User talk:Black Kite/Archive 85

User talk:BIack Kite
If I may ask, why does User talk:BIack Kite redirect to itself and not to this page? 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 12:47, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Because I clearly included a typo when I created it! Thanks for noticing. Black Kite (talk) 13:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Appreciate your assistance
Thanks again for the partial block on the COI user at ANI. While his pattern recently has been to lay low for a few days or weeks then resume, at one point years ago he did disappear for long enough that I forgot about him. I had also forgotten he's been doing this for 13 years. Previously, he always managed to stop right before getting blocked. This time.... I predict eventual site-wide indef due to him following through on his vow to continue to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Well, we'll deal if and when that happens. Thanks again. - CorbieVreccan  ☊ ☼ 00:24, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Time to close AFD
Hi, this article here Disappearance of Maya Millete AFD need closing, as it is in it's third relist. The third relist has now been more than seven days. Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

ARBAA2
Hello Black Kite. The discussion on AntonSamuel's page move, in which you participated, was archived, and there seems to be no consensus. I am still convinced that there is an NPOV issue with the new name. All the other undiscussed moves were reverted earlier per Ymblanter's first comment. Parishan (talk) 18:55, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

RevDel request.
Just reverted these two edits |1 and |2 and I think that they should be revision-deleted. Sorry if I gave a too descriptive edit summary in the revert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.152.66.123 (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Manchester City
Hi Black Kite

Please could I request for you to reverse your close of the Premier League nomination at WP:ITN/C? If you take a look at the discussion that's underway at WT:In the news, you can see that there's at best no consensus that we should wait until the end of the season to post such things, and probably even a consensus that it's correct to post now. Furthermore, as I've mentioned at that discussion, posting when the winner is known matches precedent in all previous seasons except for 2017–18, including last season.

I have now expanded and updated the season summary, which I'm hopeful addresses the concerns of those who objected on quality, and I would like this to be reopened so that we can come to a consensus on posting it. Many thanks &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

ConnorGuy99
Black Kite, I’m afraid the user Connorguy99 may start another edit war on the list of Eastenders characters page for Ian Beales character. As you are an administrator I’m doing the right thing and notifying you. He states that 3 people agree to remove Ian but nobody really does agree, he only made that choice himself. Me and Soapoholic agree with eachover that it’s still not necessary to remove the character but he still won’t fly by that. Just notifying you before things start to get dire. If you can could you let some other administrators know that where involved in the last one that was a few months ago?

WikiFlame50 (talk) 11:48, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

None of us are trying to war. It’s Connor that is starting it. Soapoholic is innocent WikiFlame50 (talk) 10:59, 17 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Soapaholic reverted without discussion, and then did it again. That's disruptive, and it's why I have warned them - you can't say "this needs to be discussed" and then completely ignore the talkpage. I see two people agreeing with Connorguy99 in that discussion. Black Kite (talk) 11:10, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

I don’t believe I saw any full 100% form of agreement. But there’s another thing. Connors attitude. What can you do if somebody is disrespectful and quite rude? What would your advice be right now as an admin WikiFlame50 (talk) 11:12, 17 May 2021 (UTC)


 * You didn't see any "full agreement" when another poster literally started their comment with "To be honest I agree" and another user commented, "which I agree with since he is not present". Stop the narrative that I am pushing my own opinion and being disrespectful or rude. Connorguy99 (talk) 11:15, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Concerning user
I discovered a while ago in the comments of a video I was watching that some people were discussing the placement of the creator onto Wikipedia (e.g. him being listed as a Hurdy Gurdy musician, being on the Gesamtkunstwerk page, etc.). I removed these promptly, but I noticed one user actively gloated about placing him into the List of Johns Hopkins University people page and "nobody knowing". I tracked down their misleading edit and removed it, and added a subtle vandalism warning to their page. However, this user also did only one edit. Looking back, they might have been a sockpuppet. Also, I also believe I placed the incorrect template on their page; subtle vandalism is for good faith vandalism. One more thing making the situation difficult is that the comments have now been removed. Since the comments were not against Youtube's Terms of Service, I believe the video's creator took them down. Can you give me some guidance on this situation?

links to archived versions of the video where the comment is available:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210111225540if_/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV__C64Ni50&ab_channel=briandavidgilbert

https://web.archive.org/web/20201217202637if_/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV__C64Ni50&ab_channel=briandavidgilbert

user in question

User talk:2600:100E:B02D:5429:B011:7FA0:AD4D:D373

@Black Kite

Ardenter (talk) 10:41, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Ganja sockpuppets
Hello, first of all thank you for protecting the Ganja city article. I believe that the sockmaster for those (or at least some) is, but sadly I don't know how to file an SPI report. Could you help me with this? - Kevo3 2 7 (talk) 10:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC) Here is a list of all the SPAs and IPs that did the same edits as Mastersun25 (linked with no-ping template):

(probably the same as Nik0305).
 * If you go to WP:SPI and click on the "How to open an investigation" box it leads you through the routine. Black Kite (talk) 10:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Or if you're using Twinkle, go to the alleged sockmaster's talk page and use the "arv" tab at the top of your page. Black Kite (talk) 10:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Latest report
Hi again, i want to make sure that we got each other right. Did I understand it correctly that you haven't even read the full report before making a decision? In other language Wikipedias, we usually reach consensus before making controversial edits to articles, especially with regard to such vulnerable topics as Armenia-Azerbaijan relations. --Mastersun25 (talk) 10:46, 22 May 2021 (UTC)



How about these edits by a reported user:, , is it ok to remove information you personally do not like? Please try to be objective. --Mastersun25 (talk) 10:50, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've read the report, and I've looked at the article history, which recently is basically a whole bunch of throwaway accounts, almost certainly mostly sockpuppets, removing the Armenian name. Meanwhile, on the talkpage there appears to have been absolutely no discussion about it since 2015 - which is what should happen now.  If there's a good reason that name should not appear in the lead, then it should be particularly easy to articulate that, instead of edit-warring over it.  Meanwhile, there's no information "I personally don't like" - I have no interest in the subject at all apart from administrative ones. Black Kite (talk) 10:55, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree there must be a discussion, but it must be opened by those who add an Armenian name, since it is initially a non-consensused version, but not vice versa. I thought it was a basic rule of Wikipedia. --Mastersun25 (talk) 11:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * So start that discussion, then. Black Kite (talk) 17:52, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Regarding a vote
Hello Black Kite. I had a question about this vote [1] if you don't mind. The consensus seems to be to include the significant alternative name Shushi in bold in the lead, and the vote hasn't been closed yet for months. I think the closure is overdue, and I would appreciate hearing your thoughts about it. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 09:24, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Page moves
Dear Black Kite, I left a message here some time ago but it seems to have been automatically archived. May I please ask you to unarchive it? In addition, there a page move which you had reverted but the page was moved again by a new user. The user later agreed that their move needed to be reverted but says they are unable to revert their own move. Could you please give us a hand? Parishan (talk) 22:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Black Kite (talk) 22:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. How about this move, which was also undiscussed and for which there seems to be no consensus? Parishan (talk) 22:29, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

My talk page
Thank you for handling whatever vandalism appeared on my talk page earlier. Notfrompedro (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Fegatello etymology
Regarding this you made https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=126893105 do you have a source for the "dead as a fried liver" idiom mentioned in the Origin section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.168.72 (talk) 00:55, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

ARCA statement
Hi Black Kite, thank you for your statement at ARCA. I share your concerns. You may want to strikethrough your statement instead of removing it, since Bh has already responded to you. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 07:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Sunshine
Happy first day of summer, Black Kite!! Interstellarity (talk) 14:26, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Reopened RfCs
Hi Black Kite, I've never been in this situation before, so I don't know the usual procedure. The RfC you unclosed at Talk:Jessica Yaniv: should it be given a new start date and another 30 days of listing at WP:RFC? Another editor recently made those changes. Thanks, Firefangledfeathers (talk) 17:54, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi.

You partially blocked the IP 185.237.102.249 for disruptive editing on Siegfried Verbeke (I could not get them to understand that a "soon to be published" source could not be a reliable source). They are now editing with 185.237.102.152, making the same edits.

I don't know if another partial block would be best, or a range block (they've also used 185.237.102.207 in the past) would be better.

Thanks in advance,

Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:21, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Haxxorsid
Hi you have partially blocked but I don't think the disruptive editing has stopped. The user has now come to Kongu Nadu and removed a well sourced section citing No proper references and later adds two unsourced sections.. When I reverted the edits which are clearly unconstructive, they reverted it without an edit summary. Some action here will be helpful, Thanks. SUN EYE 1 19:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Aye - dealt with. Black Kite (talk) 22:52, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

University of the People
Please review the University of the People activity. There is disruptive editing taking place. Weatherextremes has been blocked from editing the page before. Modulato runs a website critical of the university and calls everyone who challenges his edits "UoPeople spammers." Israeli IPs are editing the page, and the university has staff in Israel. It's a complete mess. EffortlessDisco (talk) 17:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Badge of Belgium national football team
Hi. Can you please explain to me why you removed the Royal Belgian FA logo 2019 please? I totally don't get it... ProudTarjaholic (talk) 22:11, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!
 Happy Adminship Anniversary! Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:31, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

My report for WikiBullying
Hello, I no longer see my report here. Can you please tell me how do I know the outcome of the reporting? Thanks again. --Bringtar (talk) 17:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Miss Grand pageant article
I have just deleted and salted Miss Grand as an attempt to recreate a deleted article (via a redirect) per Articles for deletion/Miss Grand International (3rd nomination). Should I also salt the talk page? There may still be "Miss Grand " or "Miss Grand " articles lurking about that need scrutiny. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:47, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * The baffling inappropriateness of this action has been raised at Dodger67's talk page. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I have restored the page Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * To be fair the page has caused far more problems that it's been worth since it was reintroduced, since it was only restored on the basis that it should be about the franchise, not the pageant itself, which was indeed held to be non-notable per the AfD. Multiple editors are trying to turn it back into what it was, and I have had to delete a number of sub-articles.  I suspect a number of the articles on models that are only "notable" for placing in this pageant are nonnotable, too. Black Kite (talk) 22:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * In case you haven't noticed, a DRV on that discussion has since concluded with the result that the full creation-protection of the page be downgraded and re-creation allowed. Salting everything related to a topic based on a four-year-old AfD that was quite poorly argued is rather overzealous and not really supported by policy, IMO. (There does seem though to be a lack of adequate, more appropriate policies for dealing with cases of users trying to push problematic subject areas.) --Paul_012 (talk) 23:41, 30 July 2021 (UTC), updated 23:53, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Black Kite. Deletion review/Log/2021 July 17 was closed as "Reduce protection to ECP", which implemented here. Would you reverse the full protection you applied and restore the extended confirmed protection? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:53, 31 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Excellent. Lots and lots of non-notable subarticles coming up from the usual suspects.  Used to be an encyclopedia, this. Black Kite (talk) 09:16, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

August 2021
Hello Black Kite, there's an ongoing talk to reach consensus about peacocky terms used by an user reported for ownership/edit warring. just an invitation if you want to participate. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 17:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:35, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gerda! :) Black Kite (talk) 09:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Unable to edit
I am trying to edit Draft:Zebronics but I am unable to create the page as it is still showing me blocked although it is written that you removed the protection. Can you please guide me? Alllyy (talk) 08:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Try it now. (It was still on the title blacklist). Black Kite (talk) 10:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I updated the page,please check.
 * I think you'll need more information on the company itself and its history before it's a viable draft. There's very little there at the moment. Black Kite (talk) 11:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, thank you for your feedback. I have searched more but unfortunately, there isn’t too much information about the company history that’s accessible to common public. There are various market research reports which I think will have great details about the company but they are all subscription based or paid. Other sources are not looking very independent or are just primary. But, taking your feedback of making it a viable draft, I have added more content that gives context of what the company is. I have merged the lead and history paragraph in one to give a cohesive read to the article. Also, I have added the infobox and a section on it’s perception of being a Chinese company along with it’s competitors. From a draft point of view, I feel it has sufficient information to be in main space. But I will lean back to your expertise and judgment I have also avoided to use any figures coming out of interviews and have kept it generic since those numbers are not verified by third part sources. I saw an interesting product comparative report published at a Government of India website for consumer affairs: Do you think something could be added from here? Alllyy (talk) 12:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Page Feedback
Hi, I updated the page long back but I lose the conversation with you for Draft:Zebronics. I searched more but unfortunately, there isn’t too much information about the company history that’s accessible to common public. There are various market research reports which I think will have great details about the company but they are all subscription based or paid. Other sources are not looking very independent or are just primary. But, taking your feedback of making it a viable draft, I have added more content that gives context of what the company is. I have merged the lead and history paragraph in one to give a cohesive read to the article. Also, I have added the infobox and a section on it’s perception of being a Chinese company along with it’s competitors. From a draft point of view, I feel it has sufficient information to be in main space. But I will lean back to your expertise and judgment I have also avoided to use any figures coming out of interviews and have kept it generic since those numbers are not verified by third part sources. I saw an interesting product comparative report published at a Government of India website for consumer affairs: Do you think something could be added from here?. Hope this helps as we need to explore print coverage.Alllyy (talk) 04:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Copyright
Hi, I uploaded a image to Commons. The copyright holder gave me permission to do so. I wish to know where to attach the copyright info. The holder corresponded with me via email, and gave me permission. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoyalKnights3000 (talk • contribs) 22:55, August 31, 2021 (UTC)


 * You'll need to follow instructions here: Declaration of consent for all enquiries, this will get you headed in the right direction and most of your questions answered. Cheers, -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 06:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much.

AYUSH
Thanks for redirecting, I almost did the same when I read it. I didn't because the name appeared greater in scope, i.e. it could have described a history of gov policies, but it was still centered around the same topic and in its current form was basically a POVFORK of Ministry of AYUSH... — Paleo Neonate  – 19:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Miss Grand International 2020
I am reviewing a draft, Draft:Miss Grand International 2020, and I see that Miss Grand International 2020 is a locked redirect to Miss Grand and that you are the locking administrator. I see that the edit summaries say that this is a non-notable pageant for which we don't have individual pages. So, first, I will simply notify you that the draft has been submitted and is waiting for my review, and that I will decline it as non-notable. But, second, my question is whether there is a notability guideline or a previous AFD or a policy RFC that I can cite in declining. I am aware that there is a lot of promotional editing of non-notable beauty contests. I just would like to provide the best information possible on why I am declining the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:38, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Robert. This is long-running. MGI was deleted at a previous AfD as a non-notable pageant (it's effectively a franchise).  It was allowed that Miss Grand could be re-created as an article to cover the company that runs the various franchises. However, this has turned out to be a poor idea, as it has simply meant that pageant editors have assumed it is now notable again and have started creating articles for the various iterations - see also Draft:Miss Grand International 2021. Black Kite (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I have Rejected the 2020 submission, because a Decline implies that there is some possibility that a resubmission might be accepted, which there isn't if the target is a locked redirect. There is a possibility that you will be asked why you locked the redirect.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:19, 5 September 2021 (UTC)