Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
News This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:

Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2014[edit]

Admin [User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite] was involved in a dispute at the Sri lankan presidential elections 2015 article. He had reverted the article 5 times in a period of 24 hours. He removed my contribution including the banner, to which weight of certain reported issues was disputed. I asked for his assistance here [[User_talk:Bgwhite#Sri_lanka_Press_Polls] User User:Obi2canibe later got involved in the dispute and removed my contributions that was properly sourced and cited. I attempted to resolve this issue by asking here. I added my material back in, and left messages on the comments section as here User_talk:Obi2canibe#Conduct_section and,_2015 I received no response and other user reverted my work. As I originally added the work, I reverted his edit and advised him to add his contribution and to discuss his objection to my material in the talk section. This revert caused Admin [User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite] issue be with a block [[1]] The admin used profanity against me and was clearly involved in the dispute. see here [[2]]

After reviewing this article I am right now making a request for comments at the dispute resolution center for consideration of referring the admin to the arbitration committee.

How do you think we can help?

I make a request for comments for consideration of referring the admin to the arbitration committee.

--Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 11:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I doubt a referral would be successful. (Of the less than 20 cases the committee accepted in 2014, I'm the filing party in two of them regarding misuse of the administrator user access level). While Bgwhite's conduct has not been perfect, that's accepted here. Secondly, as a newly registered Wikipedia:Single-purpose account, any filing would have to overcome a great deal of scrutiny. I'm sorry your initial efforts to help build the encyclopedia have been frustrating, but the most likely outcome is that continuing to pursue this will leave you more frustrated. NE Ent 12:20, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Without evaluating the merit of your complaint, the correct place to complain about 5 reverts in a day is at the 3RR Edit Warring notice board which is liked in the box at the top of this page. Legacypac (talk) 09:10, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Lost 116 Pages[edit]

I am not sure if this is the correct place. Requesting Admin assistance with regards to the Lost 116 Pages article. Dispute is regarding the question of noteability. There are 2 small sections, one favorable and one unfavorable to LDS perspective. I am not the author of either section, but propose mutal inclusion or exclusion. Another alternative would be to have references to both sections included the see also section. — This unsigned comment was added by Mormography (talk • changes) on 01:26, 17 January 2015‎.

We've never had an article here by that name. I think you're referring to the article on English Wikipedia. This is the Simple English Wikipedia. You need to ask for help on English Wikipedia. Sorry we can't help. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mormography (talkcontribs)

As this appears to be a content matter, the best place to raise this is Talk:Lost 116 pages Nick-D (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Gordon B Hinckley Edit Warring[edit]


users warned, page protected. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:58, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requesting admin assistance. Users ChristianMJ and AsteriskStarSplat are making multiple reverts with out discussion.Mormography (talk) 01:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

You left out the fact that you have reverted as much as Christensen and Asterisk has only reverted once. I have left a warning on your talk page and protected the article to stop this edit war.
Also, for future reference, matters like this should be reported to WP:RFPP and/or WP:AN3, not the talk page of the admin norticeboard. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:58, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Block evasion?[edit]

It appears Paway2 might be the blocked editor Paway. -- GoodDay (talk) 19:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Even if he's not, his user page is a confession of a WP:NOTHERE vandal. I reported them at WP:AIV. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Blocked. With such poor inventiveness in creating new names, we may have to use a filter when it reaches Paway10 or so — I don't know how to do that. Bishonen | talk 19:19, 22 January 2015 (UTC).