User talk:Guerillero

WikiProject Scouting Newsletter: May 2024
--evrik (talk) May 22, 2024

Block of Evrik
Could you make a post on his talk page explaining the situation? I don't see anything except a short block summary with no link to relevant discussion. I've occasionally interacted with this user and I thought they were an editor in good standing, and would like to learn more about what happened. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * @Piotrus: The block is based on CU data and I cannot reveal additional details under the WMF's current privacy policy. What I can say is that their behavior fell under several of the prohibited actions enumerated at WP:BADSOCK. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 01:36, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your reply, but I find the lack of transparency worrisome. To be clear, I am not criticizing you personally, but what checks and balances exist that can be verified by the community that such a block is justified? How is what happening here different from a secret trial? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Evrik can appeal his block on his talk page to any checkuser. UTRS is also an option if he would like to appeal in private. If his appeal is denied he can appeal to the arbitration committee. If a user feels that I misused the checkuser tool they can ask either the arbitration committee or the global Ombuds commission to investigate. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 13:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining. For the record, I have full trust in you, I am just concerned about checks and balances in the system. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking . It was a surprise to me as well - I am fond of working with Erik. Lightburst (talk) 00:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement action appeal by
''Procedural notes: The rules governing arbitration enforcement appeals are found here. According to the procedures, a "clear and substantial consensus of uninvolved administrators" is required to overturn an arbitration enforcement action.''

''To help determine any such consensus, involved editors may make brief statements in separate sections but should not edit the section for discussion among uninvolved editors. Editors are normally considered involved if they are in a current dispute with the sanctioning or sanctioned editor, or have taken part in disputes (if any) related to the contested enforcement action. Administrators having taken administrative actions are not normally considered involved for this reason alone (see WP:UNINVOLVED).''


 * Appealing user :


 * Sanction being appealed : Topic ban from the subject of Eastern Europe, broadly constructed, imposed at AE. You were the uninvolved admin.


 * Administrator imposing the sanction :


 * Notification of that administrator : The appealing editor is asked to notify the administrator who made the enforcement action of this appeal, and then to replace this text with a diff of that notification. The appeal may not be processed otherwise. If a block is appealed, the editor moving the appeal to this board should make the notification.

Statement by
Good afternoon, esteemed colleague. It has been several years since my editing privileges were restricted regarding topics concerning Eastern Europe. I am eager and motivated to contribute more productively and conscientiously than before to this area of our encyclopedia.

I acknowledge that mistakes, misjudgments, and communication failures occurred, which resulted in sanctions against editors who are active and productive in this field. It would be naive to deny these issues and my part in it. While it's natural to initially point fingers at external factors when facing adversity, I take responsibility for my actions and having given another opportunity I would do thing much differently.

Previously, I extensively edited topics related to 20th-century politics and history, recognizing the complexities and challenges inherent in these areas, especially on Wikipedia. However, I do not attribute fault to the subject matter or circumstances. Now, after a substantial hiatus, I have the time and strong desire to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia's development. Furthermore, I have thoroughly reviewed Wikipedia's policies and guidelines in order to enhance my work.

I previously contacted you with a similar request last summer, and you advised me to reapply after six months and explore other areas outside my primary interests. I waited nearly a year to gain perspective and reflect on my approach. And I have been editing actively. Also, during this time, I have successfully contributed to other English language projects, Commons, and Wikidata (patroller), without encountering any issues.

I sincerely hope for the opportunity to edit in this area again after this extended break. If necessary, I am willing to refrain from editing topics related to the history of 20th-century Eastern European countries until the end of the year.

My genuine intention remains to contribute to the creation of a comprehensive and free encyclopedia.

Thank you in advance G. —  Sadko   (words are wind)  10:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Discussion among uninvolved editors about the appeal by
''Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.''

Result of the appeal by

 * This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.


 * I'm not thrilled by the low edit count, but I am inclined to lift the sanction. I will give others a few days to leave comments --Guerillero Parlez Moi 19:20, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Sadko: Seeing no objections, I lift the sanction I imposed on you -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 20:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ty. G. Best. —  Sadko  (words are wind)  10:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 July newsletter
The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:


 * with 1,059 points, mostly from 1 featured article on DeLancey W. Gill, 11 good articles, 18 did you know nominations, and dozens of reviews;
 * with 673 points, mostly from 2 featured articles on Worlds (Porter Robinson album) and I'm God, 5 good articles, and 2 did you know nominations;
 * with 557 points, mostly from 1 featured article on KNXV-TV, 5 good articles, and 8 did you know nominations; and
 * with 415 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Great cuckoo-dove, with a high number of bonus points from that article.

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Religion
Hey. I just want to let you know that I was happy to see your comments about the sudden rise in anti-religious bigotry on Wikipedia. I wanted to call it that, but I was worried that I would get accused of personal attacks. I say this as an editor who has made more than 250,000 edits to this project since 2010. Multiple unjust outcomes have taken place at WP:ANI since the start of the year.

Within the past few weeks I removed a pro-old fashioned Wikipedia values userbox from my userpage because I felt like I could no longer abide by its principles. Scorpions1325 (talk) 00:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I appreciated it too, especially given questions 6 and 7 at my RfA. Clovermoss 🍀  (talk) 10:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I also wanted to echo the appreciation for this comment. There are absolutely situations where editors' creeds can contribute to COIs. However, your acknowledgement that the pendulum may have swung a bit too far of late is heartening. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

July music
My story today is - because of the anniversary of the premiere OTD in 1782 - about Die Entführung aus dem Serail, opera by Mozart, while yesterday's was - because of the TFA - about Les contes d'Hoffmann, opera by Offenbach, - so 3 times Mozart if you click on "music" ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Today's story is about a photographer who took iconic pictures, especially View from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, on Manhattan, 9/11, yesterday's was a great mezzo, and on Thursday we watched a sublime ballerina. If that's not enough my talk offers chamber music from two amazing concerts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)