User talk:Muboshgu/Archive 53

elitist much?
I have an edit that you have decided to remove and made a pretty ridiculous accusation/assumption. 2603:7000:3540:AF:BC0C:EC60:B9E3:A370 (talk) 01:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC) MOST RECENT EDIT THAT WAS BLOCKED IS ACCURATE: You cited an old version and blocked anyone from editing the page. The edits were not disruptive nor vandalism. THE CORRECT VERSION IS ACCURATE and should be included on the page.


 * According to the NYTimes the number of migrants in shelters soared above 10,000, Mr. Adams announced that the city would open emergency centers to temporarily house the new arrivals — including several barrackslike, winterized tents the size of airplane hangars that will shelter single adults at a parking lot in the Bronx. Sept 22, 2022 https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/22/nyregion/migrants-homeless-shelter-crisis.html 2603:7000:3540:AF:205D:AFEC:BBC7:E3A3 (talk) 23:30, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Mayor Adams is building Tent Cities in the Bronx to house the influx of migrants seeking asylum who were sent to NYC from the southern border states of Florida and Texas.


 * If your edit was accurate, it might have stayed. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It's accurate- so many references on this issue. Here's another. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11260635/Huge-tents-erected-Bronx-parking-lot-NYC-Mayor-Eric-Adams-rushes-house-13-000-migrants.html 2603:7000:3540:AF:205D:AFEC:BBC7:E3A3 (talk) 20:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * See WP:DAILYMAIL. They don't write accurate articles. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * And CBS, AMNY, NYDaily News, NYPost - all of these are inaccurate Muboshgu?
 * https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/video/nyc-addresses-bronx-residents-concerns-about-migrant-tent-city/
 * https://www.amny.com/new-york/bronx/tent-city-migrant-center-opening-bronx/
 * https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/new-york-elections-government/ny-nyc-mayor-adams-migrant-tent-camp-right-to-shelter-20220927-rzwhabrj7zc3hgqptjegmukaku-story.html
 * https://gothamist.com/news/mayor-defends-plan-to-build-asylum-seeker-tent-shelter-in-the-bronx?br=1
 * https://nypost.com/2022/09/26/nyc-locals-gripe-as-mayor-eric-adams-migrant-tent-city-gets-built/ 2603:7000:3540:AF:205D:AFEC:BBC7:E3A3 (talk) 20:40, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The edit was Mayor Adams is advocating for Tent Cities in the Bronx to house the influx of migrants seeking asylum who were sent to NYC from the southern border states of Florida and Texas. even though the title says "Mayor of NYC mulls plan", and the article itself said New York City Mayor Eric Adams has announced he is considering putting up large tents as temporary shelter for the influx of relocated migrants the city is struggling to accommodate, The Associated Press reports. Emphasis added. That is what was inaccurate in that edit. If sources are now saying that he's going along with the plan, well that changes things doesn't it. But it doesn't change the inaccuracy of the edit to the page from a few days ago and it doesn't excuse the disruptive editing.
 * – Muboshgu (talk) 20:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * and NYTImes? Also inaccurate?
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/22/nyregion/migrants-homeless-shelter-crisis.html 2603:7000:3540:AF:205D:AFEC:BBC7:E3A3 (talk) 20:42, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

You did not read the current edit. There was no reason to tag as disruptive editing or vandalism. And your first dispute when I noted it was an accurate statement was to invalidate the source, which I concede after I read the directed page. Now that there are more valid sources, you're reverting your argument back to the edit, which was accurate - yet you disallowed and imposed punitive actions via disallowing edits to the page. As a reminder, here was the latest edit: Mayor Adams is building Tent Cities in the Bronx to house the influx of migrants seeking asylum who were sent to NYC from the southern border states of Florida and Texas.

THE EDIT YOU CITED WAS VERSIONS OLD
 * I don't know where you're getting that. That was not the content in the edit that I reverted. Diffs don't lie. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:26, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2022
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Gil Kim
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg ScottishFinnishRadish
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Staxringold
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ahoerstemeier (deceased) • Ched

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Cyberpower678

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg GorillaWarfare

Guideline and policy news
 * Following an RfC, consensus was found that if the rationale for a block depends on information that is not available to all administrators, that information should be sent to the Arbitration Committee, a checkuser or an oversighter for action (as applicable, per ArbCom's recent updated guidance) instead of the administrator making the block.
 * Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
 * Community comment on the revised Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines is requested until 8 October.

Technical news
 * The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration
 * Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a motion.
 * A modification to the deletion RfC remedy in the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been made to reaffirm the independence of the RfC and allow the moderators to split the RfC in two.
 * The second phase of the 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review closes 3 October.

Miscellaneous
 * An administrator's account was recently compromised. Administrators are encouraged to check that their passwords are secure, and reminded that ArbCom reserves the right to not restore adminship in cases of poor account security. You can also use two-factor authentication (2FA) to provide an extra level of security.
 * Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections open 2 October and close 8 October.
 * You are invited to comment on candidates in the 2022 CUOS appointments process.
 * An RfC is open to discuss whether to make Vector 2022 the default skin on desktop.
 * Tech tip: You can do a fuzzy search of all deleted page titles at Special:Undelete.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Hector Lopez
I combed though it a bit more. It's mostly verifiable (AGF on the offline sources), but I can't give a formal "support", as there's too much reverse engineering of his career based on stats sites for my taste. I'm a stickler for WP:PRIMARY's Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them. All that previous OR is not too suprising. I did an FA review for that editor once, raised the same issue w/ stats DBs (though wasn't as widespread as here). Alas, none of the other non-sports reviewers seemed to get it. Good luck. —Bagumba (talk) 18:11, 2 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , thanks for your work there. I'll take another pass at it myself, and I'll keep an eye out if anyone wants to initiate GAR. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:18, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative algorithms for providing personalized task recommendations through SuggestBot. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

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) 23:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the revdels
I was looking to see if anyone was active to get a second opinion, and your action answered my question. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:18, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Which revdels were you referring to? Magnatyrannus (talk &#124; contribs) 00:20, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Not yours. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:37, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah that's one's a particularly nasty LTA who comes and goes from time to time. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:37, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

That's what I call...
an alley-oop. Andre🚐 01:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Gotta keep an eye on the abortion pages for sockpuppetry now. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Is this our friend Andre🚐 19:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * What are you even on about? This was discussed at length at Talk:Abortion_in_Vermont, there is no reason for the inclusion of these two sections. 2A01:4B00:9D42:6E00:FCE7:AC6D:CFC5:3126 (talk) 19:19, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Andrevan - Definitely a sock with the types of edits they are making and the justifications for those edits. No doubt in my mind. — That Coptic Guy (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Bruce Timm
Hello. In case you didn't get the notification, I made nearly all of the improvements you suggested. There were a few points I hoped to get feedback on, otherwise I believe the GA review should be complete. FlairTale (talk) 05:37, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Kari Lake Covid
The word 'misinformation' is meaningless. Instead of parroting whatever so-called "reliable source" you rely on, quote the actual words of Lake and let readers decide. If your reliable sources are using words like "misinformation" they are not reliable. 2600:8805:4802:DD00:A1DD:168E:F3CC:C6E6 (talk) 14:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Talk: New York Mets
What about this website Mets have tie up with Braves 101—62 record — https://www.mlb.com/standings 184.75.32.230 (talk) 00:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * It says that the Braves clinched the division and the Mets clinched a wild card. The Braves hold the tiebreaker. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry about that I know is tricky if the Mets lose they could of go down but I agree now. 184.75.32.230 (talk) 01:07, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Anti abortion vs ProLife
There is an actual difference between anti abortion and pro life. It’s not a euphemism. There’s a difference. 47.203.22.26 (talk) 01:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * It is literally a euphemism for opposition to abortion. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:57, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

That 2022 Las Vegas Strip stabbing spree vandal
Hi, I noticed that you scrubbed the username of the vandal that edited the aforementioned page. Could you also scrub my report to AIV, so everything is consistent? Liliana UwU (talk / contribs) 02:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ This one was a borderline revdel case. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:27, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Edit Warring
I do not understand why you are following my account and removing my edits by labeling them as edit warring. I am making objective edits in accordance with the Wikipedia rules, but you seem to be removing them because disagree with your political preferences. Might we please have a substantive discussion? AnubisIbizu (talk) 18:29, 9 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I am not "following your account". 2000 Mules and KBJ-related pages are on my watchlist. Substantive discussion should be happening in place of your edit warring, yes. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * But I have added an edit that you removed. Does that not make you the warring party? Does not my post get to remain until a substantive discussion concludes that it should be removed? Or does the rule not apply equally to you? AnubisIbizu (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @AnubisIbizu Go read WP:3RR please. "Warring party" makes it clear you do not understand that policy yet.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 18:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I understand the three-revert rule. My point is that I am being told not to edit anything without engaging in talk by the same person who is editing my work without engaging in talk. AnubisIbizu (talk) 18:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The WP:ONUS is on you to gain WP:CONSENSUS for contentious edits (see also WP:BRD). If people are reverting you, it is on you to initiate discussion.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 18:43, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no contention in saying that there is currently one military veteran on the Supreme Court. It is an unbiased objective fact. I am confused how that is contentious? AnubisIbizu (talk) 18:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Nobody is questioning whether or not it is true. We are questioning its relevance. See WP:NOTEVERYTHING: Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful. A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your feedback. I will ensure that my additions demonstrate stronger relevance. AnubisIbizu (talk) 19:14, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, this turned out not to be the case. BD2412  T 17:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , have you seen WP:ANI? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I am aware of it, and contemplating my contribution to the discussion. BD2412  T 17:54, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Howie Shanks
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 10 October 2022 (UTC) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 17:44, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for being consistent
I won’t revert on Anthony Weiner as I believe there is a special rule for this on post 1992 political articles (and you are showing a consistent position), but I do believe there may need to be a broader clean up effort and perhaps a vetting for consensus on this topic. TruthByAnonymousConsensus (talk) 20:50, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * the rules about post-1992 US politics articles are the discretionary sanctions. I think you are right that the articles on people with felony convictions are not likely uniform and it would be good to firm up how to handle these. My opinion is that the leads of these articles (Weiner and Hastert) devote quite a bit of real estate to their crimes, and so it isn't needed in the first sentence, before the thing that makes them notable. Cohen's being disbarred shouldn't go ahead of him being American. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Placement of first mention of Pulitzer Prize winning in lead
Take a look at this. What's the right thing to do here? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 14:30, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Same as the discussion above regarding Anthony Weiner / Michael Cohen etc., nothing goes before nationality. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:10, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay. Is that a firm guideline? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:26, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems to me to be against MOS:FIRSTBIO. Maggie's lead can say she won a Pulitzer but it shouldn't lead with is a Pulitzer-Prize winning American journalist. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:53, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Isn't it basically a matter of mentioning things in their "order of notability", while placing adjectives in their logical spots? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me)
 * Yes. Which shouldn't be an award in front of their nationality and what makes them notable. Haberman isn't notable because she won a Pulitzer, she already was notable. (I've never seen any biographies lead with "is an X-award winning" anything, other than Pulitzer Prize winners.) – Muboshgu (talk) 17:27, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "other than Pulitzer Prize winners", which is why I did it. That's standard English writing. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:13, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Would "is an American, Pulitzer Prize winning, journalist" be acceptable? I don't see any other way that isn't awkward, and it should be mentioned in the lead. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:16, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Still reads as awkward to me. I'd say "Haberman won a Pulitzer Prize for..." at the end of the paragraph. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:03, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems awkward because anywhere but here the standard formulation would be "Haberman is a Pulitzer Prize winning American journalist" or "...award winning American journalist". Attributive adjectives come before the noun. Predicative adjectives do exist, but would be awkward in this case. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/internet-grammar/adjectiv/postpos.htm -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:04, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it would fit well at the end of the current lead. Where she worked (or the important beats) is more important to me than what awards she's won. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:15, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Your advice is needed here. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 01:29, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * With what? I don't think any page should lead with "award-winning", especially if it's the "Izzy Award", whatever that is. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Harry Booth (coach)
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Walter McCredie
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Darrell Mudra
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Mike Erre
I'm asking both of the admins involved in the deletions if it would be possible for you to send the two deleted Mike Erre articles to my user space. I want to see if I can add reliable sources and updated information (him being on national broadcasts, for example) that would qualify this as an article. I appreciate your help!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Mike_Erre


 * 18:11, 8 December 2019 Muboshgu talk contribs deleted page Mike Erre (WP:BLPPROD: Nominated for seven days with no reliable sources present in the article)  (thank)
 * 01:06, 5 February 2008 Coredesat talk contribs deleted page Mike Erre (CSD A7 (Bio): Biographical article that does not assert significance)  (thank)

UPDATE: I just saw that Coredesat has a note that they're no longer active here. So I'm asking you. Thanks for your consideration.

-- Alden Loveshade (talk) 19:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)


 * PRODs can be restored upon request, and since this was a BLPPROD, I would only undelete it to draft or user space. You can now find it at User:Alden Loveshade/Mike Erre. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help! -- Alden Loveshade (talk) 21:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Jonathan Beaulieu-Richard
Vanamonde 12:03, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Tom Urbani
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

George Lucas
George Lucas is more than a director. He's a director but he also worked as a producer on films such as Willow and Howard the Duck, a screenwriter with creating Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Willow to name but a handful, and an entrepreneur with founding ILM, THX Sound, The George Lucas Education Foundation, and more. The opening of his Wikipedia should reflect this. Not just saying he's a director as there's much more to him like Francis Ford Coppola and Andrei Tarkovsky. Joe12Hawk (talk) 00:15, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , did you read MOS:FIRST? It says, in part, Try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject. Instead use the first sentence to introduce the topic, and then spread the relevant information out over the entire lead. We don't list every single thing they've done in the opening sentence. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

That's what I was doing. George is known for more than just being a director/filmmaker. Joe12Hawk (talk) 00:32, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , the problem is that you're doing the opposite of what the Manual of Style says to do. It says don't overload the first sentence. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:47, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that Joe12Hawk edits for the opening sentence is much more accurate. George Lucas is certainly not "just" a director. 2603:7000:3540:AF:3194:B3C:EFC9:F4D9 (talk) 00:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Neither of you understand the point of this. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * You are engaging in Disruptive Editing and have locked the page for absolutely no reason. Directors, producers, screenwriters in such esteem as George lucas are many times introduced with more than 1 role.
 * There are two editors that are in agreement. You are one not in agreement. We suggest you undo your disruptive edits. 2603:7000:3540:AF:3194:B3C:EFC9:F4D9 (talk) 01:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Examples that you are incorrect:
 * Steven Allan Spielberg KBE (/ˈspiːlbɜːrɡ/; born December 18, 1946) is an American film director, producer, and screenwriter.
 * Francis Ford Coppola (/ˈkoʊpələ/; Italian: [ˈkɔppola]; born April 7, 1939) is an American film director, producer, and screenwriter.
 * Alfred Hitchcock (1899–1980) was an English director and filmmaker. Popularly known as the "Master of Suspense" for his use of innovative film techniques in thrillers,
 * AND MANY, MANY OTHERS. 2603:7000:3540:AF:3194:B3C:EFC9:F4D9 (talk) 01:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

It's just as important I feel to establish who the person I feel than just one word that doesn't tell the story at all. Having George's four key contributions listed establishes what the reader will be reading. If they see "filmmaker" or "director" they'll only think of him as such but he's much more than that. His Wikipedia page has reflected as much for a long time. There's no reason to break the formula. Joe12Hawk (talk) 01:02, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , that's what the entire three-to-four paragraph lead is for. The opening sentence is for what makes him notable: being a filmmaker. The "formula" is MOS:FIRST, and you're breaking it. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

It's always been like this on countless Wikipedia pages about various people. There's no reason to break the formula. Joe12Hawk (talk) 01:10, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't know what to tell you other than that every one of those pages you've seen are wrong, we follow MOS, and if you don't revert that edit, I will. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay. Whatever floats your boat. No need to get testy over something on the internet that's supposed to inform people and not subtract. Joe12Hawk (talk) 01:14, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , I'm perfectly calm. Overloading the first sentence makes the article less readable, not more. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:16, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Nobody else had any problems reading it in all the times I read the article and noticed edits. So I'm not sure that's accurate. Joe12Hawk (talk) 01:17, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bettye Crutcher
Hello! Your submission of Bettye Crutcher at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Vladimir.copic (talk) 00:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Ammon Bundy
I was instructed to change the article on Ammon Bundy, claiming he is an "anti-government militant". That is a political opinion and not a fact. If Wikipedia continues to claim that about a political candidate, then it is open to lawsuit. If you were involved in reinforcing that claim, without any proof, you are also legally involved and could be a litigant. You can change the language as you wish, but to state that Mr. Bundy is an "anti-government militant" means you are making a claim of fact, which can be litigated. I would suggest removing that language to protect yourself and Wikipedia from suit. U25 (talk) 01:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * "You were instructed"? By whom? Also, don't make legal threats. If you don't rescind that I'll block you. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:33, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Edit needed to Infobox MLB yearly
See this discussion Can you add this? Spanneraol (talk) 00:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ – Muboshgu (talk) 01:05, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thanks much for the edit — it looks like "president" needs to be added to the "Check for unknown parameters" section near the end of the template, as use of the new field certainly works but generates a preview warning (Page using Template:Infobox MLB yearly with unknown parameter "president"). Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 01:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's right. Is it fixed now? – Muboshgu (talk) 01:28, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks! Dmoore5556 (talk) 01:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Ammon Bundy
I removed a suspect link (it fell far outside of being an unbiased, reliable source). I explained this and you kept reverting - then blocked me! Please advise, since this was done perfectly reasonably per wiki guidelines. Further, I removed the inflammatory phrase "far right" from a descriptor since the referenced source for this does not use it (and, again, it's inflammatory and unnecessary. People can decide for themselves). 2603:6011:C003:1256:1558:B5F4:865E:77AC (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * You're vandalizing, the source is valid, and there are millions of valid sources that refer to Bundy as such. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:41, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The source is not valid. The IREHR is a direct subsidiary of the Action Network (a political operative tool). They display this on their landing page. This biography does not need one-side of political commentary, but just the plain facts. Please remove the link as it is patently biased and unreliable. On the second issue, if you want to post a valid source explicitly stating that Bundy is "far right," then find one, make sure it's unbiased and link it. Don't just say "because there are millions of valid sources . . . " That argument wouldn't work on my behalf if I presented it to you. And it doesn't work for you presenting it to the community. I invite you to find such sources. But in the meantime, please remove the biased IREHR link. Thank you. 2603:6011:C003:1256:1558:B5F4:865E:77AC (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia reflects reliable sources. Here are some more that call Ammon Bundy an "anti-government militant". Have a nice day. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:51, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you removing the unreliable link from IREHR? And btw - that is for you to link to the article. Also, I could consider NPR or WaPo, but NOT Vice. Please remove the improper, biased source. Thank you. 2603:6011:C003:1256:1558:B5F4:865E:77AC (talk) 01:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I took it out, since it isn't necessary. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that. Thank you. I still take umbrage with the unnecessary descriptor since the direct link for the citation does not mention 'far right'. But please stay in good faith. Thank you and be well. 2603:6011:C003:1256:1558:B5F4:865E:77AC (talk) 01:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Tony DeLuca (politician)
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Troll
VeryBigCannon = Super Atlantic bluefin tuna = Atlantic Tuna = StormL and a couple of others. Materialscientist just blocked their IP for three months. I recognize the assholery with the 9/11 photos and thought it was worth a check. Drmies (talk) 21:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Good to know. This is not an LTA I'm familiar with. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:06, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Fell free to comment
Talk:Kanye West Moxy - 02:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:50, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Elmer Smith (baseball)
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Joesph Campbell's 'The Power of Myth' citation
I'm sorry, but I only cited that video from Youtube because it was the only free place where I could find the source so that someone can watch it, and they would see what Campbell says about Star Wars and the psychology of mythological motifs. What do you suggest I do instead? Mobfighter63 (talk) 21:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)


 * whatever it is and whyever you think it's relevant, get consensus on the talk page first. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Edit conflict
Never had an edit conflict during protection, so wasn't sure which one would take priority. Thanks for the correction. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 18:59, 30 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , I don't think I have either! I'm happy to defer to the longer one. It is a talk page, but this antisemitism is highly problematic. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:09, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with your perspective, and when dealing with BLP related issues I prefer longer protection times. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 19:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , I usually err to shorter protections for talk pages, but the insidious nature of this case does justify longer protection. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:31, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative algorithms for providing personalized task recommendations through SuggestBot. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

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) 23:34, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2022
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Isabelle Belato · Whpq
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Atama · Astronautics~enwiki · Athaenara · Eddie891 · GraemeL · Marianocecowski · Natalya · Pratyeka · SB Johnny

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg TheresNoTime
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Ragesoss

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Blablubbs · Firefly
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Joe Roe

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg DGG

Guideline and policy news
 * The article creation at scale RfC opened on 3 October and will be open until at least 2 November.
 * An RfC is open to discuss having open requests for adminship automatically placed on hold after the seven-day period has elapsed, pending closure or other action by a bureaucrat.

Arbitration
 * Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 13 November 2022 until 22 November 2022 to stand in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections.
 * The arbitration case request titled Athaenara has been resolved by motion.
 * The arbitration case Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block has entered the proposed decision stage.
 * , and  have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee Elections.  and  are reserve commissioners.

Miscellaneous
 * The 2022 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of two new CheckUsers.
 * You can add yourself to the centralised page listing time zones of administrators.
 * Tech tip: Wikimarkup in a block summary is parsed in the notice that the blockee sees. You can use templates with custom options to specify situations like or.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Please block User talk:Dill Do Blaster 3000 on their own TP asap. TY
They are a ceaseless vandal. TY — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 03:41, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * , I was watching WP:AGF and give that user every chance to demonstrate that they deserve editing rights. They're clearly an anti-semetic troll that did a better job holding it together than most. I revoked TPA. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:44, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. They seemed reasonable at first, but then went off the rails... — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 03:45, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Whats the "A" in TPA stand for? TP=Talk Page, but the "A"=Access? — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 03:45, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, talk page access. And yes, they looked legit for a moment there. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:47, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Wait... they are now vandalizing wiktionary! How can we stop them? — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 03:50, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to link to that, except to give the raw link, so here it is... https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=jew&oldid=prev&diff=69632054 — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 03:51, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Ian Smith userbox
Hello, Muboshgu. I would like to hear your opinion on this particular userbox – User:Katangais/Userboxes/Ian Smith. I am really puzzled that it survived two MfD nominations so far (here and here; I was the nominator in the second one, and it was closed as no consensus). Ian Smith was the leader and personification of Rhodesia, an unrecognized white racist ethnostate, so having a userbox stating support for him is highly inflammatory and divisive, IMHO. Not to mention that it fails WP:NORACISTS, and is a clear violation of WP:UBCR. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 09:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I imagine it survived because it doesn't say anything too "out there", just "I support this racist". I have to admit as an American that I don't know all the details of UK colonization. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I find it deplorable that a userbox like this survived two MfD nominations, as its apparently not too "radically" racist, only "moderately"... Being from Serbia, I myself am not directly connected to the British Empire and its history, but I do know things about it, especially when it comes to Africa. Rhodesia is a "special case", for sure – through history of the world, there weren't too many countries that created separate voter rolls for about 80% of its population, in order to exclude them from power and preserve the white minority rule. The only similar case was South Africa under apartheid. All of that makes me even more amazed that a userbox like this exists on Wikipedia. Its not different than having a userbox that says "I supported apartheid", or "I supported the Jim Crow laws". —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 23:33, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I agree with you. I get your Hitler analogy (despite doing my best to not invoke Godwin's law) but perhaps there's another awful historical figure who's a better comp. Then again, the creator's comment, My impression is that it is infoboxes expressing support for controversial politicians is OK, as long as it’s not outright inflammatory in the sense that it attacks or disparages specific groups might be accurate in explaining why it wasn't deleted. It was at MfD six months ago, so it may be too soon to try again. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm glad that we agree on this. And honestly speaking, Smith was worse than Hitler in some aspects, however strange it may sound. Hitler was, beyond any doubt, supported by a vast majority of his people, especially during some periods of his rule. If some open and fair elections were held in Germany sometime in the 1930s–1940s period, even as late as 1943–44, I truly doubt that Hitler would be voted out of office. On the other hand, Smith simply made it impossible for the black African majority of his country to even vote against him, and just placed them on separate voting rolls, giving them a fraction of parliamentary seats. He simply relied on the small, white minority of the population, and ruled that way for 15 years... And yes, I agree – since this userbox was at MfD six months ago, it would probably be too soon to try again. That's why I didn't want to nominate it for deletion once more. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 01:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 November newsletter
The 2022 WikiCup has drawn to a close with the final round going down to the wire. The 2022 champion is
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski (1752 points), who won in 2020 and was runner up in both 2019 and last year. In the final round he achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on cue sports. He was closely followed by
 * Bloom6132 (1732), who specialised in "In the news" items and DYKs, and who has reached the final round of the Cup for the past three years. Next was
 * ICS Zulu.svg BennyOnTheLoose (1238), another cue sports enthusiast, also interested in songs, followed by
 * Muboshgu (1082), an "In the news" contributor, a seasoned contestant who first took part in the Cup ten years ago. Other finalists were
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie (930), who scored with a featured article, good articles and DYKs on TV and radio stations,
 * 🇺🇳 Kavyansh.Singh (370), who created various articles on famous Americans, including an FA on Louis H. Bean, famed for his prediction of election outcomes. Next was
 * PCN02WPS (292), who scored with good articles and DYKs on sporting and other topics and
 * Z1720 (25) who had DYKs on various topics including historic Canadians.

During the WikiCup, contestants achieved 37 featured articles, 349 good articles, 360 featured article reviews, 683 good article reviews and 480 In the news items, so Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors. Well done everyone! All those who reached the final round will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or the overall leader in this field.


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski wins the featured article prize, for a total of 6 FAs during the course of the competition and 3 in the final round.
 * 🇺🇳 Kavyansh.Singh wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 2.
 * Pirate Flag of Jack Rackham.svg Adam Cuerden wins the featured picture prize, for 39 FPs during the competition.
 * Z1720 wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 35 FARs in round 4.
 * Epicgenius wins the good article prize, for 32 GAs in round 1.
 * Flag of Provo, Utah (1989–2015).svg SounderBruce wins the featured topic prize, for 4 FT articles in round 1.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski wins the good topic prize, for 34 GT articles in round 5.
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie wins the good article reviewer prize, for 71 GARs overall.
 * Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie wins the Did you know prize, for 30 DYKs in round 3 and 106 overall.
 * Bloom6132 wins the In the news prize, for 106 ITNs in round 5 and 289 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January and possible changes to the rules and scoring are being discussed on the discussion page. You are invited to sign up to take part in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to have a good turnout for the 2023 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners and finalists, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

PETA Userbox deletion notice
Hi! About fifteen minutes ago, I looked at my user page and found on it the following: Said notice was attached to a userbox I transcluded, which you nominated for deletion. Every user who transcluded that userbox now has that notice on their user page! Worse, the notice in context is ambiguous and it seems like the userpage itself has been nominated for deletion.

While obviously this is an unintended consequence of a good-faith action, it is highly annoying, damaging to the users who transcluded it, and (quite unintentionally of course) creates a chilling effect on the users who transcluded the userbox. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 05:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * , yes, now its happening to my user talk. This is probably something to bring up at the village pump, WP:VP or WP:VPT – Muboshgu (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

"Kandiss Taylor" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kandiss Taylor and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TartarTorte 22:01, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Bettye Crutcher
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup awards


Congratulations on your success in the WikiCup! Your contributions to "In the news" are much appreciated. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:19, 10 November 2022 (UTC)


 * , thanks for all of your work! But, I would've been cool to get Jackie Moon-style award. https://tenor.com/xQRM.gif Fourth Place! – Muboshgu (talk) 15:10, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Haha. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Summary
A discussion started by an ip in Talk:Franklin D. Roosevelt and continued by me was removed unilaterally without waiting for more input from editors. It was labelled fringe by you, Muboshgu, in an edit summary, without discussion in talk page. There was no mention of prior consensus, discussion or action for said or similarly relevant content.

Context
On 18:01, 9 November 2022, an ip user started a thread in the talk page of Franklin D. Roosevelt. They were informing about alternative content claiming that Roosevelt was poisoned, among other things. But said thread was removed on 19:48, 9 November 2022 by User:Rjensen, with the edit summary, "drop--not helpful in editing article".

I noticed the revert when I was in my watchlist. I did a short search in Google with the terms and I did find several websites with information about his possible poisoning by enemies. Given that I found that the ip was not simply trolling, I reverted the removal, adding again the thread for further discussion about the claims and replying to the ip.

But on 02:55, 11 November 2022, Muboshgu, who is an administrator, removed unilaterally the thread again, together with my reply. Their edit summary said, "This is WP:FRINGE and will not be added to the article". There was no mention of a previous discussion, consensus or otherwise other action about said information. I searched the talk page archives without finding a relevant discussion.

Concerns
My concerns about the action that Muboshgu took is that the discussion was removed unilaterally without leaving room to find out if the information is indeed WP:FRINGE or not. Or whether it could be included or mentioned in the article even if it's fringe.

The aforementioned guideline states, If discussed in an article about a mainstream idea, a theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight, and reliable sources must be cited that affirm the relationship of the marginal idea to the mainstream idea in a serious and substantial manner. The very guideline cited by Muboshgu states that such theories may be included in the article.

Furthermore, per WP:WEIGHT, Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects. Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views.

As noted, this policy also indicates that minority views can be included in articles. Even tiny mintorities that generally are not included, could have a mention in the "see also" section.

According to WP:CONSENSUS, Decision making and reaching consensus involve an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Expectation and basis
Given the perceived undue removal of an active discussion that in my view ought to have been left in the talk page for its natural progress, given the aforementioned concerns, given that Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED, given that no one WP:OWN articles, I respectfully request that the thread at hand started by the ip about the death of Roosevelt be reinstated.

Or if there was a previous finding, discussion, consensus, action or otherwise about such content, that it be disclosed here and that in the future any such removal be appended in the edit summary pointing out the relevant previous discussion. Because otherwise a removal of a thread with legitimate information even if fringe, can be seen as wanton and arbitrary and against the principles of Wikipedia. Proper explanation must be given for said action. Thinker78 (talk) 05:23, 11 November 2022 (UTC)


 * This is a lot of words around promotion of a bizarre conspiracy theory. Seems like a waste of time to consider that conspiracy theory and a waste of time to write this essay on my talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:37, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Muboshgu, per WP:ADMINACCT, Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrative actions [...] Administrators should justify their actions when requested. Thinker78  (talk) 18:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm responding promptly and civilly. I'll remind you Wikipedia is WP:NOTADEMOCRACY. That said, if you really want to discuss a conspiracy theory that two editors have told you is too WP:FRINGE, go ahead. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Muboshgu, Per WP:NOTADEMOCRACY, Wikipedia is not an experiment in democracy or any other political system. Its primary (though not exclusive) means of decision making and conflict resolution is editing and discussion leading to consensus—not voting.
 * Certainly you removed the thread without giving others the opportunity to discuss, even though I attempted to discuss the issue in the talk page.
 * Per WP:NOTBURO, While Wikipedia's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused. Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policies without consideration for their principles. If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them. Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures.
 * You cited a guideline, WP:FRINGE, to cutoff any discussion. Certainly you followed an overly strict interpretation of the guideline. And I have tried presenting to you that said action may not have been in comformity with various policies and guidelines.
 * Per WP:ADMINCOND, Administrators should lead by example and, like all editors, should behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. Administrators should follow Wikipedia policies and perform their duties to the best of their abilities. Occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with adminship; administrators are not expected to be perfect.
 * I grew up in a country where one of the ways the government had for censorship was killing people. That's why I am so against undue censorship and arbitrary actions. That's why I am taking many hours in this issue, that may be of no importance to you.
 * Please let resolve this by simply reinstating the thread or properly refuting my points about the removal being inappropriate. Besides, it is unclear how I would be discussing a conspiracy theory that two editors (one of them being you --WP:NOTADEMOCRACY) have told me is too WP:FRINGE and removed the discussion. It is about discussing seeking consensus, not voting.
 * If your action was undue and you do not revert yourself, then you would be just compounding the issue and demonstrating a poor conduct for an administrator, against Wikipedia guidance. Also, we would go then to another level of dispute resolution. Thanks for your understanding and attention. Thinker78  (talk) 19:00, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * If you're comparing this to state-sponsored censorship, you're overreacting. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which I love dearly, does not apply to a private company like WMF. Wikipedia does not promote fringe theories, full stop. Another editor had weighed in previously by removing the fringe theory as I did. That's all I'm basing my actions on in this case. Accusing the British government of assassinating a POTUS is a big deal, especially without sources presented. So I stand by my actions. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:08, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I mentioned the case in Guatemala to explain why I feel so motivated against undue censorship. I did not bring the First Amendment at all and I am aware it is a regulation intended for the government mainly. I have no idea why you mentioned it and the WMF. Thanks. Thinker78  (talk) 19:39, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * What I did is not censorship. Wiki policies are clear that certain things are allowed, and others aren't. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Muboshgu's tendentious editing and apparent abuse of administrator's rights at Lauren Boebert
Without any explanation or comment, you rudely reverted my good-faith edit here, this is my complaint against you, both as a tendentious editor and an administrator.

Ever since you (personally) created the article and wrote the lead on Lauren Boebert you have tendentiously pushed a PoV that uses the lead to highlight Boebert's purported accomplishments as a 'Businesswoman', with the apparent intention of using this characterization to make a case for her qualifications for elected office.

If Boebert's short-lived (four year) history as a serially failed 'businesswoman' is relevant in the lead, then certainly her utter failure to ever succeed as a businesswoman is also relevant IN THE LEAD.

Likewise, Boebert's twenty-year history of ADADEMIC failure, including failing to graduate from her High School, and then only gaining her GED sixteen years later in 2020 -- just in time for her to run for office -- SURELY ALSO belongs in the lead. Perhaps, if Boebert had sought any kind of education about running a business, her fortunes might have been different.

Inexperienced Wikipedia editors tend to feel a 'sense of ownership' of the articles they create, but no such 'ownership' exists. You should know that. The lead you wrote failed simultaneously on grounds of Notability, NPOV and UNDUE WEIGHT.

More importantly, as an administrator, you are held to a higher standard and the 'burden of proof' is on YOU. Wholesale reversion of good-faith edits without comment or discussion, when YOU PERSONALLY have an obvious PoV you want to push, is (if I recall correctly) grounds for revoking your admin rights.

It's been a very long time since I encountered such brazen and egregious abuse by an administrator on Wikipedia. As things stand, you are giving the impression of being a 'shill' for Boebert, and in the process abusing your administrative powers.

Requests:  I request that you undo your WHOLESALE revert of my edit, and discuss any problems on the talk page. I would also request that, given you demonstrate a 'vested' interest in the PoV you are pushing, you 'recuse' yourself from any further wholesale reverts unless discussed/negotiated.

I will come back tomorrow to see your response. If you are unable to satisfactorily explain your actions, I will escalate this.

R.Giskard R. (talk) R.Giskard R. (talk) 22:19, 11 November 2022 (UTC)


 * This revert? I should have left an edit summary, that was my only mistake there. There was nothing "rude" about undoing your edit. Since 2013, Boebert and her husband have written off several hundreds of thousands of dollars of losses associated with a string of failed or defunct restaurant businesses is WP:POV. Furthermore, you stuck it in front of this source, which doesn't support the content, making it an WP:UNSOURCED edit. I am fully within Wiki policy to revert it, though again, I should have left an edit sumamry. I did start Boebert's article, but I'm not the sole contributor of it, as your message seems to suggest. I don't know why you bring up my adminship here since I have done nothing to that page as an admin. I am only an editor in US politics. And it's funny that you say I'm giving the impression of being a 'shill' for Boebert since I'm usually accused of left-wing bias. Enjoy your night. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Here is the summary of  wikipedia's policy on your revert: 
 * "When reverting, be sure to indicate your reasons. This can be done in the edit summary and/or talk page. Anti-vandalism tools such as Twinkle, Huggle and rollback should not be used to undo good-faith changes in content disputes without an appropriate edit summary.
 * I reject your characterizations of my edit and I object to your "Posse" showing up to intimidate me with snotty comments. The comments about write-offs of losses are sourced (and I think you know this), even if I messed up the link to the source.
 * I'd ask you to rethink your answer. You had NO good excuse for this revert. R.Giskard R. (talk) 20:56, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I explained above why I reverted you, and you're not contesting that reasoning (other than to say you "reject [my] characterizations", which I stand by, with no other reasoning on how that isn't unsourced or POV), just harping on the one thing I already acknowledged I should have done differently. I will spend no more time or effort thinking about it. As for responses from others, I didn't ask for them nor can I control what others say or do. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Always amusing to see a user with 17 edits threaten to escalate their personal attacks. OH MY! SPECIFICO talk 23:48, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * What a shame, R. Giskard is a fun Isaac Asimov reference who was no right-winger. Andre🚐 00:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Andrevan LoL -- you get points for recognizing Asimov's creation, but it feels like you are both ridiculing my username and trying to associate me with a particular political viewpoint.
 * Why are you here? Are you defending Muboshgu's indefensible revert? R.Giskard R. (talk) 21:03, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ahhh...I should have known what was going on here @Andrevan. I'd have thought after that fiasco you'd know better than to stick your nose into this. R.Giskard R. (talk) 21:41, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Making insinuations against an editor based on something from four and a half years ago is definitely not a good look. And I really have no idea what you think that proves anyway. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:46, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * And if you're digging that up you should know that I oppose Boebert and everything she stands for. Andre🚐 21:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Andrevan So, we agree on Boebert, but that's not relevant. Do we disagree on whether administrators like @Muboshgu should be breaking the rules on reverting good-faith edits, and abusing admin tools like Twinkle to do it?
 * As a former admin yourself, you should be familiar with  Wikipedia:TWINKLEABUSE .
 *  "Never forget that one takes full responsibility for any action performed using Twinkle. One must understand Wikipedia policies and use this tool within these policies or risk having one's account blocked. Anti-vandalism tools, such as Twinkle, Huggle, and rollback, should not be used to undo changes that are constructive and made in good faith. 
 *  If a change is merely "unsatisfactory" in some way, undoing/reverting should not be the first response. Editors should either make a reasonable attempt to improve the change, or should simply leave it in place for future editors to improve. Undo/revert is appropriate in cases where the contribution is arguably "wrong" (consider moving it to the Talk page), or is unreasonably difficult to fix (e.g. incomprehensible, and the author is unresponsive), or is actually harmful to the article (such as vandalism). A plain language edit summary (not merely tags) should be used when reverting changes that appear to have been made in good faith because many contributors will not recognize minimalistic tags and will not learn what the problem was and are likely to repeat it." 
 * As far as 'insinuations' I'm just trying to figure out why the hell you came here to chime in with snotty and TOTALLY UNCONSTRUCTIVE comments about my username, while I'm here to resolve complaints about Muboshgu's clearly bad behavior.
 * You have a history on Wikipedia that informs your motives. If you would just answer the question "why are you here", I wouldn't need to try to figure you out.
 * WHY ARE YOU HERE????      R.Giskard R. (talk) 23:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I answered on your talk page. I'll leave you alone Andre🚐 23:56, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:TWINKLEABUSE says in part Anti-vandalism tools, such as Twinkle, Huggle, and rollback, should not be used to undo changes that are constructive and made in good faith. Your edit was not constructive and I did not suspect it was in good faith. Some of your further comments have shown me to be correct. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @SPECIFICO I'm actually a somewhat experienced editor (approaching 1,000 edits since around 2004), which you might have imagined if you had ever read this. I might be a bit rusty, but you should know it's not ok to disparage new editors just because they are new, though it does seem to fit your persona.
 * Apart from making snotty drive-by comments that could be interpreted as harassment, do you have any legitimate reason for being here? You have a bit of a reputation for making Wikipedia an unpleasant place, I notice.   R.Giskard R. (talk) 20:46, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Question
Is this serious enough of a BLP violation for redaction? Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)


 * , not if it's true. If it's not, it's borderline to me as potentially disruptive content. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your time. It appears that I typed the wrong thing into Google. I previously wasn't able to find any proof of this incident. Sorry to bug you. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem. It does appear to be standard vandalism to me, not knowing the subject. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

2023 CFP National Championship
Thanks for catching the cut-and-paste move, that didn't even cross my mind as I was doing it. I listed the requested move at WP:RMT since I'm unable to move it myself; would you be able to help me do so? Thanks, PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 18:45, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Striking now-irrelevant parts of my message. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 19:16, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem. Good that it's moved now. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:49, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection for Elon Musk
Relatively recently, the Musk article had extended confirmed protection. I was wondering if you could reinstate. Vandalism on the page has been increaingly common since the Twitter deal was completed last month, and Musk is creeping up to a Trump level of controversy. Just today, multiple editors used Twitter to source a claim that Musk lied about his UPenn education. This was public for several hours... I would really appreciate it. Thanks, ~  HAL  333  02:29, 18 November 2022 (UTC)


 * It doesn't seem bad enough to me at this point to need ECP, but if the education thing (I saw the thread on Twitter) is repeated on there I will. I've got it watchlisted. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:00, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, 'preciate it. ~  HAL  333  03:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Katie Hobbs
This user is a political hack and removes edits made to pages he doesn’t like even when they are verifiable and public knowledge Notabotnotalib (talk) 16:16, 18 November 2022 (UTC)


 * , Wikipedia has strong policies on civility and no personal attacks. Your username already suggests you're not here to contribute constructively. This is your one and only warning. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

commonscat
Hello, noticing your edit, I have been told (long time ago ) when the external link section is too short, the commonscat should be commonscatinline. Has this consensus been changed in the meantime? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Okay, as a drive-by editor I didn't know about it. The lack of the asterisk bothered me. I'll reset it. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for James Diossa
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Users are removing information from my articles repeatedly for no reason
Hi Muboshgu,

I have a user who keep removing information from the MLB Postseason articles that I added to the site. The info they keep removing were originally there when I created it originally. I’ve added it back in last night and he still removed it again anyway. Can you look into this and tell them to stop? The user’s name is GoodDay. Alex9234 (talk) 17:48, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Edit: Apparently someone also deleted content that I added to the postseason template above section as well, without reason as well. I would appreciate it if you could look into this for me please.


 * I just weighed in at WT:BASEBALL. If there's more to it than that, please be specific about content. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:17, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Did Alex9234 just claim ownership of those articles? GoodDay (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I suppose., remember that anything you put on Wikipedia is in the public domain and can be changed, especially if there's consensus to do so. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:33, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Erick Russell
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Candace Valenzuela


Hello, Muboshgu. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Candace Valenzuela".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 04:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, Muboshgu,
 * I didn't notice you were the page creator until after Twinkle had sent out this notice. Of course, you know what you can do! Liz Read! Talk! 04:37, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
 * , thanks! This time I will! – Muboshgu (talk) 05:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative algorithms for providing personalized task recommendations through SuggestBot. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

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) 23:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2022
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 28 November 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) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

BRD?
So, someone else adds something, two people have removed it, and those two of us are discussing it on the talk page, and -I- am the one you suggest to follow BRD? --Golbez (talk) 19:41, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * , I didn't template you. I see an edit with an aggressive edit summary, I respond. And you are taking something out of the article that was there before. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:43, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep, there for a whole 20 hours. Truly an integral part of the article experience. And sure, focus on that part of my statement. Yes, you see an aggressive edit summary, I'm rather proud of it, considering the person on the other side of it has been blocked multiple times for edit warring. I was trying to delete this section with the summary "actually nm this isn't helpful" but hey why not. You've been here a hell of a long time so I'm not going to lecture you how you should actually look at the history before getting involved. But I will cease interacting. --Golbez (talk) 19:45, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I did not look deeply into the edit history or to the talk page. I'm not advocating for it to stay. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:54, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * And I'll apologize for being a dick. It's my thing lately. Golbez (talk) 19:58, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * That's okay. None of us are perfect. We all have to remember to give each other grace. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Eddie891 · Euryalus · TheresNoTime
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Alex.muller · Excirial · RedWordSmith · Ron Ritzman · TheresNoTime · Stephen

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg TheresNoTime
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TheresNoTime

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TheresNoTime

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news
 * Consensus has been found in an RfC to automatically place RfAs on hold after one week.
 * The article creation at scale RfC has been closed.
 * An RfC on the banners for the December 2022 fundraising campaign has been closed.

Technical news
 * A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget.

Arbitration
 * Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 12, 2022 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
 * The proposed decision for the 2021-22 review of the discretionary sanctions system is open.
 * The arbitration case Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block has been closed.
 * The arbitration case Stephen has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 1 December 2022.
 * A motion has modified the procedures for contacting an admin facing Level 2 desysop.

Miscellaneous
 * Tech tip: A single IPv6 connection usually has access to a "subnet" of 18 quintillion IPs. Add  to the end of an IP in Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Kolton Wong
Stop editing my changes man. He’s been traded to the mariners. Why are you not letting me change it? Fermentedmilk (talk) 23:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)


 * , because your edit was WP:UNSOURCED and all of the sources I saw said "the deal is pending physical exams", i.e. not complete. Only just two minutes ago did the teams announce that it had been completed. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Craig Greenberg
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

When do we add Free Agent official teams?
Like what's the perfect source for Verlander's and Turner's deals? From the teams official twitter account or the MLB website? MichaelFansz (talk) 20:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)


 * , team's official Twitter. That's the soonest that we know with 100% certainty that the deal is completed and won't fall through at the last minute, due to a bad MRI result in the physical exam or whatnot. MLB.com articles I'm sure say that "sources confirm" or "according to multiple reports", which is inconclusive. (MLB.com has editorial independence from MLB.) – Muboshgu (talk) 20:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Players' Tribune requests
Hi Muboshgu, I had a couple of requests open (request 1, request 2) that editors who made changes or responded are no longer responding and don't seem to be active. Would you be willing to weigh in on these? I'd really appreciate it! M at MinuteMedia (talk) 22:13, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Cody did sign to The Cubs
What is you doing Cody signed to The Chicago Cubs Young Chove 15 (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2022 (UTC)


 * , show me a reliable source that says that. All the sources I've seen say "according to reports" or "will sign". "The club has not confirmed the move." – Muboshgu (talk) 01:54, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Taijuan Walker
@Muboshgu Taijuan Walker did signed with the Phillies is in MLB.com click here and read it. — https://www.mlb.com/news/taijuan-walker-phillies-deal 184.75.32.230 (talk) 01:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)


 * As I said at Talk:Taijuan Walker, the article says: Two sources told MLB.com on Tuesday night that the Phillies and right-hander Taijuan Walker agreed to a four-year, $72 million contract, pending a physical. Can you identify the parts of that sentence that demonstrate that the deal is not 100% done? – Muboshgu (talk) 04:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Stop trying to cover up the fact that Aaron Swartz was Assassinated.
Stop trying to cover up the fact that Aaron Swartz was Assassinated. 50.238.205.34 (talk) 23:47, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * What reliable sources do you have to back up that assertion? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 23:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Peace Dove Christmas
Happy Holidays. &#8213; Buster7  &#9742;   03:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Incivility on the Elon Musk pronoun talk page?
I know you closed the topic for edits, but someone just said "F*** off", and I really don't think that adds to the discussion. Is there anything you can do about that? Chucklet13 (talk) 16:41, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * , I warned them to not do that again. If they do, we can take further steps. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Carlos
When it becomes official, can you revert the edit and add sources please. Thank you Senjuto (talk) 02:54, 16 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Of course, I will or someone else if they beat me to it. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Lol! 😄 Senjuto (talk) 14:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Fauci
I’m not getting involved in the article but see the section on Covid in Gain-of-function research. Doug Weller talk 08:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't know all the ins and outs of that topic, but I imagine "there are assertions" isn't up to snuff for MEDRS. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
 * And I think that the article I mention denies what the IP was pushing. Senator Paul was not telling the truth. Doug Weller  talk 16:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Senator Paul wasn't telling the truth??? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME – Muboshgu (talk) 12:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Lol! Doug Weller  talk 13:06, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Have you seen this about Katie Porter?
It's had quite a bit of publicity. I think her article is on your watchlist. I don't edit it. Doug Weller talk 08:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm the article creator of Katie Porter. I'll pull out my whiteboard. – Muboshgu (talk) 12:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I hadn’t noticed that. Doug Weller  talk 13:07, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Adam Ottavino
Adam Ottaviano is back with the Mets today he re-sign 2 years contract. 69.94.56.76 (talk) 02:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I completed this sources. 69.94.56.76 (talk) 02:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * "Agreed to" is not "signed". Just ask Carlos Correa and the Giants. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Changing Wikipedia rules
What do we have to do to get the rules chance so that Breaking news like baseball player signings is not Vandalism but instead welcomed with open arms. The worst that can happen is that the signing does not in fact happen and then the player would be edited back to Free Agency. It is very frustrating when the whole world knows that a certain player has signed to a team and Wikipedia is the last to know awaiting on an official announcement? Is there a petition we can sign or a way to fight for change. There has to be a way for our voice to be heard. For Example: When Player X signs with team C, We should be able to add the team to their bio or at least state that the person has agreed to a contract and will play for team C. But to revert someones constructive edit that is a FACT and call it vandalism and put a block so the page can't be edited is kind of Power tripping and needs to be dealt with. Wikipedia needs some accountability and not just admins throwing their weight around because they can. Carlos Rodon has agreed to sign with the Yankees and thus will no longer be a free agent. I want a Wikipedia where He is listed as a Yankee ASAP and have it not be considered "vandalism" when in fact it is A World FACT that major sporting websites are reporting on. I understand that Wikipedia started in 2001 and the internet was not as big as it is now. This world is changing so fast now and things happen really quickly and I feel Wikipedia is still stuck in 2001 waiting for official reports when in fact there have been official reports for over a day now. I could site several sources and I will but I know that this will all be in vain because at the end of the day you have your agenda and will follow it to the T.   I still do not understand why Carlos Rodon is Listed as a Free Agent when in fact he is going to New York. If he was still a Free Agent then the Dodgers or Padres could still try to sign him when you and the whole world knows the chances of that happening are very slim. I would bet a years worth of Paychecks and this entire Wikipedia community that Carlos Rodon does in fact go to New York and Pitch. The whole world knows about it except for the Wikipedia Community witch is always behind. Good day sir. I hope I did not make you angry, I just want so see some chance and I feel this is the only way to get it done. I will try to get a petition together to further this movement. Maybe taking it a step further to create my own Wikipedia (legally) that would update this information the moment it happens and have it not be vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.182.107 (talk) 10:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)


 * This is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. Our job here is not to break news. Many reports are false (like "Arson Judge" to the Giants) and otherwise deals fall through. See WikiProject Sports/Handling sports transactions for a partial list. Rodon in particular has a nasty injury history and we cannot guarantee that he'll pass a physical. Maybe something is off. Also, in order to make the signing, and also the signings of Judge and Kahnle, they're going to have to remove players from their 40-man roster. So, the transactions are not final until they announce them, including what the corresponding transactions that free up 40-man roster space are. Wikipedia is based on what the reliable sources say, and even though many headlines say "Yankees sign Rodon", the article text will always note that the deal is pending a physical or based on unconfirmed reports, until it's made official. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I understand now what is going on. Sadly I will have to go a different route considering that Wikipedia does not want to keep up with the times I will have to create a petition or my own Wikipedia to compete and Have accurate up to date news on player signings. Imagine people being misled thinking their team has a chance to Sign Carlos Correa when in fact he is headed to New York. I know change doesn't happen overnight but hopefully in the future when The whole internet reads about a player signing Wikipedia will get with the program and do the same. I can understand that You have to wait for official News but there is nothing wrong in reporting that Plater X is in fact in agreement on a contract and is signing with team X. It has been several days Since Carlos Correa was off the free market and Headed to New York yet he is still listed as a Free Agent. IF that was the case the Dodgers or Angels could sign him and we all no well in fact that that is far from the truth. Thank you for your time sir in explaining to me how wikipedia works and what I now need to do in my efforts to change this old way of thinking and to get information on players signing on a team updated sooner than later when the Whole world knows what is going on except for Wikipedia. I believe Wikipedia is a good idea but I do believe it has flaws when something that is A fact is considered vandalism. That is just not acceptable. Good day sir. 72.192.182.107 (talk) 07:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Jarmusic272.192.182.107 (talk) 07:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not Reddit.
 * Have fun there. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:17, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Sadly I owe you an apology on Carlos Correa. He didn't pass physical with the Giants and is now going to sign with the Mets. You were right and I was wrong. Have a nice day. But oh how easily would it have been to chance SF to NY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.182.107 (talk) 08:21, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Do I get to say "I told you so"? I think I do. Apology accepted and keep this in mind the next time we have WP:BREAKING news. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:02, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Swanson revert was wrong
You shouldn't have done | this. The Correa situation was not the same; the team never announced his signing before the deal fell apart. By the time I made my edits, the Cubs had already announced Swanson's signing on Twitter. Check before you revert next time. SS451 (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * , that was a reversion of WP:UNSOURCED content in a WP:BLP, and so was correct. WP:ONUS is on you to present the source, not on me to check the Cubs twitter feed to see if they announced the deal yet or not. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Well then your edit summary obscured your reason, since you referenced Correa. Again, that had nothing to do with Swanson's situation. And I didn't add a link to the Twitter post because a better source (like an MLB article) was going to come along within the hour. SS451 (talk) 21:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * My edit summary referenced that deals fall through from time to time, which was relevant to me since I was not aware that Swanson's deal had become official. Because, again, the ONUS is on the editors seeking to make the change. I link to twitter sources all the time in these cases as they precede fully fleshed out articles. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:02, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Tyrese Proctor
Hello, Muboshgu. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tyrese Proctor, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy Holidays text.png Hello Muboshgu: Enjoy the holiday season&#32;and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:31, 25 December 2022 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:31, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative algorithms for providing personalized task recommendations through SuggestBot. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet. The study is scheduled to end on Monday, January 9, 2023. Please note this is a bit later than the initial estimate specified in the consent information sheet.

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) 23:38, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy Fifth Adminship Anniversary!
<div style="display: flex; align-items: center; padding: 1em; border: solid 3px #2B547E; background-color: #E6E6FA;"> Wishing Muboshgu a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman ( talk ) 17:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Censored revision of Ted Kaczynski article
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ted_Kaczynski&action=history shows a censored revision that you reverted. Why was the revision censored? Simple inaccurate information is usually reverted only. The lack of transparency here is disturbing 2603:8080:B400:5D2B:0:0:0:13B5 (talk) 03:20, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * WP:RD2: Serious BLP violations. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

FYI
https://jewishstandard.timesofisrael.com/lighting-15-candles-together/ 2603:7000:2143:8500:A00D:1A5A:E4FF:4798 (talk) 22:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * A photo op does not make a politician an "anti-racist activist". – Muboshgu (talk) 22:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Jack Smith (lawyer)
-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
<div style="border:3.5px solid #FFD700; background-color:#FFFAE0; padding:0.1em 0.2em; height:auto; border-radius:1em; box-shadow:0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">



 Muboshgu , Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)


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

CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Muboshgu!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

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

Abishe (talk) 02:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

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

Abishe (talk) 02:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 January 2023
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2023 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. 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 ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else 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. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Muboshgu!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

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

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 20:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

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

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 20:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Walters
You're not correct. You are also overdoing it. There is no reason for some of your edits.Infactinteresting (talk) 05:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)


 * "Not correct" about what? And "overdoing" what? I'm editing the page by cutting out poor and excessive language and adding sources so that it can be featured on the main page. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No one is telling you that you can't improve articles. I am finding errors that you are making. There's no reason to edit that one article this much.Infactinteresting (talk) 05:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * There are many eyes on this article. If you see any other typos or errors, point them out or fix them. Don't police my editing unless you see some policy problems. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Stop trying to "make" this a featured article. You're free to submit it as it is. You also could review it, etc. Use the talk page; you are no authority on any of these matters. I will get you restricted from editing if you persist.Infactinteresting (talk) 05:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, do you see here how you introduced typos and otherwise just reverted my edits because you wanted to? Your behavior is unacceptable. Kindly stay off my talk page and don't WP:HOUND my edits. – Muboshgu (talk) 06:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I will explain why that sentence does not belong.Infactinteresting (talk) 21:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

NPOV violation
Please refrain from calling Nicholas Fuentes a “loathsome person” on the article’s talk page. 2600:1005:B181:797D:98F5:A316:9A0D:CF62 (talk) 23:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Talk pages generally allow for more flexibility than the actual article page itself, while not unlimited in scope. The talk page does allow for some freedom of expression, within reasonable limits (no profanity etc.). TY — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 23:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg ComplexRational · Extraordinary Writ
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Stephen
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Andrew Yong · Dbenbenn · DESiegel · GlassCobra · Joe Decker · Nancy · Pathoschild · StuffOfInterest · William Pietri · Wwwwolf · Xdamr

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



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Moneytrees


 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Ivanvector · SilkTork

Oversighter changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg GeneralNotability · Moneytrees
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Guerillero · SilkTork

Guideline and policy news
 * Speedy deletion criterion A5 (transwikied articles) has been repealed following an unopposed proposal.

Arbitration
 * Following the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , , , ,.
 * The 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review has concluded with many changes to the discretionary sanctions procedure including a change of the name to "contentious topics". The changes are being implemented over the coming month.
 * The arbitration case Stephen has been closed.

Miscellaneous
 * Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
 * Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for James B. Jones
BorgQueen (talk) 12:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Randy Wilkins
Hello, Muboshgu. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Randy Wilkins, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Marie Newman page consensus process
Hello Muboshgu,

It looks like you are open to consensus model to update the Marie Newman page. How does one initiate the model? How might I participate? I am happy to show documentation, receipts, etc.

Please advise how to begin the process?

thank you,

System Writer System Writer (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


 * , if you want to form or change a consensus about the page, post a message on the article's talk page about what you want to see happen. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:41, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

?
I don’t know how to add a reference. I am seeing tweets on Twitter from trusted pages and adding them. Don’t see why you care so much. 2601:140:9480:E340:DDED:4B7E:2AA4:4523 (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Because that's how Wikipedia works, with references to reliable sources. Please read WP:Citing sources for a primer on why and how to do it. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:24, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * And keep in mind that tweets are not the best sources. Trusted journalists were tweeting that Carlos Correa was signing with the Giants. Then they tweeted that Correa was signing with the Mets. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Elie Honig
Hello! Your submission of Elie Honig at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! (Apologies for the delay in sending this.) Bridget (talk) 13:46, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Got a spare minute? Need a bit of help
Hi! I decided to seek guidance from you because you're a member of WP:PSYCH and creator of biographies. I want to say the right thing to the COI editor regarding his autobiographical draft (which I moved there from his userpage instead of tagging for U5). He's got an article on the itwiki and ruwiki. The prose is kind of okay, and there's a notable award and some interesting sources, but I'm not sure if it would be more helpful to tell him to give up on the idea. I want to be sensitive to the man. Please help if you think you can. —Alalch E. 17:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)


 * If that's all the referencing there is, he doesn't look notable to me. I'd suggest at a minimum that his draft has to go through WP:AFC. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

JoeBidenReal1942
His new username looks alright. You OK with an unblock? Daniel Case (talk) 07:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, I had no concerns but the username. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2023
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:14, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Elie Honig
BorgQueen (talk) 12:03, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for 2023 Speaker of the United States House of Representatives election
-- RoySmith (talk) 12:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)