city. It was once in the Diocese of Cork; it is now one of the three cathedrals in the Church of Ireland Diocese of Cork, Cloyne and Ross, in the ecclesiastical province of Dublin. Christian use of the site dates back to a 7th-century AD monastery, which according to legend was founded by Finbarr of Cork. The entrances contain the figures of over a dozen biblical figures, capped by a tympanum showing a Resurrection scene. (more...)

Help wanted
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project that you'd like to highlight? An issue that you'd like to bring to light? Post your inquiries or submission here.


Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity • Get answers to questions about Christianity here
Discuss any of the above stories here • For submissions contact the Newsroom • Unsubscribe here
Delivered: 09:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Sent by DannyS712 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 09:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:George Washington

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:George Washington. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that ...

I'm very sorry to hear about the death in your family. Please take care of yourself, and we'll see you when you feel like editing again. Softlavender (talk) 04:35, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Condolences

Deeply saddened to read about your loss. Apologies if I have at all contributed to your stress. Hope you’re not worrying about Wikipedia stuff and get sufficient time and space to heal.—NØ 21:10, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

I too want to offer my condolences. I hope that your memories of your loved one will be a comfort to you as time goes by. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Condolences

I am very sorry to hear about your tragic loss, I hope in time that you feel better. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:41, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Condolences

Am truly sorry to hear of your loss. Please accept my sincere condolences.--Jeremydas (talk) 08:48, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 12:50, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Just letting you know

Sorry to hear about what's happened. Hope you're doing well despite it all. Just letting you know, looks like an IP you previously blocked for block evasion by BlaccCrab, 173.69.157.86, is back in use and it's definitely still him. Ss112 11:31, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Blocked x 6 months. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:50, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Waskom, Texas

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Waskom, Texas. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:50, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go!

Please consider coming back soon! My sandbox contains a lot of series that I watch, if they're currently airing. or have watched, if they have ended.

Outside of kid networks, I also watch ABC, CBS, and NBC.

ABC:

CBS:

NBC:

Amaury • 20:08, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope that in time the situation will allow me to return. But that ball is in the WMF's court. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:11, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Once we get this solved, I hope I can welcome you back. Thanks for everything. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for your service. Take care. I respect your decision and I hope the WMF does something soon to take away the reason for it. Drmies (talk) 15:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Best wishes man! Hope you can come back soon.... IanDBeacon (talk) 20:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Not possible

I cannot possibly convey to you my appreciation for your work on this project, or my disappointment at your departure. I hope that the day will come when you decide to return, but that decision is yours. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:54, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328. I haven't given up on the place yet and am still keeping an eye on things. We will have to see how this goes over the next week or two. But like Dennis, I'm not overly optimistic. What's been coming out of the WMF thus far is not at all encouraging. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:16, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Resignation from Adminship

Having been away for personal reasons, I have only recently become aware of the Framgate dumpster fire. Now having caught up to date, I find myself unable to continue in my position as an administrator on the English Wikipedia. For explanation I fully endorse the statements made by Boing! said Zebedee and Dennis Brown on their respective pages. To which I will simply add that I am not a fan of star chamber type justice, or organizations that employ that kind of tactic. The bottom line is that I have lost confidence in the WMF and the manner in which it interacts with the community here. While I hope that this may change at some point, in which case I would seriously consider returning, at present it doesn't look likely. They have had two weeks to address this issue and what statements have been made strongly suggest they are digging in. In closing I will simply state that I enjoyed my time here and will miss it. I even enjoyed (most of the time) my run as an admin where, despite my occasional "what the bleep did I just say/do?!" moments, I flatter myself in believing I did actually contribute positively to the project. In the end though, adminship is "no big deal." Principles however, are.

So, any suggestions for some good material on Netflix I can binge watch? I think I am going to have a lot of free time for a while. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy ping JimboWales: To the best of my recollection I have never posted on your page or interacted with you, so please forgive my presumption. But you (by which I mean the WMF) have a serious problem here. You might want to encourage the people in the corner offices to have a look at WP:BN, including its recently archived threads. You are losing serious and longtime contributors. I have never been more than an OK editor, and on a good day a passably competent admin who knows what buttons to push when someone yells "Cleanup needed in aisle six!" But when you start hemorrhaging people like those named above and 28bytes, WJBscribe, Floquenbeam and... well you can read the list for yourself; these are people the project will not easily replace. I really hope I am wrong and the WMF reaches out to the community and settles this business in a way we can all live with. But as I noted above, two weeks have now passed with no constructive response to our concerns. All the best... -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Ping Jimbo Wales correctly.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:38, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Genuinely sad to see you flipping the bit back. You were one of the good admins. And hopefully you'll be able to be one again once this shitstorm subsides and people fix the damage they've caused. Respect. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

  • re Netflix. I'm partial to NCIS - 15 seasons would keep you busy for a while. If you're into that DC or Marvel type of stuff - Supergirl, Flash, DC's Legends of Tomorrow, Daredevil, Agents of SHIELD< Marvel Defenders, Luke Cage, Iron Fist (some of these only had 2 or 3 seasons). There's also a fair number of the DC and Marvel movies available.

and thanks for everything you've contributed. — Ched :  ?  — 18:49, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

You were one of the first admins I ever had the pleasure to interact with on this site. I'm seriously taken aback to see you go. :'( (edit conflict) –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 18:50, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you everybody. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:55, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Your servant (bowing). -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Not Netflix, but if you've got Amazon, Good Omens has been turned into a TV show. Not as wonderful as the book, but pretty good so far. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:41, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Again, thanks to all. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  • This feels like the end of an era. You have played such an important role in reintegrating me back into the community after my two year respite. Thank you so much for all you’ve done.*cries*—NØ 19:17, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I just rebuilt my studio for audio and video production. Low tech for the most part, but it will help me with my business, and seems like a better use of my time. Wikipedia is a lesser place with you giving up the bit, but it became a lesser place when the community was subjugated to the status of "free labor" rather than "volunteers", so it isn't our fault, is it? Dennis Brown - 2¢ 19:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
So... your telling me my prospects for unemployment insurance are not good? -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh no, you are eligible for up to 60% of the weekly salary you earned as admin until you find a new admin job. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:48, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Hmm... any idea where they keep the cheap whiskey? I don't think my unemployment insurance is going to cover the good stuff. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:00, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Actually I think I am going to start with Outlander (TV series). -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:46, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Do give Lucifer a look. The Angel of Death as an assistant detective with psychological issues -- priceless. — JFG talk 12:46, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Wow. I don't vote very often at RfA, but I do remember voting in favor of you taking up the mop a few years ago. I don't know Fram, or any of the circumstances surrounding that, and frankly don't have the time to look into it. But one thing I learned about you is to trust your judgment. I contribute a little bit here and there around the project, but your decision has kind of tilted reality for me. Regardless, you are one of the good ones, and you will be missed. As for shows, I'm a bit old school and don't really binge watch (the last one I did was Band of Brothers (miniseries), but I did stumble upon Stranger Things last night, the first three episodes were damn good. And of course, there is Suits (American TV series), which I always found highly entertaining. Onel5969 TT me 22:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
June
cornflowers

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

removed 28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Guideline and policy news

  • In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

Technical news

  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Where things are

To my pleasant surprise, recent developments in WP:FRAMGATE seem to be moving in a somewhat positive direction. For now I have decided to resume editing in the mainspace and other normal community oriented activities. However, I am not going to ask for the bit back until I am more certain that the threat to the community's autonomy is safe, conceding those few areas where the WMF's jurisdiction has always been recognized. The issue involving Fram's alleged behavior has been effectively remanded to Arbcom which is where it belonged from day 1. Beyond which I have no opinion at all on the merits of the case. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:49, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Sorry that you had to step down. You were so much help over the years.

Bearian (talk) 15:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Wojciech Waleczek

Hi. Could you please help me to move an userspace draft about an award-winning composer into article space? I would appreciate this a lot if you could review it or tell me who could review the article. The draft is about Wojciech Waleczek—a succesful pianist from Poland whose numerous achievements deserve to be celebrated with his own Wikipedia page. He took 3rd prize at the Premio Mario Zanfi competition and was the absolute winner of the 4th Franz Liszt National Piano Competition—to name just a few of his accomplishments. Mr Waleczek already has his articles on German and Polish Wikipedia. Hope to hear back from you. Regards, AngelOfDestiny (talk) 13:47, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi AngelOfDestiny. It appears that this has already been handled by another editor. Congratulations on your new article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. ;) AngelOfDestiny (talk) 17:09, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Federalist Society

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Federalist Society. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Danfrosty1 (talk) 17:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:17, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back...

...And may there be many more resysops to come. GABgab 00:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks GAB. And yeah. Everybody has to do what they think is right. But IMO the emergency is over. Que appropriate sound effects. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The nightmare is over! GABgab 01:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Welcome back. Thanks for asking tough, incisive questions and helping shed light on the current improving status of the crisis. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:24, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


Hi, I was upset to hear that you resigned, but I am glad that you are back now and you will make Wikipedia a better place. Davidgoodheart (talk) 14:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Glad to know that you are back. Masum Reza📞 15:16, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back Ad Orientem!, –Davey2010Talk 15:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back! To celebrate...

Here's a new iteration of Wikidestruction vandal, or the "reverted some good faith edits" user, to block: 2A00:23C6:6583:1C00:3D75:F908:5414:B2A0 using their favourite edit summary too. Ss112 18:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Blocked x 1 week. Haven't pushed that button in a while. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:27, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

MP Image

Hi Ad Orientem, I shrunk the MP Image you added to width=120, puts it more aligned with the OTD image; if there was already some discussion (I can't find one) about why this should be larger, feel free to revert! — xaosflux Talk 19:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

No issues. I was actually just looking to shrink it when you beat me to it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Block

Could you please block user:2804:431:CFF2:AF01:C91C:6A17:88C5:5C2B for vandalism. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 02:35, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Having a look. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Blocked x 31 hrs. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:41, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
They are back under user:2804:431:cfd8:1740:195c:26f9:603e:5319 . 99.53.112.186 (talk) 02:42, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Blocked and page protected. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

user:2601:940:4380:490:4cc:6621:42ca:15ab just vandalized as you were responding to my report. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 02:54, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Not to mention, they seem to have hit many filters. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 02:57, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Blocked. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Late to the party, but...

Welcome back, AO! While I did read the threads, I still personally don't really understand the issue as a whole. All I really know is that one administrator was blocked by an outside source, with some people agreeing with the block itself and some people disagreeing. As a basic understanding, it seems like the core of the issue is that any of the alleged issues with the administrator in question should have been handled locally on the English Wikipedia, but I'm sure it goes deeper than that. Amaury • 17:41, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

It's a bit complicated but you basically nailed it. The WMF was doing stuff that was widely seen as a serious threat to the traditional autonomy of the community here. There have always been a handful of areas where by mutual agreement it was understood that the WMF had jurisdiction. But their actions, which at least initially they defended, were very problematic. Without saying so directly they have effectively backed down on the most serious issue. Some of the related issues are being worked on. But the community is involved in those discussions so I don't see any immediate threat to our self governance... for now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm hoping our other great admins, such as BU Rob13, who's been a huge help with a sock we've been dealing with since late September 2016, return. Amaury • 18:07, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately this episode is likely to have done lasting damage. At least a few editors are probably gone for good. But I too hope that most will return in time. Everybody has to obey their own conscience and do what they think right. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Serpentza does not live in China anymore, please revert article back to 3-4 days ago

Xiaoyun64 is suspected youtube friends/peer, only contributions are for Serpentza (please investigate accoun)


Serpentza does not live in China anymore

Please see this video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYA2BDnnfGI at 1:22:45

Article at 11:30 he talks about moving https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J35AxY1pLE&t=690s

Wife talks about living in the USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2LfOV9nw_0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZyKGCplB3Y&t=252s

Serpentza Article fraud, please revert article back to 5 days ago, before Xiayun64 changes

Xiaoyun64 is suspected youtube friends/peer, only contributions are for Serpentza (please investigate accoun)


Serpentza does not live in China anymore

Please see this video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYA2BDnnfGI at 1:22:45

Article at 11:30 he talks about moving https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J35AxY1pLE&t=690s

Wife talks about living in the USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2LfOV9nw_0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZyKGCplB3Y&t=252s

You may open a discussion regarding your concerns on the article talk page. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

your block of user:Brusto721

Already using next sock user:Mookar721 to make the same SPI redirects Meters (talk) 04:40, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Indeffed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:42, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Shane Lowry (golfer)

Thank you for your response on the other page. The reason I asked for protection in advance is because an incredible amount of vandalism happens to the winner's page after that winner is declared. The purpose here is to avoid the interference as we try to enter info on the winner's page, to keep time consuming and frustrasting edit conflicts from happening. I speak from past experience on this. A perfectly undisturbed athlete's Wikipedia page becomes a spam paradise for IP users when that athlete wins a major tournament. We golf editors want to be able to edit the winner's page without that kind of interference happening again, and protecting that page in advance will enable us to do that. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 03:14, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Johnsmith2116. I completely understand but our guidelines seriously discourage preemptive protection. It's also important to keep things in perspective. There is no damage that can be inflicted on any article that can't be reverted with a few clicks. If this gentleman should win and it looks like things are heating up, just resubmit your request. Alternatively you can always look for an admin currently online and drop them a note. Sometimes that is faster. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:21, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
P.S. I've added the page to my watchlist. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:29, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
An administrator has protected the page. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 18:01, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Johnsmith2116 I saw that. It's only for 24 hrs. I may extend it tomorrow. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:03, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. .. While I'm here, this coming week, golf will have the 2019 WGC-FedEx St. Jude Invitational which also is a high profile tournament. Next Sunday we could once again need protection for the winner of that also. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 18:06, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:08, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Jeff Hatch

Thank you very much. Earlier BLP violations may need to be clipped as well. Cheers, 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:04, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:12, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Terrific. Man, it doesn't take much to get the trolls typing. 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Apparently not. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:17, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico

While reviewing your user page, I noticed that you are a fan of the Emperor. I do not usually recommend Facebook pages here on Wikipedia, but there is a great page called "Baghdad by the Bay" that often includes items about Emperor Norton. I sometimes post my San Francisco photography there. For what it's worth. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328 I believe that I am the last living human being who is not on facebook. But if I can look w/o having to sign up I will check it out. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:54, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
My 21 month old granddaughter is not on Facebook and her parents radically minimize screentime in favor of human conversation and wooden toys and cats and books. It is almost like the 19th century around their house, except kinder. On the other hand, I post photos of her on Facebook sometimes because I love her so much and want family and friends worldwide to see her grow up. So, you are not the only one who is not on Facebook. You can probably look at the group without a Facebook account but it is highly active and you would be glimpsing at an ice cube chipped off a gigantic iceberg. Since I am not on Mark Zuckerberg's payroll (though I have worked on a construction site that he and his wife funded), I will move on and let you enjoy your Facebook-free life. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:05, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
While there is much to recommend the 19th century, I confess to a fondness for antibiotics, modern dental care and a society that appreciates the virtues of regular bathing. I believe it was James I/VI who when explaining his views on health, boasted that he had gone for forty years w/o a bath. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:09, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

People whose existence is disputed

Hi, this is one of my favorite topics. Do you think this person Holy Child of La Guardia existed? I will have more questions about people whose existence is disputed coming soon. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:45, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

In this case that seems doubtful. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:16, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Do you think that Gilgamesh's existence if for sure or disputed? If you tell me for sure I will remove him from the list of People whose existence is disputed as he is currently on that list. Davidgoodheart (talk) 09:43, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Davidgoodheart I am not a reliable source. However according to the article there seems to be a rough consensus among historians that he did in fact exist. If you are uncertain, the correct course is to open a discussion on the article talk page and seek WP:CONSENSUS. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:15, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, what about Utnapishtim did he most likely exist? He is from the same story of Gilgamesh. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I have never heard of this person and am unqualified to express an informed opinion. I can only go by what our article says. Beyond which I would refer you to my previous reply. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:42, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, I will do what you suggest. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:45, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Ichthus July 2019


ICHTHUS

July 2019
The Top 6 Articles
By Stalinsunnykvj

A suicide attack on July 11th claimed by Islamic State (IS) near a church in the Syrian city of Qamishli shows that Christians remain a major target of the terror group. The Top 6 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:

    1. Henry VIII of England – King of England, He was an accomplished musician, author, and poet; his known piece of music is "Pastime with Good Company". He is often reputed to have written "Greensleeves" but probably did not. He had six marriages.
    2. Elena Cornaro Piscopia – was a Venetian philosopher of noble descent who in 1678 became one of the first women to receive an academic degree from a university, and the first to receive a Doctor of Philosophy degree. In 1669, she translated the Colloquy of Christ by Carthusian monk Lanspergius from Spanish into Italian.
    3. Mary, Queen of Scots – arrested for Reigning While Catholic (RWC), Mary was found guilty of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth I of England in 1586, and was beheaded the following year.
    4. Bob Dylan – American singer-songwriter, author, and visual artist.
      " Take care of all your memories. For you cannot relive them."
    5. Elizabeth I of England – The Virgin Queen, Elizabeth was the last of the five monarchs of the House of Tudor who ushered in the Elizabethan Era, reversed re-establishment of Roman Catholicism by her half-sister.
    6. Billy Ray Cyrus – Having released 12 studio albums and 44 singles since 1992, he is best known for his number one single "Achy Breaky Heart", which became the first single ever to achieve triple Platinum status in Australia.
Did You Know?
Nominated by Stalinsunnykvj
... that The Vision of Dorotheus is one of the earliest examples of Christian hexametric poetry?
Featured article
Nominated by Stalinsunnykvj
Eric and Leslie Ludy were 21 and 16 respectively when they first met, English professors suggest that older singles are unlikely to gather hope from their story.
Eric and Leslie Ludy were 21 and 16 respectively when they first met, English professors suggest that older singles are unlikely to gather hope from their story.

When God Writes Your Love Story: The Ultimate Approach to Guy/Girl Relationships is a 1999 book by Eric and Leslie Ludy, an American married couple. After becoming a bestseller on the Christian book market, the book was republished in 2004 and then revised and expanded in 2009. It tells the story of the authors' first meeting, courtship, and marriage. The authors advise single people not to be physically or emotionally intimate with others, but to wait for the spouse that God has planned for them.

The book is divided into five sections and sixteen chapters. Each chapter is written from the perspective of one of the two authors; nine are by Eric, while Leslie wrote seven, as well as the introduction. The Ludys argue that one's love life should be both guided by and subordinate to one's relationship with God. Leslie writes that God offers new beginnings to formerly unchaste or sexually abused individuals. (more...)

Help wanted
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project that you'd like to highlight? An issue that you'd like to bring to light? Post your inquiries or submission here.


Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity • Get answers to questions about Christianity here
Discuss any of the above stories here • For submissions contact the Newsroom • Unsubscribe here
Delivered: 12:31, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Denial of Page Protection for the International Action Network on Small Arms

Hi John, I am an intern at the IANSA, and was tasked with correcting some inaccuracies in our Wikipedia page. Whenever we make a correction to the page, it is eventually changed to something explicitly or implicitly negative (and false) about the organization. The page's edit history reflects this. This is why I put a protection request on the page. You denied the request because there wasn't enough recent disruptive activity. While I acknowledge that the disruptive activity was not very recent, it is continuous, and being the small organization we are, we do not have time to continue making corrections every time our page is defaced. We at IANSA would be very appreciative if you could accept the page protection request on that count. Thank you very much.

Hi Arijmoore. Thanks for your note. I have reviewed the article and its editing history and am afraid I have to stand by my earlier decline for the requested page protection. The article is being edited so infrequently that it simply does not meet our guidelines for page protection. On which note I have to caution that there are some potentially serious issues I discovered. Firstly, I have doubts that the subject matter of the article meets our guidelines for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The relevant guidelines are WP:GNG and WP:ORG. The article also appears to have been heavily edited by persons affiliated with the subject and also relies on affiliated sources. Claims of fact should normally be sourced to independent reliable secondary sources, which is also how we typically establish the encyclopedic notability of the subject. Lastly the tone of the article is unencyclopedic. It sounds like an advert for the subject and as such its neutrality could be called into question. I have placed tags on the article alerting editors to these issues. If you can fix some of these issues, please do so. While I have not nominated the article for deletion, it is possible that another editor may do so based on the subject's lack of notability. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:46, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Club Factory

I'd consider applying semi-protection to this article that's much longer in duration than just one month. I just looked through the edit history of this article, and abuse from this LTA goes as far back as the end of 2018, and occurs with almost every edit to this article since then... I'd suggest extending it to at least one year to put a stop to the abuse there. Thoughts? Ping me in your response so that I'm notified; I have too many pages on my watchlist right now... lol :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:24, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah. I see you have extended the protection. I'm fine with that. It clearly is long term abuse. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Okay, cool deal. Thanks for responding and for letting me know. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:29, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) After looking into this matter further, I went ahead and extended the duration to one year. If you disagree or object to this change, please let me know. Given the abuse and history and how well I know you, I doubt that you'll care... I'm just letting you know about this just in case. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:29, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Billy Unger

Can we please get protection here? Persistent BLPPRIVACY violations. Amaury • 00:31, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

 Page protected x 2 weeks. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:34, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

United States Secret Service

Nice to meet you ~
~ You know I once saw a Parade ~ where this little Volkswagen beetle ~ came by and stopped right in front of me and ~ the doors flew open ~ and a bunch of Clowns came out ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Mitchellhobbs LOL. I expect something similar every time I see one of these. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

WP:LOL ~mitch~ (talk) 23:30, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

It's good to see you!

Hi Ad Orientem! I just wanted to leave you a message and wish you a great day! I figured I'd message you to know that I was thinking about you... I'm glad to see that you're still active here. Keep up the great work, and keep doing the great things you do! :-D Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:18, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back and thank you!

The Padlock Barnstar
Hello Ad Orientem, welcome back and thank you for protecting Wikipedia via WP:RFPP. About this Barnstar, Awarded to any administrator who secures Wikipedia by placing a padlock. per Barnstar criteria. I've chosen you to be the first admin to receive this award. Again, welcome back and thank you. JudeccaXIII (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
@JudeccaXIII Thank you sir.. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

User: Bradley026258

Bradley026258 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – Looks like the previous block didn't deter this user. They're back at it again. --GoneIn60 (talk) 22:28, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@ GoneIn60 Indeffed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:31, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

LTA My Royal Young IP vandalism

206.201.0.227 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - Vandalism has occured from this IP address. I believe this IP was being used by LTA My Royal Young. I have already reported the ongoing incident at AIV. Regards. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 00:22, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Already blocked. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:23, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Again, about editors accusing me of stalking when I did no such thing and then throwing out threats of taking me to ANI. I see they love ANI, so it's fitting they'd threaten to report me there—however, nobody should wish that upon themselves unless it was a last resort and you'd think someone who's been there so often would know this. But maybe if they did, then they'd have to explain how I apparently stalked them. Maybe you can have a word to Erpert about being OTT and making false accusations. It'd be appreciated. Edit: I just realised I probably got accused of "stalking" because I pointed out they have been here for nine years and made 37,000 edits, when that's found in literally two clicks when one browses via mobile. Like I said, OTT. Ss112 22:39, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I have posted a reply on their talk page. This bickering stops now or I am going to start treating it as disruptive editing. As this is now a public quarrel any further communications on this matter, and it would be best if there were none, are to be posted in the open either there or on my talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:19, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
@Ss112. They have asked you to stay off their talk page. Please respect that. Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:21, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
I said exactly the same thing I said to you via email here; there was nothing being hidden away from the open and you know this. I thought you get emails quicker, so I notified you in both locations. I have no interest in going back to an OTT editor's page; they only told me "not to bother them again" after I asked them below the closed thread in a new section how I had stalked them. Before that, I did not think closing a discussion meant not to post at their talk page. I wasn't attempting to bicker, but I don't like being accused of doing something I didn't do and I'm sure anybody would ask how the same as I did. But thank you for dropping a note to them. Ss112 23:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Blocked accounts

Hi, when you block a user "indefinitely" how long does that often last for? I noticed that when you emailed the creator of the Pavlos Kouroupis to vote on AFD he had been blocked since 2013! What is the reason for blocking someone for so long? Davidgoodheart (talk) 02:41, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Davidgoodheart. An indefinite block, or indeff, means there is no expiration date. A person blocked w/o an expiration date can only return to editing if they successfully appeal their block. Such blocks are used sparingly, but are sometimes necessary when dealing with obvious vandals or persons who are WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia. And some people gravely abuse the community's trust through sockpuppetry & etc. or are just unable to abide by our policies and guidelines to the point where over time it becomes clear that have to be blocked to prevent incessant disruption. There are a variety of avenues for appealing blocks, but it generally depends on the offense, their track record as an editor and what they hope to do if unblocked. Some editors with very bad records are never unblocked. And many editors who are indeffed just walk away from the project. As for notification of AfDs, Twinkle does that automatically and it doesn't check to see if the user is currently blocked. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:51, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
P.S. Davidgoodheart if you want a bit more detail on this subject here are some useful links... WP:BLOCK, WP:UNBLOCK, WP:SO, and WP:ZT. You can also get an idea of what goes into these decisions by taking a look at our noticeboard for reporting obvious vandalism or spamming at WP:AIV. The noticeboard updates frequently but if you see a report click on the contribs link for the editor or IP reported. You can then look at what they have been up to and get an idea of why they might, or might not, get blocked. One thing that is common is that if an actual account is reported for vandalism, and the vandalism is real, very often you will see that the account was only recently created and that all or most of their edits are clearly disruptive. In those situations an indefinite block is normative. IP's by contrast cannot be indefinitely blocked because it's always possible someone new may end up with the IP address. While I have seen a handful of exceptions, the maximum duration of an IP block is usually three years. I hope this helps answer your questions. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
  • The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

    Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:23, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Neo-Nazi etc.

Would you mind rev deleting Special:Contributions/39.118.192.141? I pinged Sam on WP:Discord for a block, but he's on mobile and can't easily revdel everything. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:40, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

It will be a few minutes. I'm clearing out RfPP right now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:43, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
@MJL. Handled by Anarchyte (thanks!). -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
[Thank you for the ping] You got beat to the punch it looks like! I'll be sure to update WP:LTA/MRY to make sure it reflects that their also a nazi. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:56, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Reporting 205.126.54.229

205.126.54.229 (talk · contribs) This editor keep adding unsourced content in articles by changing charts without explaining why. For example here. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:26, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Blocked x 24 hrs. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:34, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
The editor is now using 63.248.206.190. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 12:30, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Blocked x 3 months. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Now the editor is block evading [1]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 22:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Blocked x 3 months. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:22, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz is again edit warring

Hi AO. I tagged you on the article, but WP:BRD applies at The Search (NF album), where Walter Görlitz is again edit warring (far from his first time). I and the editor MikeOwen had written "number" and not "No.", but Walter is edit warring over maintaining the latter while citing MOS:NUMERO, which actually says either can be used. Walter has said "No. 1 was used consistently here before YOU changed it", but the article actually used "number" consistently before Walter's change here yesterday, so I guess Walter is either lying or has quickly forgotten as well. I reverted that indirectly yesterday; Walter indirectly restored it today and has edit warred to retain it after I reverted him directly. He then used the excuse of "the artist's other articles use No. 1" when there is no such "collective rule" about one act's articles needing to be the same. I know you will say to use the article talk page, but Walter has disregarded BRD so I have nothing to discuss. He should, being the one seeking the change and edit warring to retain it. You know personally as I have told you about this editor before that this is far from the first instance where Walter has edit warred and he is again doing it. Ss112 22:41, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ss112... page fully protected for six hours. Resolve this on the talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:49, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
I am not having a pointless discussion with a nasty editor about a change he made and edit warred to maintain, but sure, thanks for protecting an article so Walter can be happy that his change stays there. Ss112 22:52, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
I am not taking sides in a MOS content dispute. The article talk page is where this gets handled. If you are not interested in discussing it, then yes, the current version will stand. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
You know that's ridiculous: An editor can edit war to retain changes on an article and then their version stands? What about if another editor reverts Walter after the article is unprotected? Ss112 23:02, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
You need to open a discussion on the article talk. I have already dropped a line on Walter's talk page. Be sure to ping any other involved editors to the discussion. As there is no specific MOS standard the issue will be resolved through talk page consensus. Once that consensus is established then that is what we will go with. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:08, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Sock of blocked user

Hi AO. I believe Connexeon is a sock of the EDM article vandal Phantasus Magician (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phantasus Magician/Archive). They have made much the same edits to the same topics; unexplained blanking and moving things around, including to Skrillex discography, which previous socks did as well. One of the sockmaster's typical things to do is give a misleading edit summary while removing a large amount of information, like here. Ss112 16:21, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Indeffed for WP:DE with the added note that they are likely a sock. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:29, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello AO. Thanks for the block of 59.0.83.117 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). When you have a moment would you zap two of the edit summaries. Cheers and have a good weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 01:42, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Well as always my typing was too slow and they've been taken care of. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 01:43, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
NP. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:48, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

MaranoFan

I really hate writing this, but this is a situation that needs to be sorted out at WP:ANI. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi there Ad Orientem. I have never encountered this user before in all my years on here. The user is displaying WP:OWN on Mad Love (Mabel song) and has been harassing me ever since I started improving the article as it appears the user wants to do everything on his own in hope of nominating it to be a good article.

Here is a timeline of the behaviour:

I have now reverted the user on the article as my expansion was definitely an improvement on what it was, but I'm sure they are going to revert it back to their version and look for something to cause more drama to chase me away from their article. I have had patience and been completely civil with this user up until this point but now I have had enough and they have gone too far. CoolMarc 06:08, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I have started a talk page discussion on the talk page, which is what you should have done after being reverted. Stop drumming up drama, thanks. And please discuss the content additions one by one instead of forcing in hefty offtopic content without even using edit summaries to explain it. THAT is WP:OWN behaviour. I completely disagree with your content being an improvement, hence why it was reverted. And yes I’m open about wanting to GA nominate the article, nothing wrong with that. Look at this, this user is refusing to abide by WP:BRD and is blatantly edit warring with no edit summary now.—NØ 06:11, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Oh please quit the oblivious act. You know very well what you are doing. CoolMarc 06:21, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Nah ah, everyone actually knows what you are doing, since looking at your talk page history this is not the first time this has happened. And what you are doing, is creating a completely new version of the article every time someone else accumulates authorship of the current revision. That is textbook definition WP:OWN behaviour.—NØ 06:29, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
You have gone way too far this time for someone who has such an extensive block log. I'm sure this is the reaction you wanted and an admin will be able to look at the diffs and make an informed decision. CoolMarc 06:37, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Yes, a fine admin like AO will certainly make an informed decision. He'll see that you are forcing in your content through edit warring (Policy violation), your last two reverts violate the WP:BRD cycle (another policy violation), and your refusal to discuss the content and resorting to attacking me as a person (Another policy violation). You've made more reverts than me, without leaving a content-related edit summary on any of them. Maybe it's time your block log begins getting some action too.--NØ 06:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Could you please assist with an edit warring (possible) sockpuppet(eer)

Hi :) I recently reported a block dodging sockpuppeteer at SPI and it's sat there gathering dust since :( I recall you warning me about that. <-- aside

So, with the above in mind, I wonder if you might be able to help with what seems to be a set of IPs being used by the same person, making repeated reverts to multiple music subject pages, to get what they want. I first became aware that there might be a problem when I saw Binksternet leave this user warning with the summary Warning: Usage of multiple IPs on Havoc (musician); I had already left a message on the IP's talk about their editing on Mos Def.

I looked at 2601:8C:8200:8144:2195:7C79:D92C:ECE3's contribs and the histories of the edited pages, and found poor Binksternet apparently battling a set of IPs over all kinds of changes on various pages.

I got involved on a few of the affected pages; on Sheck Wes, Mos Def and André 3000, but there are so many IPs and pages involved – if this a case of sockpuppetry, I think it needs less foggy eyes (it's midnight here) than mine.

I left a warning for edit warring at User talk:2601:8C:8200:8144:2195:7C79:D92C:ECE3 for their 3RR violation on André 3000, but am very tired now. Sorry to dump all this on you like this, but the official channels require a little more wakefulness than I have right now. Cheers. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 23:08, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Checking... -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:16, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Range blocked 2601:8C:8200:8144:0:0:0:0/64 x 1 week for disruptive editing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Courtesy ping Binksternet -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Wow! You're efficient :) Thanks for taking this on in this manner. Have a good day/night Ad Orientem :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 23:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
NP. Good night. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:33, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello again. Hope this finds you well. It appears that the same IP editor is back at it from at least this IP – Special:Contributions/‎173.49.62.225. They have just edited André 3000 and Mos Def again in a familiar pattern. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 00:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Checking. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:42, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Blocked x 1 year. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks again Ad Orientem. I noticed Binksternet had words with that IP in October 2018 about using multiple IPs. Apparently very persistent. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 00:51, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Opinion of editors blanking pages due to unsourced content?

Hey AO. I've recently come across Koavf blanking large parts of sections and even most of an article while citing WP:SOURCE, in the case of List of awards and nominations received by TLC. Before Koavf started editing: [2] and after: [3]. I don't know who Koavf is citing that policy at, like who on Wikipedia isn't aware WP:V is our most basic policy, but I personally feel uneasy about decimating articles unless it's blatantly false information and formatting and I wanted to know if this is okay to do in your opinion. When it's just unsourced but obviously true I usually just tag it. The article was tagged for refimprove (since mid-2017), but Koavf has seen fit to turn it from 16 KB to basically little more than a stub. Koavf and I have had our differences and I think I know him well enough to know that if i had reverted his removals outright, he'd get quite defensive about removing all unsourced material so I wanted to seek another opinion. Ss112 04:51, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ss112. In general, unless we are talking about obviously controversial claims of fact or BLP type issues, my usual preference is to tag questionable material with CN tags and give editors a chance to fix it, before redacting large swaths of material. Tagged material can and should be removed after a reasonable period if it remains unsourced. Mass deletions of uncontroversial claims of fact, or claims that as a matter of common sense we know are likely true but simply lack a citation has sometimes been treated as disruptive. I am a big WP:V fan and have occasionally been accused of being hard nosed about it. And yes, I have stubbed some very poorly sourced articles. But only after tagging them and leaving a warning on the talk page that if sourcing didn't improve that I was going to take a meat cleaver to the page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:00, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Hope you both won't mind me joining in; I find "...any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed" in the lead of WP:VERIFY pretty much says it all, and have a soft spot for WP:NOTTRUTH. I can add the claim that e.g. "The Roman Empire had a strong influence on the early cultural development of many modern nations", without the requirement to include a reference; I think it's not wholly controversial by any reasonable measure. If another editor challenges the statement by removal (WP:BRD kicks in) or tagging, the statement then does require a reference. It's nice and simple :) Of course, it would be great if everything was added with a reference off-the-bat, but it would also be nice if it rained chocolate drops in my living room on command, and I'm not expecting either to happen – ever. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 06:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

A Rush of Blood to the Head (coldplay song)

Hi, there is persistent vandalism/disruptive editing on A Rush of Blood to the Head Arcadegirl (talk) 07:45, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Arcadegirl I've range blocked 2601:484:C103:FFC0:0:0:0:0/64 x 3 months. They have a history of disruptive editing and have been repeatedly blocked before. Hopefully this will put an end to the problem for a while. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:35, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of terrorist incidents

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of terrorist incidents. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Revision deletion request

Hi. I arrived here through WP:REVDELREQUEST in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests. Recently, a fellow WP:F1 was seriously insulted on the talk page of 2019 Formula One World Championship. I thought that maybe it would be best that the revisions containing these insults were deleted altogether. They are the following: [4], [5], [6], [7].Tvx1 12:41, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@ Tvx1  Already done by Diannaa. (Thanks!) -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:59, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Tony1's scripts are still causing signifcant issues

Not that I honestly expected him to fix the scripts he runs after you told him to be more careful, but Tony1's "script-assisted fixes" are still changing the date format of pages, for example here on an Italian DJ's article. Italy uses dmy date format on Wikipedia and not mdy, but Tony1's script sees fit to change the {{use dmy dates}} tag to whatever he has set it to, which is a mystery to everybody but him. This is a significant issue considering the amount of articles he edits regularly and runs the script on. God knows how many more thousands of articles he's run it on and changed the format of. Ss112 15:15, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I realize this is getting tiresome and I've dropped another message on their talk page. Hopefully they will take corrective measures. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Now User:Ss112, I've examined the versions of Prevale (DJ). It was mdy before I edited, which my edit preserved. What is the problem? And if there were anything for me to report to the script manager for fixing, you'd have a better chance of my doing so if your edit-summaries weren't so rude and your message here weren't sarcastic. Be nice.

And one more point: YOU are the editor who mushed up the year (20019), here; you then blame ME for doing that in a later edit summary. Get a grip. Tony (talk) 23:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@Tony1: No, Prevale was tagged with use dmy dates. The editor who created the page, who does not appear very experienced, used mdy in prose, obviously mistakenly. Your script should not be changing a tag from dmy on an Italian subject's article to mdy. That also doesn't explain why on On My Way (Alan Walker song), about a Norwegian subject's song, that you inserted a date format when the article consistently used dmy, and of course you are ignoring the fact that your script obviously changes or inserts date formats to whatever you want it to be. It, or you, should not be doing that regardless. And don't be dense. I wasn't blaming you for me misspelling 2019 as "20019". I don't want to use scripts, so my point was that I wouldn't be needing to retype the date formats back to dmy in the first damn place if you didn't come onto articles and use scripts to change the date format against what it was previously or what it should be. Ss112 00:52, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Oh and I'm not going to fool myself into believing that you would report any issues others have to the "script manager", because as we've seen before from your responses, even before I tagged you in edit summaries, you don't see them as problems. Your response when I commented on a talk page raising the issue of your edits changing em dashes in wikitables to en dashes was basically "I don't see the issue". You obviously don't see the issue here either, but it is a big one because you run your scripts on a tonne of articles and you're changing date formats on them from what they should be. Ss112 00:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I wasn't uncivil, last time I looked. But Ss112 is still being rude ("don't be dense"). I'd treat it more seriously if he were civil. I urge him to read the MOS on the guidelines for date formatting among the country-related articles. Neither Norway nor Italy has a mandatory date format on WP, so usually WP:RETAIN applies. I did get that wrong originally on that article, yes; but this is a copy-book case of how to dissolve any semblance of cooperation. Tony (talk) 00:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
@Tony1: Here we go. You are again making excuses (my apparent "incivility" by telling you to not be dense) to continue ignoring this issue so you can continue on your way using scripts that change date formats on articles that already consistently use a different one, like On My Way (Alan Walker song) did. This is ridiculous. This is just an example and clearly not entirely about these two articles. I'm not going to go through every one of your edits and see how many articles you've changed the date format on, but I know there are plenty more from this example. Ss112 01:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I mean, if you won't fix the issue when an admin confronts you about, what will get you to stop using a script to change date formats that others have to fix? ANI? Ss112 01:04, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't do this on purpose, and they're a tiny percentage of my total script output. You, too, make mistakes, such as the 20019 you blamed me for. BTW, it's not the script's fault: it's my fault for choosing the wrong button. Please tone down your language and be more collegial. I'm sure you do good work on WP. You could extend a little goodwill to others, rather than using the language of anger and confrontation. I'll try to be more careful. Tony (talk) 01:08, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
@Tony1: I don't appreciate you continually calling me out for my apparent incivility on the issue when I have seen your profanity-laden responses to others that have landed you in hot water (as recently as several months ago) that I assume, like mine on this issue, were borne out of frustration from someone else. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone—if you were a bastion of calm on WP, then I might think you have a point and not see hypocrisy instead. I hesitate to bring this up here, but your to tone others has gotten you blocked for personal attacks, yet you're telling me to "tone it down" and be more "collegial". And yet again, I wasn't blaming you for my misspelling; I just told you I was continuing/clarifying my previous edit summary by saying "fix your script so this doesn't happen again" when I was fixing the errors in my edit from having to revert your script edit manually. Ss112 01:15, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Good. So can we agree to work together productively? Tony (talk) 01:18, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Oooh a productive comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:21, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
@Tony1: Yes. I just hope you fix (or take steps to fix) the issues raised here and/or be more careful with your scripts, because I don't think you can blame someone for being frustrated if beyond here there are future instances of your edits wholesale changing a consistent date format. Ss112 01:22, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Not pointing any fingers here, but we should all bear in mind that it's bad form to create unnecessary work for others. Or in other words, if you spill something, clean it up. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Warning of Vandalism

Warning of Vandalism
I hope you don't make the redirected page or deletion of the page without my permission (as the author of the page) if you do so categorized as acts of Vandalism. Regards Thank You Roseirena (talk) 13:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
As I noted on your talk page, Roseirena you cannot just overrule a valid AFD close. You need to go to WP:DRV if you want to challenge it. Further, you don't own any article whether you created it, got it to GA status or otherwise. Also it is not vandalism. Praxidicae (talk) 13:10, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Roseirena I realize you are new here so I am going to cut you some slack, but the redirection of the page in question was consequence of a community discussion. Please refrain from reverting edits made via community WP:CONSENSUS in the future as such behavior is disruptive. Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

A reported sock puppet block evasion is apparently being ignored

Hi there. I previously mentioned in passing (up this page a bit), that I had reported a blocked user for continuing to edit with various IPs; The report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CodyFinke2019 has been sitting there doing nothing (other than being the target of some weird vandalism) since creation, and I've just added yet another IP to the growing list. Could you take a look and maybe poke a clerk or something? Thank you :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 14:44, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

@Jpgordon: Hi. Since you blocked CodyFinke2019, I thought I should now also bring this to your attention. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 14:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Fred Gandt. I have updated the SPI report. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:30, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Howdy (I've been awake too long again); thank you again (and again and again...) I see blockages; I'm sorry; I didn't know Drmies had blocked one already (Aug 8). Centralised discussion *grumble grumble*. I should go to bed. Have a great day/night Ad Orientem :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 16:41, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anitha Karthikeyan

Hi, just a note that the Mirchi Music Awards do seem to be a notable award going by their wikipedia page with reliable sources coverage and televised annually on national TV stations, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 18:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Atlantic306 when closing discussions I have to base my decision on WP:CONSENSUS. In this discussion there were three WP:PAG based comments favoring deletion and one favoring keep. In particular I found the last comment persuasive. A notable award is not necessarily a "major award" as understood in many of our notability related guidelines. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry

About restoring the vandalism to that IP's talk page. I was trying to undo their edit. 2601:644:877F:F6D8:CC13:6BB7:E0D:52C3 (talk) 02:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

No worries. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:39, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Block evasion by PeopleEater143

2601:48:8100:6d8a:cf8:858f:a95c:e356. Same topics (New music articles), same snarky edit summaries, IP geolocates to the same area of the US. Ss112 18:51, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ss112 Range blocked 2601:48:8100:6D8A:0:0:0:0/64 x 6 months. They have been operating all over this range for a long time despite repeated blocks. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:44, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, this page here Maud Crawford was deleted due to something have to do with copyright. What exactly was the issue, can it be restored? Davidgoodheart (talk) 23:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi David. I took a look at the page and large parts of it appear to have been only slightly reworded text from other sources, notably this. That represents a very serious copyright issue. And unfortunately I would not be comfortable restoring the page. This will need to be rewritten from scratch with much closer attention to copyright. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:14, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism only..`

[[8]] Every edit, every single one is vandalism. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 00:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Blocked x 48 hrs. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Stale report?

If you could, please clarify one of the IPs tagged as a stale report. (I reported 197.38.28.156 earlier for persistent vandalism, and he was tagged as a stale report for 24 hours...) James-the-Charizard (talk) 17:04, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I misread the date and just blocked them a minute ago. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:05, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for blocking them. James-the-Charizard (talk) 17:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

RevisionDelete request

Hello, looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:109.66.225.99 it appears his latest message is just blatant harassment of Adam9007. Hope to hear a reply from you. --SacredDragonX (talk) 20:34, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Blocked x 2 weeks TPA revoked and edits revdelled. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Can someone please help me?

Resolved
-Ad Orientem (talk) 05:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There is an IP who (194.32.79.116) thinks that accused me of RainbowSilver (who is another user) just being I shared interests with anyone else. He or she thinks that I am being disruptive. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 03:33, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@ SpinnerLaserz I dropped a note on their talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
I added sources to any articles (this is not considered disruptive) and I always follow the rules. If you had any question about me, let me know. I do brought this up at the Wikipedia:ANI. I believe is that anyone can have the same topic. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 03:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@ SpinnerLaserz Thank you for your contributions to the project. If you are concerned about accusations of socking the easiest way to answer is to contact a check user and request that they run a check on you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
If, however, I was the same person as RainbowSilver, then it is probably my former account but take a grain of salt. This leads me to a question, can a user abandoned their old account and create a new one (without being disruptive)? SpinnerLaserz (talk) 03:53, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Ok, here is a direct question. Are you RainbowSilver? Yes or no. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:56, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Before I answer yes or no. Am I in trouble for something? My edits are in good standing because I add sources. I've checked the RainbowSilver and RainbowSilver2ndBackup accounts, the edits made by the accounts seems to be in good standing other than solved disputes with other users (which ended pretty quite well and peacefully). SpinnerLaserz (talk) 03:59, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@ SpinnerLaserz As far as I can tell RainbowSilver's last edit was two years ago. There is no rule against adopting a new username as long as you are open about your previous identity. Generally editing from two accounts is strongly discouraged although there are rare cases where it may be allowed. As an example I have a back up account in case I can't access this one. I have never used it. It's fairly clear to me at this point that you are RainbowSilver. If you wish to use this account you should declare the old one on your user talk page and indicate that you have abandoned it. You should also make similar declaration on your previous account's user page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Okay thanks. Can we close this ANI immediately? If your statement is true then I probably had to declare it that these accounts are abandoned because I may dislike the names and I wanted to start all over again. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 04:08, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@ SpinnerLaserz Ok. You need to post on your current account user page a list of any previous accounts and a statement that you have abandoned them. You should also post on the user pages of any previous accounts that they are abandoned and that this is your current account. It appears that you have noever been blocked so there should be no issue. I will close the ANI. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:11, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Looks like I am in good standing, right? Is there is a template dedicated to former user accounts that they owned? SpinnerLaserz (talk) 04:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC) SpinnerLaserz (talk) 04:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@ SpinnerLaserz Assuming you have not been indefinitely blocked under a former account, you should be fine. I suggest you read WP:MULTIPLE. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:17, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
194.32.79.116 removed discussions page and I told him or her that these are very important. Is this fine? SpinnerLaserz (talk) 05:09, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@SpinnerLaserz: *facepalm* See WP:REMOVE. Anyway, just drop it. 194.32.79.116 (talk) 05:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm moving on right now. Good morning. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 05:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
I am off to bed shortly. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ad_Orientem/Archive_13&oldid=1211791315"