Jump to content

User talk:BusterD/Archive 17

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


Archive 10←Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19

Warn before welcome

I would advise against warning a user who has not been welcomed yet. This can be seen as biting newcomers and can be seen as not assuming good faith. We don't wanted to scare away editors just because they made a mistake or don't understand Wikipedia yet. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the engagement on the subject. I do a quite a lot of vandalism patrol, and I often find myself reverting and warning. I always use escalating warnings, and the level one starts with "Welcome to Wikipedia." As someone who has been editing the pedia since 2005, I appreciate feedback from a newer editor who might see things with fresher eyes. Thanks! BusterD (talk) 13:38, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
No problem! I actually was made to think about this myself when I warned a new user who had put something on a page that was not from a neutral point of view and they told me about it that they were new and I was like, "You know what, I shouldn't be warning people who haven't been welcomed yet and instead welcoming them myself" so that's what I do. Also I may have been on Wikipedia longer (check when my alt was made) however I forgot I had that account until I just discovered it. I hadn't edited until I got this account tho. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Also you have been editing since before I was born which is.. weird to think about. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Blaze The Wolf, you're talking about the message on User talk:Davidfradin? That's in response to this edit--I guess they're lucky to have run into BusterD and not me: I probably would have blocked them on the spot, since all they're doing is promoting themselves on Wikipedia--read all the way down the edit, and then see User:Davidfradin/David fradin. (I'm not going to delete that right away, so you have a chance to look at it.) So sure, welcome before warn--but Davidfradin has been trying to plug David Fradin since 2009. Buster, you're a kinder person than I am: I always skip the first level in cases of obvious vandalism. (This was a bit different--it was purely promotional.) Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:18, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

So you're the one who rather have fiction than fact on Randy Newman's page, but pretends you have all the answers? So much for welcoming a stranger. And so much for wiki being a trustworthy site. 173.49.69.238 (talk) 15:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXI, May 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

AfC

Thanks for joining the AfC team. I suggest you install the AfC helper script, as reviewing drafts manually is fairly tedious process. Cheers. – bradv🍁 19:06, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

No kidding. I'll expect to perform one page a day at first to get into a rhythm. Occasionally performing a few reviews manually will help me better appreciate the process, IMHO. I've got a pet set of my own creations I'm going to focus on for a bit, but I've avoided this process long enough. In the case of a contributor like User:Florida Army, IMHO that user is clogging AFC with large numbers of creations which are minimally formed. I guess it's wrong of me to criticize another editor because they don't edit just like me, but an editor with that much experience should be able to self-review. Is there a backstory which we can't talk about? BusterD (talk) 19:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
The process really isn't set up to be done manually, and I can't recommend trying to do it that way. The process and the script have developed together, so it would make more sense to just use the script and then review your contribs to see what it did.
Regarding FloridaArmy, you can find background information in the ANI archives, including this and this which together enacted the current restrictions. You should be able to provide feedback on those drafts and review them to the same standards as any other. – bradv🍁 19:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the info on both. Have checked that box and purged my cache. Will give the script a shot later on today. Nice to chat with you. BusterD (talk) 19:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) For a bit of back story, I tried mentoring FloridaArmy some years ago, and rescued / improved a few articles so they didn't get deleted at AfD, but I couldn't do that forever, and their creations always do seem to be a bit hit-and-miss. The best thing to do for all of them is try a quick Google, drop the extra sources into the article, which should hopefully be enough to pass it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
It's also worth noting that FloridaArmy primarily works on articles about a demographic that's traditionally been underrepresented, not only by Wikipedia, but by reliable sources as well. This is obviously quite a challenge, so as Ritchie333 says, it's best to try to help whenever possible. – bradv🍁 18:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
I have seen their "rants" at Jimbo's talk, and have come around to appreciating the positive contributions that editor makes. I agree wholeheartedly with Bradv's comment above about the dearth of sources, especially online sources, available to an editor attempting to find RS for AA subjects. As someone who at one time worked with an editor of an historic AA community newspaper (which does not yet have online archives), I'm sensitive to such a poverty of material upon which to draw. This situation also applies to sourcing for articles about female subjects. I'm fortunate that my latest article subject was successful in several professional arenas dominated by men; as a result I can find sources about her (with support from her sorority's national journal). BusterD (talk) 18:47, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Ha, guess what, I got two cents on this topic also. I've also tried to work with that editor, and found it very difficult; I write articles in the same (heavily underrepresented) topic area, so I appreciate what they're doing--and things are getting a bit better, though for all their years and all their edits they are still not very skilled. Plus my interactions with them were very abrasive, to put it mildly. So yeah, hit and miss--difficult. There was a huge thread on ANI, which didn't resolve anything. They're a net positive for the project, but that doesn't make it any easier to handle in individual cases. Drmies (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

RfA candidate poll

Regarding your RfA candidate poll, just a minor note: there is a typo in "Failed AfD RfA ten years ago". isaacl (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

It took me several days of staring straight at your kind critique before I realized my intense effort was spoiling my ability to actually look at this correctly. Sometimes the mind fills in the gaps by itself and can't see things freshly. I always like to have a human being look my writing over, or give the writing some time for a fresh look. I've never really worried too much about it on pagespace, because can I trust someone will come along and fix it. BusterD (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
My apologies—you had thanked me for the edit, so I assumed the typo was clear. Glad that you've found it now! isaacl (talk) 22:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
I hate to be that person, but your edit changed the wrong instance of "AfD". (I see someone else fixed it already.) isaacl (talk) 22:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank the lord! Going to have to find someone to revdel that so I can get the controversy going if I ever decide to enter process. Goes to show you my head was elsewhere and not in the job. BusterD (talk) 22:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
I probably should have just fixed it initially; I just generally have an aversion to editing other people's posts. (A notable exception is list nesting issues, once I convinced myself the changes have no discernable visual effect.) isaacl (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
I have learned to use some version of the word "refactor" in edit summaries when I feel compelled to make such a change, just so I'm swinging big elbows and making my intention clear. In the last few days I've made statements on other new folks' talk, and as part of showing them how to edit have inserted a few indents to demonstrate threading. Thanks for helping in any event. I need to be more sensitive to knowing when to take a break. Funny, I just published an old essay this weekend at WP:PACE on this exact issue of knowing when NOT to edit. BusterD (talk) 23:29, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Just to mention that along with the "support" in the WP:RFAPOLL discussion, yes - I'd be willing to offer a co-nom statement. I think there are others out there that could likely do a better job (and would be willing to) - but I do offer my services if desired. — Ched (talk) 01:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
    It's very nice of you to offer, Ched. I was thinking Drmies and yourself as co-noms, since both of you have made offers, and I have trust in you both. In my first RfA, I chose wiki-friends to co-nom, two of whom were under clouds at the time. That granted, I was simply not ready at that time. Certainly the community did not yet see me as trusted, and the community was quite correct. As demonstrated by my inability to correctly interpret isaacl's comment, sometimes it's good to trust friends to tell me when my fly is down. I hope you and others will continue to do so. BusterD (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
    I'll work up a rough draft this week and get with Drmies so we don't just repeat the same things. — Ched (talk) 08:10, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

???

Do I know you sir?Valkyrie Red (talk) 05:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

We have argued the same position, I think. The last time was about an infobox on Battle of Cold Harbor. We might have disagreed once or twice, I believe, also about infoboxes many years ago. I saw your helpful edit to Battle of Antietam and wanted to say something welcoming. It's always nice to see an editor in the ACW sphere, especially one with experience. BusterD (talk) 07:51, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:American Civil War battle stubs

I've decided to try to look through this over the next few months as a summer project, to see what at least can be destubbed. Stuff like Clark's Mill and maybe Romney should be easily destubbable, especially once I finally get to move (the county I am moving to has a much better library system than the one I currently live in, so should make research easier) and I'm personally shocked Pickett's Mill and Rocky Face Ridge are stubs. But I'm really concerned that some of these may not be notable (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Young's Point for a recent example and see User talk:Eight-Nation-Alliance fan101 which has a bunch of AFD notices from that user creating a bunch of articles for tiny skirmishes.

The first one I looked at was Skirmish at Threkeld's Ferry, and I frankly can't find anything substantial beyond the Encyclopedia of Arkansas entry cited in the article, which only uses the OR's as a source. Is this one really that iffy on notability, or am I just missing something that's fairly obvious? I don't like AFDing ACW battle articles, but some of the ones in those categories are looking really bad. Skirmish at Ackworth is currently only sourced to Dyer, for instance (haven't looked in-depth into that one yet. Donner60 took part in the old 8NA Fan AFDs, so they might have some insight into this. And TwoScars may be knowledgeable about some of the WV ones like Battle of Clark's House. Hog Farm Talk 04:27, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Very exciting. Yes, I'd very much be interested in de-stubbing ACW stubs. I've watched your GA/FA tally recently; you're making huge subject area gains for the pedia. Thanks so much for your boundless enthusiasm. I'm not sure what most normies think of wikipedians, but IMHO every time we create a well-sourced article of any stature we make a pledge to those of our past we don't forget and the world will continue to care. (I call your attention to the photographs on Queen City, Iowa.) It's so hard to vandalize a really well-done page without people noticing and reverting it. I have some pagespace ambitions myself, but I have a harder time reviewing than some. But de-stubbing is right in my wheelhouse. I am certain we can find other like-minded souls to help. I'm a Donner60 fan. He finds article subjects I think need creation and does a splendid job sourcing them. Let me spend some time and I'll see if I can come up with sources on your linked stubs. BusterD (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Have created User:Hog Farm/ACW battle stubs as an attempt to sort these by if the primary issues is sourcing, need of expansion, and noting two that its unclear if stand-alone or merger is the better option right now, as well as one that contradicts itself. Hog Farm Talk 15:07, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Jacob Cox may have discussed Battle of Clark's House briefly on page 209 of his "Military Reminiscences of the Civil War" book (Volume I). Books about Rutherford B. Hayes might also mention it. The OR has reports by Cox, Scammon, and Jenifer. The OR is not that helpful and calls the incident a skirmish at Camp Creek. The Flat Top Copperheads (Confederate militia) might be interesting. Here is a brief source not good enough for Wikipedia. TwoScars (talk) 16:35, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hog Farm TwoScars BusterD Great idea from HogFarm. Thanks to BusterD for the compliment. This idea reminds me of some necessary editing that has crossed my mind a few times, especially when Eight Nations Alliance was throwing up stubs, especially about the Camden Expedition skirmishes. For whatever reasons, I have let this idea drift along rather than giving it some of the attention it needs. I think Eight ground out some articles that were about skirmishes that were not notable and possibly a few that might be notable if they were expanded and better sourced. I'll pay some attention to this over the next few months. It will be a good project for several editors to work on. Donner60 (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXII, June 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

RfA poll

I missed your RFA poll but I forgot I was looking at an archived page and added support anyway. A bot did not throw me off the page so I guess it turned out ok. Best wishes if you go ahead with it. Donner60 (talk) 04:40, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Too early to say congrats yet, but best of luck! BOZ (talk) 14:08, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Precious

U.S. historic biographies

Thank you for beginning articles such as Charles Heywood and William E. Woodruff (soldier), for Samuel Escue Tillman, for offering admin services, for "I appreciate feedback from a newer editor who might see things with fresher eyes" and "wants infinite forgiveness", - Buster, repeating (3 May 2009): you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2626 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

What a very nice surprise this morning! Thank you for helping to keep morale high on Wikipedia. I admire the effort you are making these days. I've got a sweet 16th wiki-birthday coming up soon too. BusterD (talk) 15:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
I am a bit ashamed that I confused you with the also sweet Buster7, or you would have received this a bit sooner. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Jane Douglass White

On 7 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jane Douglass White, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before she entered the U.S. Army in 1942, Jane Douglass White, a songwriter for soldier's shows, had already composed the tune which would become the official "Song of the Women's Army Corps"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jane Douglass White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jane Douglass White), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Song of the Women's Army Corps

On 7 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Song of the Women's Army Corps, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before she entered the U.S. Army in 1942, Jane Douglass White, a songwriter for soldier's shows, had already composed the tune which would become the official "Song of the Women's Army Corps"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jane Douglass White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Song of the Women's Army Corps), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Soldier's show

On 7 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Soldier's show, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before she entered the U.S. Army in 1942, Jane Douglass White, a songwriter for soldier's shows, had already composed the tune which would become the official "Song of the Women's Army Corps"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jane Douglass White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Soldier's show), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank You

Hello BusterD, I appreciate your thoughtful responses at RfA. I found the answer concerning reading with your daughter to be a nice little moment of humanity and it brought back memories of my Papa. Sometimes we forget the very human side of Wikipedia. I found that and most of your answers to be refreshing. It seems you will be confirmed but we will let the tally finish first. Keep reading with your daughter. You have a beautiful song to sing and it's moments like that where you share it with her that will most definitely impact her life for a long time to come as it becomes part of her song too. Thank you for your contributions here and I wish you all the best. --ARoseWolf 20:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello BusterD:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1100 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Ehhhhhh let me be the first

Congratulations in advance for a successful relatively stress free RFA Celestina007 (talk) 22:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

While technically it's too soon to congratulate you, someone would have to find one hell of a dirty secret on you in the next several hours to get several dozen people to switch to oppose. :) BOZ (talk) 02:38, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Now it's official - congrats on a very successful RFA. :) BOZ (talk) 17:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Make that less than an hour now, haha. Anyway, congrats for finally getting the mop!  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
The dirty secret? I still play AD&D 2.5. Don't tell anyone. BusterD (talk) 17:41, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
+ you owe me a drink for being the first to congratulate you 🙃. Celestina007 (talk) 17:46, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Admin common room

I've allocated you a chair, and plumped up the cushions. Welcome to the strange world of the Admin. SilkTork (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

What a kind way to treat a stranger. Hospitality. Now even stranger. BusterD (talk) 17:24, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Congrats! You'll do great. If I've made it almost 6 months without getting in trouble for sheer incompetence, then you'll have no problems. Hog Farm Talk 17:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Wait Hog Farm, you have a mop? Well, congrats then! Drmies (talk) 21:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Drmies - Yes, since mid-January. I hope I haven't messed anything up yet. Hog Farm Talk 01:37, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Well, Hog Farm, you haven't blocked me yet, haha! Drmies (talk) 15:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Congratulations BusterD, and welcome to the couple extra buttons. I also wanted to extend a heartfelt Thank You for allowing me to be a part of your RfA. It's an honor to be associated with such fantastic outcome and editor. Best of luck, and don't be a stranger. Cheers. — Ched (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Take the sacred mop and with it rinse the Wiki of its scum and villany! CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓

A way to help a new functionary administrator

I have seen welcome and congratulation for my successful run. I appreciate your trust; I will not betray it. That said, I'm not perfect but improving daily, I hope.

If you'd like to help me as a wikipedian, please begin by commenting on my answers to questions. I have zero idea how I sound in the wikisphere. I'm blind to myself. I try to write from experience, not projection. So, what did I say well and with what do you disagree? Please help me to understand where we are as a community. (FD: I'll move this to a subpage if it gets too ruckus/raucus). BusterD (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I really didn't want to be that person (it is my kryptonite), but, um... I don't think admins are functionaries Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
I thought the answer to question 14 (particularly "somewhat condescending, certainly leading, and absolutely improper") was bravely honest as I believed there was a decent chance of it starting to garner opposition, whereas a more timid answer would have been safe. But I agreed with it and am glad you said it. I like your position on recall and stated criteria, but if the question had not come up, would you have not said anything about it? I would prefer people to set their conditions upfront, just to avoid even the appearance of coercion. — Bilorv (talk) 20:59, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. By today's RFA standards/common outcomes I find it awkward for a candidate to volunteer such a statement. I would not have mentioned it like I wouldn't mention the wart on my nose. It was considerate of User:Beeblebrox to ask the clarifying question during the process. I was happy to speak bluntly, if such it was. The question's principle is derived from a proper spirit of rotation. None of us gets out of here alive. This is a fair concern. This is true of all volunteer-driven enterprises and volunteers who serve them. So in my generation as administrator, I imagine the community devising a system where the torch is passed and trust maintained. I'm not retired but I'll give up my driving privilege eventually. Time will catch up with all of us. Burn brightly while we have choices. BusterD (talk) 21:59, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I will be AFK for the next hour or two so feel free to trash the place. I have a new set of tools right here (or there, somewhere, oh, up there). I might warn somebody... BusterD (talk) 17:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry, as far as I know its very hard to miss the tools. Accidently clicking them on the other hand... -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 18:33, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Wahoo! I can semi-protect my own sandbox. BusterD (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Congrats

For the record, I would have supported you for admin but I didn’t get to the discussion in time. Sorry about that! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 20:58, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

P.S. I’m sure you know this already, but ANI can be rough. Go slowly and say as little as possible but no less. Also, and I’m sure you also know this, people will hate you if you do the job right. Don’t take it personally. My only other advise is - be prepared to admit mistakes and if you are unsure of something ask for review. Oh, and take my advise with a grain of salt, I started out great as an admin, but flamed out spectacularly. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
I thank you. You are still burning brightly as a wikipedian, User:Aussie Article Writer. I thank you for your question and I hope I didn't sound as though I was being cute. I decided the hill worth dying on was hypotheticals. Your question was legitimate. I would have to drudge all kinds of details from you about particulars. There's always a context. BusterD (talk) 21:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
All good, I never took it as such. I’m trying to live a quiet life of article writing, DYK and GA reviews. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Same here. I've fallen out of regular practice, but you're the best kind of admin: nose to the grindstone. Keep up the good work. HiDrNick! 02:08, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Congratulations, here is your new uniform. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:44, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Cheers--you did it. Well done. Drmies (talk) 21:55, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

A goat for you!

I GOAT you this goat to celebrate you becoming an admin. I supported you, you deserve it

EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 17:03, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Casting resurrection

As an admin, and content creator, and with a background and interest in tabletop games, you might just be interested in my project User:BOZ/Games deletions which I am still working on. :) I hope to be able to bring back anything that we can find sources for, although I'm sure most of what is on that list is going to stay the way it is. BOZ (talk) 13:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Congrats!

Take the sacred mop-head hydrangea and with it rinse the Wiki of its skill and vumany!

Sorry I did not get to !vote, BusterD. I'd say 99% a good result!! Martinevans123 (talk) 16:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Please also accept these bribes of yummy cream cakes to avoid you ever having to block me. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Belated congratulations on your successful RfA Buster. I've been on vacation the last couple of weeks. Glad I had a chance to vote for you before I left. Mojoworker (talk) 21:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for thank you

I don't think I have ever had a detailed thank you before from someone I have supported at RFA. Such scrupulous courtesy confirms me in the belief that you will be a top-notch admin. I wish you the very best of luck and great pleasure in your new capacity. Tim riley talk 17:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Very belated welcome

Maybe I'm the last to welcome you to the admin corps. Sorry 'bout that! I know you will do great. Besides welcoming you, I wanted to clue you in to a couple of things your new status entitles you to. I see that you haven't yet created your adminstats page. You can learn how to do that here: User:MelanieN/Admin bling. And if you are planning to do much in the way of page protecting, you might want to check out this essay: User:MelanieN/Page protection. Have fun, and see you around the Wiki! -- MelanieN (talk) 21:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIII, July 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Big Bethel

Re your comment of 10/6/21: 'Not a good summary'. Does this refer to the lede? If so, I cannot see how it fails to summarise the action, as well as the context. Perhaps you could suggest key points that have not been covered. Valetude (talk) 09:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I thought the diff and summary make my intent clear: the attempted new short description was not only a poor choice of words, it did not summarize the article well. The new current short description ("1861 battle of the American Civil War on the Virginia Peninsula") is overlong bit at least describes the event better than "Decisive Confederate Victory". BusterD (talk) 12:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, Buster. I don't have much involvement with the 'Short Description' features, and didn't immediately realise what you were referring to. Most of my disagreements involve lede-writing, on which I do claim expertise. Valetude (talk) 18:45, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Input requested about Seven Pines

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/James Longstreet/archive1. Essentially, William Garrett Piston attributes Longstreet getting on the wrong road to Longstreet making an error, and is the source currently used in the article. Stephen W. Sears states that the issue was probably caused by Longstreet thinking he had the authority to reroute his troops. Sears can be kind of a maverick at times, though. Would you happen to have access to other sources on this topic to try to determine what the consensus is here (if there is one?) Thanks! Hog Farm Talk 04:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIV, August 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:44, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

My recent absence

This statement is not intended to draw attention or sympathy, but to explain my recent inattention to matters Wikipedia. I have taken an entirely self-enforced break to deal with personal grief. I find it very hard to look at my watchlist. I trust all my fellow contributors will cover.

I had a sibling die. As we had been long parted and not especially close, I was startled by the overwhelming grief I felt, the despondence of us missing our window, the depression of inevitable mortality. I withdraw now from the community so as to cause no harm in my sudden unbalance.

I am grateful for my life, and I love my family and friends fiercely. While I am often at odds with my fellows here, I wish to express my enormous gratitude for my co-volunteers on Wikipedia. It is a strange thing that I gather my wikifriends by disagreeing with them, finding common ground on the other side of each conflict. Here consensus is a blessing born of skepticism and good-faith dispute. I am grateful for learning this lesson. I am grateful to each of my fellow editors for helping to teach me.

I am working to build gumption capacity back, and intend to get back to work (at some level) in a week or two.

BusterD (talk) 20:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Was traipsing through my quarantined talk archive and remembered your well wishes after the events of June. Made me want to personally express my congratulations, though late, to you for passing through that Godawful swamp. Thank you for all the kind words since; I'd like to offer my own now (and this coffee). ♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
And I'll keep it warm for you. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello BusterD,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXV, September 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXV, September 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FS1. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

IPv6 ranges

So a couple of months, maybe a year ago, someone made a helpful tweak to the block process for IPv6's, with the option to quickly block the range. I've learned that it's worth checking esp. if the same IP made a series of vandal edits, indicating a habit; if that's the case, then often more came from the range. In this case that was valid, so thanks for blocking the range. Later, Drmies (talk) 14:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Masters world records progressions

The Masters world record progressions are a direct adjunct of List of world records in masters athletics. As in every other world record page that has progressions, the link is event specific, or in better wikipedia terms "subject specific," rather than a hodge podge of sublinks. When editing, you go directly to the article in question rather than a mass article and then needing to find the correct section to edit. For each sublink, all the targeting must be perfect or the user is taken to the wrong place. The user will be confused. Editing to articles is not limited to people who know what they are doing, anybody can edit meaning, in the process of adding new, relevant information, the linkage can be destroyed by someone who doesn't understand all this code. Yes it can be fixed once somebody notices, but that means somebody needs to notice. I'm monitoring 16,000 pages. Stuff slips by me sometimes.

In the case of the article under attack, yes the number of instances of improvement have been few. There are very few athletes qualified to attempt such a record, the requirements being male, 85+ years old and still capable of jumping in the very specific fashion required for triple jump. I've got decades before I can attempt it.

Let me ask you, why the concern about the size of the article. Yes the server has size limitations on large articles because it slows things down. On the List of world records in athletics we had to pare things down to make spacing work and its still slow to load. Another one I'm involved in is List of deaths due to COVID-19 which has been revamped multiple times to reduce size and its still huge. On the List of high schools in California, it used to include Los Angeles County and even Los Angeles City Schools in the master list (same for San Diego County) through sublinks. That got so screwed up repeatedly, we've just given up and post a link to the county list and it then links further to List of Los Angeles Unified School District schools.

Small articles do not cause the same problem. We use small templates constantly in our articles to make repetitive functions work. Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay world record progression is a small article because it has a short history. I don't see that under attack. Small articles only look like low hanging fruit to deletionists who want a new something to target. Deletionists are the cancer that will destroy wikipedia from the inside.Trackinfo (talk) 00:32, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Commentary aside, the technical point is intriguing and if I read your evaluation correctly, unavoidable. Why have you not raised this point in the discussion, where knowledgeable folks are engaged? For my part, I'm not sure of the limitations of the software. When I see a wikipedian with lots of years and loads of essential page creations in an important content arena, I presume they know why they do things, so I'm here to help. Is there some diff in the examples you've provided here which helps make your case? BusterD (talk) 21:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team

Hello! Your submission of 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Stuart Scheller

User:BusterD could you please move the underlying entry to draftspace so it can be worked on. The subject continues to be very much in the news. Thank you. FloridaArmy (talk) 20:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

You came to my talkpage posting an aggressive and threatening post saying I should have worked on the subject in drafspace. All I'm asking is for a little follow through User:BusterD. Needless to say your comments and actions have been abusive and inappropriate. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK for 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team

On 22 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that women's basketball Hall of Famers Chris Dailey and Geno Auriemma are in their 37th season of coaching the UConn Huskies together? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft proposal

Greetings BusterD. I created a draft proposal for your "Admin sponsorship" idea. Tonight I'll add some content to it. Currently it only has the {{under construction}} tag in place. Of course you can edit the page and add whatever you'd like, whenever you want to, and seek help from whomever else you wish. The page is: Wikipedia:WikiProject Policy and Guidelines/Draft proposal: Admin training with sponsorship, which is pretty long so I also made WP:ATWS. Best regards.--John Cline (talk) 13:19, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

i need your advice

Hey, i haven't gotten to the list assembly yet, I'll do that—but i need your help. I got these comments at WT:DYK [1] [2]. his comments are making me feel stressed out and overlooked—should i respond, or just ignore it? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:32, 23 October 2021 (UTC) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:35, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

I have said something (hopefully) helpful there. Be the bigger person. Always be the bigger person. Grow thicker skin, too. Pages have histories. Readers aren't stupid. As wikipedians we share a responsibility to model behavior to others so others can see how the societal norms manifest. Principles, pillars, policies. Other non-admins I know are way better at this than I. On sponsorship, I have been mostly reading a lot. Visit my sandbox and read the helpful signpost template User:Kudpung accumulated. This provides a very nice backstory to what's happening now. There's a lot more. I want to poke around in successful content-area WikiProjects for more training/mentoring stuff. BusterD (talk) 20:34, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the help :) I'll need thicker skin going forward, for sure—I'll read up on the successful sponsorship programs, too. Should be able to write something concrete by monday. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:42, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
  • On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, October 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
For correcting the Trans-Mississippi map! Hog Farm Talk 05:04, 30 October 2021 (UTC) 
Hog Farm  Talk 05:04, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thank you for saving my talk page from an angry bird!
Princess of Ara 09:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Museums in Boone County, Illinois

A tag has been placed on Category:Museums in Boone County, Illinois indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 20:25, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Scardust lock

Hello. I was the one who requested Scardust be locked. I just realized that locks me out, but not the vandal who keeps reverting relevant information. Is there a way to lock the article do only admins can edit it, for now, or to have an admin monitor the article so the disruptive edits may not continue? The state of the article is good right now. I'm in the process of reporting the vandal as being in an edit war, although I'm not quite sure what I'm doing. 2601:44:C27F:83A0:B15B:D4FD:1BA3:F229 (talk) 04:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC) Edit: He (User:Binksternet) changed the article, once again, removing important information, such as the timeline I made and the most recent concert, now I can't even revert the vandalism he created. Could you please revert the article and place a higher lock on it? I've reported him with this IP address. This is ridiculous...

I appreciate you are engaging on this. All wikipedians disagree. A lot. Based on my reading, User:Binksternet seems to be acting in good faith by maintaining material based on reliable sources. Several ip contributors seems to be making identical edits in opposition to that named editor on the Scardust page. One of those editors has been blocked for their edits. The sources put forward by yourself and the others don't seem to meet the level of sourcing already applied. If you disagree with another editor like Binksternet, it is best to create a discussion thread on the Talk:Scardust page where you and other like-minded editors can create consensus on these sorts of disagreements. The talk page is unprotected so discussion can occur. BusterD (talk) 05:41, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Star Trek

I re-read your response on Star Trek Into Darkness AfD. I wanted you to know that I probably laughed to hard, but I do think it is a keep. I am not sure if your were being flippant or serious with the response under my initial, lol. Just want to make sure I was not being dense by thinking you were reconsidering the article. Cheers. Lightburst (talk) 23:31, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

You and I are good. I appreciate your concern on this issue. I'm sorry where the ANI discussion has headed. This is a policy issue which has become an unfortunate personality issue. BusterD (talk) 23:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
thanks there was so much talk about my participation there so I was not sure. I guess looking at it I can see how it disrupted the process. My Lol. I still laugh at the thought of that article. There are participants who hold long standing grudges and they seem to be having a Festivus airing of the grievances. Perhaps next is the feats of strength? - I think the grievances go all the way back to 2007? - maybe 12 years before my edits, but my own responses to some editors have not been exemplary. If I had been an employee at McDonalds, they would have given me a stern talking to and maybe a sensitivity class. Lightburst (talk) 00:04, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
I very much enjoyed your input in that humorous sorta-meta AfD conversation. Wikipedians are interested in reading about themselves and rarely get to laugh with each other this much in RL. I still think it's a merge, but I pinged User:Dream Focus to the page because their involvement would move the discussion towards sources, which is what happened. If somebody were to ban me from discussing articles up for deletion, I would become the most prodigious cite inserter at articles at process. I'm a born troublemaker. BusterD (talk) 00:15, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
I already found what sources I could and mentioned them in the AFD. In case it gets deleted I exported it to https://cultural-phenomenons.fandom.com/wiki/2013_Wikipedia_Star_Trek_Into_Darkness_controversy for safe keeping. Dream Focus 00:27, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Friends, help me with this: Did Andrew get promoted Colonel when Colonel Warden retired? BusterD (talk) 00:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
He is from the UK, does a lot of Wiki meets I think. I do not know why people call him by Colonel but I think it has to do with a Wikipedia name he edited with years ago. Sometimes I think it is used in a backhanded way maybe just because I see he is not calling himself that but others do. I know him only as Andrew. But I am not sure. Lightburst (talk) 00:48, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
For many years he was Colonel Warden, that the name Winston Churchill used to hide his true identity from the Nazis agents. Then he started editing with his real name. Dream Focus 01:00, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Npa

Hi there BusterD, hope you're doing well. The IP from Van Cat page that you recently protected is making all kinds of personal attacks and rants against me, diff. They're doing the same WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments like they were doing in their edit-war descriptions, without attempting to talk. I'm not sure what to make of someone with such a high WP:COI and unawareness of their racism, so many baseless and weird assumptions topped with racially charged attacks. Seems to me like a WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality, and the IP mostly edit-warred in Van Cat page, using other ranges [3], [4]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 07:35, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

All your edits are about Turks. You edit a bit of this and that to fly under the radar. You're an Armenian living in USA, trying to push the Armenian propaganda and when people react you cry at a random admins talk page, trying to get them to do what you wish. Rest assured clickity clacking on wikipedia won't change reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.173.190 (talk) 20:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
88.230.173.190 I don't think you're fit to edit on Wikipedia, get well soon. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 08:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
"You wolf-folks stick together and stay warm", this phrase that you said on RoseWolf's talk page really made me smile. Thank you for your kindness (even though below that convo is a discussion I"m not getting into) ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:29, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the nice words. It's astounding how far we can go when we choose to be kind to each other. I was traveling to my big sister's funeral a few weeks ago and stayed at an Airbnb in California wine country, a nice old farm house with tiny ripe champagne grapes all around. While enjoying my morning Nambarrie I watched five kittens playing together. It reminded me of the sometimes too serious play my siblings and I shared. Wikipedians are stronger when we remember our love for one another and choose to handle whatever burden together. Thanks again for the star. Wikilove strongly appreciated. BusterD (talk) 19:39, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello, you misinterpreted the consensus on deleting Stephen Hogan

Hope all is well. The deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Hogan - Wikipedia was full of sock puppet vandalism by deity who is really User:Nyxaros2 and who had come to edit disruptively previously under the guise of User:Dollyplay and User:Sleptlapps as well. Though I respect the nominator @DGG:'s vast and long experience over the years, he made factual inaccuracy about the actor's performance and didn't refer to Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Entertainers. Since his nomination, another article came out at Dublin actor stars in fascinating new Amazon Prime film about Indian revolutionary - Dublin Live which had been added to the underlying article to again demonstrate his notability. Maybe I was a poor writer who didn't know how to improve the writing. But clearly, the page shouldn't have been deleted. I respectfully request you to undelete and extend the deletion discussion at a minimum. Thank you for your time and consideration. Supermann (talk) 03:47, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your view on the matter. I decline your request to undelete or relist. In my reading of the discussion, several editors in good standing believe the subject doesn't meet the standard for inclusion: multiple independent reliable sources directly detailing the subject. While a sockpuppet was revealed during the process and blocked, that editor's contributions did not unduly affect the discussion or change any opinions. It's entirely possible we see this in a different way. I believe I closed in a manner dictated by consensus and policy. If you'd like to appeal my close, you could apply to WP:DRV. BusterD (talk) 22:02, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
{{subst:DRVNote|Stephen Hogan}} thanks. ~~~~ Supermann (talk) 03:45, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate the temporary undelete and have saved down a copy. Supermann (talk) 20:15, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Please read and acknowledge the conditions (some informal) I've made for any recreation at the DRV. BusterD (talk) 20:28, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I don't think I am gonna win out at DRV for the reasons I stated there. And I apologize if I leave the impression of being disrespectful, as I am just lost in translation. Could you please send me the deleted content so that I could post it somewhere else outside Wikipedia or just for my personal memorabilia purpose. Thanks for your time and consideration. Supermann (talk) 17:05, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, here you are, BusterD--doing your job as an admin on something that should be cut and dried, something simple that is now turned into a 45k slog by editors with more zeal than common sense. I'm sorry, but this is how it goes sometimes, and there's nothing I can do to make this easier. I hope this gets ended the proper way--with an endorsement of your close. Drmies (talk) 18:50, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

I put this behind me a week or so ago. Sometimes more eyes is a good thing. Sometimes folks are looking to make a point. Sometimes they actually make their point. Sometimes not. The process under discussion did not shower any particular participant with glory. For my part I've found something new upon which to spend time and I'm enjoying simply doing the background reading. I want to respect the material. Untold stories are a wonderful thing. At this exact moment I wish I remembered more from my physical geography class 28 years ago. Best to you and yours. BusterD (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Lots of start-class articles

Got bored today and pieced together User:Hog Farm/Trans-Mississippi pulling from the various "Battles of the American Civil War in State" categories. Not perfect (I had to add Port Hudson to LA by hand, it was not in Category:Battles of the American Civil War in Louisiana for some reason), but should be generally pretty close. I wasn't entirely sure if the Apache Wars and Sioux Wars ones belonged in Trans-Mississippi, but went ahead and included for completeness' sake. Also some overlap in Arizona/New Mexico Territory I haven't had the chance to examine yet.

Probably more work there than can ever be dealt with, but a few here and there and things will look better (currently have Battle of Bayou Meto at GAN, so that'll be one down hopefully).

As an aside, should Category:Battles of the American Civil War in North Dakota be Category:Battles of the American Civil War in the Dakota Territory? I see the Indian Territory is used instead of Oklahoma in that category. Hog Farm Talk 05:51, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Hog Farm, what a clever way to use this template! I'm preparing a presentation to a local history group about Wikipedia and your colorful visual concept is appealing. You don't mind if I swipe your idea and use it elsewhere do you? Shifting gears, contemporaneous "territory" is a concept some wikipedians have not yet sorted out. Yep, we need it. Note: a reasonable case has been made at Talk:Bear River Massacre that even though some ACW-era events are among those whose records are compiled in the OR, strictly indigenous vs. Confederate or Union unit incidents may not belong categorized properly as ACW events. This probably deserves a more centralized discussion but I'm largely sympathetic to such views. Almost all the ACW-era battles and skirmishes in Indian Territory likely do belong as part of the ACW category tree, but those of ND, UT or even CO may not. I'm not drawing conclusions myself, but thought I'd stick that idea out for consideration. Perhaps the cat should be moved to Category:Battles during the American Civil War in North Dakota Territory. BusterD (talk) 02:06, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Feel free to use the format, and I'm sure you can find ways to improve it. (Sometime it might be useful for me to give the eastern and western theaters the same treatment, but Virginia and Tennessee will take more time than I really have right now) I've always thought it was weird to consider ND, UT, etc as ACW, but the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission classified Sand Creek massacre (not included on my list), Bear River, and 5 ND ones as Civil War, and a bunch of sources have picked up that classification. Stuff like Attack at the Lower Sioux Agency has basically nothing to do with the war, but it's hard to draw the line with the way CWSAC included some stuff.
Recently found out that a local library has a series of books about guerrilla operations in Missouri, so I'm gonna try to see if I can get a couple of those Missouri articles worked on. Ought to be an interesting exercise - one my ancestors was an officer in the Missouri State Guard and later CSA before being captured on a recruiting mission and executed for bushwhacking. Hog Farm Talk 05:51, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Hog Farm: The Civil War supplies no interruption to the Indian Wars in the historiography thereof, as much as I have read; they are on the whole a war between indigenous peoples and a colonizing force. Kit Carson, Dove Creek, the frontier cycle of violence during the Civil War, is just considered another chapter of the Indian Wars. Those events were also very important to the course of the Civil War itself, as for example Texas and Texans did not want to denude the frontier. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:10, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Boone County, Illinois, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Algonquin.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

DR

You have it right. Thanks. DGG ( talk ) 11:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Nice to hear from you. Hope you are well. BusterD (talk) 15:23, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Edits at Hogan & talk

I am pleased Special:Diff/1056256243. However I have been working over several hours this evening on/around the Hogan article/talk with regards to edits you made and a strikeout/change would be more appropriate. While you can argue there have been no posts to the talk page and you have done an edit summary and you can judge its within their rights I regard it as bad form to alter comments to talk discussions. Probably more serious is the feeding of discussions on the AfD, I'm a little horified about the fallout discussion from DGG's good faith !vote and comment. I'm also concerned you may have attributed a viewpoint to DGG they they haven't made .... per Supermann is gone, which is what DGG would have liked to do but was just too just too personally kind to do which I think essentially refers to a comment that Special:Diff/1055150104 was correct, and my reading of that doesn't seem to directly read that DGG would have liked to have blocked Supermann; but I concede I may be wrong. I think at time DGG makes very thoughtful nominations of marginals to determine what the community thinks of marginals, and your close was entirely endorsable. Anyway back to MOTD & the article, or maybe viewing Tate paintings or Dodder'ing study. Thankyou. 22:59, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

just wanted to mention that I do indeed make nominations of marginal articles in the hope the community can determine consensus; I do not feel personally concerned if the article is kept or not. DGG ( talk ) 02:25, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Blocked editor page moves?

You recently blocked User talk:Ruling party but they moved something like 200 tennis articles before the block. While some can be moved back, others will need administrative privilege to move back since he added items to the redirected page. Is there a bot that can move back all his moves or is Tennis Project out of luck in doing them all one by one? Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, November 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Please review your template for Dave Berkus per explanation below.

User_talk:Dberkus#Explanation_of_changes_by_subject_November_2021

1. Page had been "attacked" by unknown Wikipedia editor adding racially inappropriate photo and racially inappropriate description as well as sexually inappropriate label for Nate Berkus. 2. DBerkus removed both of these (twice attacked and removed) and in the process edited certain facts updating factual quantity of investments data from 2018 to 2021 and updated "Boards of Directors" section to remove obsolete information. 3. DBerkus added reference information to source of "FOSSE" sentence in first section. 4. DBerkus neither added nor changed any autobiographical information from original third party page posting other than these updates.

I believe the page conforms to the rules required for such pages and that the template should be removed.

Dberkus (talk) 18:32, 30 November 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dberkus (talk • contribs)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Greeting

Hello, @BusterD: how are you? hope you are well Can you create an article about this person or review this He is a writer, journalist, Middle East correspondent for a well-known Turkish online newspaper Ensonhaber and translator I think he is notable if you have the time of course

Sources

Turkish Sources

Arabic Sources


The Turkish Editor 1990 has also posted a copy of the same message at User talk:WereSpielChequers. JBW (talk) 12:43, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

 Comment: this solicitation is from globally-blocked LTA, continuing their relentless quest to publish an article about themselves; see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/علي أبو عمر/Archive. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:31, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 13:54, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas, BusterD!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 01:07, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer.  :) BOZ (talk) 20:17, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:06, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, December 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year, BusterD!

Happy New Year!

BusterD,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi BusterD! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

done-dunino!

Here at User:Theleekycauldron/theleekycauldron's guide to prep set building :D it should be everything you need to know along the way! peruse before you go, but don't cram it—it comes with experience, and I know you're more than capable. Hope to see you around the prep sets :) cheers! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 11:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Probably WP:NOTHERE, what do you think?

So coming from this, they registered at precisely 1:36am in April 2021 with their first edit, then their second edit three minutes later then would go into hibernation for months, and would eventually return at precisely 9:08pm after 9 months of sleeping to make disparaging comments barely 8 minutes after at Power's TP. In my honest opinion that’s a WP:SLEEPER + throwaway account maintained by someone who clearly isn’t a fan of Power, in the very least that account is WP:NOTHERE, note that all their edits have been negligible. Celestina007 (talk) 06:23, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your common sense and for taking a moment offering it to me. I don't know why I didn't just block when it happened. Still a bit block shy... Then I got distracted by the dogs and later by a news article. When I read your message I thought it best to SPI. SPIs read the code completely differently than I do and they're cleverer at adding things up. BusterD (talk) 10:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
You did great. The SPI report yielded positive results and has put an end to their harassment. Celestina007 (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, January 2022

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:44, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:20, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

RE: Gringo RFC

Unfortunately, this was affected by [https://today.in-24.com/entertainment/News/328586.html an unrelated event]. However, the form people comment points out the current version does give undue weight to one side, an issue that didn't exist before September. Before that date, the page was stable. The way I see the RFC, there is at least a consensus that the current lede is to be modified, but it is just missing the how. (CC) Tbhotch™ 19:31, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

  • AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
  • The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Temp block of user that is obviously only vandalizing pages

Hey! I noticed that you blocked DonkeyKong65 for only 31 hours, when it was clear all they were doing is vandalizing pages. May I ask why you didn't give them an indefinite block? Not trying to question your actions, just curious. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 22:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

I blocked them as soon as I saw any misbehavior (seems like blanking AIV five times would have drawn some attention). Wasn't worried about the block duration at the instant I blocked. Was trying to apply a block ASAP. Thanks for the contact. Do we have a sock master in mind? BusterD (talk) 22:25, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
No I don't since I don't know if they're a sock or not. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 22:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
From further reading their edits, it seems like they came in cold on 2/12 with a good faith interest in images of sports figures. Nobody welcomed them then. It seems while they went unnoticed, they made image changes and even reverted themselves. Normal newbie behavior. Then they got into a dispute on a high visibility page Bob Griese (where it appears you two met). From there they got frustrated and just started doing dumb stuff like blanking (which is a workable short-term strategy on one's own talk). From my reading, you and I disagree this is an editor unwilling to change behavior. If I'm proven wrong, then I'll indef. Until then, I'll attempt to AGF. BusterD (talk) 22:39, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Ah ok. I didn't see their edit history since usually if a user acts like this, it's either a compromised account, or they have no interest in being here to edit constructively. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 23:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Also I saw them first on their AIV report which was why I went to that page. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 23:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
I'll grant I came to the situation with some preconceptions. With a username like DK65 I was assuming they'd be a sockpuppet. My block of DK65 is actually only the 42nd time I've blocked anyone so I'm still 'gun'shy. I was pleased to have the toolset when I saw the blanking however. Finally a cop around... I've taken a liberty of welcoming the user (with test edits template). If the user wants to contribute, they can see a stick AND a carrot. It will reveal much if they choose to blank the welcome message. They've demonstrated they will blank stuff they disagree with; let's see if they choose NOT to blank this. During my RfA I described how I felt being blocked. I wish that feeling on nobody except actual malicious offenders. BusterD (talk) 23:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm a bit confused as to why you'd immediately assume they're a sock (presumably) because they have numbers in their username. Also, are you saying that you've been blocked before? If you have I"m actually a bit surprised you've become an admin. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 23:31, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
When I see any new username that took all of three seconds to choose, I think sock. Some preconceptions are based on long experience. BTW, lots of admins have been blocked at some point. None of us are flawless. Not even the very best of us. So let's say DK65 becomes a regular contributor, does the right thing. Two years from now, that editor runs for the mop, I'd be the first to !vote support, announcing I'd once blocked them. As I explained in answering a question in my RfA I was once caught in a rangeblock. I was incredibly angry. I had no clear way to express myself about it on-wiki (it was a range block, so I didn't get any talk page block notification to which I could respond), so I emailed an admin with whom I'd previously emailed. It was infuriating because I was more easily infuriated back then. BusterD (talk) 23:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Ah ok. I thought the getting blocked ruined your chances of becoming an admin because it proved that you would have a hard time being trusted with the administrator tools (since those require a user to understand Wikipedia's policies very well) but as you explained clearly not. I don't really like that judgment of "if a username seems generic its a sock". Technically you could apply that to my own username (which there have been 2 other instances of my current username I say current because I was renamed) due to it's simplicity, Blaze being another term for fire and Wolf being, well, the English term for Canis lupus. Doesn't necessarily mean anything (or at least, doesn't mean anything that I'll openly share), but I'm definitely not a sock (although my alt will be if either this account or that one become compromised). ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Also scrolling up reveals that I've encountered you previously. Obviously I've completely ditched the "welcome before warning" mentality since I read somewhere that welcoming a user doesn't really encourage them to remain on Wikipedia. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:03, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
I thought your "welcome before warning" was an important message. In the moment it freshly reminded me that new users see things differently and their vision of the project is just as valid as mine. As it turns out my response to you then was mentioned several times in my admin discussions. BTW, I'm not saying a username automatically makes me think a new user is a bad actor. I'm saying when dealing with vandals, some username formats seem to occur frequently. My hackles go up. I hope this brief chat with me has shown you I try to AGF even when I'm faced with critique, opposition and outright vandalism. AGF is a game changer for me. See my User:BusterD/FFFearlesss subpage for more about that. I don't necessarily welcome new users just for their sake or whether or not it actually helps; I welcome because that's how I'd like to be treated. Assuming good faith helps my worldview. BusterD (talk) 00:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Second French intervention in Mexico changes reverted

Hi, I just made a few edits to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_French_intervention_in_Mexico and they were reverted as incorrect. I changed the year 1862 to 1861 at the beginning (As in the sentence "On 8 December 1862, the three navies disembarked..."). I think the reversions are incorrect. To see this, just look at the rest of the article, which contradicts these dates. For example, see the sentences in the section "The Tripartite Expedition" that read:

"On December 14, 1861, a Spanish Fleet sailed into and took possession of the port of Veracruz. The city was occupied on the 17"

Then in the next section ("The French invasion begins") we have "On April 9, 1862, agreements at Orizaba between the allies broke down...". So it definitely must have been December 1861 that the intro section wants to reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SittingPlant (talk • contribs) 20:34, February 26, 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for engaging on this. I am wrong. I am so very sorry. I have reverted my changes, admitted I blew this call. It turns out an ip editor inserted this and other misinformation in this edit back in January. Thanks for your eyes on this subject and thank you especially for pursuing my error. That makes us friends. BusterD (talk) 20:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
No worries! :)

The Signpost: 27 February 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Use of "union" in American Civil War articles

Buster,

That's quite a long entry in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 165. I will read it later and perhaps have more to say. But I'll give you a quick reply for now. I read and enjoyed Seidule's book, Robert E. Lee and Me, and I take his point about using "U.S. Army" instead of "Union army"; it is important to emphasize that we should not view blue and gray as equal, but blue as a nation and gray as traitors to that nation. But I don't believe that ceasing to use "Union army" or "Union" generally will affect how people view the conflict (whereas ceasing to use "War Between the States" will). Certainly writing "union" in lower case has no effect except to appear to be an error.

Everyone uses "Union," and that does not mean that they view blue and gray as equal. I have been reading extensively about the Civil War for 20 years (I've published reviews of more than 25 books on it, and I don't mean at amazon.com), and that's the basis on which I say that everyone uses "Union." (By the way, I have little interest in military history; my interest lies in the law and politics and personalities of the Civil War.) Also by way, I am a northerner, so I am on the same side as you; I just don't think that ceasing to use "Union" will advance our side. (I see that you're from N.C.; I have one connection there: My daughter went to Guilford College in Greensboro and, after she graduated 20 years ago, married a local boy and has remained there, so I've spent quite a bit of time in that city.)

I will quote you something that you might interest you. It is from The Fiery Trial, by Eric Foner, pp. 267-268:

The Gettysburg Address also contained a subtle but significant shift in wording. Since the mid-1840s, in referring to the United States Lincoln had generally used the word "Union," a polity composed of individual states, rather than "nation," a unitary entity. In his message to Congress of July 1861, Lincoln had referred to the Union over forty times and the nation only three. Now, he spoke of the nation five times and did not mention the Union at all. In this, the speech reflected the explosive growth of national self-consciousness that arose from the Civil War.

Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

  • The lc union was indeed an error on my part. I can find no deep disagreement with your comments and very much appreciate the Foner quote. This is a subject we'll all be discussing down the road, for generations. The discussion which I referenced concludes largely as your position holds. The word "union" (intentional lower case) charts such an interesting course in late 19th century American English vernacular. It is very nice to interact with you and I'm delighted to see your activity on the ACW article. If I can be helpful please call on me! BusterD (talk) 23:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIV, February 2022

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

A block is needed on Madreterra

Hi, Buster. I think a block is needed for this user, whose talk page is filled with unheeded warnings for violating WP:V/WP:NOR/WP:CS, which go all the way back to May 2013, just a few months after they started editing, with no indication that they heeded or even responded to them. The most recent violation was this addition of uncited material to Ronald Paul Bucca. Looking through some of his recent other edits, I see other additions of uncited information, such as here and here. Please help. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry

I did not see the article before editing Civil War. Sorry about that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteelerFan1933 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Adoption

Hello, BusterD,

I have recently been unadopted by bop34, and I was wondering if you could adopt me. Can you please adopt me?

Sincerely, SteelerFan1933 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteelerFan1933 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

You are adopted. So to speak. Ask away. If I were you, I'd start by finding the quick-fail criteria for good articles to see where we are right now. I'd say the article is in a weak B-class now, possible even a legitimate C. BusterD (talk) 05:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Get into the habit of signing all your talk posts by placing four tildes (~~~~) after your post. This lets everyone know who posted and when they did so. BusterD (talk) 05:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I will do it from now on. SteelerFan1933 (talk) 18:11, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You!

The Helping Hand Barnstar
Thanks for helping out so much with the new user at WP:RPP. I was reading over the talk-page from after my previous message and the level of care and assumption of good faith you put in there was delightful to see and something I strive for as I try to become a better editor. Thank you for being an example for the community. TartarTorte 01:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
  • What a nice thing to say! I'm feeling pedagogical I guess. I get the impression that the new user doesn't use English as their primary language, but when someone new engages in any disagreement, I jump on the opportunity to be kind. You never know who that editor is going to turn out be years later. Thanks for the shiny new star. If I can be of any assistance to you, feel invited to ask for me. Have a nice night. BusterD (talk) 01:13, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Need page protection Band in China

Hi, Buster. An anonymous IP editor keeps removing material from the Band in China article. Although I've reverted, and attempted to place warnings on two of the IP pages they've used to do this ([5], [6]), they've done it a third time, from a third IP account. Can you protect that article? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 13:38, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Glad to help. Keep updated please. BusterD (talk) 16:11, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 March 2022

  • Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:49, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, March 2022

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Happy April 1

Don't open this!
What the?!



Happy April Fool's Day! Thanks for your contributions to improve the dissemination of free knowledge to humanity! North America1000 15:16, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Check it!

deja vue?

Special:Contributions/Lskkls16 --Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:12, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

That is very disappointing but not totally unexpected. Very appreciate the heads up. Do what must be done. I'll stand by my kid. BusterD (talk) 23:02, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
They have BOLD going for them... BusterD (talk) 23:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Not sure it's your kid. After accusing me of elitism, they vanished. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:37, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
l'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace --Frederick the Great --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Every time I see those words I hear George C. Scott's distinctive French. BusterD (talk) 18:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
I was eleven. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:23, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Me too, but I lived next to an enormous military complex and saw the film in the company of several hundred US soldiers, sailors and airmen. Their company and rapt attention made an impact. BusterD (talk) 19:26, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Wow. There were probably children of men who served under Patton. That must have been an amazing experience for them --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Such movies were popular among the large body of individuals making their way as new service people. My father was a WWII-era non-com who kept them all moving in roughly the same direction. Our attending movies was part of the social responsibility of a senior non-comm's family. Best of all, we got to watch flights of Zeros fly over Pearl Harbor in formation while my dad was acting as an extra in Tora Tora Tora. It was freakin' amazing. I was NOT allowed to sell my Navy Times from ship to ship during the filming, but was still allowed on post to sell at the corner. When the movie was released, our school, along with lots of others, was bussed to gigantic movie theater in downtown Honolulu to watch the movie in the first week. BusterD (talk) 19:38, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Awesome. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
It was. BusterD (talk) 19:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I actually relate to his compulsivity . My OCD, or Aspergers, or whatever came in handy for RCP. Never got tired making many repetitious edits quickly. Though I think it to early to send him in that direction. I think the current taskset will be helpful to him.~~~~ --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2022 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship Game

On 5 April 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2022 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship Game, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 04:45, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

puzzled

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BusterD/Archive_17&oldid=1180731125"