User talk:Ryanoo

Hello the link is not outdated the definition is the same. if you have a new link please send it to me. if there is to be a revision it should be in 2020. otherwise, U.S Census have not changed the definition. Please porvide link. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mameab1989 (talk • contribs) 09:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Your report on Mameab1989 (talk · contribs)

Hi, sorry but I couldn't see an obvious pattern of vandalism on this user. I'm sure I'm missing something and they are indeed close to edit warring but when in doubt, I prefer not to act on WP:AIV. You might want to raise this issue on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, though! If you need further help, please don't hesitate to post on my talk page or to put {{helpme}} followed by your question on this page. -- Luk ^talk 13:04, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Omar Gamal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minya (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Ways to improve Abdulaziz Waseli

Hi, I'm Boleyn. Ryanoo, thanks for creating Abdulaziz Waseli!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This has been tagged for 2 issues.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 20:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

AIV

Why are you reporting an editor that's already blocked? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:04, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Apologies are owed

I was investigating the disruption at Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories, and out of my pure stupidity I blocked you for edit warring for about two minutes. I've of course unblocked your account and I sincerely apologize for what happened. Good news to share though: Those two other accounts that kept adding vandalism have been indef'd ;-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your note of apology, I really appreciate it and the fact that you are reaching out. Mistakes happens as none of us are perfect as humans. Ryanoo (talk) 07:44, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar is awarded to those who show great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. – Lionel(talk) 11:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Here, here! Thanks for committing your time and energy toward recent changes patrolling and toward cleaning up vandalism - it's not easy work and it's quite a thankless undertaking; just know that your good work has not gone unnoticed and that we appreciate it very much! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:03, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

~Oshwah~ Thank you so much for your kind and supportive words :) Ryanoo (talk) 07:39, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

No problem; it's part of what I do around here ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, if you're not using Twikle to aid with reverting vandalism and warning users, I highly recommend it. You can enable the tool by navigating to your preferences page and clicking on the "Gadgets" tab. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:45, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much :) I will enable it.Ryanoo (talk) 07:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

No problem - I've been patrolling recent changes and reverting vandalism for quite a long time. If you have questions or need help with anything in that area, don't hesitate to leave me a message - I'll be glad to lend a hand and answer any questions. Keep up the awesome work! Continue reverting vandalism, warning users correctly, and reporting repeat offenders to AIV for a few more weeks - and I'll make you a rollbacker. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:58, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much :) Ryanoo (talk) 14:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

London Zoo

Hi Ryanoo, before I request further assistance for consensus, can you tell me why this trivia [1] was restored? Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about the random revert

We just so happened to be looking at Politics of the Philippines at the same time. TheConnorMan (talk) 08:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Never mind my friend :) Ryanoo (talk) 04:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:49, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind advice. Ryanoo (talk) 04:33, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Vandal

How do you report vandals. There is a lot of false information on Eric Bledsoe and Kostas Antetokonmpo. Sorry for my English Jerry44west (talk) 04:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Never mind my friend. I hope this link could help you [2] Ryanoo (talk) 04:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

hi why do you think my changes were not constructive?

Homosexual is considered outdated and offensive by many including GLAAD, https://www.glaad.org/reference/lgbtq, my changes brings the pages in line with standards that im sure are in the majority for wikipedia articles about gay induviduals, for example Ian Mckellen "He has been openly gay since 1988" i understand why you might think my change was meaningless but it clearly has meaning to a lot of people — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:1E7F:FB79:11E9:FACA:D13E:F2D5 (talk) 03:36, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Disagreement on the use of the word ‘vandalism’

Hello!

I wish to voice my concern for the incorrect use of the word ‘vandalism’ referring to the reason as to why you removed my edits. Time and time again these truths have been proven, shown by the overall animosity showed by liberals.

For example:

Green Mountain College and it’s Day of Absence and how it had degraded into a show of tribal disorder against white students and faculty to the point of hostages being taken and yelled at.

The recent attempt by one Steven Crowder to receive apology from a liberal woman who had openly demanded for his van (and passengers in said van) to be firebombed on Twitter; note this threat was also accompanied by his location.

The case of Samantha Ray Myers who had raped her ex boyfriend at machete point yet has not received any charges of sexual misconduct or rape. Including the news outlets clearly avoiding the obvious term of rape.

There are plenty of examples still out there and I will be happy to provide them upon request and I would love to hear your side of this as well.

Soulishar (talk) 04:41, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Remember to warn users ;-)

Hey man, thanks for taking the time to patrol recent changes and revert vandalism. It's a thankless job and I appreciate all the help that I can get. Just remember that after you revert such edits to warn the users; else I won't be able to justify blocking them if the disruption continues and they won't ever be asked to stop ;-). Thanks again, and keep up the excellent work! Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:46, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@~Oshwah~ I am sorry for the late reply, I just noticed your message right now. I would like to thank you for your kind reminder and advice, I will try my best to warn every user in the right way. Thank you again for making Wikipedia a better place :). Ryanoo (talk) 18:19, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

No problem :-). I hope your day is going well and I wish you happy editing. Keep up the excellent work! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:22, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Stoke Gifford

Hi Ryan. Re your revert here, do you think "Alex Stedman" might be notable? Many Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:22, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Line

Middayexpress? check this [3] [4] 84.0.46.185 (talk) 00:59, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Hello, I'm Ronhjones. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition at [:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arboleh&diff=prev&oldid=853160616]. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. If you put in a "sock" template, then you must complete the job and go to WP:SPI and file the proper report, otherwise you are harassing the user Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 14:37, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@Ronhjones  Thank you for your message. This Somali user is a very persistent sock puppeteer who has been using many fake accounts in order to promote his racist Afrocentric agenda and vandalize Wikipedia, this user is trying to whitewash Horn Africans and link them to Middle Easterners and North Africans while distancing Horn Africans from their other fellow East Africans brothers which is very racist. At the same time, He is trying to black-wash Middle Easterners and North Africans and linking them to horn Africans:), this guy got really no life, he has been using hundreds of sock puppet accounts in order to vandalize Wikipedia and promote his Afrocentric agenda, for example, he is trying to deattach modern Egyptians from their ancient Egyptians origins and link the Egyptian civilization to Sub Saharan Africans who have nothing at all to do with Egypt or Egyptians which is extremely racist and ridiculous!!!. I have already filed a sock puppeting report against him but It was reverted because some other user before filed a sock puppeting report against the same user and the result was inconclusive because he is using proxy. You can check his IP history and you will find that he uses only proxies and that he never logged in through a legit IP address which means that he is trying to hide something, also this account was created shortly after the block of confirmed sock puppets Middayexpress, Soupforone, Geneticanthro, ....etc and he has been making the same edits on the same pages with almost identical edit summaries. You can also check the behaviors of this account and Middayexpress/Soupforone, you will find that the behavioral evidence is very clear and unmistakable. Unfortunately, the Wikipedia regulations against sock puppeting are very loose. For example, in this case of this Arboleh (a.k.a Middayexpress, Soupforone, ...etc) I don't think that a checkuser will be beneficial or conclusive as this user has a long history of using proxies and Middayexpress/Soupforone before insisted on the use of checkuser and then later was confirmed to be a very persistent sock puppeteer. The behavioral evidence in this case is pretty clear. Unfortunately, users like this, are why Wikipedia occasionally gets a bad name. Thank you. Ryanoo (talk) 16:43, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

If you know it's a proxy, the standard procedure is to request a block (policy, Wikiproject), which might help to some extent. LittlePuppers (talk) 01:18, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

I hope It works. Thank you.Ryanoo (talk) 05:04, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@ Ronhjones  @ LittlePuppers This is what I was talking about, the user Arboleh opened a new account Soupforone and did almost the same thing he did before like disruptive editing, edit warred me, asked the same person for help!! and reported me asking for administrator intervention. I wonder how can such person gets blocked and then make a new account on Wikipedia and continue vandalizing it while remains unchallenged and me who is battling such vandals and puppeteers is warned!!!! How come?!!!! Ryanoo (talk) 19:19, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This is for your valuable efforts for reverting and protecting enwiki from Vandalism PATH SLOPU (Talk) 07:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

@PATH SLOPU Thank you :) Ryanoo (talk) 08:45, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Drmounza

An editor who registers an account and then doesn't edit for 9 months is almost certainly a sock. Why do you think he's Middayexpress's sock? Doug Weller talk 11:46, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

@Doug Weller Thank you for your message. As you said the account seems to be a sleeper and It is a common habit of Middayexpress to have sleeper socks. He/She has very similar editing and writing style and seems to be an experienced user, he/she is no way new to editing on Wikipedia. He/She also did very similar edits on the same pages as Middayexpress. Ryanoo (talk) 15:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Re: North Africa

I have contacted Wikipedia and will await their assessment of my verifiable and good faith edits on the page. Your edits made to my account’s user page are argumentative and unwelcome. Itaren (talk) 17:05, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@ Itaren LOOOL You really got no life Mr. insecure Somali Sock puppeteer. Your persistent sock puppeting won't change anything :). Go get a life my friend :). By the way Sock puppeteers such as yourself aren't welcomed AT ALL to write on my page ;) Ryanoo (talk) 17:10, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

FINAL WARNING.

If you attack (WP:NPA) this editor again as you have here, and sockpuppetry tagging and the unwarranted THREE warning templates on their Talk page, I will ask for Admin intervention against you. Your incredibly poor attitude is disgraceful. -Roxy, in the middle. wooF 11:51, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your message and your kind advice Mr. Roxy. I didn't attack him, I know this person very well and was just saying the truth. Anyway, I am sorry for any inconvenience and I am going to file a sock-puppetry report against him today, in fact I was planning to report him for sock-puppetry yesterday, but unfortunately, I didn't have time. Thank you again. Ryanoo (talk) 12:51, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

@-Roxy, in the middle. wooF Hello Mr. Roxy. After I refuted this user claims on the talk page of North Africa, he insulted, attacked me personally and threatened me as expected and at the end he refused to continue the discussion on the talk page and came here to attack me personally and threaten me on my page. Please help me in taking an action against this user, he is constantly insulting and attacking me as well as threatening me on my talk page and disruptively writing on it. He was disruptively editing the page of North Africa and was refusing to engage in the talk page and after he finally engaged in the talk page after many warnings, the discussion turned this way!!!! [5]. Anyway I am now writing a sock puppetry report against him and the decision is entirely up to Wikipedia administration. Thank you and sorry for any inconvenience. Ryanoo (talk) 07:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

You have to maintain some decorum regardless of whether you think the person is socking or otherwise misbehaving. Note that Itaren has opened an ANI discussion about this now. I haven't made much sense of it yet, but your edit summary doesn't make you look good. It's best to just write in a neutral and factual style. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 06:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

@173.228.123.166 Thank you for your kind message and sorry for the late reply as I just noticed your message now. I might have used a harsh way in dealing with this suspected sock and I am really sorry for this as It is against the policy, but I did this only because I am 100 % SURE, no not 100 %, because I am 10000% sure of what I am saying about this suspected sock. I am a human, not a robot and any human with blood running through his veins and a bit of scientific honesty will get angry If he watches vandals and unchallenged sock puppeteers destroying one of main the sources of knowledge in our world. Unfortunately the persistence appearance of people like Middayexpress/Soupfrone discourages the good users from editing and are why Wikipedia occasionally gets a bad name. Thank you again for your kind message and sorry for any inconvenience. Ryanoo (talk) 14:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

It's understandable. I'm not familiar with the article or editor in question so I don't have a view on the immediate situation, but I know it can sometimes be difficult to stay calm through editing conflicts. It would help if you posted something to ANI and/or SPI if you're claiming Itaren is Middayexpress. Establishing that would bypass having to dig through the very confusing ANI complaint. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 21:09, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@173.228.123.166. I have already filed a sock puppetry report aginst this user here [6] including the very clear and unmistakable behavioral evidence, you are welcome to check it and evaluate the behavioral evidence as well and If you can leave your opinion, this will be highly appreciated :). Regards. Ryanoo (talk) 00:58, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Your post looks good. Per Oshwah I'd leave out the exclamation points from the next one, but at least in the current version it's a pretty minor issue. The main requirement is well-presented evidence and you did a good job of that. I can't predict what the SPI admins will do but in any case you gave them something to go on. Nice work. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 02:00, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

@173.228.123.166 Thank you so much. Ryanoo (talk) 02:42, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Middayexpress

You have become disruptive at the above case. Don't edit the report. Don't create the case Talk page (I deleted it). Just stop. Perhaps Oshwah didn't make it as clear to you as he could have in declining the CU request and then answering your follow-up question. All blocked puppets are  Stale. As an aside, there are no "confirmed" puppets, only suspected, but regardless, none of those suspected puppets is checkable. Your belief to the contrary is wrong.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:05, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your input and the clarification. But, does that mean that a sock puppet can come after 3 months after his block and continue sockpuppeting without any problem?.Ryanoo (talk) 23:13, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

No, it means that CU evidence can't be used for that user. Behavioral evidence is always important. Tip: don't use question marks and exclamation points in your posts. They make you look like you're ranting, just as capital letters make editors look like they're shouting.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for answering my question. As for using question marks and exclamation points, I didn't mean ranting or something and I removed it anyway. Regards.Ryanoo (talk) 23:23, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

No. There are many ways that sock puppets are discovered and blocked - timeline has nothing to do with it. In this situation, however, you filed an SPI where the users you're saying that Itaren is a sock puppet of have not edited Wikipedia in over three months. An investigation is still pending, but a CheckUser is not going to be useful here due to those accounts being stale (as Bbb23 explained above). That doesn't mean that it's over and there's nothing that can be done. We typically investigate SPI reports by making behavioral and editing comparisons, reviewing timelines and logs, many other methods - to identify evidence and proof, and make a determination. CheckUsers are simply one of the tools in our belt that we can use to help confirm accounts or establish a probability or likelihood (to explain it as simply as possible). :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:26, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@~Oshwah~ Thank you for the clarification and sorry for this misunderstanding as I am not quite familiar with this stuff. Regards and sorry for any inconvenience Ryanoo (talk) 23:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

No problem. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:41, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@~Oshwah~ By the way, may I know your opinion of Wikipedia policy of fighting sock puppeting as a user not an administrator ;) Do you think it is effective enough? Ryanoo (talk) 23:42, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

I used to combat and take part in a lot of sock puppetry work before I became an admin. Just because you don't have the extra few buttons that allow you to block accounts doesn't mean that you can't be a highly effective user with exceptional knowledge in identifying sock puppets and reporting them for action. Until just recently, the users who I'd consider our best and finest when it comes to combating sock puppetry were not administrators - they of course are administrators now, but they were just as knowledgeable and resourceful in this area without the tools. Don't think of administrators as special people who have more "privileges", "rank", "knowledge", or "status" on Wikipedia than others... administrators are simply volunteers just like you and I in every aspect. The only difference is that they have (literally) a few extra buttons available to them that allows them carry out tasks that (for obvious security and practicality reasons) can't be given out to everyone. I know editors here who are much more intelligent and useful than I am who are not administrators, and (sadly, on the contrary) I knew users in the past who were absolutely toxic and detrimental to anything they touched on Wikipedia who were admins. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:47, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

@~Oshwah~ WOW! this is really informative and inspiring. Thank you so much for sharing your opinion and experience, I really appreciate it and sorry again for any inconvenience. Have a great day :) Ryanoo (talk) 05:00, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

No apologies are needed; it's in the past, and the important part is that you learned and gained experience from it. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:03, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

@~Oshwah~ I hope you are doing well. I have reported some user who has attacked and harassed me. However, I feel that the users who are discussing me there are very biased, I might be wrong. I really trust you, you can check it [7] and your input there (even if it is against me) will be highly appreciated. Regards. Ryanoo (talk) 09:09, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ryanoo. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Got Arboleh / Middayexpress/Soupforone banned

Got the buffoon banned, check this: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Middayexpress
I can't stand him either, and I am even from the same region as him. The guy has major issues. Thank you for taking a stance against him.Wadaad (talk) 12:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you :). This guy is 100% mentally sick. Sorry for the late reply, I was on a long trip and just returned back two days ago. Ryanoo (talk) 13:27, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)