User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish/Archive 15

Hey, Radish. I went to block for promotional username and promotional edits, but found you had already done the deed. I have trouble with your softblock, though. Both the name and the edits (which I just reverted) are seriously promotional. Why a soft block? Bishonen &#124; tålk 15:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC).


 * While reviewing the edits I was looking more at the mass removal, and though they may have just been an inexperienced user. Reviewing some of the replaced content, things like Faisal and his team have built a portfolio of over 70 companies from across the globe, all of whom are working to transform the way global industries and societies are interacting with our built world. are definitely promotional, and a hard block was probably the right call. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Right. Well, if you don't intend to change the block, I suppose I will. Bishonen &#124; tålk 17:44, 16 January 2023 (UTC).
 * I changed it. Sorry about that. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Bishonen &#124; tålk 22:37, 16 January 2023 (UTC).

Happy New Year!

 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Professor Penguino (talk) 23:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Redaction required and probable block
Dear friendly local admin: See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ursula_von_der_Leyen&diff=1134158474&oldid=1132887733&diffmode=source Libelous, opinionated and disruptive. Redact and block, I suggest. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:11, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I've revdel'd and given a 4im warning. If you see further edits like that from them, let me know. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

What to do?
Howdy. Is there a place where one could request a hatting of a discussion? It's apparent that the editor is not going to stop complaining, even though he's not getting a consensus for the changes he wants. Since his return to Wikipedia (Jan 15), he's done virtually nothing else, on the project. GoodDay (talk) 16:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I find that if everyone stops responding, they have no one to talk back to. Failing that, AE or ANI of you think it has reached that level of disruption. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Infobox protection request for Template on 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine article
Thanks for doing that close on the previous RfC. There seems to be sufficient consensus in the Template discussion for the Infobox of the 2022 article between 4-5 editors that it seems useful to use it, for purposes of wanting to avoid yet a 4th RfC which would end up stalemated. I've added the version of the Infobox to the Template page for the article and would like to request that you fully protect that version for some time period. I realize that it would keep me from editing it as well, though full page protection would provide a useful deterrent to others making further unproductive RfCs requests on that article's Talk page. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I just reviewed the recent discussion and editing and I'm not going to unilaterally fully protect the template at this time. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:39, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Your block of Speedrunner69
Now we have an antisemitic remark in an edit summary for their Talk page. Time to revoke access. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 23:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Looks like my hero,, got around to it while I was reading about an infobox. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:41, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That's me, The Greatest American Canadian Hero!-- Ponyo bons mots 23:43, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Ponyo I'm acquainted with a former admin elsewhere on the 'Net. I don't know what handle they used here and haven't asked but they speak very highly of you. Skywatcher68 (talk) 23:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Really? All of those bribes were worth it then. Seriously though, that's nice to hear.-- Ponyo bons mots 23:53, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Canadian?! I thought you were French. Unless you're... French Canadian! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:49, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm as Canadian as a hockey puck.-- Ponyo bons mots 23:53, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ...wait, I just read that the first hockey pucks were made from frozen cow dung. Can I be as Canadian as a lacrosse stick instead?-- Ponyo bons mots 23:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That's pretty Canadian. Even moreso than apologizing while drinking Molson and watching corner gas. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I have admittedly done one of those things to excess. Also, I have never watched Corner Gas.-- Ponyo bons mots 00:01, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe I should have gone with kids in the hall instead. Unrelated, but I hate the new reply button. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:03, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Given that I am waiting for my citizenship to go through, maybe I can be as Canadian as imitation maple syrup? Dumuzid (talk) 00:08, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That's what I call all Canadian maple syrup. Real maple syrup comes from the woods of New England. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I guess that's better than the indef I was expecting. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:18, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Blessed are the merciful,for they will be shown mercy.-- Ponyo bons mots 00:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

AN close
If no one else has said it, thanks for your close of this AN thread. I think your close was good and well considered. Happy new year, and thanks for all the work you've been doing! — Wug·a·po·des​ 21:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks, much appreciated. Who would have thought that wouldn't be my most contentious close in the past few months, eh? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk:LGBT grooming conspiracy theory
Might need a bit longer semi-protection? We're still getting comments like this. Cheers, Generalrelative (talk) 01:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Give it a bit longer of just reverting without engaging and see if it abates. It was pretty quiet for a couple days after protection expired, and I really don't like protecting talk pages when it's not absolutely necessary. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:32, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough! Generalrelative (talk) 02:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Liliana UwU (talk / contributions) 18:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Wasn't quite sure with whom to share this....
But I am always fascinated to see our little project here show up in the news. Cheers, and Happy Friday! Dumuzid (talk) 20:03, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The worst part about that is they keep calling it a Wikipedia bio. Definitely chuckleworthy though. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

RFC
Hello ScottishFinnishRadish. How on earth is that collection of WP:NPA and  pertinent to the RFC? The RFC is "In this source do and   mean that events occurred in the United States?" At least one editor has already been unable to find the RFC because of the volume of that stuff.

Secondly when is it ever not disruptive to change the section header to something completely different? Invasive Spices (talk) 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see any personal attacks, never mind a collection of them. There are several constructive responses there about how best to frame this RFC and responses discussing how the RFC is malformed. Also, how is changing a section header specifically disruptive? Editors change section headings all the time. They're part of talk page contributions that are specifically not included in the prohibition on editing another's comments. Additionally, could you please sign your posts in the standard way, ~, so that your pings work and tools for making discussions easier will function. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Am I meant to take this seriously? Have you tried almost every comment by User:Rja13ww33? The only good thing about that WP:SPA is the lack of subtlety. How has such an obvious SPA remained unfettered on Wikipedia for so many years? At least absolutely no one denies that Rja13ww33 is a SPA which should have made this easy to remedy years ago…and yet we see yet another POV conflict created by the same SPA…
 * Page after page of repetitious insistence upon debate about things that are not in the RFC is obviously not constructive. Those distractions have caused at least one editor to be unable to find the RFC. Let me really stretch here: Are you perhaps also completely unaware where the RFC is and what it is because you are also unable to find it in that ocean of spam? The RFC is:
 * In this source do  and   mean that events occurred in the United States?
 * Am I meant to take this seriously? I can only repeat myself: This is unheard of and rightfully so because changing a section header to something unrelated is obviously disruptive.
 * Why should a section header stating it will contain one note be filled with repetitious distraction spam, and then when that becomes too obvious the section header be changed to retroactively obscure what is going on? Invasive Spices (talk) 21 January 2023 (UTC) 22:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Just a couple things from WP:TPG that you should familiarize yourself with.
 * On section headings: Section headings: Because threads are shared by multiple editors (regardless of how many have posted so far), no one, including the original poster, "owns" a talk page discussion or its heading. It is generally acceptable to change headings when a better heading is appropriate
 * On collapsing discussions: Involved parties must not use these templates to end a discussion over the objections of other editors.
 * ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not a SPA. (Which is quite obvious from my posting history.) You've had numerous editors tell you in multiple discussions on this and other topics that you simply don't know what your are doing.  Rather than listen to what anyone is saying.....you've just continued to insist you are right. Not sure what it will take to sink in.Rja13ww33 (talk) 01:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you kindly, much appreciated. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Rollback toggle
Hi SFR. I vaguely recall you asking somewhere about a way to create a toggle to show or hide the "rollback" button. Did you ever find this piece of code and, if so, would you mind directing me to it? —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)


 * .mw-rollback-link {
 * display: none;
 * }
 * That removes it from your watchlist. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. Nothing quite as frightening as seeing a big rollback link beside everything on your watchlist when you're editing from a phone and have cats. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:43, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

مهدي جزائري
Hi ScottishFinnishRadish. You blocked as well their IP  last week. They returned today as. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Blocked. Hopefully there's a reasonably range that shows up after a while for a range block. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:10, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. Let me know if you see them pop up again. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It didn't take long: Robby.is.on (talk) 22:35, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Blocked. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I placed a range block for a week. We'll see how that goes. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Robby.is.on (talk) 22:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem. Here's to hoping. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Here's another: . Robby.is.on (talk) 20:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Another range block for a week. 154.121.48.0/20 ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Null sweat, chummer. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

RfC
Hello, I was wondering, could you please close the RfC at WikiProject_Weather/Color_RfC? Noah Talk 18:36, 24 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I'll try and take a look at it within the next few days. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:46, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * , this is all set. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking time to read and close the discussion. Noah Talk 15:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Gritty&#32; on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 21:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I was going to add a better photo but whatever your majesty…🙄
😡 Beatleslm (talk) 15:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Your edit removed the infobox, and did not add a new image. You can use the preview button to make sure your edit is displaying the way you intend. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

66.42.227.243
Hi there, just wondering if you took a look at this IP's block log when considering their block duration, as they were straight off of a three year block. Apparently they were blocked by the proxy bot several times while the previous three year block was still in place. Not sure why the proxy bot blocked a school IP, but the reason I reported them (even with only 1 recent edit) was because it had only been a few days since their previous three year block expired. Thank you. 73.67.145.30 (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I did check it, but I didn't scroll down past the number of proxy blocks to see the three year block. Looks like Widr has picked up my slack, though. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

BLPCRIME
Hi, how was BLPCRIME being applied here as a reason for your edit? Specifically which issues were problematic, and are there any parts that can be salvaged? Vacosea (talk) 07:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)


 * , pretty much the whole things, per For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by Public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. The use of the mugshot in the article currently is also not good. Alas, I don't have the time or the motivation right now to argue about it, so I'm going the "shrug and realize a lot of Wikipedia isn't great" method of dealing with it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Allegations of CIA drug trafficking
Your comment here User talk:Invasive Spices is difficult to justify. You are an admin and so I must assume you are aware how inappropriate that is. Invasive Spices (talk) 21:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Nithyananda
Regarding your revert asserted with comment "It would be very hard to disprove a blue notice being issued in November 2021 by showing images of letters from February 2021".

The date of one letter is November 2022. Can you clarify and confirm the revert based on this information? Nofoolie (talk) 22:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I've reverted. Thanks for the heads up . ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:05, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You are a legend! I understand what happened and I respect your work! @ScottishFinnishRadish Nofoolie (talk) 23:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I appreciate it. Glad we got that worked out. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Message from Bluescluesrocks
Hi are you the one that sent this message to me? User talk:Bluecluesrocks Bluecluesrocks (talk) 00:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes. Please stop opening duplicate edit requests without addressing the reason the previous requests were declined. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

User rangeblocked?
According to the bot you rangeblocked this user. I don't think that's actually possible. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:07, 2 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's weird. is the log entry. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I've noticed that the bot tends to have some buggy edit summaries with no reason given as to why they happen (i've mentioned them before but never got any response) ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, while we're here, do you mind disabling the TPA of 92.4.181.158? They're treating their talk page like a sandbox. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Eh, their block is up tomorrow, and there were three edits today after two+ weeks of nothing. When they invariably go back to disruptive editing tomorrow we can address the talk page stuff then. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:42, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:2015 Zvornik police station shooting&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 11:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Frelinghuysen University
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Frelinghuysen University you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 22:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes&#32; on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 08:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you kindly, much appreciated. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Jim TBan
Just wanted to voice my complete astonishment that that editor has been topic banned. I've had strong disagreements with that editor on those articles, but they've always maintained civility. The only issue I've seen is an tendency to WP:BLUDGEON which is worthy of a warning, but to remove a valuable editor who has invested a ton of time into those articles is a shame. Frankly is discourages me from participating on those articles if this is how disputes are going to be resolved. Nemov (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't mean to interject--but SFR's reading of consensus was clearly correct there. This was not something he did under his own aegis.  I am not sure I personally would have voted for a tban, and I even tried to give Jim opportunities over there to say the right thing--essentially that he saw that consensus was going another way and he would proceed accordingly.  His inability to do that without caveating and defensive hand-waving did not help him.  I hope after an appropriate length of time he asks for the ban to be lifted.  Happy Friday. Dumuzid (talk) 17:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree to some extent, but this should have never been escalated to this point. I only found about this entire discussion a couple of days ago by accident. The editors warring with Jim and the others have been opening up discussions all over the place. I disagree with how this was handled and now 8 days later the user is been pushed out with several involved editors (who disagreed with him the past) opposed to sanctions. Nemov (talk) 18:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There was a clear consensus for the topic ban in that discussion. We don't ignore consensus because an editor has made valuable contributions to a topic. That said, indefinite is not infinite, and it is likely that the ban can be lifted in the future. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, several new editors to main year articles have started & continued several concurrent discussions which seek to greatly change the format & inclusion bars for the articles, as well as splitting sections off into new articles. Some of the discussions conflict with each other & some editors are arguing for different things in different discussions, such as arguing for expanding the Deaths sections in one discussion, but arguing to delete them in another. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 18:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with the assessment that the consensus was to ban User:Jim Michael 2 from 'Year Articles' "broadly construed". All of the arguments and problems are around activity in relation to the 'Main Year' articles. Can you clarify if you believe the consensus was related to main year articles, or any article about a year in general e.g. "2022 in Sport", or "2022 in America" etc.? Could you review the exact wording of your close please? I've clashed with Jim plenty of times in the past but he's always come across to me as someone who edits with the best intentions of the encyclopedia in mind, and a topic ban that basically encompasses 90% of his editting when the issue is about actions in talk pages on some of those articles seems ridiculously harsh. In fact if he's topic-banned to prevent bludgeoning in talk pages and RFCs, why does the TBAN include editing at all? Jeff UK 18:15, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. I've improved many year by country articles without any conflict with anyone. Banning me from them makes no sense. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 18:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem was wider than the main year articles, as demonstrated by concerns about Village pump (proposals), which is ancillary to the year articles themselves. The broadly construed language, which was present in the initial topic ban !vote, is very standard. A response like Support TBAN of Jim Michael 2 from years articles and related discussions does not read as "narrowly prevented from editing just discussions on the main year articles, and should probably be allowed to continue to edit the articles themselves." ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, that RFC relates specifically to year articles ("(e.g., 2022)") not a 'Year in x' or 'X in Year' articles.  Most of the !votes just say 'year articles' which could mean either. Jeff UK  19:12, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, most of the contributors wouldn't have even been thinking about the subarticles, because I've never been in a dispute on any of them. None of the RfCs, nor the discussions on article talk pages, the Years project, village pump etc. related to the inclusion bars, format etc. of any of the subarticles. I've been improving them for years without any problems, so banning me from them is a disadvantage all round & can't help anyone. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 19:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:BROADLY covers this. I've already carved out significant exemptions so you're not entirely disconnected from your main area of editing, while hopefully preventing disruptive editing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:TBAN. The "broadly construed" is (as SFR notes just above) standard language for a TBAN. There's also a little more at WP:BROADLY. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:47, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Pelé&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 22:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

DYKN
Hi ScottishFinnishRadish, I just reviewed your DYKN for Frelinghuysen University. I am just waiting on you to provide QPQ and it is all set to be approved. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:44, 14 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Do I need a QPQ? It's my third DYK. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * , pinging in case you're not watching. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I wasn't watching. In that case you do not. Going forward, make sure to state that on the nomination page so the reviewer knows. I'll go approve it now. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:25, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Will do, sorry about that. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

مهدي جزائري (continued)
Hi. has returned as. Many of their edits have been okay, but those at Ishak Ali Moussa (diff) were blatantly unsourced. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 09:49, 16 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I've range blocked for two weeks this time. Looks like they've been active on other IPs as well. Too bad I can't pblock by category. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:26, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Bias
Describing someone's beliefs as "fringe" or calling a view debated in the scientific community "false" is in violation of wikipedia's policy. I attempted to remove these charged words from a page. You removing my edit violates wikipedia policy and turns wikipedia into a website to push political beliefs. 98.10.105.122 (talk) 00:01, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I suggest you discuss your proposed changes on the talk pages with sources to support your wording. Talk:Monica Gandhi is an example of how this should work in practice. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

frelinghuysen university
hello, ScottishFinnishRadish! regarding your dyk nomination of this article, to fulfill your request, i squeezed your hook into the set i was compiling so that, hopefully, it will hit the main page before the end of the month. according to the current schedule, your hook should be up in d.c. for the last five hours of february. if the schedule shifts to two sets a day before then, it may show up earlier.by the way, for future reference, i believe hooks with images of english text generally do not get selected to run in the image slot because they are often not really integral to the hook and are generally less interesting than the other images available. in contrast, for example, the image i ended up selecting is basically the core of the hook it illustrates. dying (talk) 16:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * No worries on the image, I just tossed it in there on the off chance there was an image hook open. Thanks for getting it scheduled. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from DKaufmann4492 on User:DKaufmann4492/sandbox (20:17, 18 February 2023)
Good afternoon I am trying to publish a page on a Taekwondo practitioner from Pennsylvania who has been inducted into two different Martial Arts Halls of Fame. I have many articles cited on my draft and probably will add videos and photos. But I was wondering if you could take a look at it. --DKaufmann4492 (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * , I took a look at the article, and it doesn't look like it would be ready for inclusion at this time. When we assess notability for a Wikipedia articles we rely on secondary, independent, reliable sources. Local blogs such as thunderoutreach.com and buildingabetterboyertown.org don't contribute to notability. Similarly, with amerikickinternationals.com, if being inducted into their hall of fame wasn't covered in secondary sources then it does not help to demonstrate that the subject is notable enough, in the Wikipedia sense, for an article. Also, the source you're using for the Last Airbender stuff is a forum post, not Kung Fu Magazine, which refers to a non-archived page on a community television station's website. I did a bit of searching, and there are a few mentions in local news, but nothing that would meet the criteria set out in WP:NBIO. If you can find some reliable sources, I'd be happy to take a look again. Sorry for what I'm sure is disappointing news, but Wikipedia has specific requirements and our own definition of notability. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * No, I'm just compiling information at this time. I know the guy so I've been working on it. He is extremely well-known in the Martial Arts world and has a bunch of championships. I just need to gather some information. unfortunately, it was before the internet so some information is in print and not archived online. I'll keep working on it. Thanks for the information. DKaufmann4492 (talk) 21:23, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * , keep the conflict of interest guidelines in mind. Generally, editing about someone you know personally is frowned upon, and it brings a lot more scrutiny to your article. If you do a decent amount of editing (500+ edits, 6 months of account age, and 10 edits in the past month), you'll gain access to WP:TWL which can provide access to a lot of offline and paywalled sources. I use to to access newspapers.com, which lets me find a lot of older dead-tree content.
 * Glad I could provide you with some info. If you need anything else, reach out. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * oh it's not a conflict of interest. I just happen to know the guy from the Taekwondo world.
 * thanks for the info on the paywall stuff DKaufmann4492 (talk) 21:31, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Tim Peel
As a follow up to the discussion, I hadn't seen the 2017 Tim Peel article, and I apologize for having failed to improve upon it. Thank you for your response. White 720 (talk) 00:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration notification
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests/Case and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, TomStar81 (Talk) 01:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Maybe take a look
At this, given the creator's recent activity. Newimpartial (talk) 02:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Looks like someone got to it before me. Thanks for the heads up. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Humiliate?
First, they are not capable, second, that's kinda part of my religion, and I need all I can get, third, I eat up the attention, even the bad kind. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:44, 22 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I can leave it next time, if you want, or I can intermittently vandalize your userpage if that helps? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

== WikiMedia Foundation involvement in software deployment on the English Wikipedia: Arbitration request declined ==

Hello ,

The case request about WikiMedia Foundation involvement in software deployment on the English Wikipedia has been declined by a majority of Wikipedia's arbitrators.

The request had been explicitly created as an "Ignore All Rules" request, but the Arbitration Committee disagrees about a need for ignoring its policies, which exclude "official actions of the Wikimedia Foundation or its staff" from its jurisdiction and define it as "as a final binding decision-maker primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve" in the "Scope and responsibilities" section. Its procedures describe an "expectation of prior dispute resolution" that hasn't been fulfilled yet.

For the Arbitration Committee, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:12, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

2600:1008:B165:E2DA:5CAF:E6FF:FE00:9E2
Hi. Please revoke this IP's TPA. Thanks.  Zoe Trent Fan 🎤💍 19:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)


 * All set, thanks for the heads up. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)