Jump to content

User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 107

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 100←Archive 105Archive 106Archive 107

Question

Hello! I think you might know me or have noticed my work on Mario 4-5 months ago. My question is regarding the non-free images. Recently, I have been working on Julia Chang. I have finished working on it but am concerned that two non-free images in the infobox are appropriate to use. I was using that image, but it only contained the upper body of the characters and a blurry background, so I ended up using two different images on the infobox, so it is fine? Is it necessary for the fictional characters to have a transparent/white background? Kazama16 (talk) 15:49, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Yes, I rememeber you. It's hard to say. On one hand, usually no, 2 non-free images in a infobox would not be acceptable. But on the other hand, at least both images are both very different, which could show a bit of necessity. I recommend reposting this at WT:VG and getting further input. Sergecross73 msg me 16:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Reaching out for sock

I saw your message on this talk page about reaching you directly. Pretty certain this is the same user. Account created just a few days ago, 100+ edits, shared interests such as the metal articles, intentionally keeping their descriptions low-key to avoid suspicion. Etc. PainiacPig (talk) 22:23, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi there. Yes, I'm happy to look into things like this. That said...I don't know if there's enough here to make a WP:DUCK block. Right now it looks "new editor making lots of music edits", which certainly could be him, but is probably not enough unless there's stronger overlap - stuff like restoring the same content to the same articles. But you can definitely still take this to SPI again and see if anyone else sees more than I am. You may be able to request a WP:CHECKUSER, something I cannot perform but some others can. Sergecross73 msg me 14:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Deleting an article that also has a (declined) draft

The article Luma3DS was created despite the fact that its Draft:Luma3DS was declined twice and no changes were made to the draft to address the issues. What is the best course of action? It can't be moved to draft space because the draft exists. Would it need an AfD or can the article be deleted outright? ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry I never responded to this. Technically, the correct avenue would be to AFD or to CSD it, since the AFC process is technically voluntary. I was going back and forth on what to do because I personally felt like AFD was as a waste of the community's time on such an incomplete, junk article. In the end, someone else successfully CSD'd it. Thanks for bringing this to my attention again though, because I believe a warning is still in order. Sergecross73 msg me 19:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Sonic Generations and Shadow Generations

I'm sorry for the unsourced edits but it is a true fact - you cannot buy the game on PlayStation 4 physically in North America unless you get it through Limited Run Games until October but I cannot find a single article talking about it. I really tried but for some reason nobody is talking about this. I was trying to be informative not malicious. Even then, only one of the notes on the Sonic Generations page had a source so I didn't know which notes needed sources. Anonymous29345 (talk) 13:24, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

If you can't verify it with a reliable source, then it has no business being on Wikipedia. All content needs sources, even notes. If you see an unsourced note, that's something that needs to be fixed too.
I don't get the vibe that you're trying to be malicious, but I'm concerned that a lot of time has passed and you still don't seem to understand the requirement of needing to add sources. Like, just yesterday, you asked if it was okay to publish an entirely unsourced draft. Why would you think there was any chance that would be acceptable after the warnings and blocks you've recieved about adding unsourced content? It's good to ask questions, but I'm troubled you thought there was a chance someone would say yes. Sergecross73 msg me 16:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Request

Earlier this year, you reverted some edits on the new wave page under the belief that all of them were made by sockpuppets or block evaders. One of the edits you reverted was one I made: adding the Post-disco template. However, I am not a block evader, and I was certainly not evading a block when I made the change. Could you put the Post-disco template back on the page for New Wave? 2600:6C5A:417F:528F:DD65:6D7E:9939:D516 (talk) 17:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd recommend asking on the respective article talk page through an WP:EDITREQUEST. I'm not saying the template was or wasn't appropriate, it merely looked like it was added by a serial disruptive editor. Someone else at that article should decide. Sergecross73 msg me 02:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Atari Panther image dispute

Hi @Sergecross73

I have been in a bit of a back and forth with user oknazevad over on the Atari Panther page. They are determined to continue to remove a 3D mockup of the Atari Panther console and keep reverting my changes back to a very oudated, very rough and unclean sketch. Asking for some assistance so we can get that article at least looking a little better. TheEmperorAnt (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I responded at Talk:Atari Panther. Sergecross73 msg me 15:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Continuous block evasion and sockpuppeteering

Hi Sergecross73, hope thinks are going well with you. I've got a question, and you're usually my go-to admin for these kind of issues. For a month and half, there's been a person unnecessarily changing the leads of hip hop artists' articles. They mark all their edits as a minor one and occassionally leave unnecessary opinions in edit summaries. The main account is Maurice20111 (talk · contribs). Confirmed socks are WilliamNathan (talk · contribs), LeahAnderson2005 and Joseph231028 (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maurice20111/Archive). I'm also absolutely sure KingVonFan2011 (talk · contribs) is another (ANI'd, but to no avail). They also edited under changing IPs, such as Special:Contributions/2600:1007:A111:709:A1E0:9A8F:2DEC:4FD5, Special:Contributions/2600:1700:1BFB:5010:C965:9B83:9189:EB29 and Special:Contributions/2600:1007:A111:709:1CE4:C321:F5A9:7A49.

In my experience, sockpuppet investigations is too slow for continuous disruptive editing - there aren't any tools to do that quickly, but ANI didn't work last time. In your opinion, what's the best course of action here? It's not the worst kind of disruptive editing, but they do need to stop. Input is appreciated. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) For what it's worth, I have reverted multiple edits made by the sock. From where I sit, obvious WP:DUCK situation. JeffSpaceman (talk) 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

P.S. If you can indef KingVonFan2011 as an obvious sock in the meantime, I'd appreciate it.

Before I do anything - what was the result of the ANI case? Was there opposition to blocking/seeing them as a sock? Or did it just close due to inaction/indifference? Sergecross73 msg me 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Inaction I suppose? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 03:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Okay, just making sure there wasn't differing views on him being a sock. I've blocked him, as I see what you both are talking about here.
Sadly, your options are limited outside of SPI. You can find a friendly admin who can help with WP:DUCK blocks (me), or find a Check User who can run CU scans for you (not me - I don't have that access.) I have a pretty high tolerance for DUCK blocks for as long as it takes, but there will likely be times where I can't justify action too. Sergecross73 msg me 13:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your vigilance. If it's okay with you I'll send you a quick message if (when?) they return. So far they haven't changed their MO one bit, spotting them has been easy. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Yup, no problem. I can do it for as long as you're motivated to spot and report them. My only request is that you don't get mad if I dont take action because I don't think there's enough evidence. (Not saying you would, I just say that to everyone.) Sergecross73 msg me 01:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
That didn't take long: Leonard1245 (talk · contribs). One edit, but a) new account b) hip hop artist c) marking as minor d) same type of changing the lead. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, on KingVons talk page someone pointed out a IP range that was making similar edits too, so I'm not surprised. Leo has same target and naming convention for account too. Blocked. I'll start protecting repeated targets as well. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 21:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
They're back as Depeet1998 (talk · contribs). soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 15:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Now back as this IP address. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 00:56, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
And this is them too. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Both blocked. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 21:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
They're back. It was almost an entire week. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Blocked, protected a few repeat targets. Sergecross73 msg me 15:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

TyMega

Hi Sergecross, similarly TyMega (talk · contribs) has been doing the same thing for years apparently. See this IP address and the articles edited. I believe HorrorLover555 and FlightTime have experience with them as well. Is this another case of edit protecting those articles? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

TyMega has been doing it for years, as it looks like they have been using a VPN to evade. They've just recently been changing anything related from "guest appearances" to "guest featured appearances". As usual, I revert their sock edits and report them to ANV. HorrorLover555 (talk) 11:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
If reporting to ANV is working for you, I recommend sticking with that. But let me know if there's common targets you'd like me to protect and I'll look into it. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 15:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
And they're back. They definitely have their favorite targets. I wish I had the time to revert everything, but I have to get going and won't be able to look at their edits for the rest of the day. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 04:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Fair to midland history

What’s up man, I’m not super great at adding sources into articles (yet) but it’s legit, if you look at the discogs page for the album or the back of the album, Brett is listed as an official member, as well as the dedicated percussionist. He’s also in the band photo on the back of the album. https://www.discogs.com/release/3622747-Fair-To-Midland-The-Carbon-Copy-Silver-Lining Tritonianyeti (talk) 15:20, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

While technically Discogs isn't a usable source, it is possible to source things straight from an album jacket itself. I don't have that album though, so I can't confirm or deny. Sergecross73 msg me 16:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
I get that, and it’s quite hard to find the album jacket online, especially the insert, but there are some pictures on like Reddit or Instagram or whatever. I can’t link because of wiki’s link block stuff but if you look up the name of the album and scroll a little it’s right there. Tritonianyeti (talk) 19:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
I'll try to do a search and see if I can find anything usable. Sergecross73 msg me 19:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

User:BorisDG uncited information on Apple Silicon articles

The user is at it again as in [1], still not having read WP:CITE, WP:RS, WP:VERIFY, etc. and providing a wiki as some kind of citation in the edit summary. You had given a last warning previously, is it time to ask for a nudge from ANI? —DIYeditor (talk) 09:51, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

No, I'll take care of it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Asking for advice

Hi Sergecross73,

I had the talk page of MiamiManny still on my watchlist after I left them a message about a BLP situation. Yesterday I noticed the back-and-forth between them and Cambial Yellowing. They issued MiamiManny a standard notification for an incorrect edit summary. MiamiManny immediately described this as "wikibullying". It went to "wikihounding". Cambial Yellowing responded, saying if MiamiManny doesn't want to communicate, they shouldn't ping them. I left a message, that MiamiManny that accusing someone of such behaviour is acting in bad faith. That message made me also a wikibully for some reason.

They changed Cambial Yellowing's message, which is a violation of WP:OTHERTALK. This went on for a while, with some warnings issued and telling them not do so. Their latest edit again includes editing others' comments and the edit summary is "Removed repeated wikibullying and wikivandalism after multiple warnings- Please cease your harrassment". I respect WP:OWNTALK, but at the same time they've been told not to incorrectly (or falsely?) describe other editors' comments as bullying, vandalism and harassment. What are your thoughts? Do I need to start a discussion at ANI for this rude behaviour or just let it slide? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

I considered doing so, given their repeated editing of other's comments and deleting of individual comments in the conversation, even after 3 explanations that editing other's posts is not appropriate.[2][3][4] (Miami deleted those explanations). Ultimately though, they have ceased their disruption of the wider encyclopaedia for the moment. I don't think we should escalate it unless it becomes necessary. In my view the facetiously inaccurate edit summary ("removed false claim about no physical evidence and reference that did not mention that claim" – the references in reality) was more troubling than the talk page behaviour. Cambial — foliar❧ 16:35, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
I completely agree with both of you that the editor is out of line. Nothing there remotely constitutes "harassment", refactoring others' comments isn't allowed, and it's baffling to ping people just to tell them they're not welcome on their talk page (even though they are technically free to ask people not to comment any further.)
That said, if they've stopped for now, I wouldn't escalate it. Their talk (and user) page makes it pretty clear they have a chip on their should in regards to be told what to do by others. It'd probably be a messy, heated timesink.
Their "threats" to take you to ANI are meritless, they could never incur any action against either of you. So, I recommend letting it sit for now, and if you have further issue with the user, feel free to reach out to me again, and I can review at that point, and let you know if I feel like its something I feel comfortable taking action on, or if it feels like something that the community should evaluate at a venue like ANI. Sergecross73 msg me 18:13, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice, Sergecross, I appreciate it. They left their talk page for what it is, but they did wrote this uncivil message, which includes Further, your tone and hostility are uncalled for. If you persist with aggressive behavior and attempts to misrepresent well-sourced content, I will escalate this issue. You've been warned. Cambial Yellowing, that latest comment wasn't addressed to me, so I feel like it's up to you make a decision how to handle this. You're welcome to use my initial message here for the diffs, in case you'd like to take this to ANI. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Seeking urgent assistance in WP:ANI

Heya ☺ Just wondering if you could help take a look at this case. An IP address is persisting with wholesale addition of Tamil scripts without consensus nor edit summaries (and displaying identical behaviour to a blocked user). I think it's best to seek urgent intervention on this. Thanks! hundenvonPG (talk) 03:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I'm not really familiar with the subject matter, or the editor in question as far as I can recall, so I'm probably not an ideal Admin to field this one... Sergecross73 msg me 14:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Assitance on NES Open Tournament Golf Article

Hey Serge, I know your probably busy fixing articles or whatever but I need some help here. For the past few weeks I have tried to rewrite NES Open Tournament Golf from the ground up to hopefully get it to a good article status. As you can probably imagine, being as I am the only one currently editing it right now, its hard to get everything I want done. All I ask is for you to take a look at it and help where you can. If not, I understand 50.232.118.218 (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Haha, yeah, I am busy "fixing articles or whatever", but I can take a look at it and see what I can do to help too. I'll check it soon. Just curious, do we know each other beyond me reverting you at that Mario Golf article recently? Sergecross73 msg me 23:31, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Aside from two stupidly minor edit on Mario Sports Superstars (one of which you also reverted), no. For the most part I have been making minor text based edits on other video game related articles. Some of my bigger past edits have been rejected for me just not being aware of certain rules at the time (Made a list of unlockables on Mario Power Tennis, Putting a Youtube video onto Out Run). Others, like the reverted Mario Golf edit (And a particular unconstructive edit on NES Open that you might find to be...babyish and whiny), were mostly me just doing stuff that felt right in the moment, happiness or anger fueled (The reverted Mario Golf subsections were nice on the eyes. Just my thought process). 71.195.31.254 (talk) 01:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
(also if you were at all curious the 71.195.31.254 and 50.232.118.218 accounts are the same person, just to clear that up) 71.195.31.254 (talk) 01:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Is this capitalization correct?

Hello, I stumbled upon the article Advance And Secure; is the article title capitalized correctly? It looks odd to me, at least the "And", possibly the "Secure" also. I don't know much about the subject matter and thought you might know more. Feel free to move the page if necessary. Left guide (talk) 13:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

You're correct, it doesn't really sound like its a proper noun so I believe it should be Advance and secure. I've moved it. On a separate note, the article is in awful shape. If you're planning on working on it or something, I'll hold of, but if not, I'll merge it to video game glossary for the time being. Sergecross73 msg me 20:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for helping, and no I didn't have plans to do anything major, just fixing the capitalization in the article prose, but that's moot if you plan to merge it elsewhere anyways. Feel free to have at it. Left guide (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Guidance

Can you please give assistance on my new project (which is still in progress). While I'm working on it, I just want to make sure there are no notability concerns. Thanks. Kazama16 (talk) 13:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to take a look at it, but I'm expecting to be a bit pressed for editing time for the next week. You can always run it by WT:VGCHAR and see what they have to say. Otherwise, I'll try to look at it in a bit. Sergecross73 msg me 21:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

The anon changing hip hop artists' articles is back

Hey Serge, it has been a little while, seeing the previous discussion has been automatically archived, but they're back. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 16:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
They're back. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 06:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Motives?

Listen you blocked me just because I put a franchise that in reality is a spin-off all this would not have happened if it was not that I had the “Infobox” of a franchise and I edited everything you blocked I fixed it and for me the franchises of video games that have that “Infobox” for me is part of the list and if I had but not have other transmedia outside of its original material then I edit it without problems in reality “Donkey Kong” like “Kingdom Hearts” are part of the same franchise PS: While one started what we know as the “Mario” franchise, the other is a spin-off crossover of the “Final Fantasy” franchise. Marisoft69 (talk) 00:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

As I explained on your talk page, you were blocked for violating my final warning unsourced content additions. If you're adding content, add a source. Sergecross73 msg me 00:16, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All the Love in the World (Nine Inch Nails song)

Hello, this discussion that I started and you participated in ended with the decision to merge content from the article into With Teeth. I am reaching out because I'm trying to consider how and what content from this page should be merged into the article, since I'm somewhat stumped on how this should be approached. If you have any ideas, feel free to let me know. JeffSpaceman (talk) 15:13, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to ignore you on this. I'll try to help with it later if no one else wants to still. Sergecross73 msg me 18:54, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
It's all good, I was just having trouble figuring out where to begin and what to merge. If you can help later at some point, I would definitely appreciate that. Thank you for the response. JeffSpaceman (talk) 19:04, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Request

Well, hello again. I wanted to request you to block me. No factual reasons. Just asking as a companion. Thanks. Bye. Kazama16 (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Technically, I can. But why don't you wait a few weeks or a month and make sure you still feel the same way. I don't want the blemish on your block log if you decide you want to stick around. Sergecross73 msg me 14:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Issue with ANI discussion being archived

Hi, just contacting you since you had some participation in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1170#Ongoing issues with CfD nominations, the subject of the discussion seems to have gone totally radio silent after their initial response, presumably to allow it to be archived and forgotten. I am wondering what the procedure is now, because something still has to be decided by an admin about what to do but nobody seemingly cared. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:16, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

If it fizzles out and gets archived, and there aren't any dissenting opinions, I'll leave him a stern warning about Wikipedia being a collaborative project, the need for discussion, etc, and keep an eye on him. Sergecross73 msg me 14:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, it's already archived. Sergecross73 msg me 14:10, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

AfD Discussions

I wanted to discuss this with you given that the recent discussion at Celestial is at least the third time now you've accused me of bad faith in controversial AfD nominations. I want to at least make clear where I'm coming from, because I'm very concerned you think my edits are coming from a negative place when that really isn't the case at all.

I've mostly started editing through fictional character articles, which have very strict notability standards compared to most other subjects on the site. As a result, I tend to have a bit of a stricter view when it comes to notability as a whole. Regardless of the former fact, I'm still trying my best to work within the guidelines as specified per subject. It's why I was working with NSONGS during the Celestial debate, for example. Additionally, my shape of how standards work has been shifting per discussion, too. For instance, Shulk's old discussion definitely helped with showing how much coverage a subject needed for me, and Koopa Troopa's has been beneficial for showing me value beyond Reception. Whenever I get into these kinds of controversial discussions, I try to at least take away what went wrong with it from it, and incorporate this further into my editing style.

I bring this up mostly because I worry you think I'm making hasty nominations, and then don't take anything away from them. Yes, I make a lot of AfD's focused on sourcing and how they're showing notability, but that's because I want to ensure quality articles. I've made sure to take in points from past discussions to ensure I don't make other unfounded nominations, and make sure to account for these facts when I do consider if I should nominate a subject or not. I may have stricter standards, but that doesn't mean I'm doing so solely on a biased principal, or because of some other similarly bad faith idea. I genuinely just want to ensure quality standards are applied consistently, and if I make a misstep along the way, I try to make sure I don't do it again.

I'm not saying I'm a perfect editor. Zx pointed out to me recently that my argumentation style has several flaws in it, and that's been something I've been trying to work on, as an example. But no matter the case, I really just want to make sure that I don't come across as an editor who's being obtrusive for the sake of it, and rather as one arguing for quality and cleanliness. I understand how I'm viewing what I'm doing and how you're viewing it can be radically different: I've made my side known here, and I'd really like to see if you have any observations you've made or advice you can give that can help improve my editing style, so that way we can avoid any further confusion in later discussions. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the insight. I recognize that you're a good editor who has done some great content creation. Definitely a net positive to the website. But I do not agree with a number of the AFD nominations you've made. I do not believe they've been good judgement calls. If I recall correctly, I've also objected your sentiments that reviews are required to establish notability, when they're not. To me, it sometimes feels like you blur the standards of "barely meeting the GNG" and "meeting GA standards". It's great when we aspire to great GA content, but it's not great to hold GA-like standards for notability requirements. I know you've already refuted this commentary, and I'm not trying to rehash it, just give you the input you've requested for how it looks from over here, to me. I just don't agree with where you draw the line sometimes.
It is good to hear that you've learned from some of the ones I've more vigorously objected to though, as that hadn't particularly been clear to me in our past interactions. Sergecross73 msg me 15:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
@Sergecross73 If it's not too much, could you give me an example of one you've disagreed with outside of the ones I've mentioned, if you remember any? I want to make sure I fully understand what you're saying, and I feel like another example would help. I think I get what you're saying, in that I'm holding the standards higher than I should, but I want to make sure I'm not misconstruing something about your comments by accident. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Shulk, Koopa, and Celestial are the ones I know off the top of my head. I'll have to dig and see if there were more. Sergecross73 msg me 13:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
@Sergecross73 gotcha. Regardless, thank you for the advice. I'll try my best to incorporate it into my nomination philosophy going forward. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Disruptive editor issue

I'm also having another issue with User:AHI-3000. They are being incredibly stubborn and refusing to compromise or seek consensus for their edits claiming that it's too small for them to bother debating. Even after there was consensus to do one thing, they keep edit warring and reverting it and ignore the attempts of multiple users to debate civilly. This has been going on for quite some time, anyway, but they delete most stuff from their talkpage before it can be resolved. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:56, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Warned. Sergecross73 msg me 16:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sergecross73/Archive_107&oldid=1258203075"