User talk:Bbb23/Archive 57

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

A cup of coffee for you!

Good morning. Drmies (talk) 12:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Sam Birrell

This person is a member of parliament in Australia, can you please undelete this? The subject is clearly notable regardless of who created the article. ITBF (talk) 08:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

List of Trojans for Representative Government members

  • 2022-06-25T12:15:39....I made an edit
  • 2022-06-25T16:18:42....@Bbb23: talk contribs deleted page List of Trojans for Representative Government members (A7: Article about a club, society or group, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject)
  • 00:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC) : saw your message


I want a copy of the deleted page at:

....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 00:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Moved to draft, a better location than userspace.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

It's beauty pageant sock season again

I noticed you blocked 180.191.14.0/24 with the comment "either abusive logged out editing or block evasion". You might want to look at 124.104.128.0/17 with very similar editing. To wit, beauty pageant SPAs. Both geolocate to Luzon as well. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Any idea to whom I was referring? I can't remember. :-( --Bbb23 (talk) 13:18, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Afraid not. But since I brought this up here, at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Uncommunicative editor, disruptive editing Ponyo has determined that a user associated with the range you blocked is LTA RadyoUkay819. Here's an example of a probable transition from the IP to the user or vice versa. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:43, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
I tagged this one as suspected based on what I could piece together (and in comparison to other such groups as DevilBlack69), but the number of accounts sucking the air out of the room in this topic area is vast.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:50, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
You might want to check out edit history on User:Missgluegurl/sandbox. I see a IPs in the 180.181 range, a previously blocked sock spammer, and MaximoredelValle who have been in there. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:55, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Can anybody give me advice on how to seek a rangebock? The IP is still disruptive. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I blocked 124.104.128.0/17 for two weeks. Any other IPs active now?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Oh, thanks. I have to check my notes. Perhaps I can give another range to you for review. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Another candidate Luzon range above. Not 100% pageant related edits, but a lot. A lot on tornadoes too. I will keep scanning for more. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:41, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm not comfortable with that range because of the wide topic range. Not sure how much collateral damage there would be.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Regarding an IP

Hi Bbb23, hope you're doing well. The range of IP 176.219.128.0/17 (talk · contribs) you've blocked for nationalist editing has been doing some questionable stuff since their unblock that I think is worth pointing out to you as the enforcing admin. For starters, just after their unblock, they did this extremely tendetious edit, and are now wasting time of good faith editors on the Armenian genocide article, with WP:FORUM threads like this Talk:Armenian_genocide#Massacres_perpetrated_by_Armenians_against_Muslims_and_Turks_(1914-1919). All the sources they presented are either primary or partisan Turkish state sources, and they have been told so, but they keep insisting on talk. It's a very similar behavior of this IP prior to their unblock.

The topic of Armenian genocide is very important to me and I hope I don't sound too biased. I would kindly ask your evaluation because as far as WP:NOTHERE goes, to me this is a clear example of it. The IP seems to have a single mission on Wikipedia, and it's to undermine/deny the Armenian genocide by all ways possible. It didn't change after their block expired. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 06:18, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I re-blocked, this time for 3 months.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:45, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Charli

Hey, sadly Typ2022 (talk · contribs) he has a new account. Global lock is already requestred by RoBri but maybe you can chip in quick. ;) Kante4 (talk) 17:51, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

HelenHIL

Is right back to edit-warring, right where they left off [1]. Thought you might want to know. Thanks, Khirurg (talk) 22:45, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up but I had HelenHIL's Talk page on my watchlist because of the previous block, so I noticed the warning left by SilentResident. I've indeffed HelenHIL.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:23, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
I was aware of their recent block, so I tried to reason with them at my Talk Page [2] with the hopes of making them a better editor, by explaining to them that the article is a WP:GA and the information in it, is carefully written and verified by veteran editors who contributed greatly to Wikipedia, and how the stable article version is actually the result of difficult mutual compromises by several editors over the years. (Aside from explaining to the editor the necessity for seeking WP:CONSENSUS, I mean). Even though it is the very same editor who caused disruption on other articles of the Ancient Macedonia topic area, I'm sorry to see things coming to this end for them. Thank you, Bbb23 for your swift action, and I appreciate your advises on how to deal with them in the future. I will try my best to follow them. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 23:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Maybe sock again?

This again with 49.186.59.192 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). ― Qwerfjkltalk 07:00, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:05, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
...and 123.208.18.144 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). ― Qwerfjkltalk 14:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Page deletion

How exactly was this vandalism? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:14, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

That was when I was making certain assumptions about your edits. Would you like me to restore it? It doesn't look like it's of much use to anyone.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:00, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
I will do it, since I will put different content. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 19:01, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Edits made on Kunu

Hi @Bbb23:, I noticed you deleted a contribution made on kunu by an kwalaw participating in the Nigerian Cusine contest? The editor really put in the effort to make that post to benefit people who are searching to know the health benefit of Kunu which is made from Millet. Please kindly look into this. Thanks :) Edriiic (talk) 18:29, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

The edit by the user was nothing but egregiously unencyclopedic, promotional material. We are not selling kunu.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Regarding a deleted draft

Hi Bbb23, you recently deleted Draft:Croatian Tales of Long Ago - animated collection under G11, but following an interaction with the creator on their talk page (User talk:Ilijadjordum), where they shared several links, it appears that the subject passes WP:GNG easily. You may wish to reconsider the deletion. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 10:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Whether the subject is notable is irrelevant to G11. The discussion between you and the user on their Talk page indicates that they are a WP:SPA with an obvious WP:COI and have other problems as well. I've also tagged the image from the draft as a copyright violation at Commons.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:00, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for sharing your findings Bbb23. But my personal opinion on the matter is that it is okay for a COI editor to create a non-promotional draft on a notable subject which will eventually be vetted by a AFC reviewer. In fact WP:COIEDIT explicitly states "you should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly" which indicates that COI creation of drafts is acceptable as long as proper channels are used, which would be analogous to {{request edit}} but for entire article. As for SPA thing, maybe they'll be a regular if they don't feel unwelcome. A particular example I can think of is RGBLight who was a SPA when I userified their first article, but later appears to have become a regular contributor. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 16:01, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
But they didn't create a "non-promotional draft".--Bbb23 (talk) 16:35, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Oh God, you could've told me just that in the first reply. In that case, I rest my case here. Thanks for your time. Best! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 16:43, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
But you knew that before you even posted here; surely you know what G11 is. In any event, I've now blocked the user for making a legal threat, which given their attitude, does not surprise me in the least.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:47, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Fair thing. It is my mistake and I accept it. I know what G11 is but I got carried away by GNG arguments. The CSD page says, if it meets notability, copy-editing is preferred to deletion or something along that line. I did not have them making legal threats on my bingo card. Now that they're blocked, it is better deleted. I really do not know what I was upto. I'm sorry for getting into a meaningless argument with you. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 17:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
No worries, I know you were acting in good faith.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Another sock?

Bbb23 You blocked NebulaOblongata at 13:55, 4 July 2022, who last commented at 16:16, 4 July 2022 [3]. New account UtkarshSharmaJi was created at 16:17, 4 July 2022 [4]. Attitude seems similar, [5] vs [6]. Is it possible to run a check? MehmoodS (talk) 19:24, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

The two users don't look at all the same.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Egor Rays

@Bbb23 - Good afternoon, can you help protect the article? because the participant "Praxidicae" again starts to throw for deletion, like the last article, please, help! Karol DEO (talk) 12:38, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Just a note that this is a massive xwiki spam campaign by an obvious paid editor (Karol DEO). PRAXIDICAE🌈 12:39, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
@Praxidicae Man, I noted this in my profile a long time ago, therefore, there is no point in hiding anything, and the artists are significant for Wikipedia, why are you not trying to delete that article, especially after your edits many times from Karol DEO (talk) 12:44, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

some sorta sock

I see you deleted a bunch of hoaxes by this user, they probably need a block for socking too, though I'm honestly not sure who, maybe this one, they're just being trolly/disruptive. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:19, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

They go by a few names, the most common is now on their user page. LTA page is also linked from the master. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:32, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Yeah I realized Bbb blocked as I was typing this then saw your block. I'll request a glock. Ty! PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Oops I misread that, so I've put in a glock request. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Technical news

  • user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Edit warring on Macedonians (ethnic group)

Hello Bbb23. Editors are fighting among themselves for a new image (a map) on Macedonians (ethnic group). There is no consensus yet for it to stay, so I removed it. I believe the editors have been in Wikipedia for quite a while and are experienced users, so I am confident the edit warring will stop there, but I will feel better if an Admin keeps an eye on it just in case. Thank you very much. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 18:55, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Potential sockpuppet

I noticed that you recently blocked User:Editonic for sockpuppetry. Since then, an editor named Fjfgd[7] has been making very, very similar edits using much the same aggressive tone, continuing edit wars started by Editonic and acting in a nearly identical manner. I thought you'd want to be made aware of this. Anwegmann (talk) 21:14, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:20, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks for taking quick action. Anwegmann (talk) 22:22, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Advice

concerning your closure of my report [8] can you tell me where I should file it? I have looked around and thought the noticeboard was the most appropriate place to file the report but it appears I’ve been mistaken Thundercloss (talk) 01:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

You use the normal methods of dispute resolution. Administrators don't resolve content disputes, even protracted ones.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
did you mean wp:dr? Your link sent me to the policy on disruptive editing, not dispute resolution. Thundercloss (talk) 02:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Yes, sorry!--Bbb23 (talk) 03:11, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Administrators noticeboard

Have correctly notified the user now. However unable to reply to you there for some reason. Thanks your help though. SjShane (talk) 14:10, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Another sock at Talk:United States

Awolf58 again. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 19:49, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, blocked before I saw this post. I have the page on my watchlist.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:52, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 19:56, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

An AFD you closed as keep was renominated by the same guy

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haya Maraachli as Keep. The person who sent it to AFD then nominated the article again at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haya Maraachli (2nd nomination). Dream Focus 18:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

I've deleted it and warned the user. The article is now on my watchlist. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:46, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I was just stopping by to wonder about the deletion of the new AfD, because there had been an extensive discussion (that I participated in) before it was deleted. WP:VANDAL policy includes Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. However, I feel like I lack sufficient experience with these types of issues to understand the basis for this action. I have previously seen an article rapidly renominated at AfD in the past that was permitted to proceed, so I am curious about how this is different. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 20:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
The renomination was somewhere between vandalism and disruption, but in my view closer to vandalism. It was certainly not done in good faith. In the example you give the first AfD was closed as "no consensus", not as "keep".--Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
After the research I conducted and my discussion with the other !voter who withdrew their keep !vote (that they had also made in the first AfD), I think there is some support for a good faith basis in the renomination. If it had started snowing 'keeps' with independent RS cited to support notability, then I would wholly agree with a speedy close of the discussion. However, at this point, the participation of three editors has been deleted per WP:G3, while the further discussion had uncovered a lot of sensationalist tabloid content and evidence that there is no support for notability. Under these circumstances, I ask that you reconsider the deletion and reverse it so the discussion can continue. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 20:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
The previous AFD was open for 9 days, and all three editors that voted said Keep. Less than an hour after it was closed, it was nominated again by the same person. He should've asked to have it reopened for more time to discuss it farther. Dream Focus 21:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I think the nominating editor could be warned about how to best use the process to help prevent disruption in the future. I had previously seen a rapid renomination happen, and saw a basis for deleting the article, so I participated. Beccaynr (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23, as an update, I had a discussion with the nominating editor on my Talk page where I explained the usual process for addressing disagreements with AfD outcomes. I am hoping this helps address the concerns you may have with the rapid renomination and provides additional support for restoring the AfD so discussion can continue. One of my concerns about this deletion is related to how if I nominate this article for deletion in the future, I would need to request undeletion to retrieve my good faith research and the record of the discussion, because I do not see any basis for my work to have been deleted as vandalism. I think it would be easiest if the AfD is restored now and the discussion can simply continue, and we can just return to our regular work on the encyclopedia. Thank you again for your consideration of this request. Beccaynr (talk) 20:23, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Your discussion with the user does not address my concerns at all. Part of the reason for that is I don't trust a new user who has conducted themself the way they have. I am unwilling to restore the AfD.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:17, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. Please note that I plan to seek review of this deletion because it seems best for the encyclopedia to have the deletion discussion continue for this sock-created article, and I will notify you when I have posted the request. Thanks again, Beccaynr (talk) 23:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Socks everywhere. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 23:26, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
I would not be surprised if the article is also a UPE production, based on the self-promotion by the article subject (and lack of independent RS supporting notability) in the sources I found in my research. I completely agree it is not ideal for a new editor, whose first AfD sucessfully deleted an article, to not consult with you after their next AfD closed. But the thought of reviewing the sensationalist tabloid content again, and finding the source that admits she has no WP:NACTOR notability, using Google Translate for most of the sources, is just ugh. I already did the work, one of the previous !voters withdrew their support for keeping the article, and it's been deleted as vandalism when it seems clear that we were trying to protect the encyclopedia. I still do not understand why the discussion was deleted after established editors participated, but I do not want to keep bothering you about this, because it also seems clear you have made your decision and I have the option to appeal when I have the time to focus on it. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 00:11, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haya Maraachli (2nd nomination)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haya Maraachli (2nd nomination). 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. Beccaynr (talk) 14:47, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

bkfip?

I think you're familiar with them...I'm definitely not but does this person strike you as similar to their socks? I admittedly have had no interaction I know of with their socks prior to this but they're also obsessed with removing sourced negative info from articles and it's clear they are some LTA but I'm at a total loss for who, but the behavior is super familiar. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Apparently it's this fun person PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:02, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Recreation of the page Rey Enigma

Hello. I am the creator of the page Rey Enigma which was speedly deleted per A7. Today I have spent some time searching on google.news instead of google, and found that the news this funny guy is reported in Diario de León, El Comercio and Marca, which are newspapers in Spanish. Do you think these sources are reliable enough for recreating the page? Thank you. Z423x5c6 (talk) 16:08, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion at SPI

I imagine you'll notice, but just in case I figured I'd point out the rather obvious block evasion going on at the Dnywlsh SPI itself. You can't make this stuff up. - MrOllie (talk) 22:25, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Forgive me, but it's unclear to me what block the IP is evading.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
The block you placed on 73.128.151.200 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) today. MrOllie (talk) 22:41, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
From a geolocation standpoint, it's not obvious to me, but the issue is moot as another admin has blocked the IP for disruption.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Credible editing

I am Tim Wilson (Australian politician). I feel the page about me relies too heavily on columns, op-eds, primary sources and other weak sources to add erroneous or bias information. A lot of the page was written by Playlet, who was recently blocked again as a prior sockpuppet user and was involved in a political opponent's campaign. I am not allowed to explain the details, due to the rules against "outing".

I have complained about the page about me a few times, however I have no way of knowing which editors that respond are impartial, or which may be another Playlet account or members of his political advocacy group. Sometimes editor(s) with similar interests as Playlet respond within hours. I was hoping you might be willing to review the page with BLP in mind, because I know with confidence that you are a random, impartial editor with no affiliation to Playlet, his advocacy group, or Australian politics in general, so I can trust whatever feedback you give.

Thank you for your time and considering my request. Stay well. TimWilsonMP (talk) 00:51, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

sock

FYI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mr._G._Price is a sock of another user you banned https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HollywoodHero30 Cantthinkausernamenow (talk) 19:42, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

@Cantthinkausernamenow: You're absolutely right. Too bad they've edited since mid-June; they're prolific and create a category nightmare, some of which I've cleaned up, but it's very tiring. I appreciate the heads up, but I find it nonetheless curious. This isn't the first time you've alleged that users are socks, and if I recall correctly, your allegations had merit. How do you spot them? As an example, how did you discover this one?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:45, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
One wonders where this user comes from, given comments like this. Drmies (talk) 01:02, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
What's the matter with you? You English professors are soooo picky. You don't like words like "reinstations"? Based on what TB said, I think they are the prime minister...probably of some micronation, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Aw darn.

I was really looking forward to that lawsuit from the gov't of India. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:11, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Sock report from last week

Not sure if this was overlooked, but I reported a different potential sock last week, and the case is still open with no updates since the reporting. Would you have a look? July 14th case on Aamir Suspect Sambhai1. Thanks. Zinnober9 (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

I didn't overlook it. One edit to the AfD wasn't enough for me to block without corroborating technical evidence. You might consider requesting a CU for that reason.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:02, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Bbb23 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Question

Why delete this page? There is an active discussion regarding it currently taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Field marshal rank for the SS, (as well as the article's tp). - wolf 08:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

The page was deleted in 2017 as a priobable hoax. It was recreated recently by a vandal and then tagged for speedy deletion as a hoax. I didn't feel capable of making the determination as to whether it was a hoax and deleted it as vandalism. As I understand your discussion at the Project, you are discussing whether the rank existed. The absence of a redirect page is not going to hamper such a discussion.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Darwin.estrada29

Hello Bbb, you may wish consider revoking TP access as the user continued to disruptive editing in the said page as seen here in this revision despite being blocked. Thanks! VictorTorres2002 (talk) 03:39, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't see that series of edits as a big deal.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:42, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Electro Arc

Hi Bbb23, are you sure about G11 for Draft:Electro Arc? I had softblocked the user as the draft didn't seem much promotional to me, and just unblocked them after a successful rename. The most promotional word seems to be "privilege" inside a quote; the rest rather looks like a collection of (not yet sourced) factual statements to me. I'd ask BangJan1999 not to tag such pages for G11 deletion, but the page I'd refer to when explaining the issue has been deleted... ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:36, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

(smiling at your last comment) Go ahead and restore it if you believe it's okay.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:47, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
😅 thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:25, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Arbitration

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#new(ish) user giving warnings to users that have older accounts and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks,User:Cosmictoilet(talk) 00:02, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I need your help

Hello Bbb23. I am nelson the creator of Nazeri Lajim. I would like to request for you to review my article and look at the talk page where I submitted the reason why it should not be speedily deleted. Thank you for the edit too, and hope you may look through my request. --NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 00:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I've declined the A7, as I think you know. I don't review articles the way some editors do.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:47, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I not sure about the speedy deletion things, and only know about the discussions for the deletion nomination. Still, thank you for the reply NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 00:52, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Qammy

Qammy looks pretty ducky to PixieMiller2094, but I'm not familiar with this master. Thoughts? -- ferret (talk) 16:13, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind, once I noticed the user pages it's beyond any reasonable doubt. -- ferret (talk) 16:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Black Rose (2018 film)

I redirected the Draft:Black rose (2018) to Black Rose (2018 film) as the creator posted another copy onto mainspace under a different title. The movie does show up on Netflix in the US, so I tagged it as a Stub from NPP. if you want to throw it back on draft, that's okay too. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:46, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Might be okay to keep around. I'm seeing some Nollywood awards and noms. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:47, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for improving it.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:43, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Wikidata_templates_on_biography_articles

Hi Bbb23. Can I ask for some advice on a potential SPI issue? Jezebel's Ponyo pointed out an overlap in editting with some Slowking4 socks, and I've noticed something else connecting the cases (as the LTA page states Shows typical language in non-content namespaces.). I hesitant to file an SPI case with the details, as that would highlight the similarity or later avoidance. So I'm unsure how to proceed. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 16:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

You should probably follow up with Ponyo when she returns to Wikipedia (usually after the weekend). Honestly, I don't feel like really reading that AN thread.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:15, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
I was just going to let it go unless Matsmetal returned to editing the same way, in which case an indef block could be considered on its own merits without having to deal with the SPI issue. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:52, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

GTA5Player

I'm guessing that all of the previous socks from the last SPI in 2021 would be too stale to check a new account, User:Mattcymru2? I've blocked based on strong behavior evidence, but I'd be happy to file a new SPI if there was a chance that it would be useful. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:27, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

It's possible there is non-stale login data, but only a CheckUser would know by checking. Otherwise, all the tagged accounts are stale. If the behavioral evidence is strong, I don't see the necessity of filing a report. I noticed that you've tagged the account, so they can be found if it's helpful for the future.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:32, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Reincarnation?

Please look at this, and then this and this. It looks very much like a reincarnation. Also, the previous user seems to be connected to a previous sock, please look at the language of these users in these two threads (Want to know more and Reply). This is a very persistent case, unfortunately. I wonder what can be done. Chaipau (talk) 06:34, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I would like to add that the blocked user has been active as an IP editor, the remedy to which has been page protection. Chaipau (talk) 06:45, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Inasmuch as RoySmith rejected Homogenie as a sock in the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sairg case last year, I would create a case with Homogenie as the master and Somadrink as a suspected sock. The behavioral evidence between the two seems strong to me. I'd also request a CU, particularly because Homogenie has had an unblock request open since last month.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:33, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, shall follow through. Just noticed that the unblock request has been closed. Chaipau (talk) 04:09, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
As you probably know the resolution was amazingly quick. Thank you for suggesting CU—it netted a number of additional socks and virgin sleeper accounts all ready to serve. Chaipau (talk) 06:04, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

0xCryptoDegen

Hello, could you please review latest comments by the above user on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liam Andrew Wright , further personal attacks despite your final warning   Kadzi   (talk) 20:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I reverted the edits and blocked the user.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Special:Diff/1100816494

Hello. I am MdaNoman. I noticed that you reverted my edit. I know the abuse. But can any user use "infobox artist "? --Abdullah☆ (Talk) 03:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I see no reason why not. The bigger problem is you changing it. You shouldn't be altering other users' userpages. Also, you should change your signature so that it displays your actual username. "Abdullah" is confusing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:46, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Busted! =)

Per the "Peace70x7" report, they obviously aren't block evasion sock puppets. Just poor memory or trouble with WiFi and laptop. Differentdaytomorrow (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

P.s. Friends and/or family are possibly editing on them or creating/changing passwords on me? My apologies in advance... Have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Differentdaytomorrow (talk • contribs) 15:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

  • I find that a very strange story, and in addition I'm wondering if NOTHERE applies. Drmies (talk) 16:02, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Hong Kong Parliament Electoral organising committee

Hi - you removed the speedy deletes I placed and restored a redirect. However, if you look through the history of the page, you'll see that the copyright material taken from here was added to a redirect of the "Hong Kong Parliament" page and then moved to the current name. Restoring the redirect to the HK Legislative Council under the current name is not correct, this is a group of expatriate Hong Kongers in Canada. It was formed a few days ago and does not appear to have notability. I requested speedy deletion on the basis of a page which had copyright material, I mistakenly included CSD criteria for a blank page. I think at the least the edits from 2022-07-28T10:29:39‎ to 2022-07-28T10:37:31‎ (inclusive) should be suppressed. I'll make another assessment and see if it should go to AfD. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:56, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

If there are copyright violations (which are rev del'd, not suppressed) that are removed before you tag the article, you should not use G12, but instead use the template that states there a copyright violation in the history - I forget the template. Diannaa?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:00, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi - I don't want to revert your edit or undo the intention of your edit, which restored the redirect. Do you agree that redirecting to the HKLC is incorrect? I'd like to restore the page to the text that was left there, which was not copyright, so it can be sent to AfD for discussion. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 01:43, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
The template is {{Copyvio-revdel}}. — Diannaa (talk) 02:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Diannaa. Goldsztajn, I've verified that there was indeed a copyright violation, right from the first edit by the user after the redirect from a long time ago. I've therefore deleted all the contributions per R1. I'm not sure what it is you want (or why), but you can't go back to any version subsequent to the redirect because of the deletions. As for the redirect, if you think it is wrong, you'll have to nominate it for a deletion discussion - a speedy tag is unfortunately not possible.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:18, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
I just realized that I went further than needed to remove the copyright violation, so it is now possible to go back to the version that has only an infobox. If that's the version you want to send to AfD, it's not necessary. You could just tag it with A7, although I don't think it makes any sense and that nominating it to be deleted as a bad redirect would be best.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

TheFattyClan again

AussieRulesFan123 (talk · contribs) looks like another sock of TheFattyClan (talk · contribs) based on their edits at WP:AFCRC. If they're blocked, can you also delete the redirects they've requested that have been created through other AFCRC reviewers? Thanks for all your work! ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:35, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

I've blocked the account, but I don't believe I have the authority to delete redirects unless they were actually created by the sock.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:01, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Relisting deletion/Tariq Hilal Al Barwani

Hello,

I noted you deleted the article. While you may have your valid reasons, wouldn't it have been healthier to offer suggestions for improvements to an already established and credible page? Let me know your advise so we can enhance and keep the page. Thanks in advance TerryWiki12 (talk) 22:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Who is Excundar and what do you mean by "we"?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. We help update the content of the article. The use of WE to denote the team behind me that support with the development. Please advise TerryWiki12 (talk) 23:07, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

We will update & add new references upon your relisting the page. Thank you TerryWiki12 (talk) 23:09, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

So, you and Excundar are part of a team to improve the article? Any other Wikipedian part of that team? Who is paying you to do this?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:11, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

No one is paying us to do what we feel could contribute to the body of knowledge for free. We are trying to establish credibility in publishing articles in Wikipedia. Can you guide and offer advise? TerryWiki12 (talk) 23:15, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

What is Excundar ? I couldn't understand you TerryWiki12 (talk) 23:16, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Malformed edit warring report

Just a heads up, this report was supposed to be about me, which you can see the discussion at User talk:TylerJThomas1987. Just to be clear, I did make 3 reverts within 24 hours (just barely within 24 hours), but I stopped to explain myself on his talk page and he has made it clear that he intends to continue to edit war on this page that he has an established conflict of interest on. I am not going to edit the page further for a while, and am about to take my kids to the pool but I did want to make some kind of comment on what I assume is a forthcoming edit warring report while I could. - Aoidh (talk) 19:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't be so confident about a "forthcoming edit warring report". Have fun at the pool. Do you get to swim, too, or is it just for your kids?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:47, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, I see that the editor changed his mind. The kids did have fun, and the youngest is small enough that she can't swim so while I didn't get to swim, I did get to stand in the water with her, which I guess technically counts as going swimming. - Aoidh (talk) 21:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

A mocking account

Hello, Bbb23. I just noticed a newly-created account that, beside being used mostly for disruptive editing, was apparently created to mock my username – Sundostunds (talk · contribs). I reverted most of their edits; also, I don't like the idea of my username being mocked and used as an "inspiration" for disruption-only accounts. —Sundostund (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I've indeffed the user, but I suspect it's a sock of another editor (named or IP) whom you've pissed off. Any ideas who that could be?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt reaction! As for pissing off someone (and its a good guess on your part), I can only think of 178.223.1.23 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) (at least when it comes to recent/current disputes), as well as Mohammed106 (talk · contribs) – an old "acquaintance" of both you and me (disruptive editor on Libyan articles, indeffed by you last year). By the way, their latest edits that I noticed were done by these IPs – 41.253.19.4 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 41.253.6.204 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Also, Shingling334 (talk · contribs) could be a possible "suspect" as well. —Sundostund (talk) 21:57, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Srinagar

Hy you have reverted constructive addition about Srinagar city. they were both accurate and useful in providing both historic as well as architectural description of the city. Please cite your reasons Jonarja (talk) 15:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

The majority of your edits are written poorly and often violate Wikipedia policies in one way or another. I believe I've provided edit summaries for my reverts, so that should explain it. If you have questions about editing (you're new), try the WP:Teahouse, but please don't continue to edit when you don't know what you're doing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:44, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:Requests for unblock

Why did you revert my edit? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Request for reconsidering the deletion of the YunoHost page

Hi! I saw that you deleted both my draft for the YunoHost page (User:Hikapa/YunoHost) and the published page. Can you please think about the fact that this page is a 100% non-commercial project, has a Criticism section, and is very similar to other pages for self-hosted open-source OSes with the same level of notability and users? see ArkOS and FreedomBox Can you at least let me keep the page User:Hikapa/YunoHost and eventually give some constructive feedback? Thanks in advance. Hikapa (talk) 15:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

False banning

[9] This is the user who was actually vandalising The Masked Singer (Australian Season 4). I was merely removing his false information. I should not have been banned, or even warned, for reverting their vandalism, so I don't understand why you're blaming me for the vandalism. Especially since that user still hasn't been banned. CBFan (talk) 16:09, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Trolls gonna troll

Oh, look, Innican Soufou continued their Biden trolling as soon as your block expired, compare [10]. I notice you were considering an indef. What about now? Pay out yet more rope, do you think? Bishonen | tålk 17:44, 3 August 2022 (UTC).

I think the user is a lost cause, but they were having a discussion with Doug Weller and Muboshgu, and I didn't feel like chiming in. Also I didn't agree with Muboshgu when they said that it wasn't what IS called Biden, but the bit about poor health. I blocked for both behaviors. Then it got even weirder when IS said Biden "said, on camera, that he currently has cancer" in one comment, and then in another later comment said "I never said anything about skin cancer and neither did he". What kind of bullshit is that? Neither Doug nor Muboshgu followed up after that last comment, so I (reluctantly) let it go. My opinion? The user should be indeffed for BLP violations/NOTHERE.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
I have blocked the account indefinitely. For me, this is the last straw. That's a BLP violation, and also quite untrue from all accounts. Their follow-up edit changing "president" to "former vice president", much like their edits to call him "the resident" are clear trolling and a good reason for blocking per WP:NOTHERE. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess we were converging. I went there to indef just now, to find that you had done the deed, Muboshgu. Bishonen | tålk 18:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC).
Right. I hadn't seen that reply until Bbb23's ping. Not worth any more of our time. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
All’s well that ends well, thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
How many admins does it take to block one user? :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 21:03, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Fifty and a steward.[Humor] – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 00:07, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
And then another one to protect our ideological bubble and remove talk page access. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

User talk:92.11.191.227

I think maybe this editor is in the right? Removing that material was appropriate. This was a pile-on perhaps simply because it was an IP editor; the same material was blindly removed by User:Hey man im josh (simply because of lack of edit summary), and then removed by the same user, perhaps after actually examining the edit in question. There was no vandalism at all. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 16:10, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

I initially reverted because it did look like vandalism at first (removal of content with no edit summary), however it turned out not to be. Their ban should not be based on vandalism. I will say that their approach and conduct towards other users left much to be desired, but I understand how they may have been frustrated with the situation. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
I'd suggest an apology; a quick look at the edit history would show that the IP was the about the tenth editor to remove that material. (My guess is that the results of the show leaked?) --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 16:24, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Good idea. I sent one to the user after reading your comment. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:39, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
  • I'm lost and will just assume that Jpgordon is right.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2022).

Administrator changes

readded Valereee
removed Anthony Appleyard (deceased) • Capitalistroadster • Samsara

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
  • An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.

Technical news

  • The Wikimania 2022 Hackathon will take place virtually from 11 August to 14 August.
  • Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (T308570)

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • You can vote for candidates in the 2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
  • Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed here. There are also a number of in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
  • Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

The Masked Singer (Australian season 4)

Hello Bbb23, I need a third opinion. Dipper Dalmatian reverted my edits 1 2 with the reason- NO SPOILERS. But spoilers are allowed -> Wikipedia:Spoiler. What's your opinion on that?. I didn't get a reasonable answer on his talk page. Many thanks in advance and regards --Serols (talk) 15:42, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

It's moot now, isn't it, as the user has vanished?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23, the user is not vanished. After I wrote to you, has the user renamed himself, see here. The user received a final warning from admin Drmies in June. The user is obviously not willing to allow constructive discussions and sometimes ends them very rudely or insultingly. Examples 1 2 3. My change was restored by another user. Regards --Serols (talk) 14:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
The user has not edited since vanishing. I see nothing to do here unless they resume editing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Has done after my editing was restored by another user, thanks. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:50, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Serols, I don't understand why you basically participated in an edit war that was ongoing until just now, when El C wisely protected the article. I don't see an explanation here, for instance. A bunch of those users (on both sides) should have been blocked already--but you restored unverified material about the results of a show that hasn't even aired yet. Drmies (talk) 16:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, I have only reverted twice and see here. Regards --Serols (talk) 16:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Serols, it's not about how many times you reverted, it's about why you reverted. You did not explain in those edit summaries; I think this isn't the first time I commented on that. And the protection request--I guess that's great, but you referred to the REMOVAL of unsourced information as vandalism, and that's questionable, and it was to protect the version you reverted to. I'm not here to bust you for edit warring, but I do want to say that those reverts were improper and improperly explained. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, that's why I asked for a third opinion here. Regards --Serols (talk) 17:11, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Serols, the reason I was puzzled by your protection request (diff) is because, well, it didn't really explain too much. Looking at the revision history, I was seeing the same user/s revert by adding one thing and then revert again by removing that very same thing. It was quite confusing. Luckily, a separate request provided an explanation that went beyond your terse summary, which read (in full): Temporary protection: Persistent vandalism. But had they not done so, your request would likely languish. Hey, I too am often terse, but sometime, you have to use your words. @Drmies: courtesy ping. El_C 21:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
El_C, I thought that looking at the article version history says more than a thousand words. Unfortunately, this assumes that someone has the same level of knowledge. Of course that's wrong and you're absolutely right, I'm a bit lazy to write, sorry. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:22, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Serols, I appreciate that. Glad you understand. To expound a bit further, from my prespective, I could use 60 min of RfPP work-time to resolve, say, 30 requests. Or, I could, theoretically, spend 30 min researching one complex request from scratch. But I almost never do that, because: 1. It makes no sense, productivity-wise; and 2. It makes no sense because it would take the requestor, themselves, I dunno, say, 5 min to provide a decent summary (i.e. unlike me, they're not starting from scratch).

With a backlog often in the tens, RfPP, in some respects, is a game of numbers. Granted, in some instances, a reviewing admin would already be familiar with the particulars of a given case. With almost 10K protections under my belt, often enough, that's the case with me. Meaning that, unlike other admins, I wouldn't be starting from scratch. But just as often, not. While some admins unfamiliar with a particular case, would actually spend the 30 min researching from scratch (not a problem, they volunteer how they like), this happens way too infrequently to rely on.

Anyway, I ramble, but this is an issue I encounter very, very often. And, to me, it usually isn't a big deal or anything (though there were a few rare instances, especially for Cup or League requests, where I eventually outright banned certain requestors from RfPP for egregious repetition of that practice). Often times, the requestor or someone else would follow up my query and explain better. Other times, they wouldn't and the request would likely get archived without action, even though an action would actually be due. Ultimately, the inefficiency and irrationality of sacrificing tens of requests for the sakes of researching a single poorly-explained one from scratch, is a thing few RfPP admins would bother with. //Rant over! El_C 17:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello El_C, thank you for the detailed explanation, I vow to improve. Wish you a nice weekend. Regards --Serols (talk) 17:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, unfortunately I didn't have enough time to answer yesterday, hence my explanation today. I have reverted this edit with Huggle, which seemed disruptive to me. With Huggle the processing is automatically reverted and a warning is automatically sent, without allowing a comment in the summary. Like every Huggle user, I have no influence on this. My edit and the warning was undone by the above user with the reason (NO SPOILERS), but spoilers are allowed. I then opened a discussion on the user's talk page. The user's explanations were not sufficient for me and the immediate deletion of the discussion did not seem serious to me either. That's why I asked for a third opinion here. Unfortunately, this was not possible in time due to the name change. After 24 hours the supposedly correct version was online again.
I find your accusation that I wanted "my" version not fair, I wanted only the correct version (I always want that and I think you know that). There were about 15 users / Ips and admins involved, which did not make the situation any clearer, that's why I applied the protection request. Wish you a nice weekend. Regards --Serols (talk) 17:36, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Serols, "accusation" is putting it strongly, but every admin who looks at this will probably smirk at the idea of the "correct" version; that's why we have Wikipedia:The Wrong Version. Anyway, we've spent enough time on this. I didn't know that Huggle doesn't allow for an edit summary--I find that a bit disturbing. Take care, Drmies (talk) 20:48, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcoming

About this: After the 48 hours of punishment ends, will you commit to sending a cordial welcome message to the offending newbie, so that he or she might better learn the rules and regulations, and why exactly what they did was against said rules? Doling out blocks without bothering to explain the violation or rules (or even point newbies in the direction of rules) seems like an endeavor that will only reduce the pool of new contributors. --Animalparty! (talk) 06:49, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Charli

Hey, hope you are fine. He is now back with IPV6 adresses like 2A01:C22:34BE:E900:B469:BB5B:B2BB:9A78 (talk · contribs) or 2A01:C22:B13E:3100:113D:252E:CE69:C2F (talk · contribs), basically here, deleting an edit just to do it himself. Any chance we can block him (the range, i am technically not smart so not sure if or how that works) or is it the same as IPV4 (his "old" adresses) and not much can be done other than reverting? Kante4 (talk) 13:09, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I looked at the /64 of both ranges, and it doesn't make sense to block.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Ok, thanks anyways. Kante4 (talk) 12:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Bbb23 , It's a little weird. It has been 17 days since this user joined Wikipedia. Photo uploaded by another user. But this user is adding photos to some pages.

I have no idea what you want from me. Please don't use mobile diffs on my Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:05, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23 , Image uploaded by another user. Adding a new user to the page. I am telling you this information. This is a questionable type. Apologies for the mobile diff. PravinGanechari (talk) 16:36, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Removed Dispute

Why did you just remove a dispute? Did I put it in the wrong place?Tzim78 (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't know that there is a right place, but if you're going to file a report at WP:AN3, you must follow the instructions on the page for creating a report. AN3 is a very structured board, not like WP:ANI or WP:AN. In addition, looking at the page you created, I don't see any edit-warring, let alone a violation of WP:3RR. You can file a report at ANI if you wish, but I suspect you will be told that you don't have to accept Fram's move of the article to draft space, meaning you can move it back, although there might also be a fair amount of drama first.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:41, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I think it was the wrong place I want a peaceful resolution so I added it to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard instead. Thank you for all your tireless work.Tzim78 (talk) 20:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Apology

Already apologized to the user, but please accept my apology for this edit and summary. I had conflated being autoconfirmed with being autopatrolled for a moment. —VersaceSpace 🌃 15:56, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I saw your apology on the user's Talk page. Very nice of you. And I'm happy to understand your explanation. BTW, I believe the user himself removed the autopatrolled privilege.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:59, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

174.24.129.227

[11] [12] [13] perhaps a kid in the cyber-trolling. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 19:52, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

47.40.118.147

Please note the IP is now edit warring to force an invalid template on the other editor's Talk Page. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I thought block notices had to stay until the block expired, to avoid confusion when others look at the page. Perhaps that's an old rule and was later superseded? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 01:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Actually the rule WP:BLANKING has been in place for a long time. You can remove notices but can't remove declined unblock requests.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Broken nutshell

Unblock? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Reconsider Deleted Page Please

Hi, I created a page for UrgentVet, which is like urgent care for humans, but it's for animals. I created it based off of the existing pages from other veterinary medical businesses: Banfield, VCA (where my own kitty goes), and BluePearl. I made edits to ensure it was factual and not promotional. Could we please have it reinstated, and I am totally open to feedback to make it more business encyclopedic. Dianatmoorephd (talk) 18:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Could we please have it reinstated - who is "we"?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
The royal "We," Lol! I'm a yoga teacher and work in non-profits for a living. We always use "we" and "us" and "our," and this is a collective space, so it's a collective "we." I apologize for the confusion. Dianatmoorephd (talk) 14:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I can't restore the draft. It was tagged and deleted as WP:G11. To restore it would be a violation of policy.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:11, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
But it said that I could contest it, which I did. It also said I could reach out to the person who deleted it, which is why I messaged you. Was this information incorrect? Dianatmoorephd (talk) 19:39, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
The information is correct, but when you "reach out" to me, I don't have to restore it - and I've told you why I won't.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I see, however I was in the process of correcting it to be compliant as was indicated by WP as an option for me to do. As I said before, I based it off of already existing similar company pages: Banfield, VCA Animal Hospital, and BluePearl. I made edits to ensure it was factual and not promotional. Please give me another chance to correct this. Dianatmoorephd (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, @Bbb23. I see, however I was in the process of correcting it to be compliant as was indicated by WP as an option for me to do. As I said before, I based it off of already existing similar company pages: Banfield, VCA Animal Hospital, and BluePearl. I made edits to ensure it was factual and not promotional. Please give me another chance to correct this. Dianatmoorephd (talk) 13:49, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Content deleted as unambiguous advertising cannot be restored. You must rewrite from scratch using content cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and have a reputation for fact checking." Content written in neutral, non promotional language. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
@Deepfriedokra Thank you! Dianatmoorephd (talk) 18:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks

Just as I was about to revert the user who erroneously reverted me, you took care of it. Just as I was about to reply to the ridiculous warning they left on my talk page, you reverted their warning. And just as I was deciding how to deal with this user (all of whose edits were either reverted or were complaints/warnings about those reversions), I noticed that you had issued a block. Thanks for being one step ahead of me all along!  MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM  17:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Weird user - you're welcome.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

User:AidepikiwIV

Could you explain to me how a user that keeps making the same edit over and over again without using any edit summaries or talk page discussion is not edit warring, and how the edit warring noticeboard is not the right venue for them to be blocked for edit warring? Within two hours they again deleted the file without an edit summary, [14], and reverted the link to the noticeboard discussion, [15]. Aspects (talk) 02:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Sorry, like Bbb23 said, this is better suited to WP:ANI. One could argue that you too were edit warring. The other issues are not related to edit warring, but are concerns raisable at ANI. Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Skhofeni

Ok to unblock? Decline? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't quite get why you're "eager" to unblock this user. They're persistent, but I don't find them very convincing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:40, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
DFO, this is one of MANY socks and they've socked as recently as two days ago, I'm not sure why this would ever be considered especially given there are multiple CU blocks? PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
I believe the issue is whether they are in fact a sock of the master. The CU finding was "possible".--Bbb23 (talk) 20:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Obviously I'm not privy to the unblock or the CU information but I can't imagine there's much compelling in the way of an unblock for this sock farm, meat or otherwise. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:22, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
The CU finding was at the SPI, i.e., it was public.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
I meant the data itself. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Not eager. Just clearing CAT:UNBLOCK will decline-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:37, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

You said you were eager, Deepfriedokra. In any event, can you please sign your post above? Otherwise this lovely thread will never archive. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Any eagerness was killed by the drudgery of reviewing unblock requests. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
You probably deserve a barnstar for the work you do with unblock requests and UTRS. You should take a break and do something more fun...you know, like blocking socks, vandals, and other miscreants.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:56, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Mostly spammers.. Then vandals. Sometime socks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
and RfPP -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Space Bopper

I don't usually intervene in these things, but a block on the basis of unconstructive editing, when all the evidence I've seen is that they are a new and inexperienced user who is trying to be constructive (such as here), seems excessive, at best. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:01, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The user is at best incompetent. It's a combination of their live and deleted edits.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:40, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Well, competence is acquired through experience, and I would have thought advice would be better than a block. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:01, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing while logged out

Bbb23, without going into details, if I suspect an editor has commented in a Talk page discussion while logged out, in violation of WP:LOUTSOCK, what can I do? I know that WP:SPI and CheckUsers are very reticent about checking IPs against named accounts because of privacy issues... Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

CheckUsers will not connect an IP to a named account, but that doesn't mean that an administrator, including a CheckUser, cannot look at the problem. You'll have to provide me with the details if you want me to check it out.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:00, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Thank you – here is the IP edit in question. It should be obvious from the context of the Talk page discussion who the named account corresponds to. You may also want to take a look at that user's talk page (and edit history), as they seem to be pretty disruptive in general. Thanks again. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I've blocked the named account as a sock of Dealer07, a relatively prolific LTA. I don't think it's necessary to block the IP unless they continue to edit. In case I don't notice, let me know if they do.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

3RR Closing request

This page is not a proxy for ANI.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

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.

Hi Bbb23, the following 3RR report [16] has been archived without closing. Would it be possible to formally close it please? Thank you पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 04:06, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Many reports at AN3 archive without any administrative action, and as a rule archived reports are not "unarchived". In short, no.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:52, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Any reason for no action being taken? Should I re-file? Thank you पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 14:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
You should not re-file, unless there is new edit-warring at a different article. If you believe that there is an ongoing conduct issue with another editor that can only be remedied by administrative intervention, go to WP:ANI. I have no comment on the merits of such a complaint; therefore, I am not endorsing such a move on your part, just pointing out your options.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
OK... So no reason for not closing this request? (I thought you were taking the case since you had responded to it) And why would a new filing only concern a different article? Wouldn't new 3RR breaches on the same article constitute offenses? (I have been refraining from editing this article because of the ongoing case, but if I edit again I am quite sure the 3RR breaches will resume...) पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 15:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
The only edits to the article have been F&f's today. Before that, there've been no edits since July 11. How can that constitute new edit-warring? And we don't accept pre-emptive edit-warring reports. Commenting at an administrative noticeboard does not mean that someone "is "taking the case".--Bbb23 (talk) 15:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
You must be looking at the wrong article: there have been about 100 edits, with edits almost every day, by Fowler&fowler on the article Lion Capital of Ashoka since I've filed the report 10 August 2022‎, other users total 5 edits on the same period, I've made 0 edits since August 10 because of the ongoing 3RR case. If there are new 3RR breaches by F&F when I start editing again, can I file a report? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 15:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Sounds like you intend to edit war. Let's try this-- discuss your concerns about content and sourcing on the talk page before you make any changes. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:39, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
That is to say, obtain WP:CONSENSUS first. Then follow WP:dispute resolution if no consensus can be reached. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:41, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
@Deepfriedokra: I am not the one edit-warring here [17], and look what trying to get a consensus looks like on that page [18] [19]. I never edit-war, nor break the 3RR rule. I will only add good content from reliable sources. If it gets reverted, fine, I'll try to improve and explain, and yes, discuss. But if someone breaks the 3RR rule or keeps using abusive language against me, I will report it, as I have the right to. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 16:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Why? So that you can hound the closer as you did Bishonen the previous time you wanted a pound of my flesh? I'm not saying I'm innocent, but sometimes it is best to accept a judgment and move on. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:22, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Maybe it grew so large that it was impossible for anyone to determine where the clear blame lay. I see that you are attempting to bait me again at Talk:India but I'm not biting. For this is how the spat which I fatefully entered began. Apologies Bbb23 for barging in. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
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.

Potentially unconstructive comments

Hi, you blocked Khirurg last November for personal attacks (including accusing other editors of "tag-teaming") [20]. Today Khirurg accused a newbie of "following around" without evidence [21]. Even after the newbie tried to explain they were not following Khirurg around [22], Khirurg repeated the same accusation [23]. Is this allowed or is Khirurg making unconstructive comments again? Can you please take a look because I am largely inexperienced with such Wikipedia matters? Durraz0 (talk)

Khirurg's accusation that AlexBachmann is following them around seems to not be true. For example, their dispute on Dropull today started when Khirurg reverted an edit of AlexBachmann, not vice versa [24]. Durraz0 (talk) 21:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Why are you complaining about Khirurg's conduct vis-a-vis another editor? Shouldn't Alex be the one complaining? Anyway, I'm not getting involved.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

This Caught My Attention...

After this edit at Angourie Rice (and, FTR, this isn't about the merits of the argument), I took a look at the interaction report, and came up with this: [25]. That's a lot of overlap, and some pretty quick time between edits. Any thoughts? Should I maybe go to WP:SPI with this? Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I think you'll have to come up with more evidence than that to gain any traction on an editor who has over 100K edits and who seemingly has been at odds with Xselant (look at their Talk pages). I certainly wouldn't block based on what you've presented. I must say I don't see how Fmsky has made that many edits in less than a year, and if you look at the number of global contributions, it's even more astounding. From their timecard, it looks like they never sleep.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Sphere Matchers LTA

Just wanted you to know that i found the Fandom account of the Sphere Matchers LTA. It can give you some hints as to what article's he's behind --Trade (talk) 02:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Ganja Karuppu editor

Hi there. User:AnbilRajesh came back on 16 August and is making the same disruptive edit on Ganja Karuppu page. Sadly, these user(s) (likely same person) seem to have the page under their control. There are other accounts making the some exact edit ManjulJooshji here and Omanarajan here. These accounts all added the same exact information (regarding a YouTube channel prank, which is not relevant and unsourced). DareshMohan (talk) 00:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Editornews90

Hello,

I just reverted User:Editornews90's personal attacks to you on their talk page after u blocked them. At the time, I thought this was the right thing to do. But afterwards I wasn't sure if an administrator was supposed to do that, so I'm just letting u know in case I fucked up. Sorry if I did Stephanie921 (talk) 15:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Stephanie921: I think it was revertable by a non-administrator, but, at the same time, I personally would have left it alone. As attacks go, particularly after a block, it's not so bad.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Okay, thanks very much! Glad I didn't muck it up Stephanie921 (talk) 03:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

DELETION

I think this user @JJWICEBULL should be deleted for editing wrong informations.. Otiasah Miracle (talk) 18:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

MY ACCOUNT

Please I just helped an artist recover back his wikipedia profile Please don't delete my account.... Otiasah Miracle (talk) 18:41, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. With encyclopedia articles. Profiles have no place here. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

UNBLOCK IP ADDRESS

Pls I told you to block jwcebull not the ip adress Pls unblock th IP Adress Thanks. Otiasah Miracle (talk) 07:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

So predictable

There wasn't a moment I wasn't this.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I gotta tell you those ski lifts are AMAZING!!!! --Bbb23 (talk) 17:12, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Inorite? Which is your favourite run, Bump Buster or Nutcracker? -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:17, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
With such low prices, how can we resist? - Aoidh (talk) 17:16, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Call me prejudiced, but I think that ski resorts should be in mountains. I assumed from the name, before looking at the article, that it was a resort in the Alps. And who ever heard of calling a city Vermont? Bump Buster is my favorite favourite. It landed me in the hospital. You should see my casts!--Bbb23 (talk) 17:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Silly Bbb, casts refer to fishing, not skiing! It was a troll joe jobbing, by the way. But there was a legit sock created, they just couldn't use it because of the autoblock.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Good, at least I don't have to consider unblocking the master. Nonsense! Castes are a classification of certain groups. And mine are the best! --Bbb23 (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
And this concludes our master class on "How to get from skiing to castanets in four moves".-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Steve is watching news

Basic on this enquiry of mine[26] and this reply[27], this may be a displaced person with personal issues. My elderly parents are in Russia as we speak having fled the conflict in Ukraine. If a once anonymous editor has really started an account, I don't see any problems, but the behaviour surely cannot continue can it? Even if he has experienced some trauma as I am guessing? --Coldtrack (talk) 19:43, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I've blocked the user for the disruption. It's clear they were not going to stop. Sorry about your parents. I hope they're okay.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:50, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Yeah the action you take regarding the editor is fine by me. He didn't look like he was going to stop and you're right. Thanks for enquiring about my parents. They're safe and well I am glad to say, but our ultimate fear is that we may never return to our family home (I have been in England for many years by the way) and we have no way at present of finding out is it still there, or has it been looted, etc. I can't go and check myself either for obvious reasons. The only thing that might put you off is that they are in Russia for a reason. You see back in the day when they worked, they were Soviet diplomats. Regardless of what you get in mainstream news, east of the Dnieper is practically all pro-Russia and always has been. But in Lviv where I am from originally, support for Russia had always been in short supply as if anything, there is some traditional (albeit fundamental) sentiment towards Poland. As ex-Sovets, we are atheist, but pre-communism my ancestors were Catholics and my great-grandparents all identified as Poles, and Lviv was even in Poland then. In my lifetime, we ourselves never declared Russian ethnicity, only Ukrainian, but, our position in the family had always been pro-Russia and opposed to the EU. Ergo the threat that hung over the heads of my parents, and possibly myself if I return, came from Ukrainian forces and pro-government militias (such as Azov Battalion even if we are far from the sea). For the purpose of editing Wikipedia, I hope you appreciate that I do generally keep a distance from political debates, especially having experienced first-hand the bullying methods on subjects such as Kosovo and Syria (i.e. White Helmets). I find it easier and less abrasive to stick to simpler topics even within the subject of geopolitics. I hope I haven't put you off! :) --Coldtrack (talk) 20:09, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Not at all. I'm just sorry for what you and your parents have had to go through. Your decision to edit articles that are unrelated to your personal travails is a wise one.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Help

Can I use two accounts for editing wikipedia? Sudip Kumar Nepal (talk) 02:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're asking me, but you are allowed to have alternative accounts if it complies with WP:SOCKLEGIT.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:52, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Bbb23, I ask you because accidentally I had created two user account so. Sudip Kumar Nepal (talk) 15:27, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Not sure how one does that, but I'm happy to block the account if you wish with a note in the block log that you requested it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Bbb23, I requested you to block this account User:Suman Kumar Nepal which I created. Sudip Kumar Nepal (talk) 01:03, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:06, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Bbb23, Thanks a lot and Did you run a checkuser on my account before blocking that account? I ask you this because is there any other account that was created by this (36.252.223.121) IP address. Sudip Kumar Nepal (talk) 01:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
There would have been no reason to run a check, but, in any event, I am not a checkuser.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Venue

You removed a post asking for an admin to review the editing from a specific user because it was "not the right venue" Where would this type of question fit? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blough28 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Uh, you should not be editing logged out, especially on the same article as you're editing logged in. Be careful because you can get blocked for that. To answer your question, it should have been reported as WP:AN3, not its Talk page, following the instructions on that noticeboard.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. I was also unaware that was an issue since IP and Blough28 was the same. I just had to reset my password to connect to my personal computer and phone. I did reset and re-logged in on all my devices so that's not an issue in the future. Thank you for the information, like I said I didn't know that was against the rules. Blough28 (talk) 13:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).

Guideline and policy news

  • A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
  • An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
  • The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
  • Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Sock

Hi, Nawaz Khan Mubin is a sock of banned & globally locked user:Lazy-restless, confirmed by CU on bnwiki. Please block the user. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 22:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I've blocked a lot of IPs at Kalki Avatar Aur Muhammad Saheb for block evasion, essentially each IP evading the last IP's block. I suppose the IPs belong to Lazy-restless. Thanks for the heads up.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

confused by revert

You reverted an edit I made to a talk page, and I honestly have no idea why. Could you tell me what best-practice I violated so I can act more suitably in future, please? Thanks! HLHJ (talk) 21:51, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have left an edit summary. You copied something the user requested five months ago. Indeed, the user hasn't edited at Wikipedia since that time. Nor was it a well-formulated request.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Okay. So should I have added a request for clarification, not a helpme template? HLHJ (talk) 22:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Nope, you should have done nothing. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 00:47, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Lokesh Kanagaraj

@Bbb23: In that page Lokesh Kanagaraj they are adding films which have not started filming per WP:NFF. When I am reverting their edits they still continue after some days. Is it possible to protect that page? Theoder2055 (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

About a user you blocked

Hi, will you please revoke User:Fireflies-in-the-sky's talk page access. Thanks, Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 00:39, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh wait, nevermind, Drmies revoked his talk page access. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 00:41, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

CIR issues

Would it be fair to say that long-time editors who still deny that Biden won the election have some serious CIR issues? (Not suggesting anything, just asking about CIR.) This relates to NOTHERE, TEND, and BATTLE. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:01, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I'd rather not deal with hypotheticals.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

The opposite of my intent

“ It seems that Protonk is, on their own, demanding that Cmguy be indeffed for anti-White bigotry and that they are unhappy with the fact that DN 99 does not agree with them.”

This is the literal opposite of what I meant. I meant that YoPienso’s claim that anti-white bias was actionable is itself something which should be disqualifying.

I am out and about so I can’t edit ANI on mobile. PLEASE correct the record and stop taking it upon yourself to explain my posts. Protonk (talk) 18:55, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I see you "corrected the record" on your own at ANI.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:22, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
yes, I edited it when I got home, if you must know. Do we have some sort of problem that I’m unaware of? My inclination after being told I erroneously called someone a white supremacist on ANI might be to apologize, not throw off some weird snark. But you do you. I also want to point out you offered this unbidden. Nobody said “hey bbb23 I’m having trouble parsing this short exchange and I somehow can’t ask protonk for clarification, can you step in?” So I really really don’t understand why I am getting this attitude for asking you to correct a totally erroneous claim you made on a high traffic page. Protonk (talk) 20:45, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Don't post anymore here, please.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:47, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Peter Eckersley (computer scientist)

Hi, just wanted to let you know regarding the person's age, the source added to his birth date details how he had his 43rd birthday this year before midsummer's day, making it mathematically impossible for him to be born in 1978. This may be WP:OR, as I indicated, not sure though. Have a nice day! Saksapoiss (talk) 21:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

@Saksapoiss: You're absolutely right, and thank you for explaining it to me. I've changed the article accordingly. The problem there is no template that takes a range of dates (I'm not precisely sure what midsummer's day is, and in any event the source says "shortly before", which is also vague). Nonetheless, if you take a possible range of dates for when he turned 43, I decided it had to be somewhere between 6/15/22 at the earliest and maybe 8/15/22 at the latest. Anywhere in that range would mean he couldn't have been born in 1978, as you said. No doubt, that is the OR you were referring to. You have no idea how much time I've spent on this! Almost embarrassing really. Thanks again.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:08, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
{{tps}} Midsummer is June twentysomething. DMacks (talk) 02:46, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

SPI

Hi, please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Symon Sadik. They are confirmed sock but no action taken yet. I think they should be blocked. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Protonk

Just wondering if you've noted the actions of this editor, who appears to have begun (at 0453 UTC today) systematically and selectively undoing various of your reversions and other edits, apparently due to their disagreement with you concerning Cmguy77. Seems like sabotage to me. General Ization Talk 05:39, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I reverted their edit here, with a good faith summary. But it does seem odd. BilCat (talk) 05:50, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
There's absolutely no way that's all good-faith. They are taking out their frustration by going on a blind revert spree, and in the process doing lots of damage. They seem fully aware of what they are doing and intent on getting themselves blocked (see history of their talkpage). DMacks (talk) 12:00, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Wow, they appear to have some real problems. I'm surprised no one blocked them. Talk about a meltdown. The weird thing is I sincerely don't understand why they're so angry at me. I get that they think I misinterpreted their comments at ANI, but I prefaced my inferences with my own confusion about what another editor called a sub-thread. Even now I don't think my interpretation was unreasonable as the remarks were lacking in precision (and I tend to like things spelled out). Even Protonk said "I apologize for being terse and too vague." I don't know Protonk, and my comments had nothing to do with any preconceived notion of them. The only thing that struck me at ANI was their use of vulgar language (fuck and shit), which I'm not a big fan of. I didn't realize until now that they used to be an administrator until resigning a year ago. Oh well, this is unfortunately life at Wikipedia, and I doubt it will ever change.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:58, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
I had my finger on the 'block' button but then saw the behavior stopped and they might have simply walked away after a particularly bad venting (based on their userspace edits). I've been chastized for blocks that have an appearance of cooldown/non-ongoing-damage from long-standing editors, so wanted to see others' thoughts. I have no objection to any sort of block. But also no time at the momemt to deal with it further. DMacks (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
I understand. Looks like the reversions lasted about 35 minutes and that they didn't do any more after being warned by Vanamonde.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
I hadn't realized they were a previous admin either when I left the warning. The extent of the meltdown is what led me to leave a few messages after that. They went silent after a few angry talk page posts; I hope this means they took my advice to step away for a bit. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

EW noticeboard

Why did you do that? Stoarm (talk) 18:26, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Do you know what "stale" means?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:36, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
I was not rude to you, so why are you talking down to me? I simply asked for an explanation. You're an administrator, so I'd appreciate it if you'd talk to me in a civil manner and without condescension. Not that it matters, but I'm probably old enough to be your grandparent. The editor made those last two edits immediately after you blocked me (and with the edit summary, "Enjoy your block"), so I was unable to report it on the noticeboard until the week passed. You gave me relatively no time to even respond to the noticeboard report because you blocked me so quickly. So, are you saying an editor is free and clear to continue edit warring whenever someone he is having a content dispute with is currently blocked and has no ability to respond or report? Stoarm (talk) 18:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm saying that the report is too old to be considered, regardless of the reason why it is filed so late. And I have not talked down to you, or been condescending, or uncivil. If you still disagree as to the content, then use dispute resolution to resolve it. There's been no discussion on the Talk page since last January. That would be the place to start.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winterbury, Delaware

Hello, can you explain your "delete" close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winterbury, Delaware, to me? I feel I was able to rebut the major delete arguments, proving that several were completely invalid, and several others agreed with me, so I do not exactly see how "delete" is the correct closure. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:07, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

There was a significant number more well-reasoned delete !votes, and very few editors agreed with you.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:11, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
I'll be bringing this to Deletion review soon. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
There was no rationale offered in the closure. Can you please specifically explain how the "well-reasoned !votes" correspond to policy? Many seemed lacking. Djflem (talk) 12:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
First, there is no requirement that an admin offer a rationale for their decision. I'm not going to do statistics, but many AfDs are closed with a simple sentence as to the result. Second, AfD is governed mainly by guidelines, not policy; therefore, your (loaded) question about "correspond[ing] to policy" is largely irrelevant. The six editors who !voted delete (not counting the nominator) all pretty much said the same thing, that the amount and kind of coverage was not significant enough for a housing subdivision to pass notability guidelines. There was only one other editor beside you and BeanieFan who voted Keep and that editor has only a small amount of experience on Wikipedia, i.e., 83 edits. (You and BeanieFan, by contrast, are very experienced editors, as are every one of the other voters, including one who is an admin. Before you jump on me, I did not base my decision on the experience level or the status of the voters, but certainly significant lack of experience can be a factor. In this case I did not look at the experience levels of the editors, nor did I know that Pontificalibus was an admin, until now when I got curious.). You're not going to get anywhere with your arguments, so my suggestion is that you or BeanieFan take it to deletion review so the argument that went on for almost a month at the AfD can continue. AfDs are such friendly places, after all.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
  • When outcomes are clear a simple declaration is fine. But when AfD has run nearly a month weeks after having been extended three (3x) times with a longer discussions, a proper explanation, as provided here on your your talk page, would seem in order. So thanks. Can I quote you?: "AfD is governed mainly by guidelines, not policy". Djflem (talk) 09:52, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Being a wiki "Parole Officer"?

Is there any possible setup where I could be a "Parole Officer" or something similar for User:TatiVogue, under certain limitations for the user(no or minimal building of "fictional" pages in userspace) for example? I'm fairly experienced (joined in 2006), but I don't know what sort of things could be done. (And that user would of course need to agree to it, I haven't spoken to them). (And honestly, the reaction to being blocked has been *somewhat* mature)Naraht (talk) 03:24, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

It's kind of you to want to help the user, but there is a significant maturity problem with the user, and, to their credit, they seem to have accepted that if they want to edit Wikipedia in the future, it may be quite some time before they are mature enough to edit constructively, so I think you should let it go.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
True. I will, however, make an open offer to User:TatiVogue that if they have something that they feel should be edited, that I will respond to suggestions on their userpage.Naraht (talk) 13:47, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
That would be unacceptable. They cannot edit by proxy while blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:49, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Point taken.Naraht (talk) 14:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

My apologies

I don't know how the heck I grabbed the wrong diff – too many irons in the fire, I guess – this is the correct one, but when I clicked on one of those links it shows the domain is available. I cannot find the publication Asian Tribune anywhere online. Other than my goof, why did you decline it? Atsme 💬 📧 14:43, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

It's a long-standing article and I don't think amenable to A7. You're welcome to AfD it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

WP:ADMINCOND

I have contested your administrator action in a two-party edit conflict where you applied policy to only one side. In accordance with WP:ADMINCOND, and pursuant to Wikipedia:Administrators#Grievances_by_users_("administrator_abuse"), I am expressing concern directly to you here. I believe a good resolution would be unblocking Jirka.h23 to enable all parties to continue the discussion in an orderly and civil manner. IntrepidContributor (talk) 06:49, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

If the user wants to make an unblock request, that's up to them, and at that point another administrator would review the request. Unblock requests by third parties (you) are generally frowned upon.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
You can also unblock them yourself. Your block did not adhere to policy. IntrepidContributor (talk) 15:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Removal of Moses Yale Beach content

Hi, I've seen that you removed a lot of content on the Moses Yale Beach page. I would be more than happy to have a talk with you on how to improve the overall page. I've been trying to add content and context to his life as not much was said in the previous versions. I have reverted the edit as there was so much content removed. Maybe we can work together on this. Academia45 (talk) 22:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm not particularly interested in working with editors who revert first and then discuss. See WP:BRD.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:56, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Question about a block

Hi Bbb23. I've had your block of User:Topeditor01234 brought to my attention, But User:Topeditor01234 is continuously rolling back my edits. So, what can i do ? Thank you. MT731 (talk) 02:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

@MT731: First, I've never blocked Topeditor. Second, who brought it to your attention? Based on my own independent investigation, I've blocked Topeditor now as a sock, but I don't understand at all what you're saying. Perhaps you could elaborate.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:24, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Why do you keep reverting my edits?

It is from a reliable source, and I don't have any false information. Abraham LincoIn (talk) 20:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

You're a new editor. I suggest you stop your disruptive edits, or you won't last very long here. If you want to discuss your changes to the article, do so on the article Talk page, not here.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

WP:COI

There is an editor that has admitted to being the author of a book that they are trying to use in an article. Clearly this is a conflict of interest, but I am unfamiliar with the restrictions.

The person appears to be a medical professional that has wrote a book(in Dutch) about medieval history. They have on multiple occasions tried to add said book to the article, Battle of Cassel (1071),(using IPs or the account Axenhowe).[28][29][30][31]

  • Nieuwenhuijsen, K., Robrecht de Fries. Graaf van Vlaanderen, held van Holland, Omniboek, Utrecht, 2022.

Can you be of assistance?--Kansas Bear (talk) 23:27, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I indeffed him.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Sorry, I just now found the COI board. Sorry about that Bbb23! What is weird is this is the first COI situation I have ever dealt with in my nearly 16 yrs on Wikipedia! Damn! --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:37, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Be happy! COI issues are often far more thorny than this one.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Definitely. I've had far too many COI situations in my 16 years on Wikipedia! BilCat (talk) 21:06, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Medical Advantage

The creator of this article has asked for my help, and I am willing to assist in re-creating it to the point where it can me moved to mainspace (assuming notability, of course). Would you be able to userfy the initial draft for me? StAnselm (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

The draft was being reviewed by an experienced editor, Jack Frost, who both declined it when it was submitted and tagged it as WP:G11. Jack also warned the user of a COI, which they acknowledged on their Talk page. I don't see why the creator should be able to forum-shop like this. Apparently, the user was supposed to e-mail you the content. Did they?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
No, not yet. StAnselm (talk) 18:05, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, I have the text now and by the looks at it, it seems like a terrible G11. I think I will just take to to Wikipedia:Deletion review in order to work on it. StAnselm (talk) 04:34, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Marvoir

Since I am debating with this editor, I prefer not to block. However, I have no objection to you doing what you see as best. Cullen328 (talk) 20:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

The user does not have very many edits at en.wiki, but they had over 17K at fr.wiki before being indeffed for a rather unusual reason. I suspect they sent abusive e-mail to other editors, but that's only a guess partly based on their behavior here.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Interesting. If they return to en:wiki with the same attitude, their time here will probably be brief. Now, I will use my one year of junior high school French and Google Translate to try to figure out what happened at fr:wiki. Cullen328 (talk) 23:20, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Hehe, I'm moderately fluent in French (used to be very fluent), but I'm much lazier than you.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:21, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Ya'll could always phone a friend, non? Peut être one who maybe reads French?-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:26, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
That is so weird; I just posted to your Talk page on an unrelated subject. What "friend" did you have in mind? And if you mean you, you may not be that far away, but I can't call you for free, and I'm not only lazy but also cheap. I do have a friend in Paris at the moment, but she's American.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:31, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Yes, me! I meant phone a friend as in using a lifeline. We should invest in some carrier pigeons. How fun would that be?-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:34, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Marvoir was indeffed on fr:wiki for spreading conspiracy theories. That aligns with the Nostradamus nonsense on their userpage here. Cullen328 (talk) 23:39, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
God, I'm an even bigger idiot than I thought. I read the wrong thing. Thanks, Cullen.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:BoyWithUke

Hi, I wanted to recreate the above draft, but the page notice says that I have to contact the person who deleted it first. Thanks, — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 02:35, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:53, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Random

I hope I wasn't out of line or anything when I pinged you on the user talk page. I just noticed that they didn't, and I wasn't sure how to even address their question. Thanks and cheers! SPF121188 (talk this way) (contribs) 20:40, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

It wasn't necessary because I had her page on my watchlist, but it was considerate.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:57, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

roma in serbia

before you call me vandalizing, you should read the sources i given...or there is not forbidden to made links with other wikipedia pages who is in the same topic. Thank you But no i see what is here in work...against me Antiziganism...yepp this is reason, I know and see when a person is not welcome...so I went from enlgish wikipedia, about people like you and others who doesnt want people like me of romani background here. Nalanidil (talk) 15:46, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

What does "eee bree Gadji" mean?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Impersonation at ANI

Heads up. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, weird stuff. I revoked TPA of the IP. Not sure if a week will do it, but we'll see. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Page removed (Nelson Ball, poet)

Hello, due to a lack of references my article on the poet Nelson Ball was removed/deleted. I have since it was deleted received more information as to what I need to do to improve the text. I have several links from independent sources and also intend to update the writing. I was also informed that you could help me in retrieving the article so I can make these improvements. Thank you in advance. Nelsonball (talk) 16:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

That's not correct. The draft was tagged as WP:G11 (advertising), and I agreed with the tag and deleted it. Nor will I restore the draft. You have an obvious and undeclared WP:COI.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
I have since writing the article come to understand that the language has to be more neutral. The reason for the user name is that I imagine I will never write another Wikipedia article. English is my second language and I think this is a part of me not finding the right tone at my first draft. I really just do think it's a shame that such a central figure in the Canadian poetry community is not represented on Wikipedia. Nelsonball (talk) 19:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
The reason for the user name is that I imagine I will never write another Wikipedia article. Sorry, but that makes no sense. Also, your English seems fine to me.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Benny Hendel

I wrote "Again"- because the article was published on 3d august 2021 and was changed to draft only after 4 months on 14th December 2021.Ewan2 (talk) 00:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Blocked user

You blocked Mrme1234 yesterday. Today, Biggman007 showed up and continued editing Azeem Chaudhary. Both have approached me on my T.P. about reviewing that article. MB 00:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged. Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 02:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Overdue award

The Admin's Barnstar
Just wanted to finally say thanks for being there at SPI. We would have big problems without your contributions. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Block IP

Hi, Please block Special:Contributions/103.230.106.42, Special:Contributions/103.230.105.52, Special:Contributions/103.230.107.13. I think these IP's are used by User:Lazy-restless. IP's editing interest matches with the user. E.g. Manhaj (Islam) was created by the user, IP did the same here. They edited Salafi movement, Template:Salafi & related. The IP even did same thing on arabic wiki. If possible, a range block would be useful, otherwise they will keep doing it. (see https://ftools.toolforge.org/general/ip-range-calc.html for calculation). Thank you. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Please also REVDEL Manhaj. It's revisions has serious copyright violation. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 14:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I've blocked Special:contributions/103.230.104.0/22 for one year. It's been blocked many times before. I need to know the source of the copyright violation to rev/delete it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
#Salafi Manhaj matches with page 113 - salafi ideology
#Principles matches with page 4
Thanks. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 15:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I can't see page 113 for some reason. Diannaa, could you please take a look at the possible infringement? We need someone with a larger brain than mine. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 15:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I am unable to view page 113 either, whether I use the link provided or books.google.ca. The pdf is not a proper pdf but a scan/photograph, and is not searchable. That said, pages 4-5 are the table of contents, and there's plenty of overlap in both terminology used and the order of presentation. So I think rev-del would be warranted. — Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Bbb23, Diannaa: I hope this screenshot will help. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 19:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Looks like it helped because Diannaa took care of it.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Sock

Why Special:Diff/1110785658/1110785852 should his comment not be stricken off? I dont understand why you removed his unsigned signature and my comment too. Venkat TL (talk) 14:10, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

A non-administrator has no business striking a report at an administrative noticeboard.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:28, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
@Bbb23 ok. Do you have a problem if I restore his sign and my comment? Venkat TL (talk) 15:35, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Yes, it's unnecessary and smacks of inappropriate personal vindication. The account is blocked as a sock; isn't that enough?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
I personally see that entire thread as sock disruption and trolling and would prefer that thread itself to be deleted, but I am not an admin and you are, so I will let it stay. Due to the missing sign it looks as if this is filed by @Dāsānudāsa, but you have a problem, so I will let it be. Venkat TL (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

New sock

Could you please take a look at 7bongsss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as a continuation of 7bxngs (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Thanks.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:30, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:55, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Please let me know why my page was deleted.

My page "Booktasters", which was not yet submitted for review, was deleted, even though it is in no way an advertisement. I would appreciate knowing the issue, thank you so much! Booksaremyoxygen (talk) 01:40, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

You may not have intended it to be an advertisement, but it reads like an advertisement. Phrases like:
Booktasters allows readers to enjoy free e-copies of books they’re interested in while helping new authors promote their books.
BookTasters is a company built on a vision
the BookTasters Twitter account allows bookworms and avid readers to read free softcopies of their book(s) of choice from the company’s vast library of offered books
readers signed up with Booktasters gain free access to otherwise paid books, and the gamified competition system is a great push for people to read more books
Also just the section headers themselves are salesy, and some of the phrasing is way too close to this source.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:48, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Accusations at the 3RR noticeboard

Since you are one of the most active admins at and the last one to have edited the 3RR noticeboard. I have filed a 3RR report there [32] and Coldtrack appeared there to accuse me without evidence of "tagteaming", "bullying" and "trying to purge an opponent to your agenda". Are these considered personal attacks since they are not giving any evidence? Ktrimi991 (talk) 05:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

It looks like another administrator is trying to find a resolution to the issues.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
The other admin is trying to address the edit warring concerns, but has not commented on those accusations which I see as unconstructive (I have not asked them what they think about the accusations). If you are willing to give your input on the accusations, i.e. whether they are indeed personal atracks or not, it would be very helpful. If you do not want to get involved, I understand and respect that. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Request undelete

Hi, Thank you so much for your quick response to the sockpuppet report for 10JIPN10. If possible, I'd like to request the pages Tsuki to Hoshi ga Odoru Midnight and Hinatazaka46 3rd Anniversary Memorial Live in Tokyo Dome created by that account to be undeleted and moved to my user draftspace, as I have contributed to those articles and would like to continue after cleaning them up. Thanks again! PetéWarrior (talk) 12:17, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

I've moved both articles to draft space (not your draft space, just general) and draftified them.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Bbb23 , Had brought both these users in SPI case, ( Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Imsaneikigai ) now both these users have also come in Afd. ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ravivaar With Star Parivaar ) PravinGanechari (talk) 14:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Please restore my very small harmless deleted sandbox page

@Bbb23 I dispute this: Deletion log 18:01 Bbb23 talk contribs deleted page User:Crazyloop NY/sandbox/User Page Crazyloop NY draft ‎(U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host) I'm not even sure I know what a web host is. I'm a new wikipedian. This was a page I was using to learn the source editor. I don't think it was more than 1k. This is the second time this week that those with more experience have brought down the hammer without explanation. Is this the way Wikipedia operates? Crazyloop NY (talk) 18:47, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

@Bbb23 Furthermore, it was not a violation of WP:U5 because it was also a working draft of my user page. Crazyloop NY (talk) 19:08, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
@Bbb23 I've been reading up more on this. My use of this space clearly falls within acceptable uses stated here WP:UPYES Crazyloop NY (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
So, what other accounts have you used on Wikipedia?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
@Bbb23 I do not and have never had any other accounts here. Crazyloop NY (talk) 01:52, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
You're a remarkably quick study.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:55, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
@Bbb23 I would beg to differ. I’m finding being a copy editor here much more complex than expected. Could you please restore that deletion? It’s no real loss. There wasn’t much there and I could easily recreate it. However, it is disconcerting to have it wrongfully deleted. Are we not supposed to use the sandbox for what it was meant to be used for? Crazyloop NY (talk) 02:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
@Bbb23 Thank you. And thanks for putting up with me Crazyloop NY (talk) 04:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
After reviewing the sequence of events in the creation of your sandbox and userpage more closely, I realized I had misunderstood which was created first, and your explanation here of what you were doing made more sense, so I restored it. BTW, you don't have to ping users on their own Talk pages because editors are automatically notified of posts there. I'll demonstrate that in a moment by posting a belated Welcome message to your Talk page. Best of luck to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip, I didn't know that. And thanks again. Crazyloop NY (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Notwoways deletion

Hi, on 17 May 2022, you deleted a page I wrote: Notwoways. Is there a way I can get the page contents back so I can continue to work on it? Thanks. CitationIsNeeded ツ 17:46, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

@Bbb23 CitationIsNeeded ツ 19:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
I've reluctantly restored it, but I've moved it to draft space (again) as it's clearly not ready for article space.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

JangladaPR

Hello, Bbb23. I would like to ask that you, as an admin, take a look at the conduct of JangladaPR (talk · contribs) and take some steps in relation to it, if you find it necessary. Cheers! —Sundostund (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Mohammed106 (again)

Apparently, Mohammed106 (talk · contribs) (the user who you indefinitely banned last year because of disruptive editing) was active again, and very recently, this time as 41.40.197.49 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —Sundostund (talk) 22:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Too similar accounts

Maybe its just my imagination, but IMHO these two accounts look way too similar to each other – Philothesophist (talk · contribs) and AManAloneInaBigCity (talk · contribs). Its possible that something inappropriate is going on there, so please take a look at it. —Sundostund (talk) 14:51, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Why? The first hasn't edited in a year and a half, and the second hasn't edited in over five months.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:01, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
I know, both of them are sitting idle for a long time. I just thought that both of them may belong to the same person (judging by their contents and edit histories). It looked like a kind of sockpuppetry to me, or some other inappropriate activity. —Sundostund (talk) 18:05, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I actually had to create the second account because I lost access to the email address for the first account and the password to log in as well. I’m not a regular editor, but I am an active user on Wikipedia. I’d tried to request a delete on user:Philothesophist, but I wasn’t able to get it done. AManAloneInaBigCity (talk) 22:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

About Draft:Promia Rahman

You reverted my tag edit and said that it is not a hoax. Did you even checked the sources? The sources in the article are telling about another person. For example, the awards sources don't mention his name anywhere. Did you even considered these things before reverting my action. The creator of the article was blocked several times because they tried to create the same article that is hoax certainly. Mehedi Abedin 22:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Notice of impersonation

Started a topic here because I didn't want to be obliged to notify the user in question and it doesn't fit UAA. A user called "Wikiis is the bests" is seemingly impersonating Katherine Maher. Not sure if this is a blockable offense but I'm notifying you in hopes you can take care of the issue. Thanks, Duonaut (talk | contribs) 00:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Blocked. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Edit on Ishaq Dar

Why did you undo my edit on Ishaq Dar? Toomanyyearskodakblack (talk) 23:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Your editing generally is a mixture of disruptive editing and incompetence. If you continue in this vein, you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Lol are you trying to insult my intelligence? How is that disruptive editing? Reliable sources were added. Seems like there's a conflict of interest here and not on my part. Toomanyyearskodakblack (talk) 23:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Being sourced is not the only consideration we have to take into account. See WP:Neutral point of view. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Jerome501

Hello, Bbb23. I think that someone should urgently take a look at the recent conduct of Jerome501 (talk · contribs), especially because of this. "Jebem ti boga bre" is a very serious insult in Serbian. —Sundostund (talk) 04:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Greg Abbott

Please undelete the page Greg Abbott. You accidentally deleted the page when cleaning up page move vandalism. Johnj1995 (talk) 15:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Azniv Stepanian

"We're not going to block an editor who hasn't edited in well over six months" Why not? If they don't return, no harm done. If they do return, they can be stopped from leaving another trail of messy edits. I'm disappointed that you closed down the discussion instantly without giving anyone else a chance to comment.

It would be different if there was an easy way to spot when/if they start editing again, but AFAIK there is nothing, beyond from watchlisting their talk page - which depends on someone spotting a problem. It would be useful to be able to watchlist their contributions list, but I suppose that facility would enable a lot of stalking. PamD 14:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

You're a very experienced and capable editor, but, honestly, I'm surprised that you brought the issue to ANI. I'm curious: what made you even look at it this so many months later? Did you stumble across an article the user edited maybe? I sympathize with the inability to watchlist another editor's contributions. Many times I and others have wished for that capability, but for whatever reasons (too difficult technically perhaps?), our wishes remain just that. Thanks for not "complaining" about my closure and coming here instead. I hope you understand that what you asked for is simply not going to happen unless the editor returns.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
I explained in my posting what led me to that editor: I could not understand the word "bibliometric" in Elizabeth Gaskell, researched it and found that this editor had put it instead of "Bibliomemoir": presumably their spell-checker or similar didn't recognise the word, and came up with a near miss. I then looked at the rest of their work, and spent a lot of time fixing their mistakes. Finding someone's surname changed from "Yampier" to "Vampire" today was the last straw. A block would prevent them, on their return, from launching into another blitz of well-intended but destructive editing without at least pausing to consider the three main problems with their editing, my bullet points. PamD 15:41, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Stupid me, and I really did read your post. Anyway, it doesn't change anything except it's too bad that you had to do so much clean-up.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Greg Abbott

Hi Bbb23. I'm sorry about all the havoc at Greg Abbott. You deleted both the vandalistic redirect and the article itself. Could you please undelete the article? Cheers, gnu57 16:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Very embarrassing. I tried. Alison is (thankfully) dealing with it.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
All done and sorted. Bbb23 - I think the root cause was, your admin action conflicted with those of Genericusername57, just bad timing really, so the non-moved page got caught in the crossfire - Alison talk 16:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Harder Hall

I saw that you have posted that the Harder Hall article is "incredibly promotional". However, this is a building that is long vacant, and is in danger of being demolish. All sources are cited thoroughly, and 100 percent of the data is sourced and factual. I am somewhat taken aback; I spent most of the afternoon compiling data after I saw that the previous article had been removed due to lack of citation. PageEditor2000 (talk) 23:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Take it to the article Talk page; otherwise, you risk being blocked for disruption.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Whom am I supposed to appeal this to? I am responding to you because Wikipedia informed me you are the one who made the change. I am simply asking which parts of the article are not neutral and or "promotional" for a long vacant hotel that is on the historic register. Literally every single line I have sourced is back by a contemporaneous publication, or is a direct quotation from the source. I am happy to discuss specific points, but it is all cited inline. PageEditor2000 (talk) 23:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Re: My talk

I stared at this for quite a while, and while I do see where you're coming from (and I certainly do think this is unlikely to be their first account), I think they're a different person after looking through their simplewiki contributions. Factoring in the x-wiki activity, the editing patterns seem fairly dissimilar, especially since Ankitdevarpan seems to be pretty intent on promoting various stuff, and I'm not really seeing any signs of that here or on simple. Personally, I wouldn't be willing to block, but then again you're more familiar with Ankitdevarpan and I haven't had as much coffee as usual today, so ymmv. :) --Blablubbs (talk) 21:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

@Blablubbs: I too looked at their activity on simple, and I pretty much agree with every point you've made. I'll watch and see what they do. Maybe I'll ask a CU to look at it. Thanks for your input, always valuable, even if you haven't had enough coffee.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Your deletion of Conan package manager

Hi Bbb23, just a reminder that WP:CSD#A7 explicitly doesn't apply to software, so this page should not have been deleted under this criterion. You deleted as 'web content' which a package manager software is not, there's a difference between a website and a piece of software (which might also have an official website). Thanks - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

You're right, my fault. I was thinking of it as a company that produced the software, not as web-based software (regardless of how it was tagged). In any event, I don't think it's ready for mainspace, so draft space is the best place for it, at least for now. Thanks for letting me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:20, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

A suggestion

I'm sorry that this might not be the appropriate place to bring this up, but I simply don't have the energy to jump through administrative hoops when the guidance is not adequately clear, and already I fear I have exceeded my threshold. I completely missed the "Click here to create a new report" in the header of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, as there were no words to say that this was necessary. My point of posting this, though, is only to ask whether it be possible to add in a bullet under "Additional notes" to say that the report must be created using the template produced by the link provided? —Quondum 20:32, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Such a note would be incorrect for two reasons: first, you can create a report ad hoc as long as the structure is similar to the one that would be created if you followed the instructions and includes all the key elements; and, second, you can also create a report with Twinkle, which some people find easier. That said, if you want to raise the idea of adding something higher up to highlight what's at the bottom, I suggest you do so at the Talk page of the noticeboard.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Well, um, I leave the wording to you, if you are interested, though I guess not. I'm about done with WP for a long while again, as it is too accommodating to abusive types without sufficient support for those who would like to edit without being hassled by them. Dealing with a user who has many years of experience in being maximally hostile and aggravating (e.g. by regularly going to the 3RR limit and regular personal attacks, but admins regularly gloss over this at ANI when it is brought up there, presumably as being "too complex" to deal with easily) with minor curtailment to the user takes a lot of energy from multiple users, and quite frankly, WP is not worth that for me. What really caught me is that it is called a "3RR", whereas it is really what I would call a "4RR". Sorry for the rant, but I really don't think WP is a healthy environment to be editing in. —Quondum 21:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
You're right: I'm not interested. Not that I don't think the instructions could be improved but principally because I don't want to - I do enough work around here as it is, and what you wish is not my forte. I'm sorry you're disheartened about editing at Wikipedia. I know it can be a difficult environment for many people for various reasons. It gets to me too sometimes, but I try not to pay attention to the things that annoy me. I'm not always successful, though. :-) Whatever you decide, best of luck to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

George Wilson etc etc

You uncaring swine! I thought this was going to turn into the Oscars (I just want to thank all the little people who have made their contributions to my success today, without whom etc etc) and there you go, turning it all encyclopaedic again! Have you no feelings??? Shame on you! Cheers DBaK (talk) 10:03, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

User:Herousero

Hello, Bbb23,

This is the second time this week that I've found a non-admin editor responding and closing unblock requests. Do you know who this is? I just wondered if there was an existing SPI for them where I could report them should I come across them again. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 01:56, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Not sure. There's a discussion on Oshwah's Talk page that might shed some light. You don't have to report them, though - just block 'em. I'm off to bed.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:18, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Ah, you must live East of where I'm at! I saw the discussion on Oshwah's talk page which reminded me that I posed this question to you. It's just a weird trait for a troll to take on, declining other editor's unblock requests. It's also hard to track because there isn't a category for closed unblock requests, just ones that are open. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 00:44, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
By the way, User:The Casual Scholar put a sockpuppet tag on their own User page. This seems like a dumb thing for a sockpuppet to do. Have you run into this before, sockpuppets going out of their way to identify themselves? Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 03:20, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Yes. I don't think it's because they're dumb, though, but to draw attention to themselves.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Svelte

Notice anything new?-- Ponyobons mots 17:57, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Um, no.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
My signature is now more "little black dress" than "extravagant ballgown".-- Ponyobons mots 18:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Ohhh, you took the Jezebel out. Way over my non-fashion-oriented head. I have always liked the word "svelte", though. What possessed you to discard your brazen image?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:56, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
It was sort of like lugging around dead weight, I guess. I may bring the ol' gal back though, we'll see.-- Ponyobons mots 19:15, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Ponyo, you know, for years until I became an admin and started leaving messages on your talk page, I believed your name WAS Jezebel Ponyo and thought it was such a mysterious username. Liz Read! Talk! 00:48, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Not "mysterious", she just wanted a username of biblical proportions.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Bbb23. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Unfair deletion of user pages.
Message added 06:16, 11 October 2022 (UTC). 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.

You deleted my user page without any notice or reason, please restore it asap...! Anasalaskari (talk) 06:16, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I gave you an opportunity to address what appeared to be false claims on your userpage. Instead of doing so, you removed my question from your Talk page. I therefore deleted your userpage. If you wish to belatedly respond to my question, you may do so. Just so you know, I did not receive any e-mail from you.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

AN discussion

I don't want the WP:AN discussion to go off-topic, but that person in the photo of Petra Matić's official website is a woman, not a child. The man in the photo is looking away and is blurred, therefore no chance it's the user in question. You don't have to get defensive if you've got mistaken. Please use gender-neutral language when not sure in the future, thanks. -Vipz (talk) 02:00, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Thoughts?

Hi Bbb23. Hope all is well.
I noticed this online link[33]. This might result in more disruption in the cesspool known as WP:AA2 and WP:KURDS.
Google translate: ""The first spark was ignited in order to correct and organize the unfounded claims we have seen on Wikipedia recently. r/turkviki was established. Let's get organized from there."

Another link:[34]
Google translate:[35] "Friends, this subreddit was founded on the termination of unfounded claims made on Wikipedia. Our aim is to put an end to the unfounded allegations made on Wikipedia, the propaganda activities targeting our country and nation, to express the truth and correct the mistakes."
Google translate of one of the comments:[36] "we need a larger audience, salaried employees of wikipedia, and I don't know how effective we can be against the current Turkish hatred"
Thought you might be interested given your "job" as CU. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted page

Hi,

I'm just messaging about the deletion of the Draft:Riaz K Ahmed - Wikipedia page on 26th September. It was cited as being deleted for violating G11. I have since read up more on this code and completely altered the draft offline. In my sandbox, the notice I received has stated the following: 'If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below'.

As my altered version is very different to the original draft, should I proceed with creating a new draft, request the page be restored, or is there another route I need to take?

Thanks Zaara writes (talk) 06:30, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

@Zaara writes (talk page stalker) since you are being paid for your edits this is one of the things you are paid to know. So please consider my altered version is very different to the original draft and compare that with 'If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below'. You really have no grounds for being unsure here.
Nonetheless I will save you some time. If it is substantially different then you may move ahead with confidence and consider when and whether to submit your sandbox for review. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:45, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Recreation of recent speedy

Hi, would you mind taking action on this? 0xDeadbeef→∞ 14:15, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

 Done Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:52, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Likely sock

Just an FYI that Parikshit watchmaker (talk · contribs), whom you previously blocked, appears to now be editing as Parik Watchmaker (talk · contribs). I've opened an SPI. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 20:43, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Pretty obvious block. Thanks for noticing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Rollback at St. Louis City SC

Are you sure your edit at St. Louis City SC is an appropriate use of rollback as outlined at WP:ROLLBACKUSE? They look like good faith edits to me, not obvious vandalism. Perhaps I am missing something and am mistaken? Grey Wanderer (talk) 16:52, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Probably not. It's a new user who has made almost nothing but disruptive edits. They should probably be blocked as NOTHERE, but I didn't think that they had quite gotten there yet. I don't intend to pursue the issues, although someone with more knowledge of the subject area probably should. You're welcome to try.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:59, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy reply. Unfortunately sports are not my wheelhouse, but I will keep an eye on that page. Mostly just wanted to be sure I understood rollback correctly. Thanks. Grey Wanderer (talk) 17:05, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

A goat for you!

nice to meet you mate

Josephtheworst 09:02, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Sock

The editor you are reverting here is clearly this blocked IP sock. Thanks Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 13:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I noticed the IP but hadn't had a chance to investigate. The new account is now indeffed.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Hello, Bbb23, I am awarding you this barnstar today to thank you for your service to being such a good admin, and for having so much compassion. Thanks again, and happy editing! -- Blanchey (talk) 21:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

User Stoarm

Could you take a look at this? Stoarm is continuing to edit-war at Lori Greiner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), for which you previously blocked them. There's also edit-warring across multiple BLPs after returning from latest block.

  • [37] Revert, without using "undo".
  • [38] Revert, without using "undo".

@Ponyo:: I don't believe Stoarm learned anything from the block you placed.[39]. --Hipal (talk) 17:28, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

My apologies. A simple response would have sufficed. --Hipal (talk) 22:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

La Reina (song) page deleted

Did you delete the page La Reina (song)? If you did, why? The page was properly sourced.204060baby (talk) 09:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I deleted it per WP:G5 because it was created by a sock, but I've now restored it as it had substantial edits by you.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Glad to clear up any misunderstandings. Take care and good luck! 204060baby (talk) 05:04, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Re: Draft:Emlyn (musician)

Per the logs for this draft, I restored this yesterday in response to a WP:RFU request (the current version had previously been deleted per WP:G13). Even if the draft as it exits is unambiguous advertising, it is permissible for such content to exist in draft space so long as work is being done to improve the content towards bringing it into a publishable state. I don't think that the hour-and-a-half between my restoration and your re-deletion provided time for such revision, and would suggest restoring the draft to allow for the improvement proposed by the editor who requested undeletion. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:35, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

As I read the history, the draft was deleted on April 12 by Ponyo per WP:G11. The user recreated it wholesale on April 18 and did nothing to "improve the content", even though they had plenty of time to do so. Although it should have been retagged, it languished until it was deleted per G13. This user's conduct is pretty close to blockable when you also consider their attempts to create an autobiography as an article and as a draft. I will not restore the draft.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
I understand your perspective, though I draw more of a line between content in draft space and in main space with respect to the initial applicability of WP:G11. Of course, the subject here is of only borderline notability (if at all), and not so clearly notable that the encyclopedia suffers from a gaping hole from the absence of an article. BD2412 T 16:33, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hi. Hope all is well with you.

It seems likely to me that User:Iamthechacha, who you blocked for sock puppetry, and who edit-warred on Francoist Spain, has returned as User:CHACHATHECHA, who edited the related article FET y de las JONS.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. Blocked and tagged. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AJ DA YOUNGAN. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:41, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Blocking LTA

Hello Bbb23, ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 08:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Zimin foundation

Hello. You deleted yesterday the page "Zimin foundation" as an advertisement. The article is devoted to one of the most important philanthropic organizations that support science and scientists in Eastern Europe - mostly Russia and Ukraine, founded by late Dmitry Zimin and supported now by his son Boris Zimin. I think that the information about this Foundation is important, especially in today's circumstances. So far I worked in Wikipedia mostly with articles about people, this one was my first article about an organization, so probably in my desire to quickly make a detailed description of the Foundation's activity I missed some rules for avoiding advertising effect. I hope this is not a big crime? - and I would like to rework the article. So I ask you firstly to restore the text for me (as a draft? or whatever, so I could work with it) because I did not save a copy. Secondly, I would be grateful for your advices on what was wrong with the article and how I could improve it. Thank you, Mlarisa (talk) 10:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

I've restored the article and moved it to Draft:Zimin Foundation (2); another editor had created Draft:Zimin Foundation, hence the name. You can get better advice from the tagger, Onel5969, as to how to make the draft acceptable as an article. Please don't attack other editors ("I find such behavior strongly unethical") when they are reviewing articles. Also, just because the article is now in draft space, it does not mean it is immune from WP:G11, which applies to any page at Wikipedia, not just articles. I strongly suggest that you trim those parts of the article that are clearly promotional and try to stick to an encyclopedic tone and information pertaining to the foundation that is supported by reliable secondary sources. Finally, please use the WP:AFC process rather than moving it to article space on your own when you think it's ready. Good luck.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23 - I did explain to this editor yesterday what the issues were with the article, and asked if they wanted me to draftify it for them so they could work on it, removing the speedy tag to allow them time to answer. When they did not answer after a couple of hours, I reinstated the speedy tag. Thanks for the ping. Onel5969 TT me 11:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
I noticed all this. I pinged you mainly to keep you involved in the process...if you're willing.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:22, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Needtobreathe as a "Christian band"

I noticed you said on the Needtobreathe page that there needs to be "consensus" to take off the "Christian" genre. It looks like the last "consensus" was 2018, and my recent attempt to restart the conversation led to nothing. Looking back through the talk page, it seems the Christian genre is there largely because one user didn't like the band saying they weren't a Christian band. He made statements like "good job digging up the excuse the band and their management came up with" when someone shared a direct quote from Bear saying they are not a Christian band. Having appeared on Christian charts isn't even entirely up to a band. And we don't force the "Christian" label on pages for other bands in similar situations, like Switchfoot, Relient K, Anberlin, House of Heroes, and more. If no one will engage in a new consensus about how the lead singer explicitly stated they aren't a Christian band, there's no reason to revert it back when someone removes it. Rorys1989 (talk) 03:39, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Another editor has changed the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:23, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for your quick and tireless work Andre🚐 17:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

No Es Que Te Extrañe page deleted

I just noticed that you also deleted the No Es Que Te Extrañe page. I assume that it was for the same reason as the La Reina (song) page per WP:G5. I had also contributed to the page. Could you restore it? 204060baby (talk) 18:42, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

@Bbb23 please respond to my request. 204060baby (talk) 11:19, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
In this instance, you made only one edit and it was minor. Nonetheless, I've restored it.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! Also I actually made most of the site in a different edit. 204060baby (talk) 18:01, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

ANI and e-mail

That's the odd part: it wasn't from another user, like most mails, but a straight "The Wikipedia page User:MoviesandTelevisionFan has been changed on 30 October 2022 by Bishonen, see..." etc. As far as I know I was never on that page or added it to any watchlist. Cheers! Shir-El too 19:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

NLT issue

Please take a look at the response to Qzd's warning in the first "October 2022" section of [40] where this patently COI editor defends non-WP:MEDRS edits with threats of libel litigation. I alerted User:Liz as well but I'm twofering it through the "recently active admins" tool because this is pretty bad. Thanks! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 22:55, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Can I ask you to check this editors Sandbox please

Jadetheebaddie Knitsey (talk) 00:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

They created JadePonDeReplay at the same time as that account but no edits. I don't know if that's important? Knitsey (talk) 00:09, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Let me know if they edit. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:12, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Will do, thank you. Knitsey (talk) 00:13, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bbb23/Archive_57&oldid=1120281556"