User talk:Nosebagbear/Archive 6

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.

The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas3 (talk) 05:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Toven Draft

IMPORTANT

You wrote

@Spiritletters: - you've still got 2 wikipedia references, and Discogs is a non-reliable, non-independent source. The band's own site can be referenced for some things, but so that you're aware, it won't help prove that they're notable (as it obviously can't be independent). Your first source is dead-linking, and it looks like it would be quite key, so that would be worth checking. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

My reply

1.Thank you for your response. However. Discogs is notorious used throughout wiki pages as the sole reference for thousands of pages. Why is it singled out as a issue here?

2. The first source that is dead-linking was not dead linking on the original draft date for this article was submitted and wiki is aware of this. It was suspiciously deleted by the san diego reader with malicious intent to harm the drafting of this page. The San Diego Reader must be involved with wiki in some way as this publication has maliciously attack, slandered and attempted to defame The subject of this draft.See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hemmingson publishing section regarding The Toven. Obviously this was Michael's last published story was regarding The Toven and he passed away three days later. Jay Allen Sanford is the ring leader and has been for years. In fact, it was him that deleted the link you refer to as key. We plan to get to the truth.

Again I asked, since link one was deleted how do we address this with the reader who committed a unethical and despicable act by deleting it?01:58, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Spiritletters (talk)

@Spiritletters: - Discogs' usage as a source is indeed notorious as a source usage - many articles were created early on before the more aggressive vetting rules were implemented. However huge numbers of those articles get either redirected or deleted if additional sources can't be found (I'm not a specialist in the field and have probably fixed 100 and redirected twice that)
As to your second one, links deadlink to recent publications quite frequently, and thus far you've not given any evidence for it being in malice. Anyway, for our purposes, your best option is to hunt for an online archived version. I suggest asking about that at the Teahouse - they specialise in helping new editors and someone may be able to find a copy on one of the archives. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:21, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
The evidence of malicious intent is that the article was deleted one day after it was cited for this page. Furthermore you were provided additional evidence showing malicious intent here https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/jan/06/according-aversioncom-cd-review/ by Michael Hemmingson who died three days after his last article above on The Toven.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hemmingson The San Diego reader has been upset over the death ever since and even submitted false information to wiki claiming Hemmingson left the publication in 2009 when in fact he continued writing for them up until his death in 2014.
The question of the missing link was submitted nearly a month ago to TEAHOUSE and no one responded. As an administrator maybe you can submit the inquiry. Screenshots of the deleted article were taken and are available. Overall Sources say that The San Diego Reader has ties to Wikipedia and have continued to halt the publication of The Toven article while slandering his artistry at every chance.
Wouldn't be surprised Jay Allen Sanford himself wasn't a wiki administrator or volunteer stalking the would be pages of San Diego artist like The Toven. We intend to confirm.
RespectfullySpiritletters (talk) 15:00, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, as a first note, please indent paragraphs with ::: (However many is needed), it makes it a big easier to see what's in your reply.
It's removal is only a correlation with his death and/or the creation of the draft, there isn't any demonstration of causation. Nor does that page you link to demonstrate any malicious sign for the removal of content, or really, much beyond a degree of tastelessness.
While I've no idea if Sanford is or isn't a volunteer, it's extremely hard to find out about a draft - they aren't search engine indexed, and would have to be specifically searched for on wikipedia itself. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:26, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the thoughful reply. however the review clearly goes beyond tastelessness and the deletion of the discography review article (that sat untouched on the web for years until it was cited on wiki) carried malicious intent.
Sanford finding out about a draft for The Toven is the easiest thing on earth (besides something else I wont mention) he is a long time writer for the publication and co-wrote with his friend Hemmingson often. He most likely authored his OWN Wikipedia page and the wiki page for Hemmingson. Not many notable rappers in San Diego so it wouldn't be hard at all.
Would this article below be accurate regarding dates? Or could the great publication make a typo regarding dates? Kinda weird for a journalist to publish a article for a publication 5 years after he so called left the organization.

https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/jan/28/ticker-rip-michael-hemmingson/

RespectfullySpiritletters (talk) 16:21, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/jan/28/ticker-rip-michael-hemmingson/

@Spiritletters: - if I conceded that they were acting like this, would that not bring its own problem - it would make the publisher fundamentally unreliable, and so the source wouldn't be suitable. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Good point however..I'm not sure who the 'we' are that you refer to I'm just overwhelmingly convinced based on this draft and the history Jay Allen Sanford and the San Diego Reader that they are bent on impeding my success through the local media which we all know derives for artist locally. San Diego journalist are too busy catering to superstars and a billion local 'bands' that are from everywhere else but San Diego. San Diego entertainment media are bent on the belief that notable talent is what 'they make it' or declare it to be and if they don't stamp it, that person somehow isn't worthy.
That attitudes will soon be 86'd. Its too many outdated and bias decision makers especially in San Diego who may have about one hip bone in their entire body.

Respectfully — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spiritletters (talk • contribs) 22:11, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rotimi Segun

Hello, Nosebagbear. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rotimi Segun".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help to Publish Article

Aashish Kaushik is a notable person on google check this link - https://g.co/kgs/Eqfrmj Help to publish the content. Diksharohilla (talk) 17:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Diksharohilla:, hello. I've left several pieces of advice on your draft. They need to be followed before this draft has any chance of being accepted. In future, please don't contact reviewers directly - the best approach is to follow the guide at the article wizard - it will let you submit your draft to our reviewing process. There's a bit of a backlog, but you can continue to work on it until it's reviewed, which is mostly oldest first. Nosebagbear (talk) 17:25, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on editing philosophies after reading your userpage

What is a radical transwikist? I've mostly heard of inclusionists and deletionists, although I haven't quite settled on a specific editing philosophy myself. I have seriously considered joining the m:Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgments About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are in Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They Are Deletionists though. Also, I agree with you that the oversight logo does look a bit creepy with the visual of chunks of the Wikipedia logo missing. Clovermoss (talk) 01:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Clovermoss:, hi there. So Transwikists want to move problematic articles to a wiki where they better belong (whether that be a different language or a different project). There are smoother ways, but the formal method is at this meta page. I can't actually find a page for them, nor do I know of any (I've never even seen a transwiki vote, but it does remain an option on the AfD tracker - I've no idea if it used to be more common, such as when a new project was made and things could move to it). But in hope that one day I would see such a unicorn, I put it into my userpage as a whimsical wish. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. I've also never seen someone !vote that way at AfD, but I'm not very active there to begin with. I can see a few ways this might be useful: articles that are dictionary definitions being used on wikitionary, articles that aren't in English being moved to the project in that language, etc. Clovermoss (talk) 15:59, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

  • The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Henri Ben Ezra

Hi, I think I have enough reliable sources for a short entry on the founder of a chatbot company. But when I went to start it, I saw the deletion notice with the suggestion I contact you first. If you have a moment to check these, do you think them adequate for WP:BIO? My lead line was going to be: Henri Ben Ezra is an Israeli businessman, described by the Jerusalem Post as having potentially provided the seventh Israeli discovery to influence the world for his work on implementing AI chatbots in software and messaging.

And then a paragraph based on the following sources:

Thanks Seleucus123 (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Seleucus123: - hi there. I've had a read through every source you've given. The HR and Forbes articles aren't reliable/independent, so can't add notability. The wfmj, jpost, newstrail articles don't really have much about Ezra himself - quite a bit on the company, lots on the general and specific technology, but very little content from Ezra that isn't a quote (quotes being inherently non-independent). The same limitation applies with the interview, which doesn't say much about Ezra outside of the answers, which thus aren't independent. The amazon site itself obviously isn't reliable (not that you were using it in that sense), but it might be worth looking for some reviews of the text (academia, industry publications, newspaper reviews etc). That might be able to help you show notability through a different route than GNG. You obviously aren't obliged to take my viewpoint on the issue (the page isn't protected), but that's my perception of the sources. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:25, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for taking the time. I think what you say is fair and if I return to the topic I'll leave it for if and when there is a clincher. Seleucus123 (talk) 14:36, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

readded Callanecc

Oversight changes

readded HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Academy of Learning College

Hi, I made changes to the page in the headline. Removed advertorial content and the tag as well. Would appreciate if you could take a look. Best, Pratat (talk) 13:04, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pratat:, hi there. The article is definitely no longer advertorial. It may or may not suffer notability risks, but someone can raise that as an issue if they are concerned. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: thx. Personally - I think there is a notability issue, but there was a discussion and the call was to keep...Pratat (talk) 14:12, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi Nosebagbear, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism in Poland: Motion (May 2020)

The following is added as a remedy to the Antisemitism in Poland arbitration case: 7) 500/30 restriction: All IP editors, users with fewer than 500 edits, and users with less than 30 days' tenure are prohibited from editing articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. This prohibition may be enforced preemptively by use of extended confirmed protection (ECP), or by other methods such as reverts, pending changes protection, and appropriate edit filters. Reverts made solely to enforce the 500/30 rule are not considered edit warring.

    • Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may use the Talk: namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Talk pages where disruption occurs may be managed by the methods mentioned above.
    • Standard discretionary sanctions as authorized by the Eastern Europe arbitration case remain in effect for this topic area.

Passed 6 to 0 by motion at 19:57, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

For the arbitration committee, Moneytrees🌴Talk🌲Help out at CCI! 20:29, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

added CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
removed Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Incidents#FloridaArmy_and_AfC_woes. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello Nosebagbear,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources
  • A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
  • Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
  • A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
  • Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ibn Hawshab on a Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some falafel for you!

Thanks for your note about the "Besamim Rosh" Akiva100 (talk) 19:44, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

mail can be ignored

Some other admin saw the issue and rev/del'd it while I was writing an email to you. Sorry for the bother! Schazjmd (talk) 20:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Lloyd Monserratt on a Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About the Al Cannon page

The website I put down is a government website stating that Cannon's campaign paid someone $500 to create his page, this page needs to be deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by JTW1998+ (talk • contribs) 19:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JTW1998: even undisclosed paid editing does not normally lead to the summary removal of an article (though it would usually lead to the creator being blocked). Another editor has since improved the article significantly since it was originally created, so it definitely won't be deleted (they may well even have removed any bias issues that might have been present). Nosebagbear (talk) 19:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About my appeal

The appeal got archived without a Template:Archive top consensus. Since no one proposed anything else, does your proposition of me being able to appeal in another three months (during which I'll try to edit more disputable areas) become official? --Steverci (talk) 00:40, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see ....

User:Smallbones/Proposed commercial editing policy

Smallbones(smalltalk) 02:13, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Boris Johnson on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery shoppers

Have you got a link for what they did fr.wiki? SmartSE (talk) 16:33, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Smartse: this probably is useful on that front Nosebagbear (talk) 21:48, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Having been keeping up to speed lately. SmartSE (talk) 08:24, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Committee?

Regarding this edit: you referred to "the committee" out of the blue, which I think might raise questions about it and its membership. If you just meant "whoever shows up to comment", then perhaps a more general, inclusive term would be better? isaacl (talk) 17:03, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Isaacl: - thanks for pointing out. "Community" seemed to cover the general gist so I've replaced with that Nosebagbear (talk) 21:53, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE copyedit request

I've begun my first pass at copyediting the article Fairness Project. Please expect a ping on the article's talk page as I will most likely have questions. My process can be found here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:47, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

added Red Phoenix
readded Euryalus • SQL
removed Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

readded GB fan
removed Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:1985–86 Hormel strike on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Terence Coyle has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Terence Coyle. Thanks! Nosebagbear (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Correlation of energy and GDP is causation as suggested by numerous papers and seeking to help restore the Wikipedia page of the "Garrett's relation".

Concerning the deletion of the "Garrett relation" article, what would need to change to make it meet the Wikipedia guidelines?

The comments suggest that the post is original research, which is false. C.f. the 7 first (of many more) links provided as source: 

1) Garrett, Timothy J. (2011-02-01). "Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?". Climatic Change. 104 (3): 437–455. arXiv:0811.1855. doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9717-9. ISSN 1573-1480.
2) Garrett, T. J. (2012-01-05). "No way out? The double-bind in seeking global prosperity alongside mitigated climate change". Earth System Dynamics. 3 (1): 1–17. Bibcode:2012ESD.....3....1G. doi:10.5194/esd-3-1-2012. ISSN 2190-4979.
3) Garrett (2011). "How persistent is civilization growth?". arXiv:1101.5635v1 [physics.soc-ph].
4) Maddison, Angus (2007). The world economy volume 1: A millennial perspective volume 2: Historical statistics. Academic Foundation.
5)Garrett, Timothy J. (2014). "Long-run evolution of the global economy: 1. Physical basis". Earth's Future. 2 (3): 127–151. arXiv:1306.3554. Bibcode:2014EaFut...2..127G. doi:10.1002/2013EF000171. ISSN 2328-4277.
6) "The long run evolution of the global economy - Part 2: Hindcasts of Innovation and growth" (PDF). www.earth-syst-dynam.net. Retrieved 2019-01-17.
7) Nolthenius, Richard (March 2018). "Civilization as a Thermodynamic System: Connecting Energy and Economics" (PDF).

Sure some links are faulty and would require updating, yet the research is peer-reviewed and making its way to economics. C.f. for example the following paper that cites Tim Garrett:

"Economics for the future – Beyond the superorganism" https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106520 by Nathan J. Hagens https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800919310067#bib0210

Correlation does not imply causation, yet many hints suggest that GDP is unfortunately facilitated by energy, c.f. in particular the paper above (and more sources cited in that paper) but also discussed at length in Tim Garrett's papers.

Tim Garrett is also working together with Steve Keen, an economist working on energy, for more interdisciplinary, c.f.: https://www.patreon.com/posts/model-start-to-26875256

This partnership also led Steve Keen to coin the following quote: "Labour without energy is a corpse; capital without energy is a sculpture."

Economics touches numerous fields, in particular climate change these days (mostly via the energy channel). Interdisciplinary is thus a necessity and could shed light on blind spots that the discipline of economics may have. Energy is one such blind spot Tim Garrett's work helped uncover. In that sense, the Wikipedia page was a very helpful resource. (I noticed the deletion of the page no less than 15 days later as I refer to it regularly.)

It is also discussed that the article is self-promotion, which I disagree with in the same way that I do not see the Euler's formula as being a self-promotion of Euler. Or a more recent example, the Keeling curve.

If the name is the issue, I'm sure one could work toward finding an alternative naming. In any case, I am willing to help resolve any issues.

Best, Gordonschuecker (talk) 00:39, 15 August 2020 (UTC) mathematician and economist.[reply]

  • @Gordonschuecker: You would need much more secondary coverage that covered this (as opposed to small facets) in depth, most likely including secondary coverage (whether than be (meta)reviews or mainstream news coverage). Wikipedia rarely covers new topics - we much more summarise things already considered in significant detail by multiple researchers. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

for The Signpost

Yes, please write up the article you proposed for The Signpost. A basic description of the process, goals etc would be great. I've read most of the 3 pages you linked to, so I purposely did not write "a simple description". You might consider getting 3-4 *short* reactions from people who discussed the matter on those pages, but please don't start a "here are the two sides of the issue" type of a discussion, for one thing there are likely to be several sides of the issue. A short paragraph from somebody at T&S might be ok, but that's up to you. Please give me an extra couple of days before deadline to review and edit it - perhaps make some suggestions. Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier. Thanks. Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nbb - I've copied your submission over to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/News and notes. We can all edit it there now - up to Sunday morning. I'm sure the copying is ok because you were the only person to edit it so far, you're attributed in The Signpost, and you submitted it. Please feel free to make any and all edits over there. Thanks. Smallbones(smalltalk) 12:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking to help restore the Wikipedia page of the "Garrett's relation" Part II

Part II to "Correlation of energy and GDP is causation as suggested by numerous papers and seeking to help restore the Wikipedia page of the "Garrett's relation""

You would need much more secondary coverage that covered this (as opposed to small facets) in depth, most likely including secondary coverage (whether than be (meta)reviews or mainstream news coverage).

Doing a little research, I have found plenty of secondary coverage, c.f.:

"Modelling civilization as ‘heat engine’ could improve climate predictions" https://physicsworld.com/a/modelling-civilization-as-heat-engine-could-improve-climate-predictions/

"Energy Could Hold the Key to Predicting Global Growth" https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b14zbd705jv9cw/energy-could-hold-the-key-to-predicting-global-growth#.UXhZRaWkZUs

And there are a lot more on Tim's pages, c.f. here: http://www.inscc.utah.edu/~tgarrett/Economics/Media.html

and here: http://www.inscc.utah.edu/~tgarrett/Economics_modeling.html

Wikipedia rarely covers new topics

Please note that the concepts have been around for over ten years now.

we much more summarise things already considered in significant detail by multiple researchers.

Checking on Google Scholar, one can find ample citations, for example 28 for "Long‐run evolution of the global economy: 1. Physical basis".

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=0&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&sciodt=0,5&cites=6443386690730587388&scipsc=

See for example especially this paper: "A Biophysical Perspective of IPCC Integrated Energy Modelling" https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/4/839

with the following quote from its abstract: The biophysical economics perspective is that GDP and productivity growth are in fact emergent parameters from the economic-biophysical system. If future energy systems were to possess worse biophysical performance characteristics, we would expect lower productivity and economic growth, and therefore, the price of reaching emission targets may be significantly costlier than projected.

Or

The Dynamics of Human Society Evolution: An Energetics Approach https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.04400

If one digs further, I'm sure many more could be found.

Would it be possible to establish a roadmap to bring the post back online? Say - x article citations needed - y paper citations needed - Rewrite parts that are particularly problematic? - Change the name of the Wikipedia article? (Although I stand by my opinion that this would make the Wikipedia article more difficult to find, in the same way that I wouldn't know how to find the Keeling Curve if using the name of the author would have been problematic as well.)

If you or any of the persons having expressed concern over the article could provide some guidlines, any help would be greatly appreciated!

Best, Gordonschuecker (talk) 20:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Discussion Garrett Relation

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 August 29

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 August 29. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Gordonschuecker (talk) 13:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Joe Biden sexual assault allegation on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Date formats

Hi, I realise this was a couple of years ago so apologies if you already know this. Please refrain from using purely numeric date formats on Wikipedia, as you did on Stellina. A date written as 01/02/03 means 1 February 2003 to a European, 2 January 2003 to an American or 3 February 2001 to a Japanese. Rather, use one of the date formats that is standard across Wikipedia: 13 May 2024 for articles on British/European topics, May 13, 2024 for articles on American topics, otherwise just keep it consistent throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers for more information on how to write dates in Wikipedia articles. Thank you. — Smjg (talk) 11:47, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Smjg:, I mean April was the first month that I actually became active in, so not especially surprised I was making mistakes. Though given that it's a French drink, I probably felt using the evidently correct European numerical date system was perfectly legitimate. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:52, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Tanya Unni - Aug 2020

I saw you had deleted a new page (Dr_Tanya_Unni) due to significant copying. I have since rewritten the content, removed some unnecessary sentences, and checked it against a plagiarism checker. Can I post the updated version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsvishal (talk • contribs)

@Itsvishal: You can. Please be ultra-careful, since a second rapid deletion usually leads to "salting" which will make it far harder to work on in the future. You appear to have written it off-wiki, so I can't check it, but another patroller will. Nosebagbear (talk) 17:16, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, will do — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsvishal (talk • contribs)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

added Eddie891
removed Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

readded SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hamdallah Mustawfi on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rename & courtesy vanishing request

Duplicate/admin shopping, see User_talk:Deepfriedokra#Rename_&_courtesy_vanishing_request for a post that already has replies. Primefac (talk) 17:33, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I have chosen to ban myself from this website indefinitely due to an indiscretion that I made. The mistake was completely unintentional and not malevolent, but it doesn't seem like it was taken that way, and people's feelings seemed to have been hurt, so I will no longer edit. I completely misread the names of and mixed up two people that I shouldn't have. Before I do leave, I'd like for my name to be changed and my account to thereafter be vanished, please. I put in a request, but it's been a week since. Is there any way for you or another administrator to manually get this done or to look over my request? Factfanatic1 (talk) 05:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Getting "Williams Telecommunications" wiki up to code

Hi there! Appreciate your feedback on the speedy delete, I work in music so I think I'm used to writing things in a more flourish-y way than Wikipedia prefers ahaha. Do you have any advice for what can be included to make a page seem less like advertising? When I looked at telecom competitors, their pages were similar but had info about bankruptcies, lawsuits, etc. and this company doesn't have anything in that department at this point. Could I include more about the products/suppliers or the repair facilities? Kpaigewilliams (talk) 16:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kpaigewilliams: In terms of what you talk about, you want your content "weighting" to roughly match how much reliable secondary sources talk about it (so that's not the company's website or press releases) - this can be somewhat different to what you think your company actually spends most of its effort doing. I suppose bankruptcies et al get more coverage, so obviously they're included (but good to hear the company is neither going bankrupt or being sued!). One common issue is where the included content is all accurate and sourcable, but excluding relevant negative content.
More relevant is "how" you go about talking about it - don't make any specific claim about how a product is interpreted unless you've got reliable sources doing reviews on them (as opposed to just individuals etc).
If you ping me when you've finished it as a draft I'll take a look at it to at least determine whether I think there are blatant issues at hand. Issues with the former I can just point out to you, issues with the latter are what is most likely to cause a speedy deletion. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:33, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: Appreciate your help, I'll get back to work and let you know once I've got something I think might be more sufficient! Thank you so much. Kpaigewilliams (talk) 16:39, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Drunk History Australia

Hi Nosebagbear, I've noticed that you decided to remove the CSD tag I placed on Drunk History Australia. I realise that Drunk History actually exists, but the article contains several instances of unfinished text in the "Episodes" section. The article also does not have a reference section or any sources at all. I must say, the article still appears to be something better suited to a sandbox. It certainly should not be in the mainspace in this state. Please let me know what makes you think that this is a finished article as I'm still learning the ins and outs of CSD. Best Modussiccandi (talk) 17:22, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Modussiccandi: - hi, it certainly was too incomplete for an article, so I've draftified it (turned it into a draft). I just reviewed the speedy delete reasons, which only exist for extremely narrow reasons. So, for it to be a test page, it would need to clearly just be someone testing the function (these are most commonly pages say "hi" or "this is a test" etc). Since it looked as if they'd attempted to make some content (even if insufficiently for an article), it wasn't a test. Nosebagbear (talk) 17:26, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification, that makes sense. I understood the criterion in a way that's too broad for its intended scope. Thanks again and best Modussiccandi (talk) 17:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What can I do to stop vandalism without being an admin?

I look in the log but there is nothing I see that is suspicious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4thfile4thrank (talk • contribs)

@4thfile4thrank: - firstly, please make sure you sign your messages. This will be necessary for any posts you make on talk pages, like warning users.
So much of the basic counter-vandal work I do involves just going to the "recent changes" page on the left, and checking the "diffs" for various edits, especially those with suspicious summaries (e.g. being a big edit that just has "typo" or "tweak" as its summary).
If you want a proper education in counter-vandal work and the various tools designed to help fight them, the best place to look is the Counter-Vandal Academy (CVUA). They have trainers who focus in this field, and can help you identify and stop it better than I can. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to use the tool? - ❄️Steve talk? 18:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userfication Timothy Garrett

Re "Alternatively, if you want to get some experience elsewhere and then have it userfied, just let me know at a future date".

What kind of experience do you recommend getting before being able to get the userfication going? I'm unfortunately quite busy, would love to contribute, but I'm not sure where my expertise could be used anyway? If I remember correctly, climate change topics in general are especially thorny?

Is there any possibility to get the userfication going with kind of your "supervision" to make sure the resulting Wikipedia page meets all the quality criteria? I've also contacted Richard Nolthenius and he would be willing to help too. Though he has the same issue than I have in having a "single purpose account" for now.

Thx for any help! Gordonschuecker (talk) 14:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is Richard Nolthenius here, aka SalviaStellarum. I don't know Gordon, but we've now exchanged an email. What we have in common is an interest in the observed economics/energy consumption relation discovered by Garrett, and which I decided needed a name, and gave it the name "The Garrett Relation", with no prompting from Tim. Indeed, I've never met Tim or talked with him, but we've now exchanged emails over the past couple of years. It's highly unfortunate that despite a series of peer reviewed publications from Garrett and now with the help of economist Steve Keen and mathematician Matteus Grasselli (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237672), and my own informally published look at confirmations in the data, that the Wikipedia article was so summarily taken down for unclear reasons that apparently have nothing to do with the merits of the science. I admire Wikipedia's dynamic updating of information on a topic, and let the best science win. I don't think taking down "The Garrett Relation" article serves the betterment of knowledge. If conventional economists have intellectual ammunition sufficient to wreck the relation, let them unload on it in the article itself, in the sunlight and fresh air of good scholarship. And on the subject of userification and "single purpose", it would seem to me that anyone relatively new to Wikipedia will find themselves here and editing or creating because of a single subject of interest. I don't pretend to be a generalist contributor to wide ranging Wiki articles. I too am quite busy; my duties are to Cabrillo College and my students, primarily.SalviaStellarum (talk) 17:41, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another try... Gordonschuecker (talk) 22:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

added Ajpolino • LuK3
readded Jackmcbarn
removed Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
renamed There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Birger Nerman on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appian Corporation

Hello! I'm reaching out because you added a {{more citations needed}} flag to Appian Corporation two years ago. For full transparency, I have a declared COI and have recently worked with other editors to update the page. With these updates, there are now 42 references on the page. Do you believe the flag still applies? Thank you! JMGAppian (talk) 21:12, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User's resuest to be unblocked

User thewolfchild has after around 18 months requested to be unblocked.

But see how rude he was to me when I supported him for an unblock, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thewolfchild&diff=prev&oldid=892978225 his response was "didnt ask".

If you look through his history, he has been self-absorbed or even focused/stalking all my edits, and in effect twisting my mind. So take note of this if you unblock him.

Thank you

BlueD954 (talk) 05:47, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueD954: - I certainly will consider your comments and check over their interaction with you, but I would like to clarify. In this message it says you supported him for an unblock, but in the diff it says "I do not support the removal of the block". Which is the case? Is there a particular reason for the difference or just a typo? Nosebagbear (talk) 12:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well I supported him for a block but not indefinite I believe I said around 6 months back then? He rudely removed my comment with the curt summary "didnt ask." If you look at my talk page, he is very stalkish and aggressive. He removes my comments from his talk page. He signs without the need to allow ou to click to talk to him. BlueD954 (talk) 12:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thewolfchild is stating nonsense. He followed every edit I made and it messup every edit I made. He appeared to be stalkerish. That is my view. BlueD954 (talk) 16:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will end the argument and not debate on his talk page where I will no doubt get curt replies.BlueD954 (talk) 02:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Callan Method (October 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
essentially advertising
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
DGG ( talk ) 00:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Nosebagbear! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DGG ( talk ) 00:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DGG: - just re-assuring you that I haven't started submitting non-neutral drafts - I must have made a mistake in the template when submitting on behalf of another user. I'll pass it onto the draft creator. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
of course you haven't. For something that has been reviewed or submitted more than once, the template sometimes selects the wrong editor. It tries to send me notices like this too, when I rescue an article. I try to catch it, but I must have missed this one. The AFCH. script and associated templates all need rewriting , preferably from scratch. I think they're beyond fixing. DGG ( talk ) 16:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Callan Method has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Callan Method. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 02:49, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI report on Normal Op

Hello, you had participated in the report I filed on ANI, which was archived by the bot without closure, despite clear consensus. Is Request for Closure the appropriate venue for unarchiving and closing this discussion with action?PearlSt82 (talk) 14:12, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PearlSt82: that can work, or you can just recreate in AN/ANI (hatted, so the page doesn't endlessly grow), with a request for closure. But it should get a proper look at for a close and action Nosebagbear (talk) 14:21, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!PearlSt82 (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userfication Timothy Garrett [2nd try]

I'm trying to push my previous section again this way. Thx for any help! Gordonschuecker (talk) 20:35, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal archived without resolution

It had been archived, though one admin supported the appeal and no one opposed it. What happens now? --Steverci (talk) 15:38, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Archived again. No one commented after you. --Steverci (talk) 15:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Steverci: - this has become ridiculous. I've dropped a line to some other non-involved admins to ask if they can close it. If they don't do so within the next day or two please drop me a line and I'll IAR and close it myself. Apologies for the procedural nightmare. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alllllrighty, I closed it. See: Special:Diff/989297416, Special:Diff/989298348, Special:Diff/989298593, Special:Diff/989300457. Did I miss anything? Haven't poked around in AE-land in a long time, so I want to make sure I did this right. Airplaneman (talk) ✈ 05:24, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Airplaneman:, that all looks good, and cheers for the close Nosebagbear (talk) 08:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Robbert_Rietbroek

Hi Nosebagbear, regarding the no consensus assessment on the above AfD, the article suggests that the subject is the CEO of the Quaker Oats Company, a role which does not exist as it is a division of PepsiCo which has a different CEO. There is no online source that supports this CEO claim, while there are several that state the subject is in fact the General Manager of this PepsiCo division. Consensus might instead be reached around notability and substantiation of the CEO claim. The article is not a credible source of information and the information in it is inaccurate. One of the 6 keep votes counted was submitted by the original author of the article, reducing the number of credible keep votes to 5, and credible delete votes to 6. Editorwikifact (talk) 17:56, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Editorwikifact: - I specifically examined the CEO/not-CEO aspect in more detail when considering my close after seeing it on Barkeep's TP. In any case, I decided to discount the components of "CEOs of major companies, as their faces, are notable" as a violation of INHERITED, and as such, the rebuttals to those points, were also somewhat irrelevant (though quite possibly logically accurate). Deciding the substantiation of the CEO role can be hashed out on the talk page (and should be). A keep !vote by the creator, so long as its policy based, is certainly reasonable - and usually worth having. Without reason to think they were a sockpuppet or similar, I wouldn't discount their !vote. Regarding numbers, for argument's sake, if a discussion came down to 6 Deletes and 5 Keeps, all of roughly equal policy strength, I'd still consider that a No Consensus Nosebagbear (talk) 19:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, @Nosebagbear:! As the AFD decision was not right. I have merged Robbert's page to Quaker Oats Company but some editors are opposing it. I request you to take action against them and let the page be merged as per Wiki policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.102.167.145 (talk • contribs)
@191.102.167.145: - I've pinged you to the talk page of the article, but I'll repeat the relevant bit here. If you think the AfD decision was incorrect, you should first take it up with me before unilaterally revoking it (which means you're endeavouring to override a local consensus). If you have evidence I made a poor decision I'll absolutely listen to it, and review in some fairly extreme depth. If we're still at loggerheads, then the place to go is deletion review, you CANNOT just interpret an AfD close as you wish, counter to its formal status. Nosebagbear (talk) 11:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ioke closure

Hi there - just checking, did you complete the deletion on Ioke (programming language) after closing the AfD? The page is still there, and I don't see any indication that the softdelete was undone? - The Bushranger One ping only 08:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Bushranger: thanks for that - I thought I'd set-up the closer to process properly, but must have missed something. I've now removed the soft deleted articles manually. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That happens sometimes, no worries. Glad I could help! - The Bushranger One ping only 09:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Piriyadha Varam Vendum (TV series)

Thanks for letting me know that. I've been tagging revdels for years, and that's the first time someone said that to me.Onel5969 TT me 16:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Kirschenmann

Hello, why were all of my edits at Fred Kirschenmann erased? The areas that were at issue were lists of his his awards and his appearance in a film. I’m not sure they fell under the category of copyright violation. I also don’t understand why there is still a request for deletion on the page. I don’t see how it is not encyclopedic. If there was controversy about him in any mainstream news source, I would have added it. So far in my research he truly is what I wrote: one of the most celebrated and pioneering organic farmers in the United States. This is not some PR stunt, it is how he is regularly described in mainstream major US newspapers and media. Thank you. Thriley (talk) 13:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Thriley:, hi there. The edits in one sense weren't erased - I didn't revert the content back to what it was before, but your edits slowly undid some copyright violations. Because they were so small individually, it was tough to decide at what point there stopped being a breach. Your changes are still in the article, what was hidden was actually the previous version. In terms of G12, it reads in a similar style to CV-related articles, which can concern reviewers. I'm inclined to think that it couldn't meet all the requirements for a speedy deletion, since there's certainly enough in the article that is neutral to allow an article to exist, so I've struck the other CSD grounds. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:07, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
:@Nosebagbear:, thank you. I’ll be more conscientious in the future. Best, Thriley (talk) 22:14, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Huobi Wiki

Hi, regarding your question, yes I am an employee of Huobi. I would like to make some updates to the page for greater accuracy, and am submitting them for Wiki Admin's review. Would you be able to help with the updates please?

"other key half is disclosing your employer and link to this article on your userpages" -I'm not sure how to do this.

Thank you.

(Tby246 (talk) 10:54, 26 November 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@Tby246:, if you go to your userpage, click in the box that appears, and write something like "This user discloses that they are an employee of Huobi, with a paid interest in editing the article [[Huobi]]" then that should suffice.
The edit request made by you isn't marked as completed, so someone will formally review it at some stage. If you find a secondary source (reliable newspaper, book, etc - probably not an industry magazine, as crypto ones are rarely reliable) then you can give that, which will help
Please let your colleagues know that while more than one of you can make edit requests, if there is a discussion about whether something should be included, you should avoid having more than one of you participate (or you all need to specifically point out your links in the discussion). Nosebagbear (talk) 11:22, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear:

Apologies for the duplicate post, I asked @Tby246 for help as I was blocked and unable to talk/reply or access my user page. I've made my declaration on my talk userpage, hope that will suffice. Huobi is now based in Seychelles and not Singapore, recent media articles and websites will reflect that as well. Other references: https://www.huobi.co.kr/en-us/about/ https://decrypt.co/resources/huobi https://www.coindesk.com/huobi-banxa-fiat-crypto-sepa https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/crypto-exchange-huobi-adds-direct-visa-mastercard-payments-2020-10-27 https://coins-marketcap.coolplugins.net/exchange/huobi/ Pix7518 (talk) 07:47, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Hello Nosebagbear,

A chart of the 2020 New Page Patrol Queue

Year in review

It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.

Rank Username Num reviews Log
1 DannyS712 bot III (talk) 67,552 Patrol Page Curation
2 Rosguill (talk) 63,821 Patrol Page Curation
3 John B123 (talk) 21,697 Patrol Page Curation
4 Onel5969 (talk) 19,879 Patrol Page Curation
5 JTtheOG (talk) 12,901 Patrol Page Curation
6 Mcampany (talk) 9,103 Patrol Page Curation
7 DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 6,401 Patrol Page Curation
8 Mccapra (talk) 4,918 Patrol Page Curation
9 Hughesdarren (talk) 4,520 Patrol Page Curation
10 Utopes (talk) 3,958 Patrol Page Curation
Reviewer of the Year

John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.

NPP Technical Achievement Award

As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

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

18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry December


Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Season's Greetings

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Nosebagbear, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,
Starzoner (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!Starzoner (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Happy Holidays!

Hello Nosebagbear: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Merry Christmas! Asartea Talk Contribs! 16:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

'Tis the season

A Sarplaninac in the snow
two red bags, one with snowflakes on it, and the other with a drawing of santa claus
two black bears sleeping in the snow
A snowy nose + A christmas bag + Two bears enjoying the holidays = ???

Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. It's been a wild year, and I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your contributions and for the role you play in making Wikipedia as good as it can be. It was a pleasure interacting with you this year. I'm glad that I got to know you this year-- you're doing great work here, and are someone I look up to. I wish you and your loved ones all the best this December and in the years to come. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 21:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays

This year, many people had COVID to fear,
The holidays are getting near,
One thing that will be clear,
We will still have holiday cheer,
Happy holidays and happy new year!!
From Interstellarity (talk) 22:57, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, Nosebagbear! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Linguist111talk 23:43, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Nosebagbear, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Nosebagbear, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,
FlalfTalk 04:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Precious anniversary

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas, Nosebagbear!!

TheSandDoctor Talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas, and here's to a wonderful New Year

Joyous Season

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Coryphantha Talk 23:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.


Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year!

Merry Christmas everybody!!!
Merry Christmas everybody!!!

When things get rough, don't get your nose all out-of-joint. Just think of me stuck up on this church and remember how easy you've got it!

Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:33, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Smallbones: - thank you - and a nose out of joint is a particular concern to me! Nosebagbear (talk) 11:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I know of. I just like this particular angel, whatever his faults. Smallbones(smalltalk) 12:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

also by me! :) Prinzvonzavelstein (talk) 14:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!
Hello Nosebagbear:


Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters.

Starzoner (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

I wish you a prosperous 2021! Starzoner (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Nosebagbear!

Happy New Year!

Nosebagbear,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:06, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Nosebagbear!

Happy New Year!

Nosebagbear,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 01:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year!! :)

Happy New Year!
Hello Nosebagbear:


Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters.

Coryphantha Talk 16:37, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kanwali

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kanwali I object to your relist, as a blatant misuse of AfD resources. Kindly explain. I suggest you undo the relist and leave it for another admin to close as obvious keep. Walrus Ji (talk) 14:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Walrus Ji: it is not a "blatant misuse of AfD resources". I made the relist because there were legitimate reasons, including variations (though non-linked) of things like WP:CONTENTFORK. Relisting is done in order to help clarify a discussion. Had the only choice been to close it, I would have either have come down as NC or Keep, as the weight of policy arguments does currently lie towards the Geoland-utilisers. However, that would be a false dichotomy, and there was no need to make a choice when it could be settled for the longer-term by waiting. Nosebagbear (talk) 17:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nosebagbear, I did not understand what you are trying to say with the phrase ", including variations (though non-linked) of things like WP:CONTENTFORK." Anyway, considering that you have responded something already, I will make my final remark. I note that while relisting this thread you did not give enough weight to two well made Keep votes, and ended up with some sort of false balance. You know this is going to be kept after another week, yet you went on to relist it. A direct consequence will be that some other AfD will be devoid of contribution, due to this unnecessary relist. Walrus Ji (talk) 11:04, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Russia–Turkey proxy conflict on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment, and at Talk:Iskandar-i Shaykhi on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:00, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Byzantine–Venetian treaty of 1277 on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for keeping the community aware of discussions concerning WMF actions. It troubles me what's going on. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 13:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Zindor: cheers - I was a tad depressed when adding the second one to the CENT list - the first time I've ever added consecutive items to the list and both were meta items that weren't well publicised Nosebagbear (talk) 14:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Fonda Zenofon

Hello, Nosebagbear. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Fonda Zenofon".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! S0091 (talk) 17:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Terence Coyle

Information icon Hello, Nosebagbear. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Terence Coyle, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 02:13, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for saying the right things at the WM Community Board meeting! Robert Blinov (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RobertBlinov: Thanks! I was depressed by how imbalanced it was, given the overall average viewpoints, not to mention serious concerns about Maria's commentary. Nosebagbear (talk) 17:13, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maurice Hilleman Comment

hello,

your message to me was like:

February 2021 "Information icon Hello, I'm Nosebagbear. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Maurice Hilleman, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you." Nosebagbear (talk) 23:29, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

and im just wondering, perhaps its the one who said "actually" that are supposed to have verified facts.

"perhaps" its actually more certain in the line, in the spirit of Truth.

God bless you, in Jesus Name! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.66.23.49 (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @213.66.23.49:, just a couple of housekeeping things before I reply. If you're starting a new discussion on someone's talk page, then if you click "new section" at the top, it avoids the risk of it getting caught in the midst of a different discussion. Also, if you finish your comment with ~~~~ then it will sign your message for you.
In any case, it is indeed the obligation of the content-adding party to add the initial source. That paragraph has one (Vaccinated: One Man's Quest to Defeat the World's Deadliest Diseases, by Offit). If you then want to change it, you need to either show that the source doesn't state "actually", or have better sources (multiple) showing that it was, indeed, "perhaps". Nosebagbear (talk) 01:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RevDel request

Hello, sorry to bother you but is it possible to remove the edit summaries here and here? Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 11:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashleyyoursmile: done, and IP blocked. Nosebagbear (talk) 11:47, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, they were indeed here for trolling. Ashleyyoursmile! 11:49, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

request for comments on process for using RfA for administrator review

I'll be honest: I don't think the prospects are good for an RfC passing on using RfA as a mechanism for administrator review. I think opposes will again come from those who prefer a separate framework for administrator review, those who think without prior resignation, the process is toothless, and those who think anyone doing this voluntarily is likely to pass, making the whole process a waste of time. The key questions to ask are what problem is being solved, how significant is the problem, how effective and efficient is the proposed solution, and is there a net benefit, given the solution's resulting impact and costs, including opportunity costs? isaacl (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To me it seems like the RRFA is a way for a responsible admin to get a gut check, and the proposal is so those admins can go back to RFA for the gut check without people opposing the process, as well as adding in some safeguards in case of an admin having second thoughts. (And maybe once the system is in place, it could be applied in a less voluntary sense?).
I’ve been thinking it may be time for Wikipedia:Administrator review to be revived in some form, where a consensus at WP:AN can trigger a review, and a panel of uninvolved administrators can close the review after a (2-4 week? c.f. RFCU) period, enacting any consensus result. –xenotalk 13:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Xeno: I don't think individuals would support RRFA if failure meant admins had to go through another process to confirm its outcome, but didn't have any effect. I've just called it an RRFA to clarify that it's not the regular RfA process. It would be binding and like failing an RfA, would lead to not having the tools. In terms of a review process that wouldn't have the effect of terminating their rights even if it viewed them as fault, and thus working as more of a learning/warning process, then admin review could well support an adjacent benefit to RRFA. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
When reading this comment today I was thinking about the same idea of a mandatory administrator review. I suspect, though, that it would be hard to get agreement on a format and procedure (same problem as with the recall proposals). A lot of the English Wikipedia community who weigh in on such matters don't like being constrained and I think would just as soon have a discussion at the administrators' noticeboard. For that and other reasons I don't think I'd try to organize an idea development effort, though I'd be interested in collaborating if someone else is interested in taking the initiative. I think even if it fails, it can help lay groundwork to better understand the relevant considerations for a review process. isaacl (talk) 04:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nancy Pelosi on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment, and at Talk:State Anti-fascist Council for the National Liberation of Croatia on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was this editor unblocked?

I see that you have unblocked User:Bilto74811 based on this discussion at ANI [1]. I have been repeatedly harassed by this user (see [2], [3], [4]), he was not banned for only six months, but indefinitely for disruptive editing [5], and I find the closure premature. I was not even aware of the discussion and I find it highly irregular that a blocked user was allowed to post directly to ANI to request an unblock. Furthermore, he's right back editing the articles he was banned for being disruptive at [6], [7].--Ermenrich (talk) 15:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I stopped on your toes by just bringing the issue directly to AN, I don't have a lot of experience with the drama boards and I wasn't sure what the correct procedure was. I obviously don't think this was your personal decision, you were just following what the consensus was.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, there are worse things than an early jump on the close. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:54, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Redesigning the featured, good, and article assessment icons. Pbrks (talk) 21:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Irtash on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Caradog Jones: request for edit.

Many thanks for responding to me on this. I did attempt to contact the original editor, Hogyn Lleol, many years ago with those Google Docs background documents but did not get a response to that at the time. Hence I would be none the wiser if he would be interested. If he were then I imagine it would be best for him to take it on and I would be happy to provide information as required.

Failing that you mentioned: 'but for other changes, I can instead run you through how to make edit requests and the best means of doing so, if that is of interest.'

Yes it would be of interest and thanks for the offer. I will also take a more detailed look at the general guidance offered for style, referencing sources etc. Do you require an email address or do we conduct conversations here on this page? The reason I am concerned is that the entry is referenced by a surprising range of contacts both personal and professional and hence wish to get it rectified.

All the best for now, Caradoc 'Crag' Jones. Wikididit (talk) 21:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Just to add - all those years ago I did get Caradoc's request for help, and indeed I replied that I was happy to help. I wondered why I never heard anything more, but it's obvious now that he never got my message. (I tried to find the correspondence earlier, but can't; I'm not sure which medium we used.) Anyway, that's water under the bridge - I'm very busy at the moment with non-Wikipedia things, and would be very happy if we could find someone else to take on the necessary editing. Thanks. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 18:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikididit: - I'm not able to reliably commit to making edits myself, however as regards best way to make edit requests (as vs directly making edits) unless there is someone interested on the talk page, is by:
  1. Go to the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard and follow its instructions. You would want to use the middle initial option "COI"
  2. Generally it is better to make several small requests than one big request. This is for two reasons: one is that it lets you get some idea of how best to use the process and the other is that big edit requests run the risk of being declined in their entirety due to one small mistake.
  3. You'll be taken to a box, with three bits in bold needing to be replaced:
  1. The bit you want to be changed. This is best in the form of going change sentence "Copy in current form of the sentence" to "Proposed new wording of sentence" rather more general requests
  2. Why it should be changed - inaccuracy would obviously be a good reason
  3. Reference - Wikipedia values reliable secondary sources above all else, and your changes will generally need a reliable secondary source (newspaper, book, etc) to support it.

Here is fine if you want to ask me any questions. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:48, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bludgeoning by Bilto74811

Hello Nosebagbear, would you mind giving Bilto74811 (whom you unblocked following a decision at AN) a few points on not bludgeoning discussions? I'm specifically concerned about this rfc, where you can see that almost all posts have been made by Bilto in the forms of walls of text. I tried to tell them about bludgeoning [8], but they rejected my advice [9]. I'll note the problem is not limited to Talk:Moses, but seems to be the general way that Bilto handles all discussions, which of course drives people away (see also Talk:Christianity#Lede mythology parity and any number of discussions at Talk:The Exodus.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ermenrich: I've dropped them a message. If someone blanks a warning on their talk page then it is generally taken as understanding and formal acceptance of the notice, as well as not wanting to discuss it. If you believe they continue utilising negative behaviour past this point you can report it to ANI (with all the usual strictures etc) Nosebagbear (talk) 12:56, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will keep that in mind.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:59, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
see, just 1 editor, and one I have a contentious past with. The Christianity lede mythology parity was not RFC and was an ongoing discussion between the 3 of us, so not comparable at all. Also we came to an agreement on the Christianity page, so also not comparable for that reason. Bilto74811 (talk) 13:03, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't note the other pages Ermenrich raised as I decided that fault was not sufficiently clear. While it wasn't a tagged RfC, it was certainly functioning as a straw poll, and regardless of that, bludgeoning applies generally, it's not a niche rule. If you have a contentious past with them, then logically you should be being more careful about how your interaction with them appears after coming off a CBAN. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know you didnt note that other page, I agree it is not bludgeoning as it was a back and forth between 3 editors who even reached agreement. I am careful with them, I think not agreeing on their opinion about my comments on the RFC is fair. But since you dont think I should comment on the RFC I wont, as I said. Bilto74811 (talk) 13:20, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nosebagbear,

Sorry to bother you, but I am not very good at dealing with admin matters on other users, but I have a concern now that I see others expressing their discomfort with Bilto74811. I concur with @Ermenrich:'s assessment of the situation as I was in the Moses Talk page he refers to and I eventually checked out of those conversations because of the way Bilto74811 interacted with me and others there. Quite a lot of personal insults from his direction towards me and anyone who did not share his agenda - that everything religious has to be labeled "myth" (see the talk pages Ermenrich referenced). The sad part is that I was arguing for "legend", and he treated me like I was some sort of fundamentalist. He has continued his insults and side remarks for at least 4 days days even after I was not longer talking in the talk pages from 19 April 2021 (my last comment [10]) to today 23 April 2021 (his last comment [11] - in the current rfc section [12]). Why mention me after I had left the talk page on the previous section on the talk and after 4 days had passed?

Search for how many mentions by him of me there are in that time frame. As can be seen, even after I stopped interacting with the talk page completely, he referenced me about 20 times in his interactions with others in a derogatory or condescending fashion much of the time and in pinging me in that way as well. He even made some weird attempt to force or pressure a vote from me when I was already checked out of the talk page because he was not getting support from anyone and was getting impatient. [13]. It makes no sense. Essentially he was literally going to force his disputed edit and impose his view without consensus - despite me telling him about WP:NOCONSENSUS Wikipedia policy the day before in the talk page in very last comment [14]. And in fact he did just that - he violated wikipedia policy the next day [15]. This was already despite already 2 talk sections (at that point) not supporting his edit. As you can see, I had to revert him and got into an edit war over it.

All of this happened just a 2-3 days ago. So its very recent.

Very odd and I would say abusive or obsessive behavior if not some type of bullying is involved here and ignoring Wikipedia policy. Seems to have WP:OWN issues on the Moses article and talk, the Exodus article and talk, and perhaps now in the Myth article if you look at the history of those pages. He does not WP:DROPTHESTICK like everyone else does and he certainly WP:STONEWALLs discussions as you can see with the last 3 sections on the Moses talk [16] with the amount of commentary and opinion he generates over one word - "myth". Never had this kind of obsessive experience on wikipedia before.

Please note that I have never interacted with Bilto74811 prior to a few weeks ago (March 30 2021). He went to my talk page at the beginning [17] and then he took it to the Moses article (summary of events in paragraph above). What can we do about this? Can you escalate this since you unblocked him? Its unacceptable on so many levels and does show significant lack of restraint when dealing with diverse editors on wikipedia. This is not normal.Ramos1990 (talk) 03:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ramos1990: I don't have a clear, short summary of issues so I'd be uncomfortable taking it myself - however, WP:ANI is the appropriate forum. Please make sure to read the rules in the box at the top. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: Appreciate the guidance. I will ping you when I get the details there (hopefully I can summarize in short fashion) since the behavioral issues were acknowledged by you after you closed the unblock. That point came too late and I don't think any of them noticed it.Ramos1990 (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Nosebagbear. 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.Doug Weller talk 12:11, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ezra Collective, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Crosby.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Hessling Editor

Per closing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hessling Editor. You may have noticed I added a source to the article this morning. There is also the case there is a potential merge to REXX which was not picked up by due diligence in BEFORE. I didn't spot it either but my prime issues elsewhere. I've not been scanning computer AfD's delsorts every day only perhaps a glimpse from time to time. Given this new information your suggestions on how to proceed. Did you check the article for recent improvements before closing the article. You don't have to but I generally prefer to improve articles rather than being bound up in discussions. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:26, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Djm-leighpark: I've recreated and relisted the discussion, but please make sure to formally state a note on your !vote Nosebagbear (talk) 12:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Stepanakert on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question from CaptainEek (00:41, 7 May 2021)

Hi! I'm a totally new user, never edited before, not even once! [FBDB]

But for real, I'm just testing out the mentor tools, can you reply to this message in some fashion? Thanks! --CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 00:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CaptainEek: Just a note to confirm receipt - I've not enabled the tools yet, so it's just a "received like a normal TP message, replying in normal method" one! Nosebagbear (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Deportation of Koreans in the Soviet Union on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Growth Newsletter #18

Welcome to the eighteenth newsletter from the Growth team!

The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.

Structured tasks

A screenshot of "add a link" feature in development in beta.

"Add a link" is now being tested in production and is nearing release on our four pilot wikis (Arabic, Czech, Vietnamese, and Bengali Wikipedias). We'll be doing final tests this week and next week, and then plan to deploy to the four wikis either during May 24 week, or May 31 week. After two weeks, we will analyze the initial data to identify any problems or trends. We expect that this feature will engage new kinds of newcomers in easy and successful edits. If things are going well after four weeks, we'll progressively deploy it to the wikis with Growth features.

News for mentors

Mockup of the Mentor dashboard.
  • We are currently working on a Mentor dashboard. This special page aims to help mentors be more proactive and be more successful at their role. The first iteration will include a table that shows an overview of the mentors current mentees, a module with their own settings, and a module that will allow them to store their best replies to their mentees questions.
  • We've conducted our quarterly audit on Growth's four pilot wikis to see the activity of mentors. It appears that the vast majority of mentors are active.

Community configuration

Community configuration editing form under development

We are working on project to allow communities to manage the configuration of the Growth features on their own. In the past, communities have needed to work directly with the Growth team to set up and alter the features. We plan to put this capability in the hands of administrators, through an easy-to-use form, so that the features can be easily tailored to fit the needs of each community. While we developed it initially for Growth features, we think this approach could have uses in other features as well. We'll be trying this on our pilot wikis in the coming weeks, and then we'll bring it to all Growth wikis soon after. We hope you check out the project page and add any of your thoughts to the talk page.

Scaling

  • Growth features are now available on 35 wikis. Here is the list of the most recent ones: Romanian Wikipedia, Danish Wikipedia, Thai Wikipedia, Indonesian Wikipedia, Croatian Wikipedia, Albanian Wikipedia, Esperanto Wikipedia, Hindi Wikipedia, Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia, Japanese Wikipedia, Telugu Wikipedia, Spanish Wikipedia, Simple English Wikipedia, Malay Wikipedia, Tamil Wikipedia, Greek Wikipedia, Catalan Wikipedia.
  • A new group of Wikipedias has been defined for the deployment of Growth features. Please contact us if you have questions about the deployment process, or if your community likes to get the features in advance.
  • After discussion with the English Wikipedia community, the Growth features will be tested on a small percentage of new accounts. At the moment, registered users can test the features by turning them on in their preferences.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:23, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cyprien Ntaryamira on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Wayne LaPierre on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 4 June 2021

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Nosebagbear/Archive_6"