Jump to content

User talk:Black Kite/Archive 64

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Another for the sock drawer?

Good morning, Black Kite! Re: your block of 94.191.184.126 as a sock of 94.191.1878.61: you commented at the ANI complaint, "if they come back a rangeblock is very doable". I just blocked 94.191.188.2 for personal attacks at Fortuna's talk page; Fortuna thinks this is another sock; what do you think? --MelanieN (talk) 14:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! --MelanieN (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jayabalan.joseph

I think you mixed up this incident with the one above it. --NeilN talk to me 23:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Re Nikki Phoenix

Hi there, I'd like to get more feedback on your reasoning for deleting a page that was already cited by other editors as Notable, and had numerous editor vote to Keep listing specific notability. Also I'd like you to revert the article back to my sand box, so that all the time and effort put into the article by various editors is not wasted, since the article was repeatedly vandalized by 3 specific editors. Since there were a number of thoughtful entries listing specific reasons for Keeping the article, I'm trying to understand why you sided with the people who removed the articles notability references and then nominated it for deletion.

Any light you can shed on this would be greatly appreciated. I have seen first hand here there are a number of editors that are anti-Anything Adult Related and seek to simply delete whenever possible anything that has any mention of it. Since the WP:PORNBIO does not leave room for interpretation, (either the person fits one of the 3 criteria or doesn't) I'm wondering why someone who fit 2 categories was deleted, since it is not a requirement that she an award and there were specific references from other editors for the 2 other catagories. Please help me understand better what needs to happen so that I can avoid the repeated vandalism that is rampantly done by some editors. It simply isn't worth the time and energy to work on articles (for Free I might add LOL), watch other editors put them up and work on them too, only to have them be singled out because of the content they have.

Thanks in advance for your response, help and reverting the article back to my sandbox.

Best,Art javier (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi - I think my rationale for closing the discussion as Delete was pretty much explained in the AfD. There weren't really "a number of thoughtful entries" listing specific reasons IMO - for example, User:Devopam stated plainly "I find this satisfies the notability criteria" (see WP:ITSNOTABLE). Please do let me know if you would like the article restored to your sandbox, but otherwise you will have to raise the issue at WP:DRV. The instructions for that ask you to notify the closing admin, but you don't need to do that as I always watch the page. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 17:59, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, as I already asked you to please " Also I'd like you to revert the article back to my sand box, so that all the time and effort put into the article by various editors is not wasted, since the article was repeatedly vandalized by 3 specific editors." Please put the article back up on my Sandbox.

Respectfully, I would point out, there are many more articles that were cited, including the National Review and Premier Music sites that interviewed her and talk specifically about her adult material as well as her music and mainstream work. citing solely her twitter verification misses the whole point of the long list of social media and music site verifications that were listed that in fact (based on the article I posted in response to someone saying it was easy to get verified and anyone can do it) show that even on twitter, she is Notable based on her being one of only .06% of all twitter accounts. It is also notable that these editors nominated this page for deletion only after they lost the battle with OTRS over deleting her picture. OTRS put the photo back up citing "OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE" (OTRS's words not mine) sent in by herself, her lawyer, the photographer, and multiple sites.

Based on this vindictive behavior it is my intention to take this to ARBCOM. A brief look at their accounts shows a repeated pattern of vandalism on any pages that have anything to do with adult material. I simply cannot stand people who want to impose their opinions on everyone else, and make statements that are not supported by fact, a good example would be Morbidthoughts who cited a plethora of material validating WP:PORNBIO and the long list of things I left on the page for everyone to read I'm puzzled because i didnt see you mention the list of supporting links either he or I left, hence why I asked you for specifics.

The statements made by the editors in question lack any substance and simply make statements easily refuted by facts. (i.e. "easy to get verified on twitter" and "hasnt won an award, which is as we know not a requirement based on the 3 areas the WP:PORNBIO can look at.

This is exactly why I asked you for specifics regarding your decision, since there was a majority of "KEEP" for many days, and yet this was closed before anyone else was able do any additional voting after these last 2 "Delete" votes came in without any time to respond.

I look forward to your response, as I know you came into this late in the game after these editors had already engaged in vindictive behavior and vandalism. It is a well known fact within Wikipedia that at this point there are a number of editors that engage in this behavior toward articles that have any adult content. A brief look at the talk pages which show repeated editwar warnings and blocks will verify that. Frankly, if that behavior was directed toward any other demographic, (i.e. homosexuality, women, African Americans,) the entire community would be up in arms. Its honestly rather sad.

As I said I look forward to your response, and thank you in advance for moving the article into my sandbox as I have already asked you to do. And please tell me the steps necessary to approach Deletion Review, That's something I have never done before.

Best, Art javier (talk) 23:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm happy to do that, I'm not familiar with the term Salted, and what do we need to do to go to Deletion Review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Art javier (talk • contribs) 00:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

  • "Salted" means the title is barred from being (re)created; this often happens when an article is repeatedly created and deleted. Meanwhile, the Deletion Review page is here. The instructions for creating a review are further down the page, here. Some of the instructions are a bit vague so let me know if you have any problems. As I said, you don't need to follow the part that says you need to discuss with the closing admin, as I already know. Black Kite (talk) 00:47, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much, what advice can you give me/ assistance with this, as I took a long break from Wikipedia to work on other projects specifically because of this behavior from a few editors. I only came back when I was notified that this article was put up by someone else from my sandbox in order to protect if from this kind of vandalism. While I was successful in protecting the posted picture, it resulted on a backlash on the article itself. Art javier (talk) 01:52, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Block evasion "Human like you"

Now here: [1]. 84.187.155.221 (talk) 15:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Quick response. Well done! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2017

Hi, you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2017 as delete back in February, and would like to ask for a clarification on how you decided on that result based on the discussion. Two users were in favor of the article being kept and moved to a new title, while two others were in favor of it being deleted. I didn't see a particularly strong case for those in the latter category. There are two painful main problem with their arguments. First, the argument against the existence of such list articles is misguided; not only are such lists suitable topics, they have gone on to become features lists (cf. List of Billboard Hot 100 number-one singles of 2011). Second, they are looking for sources in English for a South Korea-based music chart. This is horribly systematically biased. With little effort, I stumbled upon this Gaon article (in Korean), which gives a comprehensive analysis of the chart for the first month of the year, very much as Billboard does. There's one for February, and another for March. I really don't think the article had a fair chance considering the poor discussion and the lack of users who know where to find and how to read the sources available. ℯxplicit 07:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

London marathon

Please post it, no one with any sense will complain. I'm on mobile so you can act as my proxy if you so wish! Best, Stephen 10:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Just remember to remove the "2017", we don't put the current year into ITN blurbs. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Whoops, yes, well spotted. Black Kite (talk) 10:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

L.O.R.D. and Never Gone

Wikipedia should be objective but the user who edited both those pages (whose edits I reverted) has an axe to grind with the lead actor of both films. If you look at their edits, it's been mostly to post negative information about the movies of Kris Wu.

For Never Gone, the sources used were poor. If you look at the article from Shanghaiist, they got their information from an article on Koreaboo, a site that is by no means reliable or objective. A quick search would tell you that is true. The "ridicule" comes from translated comments of Korean netizens who are fans of the Korean group Kris Wu left behind. The opinions of Korean netizens are not important in an article about a Chinese film.


SBS PopAsia is also not a credible source. They are known to report untrue events and use fake news for clickbait. The only valid source on that section is from THR and that is only one reviewer so it's hardly a consensus like what the sentence is inferring it is.

Objectivity should go both ways. No one should be overtly positive and overtly negative in an article.

Best regards. Everypart (talk) 04:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Kathleen Wynne

I added a larger description for my edit as you suggested. Basically for the Kathleen Wynne article, there was only 1 source (repeated 3 times), which used anonymous Twitter comments. This is not enough for an encyclopedia article. Maybe if there were charges laid, or a complaint filed somewhere or something concrete, we could include this. Right now, it's highly speculative.Bellpepper2 (talk) 22:19, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Vinod Khanna

He reached Wikipedia:Top 25 Report at number 5 this week, as I was expecting. @Pawnkingthree: and you improved the article. The other editor was trying to force his POV in Vinod Khanna's filmography, I didn't know the correct edit summary to remove those lines.

In WP:ITNC, article quality is forced more than popularity. Midget Farrelly was world's first surfing champion. But, he couldn't make it to RD.

Wikipedia:Top 25 Report/January 1 to 7, 2017. Om Puri was at number 3, but as the article was not developed, the RD was opposed. Actually we can't stop people from viewing that page, by not posting the RD at main page. --Marvellous Spider-Man 02:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2017

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2017. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ℯxplicit 06:33, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

IPv4 addresses

Re your closing comment on AN/I. The truth is that we've not actually run out of IPv4 by significant volume of addresses. I've dealt with multiple ancient corporate class Bs (/16s issued before CIDR came along) that either had 0 addresses with real Internet connectivity, or less than a /24 that could talk freely to the net. I can even think of class As (/8s) that had maybe just a few /24s worth of addresses that really talked to the net in the modern era (in the old days they probably had more public-talking IPs). Corporate networks mostly only really need a /24-ish per major site, and not many have anything close to 256 major sites, unless they are doing big public server hosting. That school district probably has everything going via 1 or 2 nat/firewall/proxy boxes per school, and maybe a handful of other servers for mail, etc. If the registries actually enforced modern utilisation policies, there's a huge amount of available space. Murph9000 (talk) 18:05, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Read in talk page of Vinod Khanna

Responses mentioned in talk page of Vinod Khanna. Don't destroy article on Vinod Khanna by reverting back to wrong article with wrong info. Kargayichul (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Blocking from editing

Hi Black kite, Please could you take out the block from my account because you the one who blocked my account so, take it off from my account I don't know how I can take it off I'd try many times and, I didn't get anything. Bpkhy69 (talk) 11:34, 4 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bplkhi87 (talk • contribs)

Shaykh N Mirahmadi

Hi Black kite, Mawlana As-Sayed Shaykh is now the host of a TV show that broadcasts across Canada.

http://www.joytv.ca/shows/divine-love-hub-e-rasul/

Can you please bring this page back online, feel free to modify it if you like, but this is a very valid media source that you were asking for in December

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mawlana_As-Sayed_Shaykh_Nurjan_Mirahmadi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staffsmcav (talk • contribs) 07:43, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Request

Hi there, would you have time to please take a brief look at this editor's contributions and editing behaviour? The editor appears to be a single-purpose editor who adds unsourced content and removes valid sourced content from articles relating to Nigeria. Thank you. 93.133.52.23 (talk) 22:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

on Bill Nye Saves the World

Please review the history of the page. It was locked recently because of antisemitic editors who were leaving comments trying to place Nye's name in triple brackets (an antisemitic slur) or changing his name to " Bill Noy the Science Goy". This was pointed out on the talk page too.

Edits like this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Nye_Saves_the_World&diff=next&oldid=777885386

and this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Nye_Saves_the_World&diff=next&oldid=777873043

were being made by the same people trying to link the column that the Pepe guy now keeps trying to reinsert.

And now we just so happen to have someone using a white supremacist icon (https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/pepe-the-frog) on their user page who runs in trying to make similar edits to what the users leaving those antisemitic edits were also trying to make?

Excuse me if that strains the bounds of credulity to the point of absurdity. This pepe guy knows wikipedia things I haven't even had a chance to learn, I didn't know what "ani" was until they dropped what looks like some kind of template on my talk page. And yet when I check their edits they start editing on May 5 and their first edit is literally a repeat of one of the ones made by the antisemitic editors who were posting before (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Nye_Saves_the_World&type=revision&diff=779600726&oldid=779585088). I also notice that "Anarcho-Authoritarian" likes to edit at Pepe the Frog. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Anarcho-authoritarian)

That's what I'm seeing. Why don't you do some looking. 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Morty C-137 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Protecting Grenfell Centre

Hey Black Kite, just to let you know, I added the protection template to the page. I hope you don't mind!

Thanks, Greg (talk) 23:42, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Arredondo ales

Thank you for your post at User talk:Arredondo ales#Non-free work in sandboxes. The sandbox was actually deleted per WP:U3 by an administrator due to other problems with it, but your post will be good for the editor's future reference.

If I may make a suggestion, your post might possibly be interpreted to mean that moving the sandbox content to the article namespace is all that's needed to justify the non-free content use; however, the way those logos were being used is almost always never allowed by MOS:LOGO and WP:NFCCP (WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFTABLES). It might be helpful to re-mention that non-free content use is not automatic and that there's a bit more involved than just removing a colon. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:37, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Yes, I realise this, but I didn't want to overload what is a fairly new user with multiple policies. If they end up in articlespace and violate NFCC then we can deal with them then, but to be honest I think this is a user who was confused as to what they could have in their own sandbox and what they couldn't. I've watchlisted their sandbox so I can keep an eye on it. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 23:54, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Understand and agree. I am certainly not interested in biting a new user, but I have been involved in other discussions about non-free image use where the other editor took the watered-down easy to digest explanation as being a sort of an advance de-facto permission for non-free use regardless of everything else, and then proceeded to try and justify the particular use based soley on that "explanation" alone. Perhaps these experiences have caused me to try and be too detailed when discussing such things. Anyway, thanks again for your assistance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:25, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you for banning the IP address 2600:8800:FF04:C00:0:0:0:0/64 for their edit warring on the Current Events page.

Mpawluk (talk) 19:04, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Jvm21

Hi Black Kite. You blocked this user recently for disruptive editing. I'd appreciate your thoughts on the AfD attached to this article they created yesterday. The first blocked this editor received last year was on a similar matter. Thank you. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

User:GaryFG8125

Hi, Black Kite. You previously blocked GaryFG8125 for socking and threats. They've returned a few times using different IPs, making "gnomish" edits to infoboxes, usually of Irish, mostly Fine Gael, politicians. I've generally reverted these as they're easy to spot and there is a block in place. A couple of the IPs were blocked as well, IIRC, after being reported. Gary is now apparently seeking to return to editing without being reverted - per this. I've no particular objection, except a slight concern about conflict of interest, but I don't know what the procedure is, if there is one. Does this need to be done at AN/I or does GaryFG need to raise an unblock request? I'm guessing he's keeping an eye on my talk page but he doesn't appear to have an email address associated with his account. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

ITNC: Venezuelan protests ongoing removal nomination needs attention

It's been three days since the proposals to remove the Venezuelan protests from ongoing has had any comments, and 24 hours since I marked it as requiring attention. It would thus be good if you (or some other uninvolved admin) could take a look at it. I selected you to ask as you are the most recent person to edit the ITN template and are uninvolved in the discussion. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 11:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Request for assistance

I now have someone harassing me, leaving messages like this on my talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Morty_C-137&diff=prev&oldid=781180399 Can you assist? Morty C-137 (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Another non-free image issue

Hi Black Kite. Since you tried to help out at User talk:Arredondo ales#Non-free work in sandboxes, perhaps you wouldn't mind also watching User talk:PCN02WPS#Non-free image use. This file has been de-linked once before, but maybe my message will be enough this time. Perhaps you wouldn't mind trying to help out again like before if the file is re-added again? -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:16, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for helping out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:10, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry.

-cdg428 Margravechristophe (talk) 07:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey cop :-)

If might politely suggest, you might be a little too interested in enforcement solely. I have been editing on Wikipedia for over ten years and have made my share of mistakes and continue to do so. There is layer upon layer of policy nowadays; I can't track it all. I write articles because I am sincerely interested in the topics. If I stand up for the ones I work on, it is in the spirit of being a contributor to Wikipedia. Not to cause trouble, not to break rules. Alaney2k (talk) 20:03, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

  • To be fair though, free content is one of the bases of Wikipedia ("The Free Encyclopedia") and those policies have existed since 2003. Actually ensuring that they are followed is what administrators are entrusted to do; not doing it would be a dereliction of what we were elected to do. Black Kite (talk) 20:08, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
    • I decided to put most of my above text on my user page. And someone thanked me for putting it there. I needed that after you commented out the images AND then criticized those articles. Which are just started. For me as a Canadian and in Toronto, these are important parts of our history. I don't know what else to say, it's stressful to be relentlessly pushed by an editor for several days. And then your comment comes along. Did you see that a cop outside of Toronto arrived at a party for a noise complaint, and then joined in for one song on drums? Then the music part of the party ended. A good outcome. He said he could have just shut it down. Instead, he created a good impression. He saw that the neighbours were all together, and one person felt it was loud. He worked it out in a positive way for everyone. It's not just about doing your job. Please take my comments in a positive way. :-) Alaney2k (talk) 20:30, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Did you see...

Hey - your archive bot seems... energetic! :-) Just wondering if you saw this before it got moved, and if you want to follow it up? BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:17, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi, sorry I did mean to the reply to it. I'm keeping an eye on it, but I'm not minded to take any administrative action unless the contributions turn non-constructive. Please let me know if it becomes an issue. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 06:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Your advice

I wonder if I could get your advice. I've left two messages at User talk:Kozmictommy regarding an edit to Bensalem Township, Pennsylvania. I have questions about the source they are using for several edits. No response, but the editing continues. Your help or advice would be appreciated. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:29, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Problem solved (sort of). Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

A Sockmaster Returns

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rehmat Aziz Chitrali (2nd nomination), where you were the closing administrator. The sockmaster is back with Rehmat Aziz GoldMedalist. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:33, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi Black Kite. You might also want to take a look at WP:THQ#Help. If this is really a case of WP:EVADE, then the Teahose doesn't really need the clutter because the hosts are going to assume good faith and try to answer the question accordingly. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:55, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Black_Kite/Archive_64&oldid=1139813468"