User talk:Bishonen

This user has been blocked from editing Wikipedia 3 times. And the last admin blocked by Jimbo. The LAST. Don't trifle with her.

Userbox barnstar

Awarded by DHeyward

10:19, 2 September 2015‎

Hamster-powered barnstar created for this user by User:Penyulap 24 June 2013

DS block for User:Giridharmurthy100

Hi - blocked this guy for 72 hours for violating the DS you placed on him - he was reported to AIV and I guess it was my turn. Did I do it right? Do I need to log it somewhere? I'm an AE virgin, so don't abuse me too much. ;-) Katie^talk 19:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Katie. If I'd been around at the right moment I think I might possibly have warned the user after the first post-ban edit — not the actually first, which was so harmless, but this one — because they're so new, so genuinely green — not a sock, then, I think — and the topic ban template I gave them is in miserably bureaucratic language which more competent editors may well have trouble with. The templates are the worst part of arbitration enforcement. But I've spent the afternoon in the emergency room with an aged relative. (Comes to us all.) And really, blocking them is all good; they have no other interests than Kapu (caste), so my topic ban was practically a block, and we have to consider Sitush's sanity, too. 72 hours seems right, and very clever of you to use the uw-aeblock template. But haha, no, you're not done, are you kidding? [Bishonen slaps her knees and staggers around a bit. These virgins!] You're also supposed to log the block here. Look for my topic ban of Giridharmurthy100 and note your block right underneath. It's actually comparatively easy, the page doesn't have the thrice cursed tables that community sanctions do, that are the bane of my life; you just write it in humanspeak. Bishonen | talk 21:23, 5 June 2016 (UTC).

You are the only person I know who says AE/DS etc is "humanspeak". —SpacemanSpiff 07:00, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, logged in humanspeak. This is an area with which I'm incredibly unfamiliar other than to know that India and Pakistan don't get along because reasons, so I saw 'topic ban' and 'ignoring it' and went 'stop that'. I didn't even know there was a template but Twinkle had it, so there you go - I'm all for Twinkle. Twinkle is the tao. Twinkle is the tai chi. Or something. You are all kinds of awesome for helping - thanks, and all my best wishes to you and your family. I'm almost there with my dad so I get it. :-) Katie^talk 18:09, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

In this case, it wasn't a nationalist issue but rather one relating to caste. No practical difference as it falls under the same sanctions. Appreciate your intervention and we'll see what happens next, although those of us with experience can probably already predict that! - Sitush (talk) 21:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

'Zilla Beanie

Do you care to argue whether or not this image will be saved? It was just a lark I created many moons ago. I don't have the energy to argue unless you would like to keep it. Tex (talk) 14:18, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tex! How's the patter of tiny feet? I see a couple of Zilla's fans have weighed in, including a "pocketed" one,:-) but well, frankly... it was created for a particular party, wasn't it? I don't think she's any too likely to wear it again. That reminds me, I should clear out my own attic, too. Life is too full of stuff. Bishonen | talk 15:04, 6 June 2016 (UTC).

Things are good! Little ones are not so little anymore. Starting kindergarten soon...crazy! Hope all is well with you and yours! Tex (talk) 17:38, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Is it revdel or something? Vandalism on T/P

Hi Bish I wonder if you could strike this [[1]]. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 22:42, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I think it's too silly to dignify with revdel. (Rather like my own rather primitive friend who just edited this page.) You know, too much attention. Bishonen | talk 22:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC).

‎Amendment request on arbitration decision against Rodhullandemu

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: Rodhullandemu and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, --George Ho (talk) 06:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Lady Walford Davies

Dearest Mrs Bishonen, please do rush over to pages for deletion where dear Lady Walford Davies is under attack. It is a travesty of enormous magnitude, where are those gender gap women and Cis people when one wants them? Poor Lady Walford Davies is about to be deleted unless she marries another famous man, can you believe such a thing in the 21st century? If every woman who has only married one notable man is to be deleted, who next will we loose - Anne Boleyn? Winnie Mandela or even the dear Queen Mother: I can only say "birds of a feather....." If she was a plain, old uninteresting Mrs, like pop stars' and footballers' wives, no one would bat an eyelid at her having her own page, but because she is a very dear and personal friend of mine she is pillaged and insulted. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 18:22, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, I've done what I could, dear Lady Catherine, hinting at sexual scandal that one hopes will make the cis and trans people sit up and take notice. Bishonen | talk 22:43, 14 June 2016 (UTC).

Thank you My Dear, most kind. I can't quite get my mind around all this cis and trans, it's just all too confusing. I wonder who puts these ideas into their heads. In my day some men got married and others went to live on the Amalfi coast, and one or two did both. Women, of course, had far better things to do with their time. Except for poor Vita, who was very odd indeed. One would have thought with those unfortunate equine features, she would have been so glad to find a husband at all that she would have behaved herself. Harold though was very odd too, it wouldn't surprise me if he hadn't made one or two trips to Capri himself in his youth - he had a mustache and that's always a sure sign. All those strange books they wrote too, all that To and fro-ing from Lighthouses, it's quite obvious they had odd minds. I tried to read it once, couldn't understand a word and I am very well read, educated person. I wonder if they have goats on the Amalfi coast - I must ask my nephew, he's bound to know. Anyway, My Dear, I must run; it's 6pm and my cocktail shaker is beckoning. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 17:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi

If you find time for it, please take a look at this comment and [2] by an established user. Calling someone a "sicko" and implying that it is not even enough to explain how they feel about someone is excessive and uncivil. Also the rationale itself for the AfD is uncivil in my opinion. I might be wrong but it seems to be over the top.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:23, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

It certainly doesn't sound good the way you describe it, BabbaQ. I'll take a look tomorrow. Bishonen | talk 22:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC).

OK, I've warned them. Another admin already had. Bishonen | talk 10:19, 15 June 2016 (UTC).

Thank you! There is also another editor Libstar at the AfD that once again taunts me, this is an annual occurence over the last few years with taunting messages about me. [3], [4] these are this years insults so far. And it always happens in June. He has already been warned not to write these kind of stuff about me in the past by you [5]. I can give you diffs of similar comments last year, 2014 and all the way back to 2011. Anyways, just notifying you. As an AfD is not the place for these kind of remarks.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:53, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I also wonder why this kind of taunting is necessary by the user. He keeps doing this all the time. Anyways thank you for your assistance.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:53, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

BabbaQ has been shopping around at other admins User talk:Sergecross73 with identical complaints. I note BabbaQ's refusal to take this to WP:ANI. LibStar (talk) 13:40, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

And I note that as Sergecross73 notes I have the right to contact admins about situations. And that you continue to put fire on this argument at the admins talk page and at the AfD in question. My final word about this.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:44, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

And another admin contacted on the same issue [6] LibStar (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

The same MO I see as usual. Going on and on about one event or topic, while at the same time disregarding the comments of a admin and others. If you want me to not contact admins about your never ending comments about me every single June, then do not comment about me. Quite simple really. BabbaQ (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I thought you said you were no longer going to comment on this? LibStar (talk) 14:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

These comments says it all. I rest my case. Also why do you keep fishing for my attention with comments like the one above. It is really not necessary. I will move on now. Goodbye.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:07, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

all I can say is WP:KETTLE. sergecross also pointed out contacting multiple admins was "unnecessary ". LibStar (talk) 14:09, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

User talk:73.133.140.233

I'm not that fussed either way. But I just thought there was some kind of need to enforce rules? Or even try to engage in conversation? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:22, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

It now seems that User:Materialscientist has done the dastardly deed. Oh well, I tried. Thanks. We just have User:2001:558:6020:161:25df:cba7:cd64:6450 to worry about now, I guess? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:29, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

p.s. what a stunning Talk Page image, just beautiful. But that poor horse! Does it know it's about to be covered by a sea of flowers??

That IPv6 seems to be trying to get blocked. I'll be happy to oblige if there's any more nonsense out of them. About the horse: the photographer has told me that both the horse and the meadow are now gone. :-( Bishonen | talk 22:53, 15 June 2016 (UTC).

Horses can be such skittish things. Well, they existed, that's the main thing. Unlike Blodeuwedd, of course (?) Martinevans123 (talk) 22:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

You might want to consider 73.133.140.233 to be bypassing their block per 2001:558:6020:161:25df:cba7:cd64:6450 (talk · contribs) contributions.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 19:04, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

I see what you mean, Jetstreamer. The odd thing is 2001:558:6020:161:25df:cba7:cd64:6450 repeatedly reverted 73.133.140.233's blanking of their own talk. I'll ask a CU. Not sure they can do anything with two IPs that are obviously not related as such, but maybe. CU can sometimes see… hmm… forget what's the proper way to refer to it… but see the hardware used, more or less. And they can have an informed WP:DUCK opinion. Anyway, I'll check Bishzilla's pocket for little checkusers. Bishonen | talk 19:24, 16 June 2016 (UTC).

Sorry, Jetstreamer, thought you meant me. Yes, I had considered that. But that didn't appear in the advice given to me by User:RexxS, so I assumed it was to be regarded as a "separate issue". Martinevans123 (talk) 19:27, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: Maybe. What bothers me is that both IPs are more or less making the same edits on the same topics...--Jetstreamer ^Talk 20:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. We await the check of Bishzilla's pocket with interest. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Bishzilla just caught the little CU critter trying to escape through the catflap! The IPs can be assumed to be the same person. I've blocked 2001:558:6020:161:25df:cba7:cd64:6450 and the range I believe they have access to. Bishonen | talk 21:41, 16 June 2016 (UTC).

Suspicions confirmed.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 21:48, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Let's hope we don't get into any more Talk Page antics. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: It seems we're having another sock of this IP at 209.50.132.131 (talk · contribs).--Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:40, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

This [7] blanking says it all.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:16, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Long time...

Hi Bishonen! Hope this finds you well and happy!! Randomly looked at your page and checked your "Optimist's guide to Wikipedia". Great stuff! I am well and currently in beautiful Guarujá, Brazil rather unsuccessfully trying to further my love life (TMI). But I really like Brazil and, especially, this city. --Lyncs (talk) 23:42, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Hiya Justa, so nice to see you. I trust you flew to Brazil under your own steam! Bishonen | talk 00:05, 16 June 2016 (UTC).

Steam-powered planes? Mind, the Brits had steam-powered submarines in WW1 so I guess anything is possible, even if not practical. - Sitush (talk) 09:35, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

All to the good for subs, they're supposed to sink. Steam-powered computers are a popular feature of the Steampunk type of SF. Reasonably practical, or so a devoté of the genre assures me. Compare The Difference Engine. Bishonen | talk 13:50, 16 June 2016 (UTC).

How do you think Glow-in-the-Dark Tin Fishys generate the electricity to power the motors if not by heating water past its boiling point...? People tend to forget that the once you split an atom, the energy released has to be then translated into a useable form. LessHeard vanU (talk) 14:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Wooh! It's the little user LittleHeard whizzing by again! [Bishzilla makes several swooping movements, attempting to catch the nimble little critter, but no luck.] Gone again! Now sad! bishzilla _ROARR!! 20:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC).

You must be swifter in grabbing hold of that single precious curl Bishzilla! It's his only weakness! --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Grabbed hold of user in March, my little Ponyo, stuffed in pocket, poured concrete over catflap.[8] But little escape artist still got out! How???!!! :-( bishzilla _ROARR!! 21:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC).

Are you certain your didn't just catch this guy instead?--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

And Steam-powered planes very nearly happened, props to Sir Hiram Maxim. Who says transatlantic Brits are clowns? . . dave souza, talk 15:24, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Another caste edit war

Care to step in re: this? They've had the sanctions notice and I've tried to direct them re: the problems. - Sitush (talk) 09:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm on the run , but I'll take care of it as soon as I get back. Thank you for warning the user and attempting to discuss. Bishonen | talk 10:51, 16 June 2016 (UTC).

Done. I'm not as sweet as I look. Bishonen | talk 13:44, 16 June 2016 (UTC).

Thank you. That cheered me up, just as Wales scored against England in Lens. - Sitush (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Maestro's handmaidens sharing an account

Hi Bish. Ms. Molnarova, the PA of this maestro, who has been a real pain re his article over the years, has announced on my talk page that she is logging in and using the account of his former PA (Ms. Lapsevska). I left a note on her talk page about this, but she refused to acknowledge it and went on her merry way massaging his article. She also made a veiled threat of what the maestro might do if his wishes are not catered to, but that's relatively minor compared to the shared account. Anyhow, the talk page of the account she's using is User talk:Lienelapsevska (permalink to my message). Best Voceditenore (talk) 05:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I've blocked, and handed out some advice about disclosure, the Terms of Use, bla bla. Bishonen | talk 10:23, 17 June 2016 (UTC).

Thanks, Bish and for leaving the COI information for her. I imagine she'll be back with a new account and proceed where she left off. I'll be interested to see what happens next. What is it about these maestros? Here's another one from yesterday (or his PA claiming to be him) who just can't keep his hands off his article. Sigh. Voceditenore (talk) 10:34, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Closure at ANI

I hope your admin colleagues hold impromptu hallway discussions on my ANI thread at Wikimania. I wonder if I did something dadaist like requested Marek. Be. Restricted. From. Using. Single. Word. Sentence. Fragments, if there is some way I'll ever be able to swing "disrupted economic stagnation" on my CV. I throw myself on your or your colleague's mercy. EllenCT (talk) 13:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Ellen. I hope somebody closes the ANI soon, but I'm afraid it won't be me; I'm too ignorant of the subject and the conflict. I've never even disrupted economic stagnation.Bishonen | talk 17:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC).

Here we go again

I am sorry to do this but CA is at it again. I was going to let it go by because he wasn't causing trouble but he has been editing as an unregistered user. After I voted delete at one of his articles and it got deleted, he nominated three of my articles for deletion (Baby Grandmothers, Euphoric Id, and Sir Winston and the Commons). This is clearly a revenge maneuver and I would appreciate if it could be dealt with. If there isn't anything you can do, I understand.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:00, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @TheGracefulSlick: didn't realise you had a history with said editor, otherwise I would have put up a bit more resistance in nominating on their behalf.. Though it does explain why they stopped replying after creating an account was mentioned -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 15:04, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Samtar it is okay I understand. I just wanted you to be aware in case he seeks you out again. You did nothing wrong and I appreciate your response to this. In all likelihood Bishonen will put a stop to it before it gets out of hand.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:27, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Note CA hasn't stopped nominating articles. He nominated another article, most likely because the creator is a close associate of mine on here.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Consider this, logging on to a retired account would create a sockpuppet problem and would violate WP:CLEANSTART. So what you are asking is to violate a rule. 173.52.99.208 (talk) 07:09, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

And now consider this, IP: your big wikilawyering point before was that CrazyAces wasn't blocked. That was the result of admins leaning over backwards to be nice. I even unblocked him once, on certain conditions, which he has flouted. I have blocked him now, for six months. (Presumably he won't mind since he's retired anyway.) I certainly hope there won't be any block evasion! Note, the above IP post was made ten minutes after I blocked. And why did you remove my block message on ANI?[9] Bishonen | talk 07:24, 7 July 2016 (UTC).

The block is a block. You blocked an account based on allegations from TGS. An account that hasn't edited in 5 months in any manner. The removal of the message was based on an edit conflict and not deliberate. [10] Sorry about that, it was a pure accident. You and I both know that removing a block message does nothing to stop an actual block. CA wasn't blocked so s/he was able to retire and move on. So blocking an account that was retired seems rather and hasn't edited in 5 months seem rather... vindictive. TGS's is annoyed about the AFD's but if you look at the actual AFD's they have problems with sources (blogs), personal websites, and non reliable sources. One AFD is moving towards a merge [11] A notice was placed [12] and [13] but was promptly removed by TGS. The tags give an opportunity to fix articles. He himself places tags on articles. [14] If nominating articles from the same user is a problem, why is Alongstay allowed to continuously AFD articles from one user [15] ? 173.52.99.208 (talk) 07:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

• So I said this [16] and got this [17]. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

In other words, here we go again. I've blocked the 2607:FB90:249C:E1F9::/64 range for a couple of weeks for block evasion. Thanks, Niteshift36. Bishonen | talk 08:30, 9 July 2016 (UTC).

Thank you very much for protecting the page. I understand blocking the address will not make much of a difference. Hopefully your message will get through to him.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 16:43, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

• He's back as a different set of puppets (meat or sock, I don't care). He's supporting his own proposals at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Maley and WT:NSPORTS#Judo Notability. Mdtemp (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Mdtemp. Yes, that's CA evading not only the block on his account, but also my block on the 2607:FB90:249C:E1F9::/64 range. Unfortunately he has access to mobile IPv6 ranges, which means that there's little point in my /64 blocks. I suggest this: if the IP starts with 2607:FB90: and it's a typical CA interest — both conditions must be met — then feel free to revert him per WP:DUCK, with an informative edit summary (for example "rv block-evading sock of CrazyAces489 per WP:DUCK"). Refer to me if you're challenged. Saving the diff for this post of mine might make it simpler. Bishonen | talk 20:04, 21 July 2016 (UTC).

PS, I've semiprotected Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Maley. Bishonen | talk 20:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC).

Bishonen I was watching a rather nasty discussion on User talk:ALongStay. Apparently, the IP, which is obviously CA, stated he wrote the article Ryushin Shouchin Ryu, which was created by the account User:Nihon-no-budo. However, I am not fully convinced that is CA because the writing style is somewhat better than CA's. Then again, I do not know why he would randomly choose that account if he was lying, and the user is fairly new so your guess is as good as mine. I'm not sure what to make of it, so I was wondering what your thoughts on it are.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the overall contributions of Nihon-no-budo, I'm convinced CA was just blowing smoke. Also, considering the long-term abuse he's been perpetrating, I've indeffed. Bishonen | talk 01:45, 22 July 2016 (UTC).

Sorry to ask but could you protect my sandbox User:TheGracefulSlick/sandbox? CA has edited it twice, but it is supposed to be for me I believe.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. Bishonen | talk 07:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC).

Page mover right and rollback right

Hit Special:UserRights/Dorg2994 Dorg2994 (talk) 08:24, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think you mean Special:Block/Dorg2994. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:26, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

• Look, you're new. If you don't stop trying to get random admins to give you rights, after what James086 told you on your page, it will be Special:Block/Dorg2994 and no mistake. Bishonen | talk 08:29, 7 July 2016 (UTC).

Hi, Dodo, long time! bishzilla _ROARR!! 08:30, 7 July 2016 (UTC).

Hello, again! ::waving:: =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:50, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Say hello to ma little friend!!! _Muffled ^Pocketed 08:33, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Outing?

Just how I feel on this warm morning

Morning, I just wanted to confirm something I think you said in this section. So if I was to be blocked and then return under my IP you can't point out that the IP is the block evading CambridgeBayWeather? Right now I see that my IP says I live in Winnipeg, a place I have never been to. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:49, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, it just seems safer not to. IPs generally give some geographic information, even if yours didn't much, and I'd rather not share that with the world. Though Doc9871 may well be right that the only people formally prohibited from connecting an IP and an account are the CUs. (I see they are accosting me about this matter on their own page, I can't imagine why. A reasonably civil post on this page is of course never removed.) Anyway, say hallo to the outed horse at the top of my page, young arctic fox! Bishonen | talk 12:17, 7 July 2016 (UTC).

Come on, now! I am not accosting you. IP information is freely available to everyone. If someone edits while logged out, that would be OUTING and it would be oversighted. If sock account Mr. Jackass (talk · contribs) starts editing as IP XX.XXX.XXX, it is just simply not outing to tie the named account to the IP. Doc talk 12:29, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

• I believe The Lady Catherine de Burgh enjoys the occasional outing, as long as it is not too strenuous and no ladies ride astride their mounts. And as I hear it, she is "reasonably civil" as a matter of course (if not pride). Softlavender (talk) 12:36, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. If I can work up a bit more energy than the pictured fox I will see about clarification at WP:VP/P. By the way my previous ISP gave my location as Whitehorse, Yukon, Kugluktuk, Inuvik and Cambridge Bay, only one of which was correct. Hmmm, before I was 104.160.220.65 in Winnipeg and now I have moved to 104.160.220.100 which is in Rankin Inlet, not a place I really want to live. Well, I must away and stuff a 19 year old female in my water tank. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 13:47, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Really..? Are you a taxidermist now? (Was that in fact a stuffed fox?) Bishonen | talk 15:53, 7 July 2016 (UTC).

No an ordinary human female. It's a strange Arctic ritual. All our water is trucked in and sewage trucked out. Every few years we get our water tanks cleaned out. This involves draining the tank and getting in it. Given that there is 12 in (300 mm) gap between the top of the water tank and the ceiling it takes a really particular body shape to get in. The woman that is to do it this year felt that she couldn't get in. I felt that getting in was the easy bit but getting her out was going to be the hard part. So we are going to cut a hole in the ceiling and have a permanent access put in. So now you know why weird 60 year old white males are putting 19 year old Inuk women in water tanks. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 17:30, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

This could very well be one of the most fascinating stories I have every read on Wikipedia.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:37, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I know! I'm proud to host it! Bishonen | talk 18:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC).

(talk page stalker) Could get you arrested any where else _Muffled ^Pocketed 18:54, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

We even have an article on it. --RexxS (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

This sounds a bit like Victorian chimney sweeps in terms of the demand for small and often underage people who fit into tight spaces. If it's any consolation, CBW, here on the Big Island of Hawaii, most of us go through a somewhat similar but opposite ritual for our water, in that there is no piped-in water but only water we catch from our roofs into tanks. The tanks require regular cleaning and weekly disinfection. Once I found a very decomposed dead rat in mine. Yum... Softlavender (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

And I was reminded of the recent underground astronauts. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Of course, the nineteen year-old may not be only female... _Muffled ^Pocketed 19:46, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Well it doesn't have to be a female. In other years they have used males. We actually tried to put my 12 year old grandson in but he couldn't make it. The water is pumped up from a lake about 4 km (2.5 mi) from town through an underground pipe into town where it is pumped into trucks (just visible on the right). Every so often somebody claims that they found a fish in their tank. Not true as the filters are too small. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:43, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

You may still have fish in there, just not whole ones. I know of a Canadian city where a major brewery was having a tough time keeping their water filters clear. Apparently eels drawn into the city water supply intakes from the reservoir were being mushed by the city's filters, and the resulting goo was clogging the brewery's filters. As the brewmaster explained it to me, to keep their products tasting the same across the country regardless of the local water supply, the supply waters had to be filtered to an extremely pure state to ensure that all of the breweries were starting with the same water. In effect, everything was filtered out, and then any required/desired ions for flavour were reintroduced. The brewery was very popular with the filter media distributor. Meters (talk) 04:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Gurjar

Hi i just saw the revert. i wanted to ask what is the reason behind removal of sourced material . All the theories exist, we beleive in that so why is that article only on the gujjars of india and not on gujjars overall of which the majority resides in Pakistan. Can you please add the material back as that has been verified by renowned historians not by me personally. I would appreciate this. This guy louis argon has removed plenty of sourced material which means we cant even put information with references. can you please have a look in this matter. Saladin1987 19:16, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

It's not about the number of references, Saladin1987, but about the quality. To be a reliable source, it's not enough for a theory to exist — far from it. Please use academic and up-to-date sources. Do not on any account use sources as old as Cunningham (1871) (even if he is renowned). And as for the Global Journal of Engineering, Science and Social Science Studies, it's an obscure journal which shouldn't be used. See this note on the article talkpage by User:Doug Weller. Do you ever read the talkpage? It would be much better to discuss sources there, with people who are knowledgeable on the subject. I'm not; I'm just an admin. For instance, asking your question there, and for example replying to Doug's post, would be more constructive than asking me about it. It's what article talkpages are for. Bishonen | talk 19:50, 7 July 2016 (UTC).

Saladin1987

Hello Bish. FYI I have just posted a level-3-warning on their talk page for unexplained and undiscussed POV removal of sourced content on Gilgit-Baltistan and History of Gilgit-Baltistan, edits that show that Saladin is back to his old habits (check his talk page for previous warnings and his block log for what he has been blocked for...). Cheers /Tom Thomas.W ^talk 21:17, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's time. I don't know why he ignored my reply above and stated he was still waiting for it. Anyway, topic banned for six months. Bishonen | talk 10:38, 8 July 2016 (UTC).

Dear Bishonen, there are other users that are ready to reinstate the problematic stuff of Saladin1987 [18]. You would see perfectly sourced content deleted and replaced with Saladin's OR (with two spurious citations, p. 297 of the book is the last page of the index!) Perhaps a warning would be in order? In fact, the only thing this user seems to do in a day's work is to revert me or other editors that he wants to pick on [19]. It is becoming a huge time sink. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:51, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Contributions with seconds

Re our discussion here, I thought I should give that page a rest so am replying here. It's a bit weird, but it is possible to see a timestamp including seconds, and I think I once saw a mention of a JavaScript tool that includes that feature. However, with patience you can construct the URL needed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=usercontribs
&ucdir=newer                        show oldest contrib first
&ucuser=Bishonen                    user name with "_" instead of space
&ucstart=20120823000000             yyyy mm dd HH MM SS
&uclimit=5                          number of contribs to show

Putting that all together gives this link. The second result has timestamp "2012-08-23T11:36:16Z" which means what you would expect: 2012-August-23 at time 11:36:16. I can't compete with other sections on this page, but you could consult Zulu time#Time zones for info regarding "Z". Johnuniq (talk) 01:54, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Jat people

Hello, Bishonen. A user is destroying the whole balance of the Jat people article by removing relevant well-sourced content & replacing it with some frivolous info. Can you do anything regarding it? - NitinMlk (talk) 05:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

What "balance"? Wikipedia allows editing to improve the pages. I am only editing it as per the citations provided, the above user just vandalized all my edits by reverting them, no explanation given. It was an act of vandalism on his part, I invite him on talk page. Barthateslisa (talk) 06:03, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

@Barthateslisa: The existing content that you removed with this edit just destroyed the whole subsection. I leave it up to the discretion of Bishonen. - NitinMlk (talk) 06:20, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

With this edit, I have removed POV by an author, to give the section a neutral tone, also I have added content relevant to the section, backed by citation. Barthateslisa (talk) 06:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

12 years.

File:Felix the cat.svg

• h/t: User talk:NeilN#12 Years a Slave - NQ (talk) 21:15, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

• OMG, it is twelve years today, how awful! Well spotted, NQ. And I note Bishzilla has been here for 9 years, 8 months, and 14 days (she has one of those self-congratulatory boxes). That may well mean ten years, actually, because she edited as an IP for a few months and (crossing out! nonsense, Bishonen!) was a fêted IRC personality before she registered an account. Bishonen | talk 21:30, 9 July 2016 (UTC).

• Hip hip hurray! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:45, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

10 July

Took only 300 years to restore a good name. - + 12 years Bishonen! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

You're far too merciful...

2 weeks? The editor is WP:NOTHERE.

Sorry if I seem critical, but it doesn't seem like giving disruptive SPAs ROPE serves any worthwhile function. It's not like the user has some history of constructive contributions.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 23:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

If they sock, file an SPI. Simple. Softlavender (talk) 04:59, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

• Well, I agree they seem unpromising, Hijiri 88, but I scruple to go straight from a 48-hour block to indef. I've e-mailed you about your other comments. Bishonen | talk 18:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC).

TheLongTone, again...

He's just nominated Murder of Kylie Maybury for deletion. You know, that murder case that's been mentioned in books, had an extensive 30th anniversary article in the press and has had recurring publicity for the last 32 years. One of his acolytes, if not him himself, didn't take defeat in the Riley Ann Sawyers AfD too well and sent me a transphobic email (I'm a trans man). Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 06:06, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

I warned TheLongTone about their personal attacks ("sickos") in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Riley Ann Sawyers, I remember. Anyway, you don't have to put up with abusive e-mails. I suggest you report it to ArbCom at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Bishonen | talk 11:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC).

this diff indicates he has a personal grudge against Murder of... articles. Speedy close of the Kylie Maybury AfD as it is clearly motivated by an emotional grudge and maliciousness? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 12:43, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry i didnt realise i was shopping. I just feel action is urgent. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

In that case, I even more strongly recommend you to take it to ANI. For my part, I don't find the diff you link to heinous.[20] But I do think you should act wrt the abusive email (which, if I understand you, was from another user?). Bishonen | talk 18:28, 10 July 2016 (UTC).

It may not be heinous but it indicates he has a grudge against murder victim and disappearance victim articles on the en-wikipedia. He's nominating articles in bad faith and because of an emotional grudge and obsession. He is harming the project. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Mentioned on ANI

I mentioned you and a topic related to you in an ANI that can be found here. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:07, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Bhumihar

The article is under DS extended confirmed but the talk page has now become a bit of a forum. It isn't affecting regular editing so I'm hesitant to place it under DS like Talk:Nair. Do you think a long term semi for the talk page might be helpful? —SpacemanSpiff 04:26, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) That's a good idea. At present, it looks like Sitush will be in an endless debate with moving IPs. Semi protection will at least constrain the sources of the debate. --regentspark (comment) 15:21, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I ignore them for much of the time. I've just collapsed the latest bunch, which I first noticed some days ago. I thought the collapse rationale might be the best way to get the message across. - Sitush (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Collapsing seems a good idea. As long as no good users are inveigled into wasting a lot of time and patience engaging with these IPs (who would surely do better contributing to a caste forum, and find it less frustrating), semi for the talkpage seems a bit drastic IMO. And actually, so far recently it's one IP. Bishonen | talk 15:48, 13 July 2016 (UTC).

It's every edit from Aug 23, 2015 when Christich was topic banned. Some time wasting of reverts and discussion has happened but none of the non autoconfirmed edits are related to the article since then. They are all just forumy theorizing. But I get your point, that's the reason I didn't feel comfortable doing it without some sort of discussion. —SpacemanSpiff 15:53, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not aware of that topic ban. If you think the IP posts are related, I wouldn't mind having a look. Maybe you didn't spell the name right? Bishonen | talk 15:57, 13 July 2016 (UTC).

Wasn't Chrishitch topic banned for basically repeatedly pushing a pro-Brahmin stance, while the IPs are doing the opposite? I've lost track because I'm not good at spotting patterns. - Sitush (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, they are two different poles on this dispute, not related except for the disruption aspect. It was the same issue at Nair with two groups fighting it out, as is the case with many of these caste pieces. —SpacemanSpiff 16:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) There are some really useless posts at Talk:Bhumihar, but not yet a large number. Sitush collapsed one thread. The comments by that IP would be enough to block the editor for disruption or vandalism, if it were an account: "if you see a bhumihar and a cobra, you should kill the bhumihar first, because a bhumihar is more deadly". (In the US we might call those comments racist, depending on what group was attacked). So on grounds of nastiness I'd lean toward at least three months of semiprotection of the talk. EdJohnston (talk) 16:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to say I missed that choice remark. (That's the trouble with these TLDR caste warriors, at least for me — I skim.) It's a static IP, so as a first attempt to stem the flow, I've blocked it for a month. If those types of posts continue from other IPs, I certainly won't object to semi per Ed. Bishonen | talk 16:27, 13 July 2016 (UTC).

I was trying to collapse several consecutive sections in one hit. It seems that doesn't work. - Sitush (talk) 16:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I think we'll be semi protecting it soon, this IP belongs to Level 3 Communications and I distinctly remember blocking an IP from their Broomfield, CO office for some other such stuff in the past and then it resumed via a Comcast cable internet connection. The posts by the IP are not very different from some stuff (probably deleted) at Talk:Ezhava and Talk:Thiyya when the Nair sock farms were active. Unfortunately, there's not enough time to police all this. —SpacemanSpiff 17:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!

...for cleaning up on Jens Stoltenberg. What was shocking, was that the vandalism was there for hours ...and, over the years, I have noted other (equally infantile) vandalism also being there for ages. One problem is that there are only 84 editors "watching" that page, (while it gets on average 500 views a day) ...do you know how we could get more people "watching" it? Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Huldra. Theoretically, I suppose a request on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Norway would be the thing, but I can't say I have much faith in it. The project's talkpage doesn't seem very active (few of them are). Asking for watchers on ANI is probably better — those always seem to get a few responses from experienced editors, at least. Bishonen | talk 21:56, 17 July 2016 (UTC).

Ok, thanks, I´ll try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Norway first, and see if that works. If not; then ANI next, Huldra (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Purple Prose barnstar?

Do we have a barnstar for Purple Prose? 1963 English Greyhound Derby and its related articles would deserve it! I am suspecting a copyvio but will await input from the main contributor. - Sitush (talk) 09:00, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually, just about every article they have written re: greyhound racing seems to be a copyvio of various pages on a website, eg: this is at Lifford Greyhound Stadium. There are a lot of them. I'm wondering whether they control that site. - Sitush (talk) 09:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Gaffney

He's notable for being accused by far-left extremists of being a conspiracy theorist. The "well sourced" sources belong in that category. I see you've decided by consensus to be blatantly POV in this article. I don't have time for an edit war, so revert it back, but you folks are the reason Wikipedia gets a bad name when it comes to political topics.

I have already replied on your page. Please sign posts on talkpages with four tildes (~~~~), which will create a signature when you save. Bishonen | talk 11:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC).

As have I, in case you are not watching! -Roxy the dog™ woof 11:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Til Eulenspiegel pinging Jimbo to say I'm a notorious white supremacist

See [21] - note he edited his own talk page with that IP address. Isn't this pathetic. Ah, he's back now using edit summaries for the same attack.[22] Doug Weller talk 11:14, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah. I blocked some of his ranges back in the day, but it does risk a certain amount of collateral damage. Ah, what the hell, I'll block 71.127.128.0/20 and 71.246.144.0/20 for a month. They're very nearly all Til, certainly recently, and pretty nasty.[23][24] Right? Let me know if you have some objection from a CU point of view. Bishonen | talk 11:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC).

@Doug Weller: could work a filter if the LTA is widespread enough? I'm not overly familiar with Til, but my test filter gets good matches against this wonderful phrase -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 11:50, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not using CU here of course. There's a 3rd range now. User:Samtar, thanks. I'm not sure that specific abuse is widespread enough, he sometimes uses other terms. And only in response to me - at least I assume it is, maybe he's attacking me on articles I never visit! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs)

(edit conflict) Okay, no worries :) I'll keep a half eye on it -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 12:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Not sure how much use this whack-a-range is, but it always makes Til furious, so it must be doing something. I've blocked 172.58.176.0/20 as well. Bishonen | talk 12:20, 22 July 2016 (UTC).

Thanks. Dealing with a family problem right now (lost credit cards in Charles de Gaulle airport) and then off to pick up wife and daughter from airport this side of the channel! Much appreciated. Doug Weller talk 12:41, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Sadly, this particular Til Eulenspiegel's pranks are not so merry. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 04:41, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Hehe, it's the little Heim prankster! Hasn't completely forgotten his friends! bishzilla _ROARR!! 09:15, 23 July 2016 (UTC).

This is ... interesting

Hey. Thought you might be interested in taking a look at Stefanomione's user page and its recent history, as you imposed their topic ban based on community consensus. It's not a violation of the topic ban as best I can tell, but neither is it the sign of an editor moving on and improving the encyclopedia in areas other than those they caused problems in. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 08:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, those edits keep turning up on my watchlist, so I've already thought about it. But it's his userpage. He's making a point, yes, but I can't see it doing any harm. We've topic banned him, it was necessary but was obviously a blow, and I'd rather not compound it by engaging him about this. We can't exactly force people to show signs of moving on. Bishonen | talk 09:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC).

Yeah, I know, I just thought you should be aware of it. Nothing that he's doing is actively harmful at the moment, but obsession usually doesn't end well. More often than not, this sort of behavior is followed with an editor disappearing, exploding, or slowly marching toward an indefinite block. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 09:14, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Those are definitely possible scenarios but I don't see anything positive coming out of taking any action now. Doug Weller talk 09:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Are you allowing Wikihounding/Stalking and abusive comments on talk pages?

This editor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/SchroCat is stalking pages I edit to keep up the garbage he has done since beginning this nonsense. Clear evidence of disruptive editing designed to piss off other editors. He has been doing this for over 6 hours and apparently likes to do this and has been "blocked" before here for abusing other editors https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SchroCat&oldid=202384753 and abusive comments like this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:172.56.12.50&diff=next&oldid=731426271 any vaguely sentient being with a couple of brain cells to rub together which you read and said nothing about. I have never commented on their talk page and will not be drawn into intentional taunting here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SchroCat&oldid=731443668#Talk:Gun_show_loophole stating I'll not remove it: I'm sure it would only inflame them further Petty solid evidence of disruptive editing, edit warring, and abusing other editors. He has violated 3R many times in the article and talk page as well. 172.56.12.50 (talk) 12:04, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Commons is a complete shit show. What happens there correlates negatively with common sense and decency. As soon as you cited that, it was clear that you are the aggressor, not the victim. Jehochman ^Talk 12:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks, J. I don't think SchroCat's response to me on his own page was objectionable, especially given that people have somewhat greater leeway on their own pages. But both of you should stop talking about (and hinting about) the other. As for stalking, please don't link (for the nth time) to SchroCat's block on Commons a year ago. Give some specific and recent (you seem to speak of the past 6 hours) evidence — examples — of stalking, i.e. following you to pages he hasn't edited before, and I'll look into it. Bishonen | talk 12:16, 25 July 2016 (UTC).

Adding: OK, I see you can't respond because you've been blocked (not by me or Jehochman). Bishonen | talk 12:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC).

• I'm not sure whether this is the same individual (presumably, given the timing etc, but trying to AGF), buut I appear to have an IP stalker who is undoing some of the edits I've done recently. As at their 13:53, 25 July 2016 edit on Billing (filmmaking), every one of the edits has been to revert one of my earlier ones... The new user's history is here. Also pinging Acroterion, who had one of their edits reverted too. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

• Don't worry: blocked by Ymblanter while I was typing. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

• This page is the anti-ANI. If you post here, you'll get immediate attention from a group of admins who care about human decency, and are skeptical of rules lawyering. Jehochman ^Talk 15:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I probably shouldn't comment here but Jehochman please. The behaviour you show at this page during this discussion can hardly be called human dencency. I tried to calm this user down because the conflict was exported to Commons and yet I see you undoing this work by steering up the drama with rude comments unworthy of any admin. Natuur12 (talk) 08:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    • I agree with you 100%. You should not comment here. Jehochman ^Talk 12:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

You've been...

Row-by vandalism in action!

...GALLEYED!

Peter ^Isotalo 17:44, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Very fine conveyance, thank you. Does "galleyed" mean I get to water-ski after the galley? Bishonen | talk 18:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC).

No, no, it’s obviously the French form of …

… WALLEYED!

—Odysseus1479 21:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing. But only at RAMMING SPEED. Bring yer whip.

Peter ^Isotalo 21:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I was thinking of the MythBusters test of waterskiing behind a rowboat.[25] Good stuff. Maybe I could ski behind that big fish, too. Bishonen | talk 22:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC).

Sadly, neither the galley nor the fish can sustain the speeds needed to water-ski. My experience is that around 18 to 20 knots (33 to 37 km/h; 21 to 23 mph) is required otherwise I sink. Judging by this, 'Zilla also needs the speed. --RexxS (talk) 02:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Apparently, no puny boats required.[26]

Peter ^Isotalo 18:05, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Nice to see the old girl giving the little users a treat, RexxS : great fun for them to watch her water-skiing with a front-row splashing thrown in, almost like at Seaworld. I suppose those standing on the pier are the pocket guests, temporarily let out for a special day. [Bishonen peers, tries to identify the little Bigfoot.] Hmm, not sure. I pictured him differently.[27] And you're right, Peter. Like I recently pointed out on ANI, when Bishzilla swoops, lightning stands still. Bishonen | talk 03:46, 27 July 2016 (UTC).

You found the movie of me grannie...caught in the buff after what was suppose to be a peaceful dip but so rudely interrupted by less evolved humanoids. If only I'd been more than a wee lad then, heads woulda rolled I tell you.--MONGO 17:09, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the pics, I think we have a truly AWSM movie pitch on our hands: Mutant Walleye vs. Giga-Galley. Tagline suggestions?

Peter ^Isotalo 08:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Fangusu again

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/217.79.191.29 Need a fresh block and protection on the pages they are editing. --Tarage (talk) 07:34, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Blocked for two weeks. Would you like your own pages semiprotected, Tarage? Bishonen | talk 07:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC).

Sure, thanks. --Tarage (talk) 07:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Here's another one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/172.56.13.146 --Tarage (talk) 18:34, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

And another one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/172.56.7.51 --Tarage (talk) 09:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

European wages

You have to explain me why you blocked me.TechnicianGB and Absolutepuremilk added the net average wage for Italy from a private source and not from the national statistic agency like for all other states as required in the article.That value 1560€ and the reference related must be deleted. They are vandals.Without the page of ISTAT as reference Italy at the moment has NO official national data as required in the article.Thanks.Sad9721 (talk) 07:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

It's actually quite strange to me that you simply went on making the same edits that you were blocked for when your block expired. People have explained to you again and again that you must give a reference where the reader can see the figures you give. You don't give a reference at all in the article — you just remove the Forex reference, replacing it with nothing, and when discussing on talk, you say the reference must be istat.it. That's a big site, not a reference showing your figures. You're new, and I'm sure people would be willing to help you find the proper reference, but in fact nobody has been able to locate the figure you give at istat.it. You don't seem to hear what they tell you. I'll give you one last chance: find the url at istat.it that proves what you say, and put it either on the article or its talkpage — or feel free to put it here on my page, if you like. If you continue to edit in the same way without providing this url, you will be blocked for a longer period. Please try to get your head round what you've been told. Don't edit again until you understand it. This is your last chance. I've c rossposted this warning to your own page to make sure you see it. Bishonen | talk 08:17, 26 July 2016 (UTC).

I didn't add any data.I just deleted their data that aren't the ones required in the article.They are posting data of a private company named JP that isn't at all the natonal italian agency of statistic.Article requires that one.So how can they post ?That's a no correct data and so vandalism.The guy TechnicianGB that should be serbian and not spanish and even offended me is lasting in his acting.He must blocked and banned because of vandalism.Sad9721 (talk) 08:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

(Please indent your posts with colons on discussion pages. Look in edit mode to see how I do it.) Right, you just removed the data and the source that were there without adding any of your own. The figure and the source you removed have WP:consensus on the talkpage, so it's no good calling them vandalism and it's disruptive to remove them. Look, if you simply run your own race as a new user, without taking any account of what you're told by experienced users, you'll be in deep trouble. You've already been blocked once, and if you don't change your attitude you soon will be again. At least click on my link and read: WP:Consensus. And don't discuss what nationality people are, it's not your business. Only comment on content, don't make personal remarks about editors. Bishonen | talk 09:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC).

Adding: but I see you have done it again, after my warning. You have been blocked. Bishonen | talk 09:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC).

AN/I

You're going to need this if you are going to haul Bish to ArbCom ;).

I should haul you to ArbCom, disruptin' my closes... -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 10:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

[Bishzilla, uncomprehending but a bit worried, hauls little Samtar off to her pocket for safekeeping. She can be quite protective of the little ‘shonen.] bishzilla _ROARR!! 22:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC).

(talk page watcher) Sure, but if you want to haul Bishonen to ArbCom, I suggest you give DRS a call and ask them to supply a Class 57/3 locomotive to haul Bishonen over to ArbCom (get it)? Class455fan1 (talk) 22:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

User:AdamSmith12 ignoring blocks

Hi Bishonen,

AdamSmith12, whom you blocked previously, is still removing deletion notices. His user and talk pages redirect to Adamsmith, so warnings appear in the wrong place. --Slashme (talk) 09:42, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello Slashme the article Namrata Sapkota have issues before and i have edited and fix the issues but why you put deletion tag again and again. Did you check article before and after ? Did you notice other article ? How you trying to revert deletion tag again and again ?? I know before there was issues on the article but i have already edited all and fix the dead link !! AdamSmith12 (talk) 09:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The AfD template explicitly tells you not to remove it. This is, and let me be very clear about this, regardless of the merits of the AfD nomination. If you've been blocked for this behaviour before, repeating it could lead to a very long block or even a ban. Don't do it again. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:56, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

• Hi all. TomStar81 has blocked AdamSmith12 for 3RR vio for 24 hours (rather short, considering previous concerns and block). Sadly it looks like there will soon have to be an indefinite block due to competence and IDHT problems. Anyway, Slashme, since the user has ignored my questions about the illogical and unhelpful redirects of the userpages, I have boldly reversed them, so that the account actually used, User:AdamSmith12, is now the one you get to when you click on their signature, and posts will appear in the right place. ("Adamsmith" is already procedurally indeffed because it was a confusing and unused account.) Bishonen | talk 10:59, 29 July 2016 (UTC).

Thank you all. No-one will be surprised to here that it made its way to ANI- WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:AdamSmith12 ignoring warnings. Cheers, _Muffled ^Pocketed 11:25, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Nepalirider123 block

Hi, I noticed that Nepalirider123 was blocked for being a sockpuppeteer of AdamSmith12. Yes I know this is crazy because they have close interaction with eachother and other stuff you pointed out at his talkpage but the thing here is that I've opened a SPI case regarding them a while back and the checkuser has confirmed that they're unrelated to eachother. They were also suspected at another SPI and the checkuser has confirmed that they're unrelated again. So, maybe Nepalirider123 might be telling the truth at his talkpage. I'm just letting you know. Thanks. Ayub407^talk 17:11, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Note that the checkuser tool cannot "confirm" a negative. "Unrelated" only means that there are no visible technical connections between the accounts. Checkuser data cannot override common sense and obvious socking because it's too easy to manipulate. This is noted in the second paragraph of the Checkuser policy page "Conclusions derived from checkuser data have limited usefulness, and a negative finding by a checkuser rarely precludes obvious sock-puppetry."--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:57, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Oh okay, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for letting me know. Ayub407^talk 19:08, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

(I didn't realize there were so many pretty pictures on Bishonen's Talk page.) Don't ever trust a CheckUser when they quote policy. Ponyo, of course, is speaking for herself. My checks are infallible.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you all. There are pretty pictures on my page and some even prettier links, Bbb23. For instance this from crazy water denizen RexxS. Bishonen | talk 20:33, 29 July 2016 (UTC).

Unblock the original Adamsmith account

Since that block a week ago was in error, and in fact the original Adamsmith is a completely innocent user who may one day wish to edit again after his break (he seems to return every one to three years), could you please unblock his account: [28], and remove the unwarranted redirects from his TP and userpage? -- Softlavender (talk) 12:33, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

I suppose one can assume "our" Adam Smith doesn't have the password to that account, so OK. In fact, good idea. But isn't it amazing the amount of trouble one foolish young user, who isn't even indeffed (yet), can cause, with some assistance from another foolish user. Grumpf. Bishonen | talk 14:33, 31 July 2016 (UTC).

Thanks very much. Yikes, now I see more problems: The talk page [29] is actually still the talkpage of the Nepali editor. But the Nepali editor also has a completely separate talk page [30]. It's apparently all because of the hijacking -- but should those two TP histories be merged at the Nepali editor's TP (and removed from the victim's TP history [unless we still need it as evidence at ANI, etc.]?)? Also the Nepali editor had yet another username even before Rajusharmaofc -- see the edit at the bottom of that first TP history: used to be Websolutionnepal. Paging Bbb23 and Kudpung. Frankly, the two Nepali editors have violated WP:HONEST so many times it wouldn't seem out of the question to me to show both of them the door. Softlavender (talk) 15:09, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Bhumihar caste warrior/glorifier

Pandit4580 (talk · contribs) has a long history of pov-pushing regarding the Bhumihar caste. That particular article is under 500/30 restrictions but it is not stopping them from continuing their campaign at other articles, always unsourced etc and with inflammatory talk page messages. I issued an ARBIPA notice but they seem still to be NOTHERE. - Sitush (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

I was looking, but now I see Utcursch has indeffed them. Just as well. I was thinking in terms of a TBAN, but it's really the same thing when they only have one interest. A lot simpler, too, and as Utcursch says in the block log, there are clearly competence concerns as well as intransigence. Bishonen | talk 21:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC).

h

Should I have to put up with this?

I accept some "rough and tumble" in debate, but should I have to put up with this comment from John Cline? As you know, I rarely drink alcohol, so I find the "in a drunken stupor" jibe very inappropriate, but the "seek medical attention right away for an apparent decline of cognition" is simply beyond the pale for me. I know I'm advanced in years, but I don't see that as a reason why I should have to accept another editor casting aspersions on my mental abilities. --RexxS (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

I must admit, I winced when I read that, and consider it to be an ill-thought out comment, at best. But having said that, and playing devil's advocate here, would he have been expected to know what your drinking habits were? Also, I see he did redact it when he saw that it upset you. Oh, and by the way; you're only as old as you feel. -- Cassianto^Talk 22:25, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

• Yeah, that was disagreeable; a good example of the kind of thing people would probably never say face to face, but (I suppose) think is merely jokey in text. He did redact it, though. I'm always sorry to see the anger infoboxes (of all things, seriously) give rise to. I see it's gone to ARCA now. I'm so glad I'm not an arb. Bishonen | talk 23:09, 5 August 2016 (UTC).

I don't suppose the vast majority of editors would be aware of the old maxim "don't drink and dive", so he couldn't be expected to know. On the other hand, I do know folks who have (or have had) problems with alcoholism, and it's really not a joking matter. As for infobox anger, I just don't understand it. It genuinely doesn't bother me when an article has no infobox, and I would never have been the person to add one to Holst's article. But when I see that somebody's added a hidden comment telling other editors not to add an infobox, even though there has never been any debate about it, I felt obliged to support the editor who removed the comment. --Don Quixote de la Mancha (tilt) 15:59, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Crazy Aces?

What do you think? [31] Niteshift36 (talk) 03:11, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

I think yes. If it's not a sock, it's surely a meatpuppet. But the name suggests sock. Blocked and tagged per WP:DUCK. Thank you, Niteshift36. Bishonen | talk 09:14, 7 August 2016 (UTC).

Whoa

What happened to your table of contents? Altamel (talk) 01:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed that before; that's pretty cool. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:33, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) It is skewed like the scenes whenever they were at the villains hideouts in this version of Batman. Speaking of skewed could I do so any older :-) Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 01:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

By "this version" of Batman, I assume you mean "the one true version" of Batman. I showed an episode to my stupid kids the other day, and they pronounced it "weird" and "dumb". So I've disinherited them. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:43, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Well Floq, I know it was a tough decision but it had to be done - Hee Hee. OTOH weird can be glorious and you might have set them on the road to enjoying that one day :-) Bish I like the pic you found for those of us to see when we edit your talk page. Now if we could just get Stan and Ollie to dance on somewhere in it!! MarnetteD|Talk 02:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello little stalkers. Darwinbish saw a tipsy TOC like that on somebody's page and gave me one. Ollie and Stan got deleted, shame! And another shame is that apparently I can't use this supercool animated version of tipsy, where Bishapod gets really seasick, on Wikipedia. Or so User:RexxS says.[32] Why, Rex? Won't it work, or is it just verboten? Bishonen | talk 07:49, 8 August 2016 (UTC).

@Bish: Whoa, indeed!!! Thats cool. I should spend more time visiting your talk page. :-), Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

To get it to work, it needs the @keyframes wobble to be created in a cascading style sheet (you can't define it in-line). You could do that in your own Special:Mypage/common.css, but sadly only you would then see it. We would need to convince the folks at Mediawiki:Common.css to include the @keyframes stuff, and they don't have a huge reputation for granting fun requests. --RexxS (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Newbie accounts edit warring in Maya (illusion)

@Bish: See Maya (illusion) where an edit war and persistent disruption since January 2016 by @Kashmiri has flared for the third time. Professors such as Jan Gonda and others were apparently incompetent and not reliable for @Kashmiri in the past, now not qualified/needed and can be mass deleted in @Kashmiri's view, with an edit war. Again. A newbie account has joined the "lets delete scholarly sources and sourced content" edit war. I am wondering what is the best way (semi-protect?) to deal with SPA newbie accounts adding to the disruption? There is an RSN in progress on this, fwiw. @RexxS has joined the discussion on that article's talk page. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi makes sense. Done, for one week. Bishonen | talk 14:04, 8 August 2016 (UTC).

And now at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, despite a clear note at the top of the page "Please focus your attention on the reliability of a source. This is not the place to discuss other issues, such as editor conduct. Please see dispute resolution for issues other than reliability.", Kashmiri has re-engaged in personal attacks on Ms Sarah Welch:

• "Ms Sarah Welch has shamelessly manipulated my words"

Kashmiri's whole contribution there is an ad hominem argument that Sarah Welch isn't a Sanskrit scholar and shouldn't be arguing with someone who is. Is there sufficient to ask for WP:AC/DS or do you think I should pursue a request for a topic ban at WP:AN? --RexxS (talk) 21:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

AN? Like, propose a community topic ban? No, don't do that, RexxS, I don't think you'll raise enough interest. WP:AE, if anything. But I'll take a look, tomorrow at the latest, so I'd wait for that if I were you. As I explained a little while ago to a user I had topic banned, they're discretionary sanctions, i. e. they're within admin discretion. Note also that I have warned the user (promptly removed, just like your own warning). I don't have any time right now, and of course I can't promise anything, but I'll definitely take a look later. Bishonen | talk 22:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC).

Thanks for the advice, Chère; I'm not a frequent visitor to the Great Dismal Swamp, and I'm happy to avoid it. I'm not in any rush anyway, unless some more meat/sock-puppets turn up. I'm hopeful that Kashmiri will realise that the policies on sourcing aren't subject to his own idiosyncratic views, and that he'll lay off Sarah Welch. Let's see how it all pans out. --RexxS (talk) 22:52, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

The user is not acting in a very agreeable or collaborative way, certainly, RexxS; removing all criticism and warnings from their page seems contemptuous of others' opinions, and the remarks on RSN and elsewhere about Ms Sarah Welch's editing are overly personal. However, I don't see anything actionable at present. The removal of posts on their talkpage is allowed, as you know, and they have been warned about civility, by both you and me. Nothing more to be done right now IMO, though of course you can take it to WP:AE if you think other admins will view it differently. (And please let me know if there should be something outrageous.) Bishonen | talk 15:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC).

Image questions at Austen page

Over the week-end I did put in a renomination of the Austen page now that the GOCE review was done for the article. Someone has made inquiry there concerning some of the images on the FA assessment page (version II) which I thought you might be able to look at. The images were selected by the late Wadewitz and although I could easily exchange them for other Austen related images, I did want to be respectful of the choices which the late Wadewitz made when she originally included those images now under question. Possibly you could let me know which images need to be updated and which ones replaced. Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 17:47, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've amended the Commons Copyright tags of some of the images to something that may be more acceptable. Perhaps 'Shonen will check them out for you. --RexxS (talk) 20:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps *I* will check them out? RexxS is obviously poking fun at me, Fountains-of-Paris. He understands these things and I don't. I hope his updates have solved the problem. Bishonen | talk 16:02, 9 August 2016 (UTC).

Its nice to see a little humour in this corner of Wikipedia. I think the ammendation of RexxS are useful changes to these images issue there at Austen [33]. The new assessment seems to be off to a slow start, possibly the slow summer month of August, though if time allows you might check my wording in introducing the new assessment to see if its ok. Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

I've just applied a few accessibility fixes for you and done an accessibility review at the FAC. There's a convention among reviewers that they generally ignore accessibility, but our best articles really ought to be accessible, and I don't see any problem in reminding them that Jane Austen is a good example. --RexxS (talk) 18:00, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I'm willing to make a small wager that somebody will complain that in the references, the capitalisation of Ed./ed. is inconsistent and that Wiltshire's two monographs are not in chronological order. But those are the only problems I could spot. --RexxS (talk) 18:10, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Those were very nice changes you made, RexxS, and I am supporting you in your trying to reason with User:Ling at the assessment page for Austen. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Heads up on topic ban appeal

Hi Bishonen, I thought I'd drop you a line to note that your February 2016 topic ban of Sfarney (talk · contribs) from Rick Alan Ross has effectively been superseded and extended by a one-year ban from the entire Scientology topic area, imposed by The Wordsmith (talk · contribs) and confirmed by the community. Sfarney is currently appealing at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: Scientology. If you have any comments you're welcome to add them there. Prioryman (talk) 12:05, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Prioryman. Well, there's one way it's not superseded: my topic ban from a sensitive BLP was indefinite, and I believe should remain so, whereas the much broader Scientology topic ban is for one year. Perhaps I'd better point that out on ARCA. Hmmm... no... it doesn't seem very relevant, after all. I don't see any suggestion that the Rick Alan Ross ban might/should/would/could expire when the Scientology ban does. Never mind, then. Bishonen | talk 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC).

Discretionary sanctions at Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016

Greetings, I'm reaching out to you since you've been engaged in enforcing discretionary sanctions at the Trump articles. An edit I made to consolidate sections and remove redundant content was reverted at this article. The revert had the effect of restoring the redundant content (reference to March 2016 letter). I notified the editor of the issue and requested a self-rv, but that has been disregarded. The editor has been previously notified that discretionary sanctions are in effect at the article. Can you please take a look and confirm whether discretionary sanctions have been violated? (Ping: User:Gouncbeatduke) Thanks.CFredkin (talk) 20:29, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Pardon my lack of understanding, but when I read the DS notice, it says "Consensus required: All editors must obtain firm consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion). If in doubt, don't make the edit." Doesn't this mean that for sanctions to be breached, there has to be (1) an edit; (2) a reversion of that edit; and (3) a reinstatement of that edit without talk page consensus? I can only see two edits in your sequence. I can't see where Gouncbeatduke reinstated an edit that had been challenged (by reversion). Am I missing something? --RexxS (talk) 21:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Here's the original edit. My edit essentially removed this content. GouncbeatDuke's edit restored that content.CFredkin (talk) 21:29, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

And here's a reciprocal example.... I made a number of edits] at Hillary Clinton. Gouncbeatduke reverted them en masse with the edit summary "The old version of this was much better than the new one for many reasons, please bring changes to the talk page". Instead of restoring my edits, I started a Talk page discussion. However if I've been operating with a mistaken understanding of this DS requirement, I'd like to know. I can then edit accordingly moving forward.CFredkin (talk) 22:22, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

It's too complicated for me to fathom tonight, CFredkin, since a number of changes and moving-around of content were involved. (It's too late in my timezone for that kind of thing. And in RexxS's timezone too, one would think, but he seems to be annoyingly alert at all hours, so I daresay he's got it right.) I'll look properly tomorrow. Bishonen | talk 22:44, 9 August 2016 (UTC).

OK. Thanks.CFredkin (talk) 01:14, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

OK, let's hope a good night's sleep has restored my wits, CFredkin. So Gouncbeatduke didn't restore their own edit, they restored Melanie's edit. (That means your "reciprocal example" isn't the same thing.) I had to think about it to conclude that the DS page notice on article talk actually refers to any edit, not just to any edit by the person themselves. And I'm still not 100% sure. A new user such as GBD can hardly be expected to figure out subtleties that admins are uncertain about. Also, after their edit, GBD promptly started a discussion of the issue on talk. Pace RexxS, I think your complaint is technically correct, but is overly technical. By contrast, I have in fact been concerned about GBD's editing as regards civility — in fact, though I didn't mention names, some of their posts were the immediate occasion for my general "civility warning" on Talk:Donald Trump.[34] But as far as I've seen, they were only rude when quite new, and before my general warning — calling you a vandal, for instance, which is quite unacceptable — but have posted properly since then. Water under the bridge, in other words. Bishonen | talk 13:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC).

Thanks for taking the time to look into this. So, if I'm understanding you correctly, it sounds like my interpretation of the DS requirement is correct, but that your inclination is to give Gouncbeatduke a pass in this instance given his relative inexperience. I can understand that. But I think it would be worthwhile to consider pointing out to him/her that technically he/she violated the requirement. Otherwise, I don't think his/her behavior will change. (He/she is certainly ignoring my warnings.)CFredkin (talk) 16:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, CFredkin, but I'd rather not. My momentum re the Donald Trump articles drained out of me when I got this crap on my page for my efforts there. (We're all volunteers, and sometimes we lose heart.) I didn't mind responding to your polite query, but that's as far as I'll go. Unless I see extraordinary cause, I'm not going to sanction or warn anybody for their editing there any more. If it's worth it to you to get GBD warned, I'm afraid you'll have to either appeal to another admin or take it to ANI or WP:AE. Bishonen | talk 22:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC).

I feel like I'm walking through a minefield when I'm adminning there. One wrong word and I'll have editors yelling about how I'm showing favoritism to the "other" side. We really need something short of AE to handle the day to day stuff on those set of articles. I'd love it if we could set up a page where editors could go for their DS questions and requests and a panel of three admins would answer them. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:12, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

What this place needs is an administrator that would happily block everybody and that's former admin MONGO!!! VOTE MONGO FOR ADMINISTRATOR 2016!!!--MONGO 08:30, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

MONGO FOR ADMIN!!!

Topic Bans

Hi Bishonen. Just to clarify - a topic ban from Donald Trump related articles also covers noticeboards and other drama pages, and specifically reports which involve Donald Trump articles on these boards, right? (At least that's how these t-bans have been interpreted in the past).Volunteer Marek (talk) 00:29, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Right, Volunteer Marek. A topic ban applies to all pages with the exception of appealing the ban at some appropriate board. Are you thinking of anybody in particular? Bishonen | talk 13:37, 10 August 2016 (UTC).

I don't want to pretend to speak for Volunteer Marek, but I had a similar question when reviewing Doc9871's edits to this page. At the time, the close of the case against Doc9871 was still viewable on the main page as he made his remarks against Volunteer Marek (the one who initiated the initial AE request against Doc). I'm still new here, but it struck me as odd that it would be permissible for such retaliatory remarks to be submitted as part of AE, particularly when the evidence in the scope of the case against VM falls under the topic ban prescribed. I consider myself a patient person, but I honestly can't understand how VM has made it this far in the process without giving up.

I would also note that another administrator, Coffee, essentially said that Doc's behavior was acceptable on another talk page [35]. I can't be sure if he meant that singular edit on the same talk page (the implication would be he was unaware of the context at AE) or if he meant the behavior at AE as well. Lizzius (talk) 14:35, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think it depends on the admin. I was blocked for supposedly violating my topic ban when I made a comment that had nothing to do with my topic ban at an AE action against someone where the underlying AE was about my topic ban. What I was told was that just commenting on the AE was a violation of my topic ban. So, if the AE request is about topic X and you are banned from topic X then commenting in the AE is a violation. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 14:39, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I think that makes sense, though I'm sorry it wasn't clear for you at the start, Sir Joseph. Just a note: looking closer at the history, it seems that Doc9871 made the edits to Drmies talk page before adding his opinion to AE, as though he took Coffee's reply (and implicit dismissal of any concerns VM may have had) as permission to proceed. I apologize if that assessment seems cynical. This case (and last month's case in American Politics 2) has shaken my trust in the admin corps, to say the least. Lizzius (talk) 15:22, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Coffee blocked me twice for editing those very specific discretionary sanctioned pages before Bishzilla's little topic ban. If anyone would know if there was "disruption" happening in that very specific topic area, one would think it would be Coffee. Right? Interacting with Volunteer Marek on something that has nothing to do with the topic I was banned from is not a violation of said topic ban. Absolutely reaching here, folks. Doc talk 14:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Commenting on an AE report filed against me in which my edits at the Donald Trump article are *exactly* the locus of dispute is a pretty clear violation of your topic ban. It is not "Interacting with Volunteer Marek on something that has nothing to do with the topic I was banned from". It has everything to do with your topic ban. What's worse, is that you got your topic ban for making personal attacks against me, and then you showed up at the WP:AE to continue this behavior.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:13, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

"It shows clear disregard for Wikipedia policies, a nasty WP:BATTLEGROUND attitude, dishonesty, manipulation, obscurantism, tendentiousness and... very problematic POV." You hypocritically don't practice what you preach. Personal attacks against you are actual personal attacks, but you are above that sort of thing?! That's a blatant lie. Gimme a break! Doc talk 07:46, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

"Bishzilla's little topic ban"? [Bishzilla's rare belly laugh rolls across Wikipedia, the mere sound waves sending the tiny little doc tumbling arse over tip.] Bishzilla bans never little! Always place BIG bans! bishzilla _ROARR!! 16:55, 10 August 2016 (UTC).

Eh? I am being not banned by mighty 'Zilla. How positively exciting! LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:27, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Banned? No, the little Less is being arrested! And stay there! Exciting, not exiting! No rope ladders in pies this time! bishzilla _ROARR!! 16:04, 11 August 2016 (UTC).

Twice? That's cute. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 16:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, yeah, Coffee shouldn't have been allowed anywhere near admin tools, nor had his admin status reinstated after being desysopped. Since by some cosmic mistake of the universe, he is now an admin, he should still be kept as far away as possible from anything with the words "discretionary" and "sanctions" in it, since he doesn't seem to understand what the first word means and enjoys the second way too much. So I'm definitely sympathetic to anyone (yes, even including Doc9871) who's had the misfortune of falling victim to Coffee's erratic and immature behavior. But two wrongs don't make a right, Type I and Type II error and all that. The problem with Doc9871 is that *he knows* he's being disruptive and breaking his topic ban, but doesn't seem to care, because apparently it's more important to him to be able to throw insults and attacks at me than avoiding sanctions. I'd be entirely satisfied if he simply removed or stroke his comments at the WP:AE report. Otherwise, this is a pretty strong signal that their behavior is getting out of hand.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:19, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm not striking one thing at the AE. I know that I am not being "disruptive" there; rather, you are trying to paint my comments as disruptive. It hasn't been working. Now at least 3 admins have not seen fit to take any action on your false allegation that I violated my topic ban. This includes the admin who blocked me twice, the admin who issued the topic ban, and an active arbitrator. They would know if the topic ban was violated a lot better than you! You can't expand my Trump topic ban to you and your broader activities simply because Trump falls into the American politics 2 realm. I can't currently edit Trump-related pages. I am absolutely not prohibited from commenting on you at AE. So give up trying to get me in trouble when I did nothing wrong. I've watched Bish's page for many years, BTW, and I'll leave this discussion now. Bye. Doc talk 05:59, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

You are not only violating your topic ban you are doing so in a way which is exactly what you were topic banned for. You have no reason to comment here. Your only purpose is to insult and to try and exact petty revenge for some imagined wrong (even though your topic ban is entirely your own fault). Even IF this wasn't a topic ban violation, it would still be disruptive behavior.Volunteer Marek (talk) 13:03, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Are you saying that the three admins I mentioned here, who have vastly more experience in these matters than you, are wrong while you are right? Are they just not "getting it"? You keep claiming that I "clearly" violated my topic ban. Well?! If it were so clear I would have been already been blocked for it! I am done arguing with you. Go write another novel at AE. See where that gets you. Doc talk 13:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

@Mayasutra, AN?

Mayasutra (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

@Bish: It looks like @SpacemanSpiff is away since August 1 (good for him). He had issued a final warning to @Mayasutra in April 2016. But, @Mayasutra is back with personal attacks, this time in Kapila article, casting aspersions on @RexxS, and me here. It is not one time, but repetitive. The battleground approach of @Mayasutra is apparent in a response to @Diannaa, who cautioned @Mayasutra about large scale cut-paste from a non-free source here. Previously, @Mayasutra had taken a battleground approach with @Kautilya3, @RexxS and me in the Maya (illusion) article, and @SpacemanSpiff's final warning put an end to that episode. I have been cleaning up the article after @Mayasutra edits to Kapila, but the personal attacks and forum-y posts by @Mayasutra on the article talk page is not productive way forward. What are the right steps in such circumstances? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 04:13, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

• Right, it's a long-term problem. I've blocked for 48 hours. Ms Sarah Welch, are you trying to ping users by writing an "@"? Because that doesn't work. You have to either link their name like this [[User:SpacemanSpiff]] or use some ping template such as {{yo|SpacemanSpiff}}.

• @Bish: Ahh!, so I was not using the ping template code properly!! I am quite clueless with these templates, frankly. Now I know. Thank you, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

GRAVIS sock/meat

This new contributor looks like a duck for Milkmen437 (talk · contribs) and their other presumed sock, Niveditadhi (talk · contribs). Relates to that monstrous PR exercise at Gramin Vikas Vigyan Samiti and two related biographies. - Sitush (talk) 09:08, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Blocked when I was processing a RFPP report. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 10:03, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both. I've closed the SPI. Bishonen | talk 10:52, 12 August 2016 (UTC).

Your note

I just saw what you said to me at another user's talk page, and I wanted to respond. In one fish's opinion, what you did was actually very helpful, so please don't feel aggravated about it. It's a tough talk page, where almost anything can get an unpredicted reaction. As for the point where you disagreed with me, in isolation, no obviously it doesn't look like harassment, but taken in the context of a long history, it was something I don't want to see repeating, and it arguably was. Not that I'm going to look for any action against the editor who sent the email, more like setting down a marker and saying don't do it any more. Best, --Tryptofish (talk) 23:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Boilingorangejuice again

After this, this and this (with the first edit showing concern by Berean Hunter), Boilingorangejuice (talk · contribs) tried it again. Also see Boilingorangejuice's edits at Sex tourism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). We discussed that. I know that Legitimus has been concerned about Boilingorangejuice's edits. I'm not sure about Herostratus or KateWishing. But this editor's POV-editing on pedophilia and child sexual abuse topics has weighed thin. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Flyer22 has a history of personal abuse against me. I have reported her several times for harassing me on wikipedia. She has reverted many of my edits. Based on her emotional response to pedophilia compromising the NPOV of many articles. Simple possession of child pornography is completely legal in Argentina once again she is trying to reframe the facts to suit her personal agenda.

"The Penal Code criminalizes facilitating, promoting, or benefitting economically from child prostitution.(36, 37) The Penal Code also prohibits the use of children in pornographic shows and in the production, publication, and distribution of child pornography. However, it does not criminalize the possession of child pornography for personal use.(25)"

https://www.dol.gov/ilab/reports/child-labor/findings/2012TDA/argentina.pdf

Finally the user that reverted this change, berean Hunter is no longer active and most likely is a sock puppet controlled by flyer 22 as she has been banned for using dummy accounts in the past. "This user left Wikipedia. Berean Hunter has not edited Wikipedia using this account since February 14, 2016. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else."Boilingorangejuice (talk) 22:09, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

• Hello both. This matter has perhaps landed on my page a bit at random, and I'd frankly rather not deal with it. I understand that you're both at a bit of a loss where to go, especially since Berean Hunter hasn't edited since February, but this isn't a good place for it. I suggest WP:ANI. Just a note to you first, Boilingorangejuice: it's a really bad idea to throw out sock accusations at random. Berean Hunter has edited Wikipedia since 2007 and is a long-time administrator; the idea that he's "most likely a sock puppet controlled by Flyer 22" is far-fetched. I'd advise you not to repeat it on ANI. Extraordinary accusations require extraordinary evidence, and you don't provide any evidence at all. Also, you see how many diffs Flyer provides, to enable the reader to check what she says? If this ends up on a noticeboard, you should do the same, not just say things like "Flyer22 has a history of personal abuse against me" and "I have reported her several times". Show, don't tell. Bishonen | talk 23:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC).

I agree with you that is is random that she posted this matter on your personal talk page. Hopefully it will get resolved in WP:ANI and Flyer22 will receive another ban. This time for NPOV disruption, harassment and Undue weight. I apologize for you having to deal with this offensive user. Boilingorangejuice (talk) 23:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Wow! if you can now get banned for undue weight, I'm in big trouble till I can get back on my diet. --T-RexxS (rawr) 23:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Bishonen, I came to your talk page because, on Boilingorangejuice's talk page, you gave Boilingorangejuice a stern warning for his POV-editing on pedophilia and child sexual abuse topics, and was clear that, if he continued such editing, he would be blocked for it. As Boilingorangejuice's editing history shows, Boilingorangejuice has not reported me to any editor...unless he has done so via email. And, as you can see, nothing happened if it is indeed the case that he reported me. My problem with Boilingorangejuice is made clear by the WP:Child protection policy, what I've stated on his talk page and elsewhere. As for a ban, I have never been banned from editing any topic. There was recently an interaction ban between me and another editor, but the Wikipedia community made it clear that the other editor was WP:Hounding me. The interaction ban, which is now expired, was meant to help. Furthermore, as Boilingorangejuice certainly knows, I never sockpuppeted. Berean Hunter and I reverted Boilingorangejuice for valid reasons. I am very busy these days, but I will see to it that this is editor is eventually indefinitely blocked from Wikipedia. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:07, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Problem editor

Bish, Megawave111 has been warned suitably reg ARBIPA and other problematic behavior but doesn't seem to get the message. Seems to be interested only in labeling anything not suited to their pov as "racist". RP and Kautilya have wasted more time here than I have, but it's a time sink for many editors. Could you take a look please? This is the latest I can confirm that the cited source does say that and Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund are better qualified on the topic than this person here. —SpacemanSpiff 13:52, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Then there's edit warring at India, after a specific warning. —SpacemanSpiff 14:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Space, nice to see you around. The user doesn't seem to realise the risks associated with ignoring warnings in this area, so I've given them a shortish block as a shot across the bow. I don't want to start out with a topic ban from everything they're interested in, but I'll consider it if the disruption continues after the block. Timesinks are bad business. Bishonen | talk 15:56, 26 August 2016 (UTC).