User talk:Shellwood/Archive 5

Henna - Palestinian community
Hello,

I noticed that you recently reverted the change I made on the Henna page from Israel to Palestine. To be more accurate, the page must indicate that it is Palestinian and other Arab Jewish communities, not Israelis/Ashkenazi Jewish communities that traditionally do henna. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8802:1100:2B7:65BC:57A1:39CB:DE31 (talk) 21:15, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

My mistake.
My mistake, I was just on the Recent Changes log and it came up as a page that may need review, and me not being educated in the subject I reverted it. My bad. --StarlightStratosphere (talk) 22:14, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey! there is absolutely no need for you to apologize for that, you are doing a great job! Shellwood (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Croatian Wikipedia - 2013 controversy about right-wing bias
Why did you erase correct article about far right bias of Croatian wikipedia? I know you can't speak Croatian but try to use Google translate for articles I wrote about, those articles severely far right biased, those were about fascist collaborators in Croatia during WW2 and there were no any informations they were war lords and war criminals. Do you support such a articles? Bukowski112 (talk) 20:34, 2 September 2018 (UTC)


 * You are adding unsourced content and you can't use Wikipedia as a reference. Shellwood (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Alberta separatism
This article is filled with inconsistencies, poor grammar, syntax and language. It is difficult to read due to the often conflicting change in tenses midway through a sentence or paragraph. It lacks proper citation on many of its' facts and too often relapses into opinion and conjecture.

Secondly, There is no such thing as an "Alberta citizen" if you are a Canadian citizen who is resident in Alberta you are an Albertan and a Canadian citizen. Albertans receive their right to vote at Alberta general elections by virtue of their Canadian citizenship and not by being resident in Alberta alone! Indeed being resident in Alberta confers no rights or liberties whatsoever and therefore aside from the lack of legislation, common law, tradition or precedent creating and recognising Albertan citizenship such a title is all but useless.

Thirdly, the sentence: "These programs were seen by many Albertans as an attack on oil resources and the promotion of Liberal "anti-Albertan" conservative values were seen as a negative influence for Albertans". Does not make logical sense with the verb "conservative" between "anti-Albertan" and "values". What the writer has inadvertently stated is that conservative values are both viewed negatively by Albertans and are Anti-Albertan as well as Liberal (ie from the Liberal party). You must remove the word "conservative" for the sentence to follow logically from the first premise! ie. These programs are seen as an attack...

Honestly, the article is so poorly written and edited it makes a mockery of Alberta separatism and leads to ridicule. I would suggest a complete and total re-write. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.44.150.150 (talk) 10:10, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

'socially just'
Hi Shellwood,

I see you reverted my recent edit on Distributive justice and I'm unclear as to what you found unproductive here. "social justice" is a noun phrase and "socially just" is its adjectival form; my edit makes the sentence more grammatical. Is there a compelling reason to keep the more clunky phrasing?


 * Thank you for the correction. Shellwood (talk) 08:38, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism on Sweden Democrats
Hi, i talked with another admin recently about this topic on the AIV, and i asked him if it would be the case to apply stricter protection on the article; otherwise, i'm pretty sure that IP vandals and new users will continue to attack it until the end of the Swedish general election, because that's what happened in the last 3 days and is happening right now.--GenoV84 (talk) 12:04, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, this is a sensitive issue. If vandalism or disruptive editing becomes a problem I support a temporary semi-protection until 10th september. Shellwood (talk) 12:21, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I really put a lot of effort on that page and i can't spend the next 2 weeks to rollback every disruptive edit from hordes of vandals everytime, the admins neither.--GenoV84 (talk) 12:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Revert changes to my page
I dont know somehow who edited my page the orignal page was https://web.archive.org/web/20151209212826/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikhil_Thakur  with references please have a look and i have all the evidence news papers cutting

Steven Meisel
I removed most of his "early life" section because it was completely irrelevant and unverifiable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billionaire626 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Kangolu
hi.i am a man from kangelo village. this village name is kangelo.kangolu is incorrect.you can see in google maps. Nasim96 (talk) 21:39, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

kangolu
how delete a wikipedia page like kangolu that incorrect? kangelo ia correct. can you edit this name or delete kangolu? Nasim96 (talk) 22:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * See here for information about such process WP:AFD, but your own article with the alternative spelling has yet to be reviewed. I think some sort of redirect based on consensus would be best in this case. Shellwood (talk) 22:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages
I see you recently accepted a pending change to July 5.

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. Another editor has gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.

As a pending changes patroller, please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 03:05, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I am fully aware of this policy and the sources used in the article indeed states that his birthday is 5/7/89, I suggest you correct this. Shellwood (talk) 12:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And why wasn't that in July 5? You accepted it without a direct source and you shouldn't have. Toddst1 (talk) 20:27, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * There is a direct source in the article, do some research. I also suggest you remove the warning template you gave to the user who insterated this in the first place, since that edit clearly was constructive. Shellwood (talk) 20:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * So, I don't know how to say this more plainly. A source in the article is not good enough.   As it's stated in WP:USERG, "a wikilink is not a reliable source." That is why the requirement for a direct source on the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide was added.  Toddst1 (talk) 21:56, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And I cant understand how you again and again fail to see the source above, which also is used as a reference in the article about the subject. Shellwood (talk) 22:07, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Again, it doesn't matter if it's in the article. Toddst1 (talk) 23:40, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you very much for this, I appreciate it. You are doing a wonderful job too! Shellwood (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales user page
Why you revert edit? Wales could found funny that phrase, he have a good sense of humor... --151.49.88.52 (talk) 18:50, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Your edits are disruptive. I suggest you stop trying to be funny, this will only get you blocked. Shellwood (talk) 19:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Bashir edit
Hi, I removed the newly added 'Controversy' section because I did not feel it was not necessary to add this section - it seemed to be designed to disparage. The section was created to add information on the publication of the long Dossier on Boris Johnson, which included a short reference to a 14-year old article by the Daily Mail stating that there were rumours of a 'friendship blossoming' between Boris Johnson and Ruzwana Bashir. That original article was already taken down by the Daily Mail many years ago and is now not available, but had actually already been referenced in this Wikipedia page on Bashir. As a result I added a link to the new Sunday Times article which references the original Daily Mail article, and included that link in the appropriate section under Bashir's Oxford career. Bashir is at most peripherally referred to in the Boris Johnson Dossier, and so I do not feel it warrants a new section on her Wikipedia page. I hope that is sufficient information for you. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewGSmith (talk • contribs) 18:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Matthew and thanks for your explanation, a good idea would be to include an explanation in your edit summary or use the talk page to discuss changes in order to avoid any problems or misunderstandings in the future if you remove sourced content. Shellwood (talk) 19:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Shellwood. Is this Talk page enough or do I need to add the explanation to another? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewGSmith (talk • contribs) 19:31, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Spix's Macaw Classification Status Change
I don't know why you reverted my conservation status change in the Spix's Macaw page from "Critically Endangered and Possibly Extinct" to "Extinct in the Wild". If you actually did your research, you would know that the Spix's Macaw has been officially declared extinct in the wild quite recently (with the last wild specimen spotted in 2000). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkurapat (talk • contribs) 20:16, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Very simple, you can't provide a source for that. The burden is on you to provide a source that supports your claim. Shellwood (talk) 20:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Johnny Rebel Vandalism
Shellwood, I see that 2a02:c7f:a463:3800:41b9:dce8:812b:3990 has again incorrectly and pointlessly changed the date of death of "Johnny Rebel (singer)" even after you warned him to cease doing so. I reverted his most recently change. Please feel free to report this user for blocking if you think warranted. Thanks, --Skb8721 (talk) 20:17, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The IP seem to have stopped vandalizing, thankfully. Shellwood (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Good, I didn't notice the timestamps: I thought the user had been vandalizing repeatedly for hours, not just a few minutes. Thanks, --Skb8721 (talk) 20:42, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

edit removed
Hello Shellwood, I am new to this and all I was trying to do was put back in a paragraph that has been historically on the page for ages, it was just recently removed and I feel that it shouldn't have been removed. All I am trying to do is revert it back to the way it has been. Someone savvy like yourself could assist me in doing this. I run a business for a living, I am not an avid Wikipedia editor. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjkj18 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Is this what you are looking for? A simple copy and paste without references will do no good, may I suggest you discuss this on the article's talk page before re-adding it. Shellwood (talk) 17:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for providing that information. I will have to do some learning over the weekend and I will add it back to the page the proper way. Is their guidelines as to how to handle content if people disagree on the talk page? I do not foresee the editor of the recent changes wanting it back. Rjkj18 (talk) 17:56, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Users are encouraged to seek consensus through this discussion, if you find yourself in a position where several other users disagree with you, you can request for comment WP:RFCST or take the matter to the dispute resolution noticeboard, but I urge you to stick with any consensus reached on the article talk page. Shellwood (talk) 18:35, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm one of the editors that keep removing the Hitler Speeches section. If you want the section back in the article, you should consider addressing the arguments against inclusion that Amerul, Beyond My Ken and me have made on the article talk page. Just finding sources for the quotes as such isn't going to change anything because the objection is not that Hitler didn't say these things. The objections are that:
 * The quotes are not examples of anything that mattered much in terms of actual outcomes (or even policy) and the article shouldn't falsely suggest they are.
 * There are plenty of Hitler statements contradicting these quotes (because Hitler pandered to just about everybody at one point or the other) and the article shouldn't falsely suggest ideological consistency and coherence where none existed.
 * The fact that the section was "on the page for ages" is not an argument. It basically only means someone should have caught the problem earlier.
 * There has always been a tendency in the popular imagination to attribute everything that goes on in an authoritarian system to the person of the dictator, as though no other forces, interests, or influences existed. It's an expression of a more general cognitive fallacy, a general tendency to forget about the supporting cast and remember everything as having been done by the protagonists, usually on purpose. Scholars are trained to recognize and resist this kind of thinking. Scholars of Nazi Germany in particular also know that Hitler was a very weak dictator, comparatively, who was frequently ignored or overruled by his top lieutenants or by the industrialist and military power players behind the throne. You're going to need fairly substantial scholarship to convince editors that a bunch of random examples of Hitler pandering to this audience or that adds anything of value to the article. Damvile (talk) 02:32, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that Hitler was a "weak dictator", but rather than he was disinclined to make decisions until he absolutely had to. He allowed, and even encouraged, competing authorities in the state and the party to "work toward the Fuhrer" -- i.e. to do what they knew, or thought they knew, that Hitler wanted, and if there was a conflict, he would decide between them, a process which was often dragged out.  That means that Nazi Germany wasn't the kind of dictatorship where everything originated from the top, except for core principles, but it also means that, essentially, everything that was done was done with Hitler's approval or acquiescence.  No major thrust made by the state or party (or, especially, the Wehrmacht) was anything except what Hitler wanted, whether or not he had explicitly ordered it to be done.  (Especially in the run-up to taking over, and in the early days of the Nazi regime, Hitler and his high lieutenants would say what needed to happen, and the SA would follow their implicit instructions without receiving explicit orders as to what, exactly, to do.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * You're absolutely right about Hitler's allowing and even encouraging competing authorities. I actually made the exact same point in my Aug 15 comment on the article talk page. But to the best of my knowledge there is fairly broad academic consensus that Hitler was not only reluctant to decide but also weak, in the sense that he would not have been able to ignore the opinions of his gauleiters, his top generals, and his inner circle of top industrialists even if he had wanted to. As it happens, the consensus is especially strong where the economy is concerned. Part of the reason is that economic policy is where Hitler was the most obviously outclassed by the professionals. Another part is that the economy is where Hitler had to satisfy vital and powerful allies with especially strong personalities, e.g. Göring, or especially strong agendas, e.g. the IG Farben a.k.a. More Slave Labor Now Or We Throw Some Serious Spanners Into The Works, Inc.
 * The topic is important to me because I'm Austrian. Playing up Hitler's personal competence and dominance was (and is) a tactic used by revisionists to play down the culpability of everybody else and the complicity of the general population. If it was Hitler's decision and nobody could have stopped him, it obviously wasn't anybody else's fault, right? If you want to believe in the Opferthese or in the Clean Wehrmacht or if you want to deny the degree to which the entire nation was complicit in the Holocaust, then you need Hitler to have been an autocratic strongman answerable to nothing and nobody. So that's the fiction people with bad consciences started building up in 1945. It worked well for a while, particularly after the Cold War started and both sides suddenly lost all interest in holding their respective German possessions to account. The result is that German and Austrian academia are still fighting to set the record straight 70 years later.
 * (Related: Remember the disagreement we had on the question whether Goebbles was a journalist? Same issue! The idea that there was a clear distinction between "journalism" and "propaganda" in 1920s and 1930s Germany is ahistorical and was invented in 1945 by journalists fearing for their professional survival. ("No, we journalists had nothing to do with any of this, never mind the 50 million articles we published railing against the Jews, starting ca. 1860. It was all just the evil propagandists who are nothing like us responsible professionals! Honest! As luck would have it, there really only were about two handfuls of them and guess what, it was the same two handfuls the Allies already hanged. Absolutely no reason to fire anybody still alive, what an amazing coincidence!") As with the mythical larger-than-life Hitler, the fact that we let the guilty parties get away with that has repercussions to this day.)
 * I'd go into much more detail except I'm still on Shellwood's talk page. Damvile (talk) 07:43, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, which gave me much to think about. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:19, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

sorry
hello I am sorry for vandalising I thought it would be fun. it will not happen again. sos — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.22.68 (talk) 16:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Ten Year Society
Dear ,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more. &#x200B;

Best regards, Dan Koehl (talk) 05:51, 14 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the invite Dan, but I already joined this group some time ago. Shellwood (talk) 10:01, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Risk (magazine)
I am the managing editor of Risk magazine and Risk.net. All the changes I am trying to make are valid - for example we no longer have any connection to Incisive Media, so most of the bottom section needs changing, like I did. The section about Risk Quantum that has been removed is relevant to our audience as it is a new addition to the Risk 'family', so I would rather we could leave that in where I had it. I realise now that I'm not supposed to add too many external links, but I wasn't aware of that before, so I won't add more links. Jon

OK, I'm giving up. I'll leave the old info on there as I keep getting told I'm vandalizing. My manager won't be happy but there you go. Very unhappy with this process though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonfopro2018 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

How about I just tell you what the changes need to be and you do them or not? And by the way, it would be polite to offer help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonfopro2018 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 14 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Please provide a reliable source. Shellwood (talk) 16:19, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Where? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonfopro2018 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * In the article. Shellwood (talk) 16:23, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Now I see you've also taken off the lists of Quant of the year and Lifetime achievement. What is the point of doing that? Those have been on there for ages.

There is nothing on this article left that needs a source. You've got rid of everything that didn't have a source. Do you have a manager I can speak to? I'm really not happy about this treatment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonfopro2018 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I only removed unnecessary external links you created in almost every section of the article, other users have since then removed parts they deemed promotional. I suggest you bring the issue to the article's talk page. Shellwood (talk) 16:34, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

There is no sign of any other action other than that done by yourself, unless you can point me in the right direction. I am new to this, and it's been a dreadful experience. The page has been ruined since I started trying to make it better. The talk page on the my article just shows a list of who the article would be of interest to on Wiki - what do you mean by 'bring this issue to the talk page'? I find this whole thing unfathomable to be honest and wish I'd never started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonfopro2018 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)


 * See page history . Shellwood (talk) 16:44, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Unnaturally fast
How are you so damn fast? Every time I see a flagged edit you've always reverted it, leave some for the rest of us!

On a more real note, nice job and keep up the good work! Kyle 13:41, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That's all thanks to Huggle :) Shellwood (talk) 13:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks a lot, your own contributions deserve recognition too, keep it up! Shellwood (talk) 19:54, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Tornado chaser (talk) 19:55, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Adnan Al Kassy
Hi there. You recently undid my changes to Adnan Al Kaisy's page. I've been in contact with him the past two weeks and he informed me that his real name listed on this site is incorrect. He also no longer lives in Minnesota as stated on the site so I updated that as well. He appeared a bit upset that his name was incorrect so I told him I would correct it. If you'd like I can take a picture of the letter where he stated this. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itstoocool22 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 16 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Please cite a reliable source as we are dealing with a BLP. Shellwood (talk) 04:07, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Baloch tribes
You didn't add Gadi tribe Munafbaloch (talk) 18:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you very much, this is very kind of you. Shellwood (talk) 22:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.


 * Project news
 * The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.
 * As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.


 * There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See New pages patrol/Coordination for more info to see if you can help out.


 * Other
 * A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.


 * Moving to Draft and Page Mover
 * Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
 * If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
 * Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
 * The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
 * The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

给您的啤酒！

 * 谢谢, keep up the good work! Shellwood (talk) 13:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Scott Cawthon
Hi, I noticed that you reverted my edit on Scott Cawthon. I feel that this should not be reverted as this was stated by Scott, even if it was a joke.GamingNerds (talk) 14:06, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Don't add jokes into articles, it is disruptive and never ends well. Shellwood (talk) 14:52, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Adminship?
With all the anti-vandal work you've been doing, have you ever considered a request for adminship? I feel like you might be good with the tools. SemiHypercube ✎ 20:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi and thanks for the kind words. I have never considered running for admin and this is for two reasons. First, I dont feel a great need of any administrative tools right now although I will admit it would ease the work a lot in several situations. Secondly, I dont think that I would pass per diversity, Im really only active in one part of the project and the community (judging by past RfAs) is very demanding on this issue. Candidates must typical show a high level of activity and understanding in various areas. But I personally would definitely support a candidate with good standing, whos main and perhaps only objective is to work with countering vandalism. Shellwood (talk) 14:45, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I would definitely support your RfA. I would encourage to go to WP:ORCP first, though. L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:31, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I think your anti-vandalism work is fine, Shellwood (believe me, if I didn't, you'd probably know about it by now ;-D), and sometimes I see you revert a vandal 5-6 times and think "he'd have an easier time of it with the block button, you know". However, you're right that you need to have a broad skillset, such as dealing with complex cases like this, and you need to have empathy and serious amounts of AGF, because using the anti-vandalism tools accidentally on good-faith but WP:COMPETENCE related editors can cause you misery. Anyway, I've written a big essay on it, which is worth reading. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  20:28, 26 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the message Ritchie, I am well aware of the risk of reverting good faiths edits when using semi-automatic tools. I want to stress this now, since it's not the first time I have been asked about running for admin. Im not  interested, if I had ever been interested in the mop I would have behaved very differently and focused my energy on other parts of the project a long time ago. Shellwood (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Doing anti-vandal work myself I also think you do an excellent job (I might have given you a barnstar once, I don't remember). It's not an infrequent sight for me to go to revert a vandal and find that you've reverted it. LittlePuppers (talk) 23:32, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Kate Sheppard
Just curious if you understand why/how was able to vandalize this article even after it was set earlier today to "Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access", as it doesn't appear that account (created only moments ago) is either.  General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 16:08, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I see now that the protection (with a duration of apparently only 3 hours or so) had expired. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 16:13, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Elements of Art
Hello, I'm wondering about how you find articles that may have been vandalized, have typos, etc. I'm doing a project and would like to know the process that you go through. Miraaking14 (talk) 02:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Miraaking14
 * Hi, you can patrol recent changes to spot vandalism, you will find the link on menu bar to your left, as for typos this might be of interest to you. Shellwood (talk) 02:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Willow Glen High School
Please review the you reverted to. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 17:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The part about the principal seems correct, the rest was a mistake. I should have reverted further back. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Yup, after verification, I added the new principal to the infobox. It was the potentially defamatory part that resulted in my reversion. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 18:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for fixing this! Shellwood (talk) 18:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! Shellwood (talk) 20:35, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Elliot Fletcher
You may want to revert again. I'm not really sure how the WP:LGBT guidelines indicate what should be done there.Naraht (talk) 17:24, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you. Shellwood (talk) 22:41, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 October 2018
<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) 00:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

re-emergence of blocked editor
I have little experience of such things, but a disruptive editor you had some dealings with a few months ago, user:Calvingoslingearlofsurrey, who ended up permanently blocked, appears to have re-emerged as User:Royalalmorer (who then rather unsubtly attempted to create the page Draft:Baron Gosling). I think the more disruptive edits have already been reverted, but, along with some edits as ip 82.33.126.232, there are some I can't tell if they are pure fiction or not, and am reluctant to wade into pages I know nothing about. I would be very pleased if you could cast an eye over things to see if there is a need for further action at this stage. RobinLeicester (talk) 17:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Robin and thanks for highlighting this. It does look a bit suspicious and it could be a case of sock puppetry. If more evidence can be gathered and if the disruptive pattern persists the next step would be to open up a sockpuppet investigation. Shellwood (talk) 08:08, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail
Hi Shellwood. The link I deleted was because it is unverified content .I don't think u have cited any sources regarding the link between Chutiya dynasty and Manikya's of tripura  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.48.240.2 (talk) 21:08, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks a lot for this! You are doing a fantastic job too keeping this place clean. Shellwood (talk) 14:02, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about the Altura article.
Thought it was a lot less vandalized when I first reverted it. Didn't realize it was very, very jacked up. Sorry about that mistake, I'll look harder next time. Neo (chat w/ me!) 15:12, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, there is no need for you to apologize, such things happen often when dealing with IP hoppers. The only one to blame in this case is the vandal who made the mess in the first place. Shellwood (talk) 15:51, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Astur-Leonese languages Reverted
Hi there!

I recently made an update to the article "Astur-Leonese languages" and then (stupidly) thought that adding a note asking people to not update unless necessary (because it's a kind of controversial subject) would be helpful, but it got marked as vandalism...

I reverted your change without the note, but just wanted to let you know.

Julio César Fernández Llamera (talk) 11:45, 17 October 2018

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.
 * Backlog


 * Community Wishlist Proposal
 * There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
 * Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!


 * Project updates
 * ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
 * There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.


 * New scripts
 * User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js(info) — A new script created for quickly placing copyvio-revdel on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Alexandrine parakeets
I cannot see how saying that they are kept as pets is bad? I cannot understand how this is vandilism. Can you explain, Qwerty number1 (talk) 15:56, 22 October 2018 (UTC).

I can see how I deleted some stuff, though this was accidental, but it is not productive, as far as I can see, to delete correct information because someone pressed the delete button one or two times to many. Qwerty number1 (talk) 16:02, 22 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Please be careful and preview your edits before you publish them. Shellwood (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

OK, fine. I will be more careful in future, thanks! You are doing a wonderful job at stopping vandals, and no, I'm not being sarcastic! Qwerty number1 (talk) 16:10, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

One question, can you explain what you meant by "that is not the way". Thanks, Qwerty number1 (talk) 16:52, 22 October 2018 (UTC).


 * I see that I somehow managed to remove parts of my earlier edit summary so I will reply to you here. The information you added was already menbtioned in the lead section, there is no need to add any further on this point. Shellwood (talk) 22:21, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Could you please explain where, because I cannot see anywhere where it says this. Thanks for your patience, Qwerty number1 (talk) 06:25, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

It does say that they are kept in captivity and were, a very long time ago kept as pets,but none of this means they are kept as pets now. Remember, captivity could mean a zoo. Please tell me if i am right, or if The have not noticed something. Qwerty number1 (talk) 06:47, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you, I appreciate it! Shellwood (talk) 02:52, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * Thank you very much for this! Shellwood (talk) 04:39, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what just happened.
What was that warning for? I'd love to know. Neo (chat w/ me!) 14:53, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Dont mind that, my bad. I was about to revert the IP you just reverted, unfortunately I happen to revert you instead. Shellwood (talk) 15:04, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Max just passed away, and I was still making changes.He died yesterday in Los Angeles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.107.34 (talk) 12:13, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

John S. Burke Catholic High School edits
It's a lot more vandalized than it looks, do you have any ability at all to revert these edits by those two editors User talk:Farr Face and User talk:24.103.124.235? Looking back in the page history and at the article itself it's horribly vandalized. I'd like your help on the matter. Thanks! (P.S. linked talk pages because user pages don't exist for these two, but talk pages do.) Neo (chat w/ me!) 13:58, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Neo (chat w/ me!) 14:02, 24 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know about this. You can rollback and restore earlier versions of an article yourself with twinkle. Shellwood (talk) 14:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Issue I had with that is it kept saying conflicting intermediate edits. I tried to restore the one by ClueBot but it kept giving me this error. Not quite sure what to do but I would've fixed it otherwise. Thanks for doing that as, like I said, Twinkle wasn't quite working. Neo (chat w/ me!) 14:08, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Rama vaidyanathan page edits
Hi Rama vaidyanathan is my mother in law, I edited the page because she is unrelated to the business mydala and people have come up to her asking her about it. My name is Aditya Singh baghel, dakshina vaidyanathan is her daughter and my wife. Couple of image searches and facebook can help establish the link.

Thanks for what you do Adraze (talk) 16:00, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Something to keep an eye on
made the exact same edit as has been, so I'd keep an eye on him.— Mythdon  ( talk  •  contribs ) 11:00, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, that was interesting
What'd you do to that poor IP :) Kb03 (talk) 13:44, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit change
Hi, I did make a mistake of where I was trying to change a link but I have fixed this now. Thanks for your help and letting me know

Adminship
Have you been approached? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:03, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Anna, yes twice actually but I have never given it any serious thoughts. I believe as things are now I probably wouldn't pass an RfA because as you may have seen the vast majority of all my work here is focused on only one thing in this project. And rfa candidates usually should display a good record in working in several fields, this is based upon what I have seen in recent RfAs. Shellwood (talk) 11:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, still. You could spend a few months working different areas. There's a bit of an admins shortage, and dry spell at RfA, so you'd have good chances. Sure, they'd dig up the block, but that was once and ages ago. Please do consider it if you like. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi thanks for your reply. Yes I got blood on my hands there is no denying in that. Nobody likes to advertise their mistakes and I have been too much of coward to make an apology to that user involved, whether who is wrong or right in that content dispute is irrelevant and no justification for my behaviour. I regret this whole affair and its an embarrassment for me. I did the crime and did the time and learned from it. I'm not proud of this at all. I'm sure the community could find more errors done by me such as reverting good faith edits and so on if they were to dig deep enough, I'm not going to deny this. Mistakes happens and they will happen when doing recent changes patrol. At this point I have no plans to run for admin. But I will echo what I said before should a candidate turn up at RFA with good status and having the intentions of being a pure vandal fighter I would support them, there is a shortage of those admins dealing with backlogs concerning this. Shellwood (talk) 03:24, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, my friend. Anyhow, in a few years, you may end up working new areas and change your mind. I hope you do. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:53, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

What should I do?
User 14.200.91.223 has been offended me by saying that I, in particular, make wiki unpleasant Saying I know nothing about copyright Saying I am malicious and disruptive Saying I have no sense of humour Saying I have a bad temper Telling me my comprehension skills are poor Saying I am hostile Posting that I'm not helping Wikipedia's environment Saying people like me have made Wikipedia into 'a nasty edit-warring trash fire' And then saying that I owe an apology!? Here is a link [] Please help, Qwerty number1 (talk) 09:29, 27 October 2018 (UTC).

I have looked through their talk page and seen that they have already been given a final warning for offending someone else another time.Qwerty number1 (talk) 09:32, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Something that might interest you
.— Mythdon ( talk  •  contribs ) 05:42, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 October 2018
<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) 19:10, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello
You reverted an edit and cited me for vandalism when I edited Cliff Diving. I think that the record for the highest cliff dive should be added to the page.Wheee17 (talk) 17:44, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * That is a disambiguation page and disney.com has nothing to do with it, please stop this now. Shellwood (talk) 17:47, 30 October 2018 (UTC)