User talk:Wtmitchell

My local time:

November 2024

13

Wednesday

10:43 pm PST

Hi.

One way to contact me is to edit this page and add a section at the bottom (click here to do that). If your topic concerns a particular Wikipedia article, please mention the article name. To cause your edit to be signed and timestamped when you save it, please sign it with four tilde characters (like this: ~~~~). If you don't do any of this I'll probably be able to figure it out anyhow, but I would appreciate your trying to avoid making responding to you difficult for me.

I will generally respond on this page inside the section which has been added unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you leave me a message.

Paul Graham (computer programmer)'s hierarchy of disagreement.
Please try to stay in the top three sections of this pyramid during disputes.
See also Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

Why’d you revert my ‘incomplete short citation’ tag on the seventeenth amendment page?

The problem still exists on that page (you didn’t fix the problem of there being no full citation to the Bybee source in that page’s references.) Your edit comes across as unwelcoming to a new contributor, as you undid my contribution and retuned to the previous problem without the tag I had added. Why did you do this? GlacierRinger (talk) 21:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I took a look at the edited article, and the cite to Bybee (1997) that you marked with {{Incomplete short citation}} and that I unmarked after editing it now links to this full citation along with a bunch of other cites in that article that previously named that as a source and that now also link to that full citation. I don't understand your problem with that; could you explain that a little to me? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Looks okay actually. I didn’t realize that Wikipedia had a citation style of “footnotes (primarily short cites) followed by bibliography (containing long citations)” I was confused by some of the footnotes containing full citations. Do you know how to determine which full cites appear in the footnotes vs which go in the bibliography? Thanks! GlacierRinger (talk) 01:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

I haven't gone back and taken a second look to refresh my memory about this -- too many other things on my mind just now. To your question, the short answer is "no". A number of different citation styles are found in WP articles; more info can be seen in Wikipedia:Citing sources. It is considered good practice for individual articles to stick to one citation style, but this good practice is often ignored in favor of whatever styles individual editors feel comfortable with. I flouted that good practice myself in my edit by enhancing the citations related to the one cite which brought this up by adding links between the shortened footnotes and the full citations without similarly enhancing all the similar cites in the article and without discussion on the article talk page. Cheers. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:16, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Any sockmasters/LTAs that hate you?

See [6]. Any idea who it is, they don't seem to have any previous interactions with you? Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 11:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

I lack sockfinding skills or the ambition to acquire them. I patrol filtered edits with WP:Huggle and consider edits I see there one-by-one, mostly without any research about the articles or the editors. I'm guessing that this was a reaction to a reversion and warning I issued from there. I didn't see it when it appeared on my talk page -- by the time I responded to the notification of its appearance there another editor had removed it.. Soch stuff appears on my talk page from time to time; other editors remove it before I see it most of the time. Cheers, Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking that IP, by the way - they came out of nowhere. Pahunkat (talk) 11:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry Bill

It is me the Great King Monty Mole/Great King Monty Molee/King Great Monty Mole/Montymole007. I am sincerely sorry for my personal attack, I snapped at you for no good reason. Sorry. On behalf of the Monty Clan I apologize to all I have hurt. Sincerely, --Monty is Sorry Bill (talk) 04:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

I am not personally angry with you about this; consider the apology for this single incident as having been accepted. However, please read and follow the Wikipedia community standards and applicable Wikipedia policies.Among the applicable policies would be those prohibiting personal attacks and regarding restrictions on the use of of multiple user accounts by one person (please note that this policy includes a section prohibiting sharing of accounts by multiple persons). Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Administrator changes

Hammersoft

Andres • Brion VIBBER • Rkitko • Thatcher

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek • Primefac

Oversight changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek

Joe Roe

Guideline and policy news

• Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.

Technical news

• You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.

Arbitration

• By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
• Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Good job Bill. You are a great admin. King monty II (talk) 03:32, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

That is much appreciated. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Anar Alizade

Anar Alizade is a fraudster he is not a businessman There is a lot of compr material on the Internet about Anar Aliyev — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elshadabdullayev1954 (talk • contribs) 13:16, January 9, 2021 (UTC)

I've moved this from the top of this talk page, where it was incorrectly placed.

This apparently concerns this revert. I see that the revert has been undone, and I have re-reverted that here with an edit summary saying, Reverted good faith edits by Elshadabdullayev1954 (talk): See WP:BLP. I'm not sure whether or not Anar Alizade should be considered a public figure in this regard -- I'm erring on the side of caution. If includable, this info should be better presented, and probably not in the article lead. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:45, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

How much did Anar Alizade give to Ali Kemal Celikten for betrayal to Mubariz Mansimov?https://socarcorruption.wordpress.com/2020/12/14/how-much-did-anar-alizade-give-to-ali-kemal-celikten-for-betrayal-to-mubariz-mansimov/ 17 Black money trail leads to Switzerland, with links to Azerbaijanhttps://socarcorruption.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/17-black-money-trail-leads-to-switzerland-with-links-to-azerbaijan/ Making millions from Socar:the mysterious Anar Aliyev https://socarcorruption.wordpress.com/2020/09/23/making-millions-from-socarthe-mysterious-anar-aliyev/ So who is Anar Aliyev? Global Witness found that a man named Anar Aliyev has been involved in some capacity with companies that have struck at least 48 deals with Socar, covering all facets of the supply chain of the oil industry and several auxiliary functions. He even held a stake through one of his companies in partnership with Socar in an Azerbaijani football team, Neftchala FK.40 The extent of these deals makes him a key figure in the oil industry of Azerbaijan, even though he appears to be a relative newcomer: nearly all the Aliyev-linked companies in partnership with Socar were set up after 2005. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elshadabdullayev1954 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I see that another admin has reverted some changes by this user to the article at issue since my revert and has blocked this user for a short period. I don't know anything about the article topic, and I don't intend any further action on this unless I happen to stumble across more problems in future. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Crixus

I added the part to Crixus from Mike Duncan's "A History of Rome" podcast. Episode 036, "I am Spartacus!", covers it. A relevant source can be found here: https://www.livius.org/sources/content/appian/appian-spartacus/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinfoilhat24 (talk • contribs) 02:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I undid my revert here, citing the source you suggested. I made this revert from WP:Huggle, and I was apparently too quick on the trigger based on too little; my apologies. I am (clearly) outside of my expertise here, but I wonder that other editors might nitpick the citation with {{Better source needed}}. I don't want to screw up further edits here, but I might look for sourcing support e.g., here. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:10, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi.

I use Wikipedia exclusively as a reference tool and have not made any contributions or edits to any of its pages in well over a decade, nor do I intend to in the future. If any edits appear from this IP address in the future that need to be removed, feel free to exclude me from the the process entirely and I assure you I'll be none the wiser. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.91.139 (talk) 02:02, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

From what I can tell by a quick look, this is in response to a message I left on this IP's talk page concerning a change I reverted on on 8 May 2019. I don't recall the particulars of that and have not tried to track down the details. I'm content to let sleeping dogs lie. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Concerning One Piece Tv show information

Yes I apologize for not adding a source. I will add my source then continue to add the information I inputted. I apologize again. Have a wonderful day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UhiahaUlumbnai1 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

hello i disagree with one of your changes to the page titanoboa

i stated that viktor is teit and i shared a vital piece of information that i believe everyone should know. i do not regret my actions, frankly i will keep doing it until you allow the changes to stay up.

my best regards, signed Viktorerhomosexuell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viktorerhomosexuell (talk • contribs) 11:29, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

This apparently relates to this revert. On checking, I see that the inserted text viktor er teit translates to viktor is stupid in English I stand by my revert. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Administrator changes

Hog Farm

Mattflaschen • Nandesuka • Savidan • Wangi

CheckUser changes

Berean Hunter • Xeno

Oversight changes

Someguy1221 • Xeno

Arbitration

• The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people, replacing the 1932 cutoff.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Philippine 1907 Flag Law

Hi Wtmitchell, regarding your revert a few days ago of my addition of a 1907 Flag Law mention on History of the Philippines (1898–1946), I provided a bit more explanation at Talk:History of the Philippines (1898–1946)#1907 flag law. Would be interested in your thoughts, CMD (talk) 13:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't have a good answer. I want to say something like "clarification would help" but, from what I can see, support for reasonable clarification is difficult to find. juxtaposing sources which disagree with one another on the details probably only leads to bloat and only illustrates that the sources were written by people who didn't spend much time trying to research what they were writing about. I fall into that category myself, having only looked quickly at a few sources I was able to quickly find online.

• This is the text of the law -- a primary source. You mentioned that on the talk page.
• This a secondary source is as vague about the details as the law itself.
• This source says that the law prohibited the playing of the national anthem. I've seen that elsewhere. I see that the Flag Act (Philippines) article also asserts this (without support). I don't read that in or into the text of the law, though it could be seen there if the anthem is thought of as a "device". Introducing my thoughts would be WP:OR in any case.
• I see here that a respected Philippine historian asserts that the Governor-General instructed the constabulary that the national tricolor was not banned -- that is just from a snippet, though.

I'm thinking that clarification to the effect that the law was promulgated during the period of hostilities following after the conclusion of general revolutionary hostilities (common knowledge and easily supported by numerous sources) and that the law was enacted to "prohibit the display of flags, banners, emblems, or devices used in the Philippine Islands for the purpose of rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States" (from the text of the law) would help. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:45, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

That last source seems to mention a symbol of the nacionalista party specifically, although I'm not sure if it is referring to their logo or to some other symbol (this source opens on page 1 with a quote about the close relationship between nacionalista leaders and the Americans, so I can see the Governor granting a clarification for them in that context). The source I used frames the flag law as part of a trend including the 1901 anti-sedition and 1902 brigandage laws, and it mentions 1913 as the end date, but it isn't specific about the continuing hostilities in 1907 exactly. Presumably the ongoing capture and execution of Sakay in 1906-1907 had some bearing on the law, but that is also not currently mentioned in the article. Do you think we can use the Priscelina Patajo-Legasto source you mentioned above? It has a clear POV, but it does cover the relevant reasoning and mention Sakay. CMD (talk) 13:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

That's this. I don't see support there for an assertion saying, "A Flag Law was put in place in 1907 prohibiting the display of Philippine flags." That covers a lot of flags, depending on how it is read. I think that it would support an assertion saying, e.g., "A Flag Law was put in place in 1907 prohibiting the display of flags whi9ch might incite insurrection or rebellion, including Kati8punan flags.", but that's badly worded and long-winded. On looking at this Ambeth Ocampo source again, I see that it says, "when the [Flag Law] prohibited the display of the Philippine Flag, ...", but also says that the Governor General specified informally that display of the the "nacionalista tricolor" (whatever that might be) was not prohibited. That is what I get from just the snippets of that source which I have seen, though; it might be clearer with more context. In sum, I see some secondary sources interpreting the flag law as asserting that display of the "Philippine Flag" (which I take to be this) was banned, and others interpreting it closer to the words contained in the law, and I'm concerned about WP:BALANCE. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

My interpretation is that the banning of insurrectionist flags included what is now known as the Philippine flag, and I think what you are saying is that the sources are unclear as to whether the Philippine flag was targeted in particular, or whether it just gets more attention in hindsight due to current usage. Is that correct? I am happy with "A 1907 law prohibited the display of flags and other symbols "used during the late insurrection in the Philippine Islands"" or similar, adapted from yours above, perhaps appending "including the official flag of the First Philippine Republic" to reflect modern focus. CMD (talk) 14:34, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm OK with that. What bothered me was what I took as a specific focus on what nationalists, then and now, see as the flag associated with their nationalism without a cite of a source clearly supporting that focus. I don't read that into the flag law, but that is my observation of what a primary source does not say and my interpretation that it does not mean what it does not say. Others interpret it differently. It may be that others at the time interpreted it differently and applied it so as to prohibit and punish display of the flag -- I don't know whether or not that happened and I haven't seen any reliable sources which would clear that up. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Alright, that's an important concern, I've left the second bit out as well pending a more focused source. CMD (talk) 15:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Commonwealth of the Philippines

Hi Wtmitchell, you are quite about the revert. In many languages, the term "commonwealth" used in an Anglophone context is often kept in English in a variety of cases because it is one of those words that do not have an exact and two-way equivalent in other languages. It is sometimes even borrowed and applied to non-Anglophone situations in which it serves as a better descriptor that a native word. Keep Covid-safe! Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 11:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Note "cited as a supporting source" in my edit summary on that revert. I did not look beyond that. See WP:BURDEN and WP:NOR. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I saw. It was a mere for-what-it-is-worth. I am a language person, so at times I can't help. ;-) Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 13:01, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

PyroFloe and ChipmunkDavis

(Note: This is an offshoot of a discussion at Talk:Insular Government of the Philippine Islands#National symbols -- order of precedence)

Please sir these 2 editors are refusing to listen to what I have to say and are bringing up arguments that I have attempted to debunk. However they seem to be tone deaf. You seem to have knowledge on the subject of the Phillipines and American Colonial rule on the islands. Please help me Kanto7 (talk) 07:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Trying to seek help even though you are the one that is not listening to our arguments and labeling our logic as nonsense?[7] Okay then. PyroFloe (talk) 07:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Look, your argument has flaws. Lets just add the American flag below the Phillipine flag labelled with 1901-1920. Kanto7 (talk) 07:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

No, because it is only a territory, not an integral part of the United States. With that argument are you gonna put every version of the United States flag to the United States article and put dates on it? Of course not, one is enough. PyroFloe (talk) 07:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

It was a territory. So it should have A american flag. Kanto7 (talk) 07:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

It's a territory of the United States and it used the American flag solely from 1901 to 1920. Kanto7 (talk) 07:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

What part of our discussion about sovereign state's flags use on the infobox of territories that you don't understand? :@Kanto7 as seen here [8], here [9], and here [10], you have engaged in multiple edit wars with other editors as well, you are still not listening and keep readding and reverting. I think we can safely assume that you are the one that does not listen. And with the hierarchy of disagreements chart above Wtmitchell's talk page, you have clearly crossed the line with this dispute. PyroFloe (talk) 07:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

The Insular Government was not a Sovergin State Kanto7 (talk) 07:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

And The Phillipines was under the Bureau of Insular affairs. All territories under the Bureau of Insular affairs had the American flag as the official flag Kanto7 (talk) 07:46, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

In the meantime lets just leave this alone Kanto7 (talk) 08:18, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Untill arbitration by Wtmitchell Kanto7 (talk) 07:18, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Arbitration by me insofar as resolution of the content dispute goes is not going to happen; see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. If I had stronger views and good WP:RSes I would have contributed more to the discussion on the article talk page than have. I wish I could contribute more. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		thanks for keeping wiki factual and vandal-free! OmegySock (talk) 15:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 15:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

C cell

If the only problem you had is adding Cell C to the disambiguation page C cell, then why did you rollback the addition of the radio battery c cells? -- 65.93.183.33 (talk) 12:54, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

My error. I've fixed it here. Thanks for pointing it out. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:23, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Bavio the Benighted (talk) 00:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Pabico 2006

Hi Wtmitchell, do you still have access to the Pabico 2006 source "The Exiled Government: The Philippine Commonwealth in the United States During the Second World War" you used in Government in exile of the Commonwealth of the Philippines? On Politics of the Philippines there is a sentence "Exiled leaders of the previous first Commonwealth government, including Quezon and Osmeña, provided limited support to the U.S", which is unsourced. It feels vague, and I was wondering if the Pabico source might support a more informative sentence. Best, CMD (talk) 13:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I see that the sentence which concerns you was added without support by an anon in this 2017 edit. I do stilll have the book and I've added a bit and a supporting cite from that to the article here. I'm a pretty lousy wordsmith, but I hope that is an improvement. Cheers, Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 16:29, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, and good find on the history. I've actually recently removed the bit about Laurel not declaring war, as it contradicted a source I found saying Laurel declared war in September 1944. CMD (talk) 02:09, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

That Pabico book says on p.78:

On his inauguration as President of the Japanese-sponsored Philippine Republic, Jose P. Laurel declared the independence of the Philippines, presumably from the United States. The news was both troubling and repugnant to Quezon. Furthermore, Laurel signed the Japanese-Philippine Military Alliance. The pact read, in part, "The Philippines will afford all kinds of facilities for the military action to be undertaken by Japan, and that both Japan and the Philippines will closely cooperate with each other in order to safeguard territorial integrity and the independence of the Philippines."

Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

That's useful information I don't think is on Wikipedia yet. It must have been a interesting time for personal relationships. This book says "Osmeña and Laurel reconciled" but gives no further details. CMD (talk) 12:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

The Pabico book goes on to quote: "Japan and the Philippine nation now ask America to let us to proceed in the development of our country without placing obstructions in our way. This should not be difficult for the U.S., nor against her wishes, because America always admitted friendly sentiments towards us" from Laurel's inaugural address. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

German submarine U-2337

I have changed u2337 I am new and a bad speller if you wat to check it you can — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.197.115.16 (talk) 20:35, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

This is apparently re this revert. Thanks for fixing that. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 20:42, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

TJMSmith

Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
• A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
• A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect.
• A request for comment asks if sysops may place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions?
• There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.

Technical news

• When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
• When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
• There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

• By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions.
• The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Sikh Music page: need advice

Hi

This user Srsseehra keeps editing the Sikh Music page. He keeps removing citations and links to credible sources whilst unable to provide his own. His information is correct and is going by some sect. How do I go about getting this user banned or control his edits? Otherwise I get penalized for getting in an edit war which I don't want to do. Please advise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sikh_music — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amo247 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I reverted one of his edits from WP:Huggle and placed a boilerplate warning on his talk page ([11]). I see that you have been there before me. It looks to me as if this user needs info and counseling re WP:EW, WP:BRD, WP:DE, WP:NPOV, and, particularly, WP:DUE to, perhaps, dissuade him from persisting, and also escalating WP:WARNings, and blocking if he persists in the face of multiple warnings,. I'm too focused on other things right now to get involved with doing this, though. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Pedro Gonçalves

Hello there, from Portugal,

maybe page protection is warranted now (i don't mind not being able to edit there for a few weeks), or maybe you can watchlist it for some time if you see it fit. For reasons that elude me (quite probably, they even elude the vandal!), they are relentless in their actions of destroying the article... Started last month, with even accounts being created ("GONZAAL fan", "Carmooooooook" and "Pedro Mitalves", the latter also being active on Twitter with their shenanigans, see here https://www.google.com/search?q=Pedro+Mitalves&oq=Pedro+Mitalves&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8).

Thank you very much for whatever can be provided, happy editing --2001:8A0:7667:5801:A1FC:4397:B722:9FA8 (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

The vandalism was done in four edits by a single anon, Those are the only four edits from this IP address. I'm guessing that the vandal is an opinionated sports fan -- probably a schoolkid. The vandal probably has a short attention span and will move on to something else, inside or outside of Wikipedia, which catches his interest. I'm not going to protect the page at this point -- other admins might, but I think that it would be a waste of effort. See WP:PP and WP:RPP. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your time (and reply), continue the good work. --2001:8A0:7667:5801:9CC2:F805:A6BF:126C (talk) 20:14, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

• Or maybe they won't stop, another account created. I'll do my (two) part(s), revert on sight and stop feeding them with my heated summaries (if they read them, they might feed off of that). Let's see if it stops then, i doubt it (i wouldn't be a bit surprised if it's the same vandal that has been doing that to several Sporting CP players with several accounts/IPs. I do not support this team - i do not support any sports team, but what if i did? At least i'm not a vandal!)

Attentively --2001:8A0:7667:5801:4C74:9D7:27C:EEE3 (talk) 05:47, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

University of Gdańsk edit changes

Hello Wtmitchell! This was one of my first edits here on Wikipedia and therefore i missed the source! My bad, me and a group of friends want to cover this topic regarding our Universities scandal, they are trying to hide it and get it removed from the Internet but we will do what we do best, preserve the history by nothing else than Wikipedia! I will be the head of this project and if there is anything else that we are doing wrong please inform me and we will get it fixed! Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.69.188.130 (talk) 13:36, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I make a lot of edits to WP articles I'm not really familiar with using WP:Huggle, which provides a small porthole into the article being edited. I think that what must have caught my attention about that edit was what looks on re-examination like significant but unsupported and unexplained changes which were probably visible in and near the porthole. I haven't gone back to look at the changes in detail, but I suggest that you read the Help:Edit summary and Wikipedia:Why create an account? project pages. Cheers, Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 16:31, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Never edited the page you mentioned "stunna 4"

Hello there. I received a message from you about editing "Stunna 4" in an incorrect way, but I've never visited that page. I don't even know what Stunna 4 is.

Thanks, Jesse — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.15.152.166 (talk) 14:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jesse. You are editing anonymously from IP address 209.15.152.166. The article Stunna 4 Vegas (not "Stunna 4") was edited by someone using that IP address at 13:18, March 24, 2021‎ UTC; see here. It is entirely possible that more than one person uses that particular IP address. Perhaps you should consider registering for a Wikipedia user ID; see the Wikipedia:Why create an account? project page. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 16:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Quick block for date-changing IP?

Hi, Bill. Could I persuade you to look at 107.19.24.146? This is a person whose hobby is to visit music articles from, say, 2006, 2008, or so, and change the dates to 2012 or 2013. It's wrong, first of all, and even the refs which still work after their edits point to 2006 or 2008 or whatever. They're currently getting their jollies at Beep (Bobby Valentino song). I reverting as fast as I can... Thanks, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

They seem to have stopped for the night just after I dropped you this note. I guess there's nothing for you to do then. Regards, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Sultanate of Sulu interwiki moves

Hi! Thanks for copying content from North Borneo dispute to Sultanate of Sulu. However, you forgot to add Template:Copied to the references, so I added it for you. If you forgot, that's okay, but just remember that all interwiki copy and paste moves require attribution, or else it's copyvio. Thanks in advance and kind regards, Sennecaster (talk) 21:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

That sounds like something I might have done, but I can't find a record of having done it. Could you provide a diff? Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Added information about football team, added articles, added info about investigations, added a spouse, changes some URLs, added new co-host to Point of Inquiry podcast, etc.

I don't understand why you said my edit of my James Underdown page was not constructive.

I added significant updates, replaced obsolete information, and included relevant detail.

2600:1700:9BD1:A620:B4C2:2A2:ECA4:1DB1 (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2021 (UTC) I am James Underdown, incidentally.

Hi. That revert looke like an error on my part -- I have undone it. I see that I made the revert from WP:Huggle; I'm guessing that it was the result of an unrecognized mis-click there on my part.Please remove the automated message which Huggle will have placed on your talk page. This was error, for which I apologize. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
• Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

• When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
• Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

• A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Dave McCartney

Dave McCartney is my GGUncle, he is not related to John McCartney. Dave, full name David Thompson McCartney was born in Cronberry, Ayrshire to Charles McCartney and Susanna Thomson....He did have a brother John, he went to Australia, did not play football. However his other brother William James McCartney did, Barnsley being one club, and John McCartney is in a photo we have of the club, in our possession .....John McCartney was born in Glasgow to William McCartney and Margaret Brown. JintyH (talk) 21:04, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't know anything about any of the McCartneys mentioned here. This appears to be related to this revert. Please read WP:BURDEN and WP:RS. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

New to this. Messaged the ones deleting my information! JintyH (talk) 21:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I saw that when I looked a bit deeper with intentions of pointing your comments out after responding above. The cited source says, "His brother John played for Glasgow Rangers, ...". This could get complicated; it may need someone knowledgeable re the details and with access to other sources to work it out. This may involve WP:DUE. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill)

Wolkite F.C.

Hi, you messaged me about Wolkite F.C., a club I did not existed until now. Wrong guy. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.156.77.28 (talk • contribs) 07:37, May 1, 2021 (UTC)

This apparently concerns this revert of an edit done anonymously using IP address 197.156.77.2. See here for the edit history from that IP address. Also, please see Wikipedia:Why create an account?. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:41, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

New article for verification

Hello Wtmitchell, it's me Space Chinedu. Please, I want you to check the new article that I created in my sandbox and see if it is up to Wikipedia standards. If there are any problems or anything you would like to add let me know. If the article is okay let me know so that I can paste it as a new article on Wikipedia. The link is https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Space_chinedu/sandbox. I really appreciate if you verify the new article I made. Space chinedu (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't see any glaring deficiencies in that article as a WP:STUB after a quick look except that it lists no WP:Categories; a look at another buttewrfly article should give you an idea of how to address that. I don't know much about butterflies or, truthfully, about the formal article creation process. From what I gather here, you just need to create the new article and it'll be looked at by experienced reviewers. Cheers, Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:26, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
• The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.

Technical news

• The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

• The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Hindu views on monotheism

An article that you have been involved in editing—Hindu views on monotheism —has been proposed for merging with Talk:God in Hinduism#Merge proposal. If you are interested, please follow the (Discuss) link at the top of the article to participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. GenoV84 (talk) 00:37, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

I need help

A user named Jmc is reverting all the edits in "History of Atheism" and "Criticism of Atheism". I wish if you could help me stop it and come to terms (excuse my english, i'm not english speaking) Armando AZ (talk) 17:38, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

After a quick look at recent edits to the History of atheism article, I decided to stay out of this unless I am dragged back onto it. Your insertion here re atheism during the French Revolution may or may not have merit (I'm no expert in this area), but you cited no support. My edit in reaction was done with too little thought, focusing on the word "Already" rather on the fact that your insertion cited no supporting source. I probably should have reverted your insertion on WP:BURDEN grounds. I don't remember my mention of communists there and don't know where that came from, though the edit history clearly shows that it came from me. I don't know enough about this topic to get into a content dispute -- please refer to WP:DISPUTE. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

Hello, I'm Wtmitchell. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Shout Out to My Ex—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:42, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

"Dawilli Gonga"=George Duke

Hi there, the change I made and you reverted was absolutely legit: "Dawilli Gonga" is a name George Duke occasionally used on recordings of other artists. See my referenced addition to the page about George Duke. Hence the link to that page. It would improve the article if you would restore my change. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black%20Miracle&diff=1014316297 Thanks! Frank — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.169.102.76 (talk) 22:16, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

I've undone my revert; see here. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:05, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

thank you for your MAUD efforts

I was very disappointed that hawkeye - who in the past has usually acted as a level-headed editor - has suddenly taken on some sort of ownership POV here - his revert was completely unhelpful - bordering on imbecilic, and needs to be reversed. I'm hoping he's going to let his head clear, and not fight over this. Cheers! 50.111.57.134 (talk) 06:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)