User talk:Black Kite/Archive 92

Proposed decision posted for the SmallCat dispute case
The proposed decision in the SmallCat dispute has been posted. You are invited to review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 10:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Sensitive Topic Articles
Hello. it has been quite a long time since we talked last time. If my memory does not fail me, the last time we interacted was through the AN and the AE regarding the Armenian Genocide and similar articles about Massacres in the 20th century, a topic area notorious for drawing POV warriors. It was however thanks to the admin's intervention that this kind of disruption was tackled effectively in these kinds of articles.

I came to you as I am currently trying to tackle issues on an article in the same topic area, the Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars. The issues I am trying to tackle with, are regarding irrelevant content being added to the article to suggest something that the sources do not support. The editors, despite my policy-compliance concerns expressed in the article's talk page, restore the content without any adequate explanations, along with the sources misrepresented.

With myself being aware of the spirit of the 3 core content policies, and aware of Wikipedia's set of dispute resolution procedures, but also aware of the sensitive nature of massacres and genocides in the WP:BALKANS topic area, I am trying to think of how best to offer the article the exceptional handling it requires, considering that the mass killing of people is not an everyday topic and certainly one that requires more caution.

As an admin who is experienced with past disruptions in this topic area about Genocides and Massacres, do you mind sharing with us an advice on how best to deal with this kind of disruption where content not described as massacres/deaths by the source, yet, is being added to Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars to suggest otherwise? Furthermore, the editors who defend the questionable content, avoided addressing my concerns in the talk page, and tried to Status quo stonewalling the discussion by suggesting immediately that I open a RfC to have it removed, without them even bothering to discuss the matter in depth first. Since the topic is sensitive, I seek to be cautious on how to deal with such disruptions. And I seek advice against such cases of Status quo stonewalling. Your advice is not required, but will really be appreciated given your past handling of disruptions in this sensitive topic area. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk &#9993; &#124; contribs &#9998;) 17:03, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Respected Sir, Need your Help against serious vandalism
Respected Sir, Thanks for reverting back the vandalism edit by user : truebotbhil on page : TADVI BHIL. Sir there is this user : truebotbhil, He is using bot in his name and making multiple edits and erasing data that have been with reference from many days. I request you to take action againsg him as this is a sensitive page. User3355 (talk) 19:26, 1 September 2023 (UTC) A user : truebotbhil, is doing vandalism on page : TADVI BHIL , please block his IP address , this page is very sensitive and please lock it after your final touch. User3355 (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I have watchlisted the page and will keep an eye on it. Black Kite (talk) 19:33, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Sir, please look toward his (user: truebotbhil. on page TADVI BHIL ). edits again. He is constantly making unnecessary edits and making vandalism on sensitive page . I fequest you to take action immediately please. User3355 (talk) 19:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Replying
Hi, sir, I didn't able to read your messages at my talk page, because somehow turned off its notification function. If you want me to write articles through AFD, I'll do it, I'll not cause any trouble to you and thank you for your valuable contributions to the articles written by me. Tesla car owner (talk) 16:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Please do! Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 17:51, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

September 2023
Hello, I'm Danners430. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, British Rail Class 66, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I couldn’t see any sources about 2023 imports in the article - unless I’m mistaken of course Danners430 (talk) 19:51, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for telling me to look at referencing for beginners - after all I've only been here 17 years. I was merely correcting the number lists, none of which are sourced, so they should presumably all be removed, in that case. There is a source at, but it's behind a paywall and there is currently a discussion about whether this source is reliable. There is also a source showing an image of 66306 from February here, but that doesn't source the number series, just one locomotive. Black Kite (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah but wait ... I've just found this, which I couldn't find before. I'll update the article when I get a moment. Black Kite (talk) 20:20, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that’s just the template Twinkle uses… definitely not perfect in every situation! Honestly the entire table likely does need removing… sadly there’s a lot of “referencing debt” in many of the UK Rail articles, especially when it comes to fleet tables… but I suppose we have to start somewhere! Danners430 (talk) 22:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok
Hi, I read your messages, I'll not write but don't intimidate and please stop bothering me.Tesla car owner (talk) 19:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * If you add content to articles that is good English, no-one will bother you. I think I've said this a number of times. Black Kite (talk) 19:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll do as you said. I don't want any argument. Your an experienced editor than me, I assume you know better, bye. Tesla car owner (talk) 19:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 67.149.160.101 (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2023 (UTC)


 * This truly is the worst case of WP:WIKILAWYERING I've ever had the misfortune to be associated with. I apologise on our anonymous friend's behalf. – PeeJay 19:04, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Skyerise?
You wrote in Arbitration/Requests/Case I do not believe that Skyerise is a new account. Skyerise has 14 years and 110k edits, so obviously not a new account. Did you mean somebody else? RoySmith (talk) 01:26, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I will clarify. Black Kite (talk) 10:25, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

The FA reads like an advertisement
The FA reads like an advertisement. Threatening me won't change that. Also, our own sources say the alt-right loves her. chbarts (talk) 18:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * There is a big difference between someone being a far-right loon and far-right loons liking her. We don't attribute the latter to the person themselves. Black Kite (talk) 13:17, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I've posted to WP:BLPN about this. Not sure if their comments go over the line or not, but... Doug Weller  talk 16:18, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Veho for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Veho is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Veho until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

lenta.ru
If you have reliable sources describing lenta.ru "a disinformation site" please help to edit the page. Xx236 (talk) 08:22, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Not my words - see Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_281, Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_281 amongst others. Obviously if you believe it should not be marked in this way, feel free to bring it up at RSN. Black Kite (talk) 10:29, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Whitelist for Commons
At ANI you wrote "I do wonder if we should implement a Commons whitelist, i.e. everything from Commons is disallowed unless added to a list here at enwiki. It certainly might make the people at Commons who clearly don't give a shit about being a porn repository think again."

I don't know much about Commons, but I'm not really a fan of it, and I have long criticised the amount of what I'll politely describe as inappropriate and unencyclopedic images on it. I don't have any political clout over there, and I don't know how we'd implement such a whitelist filter over here, what the knock-on effect would be for the millions of images that just sit harmlessly in an infobox that were directly taken from sites like Geograph, or even if we could get an RfC going that gathers support for it. But I do like the idea of such a move, or of being more aggressive over what images are allowed to belong in high-traffic articles. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:40, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Mail
2605:8D80:62E:109D:F8E1:A95D:5034:BC4 (talk) 02:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Hey Black Kite, I saw you shut down the conversation in the RFK Jr page. Hopefully it was nothing I said that prompted that. I'll move on to the rest of the page and suggest edits outside of the first paragraph moving forward. Also, how do we report a user? There is someone in that Talk tab who has been bad faith with everyone they disagree with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmsmith93 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Hi there. I was wondering if I should re-list the notice about User:Skyerise at ANI or should I just wait? As I said earlier I try to focus on writing articles rather than dealing with bureaucracy so I'm not sure what policy says I should do (or can do). MY CHEMICAL ROMANCE IS REAL EMO!(talk or whatever) 16:36, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I have moved it to WP:ANI given the conduct issue. Black Kite (talk) 19:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I much appreciate it. MY CHEMICAL ROMANCE IS REAL EMO!(talk or whatever) 21:15, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Skyrise
Might think I’m involved, I’d rather not have that be an excuse to feel aggrieved or I’d block. Doug Weller talk 20:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Which, hi and, if I may, I would be perfectly fine with. I saw disruption and placed a block to prevent it from continuing; just like with page protection, the result can be reasonably conceived as unfair by some (or even many). I won't place blocks I see no urgent need for in such a situation; contrary to the edit warring, civility is well-discussable in a longer discussion at ANI in my view. Temporary civility-related blocks of experienced editors are usually punitive and meant to be such, even if this is denied with a scared look to the blocking policy. I placed a one-week partial block; this is helpful to stop an edit war (it did!) but less likely helpful to resolve experienced editors' civility issues.  either agrees that there is a problem and apologizes, or won't be convinced into agreement by a one-week partial block. The only point of that block could be making them afraid of future blocks, and remaining forcedly civil in fear of blocks. I didn't see myself doing that, so I simply didn't; I don't have to. There are many others who can if they so desire. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:31, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * (doesn't apply to indefinite blocks; if placing an indefinite block is the idea, please say so: That would be an entirely different discussion and unrelated to fairness regarding a 1-week partial block.) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not taking any action on Skyerise as I blocked them last time and have been involved with their shenanigans a few times. My concern is that Skyerise may consider that they have "won" this battle despite their behaviour being seriously sub-par; we usually block editors for calling others racist. Hopefully they will take this episode into account, but there is clearly an issue here. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 21:38, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Blocked for a month - their last block was for 2 weeks. Meanwhile, their talk page has been semi-protected for almost a decade. That seems an overly long time. Doug Weller  talk 11:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * (Followed from ANI) They (SR) certainly have a history of appearing on ANI. Secretlondon (talk) 19:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I was looking at their talk page yesterday, and saw the talk page protection and haven't yet found the reason for it. The log isn't very clear on it. And protection policy suggests that semi shouldn't be pre-emptive.
 * I get the "feeling" that this might be a left over from the past when once-upon-a-time, "vandal fighters" were allowed to have their talk pages semi-ed.
 * I don't know if that's still common practice. - jc37 13:50, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe that Skyerise has had more than her fair share of stalkers in the past, which may have something to do with it. MY CHEMICAL ROMANCE IS REAL EMO!(talk or whatever) 13:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, as the semi was apparently added under a different username, I think we could probably drop it as a test to see if it's still necessary, as we sometimes do with other pages. And if it is still an issue, it can always be re-added. Though, of course, I'm saying that as merely blindly following policy, without knowing the specific circumstances of their situation, as I still haven't found the initiating discussion for it. - jc37 14:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, found it. |_user_page_|_history_|_links_|_watch_|_logs) - was protected back in 2011 for a month. And then later that year for "persistent vandalism" (from an IP) by User:HJ Mitchell. You should be able to see the edit history here.
 * With those as the reasons, I think the protection can probably be dropped now, per policy. - jc37 14:40, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I also found this and and this. Concerning the same IP(s) noted in the link above. The IP apparently stopped editing in 2011. - jc37 15:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * See this too.  MY CHEMICAL ROMANCE  IS REAL EMO! discuss real emo here... 00:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The apparent resolution of which, sounds like another reason that the ongoing talk page protection is unnecessary.
 * I typoed their username earlier, so I don't know if the ping went through, but I'd like to ask User:HJ Mitchell what he thinks at this point. - jc37 19:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

New message from Red-tailed hawk
— Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 15:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I've been away for the weekend. It was to stop the edit-warring, but I see it's expired now. Black Kite (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

More ducking
Thanks for blocking the obvious sock. They're back again, this time as. Requesting a block, deletion of drafts, and extended protection to Saint Philomena College, Puttur. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 12:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! ~ Pbritti (talk) 12:29, 26 November 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅. Black Kite (talk) 12:29, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Terry Venables
I just wanted to check if you're happy with the article now, regards. Govvy (talk) 18:27, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Palace section is still a bit undersourced, rest looks fine. Black Kite (talk) 19:42, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * ITN RD does seem overly strict at times to me, anyway, there were additional edits, and . I kept meaning to do some work on the article, but had numerous edit-conflicts every time I had a go! To me Terry Venables was one of my heroes growing up, so I was hoping to get him at least RD on the from page. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 21:39, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation
Hi Black Kite :) I'm looking to interview people here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss 🍀  (talk) 19:31, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

74.135.234.253 & 72.133.196.210
Hi Black Kite, regarding this AN discussion an this block and then  this unblock. They are back as doing the same submitting NFL profiles with only basic stats refs that are all just rejected for the same reasons wasting AfC time. Still no communication. I think we made a mistake unblocking them the first time without getting them to agree as they either ignore all discussions or just don't care. I just came across Draft:Chad Stark and Draft:Jeff Kacmarek in quick succession. It's been ~20 months since WP:GRIDIRON was depreciated but they have just kept on submitting these over and over. This frankly it the most extreme case of doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result I've ever come across, but then sometimes a new reviewer will accept or a interested editor will improve which maybe is their motivation to blindly continue. I suggest re-instating the draft block on the new IP until they communicate an understanding of the problem. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)