User talk:Muboshgu/Archive 55

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

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:29, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Identifying vandalism
Please refrain from abusing warning templates, as you did to User talk:2409:40F2:102E:1FE5:CD:3C3C:AEF7:F4F6. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please note that falsely accusing other editors of vandalism is uncivil and a sign of tendentious editing. Thank you. Politrukki (talk) 12:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * A warning for warning a an IP 2 months ago after they added "Soros backed" to the lead of a BLP? *Chef's kiss* ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Was it really two months ago? I did not check the date. What was the deadline? Politrukki (talk) 13:05, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * , this is vandalism. Perhaps you should read about the anti-semitism behind the term "Soros-backed", about how WP:FOXNEWS is unreliable for American politics, or the essay Don't template the regulars. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:02, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * A quick reply to note that I didn't receive your ping because I have disabled mention notifications. I'm subscribed to this discussion, but didn't receive a notification like I should have. I'm writing a longer response, and I'm hoping I'll get back to this soon, but pretty much everything in you reply is misleading or false. Politrukki (talk) 11:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * "Misleading or false"? How you can think somebody putting "Soros-backed" even before the nationality in the introductory sentence is not vandalism is beyond me. I think you should save yourself the time and focus on something else. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * We can't expect non-regular users – who probably don't even know what a "intoductory sentence" is – to be perfect. Vandalism always needs to be deliberate. If you claim that something is vandalism, you should be able justify your decision. In most cases vandalism falls into a category listed in the vandalism policy. If the so-called vandalism can be cured by moving the content to the body and possibly finding better sources for the claim, the content obviously wasn't vandalism. (The article already mentions that Gardner is "Soros-backed", though not with those specific words.)
 * This was just one mistake that could have been easily dismissed if you had admitted an error. The bigger concern is that you have claimed that you "do not administrate within post 1932 US politics due to my own personal biases, save for cases of obvious vandalism, restricting myself to it serving as an editor in that area". If you are unable to make a distinction between obvious vandalism and disruptive editing (including POV edits), should you use your tools in the AP2 area at all? If you need more examples of poor judgment using the tools in the area and/or issuing warnings, I may have a couple of examples. Politrukki (talk) 16:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This was clearly and obviously vandalism. Take a look at the other edits made by the IP at the same time. random pronoun additions, BBC, DW News, NPR, and CBC take advantage of both domestic and foreign media due to the censorship under regimes in their native countries and the openness of democratic nations to which they broadcast. Jesus Christ. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of edits that happened after the Gardner edit. There is no evidence the first edit was obvious vandalism at the time. Later edits are disruptive, but they are disruptive for different reasons than the Gardner edit. In some cases we can make reasonable assumptions about a motive for an edit. For example, if a user is persistently adding blatantly false information into articles, we don't have to assume their early edit(s) that added false information unintentionally misleading. That is not the case here. The current version of Gardner includes this: Gardner's campaign accepted $190,750.73 from 'Super PACs' (Political Action Committees) funded in part by billionaire George Soros.I have no idea who added that content, but it wouldn't be reasonable to assess whether that content constitutes vandalism by looking at that editor's contribution history.Here's another example from 2020: Muboshgu reverts an editor whose first, second, and fourth edits were to the Logan Act article. Then gives the user a level 2 vandalism warning. About two months later another user apparently invoked that warning in completely unrelated matter (they were trying to ping Muboshgu, but botched the ping). In 2022 Muboshgu issued a level 1 vandalism warning and when asked to elaborate, failed to communicate. Politrukki (talk) 20:50, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * This is not the first time I have asked you review NOTVAND policy. Does this discussion refresh your memory? You restored a BLP violation and then protected the problematic version. Note that even though MMfA mispresented Pool's position, it didn't call Pool a "conspiracy theorist". Was your edit vandalism? No, because even though you were careless, you weren't intentionally trying to cause harm to Wikipedia. Some BLP violations are vandalism, others are not.With regards to Soros, perhaps you did not read the editorial before citing it? Beauchamp does not argue that calling someone "Soros-backed" is automatically anti-semitic, if that is what you are claiming. If my assumption is wrong, please educate me, but sometimes you don't summarise sources faithfully (see also our past discussion). Many prominent Jewish commentators have said Soros is not above criticism. For example Alan Dershowitz writes in an op-ed that "Not only is Soros not a supporter [of Jewish community and Zionism], he is an opponent. He is 'Jewish' only on his parents' side and he boasts of the fact that his mother was an antisemite." Soros has quite proudly and openly admitted funding so-called reform prosecutors. According to the Pulitzer Prize winning St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Gardner has said (in 2016), "that she has no regrets about assistance from the super PAC. She said the latest donation is paying for the TV and online ad, and that the committee's mission aligns with her platform to reform the criminal justice system and restore trust in the community." The Gardner bio already mentions Soros a couple of times. In sum, it does not appear constructive to imply that all criticism of Soros is antisemitism.The Gardner edit was obvious "NPOV contravention", so in this case the best course of action would have been writing a custom message and next best option would have been using uw-npov1.With regards to Fox News, I think you mean WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS. Either way, the summary at RSP is based on this RFC. I have not read that discussion, but you appear to misrepresent the timeline; the discussion was initiated 21 April – well after your template message.Finally, opinions about user warnings vary. Have your read Template the regulars and Don't template anyone? I didn't template you. I don't leave messages that say something like "Welcome to Wikipedia" to regular users, because that may appear condescending, but if I do, you can safely assume it was a mistake. (I'm changing the subsection heading to something that better describes this discussion.) Politrukki (talk) 16:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Do I remember a brief revert and article protection at Tim Pool from almost four years ago? No. Looking at the edit history, I restored the preexisting version of the article as it was being vandalized and then protected it. Previous edits in the history show content removal vandalism by IPs. In hindsight I agree that I should not have protected the page after restoring the previous version. I have taken more care to separate editing from admin actions since then.
 * As far as that edit on Kimberly Gardner goes, I see it as vandalism in an attempt to cause harm to Wikipedia by spreading an anti-Semetic conspiracy theory. I didn't say "all criticism" of Soros is anti-Semetic, but I certainly believe that "when Soros is used as a symbol for Jewish control, wealth, and power, the criticism may be an updated version of traditional antisemitic tropes (see conspiracy theory, control, Jewish figures, cabal, globalist)." Of, if you prefer, "Criticizing George Soros is not inherently anti-Semitic. But casting him as an avatar of evil is." "NPOV contravention" implies a good faith edit and I do not see good faith in that. It was not an "NPOV contravention", it was a deliberate attempt to undermine our goals in presenting a neutral summary of the subject.
 * Finally, I guess you didn't technically "template" me, you just copied the language of Uw-tempabuse2 verbatim and pasted it here. That's not functionally different from substituting the template. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. Thanks for at least acknowledging making an error back then, but you're still falsely claiming you were reverting vandalism. How can you claim that adding mostly true information (it would be more accurate to say Soros supported a PAC that funded Gardner's campaign) that has POV issues is vandalism, but at the same time maintain (in the case of Pool) that adding poorly sourced content that is also blatantly false is not vandalism? To clarify, in the Pool case there were IPs on both sides of the dispute, but in this case you only consider removal as vandalism.


 * It's not under dispute whether making allegations about Soros can be viewed as anti-Semitic depending on the context, but you have provided no evidence why the specific content is promoting a conspiracy theory. To use an analogy, Russiagate – an ambiguous term but I refer to the conspiracy theory that Trump colluded with Russia in the 2016 U.S. presidential election (see my posts at Talk:Russiagate, but don't believe others like ScottishFinnishRadish) – is a conspiracy theory that collapsed long ago. POV pushing is POV pushing, but there are still plenty of legitimate ways to cover Trump's Russia connections in Wikipedia without promoting the faulty Russiagate narrative.


 * Let's compare the Gardner situation to Stephen Miller: you promoted a left-wing theory that Stephen Miller, who is Jewish, is white nationalist and implicated they should be described as such in Wikipedia's voice in the opening sentence of Miller's bio. That is blatant POV pushing. You wasted a lot of the community's time. First you filibustered this discussion even though you couldn't support your position with any direct evidence, and forced an RFC that resulted in overwhelming support against your position. I'll never understand how an edit like yours can be done in good faith, but I would tend to assume you were righting great wrongs rather than thinking that maybe it would be a good idea to vandalise Wikipedia.


 * I appreciate that you have taken "care to separate editing from admin actions since then", but maybe you've still got a long way to go? A couple of examples (to be clear, I'm not alleging that you were right or wrong in the content dispute, which is a separate issue):


 * Rollback an IP
 * Revert IP, assuming bad faith
 * Semi-protecting the article


 * At Ben Sasse you were edit-warring and blocked the IP who was your opponent. You made a total of four reverts within a 24-hour period:
 * 01:06, 7 October 2022
 * 01:48, 7 October 2022
 * 01:54, 7 October 2022
 * 19:47, 7 October 2022


 * Both articles clearly fall under AP and in both cases you acted as INVOLVED. Not a great look.


 * Finally, about "templating". I copied some text from Uw-tempabuse2 and wrote some text myself. There's a substantial difference. I mentioned this before, but you didn't comment that: you templated a regular user with a level 4 vandalism warning. And what was that "vandalism"? Editing an article talk page discussion after your close. Why would anyone even expect you to take an issue with templating or "templating" you if you template regulars? Politrukki (talk) 22:45, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * We all have room for improvement in all ways and at all times. I made too many reverts on Sasse's page on October 7 and shouldn't have blocked that IP as they were acting in good faith. I remember it, but don't remember why I acted that way. I will have to say that I did the wrong thing. The Eric Adams page was bad faith, disruptive editing, the IPv6 address I reverted there was one in a string of them. I should've requested protection at RfPP instead of protecting it myself though.
 * But yes, there are Jewish white nationalists, see Category:Jewish white nationalists. The media had lots of discussion of the subject of Stephen Miller and his white supremacy. In 2019, I was making a good faith effort to push that in the article, again, based on reliable sources. You are assuming bad faith on my part based on one article diff and one talk page section. An RfC happened and I accepted the result. I'm glad about that result in hindsight and disagree with my past point of view. Consider that I have grown since 2019.
 * The two current mentions of Soros on Kimberly Gardner's page are an appropriate way to indicate that Soros "backed" her. Putting "Soros-backed" in front of her nationality and reason for being notable is vandalism as a clear bad faith attempt to skew the article to a negative POV in the opening line. It would be vandalism even if Soros wasn't Jewish. If I used a left-wing rag to call a Republican politician "Koch-backed" before their nationality, that would be vandalism too. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Domingo Germán's perfect game
Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I love your work on baseball
Do you think the Angels are having a good season right now? 184.182.210.100 (talk) 20:14, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your sentiment. But, I'm not here to chat. I'm only open to discuss improving articles or other project-related issues. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Re Sonia Sotomayor
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 166.199.114.53 (talk) 23:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

About the user Roshanpawar369
Hey @Muboshgu, just about the user Roshanpawar369, which you permanently blocked, he is now also on the Simple English Wikipedia, since 07:28, 17 July 2023 (UTC). Can you please also block him on that wiki, as I have not made any contributions to that wiki? Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 05:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I forgot to mention that I reverted his edits on the 10 News First article, and can you please revert his only edit on the Simple English Wikipedia, @Muboshgu? Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 05:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Muboshgu, I realised you only have 3 edits on the Simple English version of Wikipedia, so I recommend that you ask an administrator on that wiki to block his account. Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 06:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * , I am not an admin on the Simple English Wiki, but I reported them for vandalism there. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Muboshgu, I knew you were reporting him for vandalism, per my earlier comments. Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 22:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Edit conflict
Sorry, I edit conflicted with you on the Tulsi Gabbard protection. I restored your original 6 month protection.-- Ponyo bons mots 21:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)


 * , two great minds realized it needed protection at the same time, just had different thoughts on for how long. I chose 6 months because it had just ended a 3 month protection a few days ago. LTA was a little slow in coming back this time. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I was going to do 6 months, but then thought I'd stick with 3 and let the pending changes kick back in. It was a coin toss really. That's an article that probably won't see full unprotection for quite some time. Regardless, it gave me a chance to drop by and say hi, so "Hi" :) -- Ponyo bons mots 21:53, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * , hi yourself! Stop by again soon. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Gene Locklear
—Kusma (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

amy
amy sock 71.223.75.14 (talk) 10:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Request
Can you please move Matt Flynn (American football player) to Matt Flynn (American football)? Yankees10 23:19, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Done. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you think that move by BoxxyBoy was proper, without any sort of discussion at all, it seems? Looking at the |Matt_Flynn_(Australian_footballer)|Matt_Flynn_(politician)|Matt_Flynn_(musician) pageviews, it seems the football player gets three times the amount of views as everyone else with that name. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * , I imagine it was good faith. That doesn't mean that it was correct. If you think the QB is WP:PRIMARY, I'd open a move discussion noting the previous status quo, rather than move warring. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:51, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Paul LePage
Hi, is there an SPI for the socks? Thanks, Knitsey (talk) 15:40, 28 July 2023 (UTC)


 * , I believe so, but I forget what the sockmaster account is. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will have a look for it. Many thanks Knitsey (talk) 15:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * , do you remember what account is the sockmaster for this particular LTA? – Muboshgu (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah I found it, it's , Sockpuppet investigations/TylerKutschbach. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Brilliant, I will add it to my list so it's easy to reference at AIV. Thank you! Knitsey (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Protecting those three pages might have been a bit barn door after horse, but I’ll CU the accounts today for sleepers. Courcelles (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Got one, User:Throne Master 9. Courcelles (talk) 16:00, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Nice. Tyler doesn't seem to stop until they get blocked a bunch and their targets get protected, so unfortunately it has been necessary to semiprotect a ton of U.S. politics pages indefinitely. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

About the user GregPage899
Hey @Muboshgu, just about the user GregPage899, I reverted their edits to the Sunrise (Australian TV program) article, with this revision. (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sunrise_(Australian_TV_program)&diff=prev&oldid=1167518887 ) Can you please block them and review their other edits, @Muboshgu? I will also edit The Morning Show (TV program) article, to revert their edits on that article, and to add the program’s new logo to the logo history section of that article. Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 07:29, 28 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Update: I have also reverted their other edits as well, so all you have to do now is to block them. Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 07:40, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * , I see that this user made four edits. I see that you reverted them. What I don't see is any attempt by you to use talk pages to discuss your disagreement with this user, only your edits to my talk page asking me to block them. I also don't see their edits as being bad faith. We don't block editors for making edits we don't agree with. I see this as an opportunity for you to welcome this new user and try to explain to them why you don't agree with their edits. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:15, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have welcomed them with the template, @Muboshgu. Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 21:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Max Scherzer
ESPN is reporting that Texas has acquired Scherzer. https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/38096440/mets-agree-deal-scherzer-rangers-pending-ace-approval — Preceding unsigned comment added by TyVulpintaur (talk • contribs)
 * , they were reporting that it would happen, not that it had happened. See the difference? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:09, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

They were reporting that Scherzer had accepted the trade, as he had a no-trade clause in his contract. That's the thing. TyVulpintaur (talk) 16:25, 30 July 2023 (UTC)


 * , no, that's one thing. The other thing was the major amount of money in the transaction, which the commissioner's office had to approve before the deal went through. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:31, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

600 home run club
Hi Muboshgu, do you remember Articles for deletion/600 home run club (2nd nomination)? Looks like the article got re-created again, what should we do about this? 2601:204:C901:B740:607B:6853:8317:25DB (talk) 14:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)


 * That's a good question, especially considering that AfD was 12 years ago. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Scherzer
Can you protect Max Scherzer's page as IP's are keeping adding the Rangers to his infobox for teams played even though he hasn't as of yet. It's becoming disruptive. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)


 * It does not appear to me to merit protection. Fighting over whether or not to include a team in his infobox strikes me as a lame edit war. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 August 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I did not use YouTube as a source I have reverted the article and I will lodge a complaint if you continue
I did not use YouTube as a source, the source is ABC News Cleveland, a link to a televised news piece, published by ABC News Cleveland. If you continue to vandalize the Flint page, I am going to request sanctions on you. Valid Identification (talk) 03:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)


 * , you added a YouTube link. See WP:YOUTUBE. ABC News Cleveland is https://www.news5cleveland.com/. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The YouTube account is ABC News Cleveland's YouTube account and the same article is mirrored by four news station and three national media outlets. Flint is a controversial subject matter and it's very likely that you are being paid to gate keep the article to twist the narrative. I am from Flint.  I was one of the victims of the crisis and all through this article is incorrect information, like the repeated references to Jordan Chariton but you're not reverting his sources which are his own media outlet that he owns, only the name Matthew Berdyck, who is literally the guy who exposed Flint. Valid Identification (talk) 03:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * All of this seems like good reason to be discussing these issues on the talk page and finding better quality sources than YouTube. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * This is the way ABC News releases some content. You're aware of this. The YouTube account belongs to ABC News, and there are 5 mirrored national news articles that were based on that video.  But i do not believe this is about what you're claiming.  As a resident of Flint, I think you're being paid to gate keep the article, which is a problem in our very corrupt city. Valid Identification (talk) 03:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * THIS USER IS BEING PAID TO VANDALIZE THE FLINT WATER CRISIS ARTICLE Valid Identification (talk) 03:56, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * You have been reported for failing to notify me that you reported me and because I was not aware of edit warring policies. I believe that you are gate keeping the article and may have bias, which is the only reason you'd exclude ABC News and 5 other media outlets. Valid Identification (talk) 03:50, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I notified you. I think you know policies around here too well to be unaware of what you're doing. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * You did not notify me. This is my first day on Wikipedia and you're clearly being PAID TO VANDALIZE THE FLINT PAGE AND YOU'RE A PATHOLOGICAL LIAR Valid Identification (talk) 03:55, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Attack on editors
See the history of User talk:Opok2021 for a nasty comment by a different editor that I deleted. It contains a very unreliable source. An editor who thinks that way lacks CIR to be here. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 21:43, 4 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Not great. NOTHERE. Indeff'd. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:52, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Your edit
Might help if you told what constructive edit I did that you are erroniously calling vandilization.96.81.123.61 (talk)  — Preceding undated comment added 16:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)


 * All of your edits are vandalism. Stop. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

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

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

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



Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Firefangledfeathers
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg AlisonW · Amberrock · Closedmouth · Scottywong

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Novem Linguae

Technical news
 * The tag filter on Special:NewPages and revision history pages can now be inverted. This allows hiding edits made by automated tools.
 * Special:BlockedExternalDomains is a new tool that allows easier blocking of plain domains (and their subdomains). This is more easily searchable and is faster for the software to use than the existing MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. It does not support regex (for complex cases), URL path-matching, or the MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist.

Arbitration
 * The arbitration cases named Scottywong and AlisonW closed 10 July and 16 July respectively.
 * The SmallCat dispute arbitration case is in the workshop phase.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of James Farris (baseball) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article James Farris (baseball) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/James Farris (baseball) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Joeykai (talk) 09:21, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Freddie O'Connell
Hello, Muboshgu, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Edward-Woodrow, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Freddie O'Connell, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Freddie O'Connell.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

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

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

Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 12:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry, you created the original redirect, but Page Curation stormed ahead and notified you instead of the user who actually wrote the article. Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 12:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Lou Whitaker birthplace
Per Template:infobox_person: Place of birth: city, administrative region, country. Brooklyn is not a city.

Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE: ...keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article (an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored, with exceptions noted below). The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. The borough of New York City that Whitaker was born in is stated in the body of the article.

For what it's worth, there has been a lot of spirited discussion about this over the years—I certainly don't agree with breaking the formula by omitting the state—but "New York City, U.S." has won the day. Rift (talk) 19:14, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Brooklyn is bigger than most cities, and I do not believe that listing NYC, which is an MOS:OVERLINK example, has "won the day". – Muboshgu (talk) 19:35, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Regardless of it size, Brooklyn is not a city. Rift (talk) 21:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * That should be a sign that sticking to "City, State" in all cases doesn't make sense. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * (Talk page stalker) For what it's worth, referencing Template:infobox_person: Place of birth: city, administrative region, country.: Brooklyn may not be a city, but as stated, a borough. Administrative region redirects to Administrative division, wherein borough is given as an example. Echoedmyron (talk) 22:29, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed. NYC's system of boroughs is pretty unique. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Muboshgu. Thank you for your work on Tony Locey. User:Lightburst, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Lightburst (talk) 18:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

You may find this interesting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Valjean/Why_Crossfire_Hurricane%3F

Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 03:07, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Kody Funderburk
Can you move Draft:Kody Funderburk to just Kody Funderburk. I don't know why that user created a bunch of random AAA player re-directs. Yankees10 23:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * That is odd. Can do. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 August 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Pppery · Theleekycauldron
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Dwheeler · G.A.S · Royalbroil · Ssd



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Bradv

Oversighter changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Bradv

Guideline and policy news
 * Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
 * A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news
 * Special:Contributions now shows the user's local edit count and the account's creation date.

Arbitration
 * The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous
 * Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

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

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:31, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Revising
Hello I have given criticism and feedback to your Articles about the Trump Racial Views page so can you look over it please Greggrag (talk) 20:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Could you take a look
Chaminade College Preparatory School (California) sexual abuse allegations. New user added the name Mr Clark (no context). One of the accused is referenced and has the first name Kumar. I reverted but something doesn't sit right? Or...maybe I'm thinking Zebras instead of horses. Knitsey (talk) 19:10, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't see the name Kumar in that article. Is it in a reference? Probably no big deal at this point but it could become one if they keep editing. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:17, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I should have said, ref 17 . It's on my watch list now. I'm probably 2+2=5. Knitsey (talk) 20:34, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Madam Westheimer
Hello sir or madam;

I have some points which I would like to raise with regards to Dr. westheimer.

You said in relation to my edit that, as I understood as custom, Wikipedia relates to nationality rather than ethnicity.

I think it’s Important to note that the meaning of nationality is not only political one (this is to say:citizenship), but also people-ethnic group.

Further more:the fact that a person has citizenship does not necessarily mean that he is part of the ethnic group (if any) which is native to or originally from the land of the country.

Now, individually to Dr. Westheimer:

When you are a saying "German-American", as the term on her article links, you mean:people who have origin in Germany.

This is however not the case of her.

She is part of the Jewish people, which is unquestionably a people. She also identified herself as Zionist:key point of Zionism is that the Jewish people and nation are separate from others, so we can also see the she herself identifies as part of the Jewish nation.

Respectfully submitted,

Amit B. עמית לונן (talk) 11:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Please read MOS:ETHNICITY. Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, so I have two questions:
 * 1.isn’t it wrong to use the word "German" rather then "German national" etc?? The word "German" relates to a member of the german nation and the ethnic group.
 * 2.Should we also add that she is Israeli??
 * Sincerely. עמית לונן (talk) 05:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The article says that her citizenship was German and American. That's probably why it says it the way that it does. If you think Israeli should be there too, that's a topic best to discuss as a community on the talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:04, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. I think she is also Israeli because,as the article says,she was on service until 1949-which is after the establishment of the state. עמית לונן (talk) 17:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Yu Darvish unprotection?
I was wondering on your opinion since you were the protecting admin, if Yu Darvish should be unprotected, since there's not really anything that's been added unsourced for a while. Thanks, Kline &#124; yes? 15:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC)


 * It's worth a shot. I've unprotected the page and will reprotect it if it appears necessary to do so. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:43, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks for considering. Kline &#124; yes? 16:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 September 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Kelly Brough
Hello, Muboshgu. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kelly Brough, 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) 00:01, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Review and Potential Unprotection of Mizanur Rahman Azhari Article
Hello! You've protected the article on Mizanur Rahman Azhari indefinitely. I have created a draft on his biography in my user namespace, specifically at User:ImranAvenger/Mizanur Rahman Azhari. The protected article currently does not seem to meet the notability criteria. I kindly request you to review the article in my user namespace, User:ImranAvenger/Mizanur Rahman Azhari, and assess whether it aligns with the notability guidelines. I want to mention that I translated the content from the Bengali Wikipedia. If, after your review, it is found to adhere to the guidelines, I request that you unprotect the article and move User:ImranAvenger/Mizanur Rahman Azhari from my user namespace to the main namespace. ImranAvenger (talk) 14:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Netball
Netball has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

"your account is being used only for vandalism on Yankee Stadium"
Asking for a friend: is that bad? Drmies (talk) 22:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Nobody messes with my Yankees. (Except themselves.) – Muboshgu (talk) 22:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Poo Dork Stankies. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Reported for vandalism and WP:NOTHERE behavior. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I was going to block K-stick, but he brought Canadian candy bars so that's OK. And Alabama won. Drmies (talk) 00:27, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Robert Lemke
I ran into this. In the meantime I blocked the creator for a username violation--that's not why I'm here. I thought this was another one of the January 6 fools, but there's a bit more to it, as I saw through Google. What do you think? This guy is probably notable enough, I think, and since you do US politics and baseball I figured that if anyone knew what do to with it it would be you. As far as I'm concerned it's not a "negative" BLP, and for 1E he's just way too well-covered. (If you have an opinion about the name and the content, feel free to act on it.) Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Probably some LTA having fun. But, notable? I don't see anything but a little coverage of the arrest. Am I missing something? – Muboshgu (talk) 03:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for editing my edit because I didn't think of that Wwe edge (talk) 06:35, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Israel Baseball
Good afternoon, I spent hours on this....and i just complained by hand all states from 2007 to now and you deleted my work. I dont know how to cite it and i was just doing it because i wanted everyone to know the player records. Please undue this, i can give you the links of where i got all these states. 50.210.182.66 (talk) 19:50, 27 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Compiled* Stats* 50.210.182.66 (talk) 19:50, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a statistics site. I am sorry you put that much time on it, but this is not what Wikipedia is for. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:52, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * On soccer pages they show Most Caps, Most Goals...its the same thing? But for Baseball. 50.210.182.66 (talk) 19:55, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I can show you sources and you can help me post them. 50.210.182.66 (talk) 19:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Carson Spiers
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

CfD nomination at
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at  on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkl talk  09:34, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Hey man im josh
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Alex Bakharev · CorbieVreccan · Cyphoidbomb · Davodd · Hog Farm · JamesR · KnightLago · Mark Ironie · Nosebagbear (deceased) · Rschen7754 · Tamzin · TonyBallioni



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg DatGuy
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Ferret · RickinBaltimore
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TonyBallioni · Worm That Turned

Oversighter changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg RickinBaltimore
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TonyBallioni · Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news
 * Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API.

Arbitration
 * Remedy 9 ("MarioProtIV topic ban") of the WikiProject Tropical Cyclones case has been rescinded.

Miscellaneous
 * The 2023 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of one new CheckUser.
 * Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections opens on 2 October and closes on 8 October.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Lindell
"Use discount code PROOF for an extra 75% off our regular price." SPECIFICO talk 00:34, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Dr Jaan Nissar Lone
Hi Muboshgu. Since you indefinitely salted Jaan Nissar Lone, I am leaving this note to let you know that Dr Jaan Nissar Lone has been created by a new user. There is also a request at Requested moves/Technical requests (permalink) to move it to the salted title. SilverLocust 💬 07:59, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Creation protected page (Admin only creation)
Hi Muboshgu, in 2019 you protected Jaan Nissar Lone from creation. This morning I was on New Page Patrol and looked at article Dr Jaan Nissar Lone and was unable to move the page to remove honorifics from the page title - as the article was admin create protected I didn't review the contents or notability of the article and added a PROD (it wasn't in my opinion meeting any CSD criteria). See also talk page of article creator. Could you please take a look and see if it is appropriate to move/create this article. Best wishes Josey Wales Parley 12:03, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Muboshgu and User:Joseywales1961, please see also WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Farooqahmadbhat, thanks. Wikishovel (talk) 14:03, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Seems the new page may be deleted, so I will not interfere at this time. But maybe the "Dr" title will need to be salted as well. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Cenk
What's the issue with your attempt at censorship, rather than discussion? Not only is that small section reliably sourced, but you also had less than 3 minutes to even look into it or see the video before reverting - far too little to evaluate the information or see that it was significant enough to be mentioned by CNN as a notable contraversy. I'll be attempting an RFC on this basis, since i think you're showing an obvious bias on the topic.

Thanks ツ Jenova   20  (email) 17:23, 15 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I replied to you on the article's talk page. This is not "censorship" and starting an RfC is jumping the gun. See WP:RFCBEFORE. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Scientelensia
Hi,

Just to let you know that I have updated my statement on the arbitration board. Moreover, sorry if this offends you, but I believe you are wrong in reverting my edit: check the source I used and my statement for more. Scientelensia (talk) 13:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Kelly Brough


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

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. When 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! 23:04, 17 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello, Muboshgu,
 * Of course, if you want to return to working on this draft, you can restore it. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Well she lost her election, so I don't expect that I will. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:31, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

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

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Non-binding congressional resolution
What makes you think it is appropriate to delete what a Congressman voted on a resolution that is non-binding? It is as relevant as a statement by them on an issue which isn't even a vote. And we reflect such resolution votes all over the project. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:8014:CEBE:F68A:4374 (talk) 04:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)


 * WP:UNSOURCED WP:UNDUE WP:BLP. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:22, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I can provide a source, and restore. But BLPs, as perhaps you are or are not aware, across the project refer to non-binding resolutions. Just as they refer to statements by office holders as to their positions - even if the statement is not ensconced in a binding resolution. Nothing at all in wp:undue or wp:blp contravenes that. --2603:7000:2101:AA00:ACC5:90EF:2806:5A6A (talk) 21:31, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!
BangJan1999 18:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 November newsletter
The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-


 * BeanieFan11 with 2582 points
 * Thebiguglyalien with 1615 points
 * Epicgenius with 1518 points
 * MyCatIsAChonk with 1012 points
 * BennyOnTheLoose with 974 points
 * AirshipJungleman29 with 673 points
 * Sammi Brie with 520 points
 * Unlimitedlead with 5 points

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.


 * Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
 * MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
 * MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
 * BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
 * Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
 * LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
 * MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
 * Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
 * 🇺🇦 Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Enough
Honestly dude enough of these little potshots at me in edit summaries. I usually don't respond but this is like the third or fourth time you've done it and it's fucking annoying and i'm tired of it. These little mistakes are hardly "lazy" and are quite easy to make/common taking in to account the thousands upon thousands of edits i've made. I've always tried liking you in the past but you always make it difficult with shit like this. I don't need to be called out in this manner, be more admin like for chrissakes. Yankees10 05:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * For the record is more than likely Narváez. MLB.com/Bref whatever just don't have it with the accent since he's a run of the mill minor leaguer.-- Yankees10 05:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * , yes, you're right I should not have done that. My greater point is lost, and that is that you need to slow down with the thousands upon thousands of edits that you make. I believe I've tried engaging you on your talk page about this before to no effect. I will not ping you in an edit summary again. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Regarding David Ross
Hello. I'm not sure you follow the Chicago Cubs and their history of collapsing. The September article correctly predicted the Cubs collapse. For that reason it is appropriate to cite the article as a source, especially since it included a reference to the 92% probability of the Cubs making the post season. But under Ross's [lack of] leadership the Cubs collapsed. A Chicago Tribune article today also notes the collapse but not the 92% stat, which makes the November article less detailed compared to the September article. But you and the other guy know more about the Cubs than the beat writer Patrick Mooney, right? It is not speculation that Ross got fired because of the collapse because coaches normally get fired if they underperform and blow a 92% percent chance at the playoffs. But I don't have time to go back and forth with some whimsical editorial decisions to protect David Ross and his sub .500 managerial record. Wmh1978 (talk) 11:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * the September article was written in September. Ross was fired in November. Anything they wrote in September about the collapse possibly leading to his firing is speculation. Anything they write about it now is legit analysis. Surely the Tribune will have some deep dives out today. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

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



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

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

Guideline and policy news

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

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

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

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

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

Proposed deletion of Jacob Pearson


The article Jacob Pearson has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "non notable minor league baseball player"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Spanneraol (talk) 21:02, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

"Gilbert Lara" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gilbert_Lara&redirect=no Gilbert Lara] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Spanneraol (talk) 21:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Stephen Waguespack
Hello, Muboshgu. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Stephen Waguespack, 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) 20:07, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank You!
You helped me, along with other professional wikipedians, to create my first Wikipedia Article! I know that was like, 6 months ago, but it is never too late to say thank you!

My Article Petjayso (talk) 23:02, 11 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I had completely forgotten about that article. Glad I could help! – Muboshgu (talk) 16:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * D
 * Petjayso (talk) 16:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

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

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:00, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Lance Lynn
Hey can you take a look at Lance Lynn because he signed with the cardinals today 1 year contract please Russellbassett0919 (talk) 01:06, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * , I have, have you? Sources say that they have reached agreement, the deal is not signed. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh my bad then didn’t realize they had not done the deal yet has Nola been signed yet? Russellbassett0919 (talk) 01:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * But Rey Lopez signed a deal with the Braves so I edited his is that alright? Russellbassett0919 (talk) 01:10, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Lopez's deal is official. Lynn's is reported on, but not confirmed. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Reynaldo lopez
Hey can you let me know about if uh Lopez didn’t agree to the deal Russellbassett0919 (talk) 01:12, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The Braves announced that signing. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Sasha Obama


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

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. When 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! 05:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Noam Chomsky
You removed my edit on the grounds that it was not accurate. The post was quoted directly from the Wall Street Journal, a reliable source. Did they issue a retraction? PerseusMeredith (talk) 18:51, 27 November 2023 (UTC)


 * , your edit said in part that Chomsky confirmed that he had received $275,000 from Jeff Epstein. The WSJ source does not say that. WSJ says that Epstein helped Chomsky move $270K of his own money. And per previous discussion, we're not including it. Everybody knows that Epstein was a well-connected financier. His sexual offenses have nothing to do with Chomsky, or many of the other people he worked with. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:05, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I see how the $275,000 payment could be confusing. My bad.
 * Put me down for including it. Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, both have it listed on their bios.  Bill Clinton's contact with Epstein was more than 20 years old and before he was a convicted felon.  Chomsky's meetings have been widely covered in multiple media sources (Rolling Stone, Yahoo, Slate, Guardian, etc...).  He chose to continue the relationship after Epstein was convicted.  I included Chomsky's explanation so I think that is fair. PerseusMeredith (talk) 19:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The nature of Epstein's relationship with Clinton and Gates appears to be significantly different than with Chomsky. An editor in that May 2023 discussion noted the nature of Gates' and why that merits inclusion there while Chomsky's relationship with him doesn't. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Joey Wendle
Hey Joey Wendell finalized his contract with the Mets today. 1-yr $2m 2601:248:8382:AD80:B953:7CF8:EADE:1C9D (talk) 22:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes it has been finalized. I've removed the protection from the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:56, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

User:asticky
You did not infact provide a previous message under your initial undo. Nor does my barnstar state anything about my political stance towards Henry Kissinger, aligning with the policy. At this point in time asticky has been covered by at least two off Wikipedia news articles which is more than enough to satisfy the criterion of The Press Barnstar. Sauriazoicillus (talk) 04:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)


 * , there's a big message on the talk page. Then read the discussion that led to the decision to blank and protect the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:20, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I read both and I still don't see the issue, look at my wording, "Re-adding this barnstar as it still applies. Asticky has been covered in an article by Katherine Huggins which was posted to Daily Dot after her contributions were shared to the Twitter and Instagram account Depths of Wikipedia." No mention of whether or not I think Kissinger was a good person, and as I've already stated, the criterion has been more than fulfilled and I'm just congratulating a fellow editor for making news coverage on what's at least two off Wikipedia news sites as of now. The discussion and reason for removal + protection was solely to stop gravedancing and abide by Wikipedia policy. In my opinion it's very well within Wikipedia's policy to congratulate an editor for making the news with The Press Barnstar. Sauriazoicillus (talk) 04:30, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, it technically "applies". My interpretation of this is that we should not in any way be celebrating the death of another human being, broadly construed. That should be clear to you from the discussion on the noticeboard and that several editors have bothered to blank it. You're free to join in that noticeboard discussion if you wish. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:46, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, how does it apply if there is literally no mention of Kissinger anywhere? "The Press Barnstar may be awarded to any editor whose contributions to Wikipedia were cited by one or more news services off Wikipedia." I am awarding asticky The Press Barnstar because this applies to her. Where am I gravedancing? All I'm doing is congratulating an editor for making the news which is exactly what The Press Barnstar is for. Sauriazoicillus (talk) 04:50, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm done going over this about a barnstar. Go add it back if you want, the press that is about the death of a person, even if you don't use his name. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation
Hi Muboshgu. :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss 🍀  (talk) 09:58, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
 Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 07:40, 2 December 2023 (UTC)


 * , should have used his mugshot :P – Muboshgu (talk) 16:28, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You're free to do so if you want ;)  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 01:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 December 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) 10:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Dealing with WP:LTA/BTSZ
Hi Muboshgu.

I have absolutely no problem with you redoing any edits that globally banned user Belteshazzar makes if you have checked them and you think that they are worthwhile improvements. I know very little about baseball. I am just following the rubric in the LTA report and reverting all his stuff, almost without looking at it, provided that I am absolutely sure that it really is him.

What I would like to ask is that you be a little careful with your edit summaries. If you say anything that he can (mis)interpret as supportive of his editing then that is very likely to encourage him to continue his disruption here. Please bear in mind that these baseball articles are not his main purpose. He was originally here to push fringe stuff on medical subjects and now his main intention seems to be just to assert his perceived right to do whatever he pleases, irrespective of the ban and the disruption he causes. His canvassing behaviour shows that he is looking for allies and there is a risk that he might perceive you as one even if that does not reflect reality. I personally suspect that his behaviour derives from some sort of mental condition and that his presence here is not only disruptive to Wikipedia but also not beneficial to his health. As a globally banned user he needs to go away completely and he needs to understand that clearly. Please can you bear this in mind if you decide to reinstate any more of his edits? Thanks. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:51, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * , fair enough about the edit summaries. I know the process with socks and so that's why I hadn't messaged you asking to stop. I've just looked through and those edits that I reinstated are positive contributions. I don't know about the user him/herself and don't want to encourage them. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:53, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for revert on my revert
Hi Muboshgu,

I want to thank you for your revert of my revert of a revert (say that ten times!) thus clarifying WP policy. I am relatively inexperienced with Wikipedia policy, and while I have edited on several pages and have a fairly decent idea of how to contribute constructively, I appreciate your intervention in this matter. It was my assumption that this would not be in violation of the three revert rule, as it was my understanding that a revert could be reverted if it was frivolous, which is what I believed this revert to be. I want to state it was not my intention to start an edit war, and I apologize if my actions were perceived this way. I have explained my reasoning for said revert on the talk page of the article in question. Please let me know if you have any further questions in this matter. BootsED (talk) 03:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi again Muboshgu,
 * After talking with Soibangla on the talk page, I would like to request that my content be reinstated on the page with two changes, that the word explicitly be removed, and the word refused be replaced with avoided in order to use more concise language that I believe will address any concerns that Soibangla may have had. Unfortunately, Soibangla did not constructively respond to my explanation of my revert and why I made the editorial choices that I did other than saying I was "incorrect" and "that's all I got here." If you have any further questions please let me know. Thank you. BootsED (talk) 04:02, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * in my revert, I asked you to "please rephrase," as Trump did not state "he would be a dictator," and I showed you a previous edit that more accurately depicts what he said soibangla (talk) 04:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message. What is "frivolous" is too open to interpretation and not definable. It's still edit warring even if you're right. Next time, if you're reverted, especially on a contentious page like Trump's 2024 campaign, that's the time to discuss. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Muboshgu,
 * After some more fruitful discussion with soibangla, we have unfortunately reached an impasse. I think we would both appreciate your mediation in this matter. Thank you. BootsED (talk) 05:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I have not suggested any mediation by Muboshgu soibangla (talk) 05:27, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * And I wasn't planning on mediating anything. Get a community consensus one way or the other. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:28, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Muboshgu, is there a place on Wikipedia I can post this to get more feedback from the community? BootsED (talk) 05:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , there are WP:Noticeboards. You can find the appropriate one and elevate an issue if you wish, but I suggest getting more editor input on the talk page first. See if you can get anyone else to respond today. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you Muboshgu! BootsED (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Soibangla, your exact comment: "I encourage you to appeal my revert by whatever means you deem necessary, as you and I are evidently at an impasse." I am seeking to appeal your revert by asking for mediation by Muboshgu as they have been involved with this discussion from the beginning and are most familiar with it. I don't want to argue endlessly and would appreciate some closure on this matter. BootsED (talk) 05:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we would both appreciate your mediation is incorrect soibangla (talk) 05:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I apologize for my incorrect language. I should not have assumed that you are seeking mediation. BootsED (talk) 05:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * you should also not only assume that you are deliberately attempting to be disruptive soibangla (talk) 05:50, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The material provided by Boots is clearly notable, verifiable, pertinent to the topic, and important. It must be restored . I strongly object to this wanton removal of mention of Trump's well-known and well-documented plans for dictatorship. As you may know, I provided a list of 75 sources on Trump's dictatorship plans recently, which also need to be added to the article. More information on this aspect of the topic must be added, rather than removed. The notability and verifiability is almost beyond debate. 67.82.74.5 (talk) 07:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * please take this to the article Talk page where it belongs soibangla (talk) 07:40, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

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

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



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

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

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

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

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

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

Active admin
Hi there, I saw you listed on recently active admins.

I noticed an IP user has been removing cites and adding unsourced content, mostly to firefighting-related articles, all without explanation. I've tried warning them, but they appear to have a moving(?) IP address and the actions haven't ceased. Any help is appreciated, thanks!

Wracking talk! 18:06, 8 December 2023 (UTC)


 * , hi. Sorry, but I do not understand the complexities of blocking an IPv6 anon user. It's more complicated than blocking a single IP. Some of our other active admins likely do. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:09, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries! Wracking  talk! 18:38, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Shohei Ohtani Rumors
Reports about Ohtani signing with the Cubs have heated up overnight, and the MLB superstar could sign a new contract by the end of the Bears weekend game with the Detroit Lions. Frontrunners to sign Ohtani have been the Blue Jays, the Giants, the Dodgers and the Angels. But TinHatSportsNetwork reports that the Cubs have accelerated their offer and are at the top of the mix. Ohtani, a two-way superstar and the sport's most valuable player, is likely to set the record for the largest contract in the history of sports. His deal with the soon to be World Champion Cubs is reported to exceed $7,953.00 a minute. !!!! Buster7 (talk) 07:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Cubs fan? Steve Bartman. *mic drop* – Muboshgu (talk) 16:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hilariously, people were tracking the progress of a private plane yesterday coming from Southern California to Toronto, thinking it might be Ohtani... turned out it was just a wealthy Canadian businessman. Now I've got to get back to refreshing sports pages to see if there is a new update ;-P isaacl (talk) 16:14, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a difference that has surfaced in the trade talks. Otani expected to be paid in dollars. The Cubs offered Yen. Talks continue. Buster7 (talk) 16:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The Jays pay in USD, even if CAD is more colourful and waterproof ;-) isaacl (talk) 17:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You misspelled "colorful" :-P – Muboshgu (talk) 18:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * So did you :) isaacl (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * A wealthy businessman with a Wikipedia page and a sense of humor. It's not too late for the Evil Empire to swoop in. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * More grist for the mill at WP:SPORTSTRANS. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I have researched many recent Cubs rosters. I find Steve Brault, Steve Sousa, Steve Stone, Steve Chisek, Steve Smyth, Steve Trachsel, Steve Trout, Steve Swisher....but no mention of Steve Barterman or whatever his name is.  Buster7 (talk) 17:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Ohtani is one of the few exceptional cases where some coverage of the soap operatic twists and turns might be warranted, though it would be ideal if some time could pass to let the current frenzy die down and appropriate perspective can be established, and desirably when Ohtani's inevitable biography can shed light from his perspective. Back to refreshing... isaacl (talk) 17:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm kinda surprised that he looks to be winding up with the Dodgers, i have come to expect them not to land the top free agents. Hope he can stay healthy. Spanneraol (talk) 20:20, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I spent much of yesterday wondering why someone would leave Southern California for Toronto. The weather alone would be worth taking a lesser offer, no? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That, and he is practically guaranteed to be in the postseason every year in LA... The AL East is loaded. Spanneraol (talk) 20:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Glad he is in the National League. Buster7 (talk) 21:26, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It's not like the players need to live in Toronto during the winter... LA smog isn't a lot of fun. But the die is cast. isaacl (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * LA smog is not nearly as bad as it used to be.. most of the year it is not a problem. I live here and it doesnt bother me. Spanneraol (talk) 22:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

MLB would've never allowed Ohtani to sign with the Blue Jays, IMHO. Their top player, in Canada? GoodDay (talk) 21:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It was never up to the league. Spanneraol (talk) 22:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

WP:INVOLVED
Hi. FYI regarding your protection of Shohei Ohtani, you should not be the one making content judgements on talk page edit requests in an article where you are also making administrator decisions. See the last paragraph of Protection policy. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:58, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Per WP:RFUP, I'm going to add a request that you downgrade the protection on this article to semi-protection, given your involvement in its content. Ed [talk] [OMT] 22:06, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no "content judgment". Contract is not signed. This is a BLP issue. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:14, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not believe I have contributed much, if any, content to that page. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * We can agree on the lack of new content contributions, but you are making "substantive content changes" and decisions both in your reversions and in your responses to edit requests. In addition, as INVOLVED says, "In general, editors should not act as administrators in disputes in which they have been involved. This is because involved administrators may be, or appear to be, incapable of making objective decisions in disputes to which they have been a party or about which they have strong feelings." We also agree that the edits that describe Ohtani as a member of the Dodgers go too far, but that does not mean you can or should shut it all down while vaguely waving at BLP. You know from our recent interactions that WP:SPORTSTRANS explicitly allows ongoing transactions to be mentioned in articles, and neither WP:BLPGOSSIP or WP:GRAPEVINE applies in this situation, when Ohtani has given out information on their own accord. Ed [talk] [OMT] 22:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That line of SPORTSTRANS is another issue to address, as the content that you added to Jackson Chourio and Juan Soto became outdated once the deals were done and new content had to be added about the finalized deals. I did not agree with it, though I know there's a line in that essay that says it's okay. I am not making "substantive content changes", I'm maintaining the status quo until there's something concrete to add to the article. And I'll let others make that addition when the time comes. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Muboshgu... that is Wikipedia in a nutshell. It is a platform and information source designed to be updated as new information emerges, whether that's in books, research papers, and even news articles. Ed [talk] [OMT] 23:19, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That's not quite how I see it. WP:BREAKING is a policy about new articles, but I think it's relevant for content within existing articles. WP:RECENTISM is of course the corresponding essay on the matter. We should be in no rush to add these sorts of things, especially when some of the recent addition can become outdated and require removal. Granted, it's much less an issue to remove a sentence or two that was just added to an article rather than go through deletion of an entire article. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I think I may have overly obscured the idea that motivated that last message, which was that one of the most important reasons Wikipedia still exists 22 years after being founded is that it can be written, rewritten, and rewritten again as many times as there are people willing to do it. It being designed to do that at scale as new information emerges is central to its value proposition for our readers—as our pageview data shows every time we see bunches of readers dropping in on articles related to current events, like Ohtani's article.
 * To your direct points, I'm not so sure BREAKING's text is followed that much anymore (beyond the anticipation of notability paragraph). I can't remember the last time major news happened and we declined to create an article on it pretty much immediately, though it's possible I've missed it. You've participated at ITNC—think about how articles about e.g. natural disasters or sports finals are being edited and with what sources. Recentism is more on point, but it's also not the most relevant bit of documentation for sports articles. Trades and contracts don't happen often enough for player articles to be "overburdened" with breaking news, and those transactions will always be relevant in those articles. Ed [talk] [OMT] 23:41, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You do make a good point in your first paragraph there, I can't argue that. BREAKING should be followed. I do know that many ITNC articles are created right before they are nominated, but in those cases sources establish the notable event, including major natural disasters with death tolls. A free agent signing isn't quite on that level. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:54, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * On another note, I am unclear on if WP:INVOLVED would allow or prevent me from responding to that RfC, as it could impact the article content. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * So following on that, I think it's fair to say that our articles not being updated means readers are less likely to use us in the future.* Perhaps those readers can distinguish how most current event articles develop (edited early, often, with all sorts of reliable sources) and sports (not until the deal is announced by the sports team involved). If so, they might still choose to use us for non-sport things... but I'm not personally confident that they can and will. It's a bad lifecycle for us, if you'll excuse the jargon.
 * That is a rough summary of why I'm advocating for including these sentences in Ohtani's article, advocating for changing the current sports transaction template to explain why we appear to be behind the times, and (heh) why I'm still writing on your talk page.
 * To the other note: I would personally advocate for reducing to semi-protection—I do think you're involved but every other admin on this site would semi-protect that article, so NOTBURO, IAR, etc. etc.—before jumping in. I'm assuming status quo would apply to this particular content question while the RfC is ongoing. But you do you.
 * * Fair points on the breaking sources providing notability for ITNC articles and that they're different in scope to free agency, but I was referring to how they're updated and expanded post-creation! Ed [talk] [OMT] 00:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The reason I went to full protection was because some users with extended confirmed status changed his lead and infobox to say he was with the Dodgers. I have been around here for MLB free agency for over a decade now and have seen this behavior every year. I can tell you that people will flock to be the one to make the change for a big transaction like this if they can. And disproportionally so when a New York team is involved. And while many of us who have commented on Ohtani's talk page today understand the nuance of the terms being agreed to but the contract not being signed, there are many others who do not.
 * I get your points, but I also don't think it's a bad thing to be seen as "behind the times" when there's a deal in process. I prefer to be accurate and not include info that turns out after-the-fact to be inaccurate. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand the reasoning behind protecting the article, but you also didn't explain to anyone what the correct way of communicating the uncertainty/grey area. Instead, you reverted and protected with edit summaries that included "Too many EC accounts not getting it" and "we are so back", and responded to edit requests with quips that included "Do we learn?" and "Many people expect things." At no time did you say "we can't say he's signed a contract without evidence of an actual signing, but we can include his announcement if phrased like this: lorem ipsum etc."
 * I'm not sure how we got back to inaccuracies. No part of this proposal is inaccurate. Ed [talk] [OMT] 03:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Your proposal has no inaccuracies. Other signing announcements leaked to the press often do and it's best to have a uniform process in place. And I can accept I may not have communicated my action on that page well enough, I probably should have been more explicit as I was doing it. I did provide some explanation at Talk:Shohei Ohtani when Twitter thought he was signing with Toronto. I should have fleshed it out more in Talk:Shohei Ohtani. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, we agree that details can be inaccurate. But the framework "X has reported that Y will sign with Z, but no official announcement has been made" doesn't include any inaccurate detail. Moreover, by citing the source in the text we are outsourcing an error to that source, which roughly aligns with WP:INTEXT ("helps the reader see where a position is coming from"). Perhaps my argument here should be that we need a standard, whether or not it's exactly the same as my proposal, as the current state of affairs is not helping anyone. To the rest of the message, I can say that I genuinely appreciate that recognition and hope it leads to better outcomes with players in the news.
 * FYI given the RfC comments around protection, I've requested a downgrade in protection at WP:RFUP. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The deal is official, so this is all irrelevant now. Spanneraol (talk) 02:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , terrific. I'm glad this one didn't take weeks. Lowering protection now. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

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

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:50, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Edits
Hi I hope this finds you well. I am inquiring to ask why my edits to baseball where deleted. I am confident that you are correct in reverting them with your long history of working for Wikipedia. But still I must ask if you can tell me why my edit was reverted as I want to know what I did wrong and grow and learn from my mistake. As my teachers tell me, "if you learned from it it was not a mistake but a lesson" DMPenguinTheJewishPenguin (talk) 21:02, 13 December 2023 (UTC)


 * , I should have given you some indication in an edit summary or talk page message. No matter how experienced we are, we can all make mistakes. Those two links you added, I have no idea where they go, but I do not think they confirm with our policy on external links. That page details what external links we should use and which we shouldn't. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:11, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * They go to two other Wikipedia sites, One is of the world series. The other is about Rounders which is mentioned earlier in the baseball article but not linked, so I put the link to the wiki page of the game Rounders. I think that they were both relevant. I am sorry for any misunderstandings. Thanks @Muboshgu DMPenguinTheJewishPenguin (talk) 14:01, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

thanks
...for being slow to take offense; I should have taken more time over my explanation. Generally I'm more likely to err on the side of overthinking it, but I think I was rushing. Valereee (talk) 11:18, 14 December 2023 (UTC)


 * , not a problem. I think we all often think the explanation in our head is more clear to whoever we are communicating with than it actually is. Especially when we rush. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Jorge López (baseball)
He did sign with the Mets 1 year contract so there's no unsources it was correct. 64.251.40.252 (talk) 19:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Provide a source that says it's signed. I'll wait. As of right now, it's not been announced as being official. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok I agree about that I will wait until is updated. 64.251.40.252 (talk) 19:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Great, thank you for your understanding. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

This sources has officially announced he signed one year contract on Thursday. Click here to check — https://metsmerizedonline.com/mets-sign-right-handed-pitcher-jorge-lopez/ 67.81.169.214 (talk) 02:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)


 * "Metsmerized" is not a good source. Lopez reached an agreement with the Mets on Thursday, one that could fall through. The El Nuevo Dia tweet they source says "llegó a un acuerdo", translation "reached an agreement". All of the WP:RS carefully note that the deal is not official yet. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:08, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok we'll just need to wait 5 to 7 days for an updated about the sources. 67.81.169.214 (talk) 02:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)


 * It may be sooner than that. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The deal official has been announced. click here — https://apnews.com/article/jorge-lopez-mets-contact-d3c7ab9bd764f5249b8d7d49f1c3f6f9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.94.56.76 (talk) 03:36, 15 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, I know. The page has been updated to reflect this. See, it only takes some time. This one took about a week. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:53, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Juan Soto Trade
MLB sources officially reported and confirmed that the transaction involving the San Diego Padres and the New York Yankees with players Juan Soto and Michael King occurred as of 23:04 on December 6th, 2023 (UTC). Please update the page to remain consistent with current news and events. 66.205.174.32 (talk) 04:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * As of right now, the source still says The clubs have not confirmed the deal. Be patient. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I work under Scott Boras' office and it has been requested that the information be updated as soon as possible on all Major League Baseball™ sources of reference. 66.205.174.32 (talk) 04:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Ball Clubs have already announced the trade, please update the page, or else I will. 66.205.174.32 (talk) 04:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * LOL, Boras' office.
 * https://twitter.com/Yankees/status/1732616100045623370 this is the official announcement, from three minutes ago – Muboshgu (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * A threat from the peanut gallery. How quaint! Buster7 (talk) 02:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , surely you don't think they were lying about working for Scott Boras, do you? His office clearly cares about how quickly we update his client's Wikipedia pages, right? – Muboshgu (talk) 02:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Could be some intern in the media relations section of the office trying to impress the boss with how quickly they update wikipedia? LOL. Spanneraol (talk) 02:26, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , Yankees over Dodgers in 5 in the 2024 World Series. You heard it here first. BRONX BOMBERS ARE BACK BABY! – Muboshgu (talk) 02:34, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * We shall see. Personally I think both teams need more pitching to get there. Spanneraol (talk) 02:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yamamoto is next. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Want to change your prediction? Dodgers over Yanks in six. Spanneraol (talk) 16:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , fine, Yankees over Dodgers in seven. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * And???....Then the Yankees will be able to win a playoff game against the ASTROS????? They are called the "BOMBERS" because of all the money they spend and it doesn't work. It "bombs".Buster7 (talk) 22:09, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Reported to AIV for vandalizing my user talk page with blasphemy. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:58, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 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) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Possibly good faith?
The edit on Trump fake electors plot by Travis46OO appear to be an opinion, and not an attempt to vandalize Wikipedia. I understand that it was very disruptive, but wouldn't WP:AGF apply here? I'm new here and clearing this up would be helpful. Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 01:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)


 * , you must be a way nicer person than I am, because I don't see any way to assume good faith behind this edit, given that it's an attempt to discredit the content of the page. Travis can truly hold the opinion that the fake elector scheme is bogus, a fabrication of the liberal media or whatnot, but that doesn't excuse edits like those. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand that it discredits the content of the page, but I think that the user was trying to help by sharing what he believes as true. The user trying to help Wikipedia, regardless of the attempt to discredit the article. Feeglgeef (talk) 01:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it excuses the edit. I'm saying that it was good faith and that the vandalism warning is not appropriate. Feeglgeef (talk) 01:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with that. Articles are no place for our personal opinions. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand that articles are no place for personal opinions. I am not saying that the edit should be there. What I am saying is that the user was attempting to help, just doing it wrong. Feeglgeef (talk) 02:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand that Wikipedia is not a place for opinions, but the user was clearly trying to help by raising a concern about the article. I am not hear to debate the accuracy of the concern, but the vandalism warning was clearly inappropriate, and the user should have been given a warning for not having a source. Pigly3 (talk) 02:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I therefore support Feeglgeef in this debate. Pigly3 (talk) 02:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, it was a warning message, not a block. And it was effective as they haven't done it again. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

™ vs ©
A trademark is a short symbol, phrase and/or word. They're used to associate name value to a brand. Even next to a short story or paragraph, they're short. The idea is for the consumer to get the whole idea at a glance (even without trying, best case scenario). You know Pepsi, I know Pepsi, we all know Pepsi. At Wikipedia, we're free to write its name and relay its logo, even repeatedly. But if one of us switched Wikipedia's trademark (see top left) with the Pepsi one in an attempt to pass this information off as straight from the horse's mouth, the WMF would quickly receive an email from a PepsiCo affiliate/associate/attorney telling it (dba "us") to cease and desist.

Now, copyright, that's a much longer and complicated story, meant for longer and more complicated stories. Sometimes they're textual, sometimes physical, sometimes musical. Sometimes, even more. Even this very simple sentence, by virtue of me authoring it without plagiarising it, is copyrightable. I digitally agree to grant that right to others, of course, as do we all here (but not at PepsiCo). I could apply for a registered trademark, but it would be a waste of time and money because it's way too long.

Also, copyright automatically applies for a set period and trademarks follow the use it or lose it principle. After a story such as Steamboat Willie (note the italics) lapses into our lawless realm of public domain, the character Steamboat Willie (no italics, see?) is "registered" to Disney (the machine, not the man) yetforthwith. I'm not sure if that's a word, but it doesn't matter; what matters is you could potentially claim Muboshgu™ if you wanted to create stories about someone of that likeness, but nobody's going to give you ©redit for "Chatterer the Red Squirrel Meets the Muboshgu" until such time as you compose such an "original" derivative work.

So yeah.

Happy New Year! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * As a longstanding intellectual property attorney, I endorse most of the above as stated by InedibleHulk, although I don't recall that I have ever seen a short story or a paragraph deemed protected by trademark. It is, however, possible to obtain trademark protection, for words, phrases, drawings, photographs, thematic design elements, sounds, and even smells. BD2412  T 02:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * As a humble smalltown bird lawyer, I may have misspoken, but meant to emphasise how I could apply for a registered trademark. I should not, because it would not "fly". Even next to a PoSS, a trademark is short. Also, I'm not sure why I'm spelling "plagiarize" and "emphasize" "incorrectly" tonight, but am fairly confident it's not illegal. Thanks for letting me know about the smells. Makes sense, scentwise. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:36, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * To look at it from the perspective of intent: copyright is designed to encourage creators to share their work by giving them exclusivity for a period of time to make copies, so they can receive a benefit in return for sharing. The period of time is limited as there are benefits to society in allowing works to be copied and improved upon, thus a balance is made. Trademark is designed to keep one company from pretending to be associated with another by using the same identifier. There is no time limit, since preventing confusion is needed for as long as the identifier is in use, but if it is no longer being used by the first company, then the need to prevent confusion ends and the trademark registration lapses. isaacl (talk) 06:12, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the education attempts, maybe I'll understand this after my morning coffee. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2024 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 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 on 31 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! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)