Jump to content

User talk:PhilKnight/Archive107

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

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. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Season's greetings and Merry Christmas to you and your family. Have a wonderful holiday season. Cheers! RV (talk) 02:57, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Vague remarks by IP in rangeblock

Hi PhilKnight. You recently did a range block [1] on 2409:4000:0:0:0:0:0:0/24 for disruptive editing. Now an IP in that range has made some vague remarks about "taking further action". They admit to being tied to an SPI, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anshuman Tiwari Official. Do you think this is an implied legal threat? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:19, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drm310, that was a mistake, I only meant to block the /64 range. I have unblocked. Regarding the IP, it's possible to assume good faith and assume they meant take it to ArbCom or something. That said, if they admit being tied to an SPI, they probably deserve to be blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 21:10, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Sir I want to make a request. S Das0406 (talk) 08:44, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sir plz help me in editing a article.

Sir the page contain chasa caste provide some false and misleading information based on some book written. Which is not acceptable for the community. The content are very much offensive and false. The actual fact is different. If you know about odisha I can explain in detail. The history part of the content should be removed. As a new member I don't know how to edit and more over the page is now protected. Plz help. The content in that page will create social disharmony in my state. S Das0406 (talk) 08:57, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plz help

Plz help S Das0406 (talk) 14:04, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Less than 48 hours after your unblocking S Das0406 (talk · contribs) on their pledge not to threaten legal actions, they made this edit including a proposal to take Wikipedia and/or another editor to an official government commission in India, the National Commission for Backward Classes aka OBC Commission, presumably for official action or response. Not a lawsuit threat, per se, but clearly an "other government process" under LEGAL. Also pinging @RegentsPark:. FWIW, regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 21:16, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @TransporterMan: Indeffed. Partly for that, mostly because of their disruptive POV pushing more generally. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:45, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About the complaints u received.

I got a notice about my discussion on some talk page, yes I do raise my voice against some editors but no where I gave any legal warning to any editor after you unblock me. But still if u think it was a mistake I will not ask to talk any type of action on my account. But yes I do believe some editors are deliberately using their power while creating some Wikipedia pages where they are very selective to some issues. Here I will rest my case . Was not so good but definitely nice experience with u all. Thank you sir. S Das0406 (talk) 22:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi PhilKnight! 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)[reply]

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) 00:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)

Sayed dynasty -Dehli sutanate.

Hi hope you are doing well. I wrote to you about Sayed dynasty. The mention of Afghan, in the origin section (as i said you can see in history and talk page)is very necessary as per various important reasons. I provided both primary and secondary sources ( you can see in both history and talk page) that out-weigh the other 2 theories- specially the second one which have no support at all. But for "various reasons" it gets deleted by a specific user. I have seen you contributing and solving issues like this. I really hope this time you come with a solution. It may be in the form of inviting third party, making Wikipedia to intervene or something else ,which you might know better. Thank you and have a good day.84.211.45.132 (talk) 22:06, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I was wondering whether you have studied my case and came to a conclusion?. As i said before the evidence is overwhelming specially about an article where there is -very few- literature "if any" is available. There is the generally rejected sayyed claim and then the Afghan claim for which i provided enough primary and secondary sources, and mind it i repeat myself, there is very little known about them. All i am asking is the mention of Afghan too in the origin section of both khizr khan and sayed dynasty page. Thank you.84.211.45.132 (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think you should organize a RfC. PhilKnight (talk) 00:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for reply. I am not sure how to do it, can you help me with that? And also will it attract neutral editors to contribute? thank you.84.211.45.132 (talk) 11:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should be fine on your own. Just read Wikipedia:Requests for comment. PhilKnight (talk) 09:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I think we have solved the whole issue. First i provided him primary source muntakhabul lubab, where is clearly says they were afghan.Then i provided 2 secondary sources for him, 1- (The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians: The Muhammadan Period) where he said it is very old source and the 2-(African Elites in India: Habshi Amarat), where he said the whole book should be readable. and now i think there is -no- excuse left for him in my 4th source and 3rd scondary source by a very well respected professor
https://books.google.no/books?id=XrJoBgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+of+india++khizr+khan++afghan+john+e+mcleod&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9oby195P2AhUXvosKHaGyAD8Q6AF6BAgGEAI#v=snippet&q=khizr%20khan&f=false
I think now you should go ahead and edit both sayed and khizr khan page. It would be the right thing to do. Hope you do it soon. have a good day.84.211.45.132 (talk) 19:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the talk page you have yet to establish consensus. PhilKnight (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But if you look at other two "theories" this one is way powerful backed up with tone of reliable sources. There was no consensus, lets say about punjabi origin but some how its there, though with a very weak and -only- source. And the sayed origin is generally rejected (it is stated in the article too). So i don't see any reason why we have to establish consensus about something -extremely obvious?84.211.45.132 (talk) 19:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Without consensus you are going to be reverted when you make your changes. PhilKnight (talk) 09:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I provided 2 other reliable modern published secondary book sources, but as expected he refused.Now i cannot do anything else. This undermines wikipedias credibility very much. Now only you can intervene and do the right thing. Thank you. 84.211.45.132 (talk) 12:32, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to disappoint you, but I am not going to intervene. PhilKnight (talk) 12:35, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight

I see you have oversighted that page, but it is still visible in the logs. Is there anything to do about that? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 09:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have now oversighted the logs. PhilKnight (talk) 09:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Borhan18

Just a heads up that he has a sock from 2018: User:Rezowansiddki. I don't think anyone picked up on it at the time. Hasn't been active since 2018, but might make sense to block now given the indef block in place for the other account. Singularity42 (talk) 20:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I have blocked the account. PhilKnight (talk) 21:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ClueBot NG impostor needs TPA revoked

Hey! The user ClueCat NG needs their TPA revoked. ALso, a user on my talk page used a template only intended for files as satire and doesn't seem to understand the issue with that. Mind helping me out by explaining? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 02:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the user on my talk page, zzuuzz took care of that since I had asked them but wasn't sure if they were still on. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 02:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 03:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for removing redirect "Donald Tramp" → "Donald Trump"!

Not a supporter of him myself, but it's still libelous. QuickQuokka [talk] 16:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PhilKnight: No problem! Literally like 3 clicks lol 😂. QuickQuokka [talk] 16:34, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hello 🤣

hi Vibhuwastaken (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and a question

Thank you for the CU work here. I know this question is adding to your plate, but should a 'discovered' sock of this sort be added to the sock-master's archive? Thanks again for your help. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 02:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JoJo, no there's no need to add to the archive. PhilKnight (talk) 09:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

IP evading block

Hi PhilKnight, earlier today you blocked User:109.52.244.252. These recent edits by User:109.52.244.135 at User talk:Kuralesache are obvious block evasion. Firefangledfeathers (talk | contribs) 19:00, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Firefangledfeathers, I have blocked 109.52.244.135 for 48 hours. PhilKnight (talk) 19:10, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Block of JohnPro898

Can you bump the block of Mohamed09252 up to indef? They're the sockmaster of JohnPro898. I have an SPI opened at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mohamed09252. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. PhilKnight (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Much appreciated. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel req

Hello, could you please hide content and edit summary that edited by Special:Contributions/106.184.133.146 because of RD1 (Song lyrics)? Thanks. SCP-2000 15:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. PhilKnight (talk) 16:19, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

[2] I can somewhat understand the reply to NM, though I think your revert is as unnecessesary as my comment. But why revert my reply to BangKettle? ES might have helped. Neither seems very rollbacky to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:26, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea how that happened. Sorry about that. I have self reverted. PhilKnight (talk) 09:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All good! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:31, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ring-a-ding, baby!

Hello, PhilKnight. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:30, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still quite shaky with all the Lua stuff, so I was wondering if you could help create a {{Find sources Japan}} template so we could use the various sources they use in the three templates they use over on jawiki: ja:Template:Find sources, ja:Template:Find sources mainspace, and ja:Template:Find sources video games japanese language. This would make finding Japanese sources a lot easier by providing links to many of the best sources in Japan. I made this module, but I don't want to make more until I'm sure of what needs to be done. I appreciate any help. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't know how to Lua. PhilKnight (talk) 06:11, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I asked because you created some of the existing ones (or at least the software shows that you created them). Who might be a better person to ask? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:50, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I don't know. PhilKnight (talk) 07:21, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lick Force

Wow, that was quick with the block. Thank you - it makes my life easier. Cheers The joy of all things (talk) 06:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PhilKnight/Archive107&oldid=1121999317"