User talk:Kbhatt22

Some stroopwafels for you!

 * Tamzin Thank you so much and totally agree that the massive amount of raw data and users that Wiki processes, it is impossible to catch all the bad eggs but the admins do a great job of catching most of it. When I went through the whole thing last time, I just didn't know who to raise the red flag too. I am confident the user group from the other sock puppet group will show up soon here and this group will also resurface. I will start to get familiar with the wiki short cuts and stuff again to be able to provide some help in the clean up. There is a lot to unpack since they have been doing this for a few years. I will lean on JJ (a seasoned wiki contributor) who has helped in this topic in the past. I hate to be a burden to him but he is super nice in mentoring and guiding. Probably best to pair down a lot of the POV pushing and simplifying the topics to basic facts.
 * I love wiki and my fondest memories of Wiki in middle school was playing the game with my friends where we would start on one page and race to get to another page by only clicking the links in that page. Start with Malcom X and get to like the Great Wall of China by clicking through article links only. Surprisingly very fun lol. Just knowing that you are available should I see any red flags is a great feeling and I appreciate all you efforts. Stroopwafel is on the shopping list. :) Kbhatt22 (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll be glad to have you around.  Now that we've got a bead on this group of socks, should be easier to keep an eye on in the future. The clerk and CheckUser who worked this request are very good at what they do, too, so I'm sure they'll be keeping an eye out too.
 * Two quick notes, by the way, of the sort I give lots of newer-ish users: 1) "Minor edit" is defined pretty narrowly. Check out Help:Minor edit. 2) Even very experienced users get this wrong, but check out WP:Colons and asterisks to see why you shouldn't put a blank line between indented paragraphs.
 * Now! On to more important business: I can get from Stroopwafel to Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha in 6 clicks (no hover-previewing pages allowed). How about you? -- Tamzin  (she/they) &#124; o toki tawa mi. 16:45, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand my error on the Minor edit usage. Will correct that going forward. Will try the line break thing to confirm I get the syntax right.
 * 6 clicks!! You beat me at my own game. I was 9. I backed up and best I could get was 7. You win this round!!
 * This was the other account that I had come across as maybe being a part of the group. Has responded to NPOV requests involving the other as well as done reverts and stack consensus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Sacredsea. Maybe worth a quick lookover. Fingers crossed I got the line spacing right here Kbhatt22 (talk) 17:11, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yep, you got the newlines right.  If you're curious, btw, it was Stroopwafel → Dutch Empire → Dutch India → Vishnu → Hinduism → Swaminarayan Sampradaya → Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha. I bet if I knew more about Hinduism I could have found something that got me from Vishnu to BAPS in two clicks, though.
 * I'll go take a look at Sacredsea. (Btw, if you ever want to link to a user without pinging them, I recommend noping and noping2.) -- Tamzin  (she/they) &#124; o toki tawa mi. 17:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @User:Tamzin Ahh I went from Dutch Empire to Moghul empire and then a few extra clicks before hitting Hinduism. My skills are rusty haha. Thanks for the ping rules. Never knew you could link without pinging. Last quick question....hate to be such a burden but, now that the users are blocked, how do I revisit edits that I may have proposed before but was vote stacked against. I am gonna focus more in helping with clean-up and pairing down POV first but a few were like no brainers that they overruled inclusion of based on perceived consensus.
 * During searching around about leadership last summer, I had found this article (https://www.vice.com/en/article/yw3xgm/when-one-million-people-believe-your-husband-is-a-god) and its a very fascinating write up about the wife of the acharya being equivalent to a female acharya and is the leader for the women in the faith. Not a single mention of it anywhere. I added a small reference to the Swaminarayan Sampradaya page just now of this but was hoping to expand in the future with a section of women leadership in the faith but was kind of smacked down of even the slightest inclusion as the Baps doesn't recognize a female leader. I would imagine opening up a talk page section for larger edits and seeing if anyone wants to discuss. Kbhatt22 (talk) 17:56, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You're not being a burden at all.  Well, you're welcome to comment at the WP:NPOVN thread I started. JJ already has. As to cases where they've manipulated consensus: If it's clear that consensus would have been different without their manipulation, I think it's fine to revert, explaining the circumstances in both your edit summary and on talk. I've already done this with Swaminarayan Akshardham (North America) (revert · talkpage post). It's important, though, to allow for the possibility that a new consensus could still emerge among good-faith editors to redo whatever was done—even if you think that may be unlikely.
 * Where it's less clear what would have happened without the manipulation, I would say to just post to the talk page, linking to the NPOVN thread and the SPI, and maybe pinging users who participated in the previous discussion, and raising the question of if that consensus should be reviewed.
 * When it comes to less controversial content where it's more a matter of article POV and puffery, just use your judgment: What's good for the encyclopedia? And of course, it's important to make sure that this doesn't turn into a POV situation in the opposite direction, especially given the history of sockpuppetry that way too.
 * And for anything else, again, it'd be great to get some coördination going at the NPOVN thread. I'm off to bed shortly (unless I spot another sock... few more I wanna check out), but I'll be around to answer further questions later. -- Tamzin  (she/they) &#124; o toki tawa mi. 18:21, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @User:Tamzin Awesome. Thank you for the guidance and advice. I will use it going forward and take it slow. Have a great night! Get some rest. You took down a multi-year network of sketchy users. I'd give you a barnster but looks like that honor has been given out already. Thanks again Kbhatt22 (talk) 18:26, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

On all being well
I'm doing pretty good, yeah! The crazy folks here have decided to make me an administrator (most support votes ever, also second-most oppose votes ever, so you know I'm doing something right... or wrong...). So if you need an admin for anything, do let me know.

Made me happy seeing your username pop up on my watchlist. Any chance we'll be seeing more of you anytime soon? -- Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 11:49, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I think you more then deserve the admin role and are an amazing asset to Wikipedia and its culture. I am glad to see you getting the recognition for your hard work on this platform. I want to get back into the mix of editing. Covid didn't do me any favors in this latter half of the pandemic so getting myself organized again but want to get back to editing car stuff. Still have some watchlist pages around the religion stuff but JJ balanced a lot of it very well and with a very strong admin gatekeeper in yourself, no one will be able to POV wash the category again which is great.
 * But totally want to jump back into car pages. Much easier to source lol. Really happy to speak with you again and glad to hear you are doing good. Kbhatt22 (talk) 12:11, 6 May 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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)