User talk:TonyBallioni/Archive 25

3 more accounts of "Weltraumagentur" have been blocked
Dear Tony,

For your information: In the de.wikipedia.org three more accounts of the Space Agency have been blocked. These are the following accounts:



For details see here.

As far as I know, these three accounts have not run any edits in the en.wikipedia.org.

Regards,

Atomiccocktail (talk) 08:27, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, Atomiccocktail. Sorry for the late response. I blocked the two that have accounts on en.wiki locally because they wouldn't be allowed to edit if they wanted to, so there isn't much of a reason to wait for them to do so before blocking. Thanks for letting me know. Merry Christmas to you. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:43, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Elisa Rolle
Apologies if this is misplaced. I still have Elisa's talk page on my watch list and have noticed that although blocked is soliciting other editors to edit on her behalf. With other editors, I've seen this result in loss of access to their talk page. Most of what is suggested is constructive but blocked is blocked. Do you think I should take this to ANI? WCM email 18:37, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you point out how the project is negatively affected? Otherwise why don’t you take that page off your watch list and find something else to worry about? Mr Ernie (talk) 19:45, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , the most-relevant policy in hand is (probably) WP:PROXYING but I don't see any violation. If the ones who are pinged ain't any concerned about the solicitation, why are you? The encyclopedia is (very likely) improving:-) &#x222F; WBG converse 19:51, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * There hasn't been a problem yet, which is why I haven't done anything. But the user was blocked on 11 August 2018 for using their talk page to ask other editors to edit on her behalf while blocked - and on that occasion it was soliciting other editors to continue an edit war. There are some admins who would remove talk page access for what she is doing if I were to post this at ANI, which is why I sought Tony's advice first.  WCM email 19:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Umm.......There's a gulf of difference between canvassing and the stuff that she's doing right now. &#x222F; WBG converse 19:58, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , also see this discussion on a very-similar locus. &#x222F; WBG converse 19:57, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks I'll leave it for now. WCM email 20:03, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Leave it for good. Why do you need to worry about it? Mr Ernie (talk) 21:10, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Indef me already
I thought that "Wikipedia was not a bureaucracy". Kamafa Delgato (Lojbanist)Styrofoam is not made from kittens. 19:50, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Tony, can you please control his "removal of links" at various pages? Unless there's something I'm missing, he doesn't get to do that and it's pointless anyway. You seem to have taken charge of this, but I'm about to block him if he doesn't stop or you ask me to leave it alone. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:26, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , please be my guest. I didn't want to block as I proposed the current TBAN discussion. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:28, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I blocked him for 31h, but I can't rollback all his edits because he now has a vanished username. I'd have to do it manually, and it's too much work.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:33, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sigh, I saw that and notified the mailing list with a neutral message about the discussion but it seems to have crossed paths (Editor D.S is not normally on en.wiki and is also new, so I don't think he's on the mailing list.) I personally think it shouldn't be allowed under WP:VANISH since he was about to be TBAN'd and someone just suggested an indef block, but I'll let the rest of the renamers discuss whether or not to revert. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * His edits should still be mass-rollbackable, but I doubt it's worth the watchlist spam. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 01:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * One experienced editor reverted one of my reverts. The whole thing is pretty silly. I've never seen Editor D.S. before. He apparently has "temporary" privileges at various projects. Based on global contributions, I'm not sure why he has any privileges, but maybe there's something I'm missing. Wouldn't be the first time.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:12, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

 * Can I eat it? Or regift it to Bbb for all the work he does? TonyBallioni (talk) 04:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!
Happy Holidays text.png Thank you for all great contributions to the project Tony! My very best wishes for this holiday season. May your heart and the heart of those around you be filled with happiness during this special time. (Please don't try to shoot or eat the cute little birds in the postcard) --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 09:50, 24 December 2018 (UTC)



Season Greetings
 Merry Christmas

Hi, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

May next year be prosperous and joyful.

– Scope creep Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 11.02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Heh, and to you as well my friend. Enjoy the time with the family, and the puppies. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:38, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

To all my Wiki-friends
Thanks to all of you who posted messages on my talk page. I'm not particularly good at designs and templates and the like, and there are too many of you to thank and wish well for it to be effective, so I'm just leaving this here: thank you for your efforts in this past year. Our project really is a testament to the ability of people to come together and build something for the greater good of humanity. Each of you is a part of that, and special to me in a unique way. If you are Christian or celebrate it secularly, I wish you the merriest of Christmases, for those who are not, I extend to you the best wishes for a happy and prosperous New Year. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , Merry Christmas to you too, buddy! SQL Query me!  03:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merry Christmas Tony! :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:02, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Block log question
In while tagging the most recent batch of Shameel Done socks through the SPI helper script, I neglected to uncheck the block checkbox. They were all already blocked, so no harm done, but you had marked all of them as check user blocks. Do I need to change anything in the block settings to correct this, or is having one CU block in the log enough? Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:08, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sir Sputnik, no worries, I accidentally changed a non-CU block to CU block on a stale master before by clicking to wrong thing, so I understand it. If you could change it back to checkuserblock-account and note the misclick, I'd appreciate it. You should be able to find it in the dropdown. Merry Christmas, and thanks for all your help clerking . TonyBallioni (talk) 03:16, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
A blessed feast to you and yours. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Greetings !
Happy Holidays text.png Hello TonyBallioni: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers,  ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  18:48, 25 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

SPI Question
I don't trust my judgement 100% when it comes to check user stuff so I thought I would get your two cents worth to see if it is worth a SPI. I got a remark on my talk page a couple hours ago from one Dafteire mentioning a deleted article. As far as I know, I haven't had any interaction with this user. However, digging deeper, I noticed that Moonchild101 had created Dafteire's user page and I had indeed left a stale draft speedy delete template on Moon's page earlier today. Without taking too much time, do you think this is worthwhile? Appreciate it! -- Dolotta (talk) 17:42, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Dolotta, it's definitely suspicious, but on its own not enough to block. If you can find other diffs that show a connected pattern that may be socking or some other violation of the policy on abusing multiple accounts, it would help an SPI. If you have any other questions, feel free to let me know. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank for your thoughts, Tony! -- Dolotta (talk) 00:16, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I love rpgs
You probably ought to do what's necessary to alert Commons to the SPI and CU block as well; he's been disruptive on an industrial scale over there. &#8209; Iridescent 00:12, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , can you do the needful re m:Special:CentralAuth/I love rpgs. See my findings at this SPI. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:22, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Odd AfD relist
I've seen you fix odd relists from eager new relisters before, so I thought I'd ask if you could take a look at Articles for deletion/Kathryn Rose, which seems to be a case of an editor clicking "relist" without actually looking at the discussion. Maybe they're right, but if you could take a look that would be great. Many thanks. Bakazaka (talk) 03:37, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ - I happened to see this and took care of it. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Bakazaka (talk) 04:26, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Telepathy
Hi TonyBallioni, while I may decide to support Ammarpad's RfA in the next few days, depending on the oppose reasons that come up, I had to smile when reading your oppose. About 2 hours before your oppose, without knowing about the second RfA at all, I created this. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:19, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Heh, very good essay that I obviously agree with :) TonyBallioni (talk) 18:25, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Happy New Year! Hello TonyBallioni: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, 5 albert square (talk) 23:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Galobtter
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Orangemike
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg BorgQueen •  Davidruben • Ocee • Revolving Bugbear • Theda • There'sNoTime • Timc • Tijuana Brass • Tristessa de St Ange

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Addshore



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Joe Roe • SilkTork
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Euryalus • Newyorkbrad • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg AGK • Joe Roe • SilkTork
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Euryalus • Newyorkbrad • There'sNoTime

Guideline and policy news
 * There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD:
 * G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is db-disambig; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
 * R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion).  This is db-redircom; the text is unchanged.
 * G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use db-blankdraft.
 * The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
 * Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.

Technical news
 * Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length . All accounts must have a password:
 * At least 8 characters in length
 * Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the [//github.com/wikimedia/password-blacklist Password Blacklist library])
 * Different from their username
 * User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
 * Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
 * Copyvio-revdel now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration
 * Following the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , ,.

Miscellaneous
 * Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
 * Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for following up that 500/30 block.

And a happy new year to you. GoldenRing (talk) 22:09, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * GoldenRing, no problem, and Happy New Year as well. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:40, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
 Merry Christmas! Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten! ¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua! God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus! Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce! Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством! 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스! สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành! Hello, TonyBallioni! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:33, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

re
Swarm {talk}  07:11, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misha Kokaia
Hi, I have nominated this article Misha Kokaia for deletion, but may not have applied the deletion tag right as I don't know how as of right now. Can you please see if it set right for me? Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:37, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the nomination page and added it to the AfD log. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:55, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Revdel something?
Hey, would you mind revdelling these five edits? The text Perception also created the locator cards, which start in the Wakandan language before translating to English. seen throughout the movie. The idea was to create title cards as if they were intended for Wakandans and then translate them to English. This process explored various layouts and ways to animate the translation from Wakandan to English in a way that wouldn't be too jarring. Their work on the main-on-end titles for the film incorporated many of their ideas for their other work on the film, including the vibranium sand techniques, various African patterns, and the concept of cymatics. Coogler suggested the credits use the thematic colors scheme that had been developed to signify the different characters and personalities in the film. is very close to this source's In addition to designing the technology of Wakanda and creating the end title sequence the team at Perception also designed the locator cards seen throughout the movie. The idea was to create title cards as if they were intended for Wakandans and then translate them to English. This process explored various layouts and ways to animate the translation from Wakandan to English in a way that wouldn't be too jarring. [...] These early tests embraced the Vibranium Sand techniques, as well as various African patterns and the concept of cymatics (visuals based on sound frequencies). [...] Coogler guided the Perception team to align the background colors to a thematic color-script he had developed with the production design team to signify different characters and personalities with specific colors. The one bit that is not lifted almost word-for-word (Their work on the main-on-end titles for the film) is OR not directly supported by the source (regardless of whether or not it's true). Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 12:42, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ TonyBallioni (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry to ask about this again (and to ping you a moment ago), but what do you think of this? The source had BUTTERS FALLS VICTIM TO AN UNLIKELY BULLY [...] Stan wants to raise awareness about the dangers of bullying by shooting a big dance video. and the text I blanked was In the episode, an anti-bullying speaker visits South Park Elementary, after which Stan raises awareness about the dangers of bullying by shooting a big dance video, while Butters falls victim to an unlikely bully. The article's oldest version had Stan wants to raise awareness about the dangers of bullying by shooting a big dance video, while Butters falls victim to an unlikely bully.; does the entire history of the page need to be revdelled? Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 04:00, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It can be, though I'm not sure for something that old and with enough other contributions whether or not it is worth it. I'll take a look tomorrow. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:06, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I would like to note that Hijiri seems to be targeting me for no apparent reason regarding all of this, especially finding an early edit from me from YEARS ago, when I will fully admit I didn't fully understand that directly copying plot summaries for upcoming TV episodes were an issue (since I had seen it done by many other editors back then). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I could point out that the episode was not "upcoming", and since F1f93 chose to create the article he had presumably already seen it, so calling it directly copying plot summaries for upcoming TV episodes is a bit disingenuous, but I only went back to 2012 to determine whether this had been an issue since the beginning of his editing career; the real problem seems to be that he is unwilling to accept that what he did two days ago was inappropriate. The "many other editors back then" have all since either changed their ways, retired or been blocked; if not, then they should be blocked. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 01:32, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Tony, given the above claim (also repeated at Talk:Black Panther (film)) that I'm "targeting" this editor "for no apparent reason", this looks like (i) the editor is unwilling to recognize what he did wrong and (ii) it might get ugly if I keep trying to address it by myself, so your advice would be appreciated. Do you think this is also too close? The source has Billy Russo is still deep in recovery for the face-slicing beatdown delivered by Frank Castle in the season one premiere, still suffering from brain damage, memory issues, and self-pity. The makeup team was meticulous in placing scars on Billy's face where they realistically would be after the fight with Frank., while our article has The makeup department worked meticulously to realistically place the scars on Billy Russo's face, who is still recovering from his injuries and is suffering from brain damage, memory issues, and self-pity. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 03:10, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hijiri, sorry, but if "it might get ugly if [you] keep trying to address it by [your]self", maybe stop trying to address it by yourself. It's not a life of death matter. Drmies (talk) 03:13, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe not life or death, but it is pretty damned important by Wikipedia standards. The Black Panther article has been averaging about 20,000 page views a day for the last few weeks, meaning that in the sixteen or so hours that the above-quoted plagiarized text was live the page was viewed ... a lot. The Defenders (miniseries) was viewed over 57,000 times in the last 30 days, and presumably much more around the time it was released, and the text Favre added that he transcribed directly from Joe Quesada's mouth but wrote as if it was his own has been live for almost 38 months. Additionally, many of these articles are "GA-class" (the aforementioned Defenders is currently nominated) and their GA status has been used (by Favre, among others) to prevent changes to the articles, even though, apparently, none of the dozens of GA reviewers have ever noticed these problems. One of the more recent reviewers was clearly a sock or troll, and came after me quite vociferously for opposing the promotion, but that's ... well, it might explain why the issue is even more important to me personally than it is to the project as a whole, but that doesn't mean it's not important to the project as a whole, and while I would be happy to leave the work to someone else to do ... that's precisely why I'm asking for someone else to do it! That being said, are you interested in helping? I'd rather you didn't tell me that it's my responsibility not to help clean this up just because I think the editor responsible might not be cooperative; wasn't cooperative either, but no one ever told me to drop it and go do something else there. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 03:52, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Nice try Hijiri. Drmies (talk) 04:24, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Okay, so, I'm very busy IRL currently (grad school is winding down and associated exams are basically the focus of my life for the next 10-12 months), so I haven't looked too deeply into this. Most of my time on-wiki of late has been spent at SPI in part because of this. I do think that what you quoted is fairly similar, but I'm only on-wiki for a few more minutes before getting back to real life stuff. At first glance, it looks like it could be borderline on close paraphrase, but I can see an argument for "tough to say any other way.", do you mind if I punt this one to you? It seems like something that your particular skillset would be useful for here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:19, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't know you were busy. I'd be happy to consult with you on this matter instead, if you're game. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 03:52, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh joy! Plot summaries – again! (hi, Tony!) So, some initial thoughts:
 * , you've already made a request about this at WP:CCI, which is the right place for it if it's as serious as you seem to think; those requests, by convention, should list at least five examples that illustrate the potential problem
 * as you probably know, close paraphrasing can be used to tag sections or whole articles that appear to have close-paraphrasing problems and is a good way of attracting other eyes to the page; that may be the best way forward at Black Panther (film) (but please see below)
 * as you probably also know, you can request revdeletion by adding Copyvio-revdel to the page, either manually or using this script
 * WP:RD1 is specifically for "blatant violations of the copyright policy"; my personal take is that that wouldn't normally cover close paraphrasing unless very extensive
 * I'd also probably decline a revdel request for Butterballs (South Park) – to hide the whole history for a one-sentence copyvio seems to me out of proportion
 * , if you think there may be other pages where you may have copied stuff (whether recently or not, whether or not with minor changes) from copyright sources, please revisit those pages and remove the copied content as a matter of urgency (i.e., taking precedence over any other editing projects you may have). If you're in any doubt as to whether a particular bit of text is acceptably different from the source, feel free to ping me from the article talk-page and I'll try to form an opinion.
 * Now I'll try to look a bit at Black Panther (film); there's a lot to read there, so – as Captain Oates may not have said – I might be some time. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, JLAN, you actually caught me in my brief watchlist browsing of the day. I've hidden histories before over close paraphrase and sentences, but the length of time here was what to me stood out as to borderline for the amount used.Close paraphrase is trickier and it can be something (I think we can both think of a user who is currently blocked who had issues both with close paraphrase and lack of attribution where I RD1 was used.) That being said, the tricky thing is whether or not there was another way to phrase it and if it is extensive enough to require hiding. Anyway, back to the coffee and books TonyBallioni (talk) 17:35, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you Justlettersandnumbers.
 * I actually wasn't aware of the "five examples" thing until you pointed it out above, and so prioritized getting that addressed over actually thanking you for looking into this. When I went through and counted, I actually had just barely given five examples, but two of them were in a single diff of a comment by me in which I quoted the offending material as I did at the top this thread, and I had not provided evidence that both of them came from Favre1fan93. The total list of examples is now ten, though some of them are fairly weak, like copy-pasting is executed in partnership with or The Flash crawls toward the mysterious book
 * FWIW, it's not actually "plot summaries" that are the issue here, since I believe Favre1fan93 when he says that he hasn't copy-pasted plot summaries for upcoming TV episodes in years (the plot summaries he has been writing for the last several have their own issues, but definitely not copyright -- they're original interpretations of the primary source material, and defy secondary sourcing).
 * Also thank you both for clarifying regarding the use of revdel in cases like the South Park episode; I would say it is blatant violation of the copyright policy rather than close paraphrasing, but it's short, old, and a lot of other editors had worked on the page in between; I think I asked Tony a similar question some months back, but that was even murkier if I recall correctly, so getting it clarified here again is helpful.
 * Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 02:20, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year!


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

Davidgoodheart (talk) 00:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

2019


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019 -

begin it with music and memories

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:23, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

I began expanding Psalm 96, can you add? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:39, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. I wanted that for 1 January, but then wasn't sad about having our music pictured instead. Not too late for resolutions, New Year or not. DYK that he probably kept me on Wikipedia, back in 2012? By the line (which brought him to my attention, and earned the first precious in br'erly style) that I added to my editnotice, in fond memory? - Next psalm 75. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:55, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

User:LLarson
Hi.

Could you once again intercede with Llarson for me? Again, the dispute is at Commissioners' Plan of 1811, where the editor is removing sourced information with no explanation as to why. I've just opened a talk page section, but, given the past conflicts I've had with LLarson, I have no reason to believe that he won't continue to remove the information.

Things have been quiet between us for a while, and I'd like it to return to that.

Thanks,

Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:54, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you very much for your prompt attention to the investigation of Kawhilaugh42 sockpuppet Do laima. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Minor typo
At WT:PERM you wrote I support this concept. Seems like the easiest solution and I’m all about practicality which I think is a typo. I think you meant to write I oppose this: it concerns a bot and I'll be damned if any bot-talk crosses my path! The keys are like right next to each other. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 22:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Heh! Truth. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Really?
Dude, I’m working with you. ANI? Really? What am I missing? —В²C ☎ 06:38, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * My response now is the same as the last time you asked that question, but I’ll elaborate: you refuse to listen to any voice other than your own, you attack people who follow the procedures designed to deal with entrenched disruptive editors, and you never should have been unblocked to begin with in my view. The combination of the three led me to the conclusion that ANI was unfortunately the only option. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:43, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * How am I not listening? Am I taking actions contrary to what you or anyone else is saying? No. Because I’m listening! Who have I attacked? Is this because I said “jerk” in my edit summary? I’m sorry about that.  But I was really miffed and insulted that you felt it appropriate to post that warning on my talk page.  I’ve been editing on WP for about 15 years now. I think you can understand why I might not appreciate being treated like a newbie.  It really felt like a jerk move on your part. I’m sorry, again. I should have abided by AGF and instead inquired why you felt I needed that notice. My whole question regarding the BLP thing is more intellectual curiosity than anything else, which is why I asked for comments, implicitly from those who are interested in discussing that question, not anyone who would be irritated by doing so. As to my block, look at the comment by RegentsPark in the more recent AE started by Black Kite. And my comment there. Or the reasoning given fir the unblock. None of these questions were ever addressed. I think we are both trying to improve the Jayme Closs article, and I think we’re both doing so. You seem to have a personal grudge with me.  I’m not sure why.  I have faith that  we can work it out, however. Thanks. —В²C ☎ 07:03, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Discretionary sanctions alerts are mandatory even for established editors. I gave it to you because you're a long-term editor who has a history of talking until people just give up. That is conduct which is sanctionable, and is what the discretionary sanctions system was specifically designed to address: established editors where individual admin action protected by special appeal provisions are the simplest way to prevent disruption to the project. We hadn't gotten to the stage where it was needed yet, but you did need to be alerted per WP:AC/DS or else they couldn't be used if needed. Beyond that, I have already explained my thoughts at ANI, so I don't think further discussion here will be that helpful. TonyBallioni (talk) 07:10, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * But what did I do to warrant receiving the discretionary sanction alert? —В²C ☎ 07:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * As the template says: they imply no wrongdoing. You were in a dispute in a sanctioned area. You have a history of not dropping anything (search your name in my archive box for one example.) It was well within the realm of possibility at the time that you would turn BLPCRIME and confessions into the next Sarah Jane Brown. Giving you the alert let you know that the discretionary system was in place on anything related to BLPs and also made AE an option if you did decide to take the SJB approach. This is exactly how the AC/DS system is designed to work. TonyBallioni (talk) 07:36, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Wow. I didn’t even think of that discussion about BLPCRIME as a dispute. The link in the See Also section issue was a dispute, but that was primarily between you and Spadaro, yet you gave only me the notice. I’m sensing your prejudices about me are getting in the way of productivity. —В²C ☎ 08:00, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Password
Hi, an editor User:Ramblersen is locked out of his account as he forgot the new password and doesn't use the old email address. Can you sort something out with him at User talk:89.23.235.183 and try to reset it with a new email address and password he'll remember? Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:01, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * , Only devs can reset emails/passwords and they'll need some solid confirmation that the person is indeed Ramblersen. Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:39, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you (or any long-standing editor over here) know the editor in RL and can vouch for his identity? That Alexander has left, User:JEissfeldt (WMF) ought be the authorized one to look at these stuff. &#x222F; WBG</b> converse 13:43, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Westminster paedophile ring listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Westminster paedophile ring. Since you had some involvement with the Westminster paedophile ring redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 194.207.146.167 (talk) 12:24, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Just in case...
...you were worrying, on a scale from "bad admin" to "god's gift to adminkind", you're a lot closer to the latter then you are to the former. And that's real honest-goodness 100%-butter flattery, so keep up the good work (nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more). Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:31, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * So long as you don't compare me to Jimmy Wales, all is good. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:40, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposal 5
Hi Tony, IMHO your proposal looks sane and sensible. My only concern is haven't we passed this stage already ? based on the history of ANI and AE threads and a previous block for same reasons, I think the warning stage was long gone. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  17:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd agree, but there doesn't seem to be an appetite for other sanctions, and the only alternative is an ArbCom case, and I don't think we are at that stage yet, and don't think anyone particularly wants one. A formal warning documents that the community considers the behavior as a whole a problem, and if/when the next noticeboard thread happens, will make it so the excuse of "I'm being targeted/What did I do wrong?" aren't really options. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:17, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * fair enough, I will support this. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  17:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

RfA close
Please 'un-close' that discussion. There is still an active post from Bbb23 to one of the contributors. They should have an opportunity to reply and I'm sure Bbb23 and others would be interested in that reply. Thank you - wolf  00:43, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I won't be unclosing it, and I'd ask that you not do so. If wants  to answer him about having other accounts on that talk page he's free to reverse me (Bbb is always free to reverse me in anything), but in my view, there is nothing to be gained by people continuing to argue on the talk page of an RfA that has been closed as successful. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:57, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Good thing you didn't unclose it. That way I don't have to revert you. --Bbb23 (talk) 01:28, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sad! I enjoy nothing more than a good bit of wheel-warring. Softlavender (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Right. Keep up the good work. - wolf  01:04, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Ugh
Thank you for getting rid of Requests for adminship/Joeymiskulin and blocking him. Joeymiskulin has been threatening to "get revenge" on me for a while, but I've been trying my best to ignore it. My resolve was beginning to break, and I was thinking about opening an ANI thread. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:32, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. I have no patience for trolls or anything that can be broadly construed as a threat. You devote too much time to this project to have to put up with that nonsense. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:34, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Beroe 2019 and Bebo71
Apologies if I should have put this on one of the accounts talk pages instead, but I wanted to make sure you were aware of something. I think it's possible the two accounts were created after the account by the same user. This assumption is based mainly on similar editing patterns. I could never be sure if the editing was intentionally disruptive or if the editor was just unable to figure out how to do things correctly. Equineducklings (talk) 19:42, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Equineducklings that account is so I can't tell you if they're connected technically. If that account starts editing again and you have evidence connecting it to Bebo71, feel free to file an SPI. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:32, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The fact that the first account stopped editing is one reason I didn't know if I should bring this up before. I also wasn't sure at the time if either account had done anything wrong. Thanks again for the response. Equineducklings (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

I've Mailed You!

 * Where did you mail him to? And are there air holes in the box? Natureium (talk) 23:42, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * , My money's on Abu_Dhabi. SQL <sup style="font-size: 5pt;color:#999">Query me!  23:52, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you just trying to send him as far away as possible? Natureium (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Haha I actually didn't think of the wording before I put that! -- 5 albert square (talk) 23:50, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

PERM
What is appropriate to move to draft? :) Siddiqsazzad001   <Talk/>'''  08:24, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * , sorry for the late reply. A member of parliament is inherently notable, and that article had enough references to confirm the notability. That article was a stub. We have millions of stubs or other not-that-great articles. We keep them in mainspace where people can actually find them to improve. Sending to draft is really only appropriate if something is likely to be kept if it had more work done to it, but in its current state would fundamentally violate some policy or guideline. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

AFD result for Wong & Ouyang
Hi Tony, should Articles for deletion/Wong & Ouyang not have closed as "No Consensus"? Also, can you provide a reasoning for closing as a Keep? Is it that the article should be changed to be a List? <b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>++ 17:19, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought the list arguments were pretty strong, which is why I closed as keep over no consensus. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/108.6.224.164 - A Vandal IP from a year ago.
I was just going through my own edit history, when I stumbled upon this lovely chap. and finally

I don't know. The user has done anything since march of last year, but it could be safer to apply a heavier block. It's all your choice really. Regards, &#8213; <em style="color:black">Matthew J. Long -Talk-<sup style="font-size:75%">☖  01:04, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, the march contributions were semi-constructive, but the older posts were still problematic. Eh. &#8213; <em style="color:black">Matthew J. Long -Talk-<sup style="font-size:75%">☖  01:07, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * He hasn’t edited in almost a year, so there’s nothing we can really do. Thanks for the note though :) TonyBallioni (talk) 01:09, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer permissions
I didn’t even know I had them or what they were. Just tried it out. Cool. Glad to know I can help with that. I’m still curious why you’re so sure I’m problematic and need to be sanctioned. Did you see WP:Hold the pepper? Curious what you think. Also do you see anything problematic in my recent history? Thanks. —В²C ☎ 07:27, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, trust me, I wasn’t criticizing you for not using them: I hate the stupid permission and wish I could get rid of it from my own account to the point where I have custom .css that makes it so I don’t notice I have it. I was more pointing out that it makes absolutely zero sense to remove something you’ve never used from you and would solely be for punishment, which I’m not about. Yes. I still support a ban, though I don’t think it’s happening this time. I’m of the general view that if someone has gone through I think 20 ANI threads, an ArbCom case, AE, and an indef block the odds of them changing their behavior are slim to none, so getting it over with and telling them to find a new hobby is better for everyone. I appreciate that you are resolving to change, and hope you’ll prove me wrong, but it doesn’t really impact my views. I haven’t followed your recent history, so can’t really comment. TonyBallioni (talk) 07:38, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Please don’t judge me so harshly, and if you must, then please look at my behavior as a whole, not just isolated incidents. Thank you.  —В²C ☎ 08:34, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Mr Wales
Are you aware with this edit [] you edited Mr Wales' post?Slatersteven (talk) 12:55, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No. Thanks for pointing it out. Not sure why it happens, but sometimes when you ctrl+f on Chrome for iPhone it removes the phrase from wikitext. I’d searched for that string to help me find his comment since that discussion has gotten too long. TonyBallioni (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Ben2719941
Hi. I believe that User:Ben2719941 is evading a block and editing as User:MusicPerson123. The edits themselves may be few and harmless but they're certaintly indicative of his recent editing patterns. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 06:14, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep, that’s ✅ to him. Indef’d both. Feel free to file an SPI for the record and I or a clerk will get to the paperwork tomorrow. TonyBallioni (talk) 07:16, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Sock, but I'm not clear who...
Hi Tony, could you please look at this guy? I think he might be the same as these others. I didn't know who to block them as, since I didn't have a sockmaster. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:56, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * that'd be . I blocked a few sleepers and confirmed it to . They're using proxies, so they weren't on the same ranges as the ones I previously blocked, but the behavior is a match and given the number of accounts, the content focus, and the username format, I'd say its that sockfarm. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:59, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * 2A02:C7F:BE3E:4200:D834:6525:605F:C5B4 (talk) 19:38, 7 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't know if ^^this guy is responding to this discussion or another, but I'll just drop a "thank you Tony" down here. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:16, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Block Request
Hoping this is a mistake and meant for another user. Not sure the reason if otherwise. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2019 (UTC)


 * It may be this one. I declined the draft and looks like the user placed the unblock request on my talk page. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

School of Economic Science
Thank you for taking the time to intervene and for making the right decision. Given the huge amount of time wasted there this week, you've brought very welcome relief. I'd now like to draw your attention to the part of the ice-beg below water. Because the problem is not just aggressive sock-puppetry with a massive axe to grind; it is exceptional lack of appreciation for the Five Pillars that would have gone straight to ANI if the user(s) weren't new. The page had been stable for well over a year. We're talking constant revert-warring, next to zero consensus-building, addition of OR, removal of sourced content, no understanding of verifiablity versus fact and primary versus secondary sourcing, etc., and even a projection of bad faith in response to even-handedness and patience. User:MelanieN appears to have interpreted this as a COI problem and I would concur. So if you haven't already, please take a closer look at the editing history and Talk page this week. I hereby request that your temporary silverlock becomes permanent until further notice, otherwise all this time-wasting will be back immediately. That would also give the new user(s) a chance to adjust and learn by editing elsewhere. Talk page requests for content change are and will continue to be given a fair hearing. -Roberthall7 (talk) 05:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Let’s give it a week and if it starts up again I can restore it pretty quickly. Takes three clicks of a button :) TonyBallioni (talk) 06:32, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. -Roberthall7 (talk) 16:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Could you look at this, please?
Hi T, could I please trouble you to look at this ANI report? There's a bit of craziness happening across a few articles about people named Qasmi, such as Waheed Zafar Qasmi and it looks like there's sock/meatpuppetry going on. We have and  who are obviously the same person. I'm not sure if they are engaging in specifically pernicious editing, but there are COI issues and they've added lots of original research. There is also, who I don't think is the same person as Shiraz, only because they've undone some of Shiraz's edits. But Pcheeku appears to be evading a previous block of. This article has a litany of blocked accounts dating back several years. Regards and thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, Materialscientist seems to have been dealing with it, so probably best to talk to him. Tcheeku is too stale to look at from CU, but if you are convinced behaviorally, you can block. I've extended confirmed protected that article for a month because of the extent of apparent socking there. Hopefully it will help. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:14, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, my bad. I didn't know that MS was a CheckUser. Sorry for the timesuck. :D Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:51, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Millandhouse33
Hallo Tony, you blocked and unblocked, but there is still a talk page banner saying that the account is blocked, with the only mention of an unblock being much further down the page. Could you do whatever's needed to remove the block banner, or to add another banner to say that it's been unblocked? Thanks. Pam D  16:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Gone. It was just a block notice, so they could have removed it themselves, which is why I didn't :) TonyBallioni (talk) 19:09, 8 February 2019 (UTC)