User talk:Johannnes89/Archive 1

Protests against Barack Obama
Hi Johannnes89. I've declined your speedy deletion tag on this article - speedy deletion can only be used if the article fits a very specific set of criteria. If you have to type in a reason for deletion, it probably isn't a candidate for speedy deletion. You may want to consider taking the page to Articles for deletion instead. Yunshui 雲 水 11:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion

 * Hi, Johannes89. In der englischsprachigen Wikipedia sind Löschdiskussion Abstimmungen. Du kannst also ruhig gegen das Löschen stimmen. Der zweite Löschbefürworter ist übrigens erst seit Mai 2019 hier aktiv. --H do it again (talk) 23:26, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Notability (films) Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release. The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release. --H do it again (talk) 01:43, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out, I've now voted in favor of keeping the article. --Johannnes89 (talk) 07:03, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Rollback given
Hi Johannnes89. I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AJohannnes89 enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Salvio 22:28, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.
 * Thanks you! I am doing vandalism rollback on German Wikipedia for quite some time and thought I would try to contribute in a similar way to en-wp as well. I think I will nevertheless only work on really clear cases of vandalism for now, as I'm still getting used to the different rules here (e.g. vandalism reporting works a bit differently). Have a nice evening! --Johannnes89 (talk) 22:33, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Politics in Bihar and West Bengal
Religion & caste based poitics are a reality in these states, since the articles mentioned several topics like immigrants, religion based promises etc. ; the addition of caste based politics is relevant. Kindly add back the following material:

In view of sizable Kayastha population which mostly depends on government jobs for survival; some political parties are trying to appease Kayastha votes and opinions by promising reservations to them in government jobs. VOT 2H4 (talk) 06:19, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * you might be right, but such political opinions can only be added to articles if you cite reliable sources (e.g. political science research). --Johannnes89 (talk) 06:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

You have misguided the user.
I have objection on your edits. You have given Tota Roy Chowdhury's Official website but he has no official website. The website " totaroychowdhury.com" is not linked to Tota Roy Chowdhury. You have vandalized with the information. And you have given wrong information. Biography360 (talk) 16:16, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you mean this edit? I mainly reverted your linkspam (posting urls from a website in multiple articles). I now removed the „official website“ because it doesn't exist any longer . --Johannnes89 (talk) 16:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

July 2020
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:21, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Muboshgu, thanks for pointing out the templates for user talk messages. I usually revert the first edit without warning (as many IPs are only trying once to edit an article) and start sending such messages with the second revert. Do you think I should start sending warnings earlier? Do you mean a specific revert? --Johannnes89 (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with not always warning an IP that commits their first vandalism. In this case, I'm specifically talking about revert on Gavin Newsom. That vandalism was from a newly registered account and was severe, so much so that I used WP:REVDEL on it. After you reverted the vandalism, they made the same edit again. I reverted it and warned the user, and so far they have not vandalized again. Keep in mind the severity of the vandalism and use the templates when you feel its appropriate. Thanks for reverting vandalism! – Muboshgu (talk) 16:39, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding, you're right these edit were so severe that I should have send the user a warning. --Johannnes89 (talk) 17:14, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Szabó Dezső
Hi,Johannnes89! I appreciate your efforts to debate about the issue. I feel at the moment that the page of Szabó Dezső is not neutral. I think neutrality in a case of an author means the article focuses on his oeuvre and has additional infos about his moral/political views in a paragraph, as it is seen for example in the case of Alan Moore. Some other pages (Hungarian, Russian wiki about Szabó Dezső) do the same. However, in this English article I see the opposite, it contains very few infos about what he actually wrote, it is about his beliefs. I added some infos (Nobel Prize nominee, Hungarian example of expressionism) which are actual facts, why the page contains some opinions (Dr. Yehuda Marton statement what happened in a public meeting, his works were popular only during the White Terror) which can be debatable. Why is it more neutral to say he is a pioneer of Hungarian populist litterature instead of writing "greatest example of Hungarian expressionism"? He was antisemitist, that is again a fact, and the article should of course contain it, but he was also against the contemporary antisemistism, which makes his ideology a little more complex. Whether his works are great or just mediocre it is not our duty to judge. According to this article they are mainly mediocre, but I can also cite well-known literary historians who claim the opposite, like Hegedüs Géza in:. I dont't mind if we keep both interpretations, I don't want to deny that he is a contraversary figure, I don't like ideological or esthetical debates, but I don't like one-sided views either. -- Atestan (talk) 10:05, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * first of all you deleted information with sources that looked serious (Dr. Yehuda Marton, Hebrew Encyclopedia, Jerusalem, 1974, Volume 25 p. 422 / Lukacs, John. Budapest 1900. Grove Press, 1994. p.168). You may not delete this without further discussion or without providing alternative sources that prove the current sources wrong.
 * Secondly the description „has been considered one of the first "pioneers of Magyar populist literature"“ had a citation, while your description „is considered to be the greatest examples of Hungarian expressionism“ was unsourced, thus simply your Point of view. --Johannnes89 (talk) 10:34, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * By the way: It is irrelevant what other wikis are writing about him, you still need to deliver neutral sources for your point of view. --Johannnes89 (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Ban Threat
Hi there, I was wondering if you could please explain to me in what way my actions warranted the ban threat you posted. My edit on Dr. Steven Gundry's article simply referred to him as a pseudoscientist and entrepreneur, both of which are easily verifiable, well founded assertions. Such assertions are not in any way defamatory, but rather, are entirely in line with widespread reasonable opinion about him shared amongst informed individuals lacking personal conflicts of interest. Further, as I have been informed by users elsewhere, no references are required in the lede portion of the article, meaning your prior reversion relating to another member of the pseudoscience community was invalid. Please help me to understand what you think and why you think it? Stardig (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * potentially biased claims such as „pseudoscientist“ should of course only be added with citations. The intro already says, „Scientists and dieticians have classified Gundry's claims about lectins as pseudoscience“ (citing two sources), if you add „pseudoscientist“ as his profession / main activity next to „author“, you need extra proof. --Johannnes89 (talk) 16:09, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Your rather senseless undoing of my recent edit
Not sure why you basically undid my latest edit on the Blackwood page since you have completely scrubbed any bibliography of Blackwood off wikipeida now, which means I'll have to go edit the page again and waste my time. I don't have the time create an entire bibliography page right now but I guess I have to *now* >_> Ummunmutamnag (talk) 14:42, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Susmuffin is right, that the bibliography was far too long . Please find consensus on the articles talk page before adding the bibliography again. --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll just add the regular bibliography to the page without the "weird fiction" section detailing what every story is about, I think including a list of all his works by category and release date is something that isn't exactly so controversial I have to get permission to do it. Ummunmutamnag (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit: It was a bit long to show off on here so I'll paste it in the talk section if you insist >_> Ummunmutamnag (talk) 14:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * As the bibliography has been removed two times now, I would really first try to reach a consensus on the articles talk page... --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Anti Albanian sentiment
Hi, I don't know how to write on wikipedia, but I was really angry that after everything I had written with resources was deleted. 1) You blamed me for not being neutral, in the ANTI ALBANIAN SENTIMENT page in the Italian part I removed the things I wrote and said that with the Albanians they were good and respect the Albanians. Italians don't hate Albanians. 2) Regarding the Serbian voice, I only said that there is propaganda against us without proof, does this mean not being neutral?

3) On Boris Malugki I said that he is fixed against Albanians in social media and I put 3 links, how can you say that I am not neutral?

I await an answer, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.71.7 (talk • contribs) 151.20.71.7 (UTC)
 * Please use Talk:Anti-Albanian sentiment to discuss your changes. You deleted several information, that was based on valid sources and added your own opinion . --Johannnes89 (talk) 18:11, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey Duggee character edits
Sorry to bother you, but could you give me your reasoning to why you reverted my edits on the Hey Duggee character section? I don’t really want to start a revert war, but I feel the changes I made were necessary to improve the article. If you also feel that your edits are necessary, we’ll bring this up on the Hey Duggee talk page. If this is simply a misunderstanding, please let me know. Thanks. -HenryTemplo HenryTemplo (talk) 12:16, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Changing character descriptions the way you did would need some source or explanation imho. --Johannnes89 (talk) 22:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Johannnes89

 * Stop vandalizing articles. -- Johannnes89 (talk) 09:23, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

sid the swan says stop aquind — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.189.141 (talk) 16:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

What you've noticed...
... glad you knew it wasn't me who operated two accounts you'd put on User talk:Widr with me mentioned. I do think other users know me well enough that the impersonating was not done by me but indeed an LTA. Just glad I can continue editing as normal and I'm happy about that. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 13:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)


 * No problem :) They deleted and protected my talk page on tlWP as i requested, because I won't be active there unless when reverting new sockpuppets of Mike Matthews – you might consider asking for protection of your user page + talk page on tlWP as well. -- Johannnes89 (talk) 22:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The admins there have done a good job in removing other user talk pages and user pages as well of other users who have been harassed by both LTAs which I know more about.
 * Re protection, by checking on Meta, my talk page is set to expire in two weeks but hopefully with the protections set two days ago I hope the LTA would be thinking that they have better things to do than posting repetitive nonsense. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 06:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd also just noticed on Commons that all four of the talk pages you'd asked for protection is indeed protected and the history of those pages was cleared out apart of a few better edits made before the vandal begun it's nonsense. I didn't notice that on the day on when that happened.
 * Just as well the page histories of all four talk pages is not a large edit count of good faith edits etc.. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 15:06, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Just talk page protection would've been enough for me but all these spam messages gone is looking better of course :) Johannnes89 (talk) 15:16, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

parm3499 profile unban
hii you can check the links that I have updated in Wikipedia are 404 links. Also how you can say that the links are spammy? You can check my previous edits as well. I have not done any spamming. I request you to make my profile active so that I can make changes and contribute towards right information in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parm3499 (talk • contribs) 09:06, 9 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I've checked all you edits – yes you're updating 404 links but you're updating them with spam links. Best example: . Johannnes89 (talk) 09:09, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism
I've just seen your recent edit to the linked page above; I find it bizarre that you were only be able to return the article and not the talk page at the same time. I've contacted an administrator to see if the original page history of Talk:Ellie Roebuck can be restored as it was at the start of the day as the page history currently reveals the incorrect set of edits, i.e. both edits made by the LTA.

Also I find it strange that, by looking at the contribs, the LTA was even able to move it in fewer than 10 edits which is the minimum amount for users to move pages. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:24, 25 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for asking to restore the talk page. I couldn't move it back since the vandal edited the talk page redirect after moving it.
 * The vandal hat more than 10 edits but they are deleted now. He created a sandbox page and did some nonsense edits there. Johannnes89 (talk) 18:15, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed, by checking the deletion log there was a sandbox page related to the user name that's where the ten edits were made with nothing else to show, before the "Lions" edit was done. That was why page moving was possible. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year!
Happy Holidays text.png Hi Johannnes89! Enjoy the holiday season&#32;and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:50, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you very much Iggy! 🙈 Much of the credit goes to COIBot whose LinkReports enable me to search for link spam more efficiently. --Johannnes89 (talk) 19:56, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That certainly makes things more easier to notice and I assumed it was only you who spots this things without anything else. Spotting LTA edits is much more easier without much assistance from elsewhere (which has returned on enwiki today I've noticed). But TwinkleGlobal should be a useful feature but I can't seem to find it on my meta preferences. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually, re TwinkleGlobal, I've found out what you did and I can now use it by creating my own global.js file. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:09, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * When I'm patrolling recent changes in deWP, I routinely check links that appear a bit suspect for possible crosswiki spam. TwinkleGlobal certainly helps reverting :) -- Johannnes89 (talk) 21:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way most useful feature of TwinkleGlobal is reporting accounts to SRG („GARV“), which makes reporting MikeMatthews17 just a matter of seconds. Johannnes89 (talk) 21:17, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Who has started to create accounts based on the two pages the LTA has moved on enwiki and mixed them both up in addition to the numbers at the end and inbetween those names. And this edit appears to ask someone to upload a photo of the same person I was speaking about on Commons. All of them have probably refused to do that if anyone has seen it. At least on Commons, this filter log appears to stop some things from happening regularly as well as cross-wiki spam with COIBot doing it's bit when others edit. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 23:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you...
...for clearing out the nonsense on User talk:Spud the Scarecrow here, I have tagged the page with a speedy deletion upon multiple reasons and whatever gibberish was on there I don't like seeing, specifically the latter part. I was, once again, pinged which bought me to that page and noticed the nonsense. I am glad to notice that the meta version of the Spud the Scarecrow talk page has been deleted but I'm not sure if this user is actually linked to any LTA in particular (just noticed that the account of Spud has been glocked). You didn't report that user, neither did anyone else by looking at your Global contribs and the history of SRG respectively. I guess I will never know what happened with Spud there. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 15:12, 6 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Perhaps they did a Steward-CU when performing the global lock on Stephen Carlsen64. The connection between both accounts seems very likely in my opinion -- Johannnes89 (talk) 17:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd guess you're right based on my response in saying "nonsense" on that reply on this section. But the response from me was done after ToBeFree reverted on User:Iggy the Swan/TPHeader. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 17:29, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I forgot to mention: on this section, apparently the Spud account doesn't appear in a CU check but geolocation was similar. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 06:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Iggy the Swan
It appears that you are claiming I am "Mike Matthews17" based on the fact an edit made earlier this year that Iggy the Swan had Covid on User talk:Robby.is.on hoping Iggy may notice something had gone wrong. I am not Mike Matthews17 or never know of him. Isn't it that hard for you to assume that accounts are operated by different people?

I have read the talk page of Iggy the Swan, which it appears I can't edit. Yes, Spud the Scarecrow is what I was originally but I have had problems logging in so the only way to continue editing is to create Spud the Wikipedian. Any issues with that? I wanted to be a Wikipedian. Spud the Wikipedian (talk) 09:52, 16 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Spud the Wikipedian / Spud the Scarecrow so you're seriously claiming you're not Stephen Carlsen64 even though they posted the same nonsense about Iggy allegedly having Covid ? -- Johannnes89 (talk) 19:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Correct. Unrelated and my userpage is the truth. Spud the Wikipedian (talk) 11:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

FYI
Unsure how that happened that someone has not reverted back to the correct name, I have now corrected the name back after you've reverted earlier today. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:10, 18 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks @Iggy! I think what happened was this: A sockpuppet of Mike Matthews moved the article in enWP months ago -> a bot updated the link  and the en-label.
 * When I reverted the article move the link updated automatically  but the label didn't update and I didn't realise it was changed.
 * Later another bot even added a wrong cs-label based on the en-label
 * Today's sockpuppet just added an alias while the label was still wrong from the bot edit months ago. When I reverted the sockpuppet I still didn't realise, that the label was wrong, thankfully you changed it now . I fixed the cs-label as well  -- Johannnes89 (talk) 17:32, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Good thing you've noticed that re the cs-label. It was hidden from view unless we've expanded the list then I would have spotted something else was wrong. That page should now be fully accurate in terms of the common name. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 17:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Good thing you've noticed that re the cs-label. It was hidden from view unless we've expanded the list then I would have spotted something else was wrong. That page should now be fully accurate in terms of the common name. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 17:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia + Commons
Hi Johannes89, in case you didn't notice when reverting my talk page on the Simple English version, I've spotted a potential risk that an account number 3 is on it's way to be created if that ongoing block appeal on User talk:Spud the Wikipedian fails. And I still see on Sockpuppet investigations/Mike Matthews17 that no further comments has been made on an 8 day old investigation yet on if the user page information is true or false.

Also on Commons: everyone makes silly mistakes either on Wikipedia or in real life, like me using an IP address once without realising after when I created my own account last year. Thankfully in cases like that the mistake was removed easily enough and the same administrator blocked another account correctly. When I saw the filter log, I saw your name on there with the description which I found was not right. But at least, looking at the list further below, edit filters are now used to disallow "LTA - various" edits, thankfully. Otherwise things could have gone worse. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Iggy, I still beliebe that Spud the Wikipedian is somehow connected to Mike Matthews17, see e.g. . There is no reason why a new user would write something about you having Covid without even knowing you? They had „trouble logging in“ because the account is globally locked.
 * Regarding Commons edit filter: My edit occurred when I was blocked by mistake for a minute instead of blocking todays sockpuppets of Mike Matthews :D Johannnes89 (talk) 16:50, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Blablubbs (not to be confused with "Blobblabs") + Mr Reading Turtle agrees with you re "connected to Mike Matthews17". I already noticed the original Spud was globally locked in line with other socks.
 * I think the LTA has (see here) inserted another social media originated photo; this time from Instagram. I don't think the uploader is the copyright holder in this case and is probably different from Mike Matthews17 given the time of edits made by the uploader and the LTAs. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:22, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * And the table I have seen on my Simple English talk page certainly has no right to be included on any article even if the information there is allegedly correct. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * And the table I have seen on my Simple English talk page certainly has no right to be included on any article even if the information there is allegedly correct. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

"Who do you think I am?" - now what?
Seems like a sock of a user who we've been discussing has revealed the IP address used. Quite hard to believe that claim to be honest.

I have checked the contributions from that IP address, none of them appear to be the LTA's editing habitual problems but then LTAs sometimes change their habitual editing behaviour, sometimes constructively, so it's pretty much bad news for the IP address in my opinion. Checking the block log and Sockpuppet_investigations/Mike_Matthews17/Archive, the block was made during the SPI case was open so I'm not sure why NinjaRobotPirate notified people about that on the SPI mentioned. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Ron-Robert Zieler
Hi, in case other people who saw what I did in the edit summary - I google translated "I think I've fixed it" as other people might think they don't understand my home language if I used the English language in the edit summary. Suppose I assume this page is a pending changes one by having a look at the article history as what I currently see is the error which I seem to have fixed. As expected, I don't have the tools to accept revisions on there just as here. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:28, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Manslaughter
Hi!

Why did you delete info I've added [here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1095329201]? It's all provided with reliable sources (same sources are used on the Polish version of this article, they've been there for years and nobody had any issues as these are reputable Polish news sites) Vstitle (talk) 07:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I see you did exactly the same thing on de.wikipedia - you decided to just revert information I added "because". Information that was provided with reliable sources and that is revenant (the fact that person from a article killed a man is revelant). Please revert your reverts in both en and de.wikipedia, otherwise I'll be forced to report that you abuse your privileges

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_administrator_attention Vstitle (talk) 07:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)


 * @Vstitle you violated Biographies of living persons.
 * Jędrzejczak was trialed for driving charges, not for manslaughter, that's also what she was convicted for according to the sources you provided („accidentally causing a fatal accident“)
 * By putting „Manslaughter“ in a heading, you disproportionally highlighted this charge, which wasn't even the final conviction. Even worse, in frWP you're now claiming „homicide“ which leads me to believe you're intentionally violating WP:BLP across different language versions.
 * There is a right for privacy, even for people convicted for a crime. I cannot find any sources mentioning her conviction after 2007, there is no way, why Wikipedia should feature the conviction so prominently.
 * deWP already mentioned the accident & conviction at de:Otylia Jędrzejczak. It can be mentioned in a similar way in other language versions but certainly not the way you did. Johannnes89 (talk) 07:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * " I cannot find any sources mentioning her conviction after 2007, there is no way, why Wikipedia should feature the conviction so prominently"
 * there you go - https://dziendobry.tvn.pl/gorace-tematy/otylia-jedrzejczak-opowiada-o-smierci-brata-i-zyciu-po-wypadku-da309154-5329297
 * this person mentions it in 2020, still playing the victim card, even going as far as trying to promote her autobiography with man he killed deaths. Vstitle (talk) 08:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You're lying again: The source mentions the accident, not the conviction. Johannnes89 (talk) 08:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

OK, just to let you know - I raised the matter here. I won't hesitate to raise it further, even to the ArbCom. Also please notice I added even more reliable resources. At this point you can either
 * start to question resources I provided
 * continue to abuse the "revert" button and face potential consequences

You can not expect that your attempts to censor well sourced/referenced valid information will just slide. They won't. Vstitle (talk) 08:05, 28 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I commented there. You violated WP:BLP in plWP, got blocked and then started to violate WP:BLP in other language versions -> WP:NOTHERE. Go ahead and raise the issue even to the ArbCom, they'll confirm that you violated our rules. -- Johannnes89 (talk) 08:10, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I will. You clearly abuse the "revert" button by forcing your point of view on valid, important and WELL DOCUMENTED information. I don't know why you are so keen to hide the truth about the terrible thing this person did and how she played (and still plays!!!) the "I'm innocent, it was not my fault I was driving nearly 200km/h and hit a tree" card, but we'll find out soon enough.
 * Also - why won't you delete this very information from the pl.wikipedia? If you are soooooooooooooooooo sure even mentioning it "violates the rules"? Maybe because you know people who know what this person did would prove you wrong?? Vstitle (talk) 08:15, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Like I said: The conviction can be mentioned, but in a neutral way, like plWP and deWP already do. What you wrote in many different language versions was a WP:BLP violation, especially when claiming manslaughter even though she wasn't convicted for that. Johannnes89 (talk) 08:18, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm lying???

https://tvn24.pl/polska/otylia-jedrzejczak-skazana-ra33285-3684011


 * Otylia Jędrzejczak skazana na 9 miesięcy ograniczenia wolności i zakaz prowadzenia samochodu przez rok. Sąd Okręgowy podtrzymał wyrok wydany w pierwszej instancji, który uznawał ją za winną nieumyślnego spowodowania wypadku w 2005 roku, w którym zginął jej brat.


 * Otylia Jędrzejczak sentenced to 9 months of restriction of liberty and a year ban on driving a car. The District Court upheld the first-instance judgment that found her guilty of manslaughter in 2005 in which her brother died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vstitle (talk • contribs) 08:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Above is a direct translation from google translator which clearly shows that YOU are lying about her "not being convicted". But please, keep on lying - it will show the ArbCom just how biased you are and that you try to inflict your biased views on the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vstitle (talk • contribs) 08:26, 28 June 2022 (UTC)


 * You are quoting the heading. If you read on, you'll read:
 * „Potwierdzili, że Otylia jest winna spowodowania wypadku ze skutkiem śmiertelnym z 2005 roku (w wypadku zginął brat pływaczki). [...]
 * Nieumyślne spowodowanie wypadku ze skutkiem śmiertelnym zagrożone jest karą od pół roku do ośmiu lat pozbawienia wolności.“
 * which translates to:
 * „They confirmed that Otylia was guilty of causing the 2005 fatal accident (the swimmer's brother was killed in the accident). [...]
 * Accidental accident is punishable by a penalty from six months to eight years imprisonment.“
 * And you're misquoting me. I said she was not convicted for manslaughter, because she was in fact convicted for causing a fatal incident.
 * Go ahead and take you'r crosswiki BLP-violation to the ArbCom. I'm convinced more than ever that WP:NOTHERE applies to you. Johannnes89 (talk) 08:30, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and take you'r crosswiki BLP-violation to the ArbCom. I'm convinced more than ever that WP:NOTHERE applies to you. Johannnes89 (talk) 08:30, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and take you'r crosswiki BLP-violation to the ArbCom. I'm convinced more than ever that WP:NOTHERE applies to you. Johannnes89 (talk) 08:30, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

"causing a fatal incident." - dude, that's the definition of involuntary manslaughter

"I'm convinced more than ever that WP:NOTHERE applies to you. " - even if it would - it would NOT give you the right to do exactly what this murderer did - try to hide the crime and make everyone believe she's a victim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vstitle (talk • contribs) 09:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)


 * By calling her murderer again, your true intentions are obvious, you're clearly not interested in respecting WP:BLP & WP:NPOV.
 * It's a huge difference if you call it „Killing her own brother“ / „Manslaughter“  (which sounds like she did it on purpose) or if you neutrally state the fact, that there was an accident in which her brother was killed while she was driving -> involuntary manslaughter.
 * And there is a huge difference whether you mention it neutrally in the article (like it already is in Otylia Jędrzejczak) or if you put it in a section heading like you did. -- Johannnes89 (talk) 09:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

"There is no consensus for your edit, which you know since you've started a discussion with me and at WP:BLP/Noticeboard. If you insert your WP:BLP violation again, I'll report you for edit warring. The accident & the conviction are already mentioned in a neutral way in Otylia Jędrzejczak#Later career. -- Johannnes89 (talk) 09:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)"

yes, please do report me. Don't forget to mention a few crucial things tho:
 * your reverts are based on the fact, that according to YOUR POV DEFINITION "causing a fatal accident without intent" is totally different thing than involuntary manslaughter
 * instead of challenging the sources I provided you think that you can just write "WP:NOTHERE" and call it a day
 * you'd love to hide the information about what you call "causing a fatal accident without intent" (well, I call it a "involuntary manslaughter" as it;s the same but it's shorter and more professional) in her "carer" section, preferably keeping it once sentence long.

Vstitle (talk) 10:19, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

vandalism
So what, now from forcing your POV you went for pure vandalism and deleting things?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1095436950

How is a quote
 * from an attorney
 * attorney that was defendants lawyer
 * a quote that directly says about guilt/responsibility for an accident, an accident that is the sole reason for a trial

is relevant to the accident/trial?

In what world this quote is NOT relevant?

Vstitle (talk) 10:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:Quote (and WP:Vandalism before you accuse me of such). There is no necessity for the quote, the facts can be stated without it. In addition your formatting is wrong. And the blockquote said nothing about responsibility, it is simply not adding any relevant information to the article. It's also not our concern if she felt guilt or not. -- Johannnes89 (talk) 11:14, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * " It's also not our concern if she felt guilt or not. "
 * not our concern? It's not relevant to the section about a trial if person trialled admitted to the wrongdoing or claimed (s)he is innocent? Is everything OK with you? Because what you say makes no sense at allVstitle (talk) 11:28, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I already said: Simply state the relevant facts. There is no need for these quotes, in order to write that she claimed to be innocent. Johannnes89 (talk) 12:00, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Cross-Wiki barnster

 * thank you very much Iggy :) --Johannnes89 (talk) 08:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

My user talk page
I'm not sure if you remember about trying to use the [reply] feature when making this edit on my user talk page, it might be the case that you also had an issue when using that, as when I checked back on the page history I see your edit summary 'aw' instead of the ususal "Reply" when responding to other discussions. And checking the tags, the common ones were not visible (they are visible at e.g. ). It was three months since you participated in that discussion with me and a couple of others, I'm guessing they had the same problem as well. Your talk page seems to be fine while using that [reply] feature, not with mine apparently. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:46, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Iggy, yes I remember the reply button somehow not working. I assume this was caused by some modification to your user talk page (maybe the header?). --Johannnes89 (talk) 19:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I fixed the issue then did a test edit  which worked so I'm happy with that. I contacted the help desk first to see if any volunteer knew what the problem was. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

YenYen KY blocked
Hi, as a late additional response to Special:Diff/1100728146, the bot operator has now been blocked, and in the fastest checkuser confirmation I have experienced so far, linked to another account named. Thanks again! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I have also managed to find this account which uploaded the photo which is used on the master's user page on Wikipedia. So probably the same person operating as well in case you didn't notice. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you
As usual, it is always useful to clear out the rest of some LTA nonsense even if it was done today.

It's very likely you were not aware of this, since you probably not have heard of the name before (Kyle Naughton): a discussion on November 2019 at Talk:Kyle Naughton reveals the correct number for the day of birth was 17 instead of 11, so I have done my best to correct the errors on all the other Wikipedias as the best I could though a few were viewed as if you were reading from right to left. Seems like "Seth the Spider" has done something right after all (which rarely happens). Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 17:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * thanks for checking and correcting the mistake across all different language versions, I didn't realize the LTA actually did something useful. I reviewed your edit at deWP :) --Johannnes89 (talk) 18:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Glad that has been reviewed, looks like November is the same month, including spelling, in both here and in Germany. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Mediawiki user page blanked?
Greetings. You blanked my user page on mediawiki, citing 'outside project scope'. I'm confused however, as the help pages state that "MediaWiki allows all logged-in users to have a user page". I'm probably missing some nuance that isn't explained at 'help'. Can you elucidate? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 19:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi @anastrophe I'm very sorry, must have been a misclick while patrolling recent page creations on Meta. Your user page is indeed not out of project scope, I reverted my edit. --Johannnes89 (talk) 20:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries, and much appreciated! cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Spud the Cleaner
What do you think about this account when you see this? Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 07:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * hmm as you know I'm convinced that Spud the Scarecrow / Spud the Wikipedian are in fact sockpuppets of Mike Matthews17, even though they denied it. I would recommend to wait for more edits until we get a clearer picture. Johannnes89 (talk) 09:05, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree. This edit you pointed out probably made you think they are the same person as seen by that one though "[2]" has now been deleted. The edits I have seen on Spud the Cleaner doesn't seem to be the usual editing pattern by previous accounts so we may have a false positive. But we are aware Spud the Wikipedian claimed to be the Scarecrow per user page and evidence is still there on your own talk page about the denial of Mike Matthews17. Waiting for more edits will do per recommended advice from you. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 09:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 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 2022 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) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
 Merry Christmas! ''Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten! ¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua! God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus! Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce! Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством! শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스! สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส!'' ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành! Весела Коледа! Hello, Johannnes89! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you Iggy! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and and a Happy New Year as well! Johannnes89 (talk) 16:58, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Happy New Year / Frohes Neues!




 Johannnes89 , Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:15, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


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

Happy New Year, Johannnes89!


Happy New Year! Johannnes89, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Abishe (talk) 11:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

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

Abishe (talk) 11:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Draft:Džavád Ramezani
Hello Johannnes89, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I deleted Draft:Džavád Ramezani, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct criterion is used. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Can you translate?
I saw your unblock review on meta wiki but the link wasn't really helpful because its in spanish. can you tell me what the english version is? 172.78.185.203 (talk) 23:09, 9 March 2023 (UTC)


 * ignore, IP address automatically changed, so the block doesn't apply for me anymore. 172.78.185.203 (talk) 23:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Reverting
@Johannnes89, on what basis did you remove my edits on Mufassil Islam. They are facts and sourced. Do not revert again. Thanks. 185.199.229.156 (talk) 09:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)


 * please read WP:BLP and stop your crosswiki BLP-violations Johannnes89 (talk) 09:34, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I did not violate anything. I added ped*hile in the intro line. It's a fact. A person who is convicted of raping a 15 year old, is a pedo, period. It's even mentioned in the EN Wiki, but in the dutch wiki, it isn't in the intro. I just added it, and now they banned me for 3 days. Since when it is prohibited to state facts in Wikipedia. I have HSP and these things really get on my nerves. 185.199.229.156 (talk) 21:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @LilianaUwU, is it a good idea to censor my response? If you're so inclined to explain rules then do so in reply to my comments, why do you need to revert my comment. That's censorship. I heard Wiki doesn't adhere to censorship. 185.199.229.156 (talk) 21:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Reverting people who are accusing people of crimes without sources is not censorship. Please read WP:BLPCRIME. Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 21:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @LilianaUwU, please read the article. It's literally stated in the en wiki. The first line reads: "Imran Nasir Ahmad Khan (born 6 September 1973) is a British former politician and convicted sex offender." Expecting my replies getting back on, hopefully you'd do so promptly. Thank you. 185.199.229.156 (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @LilianaUwU, there's endless sources provided in the en wiki. Why they ban me if I add it to dutch wiki. 185.199.229.156 (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Except that I thought that this isn't about Imran Ahmad Khan, but rather Mufassil Islam, as your first message implied. Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 21:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @LilianaUwU, you misunderstood it. I get it. Please reinstate my replies. Thank you. 185.199.229.156 (talk) 21:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure, why not. Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 21:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Regarding Mufassil Islam your sources simply do not match the point of view you put in the article. E.g. the register does not give a reason why he has been prohibited...
 * Imran Ahmad Khan is indeed a convicted sex offender but this does not justify your edit summary violation or your dewiki edits: If you read Child sexual abuse you will learn „The word pedophile is commonly applied indiscriminately to anyone who sexually abuses a child, but child sexual offenders are not pedophiles unless they have a strong sexual interest in prepubescent children“ Johannnes89 (talk) 21:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @LilianaUwU, thanks for reinstating my comments. Also for the explanation. But they simply could have just explained it to me. Why they outright banned me. Im baffled
 * On behalf of 185.199.229.156 who got caught in the edit filter
 * - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 22:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * To the IP: Such severe accusations are not to be taken lightly. Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 22:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * To the IP: Such severe accusations are not to be taken lightly. Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 22:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

TarifaXxx and WikiGusta
Not sure if these two users are exactly the same person. However, I have spotted the first user editing again which I see you are familiar with already due to deleted copyvio images. Having to make two edits globally change images to those uploaded by WikiGusta makes me feel suspicious though checking Commons and their talk pages, they could be two different people and WikiGusta has not currently been blocked. And just now crosswiki Roger Schmidt editing is happening by the TarifaXxx account. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I think that's just a coincidence. TarifaXxx is related to Jolesss, both accounts seem to originate from frwiki, while WikiGusta seems to be a long term user from ptwiki. Johannnes89 (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Hence some of the edit summaries on enwiki appears to be French, though we don't know the language much. I would think page watchers from cross-wiki projects would know various users like us use Twinkle Global with their auto summaries in English and may understand what we're all explaining as I have done so today so it shouldn't be too bad to use different languages (apart on articles).
 * Agree on the fact that is some coincidence. I think Checkuser by Elcobbola on Commons would clarify if they were the same person or not. And obviously blocking on Commons prevents copyvio images replacing free ones. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:39, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Hilfe
Was soll der Filter 391 denn genau aufhalten? Was haben Pommes mit dem Wort "Soschka" zu tun? Ich wurde davon verhindert, eine Persönlichkeit im Artikel Rheinstetten Einzutragen, Thomas Soschka.

Leider muss ich hier schreiben, da auf deiner deutschen Diskussion der Filter 275 das verhindert.

Wirklich schlimm mit den Filtern! 2A02:3031:C:BB29:1:1:6B24:EBB8 (talk) 15:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Dir wurde doch drüben auf de:WP:FZW schon geantwortet . Deine Eintragung war unerwünscht, falls die Person tatsächlich existiert und die de:WP:Relevanzkriterien erfüllt, kann eine Eintragung aber möglich gemacht werden. Bis dahin werden öffentlich keine relevanten Details zur Filterfunktionalität genannt. Johannnes89 (talk) 13:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I created one Article
Article Mehdi Tehrani is not spam. Send it by an administrator to the draft. Certainly they should know about. This version is so much different than past. Let me enjoy of editing in Wikipedia.-- Patricia   (Talk)  17:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * see my answer on Wikidata . Your draft will be reviewed by experienced enwiki contributors who will take into account the previous deletion discussion. Johannnes89 (talk) 17:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I read that sir. But with all due respect it doesn't vandalism at all. In en wiki, and others wiki, some people guide me or edit by yourself. I'm not a bad girl here sir. I'm sure of it. About this draft, administrator give me a chance as a regular user to a edit this subject. Please understand me. I'm a wiki lover and follow all policies about. Best.-- Patricia   (Talk)  19:23, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * you obviously did not follow all policies, your article doesn't meet notability criteria of most (if not all) Wikipedia language versions and some projects explicitly ban machine translations. Johannnes89 (talk) 05:53, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * What is my mistake? In March 2022 I wrote articles that I thought were popular. None of these articles were removed from other wiki languages. Wiki users edited this article, and wiki admins approved it, with some marking it as an improvement. Now 18 months have passed and this action was done all at once. Your label (tag) is not fair either here:Draft:Mehdi Mirza Mehdi Tehrani. It is prejudice. You are the global administrator and user. I am a weak and regular user. You blocked me on the German wiki. For an article that has been approved by another editor and other admins. I was sourcing and updating when you came along and accused me of manipulation. This is not fair.please Remove your tag. Another point is that there is no admin to delete articles in Urdu wiki. Do it yourself. —Patricia ( Talk ) 11:29, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Your article has been deleted shortly after creation on multiple wikis, e.g. which you ignored and continued to publish machine translations of this page. If other wikis didn't delete the article right away it's likely because they didn't notice the page or no-one took an assessment towards the article's notability.
 * Speaking for dewiki your article has not been „approved“ as there is no such process. It has been reviewed at dewiki but this just means it was marked as free from obvious vandalism. This is testimony that admins from other language versions agree with my assessment, otherwise they wouldn't have deleted the article. Johannnes89 (talk) 12:34, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 * My discussion is about your performance as a global administrator.Assuming good faith, caution against hasty judgments, and Wikipedia courtesy, maybe and maybe You have been influenced by an Iranian living in Germany, who is the administrator the Farsi Wiki and also works at the Wikimedia Foundation. He harassed me so much that he brought me to the verge of suicide. He also followed me on the English wiki. After all, as a Viking girl, I had a big heart. A few Wikipedia users took it from me. I have nothing more to say. I will not send you any more messages and I will not disturb anyone because I realized my fate in Persian and German Wikipedia with your messages and the stalking behavior of this Persian administrator living in Germany. All my hope will be in expert users independent and experienced administrator s of English Wikipedia. Best regards and good luck. —Patricia ( Talk ) 13:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 * My discussion is about your performance as a global administrator.Assuming good faith, caution against hasty judgments, and Wikipedia courtesy, maybe and maybe You have been influenced by an Iranian living in Germany, who is the administrator the Farsi Wiki and also works at the Wikimedia Foundation. He harassed me so much that he brought me to the verge of suicide. He also followed me on the English wiki. After all, as a Viking girl, I had a big heart. A few Wikipedia users took it from me. I have nothing more to say. I will not send you any more messages and I will not disturb anyone because I realized my fate in Persian and German Wikipedia with your messages and the stalking behavior of this Persian administrator living in Germany. All my hope will be in expert users independent and experienced administrator s of English Wikipedia. Best regards and good luck. —Patricia ( Talk ) 13:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).



Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg 0xDeadbeef
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Tamzin
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Pppery
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ragesoss · TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news
 * The WMF is working on making it possible for administrators to edit MediaWiki configuration directly. This is similar to previous work on Special:EditGrowthConfig. A technical RfC is running until November 08, where you can provide feedback.
 * There is a proposed plan for re-enabling the Graph Extension. Feedback on this proposal is requested.

Arbitration
 * Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
 * , and  have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections.  is the reserve commissioner.
 * Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
 * Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
 * Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
 * Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
 * An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous
 * The Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 7 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) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Ganesha811 · JPxG
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ajpolino · Lourdes · Mairi · RockMFR · Somno · WilyD
 * Pictogram voting rename.png →



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Beeblebrox · Opabinia regalis

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Beeblebrox · Opabinia regalis

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a talk page discussion, the Administrators' accountability policy has been updated to note that while it is considered best practice for administrators to have notifications (pings) enabled, this is not mandatory. Administrators who do not use notifications are now strongly encouraged to indicate this on their user page.

Arbitration
 * Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
 * The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
 * Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)