User talk:GorillaWarfare/Archive 12

__NONEWSECTIONLINK__

Disambiguation link notification for October 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paula Long, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Westfield. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Women in music
There is a bit of a do on Women in music. Of course, as it's an article on women, mostly men are involved. I reverted the blanking of some sexist quotes which may or may not be good. I left a message on the blanking editor's talk page. Airplaneman then fully protected the article and started the talk page discussion. I don't feel comfortable pushing my pov here. I thought you might want to take a look. Airplaneman's discussion is here: Talk:Women in music. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 07:22, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Please consider the canvassing guideline when you post messages like this to my talk page (and the talk pages of several others). I don't believe I've ever edited that page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:39, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no interest in the outcome. All pinged to the article were men. The only woman before my notices was warned of meatpuppetry. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 06:49, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richelle Parham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Visa. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

An invitation to November's events
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 18:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Submission for another article
Hello GW (Molly). Hope all is well. I was wanting to edit an article but it is protected and requires an administrator. Since you did work on a"Satanic Bible" article I thought it would be up your alley of interest. Below is my submission. Was wondering if you could update the article on Marina Abramović. The "Controversy" section of the article.

On November 4th, 2016, Marina Abramovic made national headlines from a Julian Assange Wikileaks email. In June, 2015, Marina Abramovic invited Tony Podesta, brother of Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta - to attend a Spirit party at her place. Tony Podesta forwarded Marina's invitation via email to his brother John Podesta, asking if he would be in New York city on the date of the party to attend Marinas event.

Cllgbksr (talk) 18:25, 4 November 2016 (UTC)Terry


 * Hi . The correct way to request an edit to that page is to paste what you've provided above in a section on the talk page (Talk:Marina Abramović) and include . This will submit a request that can be handled by administrators who are more knowledgeable about this person (and more knowledgeable about the issues leading to the article being fully-protected) than I am. GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:58, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

. Thanks! I did what you said. Now I wait. Have a great weekend.Cllgbksr (talk) 01:20, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Training Modules design conversation
Hello! We are leaving you this message because you have previously indicated that you interested in helping the Wikimedia Foundation Support & Safety team in developing our training modules this year.

We appreciate all the help and thoughts users like you have offered thus far. We would like to encourage you, if you are interested, to participate in the next step of our development: a community consultation about the design and structure of the modules. Note that we're not yet getting feedback on the content of the modules - a separate consultation about that will be starting soon.

In this "design" consultation, we're looking for advice on things like the best place to host these modules, the accessibility of content, and other potential design decisions. Please feel free to leave any thoughts you have about these things on the talk page. Thanks! Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins) .MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Congrats
I'm still watching KM's speech, but wanted to comment. I knew a fair amount of your story, but learned that it was much more troubling than I had realized. I have mixed feelings about seeing you so prominently mentioned; there is a positive aspect to it — she did make sure to cover your substantial contributions to Wikipedia, but it is troubling that part of the prominences due to the harassment you have had to endure.

The scope of the problem is sobering but let's keep on fighting.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  15:01, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind words. I thought Katherine did a great job with her talk. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:06, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Alexis Ivanov
Good block. He was actually lucky you got there first - I was going to block him indefinitely, but the firewall at my office decided to start playing up. So I've got home and find you've already solved the problem. Black Kite (talk) 18:50, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I also thought your block was good, but the response by Alexis, especially in light of what happened last time, did not convince me that there will be a change once the six months pass, so I opened a sub-thread below the one you had closed. I thought that either I would be ignored and it would be archived, or my proposal would receive unanimous support and so it wouldn't matter, but for that reason I didn't notify you. It's here, if you're interested. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 03:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, no, I'm just terrible at keeping up with highly-edited pages like ANI on my watchlist. Thanks for dropping a note here! GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:04, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

December 2016 at Women in Red
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Wayne Dupree Article was tag bombed
GW, Hope all is well. FYI another user tag bombed the Wayne Dupree article on November 28th. It was bombed the same day I made an edit to one of their articles they reverted on a Washington Post reporter, David Fahrenthold. I suspect the user tag bombed the Dupree article in retaliation for my edit to their Fahrenthold article. I'd like to get your thoughts on this please as to what course of action I have. All the best. cllgbksr Cllgbksr (talk) 11:37, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've just started a discussion at Talk:Wayne Dupree. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I saw that. Thank you. I also read his response. I want to ask user what drew his attention to the article in the first place.  Will follow the talk page. Cllgbksr (talk) 22:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * GW, one thought I had ref the Dupree article is some of Duprees notoriety is derived from his tweets and periscopes he creates on social media and not just from his radio show. I Googled Dupree in the news section and news outlets will quote his tweets or what he said on periscope for context in their articles.  Should a section be created in Duprees article that covers the social media impact?  Example, there was a news article about a retweet Donald Trump sent that Dupree had sent him that became a point of discussion between Bill O'Reilly of Fox News and Donald Trump when O'Reilly was interviewing Trump.  That's just one example.  I can work on the article by creating that section but wanted to see what you thought first. Cllgbksr (talk) 21:28, 3 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Apologies for the delay, I missed the notification. It's fine to add as long as the impact is covered in reliable sources. A publication simply embedding the tweets is not sufficient: you need to find articles that discuss the tweets in detail and how they are somehow noteworthy in and of themselves. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:48, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

More vandalism by this IP
Please see this. The IP has continued vandalizing articles since his block of yesterday. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:23, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it looks like someone else blocked. WP:AIV is generally quicker than asking the specific admin who last blocked. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:35, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Request for Enforcement : Jytdog
I am posting this under a new username since I actually fear repercussion over reporting it however this edit, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JzG&oldid=755940604, is troubling as it does goes against his sanction. CanuckChuck (talk) 02:27, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Requests for enforcement should be made at Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:36, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Rise (Katy Perry song)
Can you semi-protect to persistent disruptive editing. 123.136.106.236 (talk) 05:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No, the issues there are not to the point where page protection is necessary. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:03, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Pattypolska (talk) 05:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * responded Pattypolska (talk) 05:39, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello GorillaWarfare: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, — k6ka  🍁 ( Talk ·  Contributions ) 15:12, 24 December 2016 (UTC)


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

Yo Ho Ho


Hawkeye7 (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Merry Christmas Molly!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:07, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello GorillaWarfare: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, JustBerry (talk) 23:44, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

January 2017 at Women in Red
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Arb request
Thanks for your reply, and I do understand where you and Amanda are coming from. (I'd've responded on the request itself but I'm at -- actually slightly over -- my word limit. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:15, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year GorillaWarfare!
Happy New Year! Hello GorillaWarfare: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, JustBerry (talk) 00:35, 1 January 2017 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:GorillaWarfare}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Happy 2017!
Wishing good health and happiness as we start the new year! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato
People with people-skills would perhaps say that your timing and approach was less than perfect. But I just hope you feel proud of your achievement. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I am aware that you are not pleased with the results of the ANI discussion, or with Oshwah. However, regardless of how you feel, the comments you made towards Oshwah were unacceptable—even if you feel it was poorly-timed of me to point it out. I hope you find your retirement worthwhile, and I hope that you do come back, perhaps with a bit more perspective. GorillaWarfare (talk) 06:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, GorillaWarfare!


Happy New Year! GorillaWarfare, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Ssven2  Looking at you, kid 12:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

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

Happy New Year, GorillaWarfare!


Happy New Year! GorillaWarfare, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Donner60 (talk) 23:36, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

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

Question about changed visibility
I noticed you performed "changed visibility of 2 revisions on page African Americans: edit summary hidden (RD2: Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material)" on 18:48, 7 January 2017. I continue to see the following transactions for African Americans and Talk:African Americans displayed on my Watchlist:

Is this suppose to happen if the visibility has changed? Thanks. Mitchumch (talk) 06:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, that should not be happening. You may want to file a bug report on phabricator. I've removed the copy-pasted bit just so as not to repeat removed content. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protect request
Can you semi-protect Emotion (Carly Rae Jepsen album) to persistent genre warring. 123.136.107.227 (talk) 04:12, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The warring there is slow-moving. I'd like to see attempts to engage the participants in a talk page discussion before protecting. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:24, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Calum Scott
Hi, I notice that you've reverted the edits that I made on the article for Calum Scott (even though I included valid sources for the edit) and was just wondering exactly why this was done. Thanks! Skeldare (talk) 03:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * You removed a very large portion of the existing content without explaining why: GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that I had, I simply added a section to the bottom of the page. Would've been nice to have known that was the reason though. I'll try not to in the future.Skeldare (talk) 18:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mary Jackson (engineer)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mary Jackson (engineer) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 (talk) 04:01, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mary Jackson (engineer)
The article Mary Jackson (engineer) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mary Jackson (engineer) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 (talk) 07:02, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mary Jackson (engineer)
The article Mary Jackson (engineer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mary Jackson (engineer) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kees08 -- Kees08 (talk) 04:41, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Hi!

Thank you so much for protecting the Robert Stefanowski page.

Would it be possible for you to do something similar to this page? It's received a lot of abuse from random users → https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Daniele_Comboni

Thanks!

Pierre

Pierre Lamarre (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2017 (UTC) 

NailN
I suspect NailN, who you blocked several months ago, is a sockpuppet of David Beals because he used the username User:NeilN should be NailN.
 * Certainly possible. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

February 2017 at Women in Red
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

DYK
Hello! Your submission of Diego de Argumosa at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America1000 13:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news
 * A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
 * Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
 * Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news
 * When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
 * Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
 * The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries
 * JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Reverted edit to Keshi (demon)
Hi! You reverted my edit to Keshi (demon), probably through some automated process. Please manually review the edit -- I think you'll see that it was both in good faith and was itself a reversion of a bad faith edit. 148.87.23.4 (talk) 01:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, you're right! I'll remove the warning. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! 148.87.23.4 (talk) 01:50, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Mary Jackson (engineer)
Vanamonde (talk) 12:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Apologies
I'm sorry about earlier and understand why my edits where suppressed. I will try to avoid reveling personal information next time when making my userpage. In the meantime I appreciate you letting me know about the problem and identifying how it may be able to be fixed.

With utmost sincere regards,

Vanellaphantom04 (talk) 16:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Wayne Dupree
GW, hope all is well. The Wayne Dupree article was nominated for deletion today. I wanted to get your input on this in hopes the article can be salvaged. I still haven't had a chance to create the social media section as it relates to the media coverage Dupree receives on social media. Cllgbksr (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Social media section has been created. Would appreciate your input on the article. Thanks!Cllgbksr (talk) 21:02, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Possible meatpuppet
Hello -- could you do a quick review please of user GR.no and IP 75.82.59.241 at Talk:Umami and the editing history of Umami? This new user troll is dedicated to only one cause: disruption of the article as what the troll believes is fake information. This is consuming time and effort of sincere editors. Please advise if this requires a sockpuppet investigation or other course of action. Following your answer here. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 22:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Zefr. I don't have the time right now to look into this issue, so I'd recommend filing a SPI to get feedback from others. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:44, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Diego de Argumosa
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Amortias • Deckiller • BU Rob13
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ronnotel • Islander • Chamal N • Isomorphic • Keeper76 • Lord Voldemort • Shereth • Bdesham • Pjacobi

Guideline and policy news
 * A recent RfC has redefined how articles on schools are evaluated at AfD. Specifically, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist.
 * AfDs that receive little participation should now be closed like an expired proposed deletion, following a deletion process RfC.
 * Defender, HakanIST, Matiia and Sjoerddebruin are our newest stewards, following the 2017 steward elections.
 * The 2017 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Góngora, Krd, Lankiveil, Richwales and Vogone. They will serve for approximately 1 year.

Technical news
 * A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
 * Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
 * A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Request that Block log be erased
Please erase this block log. This is inappropriate use of a short block by JzG as per WP:BLOCKNO. As the discussion on my talk page shows

P.S. I hope I reported this to right person. Your username was listed on the Checkusers and Oversighters but you were not involved in the ANI. There is no information on how to request an erasure of public logs. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 04:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Janweh64. Those block log entries are not suppressible under the oversight policy or revision deletion policy (see specifically the log redaction section of the revision deletion policy). GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response. I was told the same through another discussion after making this request here. Sorry, I should have said disregard. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 21:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, glad you got a faster answer elsewhere. No problem! GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

What's classified as a "bad faith content dispute"
Greetings GorillaWarfare, I hope you're well. I'm currently working on a proposal to set up an ArbCom-esque body on my home wiki since our conflict-handling mechanisms are too ad hoc and ineffective. I'm trying to get inspiration from how other wikis do things and wanted to ask you about a specific piece of ArbCom procedure. It seems pretty clear that ArbCom handles conduct disputes and try to stay away from judging the contents of articles unless they're deliberately done in bad faith. On cases involving disagreements about content there's often this unanimously supported principle in the decision:
 * It is not the role of the Arbitration Committee to settle good-faith content disputes among editors.

My question is, what would qualify as a bad-faith content dispute? Is it only vandalism and refusing to follow consensus, or can it be other things? Just as an example, there's recently been a conflict about a user who (allegedly, just using this an example) uses outdated pre-1940's junk-science on articles about race, and despite criticism from 2 other users refuses to change their behavior. They don't break any civility guidelines, but (assuming the allegations are true) keep using these problematic sources. There aren't enough users on the wiki to ask a wider swath of people with interest in the subject for an opinion. Would this behavior qualify as a bad-faith content dispute worth looking at, or is it a legitimate disagreement best left alone? Thanks in advance!

Respectfully, InsaneHacker (💬) 19:36, 7 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay, InsaneHacker. A good-faith content dispute is generally one in which people disagree about the content of an article, but are discussing the issue and moving forward on improving the article and reaching consensus in a constructive manner. It is certainly more than vandalism and refusal to follow consensus: battleground behavior, incivility, POV-pushing, and other misconduct all qualify. Repeatedly using poor sources can be an issue that the ArbCom handles. The issue you bring up as an example sounds similar to an ongoing conflict the Arbitration Committee has been involved with on the English Wikipedia: Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:18, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply, much appreciated! I have another question if you've got time. I can see that WP:Ban policy allows for various community imposed bans following consensus. Do you know how often this option is used and how one avoids the usual pitfalls of those discussions (canvassing, angry mob piling on etc.)? Respectfully, InsaneHacker (💬) 20:39, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Fake geek girl for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fake geek girl 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/Fake geek girl until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TheDracologist (talk) 21:27, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks and sorry for my slight gormlessness. I obviously need to read up on the differences between the two. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 18:43, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Not a problem! GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:45, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

RevDel Comment
Hey, thanks for the RevDel! I really got a kick out of that guy... TJH2018 talk  03:00, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg TheDJ
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
 * The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
 * An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
 * After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news
 * After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
 * Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

The general 1RR restriction in ARBPIA
User:GorillaWarfare, it has been pointed out to me the New Guidelines (in the section "Motion: ARBPIA" near the bottom of the page). The key part is the sentence underlined in black. Question: Is this to imply that all new edits made since 26 December 2016 in Palestine-Israel articles can be deleted by editors, and they can challenge the editors who put them there in the first place, without the first editors restoring their edits until a new consensus has been reached? If so, you open the door for "abusive editing," that is to say, the new guidelines allow editors to freely delete areas in articles based on their sole judgment and conviction and which edits had earlier been agreed upon by consensus, and that such changes will remain in force until such a time that a new consensus can be reached. As you see, this can be problematic. Second Question: Do the new guidelines also apply to reverts made in articles where a consensus had already been reached before 26 December 2016, or do they only apply to reverts made after 26 December 2016? To avoid future problems arising from this new edict, can I make this one suggestion, namely, that the new guidelines in Palestine-Israel articles be amended to read with this addition: "Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense, or where abuses arise over reverts made in an article where a consensus had already been reached before or after the edict of 26 December 2016 took effect, such editors make themselves liable to disciplinary actions, including blocking."Davidbena (talk) 14:30, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia Revival
Hello, I'm Jamesjpk. I wanted to let you know that the Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia, has been tagged with a semi-active tag. I am messaging you about this because you are listed under the wiki-project's list of active participants. Please contribute to the WikiProject if you want to keep it alive! I hope that it becomes active again! Jamesjpk (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Couple requests
Would you mind removing talk page access for as there's been nothing productive going on there. Also, could you instate move protection for Emily Temple-Wood, right now I can't think of any reason for someone to move that page. Sro23 (talk) 02:40, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Relating to the above would probably be a good idea to revdel some of their remaining contribs. AusLondonder (talk) 02:43, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry for the delay! I've removed TPA. Someone else beat me to the revision deletion. Many thanks for the heads-up. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Comment about Harold_Keith_Johnson
It is not a living person - he is already dead. Please have a look into this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpbEdK2WJx8 - from Minute 10.30 - there is a veteran clearly from his unit who is telling about the war crimes. I guess with some research you might additional sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.117.77.18 (talk) 06:02, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * (Responding on your talk page). GorillaWarfare (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Johnson notes
This is directly connected: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Gun_Ri_massacre http://www.pulitzer.org/winners/sang-hun-choe-charles-j-hanley-and-martha-mendoza

Please have a look. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.117.77.18 (talk) 07:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Ask a question
How to become a admin quickly? Tommy Syahputra (talk) 19:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The short answer is that you don't become an admin quickly. Most people edit consistently for a few years before being elected. WP:Guide to requests for adminship offers a lot of advice you might find valuable. GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I know, But why I see there is a new user just 2 years already become admin? Tommy Syahputra (talk) 20:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * My guess would be that they've been a consistently active editor for those two years. That said, the best way to get an answer to your question would probably be by looking at the reasons people supported them on their RfA page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Windows XP
Good evening, in my opinion, it is not about vandalism, I just explained that there is the possibility of enjoying a service that was thought to have been deactivated forever. sorry for the inconvenience Danny Holme (talk) 19:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * If you choose to re-add this information, please include a reliable, third-party source that verifies your information, and also demonstrates that it is sufficiently relevant to be added to the article. Thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Person you penalised for adding "unsourced" material.
Hello,

I was about to cite that information and you threatened to block me just like that! Next time wait before you rudely attempt to block someone from Wikipedia. Cookieman234 (talk) 21:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

2017 Berkeley protests
Pinging since you revdeleted BLP violations on the 2017 Berkeley protests talk page before. This edit (to the article itself) might also need to be suppressed. (Protection on the page recently expired, and probably should be extended, especially with Ann Coulter planning to speak at the campus tomorrow, but I know we don't do preemptive protection...) Funcrunch (talk) 16:59, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I've revision-deleted the edit. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the revdelete and also for the extensive cleanup! Funcrunch (talk) 04:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure thing! Since I'm actually involved in the content now I'm probably not the best person to ping for admin actions, though obviously I'll deal with egregious violations. Thank you also for all your work! GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Speaking of egregious, I hope I can still ask you to revdelete this edit... Funcrunch (talk) 00:20, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Revdeleted, just FYI. Vanamonde (talk) 04:39, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Let me also thank you for your edits. Much improved. James J. Lambden (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Status?
Hi GorillaWarfare, in regards to this tban, has this been appealed successfully since? Is there a way to check user tban status? Thanks. prokaryotes (talk) 12:48, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Nvm, found it here. prokaryotes (talk) 13:26, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I NEED MY MATTER BACK TO ME!!
Hello!! WHY WASSSS MY MATTER DELETED WITHIN A MINUTE OF ME POSTING IT??????????????????? IS SOMETHING WRONG OR WHATTT???? THIS IS TOTALLYYY NOT FAIR!!! I TOOK LIKE 2HOURS TO WRITE THAT STUFF!! CAN I HAVE IT BACK ATLEAST TO KEEP IT SAVED ON MY DEVICE PLEASE????????? I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT WIKIPEDIA IS VERY WEIRD AND I SHOULDNT BE POSTING ANYTHING THAT IS NOT RELATED TO YOUR COUNTRY OR SOMETHING OTHERWISE YOU WILL DELETE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PLEASE GIVE MY MATTER BACK TO MEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! H Nirvan (talk) 11:32, 30 April 2017


 * I've responded to the email you sent me, and included the deleted content. GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:20, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

seen it. Thank you for giving it back!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by H Nirvan (talk • contribs) 18:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC has clarified that user categories should be emptied upon deletion, but redlinked user categories should not be removed if re-added by the user.
 * Discussions are ongoing regarding proposed changes to the COI policy. Changes so far have included clarification that adding a link on a Wikipedia forum to a job posting is not a violation of the harassment policy.

Technical news
 * You can now see a list of all autoblocks at Special:AutoblockList.
 * There is a new tool for adding archives to dead links. Administrators are able to restrict other user's ability to use the tool, and have additional permissions when changing URL and domain data.
 * Administrators, bureaucrats and stewards can now set an expiry date when granting user rights. (discuss, permalink)

Miscellaneous
 * Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Im new to this, and sorry i don't know how to properly send you the message. If i found a mistake in the content ( in the very beginning part of the article ) which seems to be not editable at all, how do i request to made modifications or corrections? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrystalWarner (talk • contribs) 05:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Request to review
Hi GorillaWarfare, Would you be willing to take a look at User talk:Bring back Daz Sampson? It seems like they are waiting for review from other checkusers and the appeal has stalled. Many thanks. Hmlarson (talk) 03:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Teet Järvi
Hello GorillaWarfare. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Teet Järvi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims importance/significance of the subject. Thank you.  So Why  07:54, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

FYI – 203.100.3.189


Thanks for blocking this IP. Just thought that I'd let you know that they had just resumed vandalizing after a 3 month block, which had just expired in a matter of hours by the time they started vandalizing, so blocking them for only 31 hours may not stop them. Regards. 88.100.20.32 (talk) 02:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh wow, thanks for the heads up. I checked the block log and saw they hadn't been blocked for a while, but didn't look to see how long they'd been blocked. I'll extend it. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)\

May 2017
Hello, I'm random IP. An edit you recently made to Callum Moore seemed to be a blind knee jerk and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. You made a mistake, you didn't bother retracting your false accusation, this is your talk page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.71.192 (talk • contribs) 06:36, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017
Hello, I'm random IP. You reverted my many edits to the Center for Medical Progress page claiming my work lacked citations. Please be more specific if you have concerns as I made many edits and cited throughout. You are welcome to add a 'citation needed' tag anywhere to my edits so I may improve if necessary. I'll revert back to my edits in the meantime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.121.163 (talk) 12:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It looks like you're now repeatedly restoring the edits, despite disagreement from several editors. Please read up on edit warring before continuing, as this behavior is not allowed. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Failure to cite?
I am,as I told Mathglot,DONE WITH trying to improve the Transphobia article.But just how is correctly identifying the authors of an already-cited reference as advocates of transgender acceptance failure to cite a reference?...or are you saying that reference is unreliable?--L.E./12.144.5.2 (talk) 22:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I mostly reverted your edits because this edit does not cite a source. However, the other two edits are also unacceptable, because it implies that the definition of transphobia is only for those who "advocate transgender acceptance", which as far as I'm aware is not a viewpoint reflected in those sources. GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Only those who advocate for transgender acceptance characterize refusal to do so in the terms cited in the sentence I edited.If the cited reference asserted the claimed equivalence to racism and sexism it constituted a statement of advocacy for transgender acceptance.--L.E./12.144.5.2 (talk) 01:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * That characterization of the reference is considered original research; there would need to be a reliable source making that point in order for it to be included. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Seriously?...you need someone to tell you that only those who oppose negative attitudes toward transsexuality regard those attitudes as comparable to racism or sexism? 12.144.5.2 (talk) 04:07, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * There's already a source supporting that, but yes. We also need someone to tell us in order for the Wikipedia article to claim that the definition of the term "transphobia" is different based on who you ask. That's what Wikipedia is: a reflection of viewpoints expressed in reliable, independent sources. As an aside, you probably mean "transgender" and not "transsexual": see . Some folks prefer "transsexual", but it's an older term, and transgender is generally the umbrella term that is used. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:38, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Just re-read and saw I missed the "only" in your initial reply. Yes, we do need a source for that. There are certainly plenty of racists who know and agree with the definition of racism, and sexists who know and agree with the definition of sexism; to claim all transphobes are unaware or in disagreement with the definition of transphobia, you'll need a source. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:03, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm not really talking about the definition of transphobia,but whether it's considered comparable to racism or sexism by anyone but the trans* or their partisans. 12.144.5.2 (talk) 06:48, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * yes well the APA seems to make comparisons here. GW is correct though that we need sources, not OR stuff about otherkin.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 07:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I don't really have much to add beyond what EvergreenFir has said. If there are reliable sources discussing folks who don't think transphobia is comparable to racism or sexism, feel free to add it (though I'll imagine you'll have to consider WP:WEIGHT fairly carefully). GorillaWarfare (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The article as it stands is one long pro-trans diatribe brimming with slander against critics and criticism of transgender acceptance.I doubt there is any source we would agree was reliable...which only again proves that the article is not neutral. 12.144.5.2 (talk) 01:30, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * My opinions on transphobia or yours do not affect whether or not a source is reliable; see Identifying reliable sources. If you have questions about sources and do not trust my opinions or those of other editors of that article, the reliable sources noticeboard is a good resource where you can get an outside opinion. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * If you think the APA impartial rather than a leading advocate of transgender acceptance,we're unlikely to agree.This whole discussion is a matter of "don't try to tell us what you think or why,only people who don't agree with you are worth listening to on either point." 12.144.5.2 (talk) 05:55, 24 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Apologies if I've come off as dismissive; I did not intend that. I'm simply trying to get you to use reliable sources to verify your changes, if you choose to make them again. And as I said above, if you think I'm unlikely to agree with you on the reliability of the sources you find, there are plenty of people aside from me at WP:RSN who can help come to a consensus about the reliability of a source. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:29, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Kaleshnia
Hello, can you please report this user and make sure they block his/her IP? His/her keeps using my name on everything to troll and since his/her has circumvented the IP usage by creating an account his/her won't stop trolling. Not to mention, harassing me by putting my name everywhere making it look like I'm doing that if someone doesn't view the history edits... Thank you for undoing those.

154thTN Pvt. Seth Adam (talk) 13:08, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry that you have encountered harassment, problematic behaviour of that nature is taken quite seriously. If you provide links to previous IP edits (and any other registered accounts) which were harassing (or otherwise problematic), that would probably help and speed things up.  Don't worry too much about a troll dropping your name in places, experienced editors and administrators can spot who really made each edit and we are normally quite careful to check that when dealing with problems.  You are welcome to contact individual editors and administrators, especially if they have already been dealing with a particular case, but can also report harassment to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (also known as ANI or AN/I).  See also: Harassment for the official policy, which both defines the issues and offers advice on dealing with them.   Murph 9000  (talk) 14:01, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I've already blocked User:Kaleshnia. The block includes an autoblock, so if they try to continue editing using IPs that should help. If you have seen that they've come back and are continuing to edit (or if you see them do so in the future) feel free to let me know, or open a WP:SPI so that the socks can be blocked. GorillaWarfare (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Felipe IV
Hello. Thanks for your message. Why do you exactly thought these referenced facts, which are relevant and 100% true, represent a non-neutral point of view and, however, the omission of them represent a completely neutral point-of-view introduction? 83.223.240.16 (talk) 20:50, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * By phrasing it With the ~10 million euros he takes every year from the Spanish citizens as "Prince of Asturias", you are introducing a negative point-of-view. If he has been criticized for this in reliable sources, feel free to include discussion of this criticism, along with citations. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

The article: Trees of Mystery


The following has been reverted: click here. Please can be reverted? Prinsipe Ybarro ( Talk to me  |  Contributions ) 02:20, 21 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I think the IP editor is correct that the removed content does not follow WP:NPOV. You're welcome to add back any parts of it that can be reliably sourced and re-written with a neutral point of view. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk
Yeah, this is Soren, sorry about the Caps, its just that this is a bit mind blowing and scary, the stuff thats going on, and the caps seem to work to get messages to people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SorenSupremacy (talk • contribs) 00:35, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, just wanted to point it out. I hope you're doing alright; agreed that this is scary. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:23, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

NYC JFK AirTrain
You said that I didn't cite a reference. What are you looking for in specific? I am the originator of original documents such as pictures demonstrating system failures. I don't know what other sources can be cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nycairplanephotographer (talk • contribs) 02:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Your documents sound like they are primary sources, which are often not sufficient sources for a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia relies on reliable secondary (or sometimes tertiary) sources for the vast majority of its information. If your research has been published in reliable publications, it may well be usable. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
 * Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
 * An RfC regarding the bot policy has closed with changes to the section describing restrictions on cosmetic changes.

Technical news
 * Users will soon be able to blacklist specific users from sending them notifications.

Miscellaneous
 * Following the 2017 elections, the new members of the Board of Trustees include Raystorm, Pundit and Doc James. They will serve three-year terms.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Blue Whale "articul"ated"..
Hey ... Are you in real conscience that is important to change the article so many teenagers feel impressed about particular thing like "50 day trial" ??? What 's your humanist way behind the knowledge ?? I had revised this article with Crispy Administrator( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Crispy1989 ). So, would thank you if you revert it , so I can do it again. If you disagree in my humanist opinion,  just argument yourself please. Tomorrow we will revert it. Be-Impartial (talk) 00:00, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey ... Are you in real conscience that is important to change the article so many teenagers feel impressed about particular thing like "50 day trial" ??? What 's your humanist way behind the knowledge ?? I had revised this article with Crispy Administrator( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Crispy1989 ). So, would thank you if you revert it , so I can do it again. If you disagree in my humanist opinion,  just argument yourself please. Tomorrow we will revert it. Be-Impartial (talk) 00:00, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm having a hard time understanding you, so I apologize if my reply misses anything. Your edits do not follow Wikipedia's requirements for reliable sourcing or neutral point of view, so I will not revert to your version of the article. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:02, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

== be reliable sourcing or neutral point of view ? HAVE TO TALK WITH OTHER ADMINS ==

Please JUSTIFY yourself when I did not "be reliable sourcing or neutral point of view" .... Your argumment seems copy-paste "baby" Be-Impartial (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Feel free to point to me where things like "with the particularity aim of fomenting administrators (also called 'curators') with no self-affirmation, who pretend to achieve superiority by inducting other passive players to suffering or suicide" exist in the reliable sources used in that article. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:09, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

== The Blue Whale Game with the particularity aim of fomenting administrators (also called 'curators') with no self-affirmation n[1], who pretend to achieve superiority by inducting other passive players to suffering or suicide. ==

This is what I write : "The fantasy about 50-day trial is completed unnecessary ,as well the TYPE OF MUSICS used that are completely garbage" you should be polite when you revise a document, and sur you agree with me  when I add " The Blue Whale Game (Russian: Синий кит, Siniy kit) was initially an unofficial community created in 2013 on a VKontakte Social Network, with the particularity aim of fomenting administrators (also called 'curators') with no self-affirmation n[1] , who pretend to achieve superiority by inducting other passive players to suffering or suicide." Are curaters with FULL SELF -AFFIRMATION ? Wait for your answer. Be-Impartial (talk) 00:12, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Again, I'm having a lot of difficulty understanding your English. But you still have not provided a source supporting your changes. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:15, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, it would be great if you could stop using barnstar templates and rather just reply in plaintext. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:16, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

== Feel the heart of Knowledge.Change the article when our lives take other destiny ==

And I'm completely ungry ,Miss (madame?) because I know a closer case about this game that was passed with a friend of a relative. unfortannly, she suffer so much by a stupid and without any heart around that BEAST.... Be-Impartial (talk) 00:18, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to hear that. However, Wikipedia is not the place for you to post your opinions about the game; there are plenty of other webhosts where you can write anything you like. On Wikipedia, we need reliable sources and neutral phrasing representing opinions about the game that have been reflected in reliable, third-party sources. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:19, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

== HEY GORRILA : YOU DONT ARGUMMENT ANYTHING ...WHAT A SHAME ..................DAMN ==

"On Wikipedia, we need reliable sources and neutral phrasing representing opinions about the game that have been reflected in reliable, third-party sources. GorillaWarfare (talk)"

Well I have too mush things to plan, Phd, job and so on...I can not attend the same time you have ...So I re-write my question again  and ASK u please your opinion against the sentence added:

"The Blue Whale Game (Russian: Синий кит, Siniy kit) was initially an unofficial community created in 2013 on a VKontakte Social Network, with the particularity aim of fomenting administrators (also called 'curators') with no self-affirmation n[1], who pretend to achieve superiority by inducting other passive players to suffering or suicide."

- "unofficial community created in 2013 on a VKontakte Social Network" >>Try to google and you will find that wan an anonymou group created in this social network VK!

- fomenting administrators (also called 'curators') with no self-affirmation n[1], who pretend to achieve superiority by inducting other passive players to suffering or suicide."

- "unofficial community created in 2013 on a VKontakte Social Network" >>Try to google and you will find that wan an anonymou group created in this social network VK!

- "fomenting administrators (also called 'curators') with no self-affirmation, who pretend to achieve superiority by inducting other passive players to suffering or suicide." Read Simon, and motivations of manipulators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_manipulation#Motivations_of_manipulators

Also, http://emotional-intelligence-training.weebly.com/psychological-manipulation-in-treating-codependency.html

Weel im a simple user you an administrator, The power between ourselves are diferent but your ideas are WEAK, and for sure if you do not give a reasonable argument the struglle withh other admins that revert this article will continue and win :)

See revision of three administrators behind Cluebot NG:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blue_Whale_(game)&oldid=782553862

I'm waiting for arguments please, do not copy paste, because it is NOT POLITE as well is POLUTION.

See you tomorrow, or never (if I want it) :) Be-Impartial (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Once again, you need to provide reliable sources, and you need to cite them within the article. You can't add material to an article and then tell people to google it; you need to cite it inline so that people can easily verify it. You also need to use reliable sources; neither Wikipedia nor that Weebly site qualify. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:38, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

== I already ADD EXTERNAL links .Seems very difficult to deal with you :O  ==

Dear user, I wont waste my time, rewriting the external links. But of course, as i am delicate and want to follow the polite way, here there are :

Goerge K. Simon - an well know international psychologist :

-> http://emotional-intelligence-training.weebly.com/psychological-manipulation-in-treating-codependency.html

-> https://www.amazon.fr/Sheeps-Clothing-Understanding-Dealing-Manipulative/dp/1935166301/ref=oosr

->Video: http://player.mashpedia.com/player.php?ref=mashpedia&q=uBfvbWRDZN4

And a resume of Simon's Phd Thesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_manipulation#Motivations_of_manipulators

About the sentence added to Wiki: "(..) was unofficial community created in 2013 on a VKontakte Social Network"

Here are several argumments: >>BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/39882664/blue-whale-challenge-administrator-pleads-guilty-to-inciting-suicide

Read last paragraph: "He started in 2013 and ever since he has polished his tactics and corrected his mistakes.Philipp and his aides at first attracted children on to VK [social network] groups by using mega-scary videos."

<<DAILY http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4264838/Teenagers-committing-suicide-social-media-GAME.html "(..) One local school director told police he had received an anonymous call saying a student had joined a 'group of death' and planned soon to kill herself. The police identified the girl who explained that had had joined a 'game' in social media network 'Vkontakte', and had been given 'tasks' by the administrator of the group." Be-Impartial (talk) 22:50, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Again, we need reliable, independent sources. Wikipedia, the Weebly page, and The Daily Mail are not considered reliable sources. The BBC page is a good start, though you need to be careful to reflect only the information within that source when you add it to the article, and not add your own opinions. You'll also need to cite it inline; you can't provide it only after the fact. The Mashpedia link only links to a list of videos posted by USA Today, not a specific video, so I can't really examine that one. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:28, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

--Be-Impartial (talk) 10:39, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok so GorillaAware, if you consider BBC as a good source , the sentence about "Vk Network(..)" meant that should be accepted, thus I'll revert it. About the citations that justify "Blue Whale Administrators" a "manipulators" ? You should ask yourself if IS NOT TRUE, or can't you feel that they aren't manipulators ? If not I really have pitty about you, because i bet all your friends and family would think so.....

But ok... I'll add more if I had time next week.

For sure I haven't the same time to dispend as you have..I preere to go to a garden drink juices and feel the Mother Nature!!!!!!!! ....

It seems you should really contact ADMINISTRATORS I cite before ( Again : ). You are abusing your power over other Administrators (Again  that have disagree with you .. Don't know what's your aim and goal on being against everything and everyone... Rolling your feed, I just read phrases like: -" which as far as I'm aware is not a viewpoint reflected in those sources" -"Apologies if I've come off as dismissive; I did not intend that. I'm simply trying to get you to use reliable sources to verify your changes, if you choose to make them again. " Please believe me; You should revise your own actions, talking with other Administrators, and waste less time on reverting everything blindly against them.

PLEASE AGAIN DONT BE RUDE AND CONTACT : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ClueBot_NG ADMINS: Cobi (talk), Crispy1989 (talk) and Rich Smith

72.238.6.137


Hi, when blocking this IP address did you happen to notice the block log? Cheers. 62.57.100.23 (talk) 00:37, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, I did see the block log. The IP has been unblocked for about 2 months now, so an escalating block felt excessive to me. If the disruption continues after expiry, I (or another admin) can place a longer block. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:39, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Understood. However, I would like to point out though, that there doesn't appear to be a single constructive edit from this IP at all... Actually, the editing pattern makes it very clear that this has been the same person ever since this IP began editing. Example: Making nonsense edits such as this compared to this a month later. They seem to always vandalize articles relating to movies/TV shows as well as actors, with the exception being the Aleppo article. The recent edits appear to be sorta similar, too. What I'm puzzled with is the fact that it appears to be a residential IP address, but that doesn't explain the sporadic editing pattern, which shared IP's usually have... My point here, is that a shorter block would probably not keep this vandal away for very long... Regards. 189.218.189.39 (talk) 04:13, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Good points. I'll keep that in mind if they continue. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:46, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Petersburg, Virginia
I see you blocked an IP at the above article. The material added was also added by. Pretty obviously, the IP was used to divert scrutiny. Now the same article is being edited by. Am I being paranoid by thinking this is yet another attempt to evade scrutiny? GroveaveII? Anyway, the latest incarnation is adding unsourced content too, but at least this time it was verifiably true. You got buttons I don't, so I thought I'd let you sort it out. Seems quite unresponsive. John from Idegon (talk) 02:20, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked User:GroveaveII. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:28, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 05:05, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Apologies for reverting your talk page
I just want to apologize for removing the edits that had been made to your talk page. It appeared to me that the individual was engaged in harassment but on seeing your responses I see that you are going out of your way to engage using wp:goodfaith. I will steer well clear of this and let you do your thing.

I wish you the best of luck!

--KNHaw (talk) 03:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No apology necessary! I was probably extending good faith a bit too far, and that seems to be affirmed by the fact that the user has since been sockblocked. My undoing of your revert was certainly not meant to imply that you reverted the edit improperly, and I appreciate you looking out for me and my talk page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:24, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Maryann Keller
Hi, Can you help address the issues raised by the warning tag in the article "Maryann Keller" here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryann_Keller. Thanks a lot for your time and help. Cutie girly (talk) 09:58, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Virginia Apuzzo
Hello! Your submission of Virginia Apuzzo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:41, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

110.145.140.230


Hi,

I don't mean to be nit-picky, but after this IP's first 1 week block, you blocked them for 31 hours and they continued vandalizing shortly after the first block. I'm not sure if a short block will keep them away for very long... Regards. 103.11.67.171 (talk) 20:21, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries about nitpickiness—I always welcome a second eye on what I'm doing! Especially in cases like these where you're correct, the block should be longer. I've updated the block length, thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Removal of comment on the page for deletion of Yash Dongre
I have removed the top header for discussion as I had made my case and the admins were not replying, so I had assumed that we have reached an agreement that this page is worth keeping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shailaggarwal (talk • contribs) 10:32, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * When the discussion is officially closed by an admin (after being open for a week, unless it's been relisted), they will either delete the article if that's the conclusion of the discussion, or remove the template. You should not remove the template yourself. GorillaWarfare (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, I will remember this. I am still a newbie, please accept my apology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shailaggarwal (talk • contribs) 18:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize! And welcome to Wikipedia :) GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Youth Setbo FC
Hi GorillaWarefare. You soft-blocked for a username violation. There talk page got added to my watchlist because I removed a non-free image from it earlier today. It looks like the editor copied-and-pasted an article onto their user talk, but I'm not sure they understand that they will never be able to move any of that to actual article as long as they are blocked, unless they use a different account. I was going move the "draft" to their sandbox, but I don't think they can edit that as well. It doesn't seem like they understand what being blocked means or if they do that they are in any hurry to get unblocked. I think that techinically their user talk page usage should be limited to accomplishing the latter. Do you think anything needs to be done here or should they just be left alone to piddle around on their user talk? -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:56, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a softblock, so I'm not hugely worried that they're drafting on their userpage. That said, if you think it's potentially confusing, you could remove it and clarify that it's not a live article that will show up in search. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking a look. While I'm not interested in biting a new editor, they did re-add the same non-free image to the user talk page. They also removed your block notification and replaced with more copied-and-pasted article content. Even though they can the block notification can probably be removed per WP:REMOVED, it does kinda of make it seem that the editor might not understand what it means to be blocked. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:20, 24 June 2017 (UTC)