Jump to content

User talk:General Ization/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16→Archive 20

Robert Kraft Edit Reverts

Hello,

My apologies to be a bother, but I recently edited the Robert Kraft article on Wikipedia to include a sentence about him going to the Mayweather vs. McGregor fight. However, you later reverted the article back to the state it was in prior to its update. From what I understand, you mentioned that the reason that my edits were reverted were due to them being considered "news".

I understand the desire to keep Wikipedia strictly factual, and appreciate your moderation, but at the same time, I'm curious as to why the sentence about the Mayweather vs. McGregor fight was removed, but the paragraph above it (about a video tape featuring Kraft helping Rikki Noel Lander with an audition) can remain on the page when it is of a similar nature.

Given that Kraft regularly spends time with other celebrities, shouldn't we be allowed to mention that in his profile in some way? (If so, is there any preferred way that would be best to do that?)

Please see below for the URL that shows the particular edit that I am referencing in the above question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Kraft&oldid=819192938

Thank you for your time. I appreciate it.

Thanks!

108.7.222.161 (talk) 03:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a newspaper, nor a celebrity gossip column. The fact that Kraft may (or may not) have attended a fight, with a celebrity or by himself, is not encyclopedic. That I didn't remove some other content from the article that might be equally unencyclopedic says nothing about the content I removed. See WP:OTHERSTUFF. General Ization Talk 03:04, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
In addition, Wikipedia can never be used as a source for itself, which you attempted to do with your second citation. General Ization Talk 03:19, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Mulligan

Thanks for catching that. Boomer VialBe ready to fight the horde! • Contribs 00:57, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

2/2nd Anti-Tank Regiment (Australia)

Hi, This unit did not serve in Malaya. The Australian force in that campaign was the 8th Division (Australia), which did not include this regiment - its anti-tank regiment was the 2/4th. The 2/2nd would have been in the Middle East at the start of the Malayan Campaign with the rest of the 7th Division, and then crossing the Indian Ocean with that division during the later stages of the campaign. I presume that the individuals unfortunate enough to have been captured were either sent to Malaya as individuals, or were actually members of the advance party of Australian troops which arrived in Java (the 7th Division's initial destination) in early 1942 and were interned in Malaya. If a significant part of the regiment had been in Malaya, they would have all been killed or captured. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 05:41, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Can't argue with your obviously better knowledge of the facts, just wanted to make sure you were aware of the cited source that seems to contradict your assertion (your presumption notwithstanding). General Ization Talk 05:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
The source doesn't "contradict my assertion". It refers to a single person, not this unit, and so didn't actually support the claim made in the article. Please see chapter 20 of the relevant volume of the official history of Australia in the Second World War for a description of where the 7th Division (which included this regiment) was over this period. A listing of the Australian Army units which fought in Malaya is also available here. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Manning

Is there a reason you are willfully deleting truthful and adequately sourced information? Wikipedia is an encyclodpia, not a platform for you to shill your personal political ideology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BingBong321 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@BingBong321: Chelsea Manning was acquitted of aiding the enemy (treason). Canada can call her whatever they like, but Manning was not convicted of treason. Hence your description of Manning as a traitor is false. We do not publish false information here. In addition, you can hardly speak to me about my "personal political ideology" (about which you know nothing) while you wear yours on your sleeve. Read and understand WP:NPOV. General Ization Talk 02:25, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
This is for all your tireless and heroic efforts last night defending the article Yahweh from our perennial troll friend Wittgenstein123, even in the face of some seriously deranged (and somewhat incomprehensible) attacks on your personal character. I am sure he will probably return eventually, but, for now, I just wanted to let you to know how much I appreciate your work. Thank you so much! --Katolophyromai (talk) 02:27, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

bad edit General

This edit bout lesotho seems to be bizzare. Lopethanekoase (talk) 09:58, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for helping out on the Tom Cotton vandal today! KNHaw (talk) 02:15, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

hi

DUBA21 (talk) 03:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on Enigma machine. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. The two warning were unnecessary, and showed a lack of sensitivity to a veteran editor. scope_creep (talk) 21:46, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

@Scope creep: It has nothing to do with assuming good faith. When it has already been pointed out to you that there is not a consensus for the removal of content from Enigma machine, and I have already suggested that you start a conversation to seek that consensus, your removal of the content a second time without discussion is not constructive editing and does not demonstrate good faith. You have been here long enough to understand this. General Ization Talk 21:51, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Sorry. scope_creep (talk) 21:56, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Pierce Brosnan got an honorary OBE

As he is Irish not british i was pointing that out. How is that vandalism ?. Cop on will you 92.251.135.193 (talk) 20:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

List of Iranian people by net worth

I had to remove the PROD as there had already been a deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Iranian people by net worth. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@CambridgeBayWeather: Yes, the last PROD was in 2013 (5 years ago) and clearly from reading it there was more content there then (though much apparently questionable) than there is now. The basis now is that the article is entirely useless, not the argument for deletion then. So what is the correct process to nominate for deletion? General Ization Talk 03:00, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Stupid as it sounds a second AfD. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 05:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
No, actually that makes perfect sense; I just wasn't thinking of it. General Ization Talk 13:40, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Aks 2001 Film

1. did Raghavan's corpse get burnt into ashes before Spirit entered Amitabh?

2. Is this [Supernatural Thriler Film] realy [Fictional] without [Happy Ending]?(73.220.163.13 (talk) 19:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)).

I have no idea. My sole involvement with Aks (2001 film) has been to revert vandalism. You should be posting these suggestions on the article's Talk page, not on the individual Talk page of every editor who has recently edited the article. General Ization Talk 19:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
  • Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

  • A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Hey i am the copyright manager of Lulu Group International , Therefore i request you to revert the copyright deletion done by your side Mohammedjaseem66 (talk) 15:26, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

@Mohammedjaseem66: See your Talk page for information concerning the correct mechanism to prove your copyright on the material. In the meantime, it remains a copyright violation. General Ization Talk 16:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
@Mohammedjaseem66: P.S. - It will be much harder to accomplish this if you are blocked from editing, which you almost certainly will be if you continue. General Ization Talk 16:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I added a source

To the Travis Scott article, thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmythick (talk • contribs) 04:55, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Kyle Snyder as best pound-for-pound

Gen. Ization:

Sorry to bother you, but I just wanted to clarify that I changed Kyle Snyder's page to attribute him being considered the best pound-for-pound wrestler in the world to this page, which is on Flowrestling, a site that functions as a journalistic clearinghouse for wrestling news and coverage and isn't known to be biased, as least as far as I've been able to tell:

https://www.flowrestling.org/rankings/6031553-international-rankings-mens-freestyle/16541-kyle-snyder-settles-p4p-discussion

It's their most current ranking since it dates to the last World Championship. But no worries if it needs to stay off the page, just wanted to make sure you knew what the change was meant to be about.

Also I can't tell if it was you or someone else, the username looks defunct now, but this is why I've followed Mr. Snyder's career:

Sorry if this isn't the proper way to respond, but as you can see I don't have much time to edit on here. I have no familial relationship to Kyle Snyder, my handle is just a goofy personal nickname. He wrestled in my area in high school and I followed his career, and thought it'd be nice to work on his Wikipedia page since I was so impressed by how he handled himself in the limelight and how amiable he seemed to other wrestlers. And I'm not an IT professional but at one point had enough time to learn Wikipedia's codes. I'm sure Wikipedia's editors can edit his page for accuracy and otherwise, sorry for any trouble. Unkledaddy2017 (talk) 20:27, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

@Unkledaddy2017: Re: "... as well as the title of best pound-for-pound wrestler on the planet": Who awards the "title" of "best pound-for-pound wrestler"? Is that a competitive title, or just the opinion of a writer for Flowrestling? If the latter, the only way it should appear in the article is with dated, inline attribution ("In May 2017, Christian Pyles with Flowrestling called Snyder the best pound-for-pound wrestler in international competition"). If the former, you should make clear who awards that title and when it was awarded. General Ization Talk 03:02, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
@General Ization: Okay sorry about the lack of attribution, I attributed it to Flowrestling since it seems like it's an overall editorial decision in the same spirit that newspapers and Gatorade or whoever do their rankings and awards for athletes and not the decision from the one writer who happens to write up the article. Unkledaddy2017 (talk) 04:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
@Unkledaddy2017: Newspapers and Gatorade or whatever have advertising copywriters. We are editing an encyclopedia. That means we don't say that anything is the best or the worst, on the planet or anywhere else, without clearly explaining at what time, why and among what set. General Ization Talk 12:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

hi

thanks for policing wikipedia, i appreciate your efforts. Have a nice weekend :) Flylikeaseagull (talk) 19:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Nice revertin', Tex!

For this, you got to the revert before I did; I created WP:FGSUES just so I could cite it there. Dammit. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi General Ization!

Regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:46.91.28.107&redirect=no

Please make the effort to read my edit explanations and the page history. You accused me of unconstructive edits. I'm sure you act in the best intent, but you apparently didn't properly read the previous comments, nor did yo explain your opinion. Yes, your's is just an option. So please stop acting as if you were Justitia - though I have to admit you seem to be blind to the improvement I did. You are behaving like a bot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.91.28.107 (talk) 19:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I have read everything you have written. We will need to agree to disagree, which means you do not have consensus for this change (and in fact, with Oshwah, the consensus is against you). Please stop now. General Ization Talk 19:28, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Happy 12 year Anniversary

Happy 12 Year Anniversary for being on wikipedia! That is a long time! -Anna 2/17/18 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.138.24.174 (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Anna! General Ization Talk 22:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

User talk:109.153.91.71

I have to let you know that users are allowed to delete warnings on their own user pages, so I will have to ask you to not delete the warnings on User talk:109.153.91.71. CLCStudent (talk) 20:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

what

you deleted my change to kingdom hearts when the change was totally acceptable, i could potentially get banned soon for making changes like this!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KeybladeKingdom (talk • contribs) 19:52, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@KeybladeKingdom: Your change was unsourced. Combined with your prior POV edits, yes, you very likely will be blocked from editing. You might want to consider stopping now. 19:57, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I kind of agree with KeybladeKingdom, they didn't really do anything wrong, and their youtube is pretty cool too, maybey you should let some minor things like this slip so things aren't all so serious here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IdrinkBLEACH (talk • contribs) 23:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Removals by Special:Contributions/2602:306:8B8C:29A0:70A4:BD5C:FF8B:FDE4

This IP is going through almost every article and removing the same category. R9tgokunks ✡ 03:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@R9tgokunks: As well they might; as they have explained on your Talk page, the category should not remain on the page of everyone who at one time was a federal prisoner indefinitely. Discuss with them, please. General Ization Talk 03:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you General. I have changed dozens this evening and this editor has reverted all edits and accused me of vandalism. It would be very nice if they would engage in constructive discourse with me and understand my position rather than removing my edits, talk page discussion and accusations of my constructive conduct.2602:306:8B8C:29A0:70A4:BD5C:FF8B:FDE4 (talk) 03:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

The category is a general one, it's not "Current prisoners and detainees of the United States federal government" it's "Prisoners and detainees of the United States federal government", it's highly inappropriate to base it off of that kind of understanding. There was no consensus for these removals and you went on a removal spree, which i believed at the time constituted vandalism. I also can't understand half the things you have put on my talk page. The wording and /or syntax is wrong and it's all mushed together. R9tgokunks ✡ 04:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Seeing as it's not "Current and past prisoners and detainees", we must indeed assume that it applies to those who currently meet one or the other criterion. If you think that something else was intended, bring it up at WP:CATN. At this point, the IP's edits and mine are based on WP:COMMONSENSE. General Ization Talk 04:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I don't believe that removing valid content constitutes as using WP:COMMONSENSE. If the category is to be removed like you aim it to be, then it should be replaced with similar categories of "Current prisoners and detainees of the United States federal government" and "Past prisoners and detainees of the United States federal government." That just creates more work and takes up more storage space. R9tgokunks ✡ 04:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Also, that link constitutes a noticeboard that is no longer in use. R9tgokunks ✡ 04:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm only going to say this one more time: if you need clarification concerning the category, take it to WP:CATN. That's what that noticeboard is for. As it stands now, the IP's edits are based on a perfectly reasonable interpretation of the category's intent, with which I agree, and that suggests that you do not have consensus to reinstate the removed content. General Ization Talk 04:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Ah, yes. I see now that WP:CATN is no longer in use. I'm sure there's somewhere else to take this matter. General Ization Talk 04:58, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Given that all of the articles affected are biographies, and many are biographies of living persons (who indeed may be most directly affected by miscategorization), I suggest WP:BLPN. General Ization Talk 05:01, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm not going to start the discussion now, because I'm going to bed. If it's important enough to you, go right ahead. In the meantime, leave the IP (who I ask to refrain from further edits of this type until the question is raised properly) alone. General Ization Talk 05:07, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I am the ip in question. I will refrain from any and all further similar edits for now. Thank you General. I appreciate your assistance and input.2602:306:8B8C:29A0:70A4:BD5C:FF8B:FDE4 (talk) 05:36, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I find it ironic to be asked to be the one to make amends or leave the IP alone, when the IP clearly was being WP:UNCIVIL and personally attacked my age/intelligence:

Oh are you older than 12? I would have guessed about seven, seeing that you do not know what the category means or even know who Al Capone or Charles Manson were?

and then refused to apologize, instead saying I should be the one to apologize:

Well, it would seem that you have come to your senses and are now working with collaboration in mind. I can merely see it from my side with your calling me a vandal, disruptive and an editor that would surely be blocked. You came off as stuffy and disrespectful to someone that was being constructive and trying to help with the work of Wikipedia. You assume because I am an IP, I have not been here before. In fact, I have been an editor on and off for at least ten years (though did not try to "pull rank" on you). Perhaps, if you apologize and admit that you were incorrect in your above assertions. I would reciprocate with an apology of my own. You sir, are the person who should be kinder and calmer now that all your reverts have been reversed by the General. (Thank you to the General). In closing, I surely hope that you have learned a thing or two about Categories and who belongs in them and when. Have a good night and I accept your apology!

R9tgokunks ✡ 06:13, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

The IP is also subject to a dispute with another user, one Xenophrenic (talk · contribs), at [1] for disruptive editing. R9tgokunks ✡ 06:19, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not particularly concerned about what you find ironic. And if you are tweaked about that (rather minor) level of incivility, you're in the wrong place. General Ization Talk 12:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi guys. I got pinged here, so I'll add my .02¢ to the discussion, though I'm only peripherally involved. I don't have the appetite to get into the "detainees" category dispute too deeply right now, but here are some quick observations for all parties to consider:

  • (1) I agree that on its face, it seems to be "common sense" that once a detainee dies or is released, they no longer fit the "detainees" category - unless the guidance at the category page explicitly includes "Past or present prisoners and detainees", which is not currently stated at the Category:Prisoners and detainees of the United States federal government page, so those deletions can be excused as good faith edits.
  • (2) However, many of the deletions were also of Category:American prisoners and detainees, which clearly states it does indeed include "past" detainees, so perhaps those out-of-process deletions were an oversight?
  • (3) I also note that while the first category doesn't explicitly include "past" detainees, it does contain a sub-category Category:Prisoners who died in United States federal government detention, which indicates to me that at least some of the "past" detainees (those who died) were still intended to be included in a subset of the category under discussion.

So while the initial deletions may have been made in good faith, the stronger argument supports changing edits like this one from a deletion into a category change. Change it to the "Prisoners who died..." subcategory instead. And on edits such as this one, the deletion of the "American prisoners and detainees" categories should be reversed as long as the guidance on that category continues to instruct us to include "past" detainees. If you want more information on why this category includes both "past" and current detainees, this discussion touches on several of the pro & con arguments made a decade ago on this very category (see also this edit).

While I've just given plenty of arguments in support of reinstating (or modifying) many of the deleted categories, there is a caveat. You'll note above that General Ization gave the excellent suggestion to raise your issue at WP:BLPN, and I can't stress enough that BLP concerns may supersede the guidance provided on category pages, and trumping my arguments. So let me echo GI's advice that you first raise your concern at BLPN to determine if there is any issue with leaving "detainee" categories on the biographies of living people. (FYI: Be sure you are well-versed in WP:BLPCAT and WP:CATDEFINING before presenting your concerns.) Then if you are really ambitious, you can attempt to get all of the aforementioned categories standardized across Wikipedia by starting a community-wide RfC on the matter at the Village Pump, but be sure to leave notifications at WikiProject Categories, WikiProject Detention Facilities, etc. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 21:14, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

I just wanted to make a point about vandalism and how Wikipedia is a good source of information even though it can be edited by random people like me. I know that what I did broke a rule and it wont happen again. Most of my edits are good (besides the last one ☺). Stega BOB (talk) 22:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Cad315 (talk) 02:33, 24 February 2018 (UTC) sorry about that edit, I did that cuz I saw a picture online that said dank meme starter pack, and dat boi was on there, thank you.

GOCE February 2018 news

Guild of Copy Editors February 2018 News

Welcome to the February 2018 GOCE newsletter in which you will find Guild updates since the December edition. We got to a great start for the year, holding the backlog at nine months. 100 requests were submitted in the first 6 weeks of the year and were swiftly handled with an average completion time of 9 days.

>>> Sign up for the March Drive! <<<

Coordinator elections: In December, coordinators for the first half of 2018 were elected. Jonesey95 remained as lead coordinator and Corrine, Miniapolis and Tdslk as assistant coordinators. Keira1996 stepped down as assistant coordinator and was replaced by Reidgreg. Thanks to all who participated!

End of year reports were prepared for 2016 and 2017, providing a detailed look at the Guild's long-term progress.

January drive: We set out to remove April, May, and June 2017 from our backlog and all December 2017 Requests (a total of 275 articles). As with previous years, the January drive was an outstanding success and by the end of the month all but 57 of these articles were cleared. Officially, of the 38 who signed up, 21 editors recorded 259 copy edits (490,256 words).

February blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 11 through 17 February, focusing on Requests and the last articles tagged in May 2017. At the end of the week there were only 14 pending requests, with none older than 20 days. Of the 11 who signed up, 10 editors completed 35 copy edits (98,538 words).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Corinne, Tdslk, and Reidgreg.

>>> Sign up for the March Drive! <<<
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

This

How exactly does this qualify as 'unconstructive'? Thanks. --2A00:23C4:3E02:B000:7052:962A:3AC:82BC (talk) 19:56, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Nazi Germany is an era in history, not a place at which a person was born. Warner Herzog was born in Germany. General Ization Talk 19:58, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, but my edit was in good faith and you accused me of vandalism. My edit did not constitute vandalism.--2A00:23C4:3E02:B000:7052:962A:3AC:82BC (talk) 20:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
The warning said your edits appeared to constitute vandalism. If they were not vandalism, well and good; don't repeat them, and you'll be fine. General Ization Talk 20:02, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
It was a good faith edit. Perhaps you should of left a note in your edit summery instead of just using RB and tagging. From where I am standing, I left a note explaining my edit - if you disagreed with that reasoning, then you should of explained why, it's just better that way and RB should only be used for cases of *blatant* vandalism and disruption. If you think my edit could of constituted vandalism, then you haven't given a reason as to why you reached this conclusion. Just a few pointers, I'm not new around here.--2A00:23C4:3E02:B000:7052:962A:3AC:82BC (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Since you are not new around here, perhaps you could better employ your talent and experience by editing the encyclopedia instead of leaving messages on my talk page. Describing a film director's birthplace as "Nazi Germany" was either vandalism or an extremely poorly considered edit. Take your pick, and, depending on which you choose, please amend your editing behavior in the future. General Ization Talk 20:17, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

added Lourdes†
removed AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V
† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

My content removal didn't look constructive because…

I just saw that comment of yours. What happened was I tried to make a small edit but for some reason it wasn't showing. So I kept trying but nothing. So I decided to see if any edit shows, I first removed a few texts & it didn't show then I removed an entire para but even that didn't show. In the end I decided to leave it as it was but that wasn't happening cause someone had already edited that page. I wondered who that was & saw that was you. I didn't obsessed over it cause that's what I was about to do before leaving that page & didn't realise you had left a comment for me. By the way the next day that small edit I made was showing, so may be there was some problem with it that the result of the edit wasn't showing immediately but after sometime.103.48.58.226 (talk) 08:18, 3 March 2018 (UTC)


Hi there,
I see you accuse me of vandalism on the Lesotho article, claiming that my edit contradicts the cited source. That's absurd, given that the very source referenced in the article reports that "the prime minister of the southern African kingdom of Lesotho has fled to South Africa, alleging a coup by the army and saying his life is in danger." The source also refers to that alleged coup as a 'coup' just like I had done. I guess you should have read what's actually written on the source. Peace.
—Mohahlaula (talk) 10:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Next shoes

In relation to the included photograph of the shoes on the Next plc page, I just thought it would be useful for readers to see current Next produces on the article. I take on board your comments, though. Goodreg3 (talk) 02:04, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Please discuss on the article Talk page, not my Talk page. General Ization Talk 02:05, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I put a message on your talk page as an apology, that is all. I'm not prepared to discuss on the talk page over a photograph of a pair of shoes, I just thought the photograph would be useful for visitors to the article, that is all. Goodreg3 (talk) 02:06, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
No need to apologize. But I still fail to see how a picture of one pair of used shoes provides any increased understanding of the breadth, variety or quality of Next plc's products to the reader. General Ization Talk 02:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction and advice

However, I altered the spelling to 'neighbor' to bring it in line with 'tumor', earlier in the paragraph. Is 'tumor' the correct spelling for that particular page, or does it need changing to 'tumour'? Muinn (talk) 19:20, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@Muinn: Tumour is the correct spelling for the article Marshall McLuhan, which includes a {{Use Canadian English}} template. General Ization Talk 22:27, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
@General Ization: Fixed. :) The difference between British and American English is one of my special(i)ties, but it never occurred to me that Canada might use the British version. Muinn (talk) 23:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with Womyn

Clearly it received the attention of some bored editors on International Women's Day. I tried to revert, but I seem to keep making errors in doing roll-backs. Are you able to take the article back to where it used to be a couple of days ago? If not, I'll go through it section by section. Thanks for any help you can offer. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 09:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! And another...

Much appreciated re Womyn. I don't usually have much need to tangle with bored vandals, thank goodness, and so perhaps lack the tools. Could I ask you to have a look at Kendrick School, and take appropriate action? Thank you. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 19:53, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done Think HickoryOughtShirt?4 has taken care of this for you. Kudos to them. General Ization Talk 21:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! Carbon Caryatid (talk) 15:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Daylight saving time

This article is in need of protection. It is savings time not saving time at least in the US, nor is it slaving time I assume anywhere. I missed the "IT’S DAYLIGHT SAVINGSSS" in the most recent edit but had changed that back before. Jackfork (talk) 23:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Read the article and its cited sources. The official name is and has been "Daylight saving time" (without an "s" after "saving"). Protection has already been requested. General Ization Talk 23:12, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
And did you read the paragraph in which "Daylight Slaving Time" appears? Its context is very clear if you actually read it instead of blindly reverting. Please do (read it, not blindly revert). General Ization Talk 23:19, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:BLPN#Floyd McKissick Jr.

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:BLPN#Floyd McKissick Jr.. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Fantastic beasts

hank you for your correction. But it is very hard to cite a reliable source, means it is very tought to type that http formats. I tried very hard but still i can't understand how to write http formats. But the information is correct and it is very necessary to add this on the Fantastic Beasts page. Please if you can able to do it i will be very grateful to you. Uchihaitachina (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2018 (UTC) Uchihaitachina (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

General, Sir,

I strongly disagree with your assertion that "CNN" is a reliable source on the matter discussed (Trump Organization revenue) There is a substantial debate as to Trump's net worth and in that debate is substantial evidence, including court records, that Trump relentlessly worked to inflate his revenue, wealth estimations, etc. at Forbes, at PrivCo., and succeeded. Rather than delve into the debate, best to remove the dodgy figures.

BUT the fundamental problem: CNN's headline says that the Trump Org is America's 47th largest company when we know (as I've cited elsewhere in the article) the Trump Organization is not a company. And thus the PrivCo claim is clearly nonsense and CNN is lazy for relaying the report. The Trump Org is a marketing name that refers to around 500 LLCs, partnerships, etc. (and we don't even know if he owned 100% of each, or 51% of each, or 2% of each, and we will never find out unless Trump puts out his tax returns in full).

And saying the Trump Organization is a company that has 22,000 employees is also bullshit because, again, it is not a company.

I'm not trying to make a value judgment but some basic logic is needed here.

So, respectfully, I will remove the revenues and employee #'s from the article.

Thanks!

Deletion of my comments

Freedom of speech — Preceding unsigned comment added by 07Alpha55 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@07Alpha55: WP:NOTFREESPEECH. General Ization Talk 17:19, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
So how does it interfere with the creation of Wikipedia? 07Alpha55 (talk) 17:20, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Spring (season)

I left a message on Talk:Spring (season)#Cultural associations, which you marked as minor with no edit summary to explain your reversion of my edits. Hope to hear from you. Thanks, Tony Holkham (Talk) 09:56, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

I think you already have, but please see my comments at Talk:Spring (season). General Ization Talk 20:37, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Camila Cabello and Matthew Hussey

Just a friendly note that after my edits on both were initially reverted I engaged the reverter on both talk pages and got no response on talk pages. -Aliceba (talk) 15:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@Aliceba: Good. However, when you are unable to achieve consensus on an edit that has been challenged, especially to a biographical article and when a policy has been cited in the reverts of your edit, that does not mean that you revert to your preferred version again. General Ization Talk 15:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@General Ization:: we report on significant others in infoboxes and most articles have a personal life section. --Aliceba (talk) 15:52, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we do report on "significant others" – generally spouses and committed partnerships, not every person that someone is dating at some given point in time. As both Cornerstonepicker and I have pointed out to you in our edit summaries, please see WP:NOTTABLOID (WP:NOTDIARY is a redirect to the same advice), particularly the last item there. General Ization Talk 15:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Also, by the way, please note that your edits at Talk:Camila Cabello will not have resulted in a successful ping. If you mistype the editor's username, then go back and change it, it will not re-ping the correct username. You did the same at Talk:Matthew Hussey. A ping on a given line is a one-time event. General Ization Talk 16:00, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Points well taken. --Aliceba (talk) 21:18, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Seasons

I didn't ignore it, I didn't see it - if I had seen it, I would have asked.

I find all five of those articles extremely frustrating, in their lack of a standardized format; and especially in the difficulty in finding, for the US, "when is the first day of spring", etc. The US follows equinoxes and solstices, as determined by the U.S. Naval Observatory, Astronomical Applications Department [2], rather than calendar months as some other countries do. Milkunderwood (talk) 22:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
That good Thewinrat (talk) 22:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Reverts

You have posted I am in an Edit war. The information that is being posted is untrue and incorrect, this user is spamming across several platforms with untrue information and sources that don't match up. I have warned already several times. user:76.88.82.246 he needs to be blocked. SoCalFlier (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

@SoCalFlier: Doesn't matter at this point whether the information is true or not, and the information appears to be reliably sourced (see Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth). If you continue to edit war over it, you will be blocked from editing. Read the warning on your Talk page carefully, as well as the information at the links in the warning message. Start discussing the issue on the article's Talk page rather than reverting. General Ization Talk 17:50, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
By the way, are you connected with Cal Jet Elite Air, and if so, how? General Ization Talk 17:52, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
@General Ization: Ok, well i am not the only one that has reverted these or changed this. I have sources close to company and as a business who is near the airport know what goes on and what is true.
@General Ization: It appears that Wozeynw39 has disregarded vandalism warnings and deleted text from the page. The material looked valid. Would you please restore it? Should I contact the person who put the vandalism block on the page to do that? Thanks.

Proxypivot (talk) 16:57, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Las Vegas shooting

Hi, General. About that Las Vegas shooting article: I appreciate your efforts to keep it clean and problem-free. I am trying to be conservative about protection, as we are supposed to be, but I have it on my watchlist and will continue to add semi-protection whenever it seems to be needed. If you notice the article getting out of control again, and I don't catch it promptly, ping me or tell me at my talk page; and if I don't respond (I do travel a fair amount), ask someone else. --MelanieN (talk) 03:02, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Why

Can you tell me why are you removing wha5 i put in — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaysonrivera787321 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

@Jaysonrivera787321: Because it is unsourced, and because it is false. The cited sources indicate that Cena is a producer of the show; they do not indicate that he is the show's creator. "Spotless was created by Simon Crossley and commissioned by ITV head of comedy entertainment Peter Davey."[3] 03:20, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

AN/I Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Please see WP:ANI#Patriciamontazaah (talk · contribs Sierrak28 (talk) 06:35, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

added 331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG
removed Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

  • Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
  • Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
  • The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
  • The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

  • A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
  • The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello (Adele song)

Hopefully this is a better solution. This is Paul (talk) 16:07, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

On second thoughts most of her stuff is co-authored, but none of her other song articles state the song was "recorded by" Adele, so to do so with this one seems a bit superfluous. This change was only introduced this morning by an anonymous user, and I really didn't think it was necessary. If you believe differently though then feel free to discuss it on the article's talk page. This is Paul (talk) 16:13, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:General_Ization/Archive_14&oldid=1045688182"