Jump to content

User talk:Black Kite/Archive 78

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


Hijiri88 block

Hey, Hijiri88 says that this block is just a self-requested block: I consider my present block to be a self-block, and therefore consider myself to be free to continue to use my talk page as I see fit. If I need to ping Black Kite or some other admin to remove the "personal attacks" thing from my present block log, I will. Your block message stated: "Personal attacks after warnings, plus self-requested indefblock."

Given the bigger implications, is it a standard block or a self-requested block? Some other admin could have placed a fully standard indef block based on the ANI thread. Self-requested blocks shouldn't be used to evade actual sanctions from an ANI thread. Hopefully that is not the case. @Lepricavark:. --Pudeo (talk) 10:11, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

While I've been pinged, I'm hesitant to comment further lest I be accused of grave-dancing. I will say that I don't believe Hijiri would have faced significant sanctions if they hadn't opted to deliberately get themselves blocked by making blatant personal attacks. But now that they have made their bed, I'm afraid they may have to lie in it. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 10:19, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Well, his original explanation -- the reason I chose the wording I did was to force a quicker self-block and therefore a quicker end to the harassment my not being blocked was provoking does not make sense because you can self-request a block for any or no reason at all. You don't have to make personal attacks. --Pudeo (talk) 11:06, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I opened a thread at AN to clarify what part of Hijiri88's block should be considered voluntary; this is in respionse to someone filing an arbitration request with the inevitable comments. I don't think this is a big deal, but please chip in at WP:AN, thanks. Guy (help!) 08:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Gavin McInnes

I am very intrigued to figure out why you deleted by contributions on Gavin McInnes' site, (twice!) considering there was no faulty information. It can all actually be looked up with a quick google search. I mean, wasn't my contribution on the section about his career? I would consider the fact that he created his own news program pretty significantly. In addition, I did give sources... this all seems very odd because like I said before, none of the information is faulty and I would render it pretty significant. Not to mention, the information I put down wasn't biased at all, it was just information about the site. Please respond with a more in-depth answer because I don't see a reason for it to have been taken down. I am also contacting you through this because I couldn't find any other way, sorry if disruptive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajarondacespedes (talk • contribs) 20:44, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

YGM and AN3

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

EvergreenFir (talk) 23:57, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of Baptist churches in Leicester

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of Baptist churches in Leicester. 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. Djflem (talk) 19:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I am a new user, and I hope I am doing this correctly

Hi, I was trying to add a comment to a dispute that was posted in WP:ANI As I am a totally new user I am sure I am doing some (or multiple) things wrong, I was busy making a reply that supported my claim that his edits were not factual and based on religious bias. But then I saw that the discussion was closed.

If you need additional information I could post it here. If I bothered you feel free to ignore my comment, or redirect me. It's all a bit daunting for a new user. Happy editing, and because of the current pandemic stay safe.

ElSnakeoBwb (talk) 20:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Gun Powder Ma is not avoiding me or Archimedes

User:Gun Powder Ma is not avoiding me as you had suggested. In fact he is still messing with the page History of gunpowder now by nominating images used on it for deletion: [1], [2]. Furthermore, he has continued to edit Trip hammer even after being "warned": [3]. Or does avoidance only count if Archimedes and I avoid him, and not him us? Qiushufang (talk) 08:52, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI: IPs now descending on the contended articles, possibly to be seen in connection with rallying for extra support from outside. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 10:24, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

User Khirurg, also known as Athenean

The concern I raised in the administrator's noticeboard had come to pass. Khirurg hasn't been avoiding us, and he has a history of helping Gun Powder Ma with tag-teaming since at least 2010 [[4]]. Even though he wasn't explicitly told to avoid us or us him,..... he's still trying to imply we're sock-puppting based on "suspicious IP" [[5]]. I know for a fact that Qiushufang and I aren't the same person, and hence won't have the same IP address. I don't know how long it'll take administrators to find out our IP addresses, but I assure you once you do you will find that my IP address and Qiushufang's IP address are NOT the same. I can't confirm if Qiushufang is the same person as this IP address 103.135.144.19 guy that Khirurg is reverting against, because I'm not him (If I have to guess, I'm going to say no, because aren't you guys trying to get at his IP address and he'll have to be incredibly shortsighted to pull something like this off). Khirurg at the very, very, very least shouldn't be going around making stuff up about us and our IP addresses. ArchimedesTheInventor (talk) 07:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Gun Powder Ma is still making changes to List of Chinese Inventions page here[[6]] and here [[7]] in which he's trying to delete the entire article, despite that you told us all to stay away from specifically that article here [[8]]. I was OK with the administrator rulings, but it would be disconcerting when rules that was supposed to be applied to all of us on paper, is somehow in practice only applied only to one party but not the other party. ArchimedesTheInventor (talk) 09:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
  • I don't see the problem at that particular article, I clearly set out what should not happen and I don't see that you or Qiu have edited List of Chinese inventions in the recent past (2nd February) and their edits are not reverts. Just to be clear
  • if I see any of you follow another to a page you have not edited before, or have not edited for a long time, and revert them, I will block you, and the block will not be short. If I see any more gaming of the 3RR system, such as currently on Battle of Xiangyang where Quishufang has reverted (yet again) three times, I will also block, and the block will not be short. If I see any evidence of tag-teaming to win a revert war, I will block both accounts, and the blocks will not be short. I strongly suggest all of you, especially Qiu and GPM, avoid each other, and keep avoiding each other as well.
OK, so just for clarity. When I asked you if I/GPM/QSF should avoid the articles List of Chinese inventions, Trip hammer, Crank (mechanism), and Crankshaft, and you responded with "That is for the best, but it's simpler than you think....", what you meant was following that was that all of us could still make edits to the articles, so long as if the edits are not reverts of each other's edits.ArchimedesTheInventor (talk) 10:45, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Basically, yes. But be careful and check previous edits in case you are accidentally reverting an edit from a while ago. Black Kite (talk) 15:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Just in case there's an issue with this, Gun Powder Ma started communicating with me again in the Trip Hammer talk page [here]. Since it had to do with my honesty, I responded [here]. I'm telling you this just to avoid potential future fiascos in which you may believe I went behind your back to do this. ArchimedesTheInventor (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Discussing anything on a talk page is absolutely fine. Black Kite (talk) 11:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Norman Hunter (footballer)

On 18 April 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Norman Hunter (footballer), which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SchroCat (talk) 10:03, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

A query

Greetings admin person. You recently range blocked 2A00:23C5:930B:B000:78CC:CD67:E98B:58B6 for block evasion. I was wondering if this IP, 2A00:23C4:4A81:7900:7C5C:5394:7142:CBF1 could be the same person? The IP you blocked seems to have a thing for vandalising BLPs of boxers that have been involved in incidents of domestic violence. 2A00:23C4 vandalised Scott Fitzgerald (boxer) with the same sentiments as 2A00:23C5, and both IPs are similar. I'm not very tech savvy and know nothing about the workings of IPs, so it's probably a stupid query, but it peaked my interest. Sorry for bothering you, I didn't know where else to bring this up. – 2.O.Boxing 22:08, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Yes, it's the same person. I've blocked this range as well, but they're operating from a massive range (2A00:23C0::/29) which is basically the entire British Telecom range for the whole of London and it's districts. Probably the best thing to do is semi-protect the articles - apart from Fitzgerald, do you have a list of others? Black Kite (talk) 00:05, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Ah, I see, very sneaky. Another article was Billy Joe Saunders which I assume may have been semi-protected at the time as the vandalism was limited to the talk page. There’s one more but I can’t remember which. The IP doesn’t seem to go on vandal sprees, it seems sporadic and in between constructive edits, like they know a concerted effort will bring on page protection lol I’ll just keep my eye out, revert and file reports when necessary. – 2.O.Boxing 09:15, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Another one, 2A00:23C4:2309:7401:748E:3D70:E743:F6C7. Sorry, I don’t want to keep pestering you with every IP I see the person using. Where would be the best place to report them, and what kind of report would it be? – 2.O.Boxing 14:40, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Okie doke. I'll keep my eye out for any more. – 2.O.Boxing 17:13, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

WP:RUCD & your comments

Just a quick word, WP:RUCD states that "[i]f the issue is a conduct dispute (i.e., editor behavior) the first step is to talk with the other editor ...in a polite, simple, and direct way." Calling a message detailing the warnings and relevant materials a user has received "ludicrous" is far from polite or simple, and it definitely doesn't help the situation. Augend (drop a line) 22:02, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

  • It may not be polite or simple, but it's completely accurate. Talking with an editor is fine, posting a massive wall of text with "Final warning" and red stop hand icons is not, as well as achieving precisely nothing (after all, what are you going to do, block them?) There are admin boards to report persistent editor misbehaviour and there are standard warnings to be placed on editor's talkpages by other editors, and you should be doing one or the other (or, as stated, simply discussing). Also, as pointed out at the WP:ANI, your "warning" is full of non-diffs and inaccuracies, so doing that on a user's talkpage is effectively a personal attack. Black Kite (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding the incident with GPM

Hi Black Kite, the incidence I reported isn't just about adding claims right after my edited sentence (didn't know that was allowed until now). It's about added claims that was not supported by the source he used, it's just something he claimed on the talk page but not in the actual sourcing. That being GPM added the claims:

  1. "However, the trigger mechanism did not rotate around its own axis", the source used (Needham) did not state this in the page cited, and I doubt Needham mentioned it in any page because it's not a correct statement in the first place. It's just GPM's claim in the Cam talk page here
  2. The cams used by Hellenstic 3rd century automaton were "rotated continuously and functioned as integral machine elements", I wonder if his source Lewis really said this or if it's just like how he added in the claim by Needham above.

I hope you or some administrator can moderate the cam page until GPM provided the necessary quotations for said sourcings before allowing those edits to exist. Also, if people start editing articles with sourcing that don't really support what their edits are saying, where would you recommend I report it?--ArchimedesTheInventor (talk) 08:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Possible block evasion

2A00:23C4:8905:100:EC41:E684:87C9:57BE same person as before? Had a big spout of vandalism a few hours ago. – 2.O.Boxing 09:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Trevor Cherry

On 30 April 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Trevor Cherry, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 00:23, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

RD: Lynn Harrell

The nomination was not made until yesterday, April 29, because his death was not announced and reported until late on April 28. Even some of the nominations on April 28 and 29 were posted after mine...... If you can reconsider, I would be very grateful. I worked this article up from being mostly unreferenced to the state it is now, and I cannot believe its posting was prevented because of one tiny issue with the lede being too short. Thank you. Zingarese talk · contribs 16:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Criticism

Regarding [9], criticism is obviously fine. What is not fine is belittling, making fun, or deliberately insulting, as the comment here - "obsession with the magic bread," - clearly is. You wouldn't call the Qaaba a magic box or use slang terms to spite "political correctness" about sexuality or race. Calling that criticism is misplaced. Now I get that he was frustrated, but that type of language could be needlessly offensive to people. Mr Ernie (talk) 11:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

  • I know, I called it "intemperate" myself earlier in the thread, and I think Guy knew it wasn't the best edit as well, which is why he deleted it. I understand JzG patrols a lot of articles on fringe subjects where there are indeed some frustrating editors who have issues with reality, but Slugger doesn't fall into that category. Anyway, it looks like it's all sorted now. Black Kite (talk) 11:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
    We're not talking about the same edit. I don't know what the rev-deleted edit says, that's the one I think you called intemperate - I'm talking about the still existing and not deleted edit summary in the diff I linked, calling the Eucarist "magic bread." Anyways, yes it looks like it's sorted, for now. Mr Ernie (talk) 11:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

A question

You stated that “if there is any evidence of concerted attempts at genocide denial after the protection is lifted then this be met with serious sanctions.“ What if the consensus is reached and the picture is removed? Would that count as genocide denial? Also, don’t you think that including a picture of a dead child in the Turkey article would create a bad impression? The event happened during the Ottoman period. If pictures of the Holocaust is not included in the Germany article, then why should pictures of the Armenian Genocide (which happened before Turkey was even a country) be included in the Turkey article? This also goes for the articles on other countries with a similar history, I have never seen a picture of a dead child in a countries article other than Turkey. Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 09:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Do you think that I would have protected the article without the image in it if I thought that removing it was genocide denial? I am talking about the longer history of the article. Black Kite (talk) 12:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, I was just questioning that particular sentence. Didn’t put much thought into it, thanks for the clarification. Regards, Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 15:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Florian Schneider

On 6 May 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Florian Schneider, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 23:08, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Nice work with this. Hope all is well with you, too. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:37, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, and you too. Black Kite (talk) 23:41, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Ty (rapper)

On 8 May 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ty (rapper), which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 16:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

ITN nomination of Roy Lester

I'm not too familiar with how ITN works, but I was pinged for the Roy Lester nomination at Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#(Stale)_RD:_Roy_Lester. The discussion was closed as "stale" due to multiple users mentioning unreferenced claims throughout the article, and I found that seven years ago a newer editor went through and chopped up most of the paragraphs and removed many references from the article. I've gone through and restored the article to mostly how it looked for its successful GA review in 2010, and there aren't too many changes since then. Could you re-review this nomination, or is it too late? Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up

Hello Black Kite, I am here because you undid an edit I made on TPUSA page, about Charlie Kirk not accepting money from the PPP, You made comments that I hope you can clarify further as I do want to re-submit a NPOV edit using your suggestions following Wikipedia guidelines. You stated I should use "Kirk claimed", as well as balance out statements with due weight of the event disclosing that he opposed the stimulus plan in the first place. Which I will add into the re-edit ( I have also found two other sources corroborating the original source that can help balance it out). Any other tips or guides you can point me to for me to read before I do this new edit? I appreciate your guidance, I am semi-new and often see other new users met with animosity/resistance when trying to be bold with their edits. I just want to learn the ropes, so thank you for helping me. Also is there any guidelines for me to post a new edit? Do I need to wait a certain amount of time? Let me know! EliteArcher88 (talk) 22:32, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks For the Heads Up Friend. This guy Won't learn a lesson. Mr. Samerkov (talk) 05:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)


Edit summary: TMI?

I think this should probably be hidden. (I'm not bothered about posting the link here as it's already been there for a month.) Would you please take a look? Thanks. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 21:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Jerry Stiller

On 12 May 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jerry Stiller, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Black_Kite/Archive_78&oldid=1141712470"