User talk:Guerillero/Archives/2020/February

DYK for The Minute Man

On 4 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Minute Man, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Minute Man (pictured) was cast from the metal of ten cannons captured from the Confederate Army during the American Civil War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Minute Man. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Minute Man), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Guerillero/Archives/2020,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

• There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
• A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
• A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
• A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Block active?

You seem to have blocked mr. Bookscale. But it looks that he is still able to edit. Or did I get fooled by the timestamp and time-zones? The Banner talk 11:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I am still rather unfamiliar with partial blocks and did not notice this was one of them. The Banner talk 11:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, partial blocks are weird --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 15:53, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Learning moment... The Banner talk 16:08, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Block

Hello Guerillero, I want to express my disappointment (to you) in receiving a block. I won't appeal it in good faith, but I feel it's unfair that I encounter a rude user and complain about it, don't even get the chance to respond to my own complaint, nothing happens to him and I end up being the one who suffers consequences.

My first revert was because no one contacted me on my talk page to discuss the issue. My second lot of edits were in response to The Banner's concerns (which I had to raise with him). Third, I reverted my own edits while a BLP discussion was ongoing and at the time you blocked me, I hadn't edited the page at all for two days. I didn't have any intention of editing it at all until that issue was resolved.

The issue I added material about is currently front-page media in Australia (and has been for some time). I added the material in good faith because the restaurant in question that is currently listed on the article (which I didn't add myself) implies it is open, which is inaccurate. The closure of the restaurant, and the reason behind it, has been repeated many times in media articles. The accusation that I was trying to imply "guilt by association" by adding content is unfair.

This entire issue has made me really disappointed with administrator action - rudeness like what I encountered from another user is not on (case in point - "And I wasn't, so take up that issue with someone else." & "if you have no understanding of English language syntax, transitions, logical structures, and writing style" in this diff), and being blocked for complaining about it makes me feel administrators don't care about it either, and my contributions, which were well-intentioned, are not welcome. If I can't ask an administrator for assistance in dealing with incivility, who am I supposed to go to? Bookscale (talk) 09:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Minor detail: my opening of the discussion on his talkpage at 14 February 19:11 versus his opening of the discussion on my talkpage at 14 February at 21:37. So he did not initiate the discussion, I did. The Banner talk 11:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I apologise, The Banner, and appreciate you pointing that out, I have struck the wording out which was in error (you contacted me after I reverted). If it's ok, I'd prefer that this conversation now be restricted to Guillero and me, and not have third parties involved. Thanks. Bookscale (talk) 11:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Bookscale: Between the AN/I thread and the BLP/N thread, nobody else saw this as a blockable personal attack. OTOH, you were edit warring with Calton et al. to keep in content that, at its face, violates our Biographies of living persons policy. --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 19:48, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement appeal by Oldstone James

Hi. Just notifying you that I have copied their appeal from their talk page to AE. Regards, El_C 02:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

@El C: Thank you! --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 15:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung closed

An arbitration case regarding Kudpung has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• For his failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, Kudpung's administrative user rights are removed. He may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.
• Kudpung is admonished for failing to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator. In future, he is urged to ensure that he remains civil in his interactions with both new and regular editors, and responds to feedback on his conduct objectively and with an assumption of good faith.
• Arbitration is supposed to be the final step in the dispute resolution process. The community is reminded that attempting to have a community-wide discussion of problematic behavior early on can prevent unnecessary escalations.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 22:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)