User talk:Muboshgu/Archive 44

December 2019
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Tulsi Gabbard; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.''Note that the article is sanctioned to 1RR. Please self-revert or I have got no choice except to report.--SharabSalam (talk) 03:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)'' SharabSalam (talk) 03:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. SharabSalam (talk) 03:13, 7 December 2019 (UTC)


 * You would be well advised to self-revert your last edit to Tulsi Gabbard, lest you be blocked for violating 1RR. —C.Fred (talk) 03:21, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I have done it. I hope someone else can take that clearly unnecessary tag off though. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:28, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to comment on House of Representatives elections
Hello, since you have recently edited 2020 United States House of Representatives elections, 2018 United States House of Representatives elections, or 2016 United States House of Representatives elections, I am inviting you to an ongoing discussion taking place at Talk:2020 United States House of Representatives elections. Orser67 (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Edit keeps being removed, even after I added an independent source
Hi,

I have been trying to add some information, regarding Declared Democratic candidate Hal Shouse, on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Georgia page.

The first time, you removed my edit, because you said it lacked an independent source. So, I re-added the information, and added the citation to the following source: https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00719963/?cycle=2020 Here is a link to that edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2020_United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Georgia&oldid=930024164 Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you consider an independent source, but that seems pretty solid, to me. He has registered his candidacy, with the FEC. He has an active political campaign.

The edits to this page are the first time I have attempted to make any edits on Wikipedia. I appreciate any help you can provide.

Thank you, Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23Mike (talk • contribs) 16:18, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , we need a reliable, secondary source, which is not an FEC filing. Many people file with the FEC and then do not run. No source is presented in the article. Also, if you are also editing with the account, you need to stop, because it is sock puppetry. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:51, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Ok. I can cite a news article, if that counts as a secondary source. Bigreddwon is not my account. It is my client. When he saw that his information was removed, he attempted to re-add it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23Mike (talk • contribs) 16:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I am Bigreddwon, I am the candidate, Harold Shouse. That is a screen name I have used for decades. I keep re-posting it because you keep deleting it. Not only have I filed with the FEC but I have filed my personal financial disclosures and I am actively campaigning. I don’t know what else you require to prove that I’m a candidate. Bigreddwon (talk) 20:48, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

My info keeps being deleted
I'm running for US Senate and my information on the Wiki page about the election keeps being deleted. I'm registered as a legitimate candidate through the FEC. The FEC IS THE ONLY place that MATTERS in reference to who IS and ISNT a candidate. YOU can go there and put my name in and CONFIRM that I AM a candidate, why is that NOT good enough? What ELSE, if the OFFICIAL federal regulating body isn't good enough do you consider GOOD enough?? Very frustrating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigreddwon (talk • contribs) 20:40, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , what matters to us is secondary, reliable sources. Not FEC filings. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Gerrit Cole IS NO LONGER A FREE AGENT == He just signed a 9 year contract and the information on his wikipedia page is outdated. he is no longer a free agent. please change this information or remove the protection so that his information can be updated to reflect his current team and position.Please and thank you. And if I am in the wrong please forgive me... But it's all over the internet. He is no longer a free agent. thank you for your time sir.Jarmusic2 (talk) 13:02, 12 December 2019 (UTC)jarmusic2Jarmusic2 (talk) 13:02, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , no source confirms that he signed the contract. Just that he agreed to one. Those arrangements can and do fall through from time to time. We are an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. We don't do "breaking news". – Muboshgu (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress. —GoldRingChip 15:02, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:37, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Gerrit Cole Is no longer a Free Agent, per ESPN.Com http://www.espn.com/mlb/freeagents http://www.espn.com/mlb/player/_/id/32081/gerrit-cole Plese remove the Protection so we can Fix this Or Plese update this information as it is outdaded and HE IS NO NONGER A FREE AGENT, BUT A NEW YORK YANKEE. The whole world knows it but you. Jarmusic2 (talk) 03:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)jarmusic2Jarmusic2 (talk) 03:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , your other edit was far more polite. I don't respond well to rudeness like this. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:16, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Miklós Palencsár's page
Hello Muboshgu, I hope you are doing well.

I would like your help about Miklós Palencsar's deleted page. It's been 5 years the page was on without any problems.

What can I do to get back the page? Could you help me ?

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alencar.rossoni (talk • contribs) 21:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , the page was deleted by User:Jimfbleak under speedy deletion criteria A7 and G11. That suggests that there was blatant advertising, which we cannot restore in article space. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Muboshgu, thanks for ping., yes, blatant spam virtually all unsourced or sourced to sites that are not independent third-party sources. Without proper sources, no evidence that he meets our notability criteria either. I guess it survived that long because it has slipped under the radar Jimfbleak - talk to me?  16:24, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Frank Robinson GA nomination request
Would you be willing to nominate the Frank Robinson page as a Good Article? I only have time for small edits like proofreading and I haven't really worked on his article nor do I have enough wiki experience. I just noticed the page had been nominated way back in 2006 and it has seemed to be improved quite a bit since then. You're one of the baseball editors I know of (Also, Yankees10 recommended to ask you instead of him), so that's what led me here to ask. Thanks, no matter what you decide. Persistent Corvid (talk) 05:53, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I can look into it, but I'm pretty busy these days. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:03, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, I did make a lot of those improvements myself when he died. It may be close to GA status, I'll have to look closer later. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, whenever you can, I was surprised it wasn't a GA considering how well it reads, you've done some great work on it. Persistent Corvid (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Didi
I gave you sources The change doesn’t need the sources Sorry you disagree SIR Jimmiefoxx (talk) 17:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , that was a misclick, sorry. I thought I had said don't roll it back when I accidentally clicked it, but I guess it did it anyway. I was not disagreeing with your edit. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Sometimes I can’t figure out people Jimmiefoxx (talk) 19:47, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , sometimes, we have fat fingers on touch screens. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I heard that: 6’6” Over 260’ most of since ~1977!! Jimmiefoxx (talk) 23:31, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft:P. B. Buckshey
Thankyou for restoring P. B. Buckshey to draft. Unfortunately the associated talk page has been lost and I am hoping you can retrieve it also. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:09, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , ✅ – Muboshgu (talk) 20:44, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Could you provide a link
...by which I might see the content that appeared earlier for "Lore (company)"? The article was linked by the article on Maria Popova, with some emphasis on its importance at a moment in history. I would like to see what is available, in particular so I might retrieve source-based content so that a section might appear at the WP article of the company that acquired Lore. Note, if you look here, the company apparently continues to function (if this is the same entity, I will not know until I see the earlier article); regardless, it appears likely that there will be sufficient source-based content for that section. Would just rather start from work already done, rather than from scratch. Thanks. (An academic editor). 2601:246:C700:9B0:10F8:DB65:ED5E:C55A (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Granting autopatroller rights
I am having some mild concerns in your judgements over granting autopatroller rights. I may be very wrong in this assessment but can I simply ask you consider give greater scrutiny before creating the right. My apologies if I am wrong in this concern. Otherwise keep up the good workload you get through. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:43, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I will take a look at this case to see if I was mistaken and should revoke the permission. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The specific case we are talking about has two stages, history before the granting and history after the granting. The question I ask is, given history before before the granting, was it reasonable to grant autopatroller rights enabling NPP to be by-passed?  The question is after the granting were autopatroller rights being albeit inadvertently and in good faith used to avoid NPP scrutiny; and if so does the autopatroller indicate CSD tags will not be removed in future?  I can only ask the questions in this instance, I can't give you the answers.  But the real reason for posting here is for you to self ask the question "am I granting autopatroller rights to accounts where there is a high possibility they will introduce unsuitable articles to mainspace?"  Thankyou.? Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I've revoked the right based on the ongoing AN/I thread. As I recall, the user met the criteria spelled out for autopatrolled permission, but clearly the behavior does not demonstrate the minimum level of competence to keep it. If there was something I missed before granting the permission, I'd want to know. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:52, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I was already preparing a response at ANI and you may get trouted for waiting for it to hit ANI before removing the autopatroller right. Looking at the talk before your granting of the right I'm not sure if there was or was not enough evidence to hesitate on grant.  There may be issues for people creating lots of small stubs.  This is not my area really.Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:40, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Jacqueline Coleman
--valereee (talk) 00:02, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hi, how I can get it again?--S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 03:42, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's wait until the process at AN/I unfolds before we talk about that. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Its over there. Please say.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * @{: I would most strongly suggest you read the closer's ANI comment "recommend the two of you just desist and back off and find something else to do for a while, lest both of you are blocked for general disruption and wasting everyone's time". Please tell us your reasons for wanting autopatroller rights and how your purposes are inconvenienced by now having it.  Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I have created about 400 articles and know Wikipedia policies and guidelines and autopatrolled rights.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 16:47, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmmm ... somewhat of a grand claim given your recent removal of CSD tags from your own articles. Perhaps it is, to loosely quote Dorcas Lane "Your one weakness".  Can you please drill down and braindump from your head all you know about autopatrolled rights.  It is incredibly easy for anyone to simply say: "I know autopatrolled rights". Can we have a bit more please. Thankyou.  Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:45, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I love to work in Wikipedia. It will reduce workload of other users. And I won't do this fault again.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 02:49, 22 December 2019 (UTC)


 * @: you could not make this quote up: "I love to work in Wikipedia. It will reduce workload of other users.". I somewhat feel you do not appreciate that creating stubs that are borderline WP:A7 ... ie the stub does not adequately indicate why its subject is important or significant, is problematic.  Probably not a problem for politicians but more so for actors say unless WP:NACTOR is demonstrated.  For example after taking a long look I am inclined to think Nagma (Bangladeshi actress) may not pass WP:A7 and I question if WP:NACTOR is satisified.  I've chosen to tag it for notability.  I've taken a look at Shah Niamatullah too.  This may risk being a case of WP:Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing.  The sources do not meet WP:RS and especially Banglapedia upon which that article stands may be problematic.  (Whereas say oclc(786166571) might put it safe and the fact I've found it may be saving it from CSD).  I see the problem your mass producing a load of stub articles and I am minded by 's comment: (albeit needs to be taken in context) "... you have bad habits in creating short stub articles".  And the way you are creating them makes and the foreign language sources, which are far harder to scrutinize and (not even using the courtesey of a trans-title and identify the author).  I in fact doubt if thees articles would be accepted at the slightly higher bar of WP:AFC. And it is unclear if your purposes of requesting autopatroller is to avoid WP:NPP scrutiny rather than reducing workload, if the latter I would hope to see a high standard of article being developed with best available sources identified and used.  In my opinion, for what it is worth, is that you are not taking on board the communities comments to try to improve your contributions.  So I personally would have concerns about the restoration of autopatroller rights as it may be a disincentive for you to improve the quality of articles and that you might use it (albeit perhaps in good faith) to get articles in mainspace that are not fit for space.   Thats my personal thoughts only.Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Shah Niamatullah passed WP:N because Banglapedia is the national encyclopedia of Bangladesh. And Prothom Alo and The Daily Star are second most circulated Bengali daily and most circulated English daily of Bangladesh respectively.


 * And Nagma, she appeared in over 150 films according to Bangladesh Pratidin (most circulated Bangladeshi daily). After her death,  Kaler Kantho (3rd Most circulated Bangladeshi daily) made newstitle "জনপ্রিয় খল নায়িকা নাগমা আর নেই" (lit trans:Popular actress in negative role Nagma no more). According to WP:NACTOR a person have to act multiplie films in significant roles. Here a popular actress in negative role acted over 150 films.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 14:34, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * @: We are not successfully communicating. For Shah Niamatullah I've tweak a couple of changes to the citations that can be helpful to help attempting to scrutinize .... trans-title, last, first and wikiling to an article which helps the main WP:RS] source.  The possible close paraphrasing I have chosen to deal with by templating.  Also note  Mahbubur (2009) and Hasan (2017) seem to simple have a passing reference to the Shrine/Grave which is OK for that but which covers little else.  In terms of Nagma the article does not indicate she has had a leading part in films as required by [[WP:NACTOR which is the key problem.  My persoanl opinoin is to avoid CSDs, PRODs, and AfD's and tagging more time needs to be spent bodying up the articles.  Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:09, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not 100% sure of all of what has been happening here, but I see enough to suggest that re-granting autopatrolled rights would not be a good decision. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:36, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I know it is unimportant because I agree with it but please provide a link to where I said "you have bad habits in creating short stub articles" . — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:23, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * @ It is important in case I have misrepresented what you have said. In which case I apologise and its me down to the WP:TROUT farm. See   (It's actually the same edit where you wiped my !vote as it happens).  I believe you were responding to being scummered by  behind your back without being notified (excpet by me), and I think this was either the first or the second occasion on which this happened.  Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:55, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Can people please note I am no longer convinced edit were entirely behind RHaworth's back and may well have triggered an alert. I need to make this matter straight and need to apologise to S. M. Nazmus Shakib on this matter and accept WP:TROUTing from all, though in fact this amounts toward being WP:UNCIVIL. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Good luck
 豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune. このミラPはMuboshguたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！ フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE! ミラP 02:35, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year Muboshgu!
Happy New Year! Hello Muboshgu: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Donner60 (talk) 05:33, 27 December 2019 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Proposed deletion of Betsy Sweet
Hello, Muboshgu

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username SportingFlyer and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Betsy Sweet, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion. The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:


 * 1) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit Edit the page]
 * 2) Remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) Click the  button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

SportingFlyer  T · C  03:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * @: On examining history details this has little to do with Muboshgu (who has simply redirected this article elsewhere as far as I can tell).  the original article may have hidden revisions. I only mention this as the article standards and issues fall in my view way below that expected of an admin, and indeed this article appears nothing to do with Muboshgu.  Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:54, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries - I use Twinkle to tag articles, which automatically posts this (kind of condescending, really) message to the creator's page, and Muboshgu was the original creator/redirector. SportingFlyer  T · C  04:05, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , can we just restore the redirect? – Muboshgu (talk) 04:06, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I considered this, but my concern with restoring WP:PROMO/political pages is that it'll just pop right back up again. SportingFlyer  T · C  04:07, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * One problem with the redirect is that it is (possibly) no longer the most relevant place to redirect to; and redirects for all candidates seem daft.Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I see. The redirect should've been updated to 2020 United States Senate election in Maine. I won't object to the PROD. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:22, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * To be fair, I wouldn't object to a re-redirection, either. Just one to keep on the watchlist. SportingFlyer  T · C  04:24, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I am minded that it is likely no other candidates have the advantage of such a link and it may be inappropriate to favor any one over any other one until elected. It they are due an article per other things fair enough, but I am personally minded (gut-feeling) a redirect is inappropriate even if I can't lay my hands on appropriate policies.  If elected a different matter.  But I am not going to strongly enforce this point of view, I am very uncertain of it.Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:33, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , Redirects are cheap. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:47, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I've worked it over twice after one cite was straight to an advocacy firm with no menntion of the subject on the page (albeit subject may have co-founded it). Once brutually and a second pass more leniently after I'd noted  had patrol reviewed it.  One big problem was the creator was linking to pages not supporting content.  People can make of things what they will.  I'd still be against that re-direct myself however cheap, but that's just my opinion.Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:08, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:37, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!
 Happy Adminship Anniversary! Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, ToxiBoi  (talk ∙ guestbook) 04:21, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!
 Happy Adminship Anniversary! Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:57, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!
 Happy Adminship Anniversary! Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, ― Buster7  &#9742;   17:29, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Sign stealing
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of a prodded page
Hi Muboshgu, I noticed that you recently deleted a prodded page of Muhammed Majeed. I had raised my objection to the prod in its talk page. Can you please go through it and address my points? I believe Muhammed Majeed is a notable personality. Apart from being the head of a big conglomerate he is also an accomplished researcher. There were sufficient references which prove his notability and I had added some in the talk page as well. Thank you for all the hard work that you are doing. Mr RD  15:20, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , see WP:DEPROD. The way to object to a proposed deletion is to remove the deletion tag. I can undelete the page via WP:REFUND as a contested PROD. This does not prevent the possibility of a deletion discussion. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Muboshgu!


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

CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:44, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

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

Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Adamu Abdoullahi
Hi,

You have recently deleted the page of Nigerian football player Adamu Abdoullahi. Can you please tell what is the reason and how is it possible to recover? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.241.185.63 (talk) 08:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I do not see any edit history at Adamu Abdoullahi. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:47, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

The Millennium Prayer
Thanks for protecting the article. There's no need to. The phrase is a throw-away term and I was wondering how long it would take for my wikihound to come to try to poke me by editing there. It did not take long. I don't have a problem with keeping it out, but a sock investigation on the anon in Ottawa might be in order. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:46, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , feel free to initiate a case at SPI then. I know nothing of the situation there, other than an edit war was transpiring. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:13, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Jim Zeigler
I made additions to this page that were properly cited and relevant to Alabama history. I included where the I-10 toll bridge was blocked which is a top ten news item for the year in Alabama. And y'all remove it? What gives? I'm getting beyond frustrated. Belledoll (talk) 02:31, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I saw that you removed other content not having anything to do with an I-10 toll bridge. It seems there are reliable sources out there that talk about it, so if you add that with good sourcing it shouldn't be reverted. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:38, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Family Tree Made Simple
Thank you for checking the request: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&type=revision&diff=933554138&oldid=933554044&diffmode=source

The editor finally came to their senses and starting listening before you dealt with the protection request, and before they would have been blocked. Maybe they needed a threat. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:14, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , sometimes the threat does the trick. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Revision to Ibraheem Samirah
Hey Muboshgu, where does it say The Washington Free Beacon is an unreliable source and you can't use it on Wikipedia? Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 02:32, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I don't know that it does anywhere. I may have been incorrect in pulling that source. It seems WFB does do some better work than some other right wing sources do. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:37, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've always regarded it as a right-wing version of Vox (which I also used in my edits of his policies), they certainly have their lean, but they've still got a degree of journalistic integrity. I'll add part of it back, however, I'll cut the Rivera and Sanders part along with the piece connecting it with Hamas on your recommendations. Let me know if you've got any other reservations. Thank you for the quick reply, Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 03:19, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Zeigler and UA
I've readded content with very specific citations. I hope it stays up this time. Belledoll (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , better to discuss this in the article talk page than here. I'm going to be offline for much of today. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Finals at UA
They did adopt Jim Zeigler's proposal in making finals optional at UA that semester. My mother was a student then and recalls it. Plus, in several Alabama publications he's given credit for avoiding a Kent State shootings catastrophe. Belledoll (talk) 05:30, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I don't see either of those things in the sources I looked at. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:56, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand. The first citation is a Tuscaloosa News article mentioning the crisis. The second citation is a contemporary Tuscaloosa News article of the time period mentioning his proposal on the front and second pages of the newspaper. The thitd is a book reference which credits his proposal on page 201.What else can I do? Belledoll (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Script-assisted fixes
Hi. I don't know what script(s) you are using, but they are introducing "More than one of |work= and |newspaper= specified" errors. see. --John B123 (talk) 10:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Dreamy Jazz • Newslinger • Rosguill
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Deor • Spartaz • Xeno
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Angusmclellan • clpo13 • Edgar181 • Matthewedwards • NCurse

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Bradv • Casliber • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Bradv • Casliber • DGG • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Someguy1221

Guideline and policy news
 * A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
 * A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
 * Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.

Arbitration
 * The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
 * Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , , , , , , ,.

Miscellaneous
 * This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Kelly Loeffler
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Sigh
Common sense is increasingly becoming uncommon, and even knowing that, I will urge you to take a look at the recent history of OpIndia. &#x222F; WBG converse 13:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , that editing behavior is far worse than what I saw yesterday. So, I have protected the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:12, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Last change
Regarding my change on the Kylo Ren page, I was simply collapsing the discussion as it was outdated. I had thought that my summary explained it well enough. Is there a better procedure for this sort of thing? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.139.192.9 (talk) 02:53, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You weren't "collapsing" a discussion. You deleted it. We do not delete old discussions even if they are rendered moot. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:13, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

New article: The January War
A new war has begun in the Middle East, and whatever it shall be named, we're in a totally new phase now -the drone strike

was prologue, savvy? kencf0618 (talk) 01:15, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Alyse Galvin concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Alyse Galvin, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

"Al" Capone
Happy New Year! There is a thread, Talk:Al_Capone, related to an edit you made years ago at Al Capone. Your input would be appreciated. You were pinged before, so I'll respect that you are choosing to abstain if I don't hear anything. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 04:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I see I was pinged the day after Christmas. I must've missed it in a turkey coma. I'll read through and respond if I choose to. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andy Carey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Barnes ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Andy_Carey check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Andy_Carey?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:02, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Sahar Ajdamsani article
Hello dear Muboshgu Hope you are well.I improve Sahar Ajdamsani article & links. please check it. Thanks a lot Music in Iran is forbidden and prohibition for women but she do, and if you read the sources you will find that many countries have written about this person that this is not the usual and there is very few artists in the world are at this level of globalization. . this article has more than 30 URL's of different & reliable sources related to subject. She has many news coverages & awards & she released a world peace music album & collected 12 countries artists to this album to show world peace & UN 7 Unicef supported her for this album “Dreamy World”. The following is also my reasons for verifiable an article based on Wikipedia rules: Based on Wikipedia : Notability (music), based on the following paragraphs, the notability is valid :

-Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.

-Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.

-Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.

-Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

-Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition.

-Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network. -Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.

& based on general notability; f a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.

& based on notability (people) People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published, secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. e person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field. Also based on Wikipedia: Proof, Wikipedia: Referrals and Wikipedia: Neutral Perspectives, this article introduces an artist who has just introduced her & is Impartial and all the statements are referenced to reliable sources (valid news agencies from several countries that is shown her internationally recognized) and can be verified, & also articles of Iranian artists similar her are all confirmed and featured on Wikipedia. & also based on Wikipedia: the removal policy, this article is not eligible for removal. ( If order and need, I will translate all Persian news in English too ) Special thanks Kind regardsSahar410 (talk) 12:52, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the note
I got your email. I was unaware of that. I don't think it materially affects how I would respond, but it is useful to help understand the nature of the problem in more detail. -- Jayron 32 18:41, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

A complaint about your censorship(imo) is filed
Re your removal of obviously notable info re; Wesley Clark at the Administrator's noticeboard. Nocturnalnow (talk) 17:05, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , really? I said have a talk page discussion, and you run to the admin notice board? (And don't even provide me a link.) – Muboshgu (talk) 17:39, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I know you are intelligent and know for sure this info belongs in the article and since you are obviously watching it the likely reason you would revert so fast is because you do not want the info in the Blp for whatever reason....maybe because its a featured article and this info might be controversial, I am not sure why this info has been well reported since 2011 and still has not become part of the Blp, but it is obviously critically important info which the Subject HIMSELF put out into the public arena so he himself must've thought it was "due" in terms of his life and contributions. I KNOW you can see this too because I KNOW you are a good editor, so, wtf?????Nocturnalnow (talk) 18:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I made a material objection per WP:BRD based on WP:DUE and WP:NPOV. The next step is to use the article's talk page to discuss why the info should or should not be included. I am not acting inappropriately in any way, so going to the Administrator's noticeboard is quite outside of normal protocol. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:09, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Trump Putin Suleimani
Thanks for the grins. I am aware of this school of thought. But what confuses me is why would Putin get Suleimani killed. Wasn't he doing exactly what Iran wanted in the middle east. thoughts ? -- D Big X ray ᗙ  17:43, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , maybe Trump went rogue. It's probably tough for Putin to handle such a "very stable genius" at all times. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:50, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * May be, who knows. Or may be Trump really wanted to do something, to take the impeachment heat off and Pompeo pointed him in the direction of his old foe from CIA days.BTW "dependable" stable genius is making headlines in India too. Regarding the second incident on Kashmir mediation, Modi faced a lot of heat from the opposition parties, who blamed Modi for "making such an outrageous request" since Modi could not issue a clear denial.-- D Big X ray ᗙ  18:16, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Rudy
As Americans we can "be" knights (or doctors) or clowns—just not while actually jousting (or practicing) or whatever—and you're absolutely right about the infobox (BLP). Meanwhile, please Ctrl+f1 honorary and think NPOV (six?). Preachy ate chew. --Brogo13 (talk) 01:17, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Americans can not accept an official knighthood, lordship, or other peerage from a foreign government. If he wanted to be "Sir Rudy", he'd need to renounce his American citizenship first. I don't know what you mean by NPOV through a Ctrl + F1. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant Ctrl+f. (Hey computer, find me this word so I can see what other words are nearby.) I simply noticed that the subject (Sir Doctor?) perhaps shouldn't come up six times. --Brogo13 (talk) 02:43, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Gays For Trump Removal Question
Hi, I do not believe I removed any information from the Gays For Trump page, in fact, I believe I added information. There was some incorrect information that I did change to reflect the correct information after reading the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7valentine7 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , not Gays for Trump, Talk:Gays for Trump. Specifically, this edit. We do not remove or refactor other people's talk page posts under any circumstances, other than the most severe BLP violations or hate speech. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:09, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I apologize it was my mistake. I did not mean to remove anything from the page, I was trying to add a note to the page. I have indicated this on that talk page. 7valentine7 (talk • —Preceding undated comment added 04:12, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I see. Thank you for clearing that up for me. I do agree that that post on the talk page is fairly nonsensical. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Note I followed up your request for deletion of Peter Boykin from wikipedia 7valentine7 (talk) 24:23, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Please explain?
Can you please explain how my edit was unconstructive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jd1schroeder (talk • contribs) 20:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , you don't see how your edit had a clear point of view? This is to say nothing of the fact that the Clinton impeachment was highly partisan. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:32, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for rejecting a multiply-cited edit based on sources from Major League Baseball, a major local newspaper, the Minnesota Twins, and Josh Donaldson himself based on the fact that a particular roster move has not YET been made. KateBergerMpls (talk) 18:13, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , the real source that will tell us if the Twins have signed Donaldson is this page. As of now, he's not listed. Because, the Twins have a full 40-man roster. They are not allowed to have 41 players on their 40-man roster. Someone has to be jettisoned before they can sign Donaldson. Also, Wikipedia is not a breaking news source. We are an encyclopedia. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for protecting the page Maltese (dog), but you've committed a little mistake: as you can see here, and as I'm sure you already know, as far as a new consensus is reached the previous consensual version is kept in a challenged page, and the previous consensual version of that page was this, with the pronunciation of the dog's name, not the one modified by "Magnolia677" whom I've been reverting to the consensual version; I'm asking you to restore the consensual version for the moment, please, currently there's a discussion in the talk page where it'll be decided if the pronunciation will be kept or not, but till that moment the previous consensual version must be kept, this is how Wikipedia works (unless it works like that just when it's convenient for the user who request the protection...). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.186.195 (talk) 08:18, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Please, reply to my message, thanks.
 * I responded to a request to protect the page at WP:RFPP. I am not at all involved in discussion on that page, and have no idea what the consensus is. If you want an autoconfirmed editor to make a change to the page, ask on the article's talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for replying. I'm not asking you to take a position about the matter, I'm just stating this: the "consensus rule" works as shown in the diagramme, if an edit is challenged (the removal in this case) the pre-edit version is the one to keep until a possibile new consensus is reached, but the current version is the challenged edit version, not the previous consensus version (lasting from years ago). I'm asking you just to apply the rules of Wikipedia, that is restoring the stable consensual version for the moment, which will be modified if a new consensus is reached in talk (where there's a discussion currently). I'm asking "you" because you're the user who protected the page, and I can't restore it because I'm not registered. Nothing more, that's all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.186.195 (talk) 18:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Please, let me know if you can fix this procedural error. If you can't, tell me whom I may ask please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.186.195 (talk) 20:21, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell, I did protect the consensus version. This is why you should check with an editor who is familiar with the page, because I am not familiar with it. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:25, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've understood. Then let me explain better what happened. The last consensual version is this. The difference between that version and the version you protected is this (which is, except for some fixing in the page that I've done myself, identical to this, the first removal). The difference is that the Italian pronunciation template "[mal'te:ze]", which has been present in the page for years (watch here), was removed by the user himself who asked the protection! It's absurd, can't you see? A user removes a content, then he's reverted, so he asks to protect the page so that "his" non consensual version is kept. Absurd... And that user is the only one familiar with the page lately, I even tried asking explainations over and over in an old talk page of mine and in the current discussion about the matter, but he keeps ignoring me, as if I'm a noisy insect. Nobody else but you can do this, which is nothing but respecting the rules. To resume:


 * 1) I've shown you that the consensual version was the one with the pronunciation;
 * 2) I've shown you that the pronunciation has been there for years without being challenged so it has to be considered a stable consensus;
 * 3) I've shown you that the version you protected isn't consensual because the pronunciation was removed without consensus;
 * 4) I've shown you that the user who asked to protect the page is the one who made the challenged edit and his behaviour didn't correspond at all to the consensus diagramme because he just kept on making his edit again and again althought it was being challenged instead of stopping;
 * the only thing you should do is, for the moment, restore the previous version, the non challenged version, the consensus version, call it as you prefer, nobody but you can do it because the only other user who could is the one I've just written about in the last point above. Please, give me a hand to fix this procedural mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.186.195 (talk) 20:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see any particular benefit to the revision you pointed out, as there are only minor spacing differences, as well as a typo of Maltese groomed with 3'(<'05839(';(9993992988 Ir that I don't want to restore. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I need to know a thing before going on: tell me, sincerely, if you're mocking me, please. In case you are, it's useless I spend more time writing explaination messages. In case you aren't, I'll try explaining once more what I naively thought it wasn't necessary to explain in such a detail.


 * 1) This is the difference between the last consensual version and the version you protected, the difference I linked yesterday.
 * 2) This is one of my edits, to be precise it's the edit where I didn't just restore the pronunciation removed by the user who asked the protection but I also made several fixes such as the "Maltese groomed with" part you talked about, if you compare this edit with the previous you'll notice they're absolutely identical except for the removal of the pronunciation.
 * 3) This is the difference between my previous edit and the version you protected, as you can see the only difference in the text is that the pronunciation was removed.
 * 4) This is the first edit by that user consisting in removing the pronunciation, it's identical to the previous difference except that here I hadn't added a source yet.
 * So, what have we understood from these differences? That between the last consensual version and the current version the differences are 2: the removal of the pronunciation and the general fixes. The general fixes I made, for their own nature, haven't been challenged, so it's all right leaving them there. The removal was challenged. The pronunciation has always been in the page, it was stable and corresponding to the consensus, removing it without discussing was an error, was "breaking the rules of Wikipedia". The version you protected, without the pronunciation, is a challenged version, and according to the consensus diagramme in a case like this the challenged version has to be undone and restored to the previous consensual version (which is my edit where I fix mispells and restore the pronunciation). So please, for the last time (let's hope), restore the previous consensual version, i.e. re-add the pronunciation which was removed without consensus and without discussing about its removal; if in the talk page is decided to remove it, then the user who is willing to remove it will remove it again, but "for the moment" the consensual version of the page is this, not this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.186.195 (talk) 09:12, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know how else to explain this: I am not involved in editing that page and I'm not going to involve myself in editing that page. Other editors are editing the page, and the protection will expire soon enough anyway. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:27, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * But I've understood "this". The thing "you" haven't understood is that you, in your action of "protecting the page", made a procedural mistake. It wasn't your fault, you just didn't check because you trusted the user who requested the protection who, instead, disguised you: you couldn't be aware that the version you were protecting wasn't the consensual version but the challenged version (which, because of the protection, wouldn't have been possible any more to restore to the consensual version), you couldn't know that such a trusted user's aim was actually "using the page protection to prevent an anonymous from making the rules of Wikipedia be respected"; if you'd checked you'd have verified that and, so, restored the previous version before protecting the page (I hope). You made a mistake, nothing terrible at all but it remains a mistake, just please fix it, I'm not asking for anything inconceivable: to respect rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.186.195 (talk) 20:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I can't say I'm happy to see that here, in Wikipedia, people who are responsible for taking decisions about issues and acting to solve them don't behave at all as people who have the same tasks in the real word, e.g. policemen: here, as far as I can see, they who're given special powers to ensure the correct running of Wikipedia are free not to care at all when they commit mistakes in carrying out their duties; out of here, in real life, they'd be either sanctioned or summarily fired... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.186.195 (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Jeff Bridich Vandalism
Hello,

With the Nolan Arenado and Jeff Bridich news in full force, there's been some vandalism on Jeff Bridich. Nothing major, but it might be enough to make the page semi-protected, I don't know where the Arenado and Rockies trade dispute saga will end but his name will continue to get brought up I'm sure.

Thanks, Hamma085 (talk) 14:16, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think that was just enough vandalism to justify page protection. I also think the page needs to be updated, since there's nothing on him since his appointment as GM. Thanks. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Michael Olmsted for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael Olmsted 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/Michael Olmsted& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SportingFlyer  T · C  07:35, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Naples United FC page?
Hi there. Since Naples United FC is going into its fourth National Premier Soccer League season and just qualified for the 2020 U.S. Open Cup I was going to make it a page but it seems only you can do that (plus three others have already tried to make it a page).

Do you think it should be brought back with additional sources from the NPSL   and U.S. Soccer  ? ColeTrain4EVER (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , the page was deleted via a discussion, and then recreated twice, which is why it's been protected from recreation. That said, we could have a page there if new information that would render the old decision outdated. None of those sources, though, would do that. They are not independent of the subject. U.S. Soccer would surely promote the 2020 U.S. Open Cup. If there are any independent sources, that would strengthen the case for making an article. Alternatively, you could try to draft an article at Draft:Naples United FC and use the WP:AFC process to get it accepted. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I could try to find different sources, but those might come after the U.S. Open Cup tournament starts. Some coverage has begun with SoccerAmerica and ProSoccerUSA mentioning the team, though its a smaller side in the NPSL and seems to get coverage based on who they play in the NPSL season. However, since the team made the U.S. Open Cup that by default would make it eligible for a page according to WP:FOOTYN, right? Quote from club notability: "Teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) generally meet WP:GNG criteria." ColeTrain4EVER (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Mail Notice
Celestina007 (talk) 00:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Reinstate deleted page?
Recently you deleted Ed Dailey's Wiki. I was hoping to convince you to reinstate it. Thebrad509 (talk) 07:26, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Ed Dailey doesn't seem to be notable, from what I see on the administrators' noticeboard on simplewiki. Nigos (talk • Contribs) 07:37, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * For reference to the discussion on simplewiki, see this.

Dusty Baker
Please restore my edits. MLB.com is also reporting according to sources Baker and the Astros are in agreement. If MLB.com isnt reputable, what is? I would be happy to link you the article as well, or update the reference if you restore it. Thanks! Sneakycrown (talk) 22:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , when I reverted those edits, mlb.com was reporting that the hiring was "according to sources". That's not confirmation, especially since mlb.com is independent of the teams. Jim Crane has since announced the hiring, and that is how we know that it is real. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:57, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Ilhan Omar
I've given a DS alert to the editor you reverted and explained that they are not allowed to edit that portion of the article. Doug Weller talk 09:06, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Staples Center protection
Hello Muboshgu, hope all is well! Just wanted to give you a heads up regarding Staples Center. It looks like editors are still adding a nickname however there is no consensus to add it at this time (see the relevant talk page section). It may need another semi-protection may be in order. I can post a request over at RFPP but wanted to make sure you're aware. Thanks! --   LuK3      (Talk)   18:27, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , it doesn't need another protection at this moment, but it might. I'll keep an eye on it. If I'm not around and it does become problematic, file another request. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:51, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Your message to me from September 2019
Hi,

This is response a message that you left for me back in September 2019, "Please stop your disruptive editing....blah blah". First of all, I did not know that I was being disruptive by editing posts. How would I know? I'm not a programmer or anything. It was never my intention to be across that.

As you can see, I do not post much. Maybe I need a tutorial on editing, which you could have suggested, administrator. You did not have to leave that shitty message. You could have simply stated to me: "Your editing is to some of the post on here is disruptive. Please view our tutorial on how to edit a post. If you continue to be do, so we reserve the right to ban you." That would have made me seek assistance from you or others. In fact, you did not even tell or show me how I was being disruptive. How can I stop being disruptive, when I don't know what it is/was that I affected. As an administrator, you need to be a better communicator to users.

You can do as you please with my account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jizzlegizzle (talk • contribs) 19:11, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , in September, you vandalized the page. The page was subject to enough vandalism from your account and others that I protected the page. I do see that I could've given you a cautionary warning that was less abrasive than that one. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Help With Recent Changes for Jamie Moyer
Hello,

I could use your guidance for making recent changes, that are accurate, for Jamie Moyer to be accepted. Or how to make edits that will not get rejected. I have read Wikipedia’s policy on “Biographies of Living Persons” Section. “Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy.” The changes to remove marriage information has multiple reasons:

1. It is inaccurate. 2. Jamie Moyer is a retired professional with minor children and desires privacy. 3. Information about his current marriage status not public information. Nor should it be public.

If this communication is private I would be glad to obtain private records to document the accuracies for your editors. I would like to better understand the rights of privacy for a retired person with minor children as well. It seems Wikipedia policy favors privacy for living people. Jamie Moyer is retired and would favor privacy about his personal life and his 8 children (some of which are minors).

Please do advise as to what is needed to remove inaccurate personal information, but, at the same time, not continue to place personal information into the public.

I would be glad to share more details and documentation if you can confirm this thread is private.

I also reference: “The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Privacy_of_names

Thank you in advance for your guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavit1333 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , we do hue towards exclusion of information on non notable individuals, but not in cases where they are public figures. Karen Moyer seems to not be trying to hide her identity. nothing in that paragraph that you deleted seems inappropriate. His minor children are not named, which wouldn't be okay. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Ergo Sum • Nick Moyes • QEDK • Wugapodes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Dennis Brown
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Aude • BrownHairedGirl • CALR • Jengod • John Reaves • J.smith • Kim Dent-Brown • K1Bond007 • MECU • Refdoc • RHaworth



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Partial blocks.
 * The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news
 * Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating.  There is currently one template: uw-pblock.
 * When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title.

Arbitration
 * Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous
 * Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
 * The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

William Barr
On the page, "William Barr," I added two lines of important information about the relationship between William Barr, his father Donald Barr, and Jeffrey Epstein. The edits were small, convey uncontroversial and biographically relevant facts, and were backed up with reputable journalistic news sources. You undid my revisions and gave the following rationale: "Donald Barr hiring Jeffrey Epstein has nothing to do with William Barr." This is false. William Barr was confirmed as the Attorney General of the United States in 2019. In that role, Barr ran the Department of Justice, the executive branch agency that oversees the Metropolitan Correctional Center, the prison in which Jeffrey Epstein died on August 9, 2019. On August 12, 2019, Barr announced that he had ordered DOJ officials to investigate the circumstances surrounding Epstein's death. That Donald Barr, William Barr's father, had a years-long professional relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is clearly relevant to the public's understanding of William Barr's handling of the Epstein case. Therefore, these edits obviously belong in a biographical page about William Barr. If you believe this information deserves to be re-located within the article, please let me know. Otherwise, your reversal of my edits are unjustified and, frankly, a bit bizarre. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:1120:60:F8AE:4E8:E3C5:353F (talk) 20:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It is WP:SYNTH. Donald Barr hiring Jeffrey Epstein in 1974 has nothing at all to do with Epstein's death in prison in 2019. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:08, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank You but Want your assistance
, Thank you for protecting Saba Qamar, but i want to let you know that user:Kthxbay who was requesting to protect this page and that other IP was same and you can see that through visiting this article's history. The article is protected but he continue to vandalise. This article is B class and well sourced but this user is removing the sourced material, , and tagging this article with maintenance tags since few days. Regards 221.132.118.17 (talk) 18:21, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The user you mention disagrees with you. I don't know the subject or the article history, so I am not going to wade any further into this. Make an edit request on Talk:Saba Qamar, or report the user at WP:AIV, or go to WP:DR. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:32, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Dont know much about how to report. What i can do is to wait for the unprotection as the matter is not resolving and no one is participating in discussion at talk page. Also he is not describing whats the worth of that tag or what is fan base wordings on that B class article. just check this, he was vandalising yesterday and admin declined his protection request and then he came up as IP with same motive. 221.132.118.17 (talk) 18:42, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

minA
Thanks for fixing Minas page 104.166.200.176 (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hasan Piker AfD
Hello. Because of your involvement with the this afd, I was hoping that you could semi-protect the Hasan Piker afd. While I do not expect as much excitement from IPs in the deletion discussion because it is the page's first nomination, I would prefer to remain on the safe side. Thanks, KidAd (talk) 01:42, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , pages are not protected preemptively. We do not want to sent IPs the chance to weigh in, especially if they do behave. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:12, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I had a feeling this would be the case. I just wanted to make sure. Thanks, KidAd (talk) 02:14, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , you can request protection if there is vandalism. Also, I'm not sure why you think I was involved in that AfD, I only responded to a related request at WP:REFUND. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:27, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I thought you were involved. KidAd (talk) 02:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Do not delete my changes to articles that you know nothing about. You are one of the problems with Wikipedia. Stay in your lane dumbass. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.62.253.75 (talk) 02:45, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Please
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alabama#You're_welcome --Brogo13 (talk) 17:37, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm not aware of any policy, but I don't see a problem in adding an unnecessary space in the page as long as it doesn't add additional white space for the readers. It also doesn't seem like a big enough hill to die on, either way. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:43, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * What hill? Oh, His Highness... He and his subjects (aerospace) are welcome to it. Preachy ate chew! 8 r' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brogo13 (talk • contribs) 13:23, February 3, 2020 (UTC)
 * , hill to die on. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:01, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Semi-Protection and the article Punxsutawney Phil Comment
Hi. Recently, you declined the request for semi-protection on the article Punxsutawney Phil for excess IP vandals. You ruled that there wasn't enough disruptive activity. Oh well, if you look in Punxsutawney Phil: Revision history, almost all edits were by IP vandals and undoers. Any second thoughts on this? I ain't gonna bug you anymore after. Can I Log In (talk) 03:10, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , at the time, I must not have seen much vandalism. It's a judgment call, as there's no concrete threshold to make this a black-and-white decision. Now, I see that there has been vandalism, potentially enough to justify protection. Even though it may have been predictable, pages are not protected preemptively. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Subartu
Hello. You protected the page Subartu in 27 January after I reported a persistent banned editor with multiple accounts and IPs. The protection ended yesterday and the guy just came back! its like he was counting the minutes!! Your help will be much appreciated.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , I protected it again. That IP needs to be compelled to discuss. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:46, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Problem is, the IP is an already indefenitely blocked editor who is not allowed to edit nor discuss anymore.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 23:35, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , in that case, I recommend you take the IP to WP:SPI. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:56, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Roger Langridge’s page
I’m his DAUGHTER and for some reason cannot edit his page to add interesting facts about his life- how can I resolve this issue? TamsinLangridge (talk) 15:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , you can use the article's talk page to discuss what changes you want to make. You need to have reliable sources for this, since I can't otherwise verify that you are his daughter. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:42, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

I have made the changes to Larry walkers page not by mistake. They are accurate changes and I would like them to stay as I’ve edited them. Not if my last attempt at that will remain but hoping it does..

Thanks Golfshirts (talk) 02:20, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , just saying "it's false" doesn't cut it. What is false? Those things you've deleted are all supported by reliable sources. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

in response to reply to: "Help With Recent Changes for Jamie Moyer"
However, the description surrounding their marital status is inaccurate. The problem I am having is that providing any reference material on the details of this inaccuracy would put non-public persons' information in the public light, which would be inappropriate and also potentially harmful. Putting non-public persons information in light is protected against. - see Wikipedia policy on "privacy of names" section for biographies of living persons "When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context...The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons.” This is a "catch 22." But the marital information on this page is inaccurate.  Since the current information is inaccurate, and adding additional references & information to update this would subject non-public persons to publicity & is protected against by Wikipedia policy, it seems the best solution is to remove the inaccurate sentence. Also as far as I understand, even though Jamie is a celebrity, he does in fact have a right to privacy according to Wikipedia.  According to Wikipedia policy, being a celebrity does not mean he has no right to privacy at all. See: - Wikipedia policy, Biographies of living persons, paragraph 3: “Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy.” Perpetuating inaccurate personal life and inaccurate/outdated sensitive religious affiliation (and even if it were accurate) does not seem to adhere to “written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy.” Do you see a way to reconcile this? Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavit1333 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , what is inaccurate? What references can you provide to update what may not be accurate? – Muboshgu (talk) 23:06, 6 February 2020 (UTC)