User talk:Aoidh/Archives/2024

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Clovermoss
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Dennis Brown
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Julia W · Marasmusine · PBS



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Aoidh · HJ Mitchell · Sdrqaz · Spicy · ToBeFree · Vanamonde93 · Z1720
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Maxim
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Enterprisey · Izno · SilkTork

Oversighter changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Aoidh · Firefly · Sdrqaz · ToBeFree · Z1720
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Maxim
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Enterprisey · Izno · SilkTork

Arbitration
 * Following the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , , , ,.
 * Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were enacted in June 2009.
 * The arbitration case Industrial agriculture has been closed.

Miscellaneous
 * The New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,000 unreviewed articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Topic ban
Hello Aoidh.

As per the Arbcom change in case on the topic banning of me from I-P articles, I have a question for the possible result that I am topic-banned from Israel-Palestine articles. Am I prohibited from editing any articles about Israel, or just about the conflict in particular. A lot of the articles I create are about Israel in general during the Old Yishuv, but do not necessarily have anything to do with the current conflict (see articles such as Lämel School, Kollel Hod, Batei Mahse). Assuming a resolution is passed that topic-bans me from I-P, would the "broadly construed" prohibit these types of articles? TIA!

EytanMelech (talk) 13:46, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The topic ban would be from edits that would fall under the "Arab–Israeli conflict" contentious topic. It would not be a blanket restriction from all Israeli topics, but from edits in the area of conflict. The wording broadly construed should however be kept in mind, given that there is a reasonable potential for overlap between an edit being about an Israeli topic and "edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict". - Aoidh (talk) 23:03, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks! EytanMelech (talk) 23:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Lamiere
Hello I created a page "Lamiere" which was deleted and I was in communication with the person who deleted the page, I was accused of receiving payment, I expressed I did not, I was told that the quality of the articles are not good sources and likely press releases, I express that this is a speculative claim and in hip hop arguably all articles concerning artist are results of press releases, and that he may not understand the culture. Then lastly he said the article was an advertisement and deleted the page. I believe this was wrongfully done and it should be reversed and sent to drafts where I can add more articles after additional research. Is this man out to sabotage certain artist? I also showed him several pages with simmilar artist, and its become about ego, Im not sure if you are the right person to make this request but can you please take and if possible reverse the deletion and send it back to drafts, the claims for deletion are just not true. and I intend to adhere to the policies of wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadedavis1990 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Having reviewed the content and sources of the deleted article Lamiere I have to agree that the deletion of the article was well within the deleting administrator Seraphimblade's discretion. Even if it were not an "unambiguous advertising or promotion" (WP:G11) it shows "no indication of importance" (WP:A7). Making music and appearing on Snapchat is not a credible claim of significance. While not directly related to the deleted article, i did want to address where you said I express that this is a speculative claim and in hip hop arguably all articles concerning artist are results of press releases, and that he may not understand the culture., as this is an inaccurate assessment of the level of sourcing available in this topic area. There is a WikiProject called WikiProject Hip hop dedicated to improving coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia where you can also find examples of high-quality sourcing in articles; see for example articles listed in Category:FA-Class Hip hop articles and Category:GA-Class Hip hop articles, though what is listed there is not just artists, and some of the articles listed there will not be strictly or solely focused on hip hop.


 * Even outside of those FA/GA-class articles however, one can look at an article like De La Soul and see that while not all of the sources are strictly independent of the subject, there are more than enough sources that are not press releases or churnalism and notability via WP:MUSICBIO is demonstrated. Articles sometimes include some content based on information provided by the subject, but no matter what the subject is, those sources should not form the basis of an article. Given that the article Lamiere was also a biography of a living person, the reliability and quality of the sources are especially critical. - Aoidh (talk) 05:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Request
Hi Sir, I created new article, reverted some vandal changes and submitted Extended-confirmed-protected edit request. I think i improved myself. I want to use the translation program. Can i request extendedconfirmed again ? LionelCristiano (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Given the short period of time since the last requests I would highly advise against making another one so soon; my suggestion would be to time some time (several months) editing on the English Wikipedia to get a better understanding of editing practices before submitting another request. Just looking at your last few edits for example, changing facts in an article as you did here is not a minor edit. More importantly, you recently added an unsourced name to a BLP article that specifically had an editing note in the lede that said . When your edit was reverted you re-added the name but added a WP:FANDOM source as a reference, which is not a reliable source to begin with, but especially for sensitive content related to biographies of living persons. Given that this falls squarely into the BLP contentious topic area I highly suggest you read WP:BLPPRIVACY and the WP:BLP page as a whole. - Aoidh (talk) 02:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok Sir, I will read them all. I wrote it because it was written on eswiki. LionelCristiano (talk) 02:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that's a good reason why more experience is necessary before using the translation tool; just because something is present in another article (even the same article on another language's Wikipedia project) does not mean it is appropriate for a English Wikipedia article. It also may not even be appropriate for the article on that language's Wikipedia and just hasn't been noticed and removed yet. Especially with BLP articles, you need to be familiar with what is and is not appropriate on the English Wikipedia rather than just copying over text, as each language's Wikipedia has different standards and practices. - Aoidh (talk) 03:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I understand, thank you Sir. I will work harder. LionelCristiano (talk) 13:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Possible Sockpuppet
You blocked User:Daviddayag from editing Andromeda Galaxy due to edit warring. A recent edit by a suspicious IP made the same change. It may be best to increase the protection level of the page. Let me know if you'd rather I go to WP:RPP to address this.  Cerebral726 (talk) 15:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It's possible that it is this editor logged out, but given that they are not the only editor to edit war over this change it doesn't necessarily indicate that it could only be them. While you're here I do also want to point out that in this edit summary you mention you are Performing my third of three reverts but Edit warring points out that The three-revert rule is a convenient limit for occasions when an edit war is happening fairly quickly; it is not a definition of "edit warring", and it is absolutely possible to engage in edit warring without breaking the three-revert rule, or even coming close to doing so. and WP:3RR further elaborates that (regarding 3RR) The rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times. Going up to three edits and then stopping is still edit warring and could still result in a block, which is something I would advise keeping in mind moving forward. I don't think it's appropriate to protect the page at this time but if the IP continues edit warring that might be worth looking into. - Aoidh (talk) 21:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Aoidh, is there any way to file a WP:SPI against two accounts those two accounts were made in the same time/months three year ago? And both accounts are not blocked yet but their actions largely overlap? So we can file a SPI case against such two accounts? Or it is necessary to one of account must be blocked before? Please reply if you got some time. If yes you can leave link to read before filing such case.?2404:3100:189A:F508:1:0:38F2:BBCA (talk) 05:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no requirement that any account is currently or has been blocked, what an SPI needs is evidence, typically in the form of diffs. A guide can be found both at the top of the Sockpuppet investigations page itself as well as Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guide to filing cases. - Aoidh (talk) 07:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Aoidh so what we can add in the Sock master slot? As in suspected sock we can add new accounts names but what we can add in the sock master name ? When we don't have a block account as master before.? Or we don't have an idea about it.2404:3100:1895:E157:1:0:3978:44E6 (talk) 08:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Following the instructions at the "How to open an investigation" box at WP:SPI you would simply enter the username of the oldest-created registered account. - Aoidh (talk) 08:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Oversight Requested
I see that blocked  and that someone oversighted some of his edits. Would you mind suppressing the phone number and other sensitive info on WP:EFFPR? –  Pharyngeal Implosive7  (talk)  22:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I see you or someone else did it. Thanks! –  Pharyngeal Implosive7  (talk)  22:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It was revision deleted but has now also been oversighted. Thank you for alerting me, however when coming across content that needs oversight the instructions at Requests for oversight should be used rather than leaving a message on a user talk page, to avoid drawing attention to the contents of the edit. - Aoidh (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't know. Thanks for letting me know. –  Pharyngeal Implosive7  (talk)  23:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

My fault
Should not have given him a loophole. Plugged. The newly TBANned sometimes test their limits, but he should no better. I should have too.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Be damned if I do. He kept going after i clarified. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update, I guess we'll see how this goes. - Aoidh (talk) 21:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

62.64.141.187
Hi Aoidh, the IP you blocked is connected to the school its article they vandalised. Not asking to change the block or anything. Just FYI. Nobody ( talk ) 13:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Shanghai Shenhua F.C.
Hello. I'm trying to add a link to the Equality Cup to this page: Shanghai Shenhua F.C., but a user keeps reverting it with invalid reasons. First he said the cup wasn't notable enough, then when I explained why it is notable, his new reason for reverting it is that "Shenhua is notable enough in itself" (?). Please see -- 𩇔 (talk) 06:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
 * This seems to be a content dispute, in which case I would suggest using dispute resolution options, such as discussing it at the article's talk page, and utilizing WP:3O if that does not resolve the dispute. - Aoidh (talk) 12:50, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:AN/EW & Portal:Current Events
Relating to these two (1, 2) reports at WP:AN/EW which you closed, it appears that the two editors in question have continued edit-warring over the same content 1, 2, despite being previously warned. Could you please look into this and take appropriate measures? 33ABGirl (talk) 05:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That page is under a 1RR restriction, but it doesn't appear that either editor has violated that restriction. Though they have both made two reverts over the last 12 days, I don't think it's something that is immediately actionable in terms of edit warring. - Aoidh (talk) 05:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reviewing the situation. I understand your reasoning and see that the situation is not immediately actionable. 33ABGirl (talk) 06:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Help
i notice a sock puppet account, who is possibly conducting WP:ILLEGIT

@109.76.192.22, @109.255.172.169, and possibly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Erik

the first two used the same vocabulary "equivocate" in recent edits on The Woman King would appreciate if you could investigate, i would accept any decisions thanks Merzostin (talk) 08:27, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * As a Checkuser I cannot connect an account to an IP per WP:CUIPDISCLOSE, so any connection between them would have to be behavioral evidence. The word "equivocate" is used by both IPs (here and here) but not by Erik. As for the IPs themselves I don't see any instance of the IPs alleging to be different editors. One of the IPs hasn't edited since the newer IP began, which often indicates that the IP being used has changed, and isn't necessarily a sign of any attempt to WP:IPSOCK. - Aoidh (talk) 09:16, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ok thank you for your help, it's just felt strange that these 2 IPs use the same vocabulary and also has the same "agenda" anyhow that's it i suppose Merzostin (talk) 10:02, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @109.76.202.116 just give me reference to
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film/Archive_48?wprov=srpw1_1#Mixed_to_positive_%2F_Mixed_to_negative
 * filled with Erick's comments, definitely raised my eyebrow, but then again even if it is without better evidence it's hard to determine right Merzostin (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi
Hello Aoidh, how are you? I would like to apply for extendedconfirmed if it is okay with you. Lionel Cristiano? 16:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * While you certainly don't need my permission to do so, if you're going to request the permission I think you should briefly acknowledge the issue that caused the permission to be removed and show in your request, with diffs, how issues like those previously discussed (such as the previous discussion on this talk page, the ANI discussion, and the previous request) have been addressed and will no longer be an issue. I may comment on the request but I'm not going to approve or deny it personally. - Aoidh (talk) 16:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Lionel Cristiano? 16:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Question
Hi Aoidh. Sorry for bothering you guys so much, I am just very concerned with the POV pushing these past months. I know you guys are busy, but do you have a rough estimate of when I can expect a reply regarding my ArbCom case? HistoryofIran (talk) 14:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm following up internally and any response will be via email, thanks. - Aoidh (talk) 00:54, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Problem user
Hi Aoidh, Yesterday I reverted an edit by User:DaquavionJohnsonSmith and left a level 2 warning on their talk page. But I noticed today that their inappropriay contributions at Redlands High School go back to October 2023 and have been reverted by multiple other editors as vandalism. Is it time for a block? — Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 20:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I've left them a message on their talk page, if it continues a block might be necessary. - Aoidh (talk) 05:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

86.44.48.70 has resumed edit warring
Hi! On 13 June you blocked for edit warring. I wanted to let you know that since the block has expired, the user has resumed edit warring on the same articles they were editing previously. For example, on The Garfield Movie they have made essentially the same edit five times since 17 June, all of which have been reverted: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. CodeTalker (talk) 21:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I have blocked them for 2 weeks. - Aoidh (talk) 21:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! CodeTalker (talk) 21:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Edit waring in Tamil genocide
Similar to the edit waring incident reported in ANB, I am faced with a similar situation were my removal of newly added content that is in disputed have been reverted by a user claiming that that my edits have been disruptive and accused of Advocacy by violation of WP:NOTCENSORED. I feel that the reasons I gave for the removal of the newly added content is valid, ,. Please can I ask you to intervein. Kalanishashika (talk) 16:30, 21 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I won't be speaking for the other user but I had thought about reporting you to an admin user page for the same reason.
 * You appear to continue gaming the system despite the admin @Daniel Case calling you out on this very behavior in AN3 and despite admin @TomStar81 issuing 1RR warning in ANI. You have been trying to remove the same content for weeks now, this being your 5th attempt [1][2][3][4][5], despite three other users opposing your move and despite there being an active talk discussion on it. I don't see this behavior subsiding any time soon given the WP:SPA behavioral pattern. Admin intervention is needed.---Petextrodon (talk) 17:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kalanishashika why are you determined to remove https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51184085 from the article? It's BBC– one of the most reliable sites on the internet. Vestrian24Bio ( TALK  ) 18:35, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Vestrian24Bio, I don't question the sources. Only the content. The content here is not directly relevant to this article. There is another article on this subject where is should be included. I explained this here . Kalanishashika (talk) 12:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The content is directly relevant to the article, it is relevant to the tens of thousands of 'enforced disappearances' of Tamils, which has been described by cited scholars as a genocidal act. Oz346 (talk) 12:43, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I will take a look, but it may result in implementing CTOP restrictions to minimize disruption in the page or topic area. Ideally this dispute would be something that could be worked out without an administrator's intervention, but if necessary it may result in one or more editors being page or topic banned to prevent further disruption. - Aoidh (talk) 18:37, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Aoidh, the issue here is that the editors Oz346, Petextrodon and‎ Pharaoh of the Wizards, seem to be pushing content want and aggressively pushing out content of others or changes. I kindly request you to review this behavior, and advice no it. They don't seem to respect rules such as Civility see and I am trying to resoulve this in the talk page . Kalanishashika (talk) 12:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I have a question why Petextrodon is speaking on behalf of Oz346 and vis versa? This seems like a tag team. Is this why a Sockpuppet_investigations/Okiloma was reported? Kalanishashika (talk) 12:14, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Where am I speaking on behalf of another? That is a false allegation. If I find something objectionable, I will call it out. I object to your unjustified removal of government crimes and their repercussions on Wikipedia, especially as they are supported by cited sources. Oz346 (talk) 13:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kalanishashika Strange you should make that accusation right after I began my reply saying I won't be speaking for the other user. Anyway, I also asked you a question at the ANI report you filed but it was archived before you could reply. So I would like to post it here if you don't mind:
 * Anyone is allowed to edit any article here but I have two questions if you don't mind.
 * 1) How did you find the Tamil genocide article given your first edits were about public figures? 2) Have you drawn any influence from the edit history of any Sri Lanka topics editor when you challenged the UTHR as a primary source; when you implied that a source must be vetted by RSN before it could be cited; when you gave explicit attribution to certain sources; when you asked third parties at RSN to audit sources used in Tamil genocide article? Thanks.---Petextrodon (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Petextrodon, I will not respond to these two questions here for the same reason I did not do so in the ANI. These questions I consider to be very personal, and I don't believe I have to respond to such questions, when asked by a fellow editor such as yourself. If these are asked by an Admin, that's a different matter, I will consider it. Kalanishashika (talk) 15:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Here is what I recommend: if you object to content in the article, start a discussion on the article's talk page explaining why the content should not be in the article. Do not comment on any editor or anything previously said, those are distractions and will result in the discussion derailing and nothing getting done which is exactly what happened previously. if Kalanishashika starts a discussion as mentioned, return the same courtesy and focus on the content. Don't discuss any editors or things previously said and instead focus on the content. Article talk pages are for discussing the article, and given that this is in a contentious topic area, CTOPS restrictions will likely be implemented if editors are unable to edit in this topic area constructively. - Aoidh (talk) 00:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

WP:LTA for User:Kamen rider saber
Hi, I was thinking to make a LTA for User:Kamen rider saber. Another account has just appeared and you blocked it. There are now a bunch of accounts being created to vandalize Wikipedia. I am just asking do we need a LTA? Cheers -- Martin talk  06:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with the previous SPI comments from User:Spicy citing WP:DENY; I don't think there needs to be an LTA page for this type of editing when it just going to get blocked either way. - Aoidh (talk) 06:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)