User talk:A. B.: Difference between revisions

Thanks for letting me know. I think this AfD is a mistake. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC) A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

m:Wikiproject:Antispam

Welcome back! If you haven't seen already: m:Wikiproject:Antispam is a cross-wiki anti-spam project. It focuses on undisclosed paid-for spam articles but also does cross-wiki spam cleanup. I've been seeing more instances where UPE spammers are also link spammers. MER-C 19:01, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome. It makes me happy to hear from you.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scottywong case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 21, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:22, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AN

Second sentence is why I'm not sure your search comes up correctly (on system end, not yours). Just didn't find that appropriate for the eyes of the Board. Star Mississippi 01:33, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Little oops

I saw your edit to Jack4576's talk page. Twinkle1990 identifies as she/her (per her WP prefs visible on mouseover popup). Just fyi. Schazjmd (talk) 18:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops indeed!

Thanks for letting me know.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:31, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all you do

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		I just saw how you stood by me to ensure that the pages I created on Nigerian topics don’t get deleted. You’re appreciated. Amaekuma (talk) 09:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! I'm honored. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 13:19, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 57

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023

Suggestion improvements
Favorite collections tips
Spotlight: Promoting Nigerian Books and Authors

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for addressing an unfounded personal attack, both in the AfD and on the ANI page. You spoke up against injustice and went on and beyond expectations! gidonb (talk) 00:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I am grateful to you for voting to keep Arleen McCarty Hynes. I found her on Women in Red, and have been learning how to write bios by crafting ones from its ranks that fall within my interests. WIR cautions that they won't all necessarily be notable, but I thought she was and I'm honored you stepped in to agree. Fortunaa (talk) 21:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for all of the time you spend checking, rechecking and tracking down references in AFD discussions. You indeed seem tireless! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I try to think "What would Liz think of this?" --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 03:06, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re. WP:BITE

Hi! I thought that concerns about my behavior (in this case re WP:BITE) are better discussed on a talk page, rather than at an AFD.

First, I‘d like to say that I fundamentally agree that it would be a shame if these editors did not continue to contribute to WP. However, my interactions with them were clearly aimed at helping them navigate the complex policies and guidelines.

My very first interaction (after the automated PROD message) was to offer my help. The subsequent misunderstanding regarding WP:PAID was unfortunate, but I think understandable given the wording of their reply. I apologised and informed them of WP:COI, which clearly applies here.

I then [[offered my help again, and then we had a brief exchange about independence of sources.

I think opening the SPI investigation is clearly explained over there and quite legitimate. While good intentions should be assumed, and I did make that assumption, meatpuppeting is nonetheless inappropriate (and can look very similar to sockpuppeting).

As the PROD was declined and notability issues were not addressed, I think an AFD was quite appropriate.

Again, it really would be a shame if these editors are so discouraged as to not return. But I‘m not sure how I should have handled this better without overstretching AGF beyond reasonability. I‘m open to the idea that I may have messed up; if I have, please tell me what I should have done differently. I appreciate your time with this, thanks for taking a look! :)Actualcpscm (talk) 12:06, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now we have a double BITE problem, which is that I was on a real warpath when I left those messages. I realized this several hours later. So please accept my apologies.

In the meantime, I'll think about your question.

Thanks for reaching out and thanks for caring!

—13:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC) A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 13:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! :) I understand that this outcome (we might lose valuable editors) really sucks, and defending newcomers against biting is important, so thanks to you as well for caring! Hopefully you can get them back to working on WP (referring to your emails). Happy editing! :) Actualcpscm (talk) 14:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For doing the right thing in multiple places after an initially unpleasant misunderstanding, and for calling me out when you suspected wrongdoing. Actualcpscm (talk) 19:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really honored!

Suggestion - talk to an admin to withdraw the AfD "without prejudice" for now until the volunteers are done with it, then reevaluate it for notability.

Just a thought - your call.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:30, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable, but I'm not sure why I need an admin for that – I could just withdraw (i.e. speedy keep) and make clear that it's with the intention of having the AFD later. Or did you have something else in mind? Actualcpscm (talk) 19:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a better idea! Let the volunteers know.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi A. B., I saw you had added some additional WikiProject notifications at WP:Articles for deletion/Felix Omobude. Is there a tool that makes adding such notifications easy? S0091 (talk) 17:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you find one, let me know. I did those manually. If it looks like I did them quickly, it's just because I had three browser windows open and was copying and pasting. When I was done, I hit "publish changes" in quick succession.

I need to be more proactive in looking for tools. I was a prolific editor/admin 10-15 years ago, then took a 10-year Wikibreak. I'm sort of still in 2012!

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that just reminded me that 2012 was more than a decade ago :O Actualcpscm (talk) 17:29, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was more interesting then.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:33, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes I think a topic is a bit too off by itself get much benefit from our traditional deletion-sorting lists; I'll post at a specialized Wikiproject. The classic example is:

Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/H₂weh₁yú

For starters, how do you even pronounce H₂weh₁yú? It looks like a name Elon Musk would give his child.

It's a Proto-Indo-European reconstructed word so I left a message for the experts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics.

Some might call this CANVASSING; I call it a cry for help.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, never thought this question would lead to Elon Musk. Dang, was hoping you had some magic up you sleeve but kudos to you for making the effort manually. S0091 (talk) 17:48, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

notability

FWIW several notability criteria have tightened since 2012 (welcome back, btw :) ). NSPORTS and PORNBIO come to mind (the latter was simply deprecated), but also NCORP, which was completely rewritten 5ish years ago. It is a higher standard than GNG now, including e.g. Attention solely from local media ... or media of limited interest and circulation ... is not an indication of notability. (noticed your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Charter Service (2nd nomination)). I don't know if that one's notable, and probably won't offer a !vote -- just a heads up. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KumoSpace

Outside the AfD discussion, thought you may be interested in this. Could be an opportunity to address the concerns of NCORP and how it is applied. CNMall41 (talk) 23:56, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 12:10, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. These should definitely apply to those 2 AfDs and their associated articles; especially WP:1RR.

Do not strike comments by other participants on the basis of unproven sock allegations as you have done. Get a checkuser first. Otherwise you are violating WP:ATTACK.

You are on the verge of getting sanctioned.

These AfDs will probably end up at WP:ANI, given current behaviour by many on both sides. You don't want to end up in the middle; outcomes are hard to predict. I suggest you just politely walk away for now to CYA; you've already made your points multiple times.

The closing admin will make their own decision based on evidence and policy, not folks' heated bludgeoning.

Do not CANVASS. There are indications of this on both sides. Checkusers have previously noted likely meat puppetry comments on your part. This could get you the "long goodbye" (indefinite ban).

I am driving the next several days and may be hard to reach. I have left Liz, an admin, a request to keep an eye on these articles and AfDs in the meantime.

Please, for your own good, lay low.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are being outright misleading with your false claims here. Let me correct you on every single point:

1) What is the relevance of WP:1RR here? How it is applicable here?

2) Checkusers won't check IP socks. As per the policy they are discouraged to do it except in very exceptional cases.

3) I removed sock comments only because it was obvious as sky being blue that same sock is evading his block. All IPs got blocked within minutes. You are supposed to comply with the ethics even if they are opposed to your POV.

4) What "both sides"? You made frivolous attempts to save Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avatar and Muhammad as proven with the "Delete" outcome on the AfD.

5) Where I am engaging in canvassing? Only canvassing is being done by the IP sock not only here[1] but also on Wikipedias of other languages.[2]

6) Not a single checkuser ever said that I am engaging in meatpuppetry.

Lastly, you will benefit from reading WP:CIR and WP:ASPERSIONS. You should read it urgently given your eagerness to make false claims. Just like you were doing on WP:AFD with regards to policies.[3]

It makes no sense that you are trying to create conduct issue out of yourself with all these false claims over a block evading sockpuppet disrupting Wikipedia to create this article for over 10 years. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 07:30, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'm traveling. Take my advice above or don't take my advice - it's up to you. I'll be at the beach.

Cheers,

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In case you haven't checked, I haven't edited either AfDs for 4 days now because the IP sock is apparently gone. Enjoy your vacation! Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 02:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol invitation

Hello, A. B..

The new pages patrol team is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
I believe that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:30, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm traveling the next 2 weeks. Maybe after that.

Thanks for what you all do.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, any time you feel up for it I'm confident the team would love to have you. Hope your travel goes smoothly! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:57, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IP block exemption request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

A. B. (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am requesting an IP block exemption as a long-time trusted editor with a clean block log. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

IPBE granted for a year. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:26, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vacation

Hello A. B., Just noticed that you will be away on vacation and wanted to wish you a good break. Take care. - Indefensible (talk) 05:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't

Make misleading reverts like that. Per WP:DENY and WP:SOCKSTRIKE, we are required not to waste time over requests by block evading socks.

If you have strong feelings over this AfD then start a new DRV on you own. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 17:44, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are an involved party. You can be sanctioned for closing a DRV in which you’re involved, sock or no sock. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:48, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DENY and WP:SOCKSTRIKE does not care about who is involved. Stop your disruptive editing. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 17:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aman.kumar.goel - be ready for an extensive review of your edits, these two articles, their 2 AfDs and the DRV at WP:ANI if you keep this up. I’m ready for mine to be reviewed.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:54, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't let the door hit you. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 17:56, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your most recent comment aged poorly. You never even went to ANI.

You should’ve taken my advice from 4 days ago. Most IPs are ignorant of Wikipedia’s rules and you’ve found them easy to abuse by gaming the system. Your mistake is to now abrasively play wikilawyer with established editors who know this place even better than you.

I was an admin for several years before my long wikibreak. I’m not surprised this ended in tears.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you substantiate your nonsensical claim that "Most IPs are ignorant of Wikipedia’s rules and you’ve found them easy to abuse by gaming the system"? Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 06:27, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:19, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You knew that, but I am following process. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Process is important which is what that AfD and DRV are all about. I’m on the wrong side of the trend at DRV but that happens. What shouldn’t happen is the shenanigans I saw at the AfD and the DRV.

Thanks for doing your part, Robert.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:32, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CSD

Hello. I'm sorry, but I don't understand this. In what way is this not unambiguous promotion? It's clear as day. Paul Vaurie (talk) 06:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the speedy tag on Draft:Punch Powertrain for several reasons:

The article is in draft space and it's not harming anything.
The company is probably notable if you look at the French Wikipedia's article: fr:Punch Powertrain
- These guys are apparently global players -- perhaps the biggest -- in continuously variable transmission manufacturing.
- That article is well-sourced. I looked at each ref.
- A decent article is possible here.
We just gave the author feedback -- why not let them act on it first?

That was my reasoning, good or bad. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 06:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's all good, but the draft was admittedly just promotion. Paul Vaurie (talk) 15:48, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it has a POV tone; nevertheless Wp:G11 states:

"This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles, rather than advertisements. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Related to Why Loiter? Campaign

The page was created by a group of people who did it together, hence there were edits by multiple users. Apart from that, does it not appear to be violating CSD A7 and CSD A11 if they are edited by a single group of people? The Activities section wholly looks that way. Requesting a friendly clarification so that I can differentiate the violations clearly in future. Thewikizoomer (talk) 06:53, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's look at these criteria as they apply to our Why Loiter? Campaign article:

CSD A7: "This applies to any article about a real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content, or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability."
- The articles states right in the lede that this program was featured in BBC 100 women -- that's the BBC and it's global -- it asserts notability.
- The article goes on to cite many references to support not just a claim of notability but actual notability
CSD A11: "This applies to any article that plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone the creator personally knows, and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant. The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify under Wikipedia's notability guidelines."
- Is there a reason to believe the editors that wrote the article invented this campaign or were somehow involved with its inception 9 years ago? I don't see any myself.
- As noted above, the article asserts notability and is, in fact, notable.

Just because the Activities section sounds like the editors support the campaign doesn't mean you delete the article. Deletion ≠ cleanup. They cite references to support each claim. Collectively there's a POV issue but nothing that calls for deletion.

Does your tagging have anything to do with Sockpuppet investigations/TechGenWikinator03? It looks like this was possibly created during an edit-thon.

This is my reasoning and you are free to disagree with me. If you still feel the article should be deleted, you can take it to Articles for Deletion.

Regards,

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 07:16, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

From the editor: Beta version of signpost.news now online

News and notes: You like RecentChanges?

In the media: Taking it sleazy

Recent research: The five barriers that impede "stitching" collaboration between Commons and Wikipedia

Draftspace: Bad Jokes and Other Draftspace Novelties

Humour: The Dehumourification Plan

Traffic report: Raise your drinking glass, here's to yesterday

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

Hey! Thanks for listing my PROD for National parishes (Quebec) at the Christianity deletion noticeboard. Do you use a tool to track AfDs and PRODs for Christianity-related subjects? If so, I'd love to use it to keep tabs so I can participate in those discussions even if they aren't listed. Thank you for your clerking! ~ Pbritti (talk) 05:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No tool - I just skim the PROD and AfD lists for articles that interest me or for articles that I think need another set of eyes.

In the case of Quebec churches, it was both. I think your assessment is probably correct but I threw it out there "just in case". I was going to leave a note at WikiProject Quebec, too, but ran out of time. I was thinking that if there were refs, they'd be in French. Also, since this is a French topic, maybe the article's title in English isn't quite right.

Being lazy with terrible French skills, I outsource these concerns and any searching to others with a posting at deletion sorting.

I find about 25% of the PRODs I do this with get overturned by someone who knows the subject. In other cases, somebody puts a PROD2 tag, confirming an article is trash.

That article is fishy-looking to me. I think a posting at WikiProject Quebec would really smoke this out. If it's really a thing, the locals will know right away.

I'll do this in the morning.

Anyway, thanks for all your work on Christianity articles!!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 08:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wow, you do it manually! You deserve every bit of credit you can get. Thank you for your willingness to take on what must feel like busywork—it really does help the project. Please feel welcome to ping me if you ever need a second set of eyes on something. Thank you for explaining your process, by the way; always nice hearing how another editor approaches things. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:19, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Really, for me it's not busywork. Some deletions are like puzzles to be solved in the interest of getting a good outcome for Wikipedia. Reaching out for help is just one part of the process.

I don't deletion sort except articles that have caught my eye. Doing others would be sort of a chore.

I do some busywork - cleaning out old prod notices from deletion sorting lists but I view that as cleaning up after myself. Ditto hours cleaning out red links after recruiting others to delete about 100 articles about non-existent Manitoba train stations and towns. I thought I had them doing all the work but afterwards the joke was on me. More cleaning up after myself.

I'm also picky - there are whole topic areas I avoid either because I'm not interested (much of popular culture) or I have difficulty evaluating sources (Nigerian topics for example)

Ironically, I'm a deletionist at heart. I think we have a lot to purge. The majority of AfDs, CSDs and PRODs I tacitly support and don't bother to comment at. I see myself QC-ing a vital process.

Also, I tag dubious articles as I encounter them while reading for pleasure. I spend way too much time on Wikipedia reading for pleasure and not editing. More outsourcing- looks fishy but I'm enjoying reading.

I am very old school about automated editing - I should take a day or two studying how to improve my efficiency. That said, I suppose my "outsourcing" to others via deletion sorting and WikiProject notices is a way of increasing my efficiency and the scope of what I do.

Also much of what I do involves thinking - not sure Twinkle handles that. Additionally I spend too much time digging for references online - I'm always looking for ways to dig into more obscure topics.

I wish I had access to a big research university library and go look at paper books.

I've followed your work from a distance- it's people like you that do the high value stuff here!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if you ever want access to print texts from university libraries, let me know. I will be relocating from my beloved Colorado (may the Rocky Mountain Empire stand tall) to Washington, D.C. If you ever want me to pop over to one of the various academic libraries—including the massive Library of Congress—I'll have general access through my work. I see you're really more of a recent return after an extended absence. For whatever time you're willing to continue contributing to the project, I'd love to enable your work. Consider this a belated welcome back! ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:50, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbritti, see:

Wikipedia talk:Quebec Wikipedians' notice board#Proposed deletion: National parishes (Québec)

A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A few more comments based on others seeing this thread:

I watch more AfDs than I participate in. If I subsequently see they don't need another opinion, I don't spend time on them.
- If I deletion sort them, I'm monitoring them even if I don't participate
- We have some very diligent deletion sorters, especially @Spiderone, and they often get there ahead of me. So I may still be watching an AfD even if I haven't deletion sorted it.
I watch PRODs -- if I've deletion sorted them, I'm watching to see if anyone responds.

Of course, this is on a heavy editing day for me like yesterday. Some days and even some years^{[4][5][6][7][8]} I don't show up here. The world goes on.

My partner says I need another hobby and they're probably right.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Y'know—and I'm just spitballing here—if you decide that this hobby is something you want to keep up with, maybe in six months it might be nice to see you get back some of the tools you let lapse. You've clearly still got the aptitude and attitude required. Thanks again for the diligent work you do. ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:22, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm flattered. We'll see.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:25, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Love for you

I don't know how should it be expressed, but I will surely say, you are one of the greatest editors I found in english wikipedia, who evaluate edits with the highest honesty as far as possible. May God bless you. ❤️ 202.134.10.130 (talk) 17:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - I'm flattered, especially since you wrote this after we disagreed with each other at a DRV for the most vexatious AfD I've been involved with (out of many 100s).

I sympathize with your frustrations both with the AfD outcome and the terrible behaviour there. (See WP:SEALION!)

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will not explicitly mention, but I mention to you with grief that I feel victimized by certain fierce people who you saw badger and vulnerablely force their point of view despite knowing about going against guideline, they never hasitate to tell open lie for their own interest, but God always sees, he never keeps anything left without proper judjement, and again I express feeling heartily to have a good people. 202.134.10.130 (talk) 17:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I ask you for info, is that, that and that edits are really undue and fringe as the undoers claimed there? 202.134.10.130 (talk) 17:41, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t normally get involved with this topic area so I won’t comment on those edits. What I will advise is that, in your editing environment

Play the “long game”
- Think in months or years
- Consider addressing the roots of any abusive, coordinating, rather than today’s edit war
Pick your battles
- - You are playing the long game.
- In particular, only add content that is unambiguously referenced by a source whose reliability will be obvious to non-South Asian, non-Muslim and non-Hindu editors. Leave no ambiguity to be exploited.
- Don’t stop editing
- Don’t fight over grey areas.
  - You are playing the long game
Take notes with diffs, URLs offline for future use
- Get very familiar with Wikipedia’s rules. Not just the titles but the detailed content
  - You are playing the long game.
Stay cool. Very cool. The least little hint of incivility will be used against you, even if the other side is worse. They will have a dozen friends show up to make a big deal of it.
- Speak to content, not personalities.
  - You are playing the long game
There’s an old quotation to the effect that, “if you’re going to kill the king, don’t wound him”
- - You are playing the long game
- Avoid noticeboards unless you have double the evidence you need.
- Read about the legal doctrine of unclean hands
- See WP:BOOMERANG
- Fairly or not, there is an unacknowledged presumption at noticeboards than an IP or new editor making a complaint is likely wrong and throwing a boomerang
- If you show up with an IP associated with a blocked user or an open proxy, your comments will be struck or even deleted. This means if you edit at an open hotspot, you should check to see who has used the IP before you and what it’s block history is.
If you find hard evidence of off-wiki coordination, take screenshots. Do not post online - email to ArbCom.

I’ll post more as I think of it.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:29, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can clearly doubt about one or more "clever" accounts being sock recently, and also doubt that thay are (probably "highly") paid and backsupported and patronised by "higher" communities for telling on behalf of them tricky lies and doing fierce attacking behaviour to targeted opponents to defend their ownselves, lawfully and even at case verily unlawfully, and also know about "admins" accused of having bribe from international leading companies for editing on behalf of them, found in google, don't know true or false, even in that case, little can be expected, only except God helps as we rely on God for His unpredictable and unmeasurable assistance. 202.134.10.130 (talk) 18:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have good evidence about admin misbehaviour, send it to ArbCom.

There is meatpuppetry associated with some accounts in your topic areas. That's harder for admins to prove than sockpuppetry.

Get familiar with the tools and methods our checkusers for the behavioural part of their investigations.

You are playing the long game.

Also, you got good advice at WP:ANI - go to WP:FTN. Avoid WP:ANI if another noticeboard will work.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:56, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think paid exploitation of Wikipedia by political and sectarian interests in South Asia will gradually begin to enter the "hive mind" of regular editors and admins here at the English Wikipedia. Press coverage (by reliable sources) of the problem will help; it gets noticed by WP:The Signpost and offline Wikipedia criticism sites.

That paid editing will get much more pushback then.

If you kept a record of user accounts and diffs offline, it'll be well-received then.

You are playing the long game. Stay cool. Keep editing, albeit carefully. Use impeccable sourcing.

I've seen it with previous efforts by the Chinese, Saudi, Russian and other governments. Eventually these schemes get found out and the reaction is strongly negative. Wikipedians hate this stuff and quickly coalesce in reaction. Abusers and their backers are publicly embarrassed.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:11, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to get paid as an editor when your missteps publicly embarrass your employer.

Some editors are playing a pretty good short/medium game and winning because the of the editors and IPs they're opposing aren't playing the long game and don't really know our rules.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P.S., I know as a technical that fact some of those editors follow this talk page. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, remember in our interactions, I don't take or oppose your "side" editorially. "I'm friendly but not your friend". (I am sympathetic and certainly not your enemy).

Ultimately when I'm online here, my motivation is "what's good for Wikipedia and its readers"

I see a problem for us, hence my advice above.

Hang in there! Stay cool!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I have love for you lastly

O believers! If you are mindful of God, He will grant you a standard ˹to distinguish between right and wrong˺, absolve you of your sins, and forgive you. And Allah (God) is the Lord of infinite bounty.
— Al-Anfal:29

And whoever is mindful of God, He will make a way out for them, and provide for them from sources they could never imagine. And whoever puts their trust in God, then He ˹alone˺ is sufficient for them. Certainly God achieves His Will. God has already set a destiny for everything.... And whoever is mindful of God, He will make their matters easy for them.... And whoever is mindful of God, He will absolve them of their sins and reward them immensely.
— At-Talaq:2-5

In a right way, it is almost of hardship and toil, don't take much that you can not bear, but also don't be much careless that might make you deviated, and always rely on God, because surely He exists and helps for good. Lastly, love again. 202.134.10.130 (talk) 19:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:57, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And lastly, as open, though not related to wikipedia stuff, I shall like to request you, you might go through or not, to study Islam, (I am inviting actually, I didn't want to miss that chance actually after having you a good heart) to study Islamic the scriptural refereces Quran and Hadith translations and scholars of the respective ( you can follow that), I wish something more good to be uncovered in front of you, I think you can try the way to find a more nearness to God as he wishes, actually, and to have yourself more bountiful to help yourself and others. Love again (sister or anything with life I don't know). May Allah (God) give you good rewards/returns (Zajakallah Khairan). 202.134.10.130 (talk) 20:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This means a lot. I would respond more about my own beliefs but my need for anonymity (I real life concerns) and my role here as a sort of neutral referee and editor preclude this.

Remember: stay cool. Learn the rules. References. Civil. Long game!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you can study comparatively. That may help to. And thanks. 202.134.10.130 (talk) 20:35, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kalki Avatar DRV

You pinged me for the second DRV, which you said should speedily closed, but it had been speedily closed by Extraordinary Writ by the time I was editing. I agree that it should have been closed and that the second DRV was tendentious. I don't think that there is anything more for me to say. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concur!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Format

I find your bullet style and signature formatting to be very difficult to follow. You should keep everything in one line as much as possible including your signature. Iterresise (talk) 05:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback about my signature, Iterresise>

This is the first time I've heard this. If anybody else is following this page and has an opinion, feel free to opine. I'm open to more feedback.

I've been putting my sig on a separate line because it's long enough that it often wraps around and that's confusing, too. Perhaps the answer is to just change my sig.

I'll think it over. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 15:02, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at my comment formatting at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 August 29#Population of cities - what a disgraceful mess. Thanks for pointing that out; I've cleaned it up. I'm sure others were annoyed, too.

I think some of that's personal, late night sloppiness on my part and even more, just the perversity of mobile editing. You don't always get to preview edits before making them - it depends on what you're editing. I have no idea why MediaWiki added <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags but I've seen it do that once before.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 15:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Final comment: you've gotten a lot of negative feedback over this TfD. I suspect it's discouraging, given the hours you put into preparing your nomination (I saw all your sandbox work).

Hang in there!

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 15:11, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avatar and Muhammad

Hello, A. B.,

This is a belated thank you for the work you did, tracking down sources for this article. And for the work you do in all of the AFDs you participate in. I wish we could clone you and have a dozen more "A. B." to participate in deletion discussions but, alas, you are unique. I really pay attention to your comments even when consenus goes a different direction and appreciate how seriously and thoughfully you take your participation in the deletion process. Thanks again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:02, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This means so much.

That was so unpleasant and it really opened my eyes to big problems with sectarian editing on South Asian topics. I don't know what we as a community are going to do; it's a whole lot bigger than me.

Anyway, thanks so much. I admire your work, too. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And now I came across your comments on Talk:Michael Weinrath! You're even checking out sources and citations for PROD'd articles! You are really going above and beyond what we expect from an editor who is involved in the deletion processes on this project. You are correct there, we have a few editors/admins who are very knowledgeable about appropriate citation rates and credentials for academics but I don't think they pay much attention to Proposed deletions. But we don't get many professors who pass through PROD, they seem to go directly to AFD. PROD draws a lot of small towns and small companies, it seems, a few athletes and some technical hardware. Many thanks again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly I work hard to be lazy. I try to "outsource" my work - see my comments at the "Quick question" thread above with Pbritti.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ProD

is not really a good reason to remove CSD tag. Besides, I wanted to see if anyone else thought it was "unambiguously promotional." Now I'll never know. 😜 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty promotional, I’d say. Maybe notable? Don’t know. Left a comment on the talk page.

My desire to punish page spammers struggles with my desire to retain notable material.

As I noted to someone else above, I’m a deletionist at heart just double-checking the waste stream.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maritime pilots

Hi A. B., I saw your comment about maritime pilots at Greghenderson's talk page. Would you have time to look through the list at Template:List of Sea Captains and Pilots and see which of these people you think do meet notability requirements? I wondering if it is worth doing some kind of group AfD process on those that don't, but would appreciate your insights. Thanks Melcous (talk) 04:08, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When I get a chance in the next several hours to days.

As a general rule, I’m very wary of bundled AfDs - too many articles and then you get a fragmented discussion to keep some and delete others. I see these big-bundle AfDs go off the rails. I recommend no more than 3 articles at a time and I think they need to be very similar as to the merits of deletion. I recommend saying something about each article in your nomination.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:31, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks A. B., appreciate your wisdom. I'm happy to hold off until you get a chance to have a look, thanks. Melcous (talk) 22:30, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lisa_Nakazono

Hi - you've !voted twice on this one, the first time Delete and the second time Keep. Looking at what you've written I suspect the Delete should be struck, but I thought I'd check! Black Kite (talk) 12:30, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness. I'm so confused by the back and forthI bailed out after the 100 comment. Can I !vote to delete the AfD itself?

I'll take another look - it may be later today. I was feeling sympathetic but then there was so much bludgeoning.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Black Kite, methinks they doth protest to much". After going through all that mess I struck my "keep".

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Solar Eclipse Maestro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SBIG.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Morning

@A. B.: Morning. scope_creep^Talk 08:36, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning!

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 14:18, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 58

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023

New partners - De Standaard and Duncker & Humblot
Tech tip: Filters
Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:26, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:APEX Accelerators

I think you may need to re-read the draft you declined the G11 on. This is written like it is meant to be on the programs brochures. It is 100% a promotional piece, I have a hard time seeing any sentence that isn't promotional. I don't want to waste more people's time in a MfD when it's such a clear cut G11. It may be notable but needs to completely re-written in a neutral factual tone based on reliable sources. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 20:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request

@A. B.:, I appreciate you to study about Aqeedah, it will help you to learn a lot more, you can read resources from this, thanks. And can I ask you to give any link to contact you outside wikipedia? 202.134.8.129 (talk) 04:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you can send a private email through Wikipedia via a link on my user talk page if you’re using the desktop view of the page.

This service may be limited to registered users.

I will not be able to see your email address. I will reply via the same Wikipedia system if you have a registered account.

I don’t wish to post my email publicly.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:15, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@A. B.:, Sent. Please check. 202.134.8.129 (talk) 05:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To protect my own privacy (you are, after all, a stranger), I will not reply to you using my personal email account or Facebook. I have already redacted your personal data (email address, Facebook page) and forwarded your emails to ArbCom via the process described at the top of the User:Arbitration Committee page.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 15:01, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you inform which account this sock used to email you? He is a ban evader and it is necessary to know his all accounts. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 12:03, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

News and notes: Wikimedia power sharing – just an advisory role for the volunteer community?

In the media: "Just flirting", going Dutch and Shapps for the defence?

Obituary: Nosebagbear

Serendipity: Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no paywall, for thou, Wikipedia Library, art with me

Featured content: Catching up

Concept: Strange portal opened by CERN researchers brings Wikipedia articles from "other worlds"

Traffic report: Some of it's magic, some of it's tragic

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Cornell study on Wikipedia discussions

Hello A. B.,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages .

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

-- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 18:03, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

News and notes: Wikimedia Endowment financial statement published

In the media: History is written by whoever can harness the most editors

Recent research: Readers prefer ChatGPT over Wikipedia; concerns about limiting "anyone can edit" principle "may be overstated"

Featured content: By your logic,

Concept: Wikipedia policies from other worlds: WP:NOANTLERS

Poetry: "The Sight"

Traffic report: There shall be no slaves in the land of lands, it's a Bollywood jam

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moving "Death Editor 2 on Starship Flight Test" to DRN

While I believe the Death Editor 2 on Starship Flight Test belongs at ANI, I've tried to comply and move it to DRN. However, both times I've tried to file the compliant at DRN, my computer crashed.

What do I do? Redacted II (talk) 11:17, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea - that’s an odd problem. Maybe reboot your computer and try again at DRN? I’m not much of a computer expert.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 11:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried. It crashed. Should I continue to try on DRN? Redacted II (talk) 11:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd avoid ANI - that's for sure. You can't predict who'll get stoned by the mob.

I just don't know what to say about your computer. Try using a different browser?

I'll be offline much of the day. Good luck.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a case shell. One of the editors has made a statement, and I have made a moderator statement. If they are trying to improve the article, as they should be, we can get the issues clarified and maybe even resolved. We don't want moderated discussion to fail. If it does fail, we will go back to WP:ANI, but that is what we want to avoid. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Thank you for telling them to try DRN. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I have created the case shell for their dispute, and have asked them what they want to change in the article. One editor has complained about edit warring, and the other editor has complained about vandalism. There has not been vandalism. There has been edit-warring, and the way to avoid edit-warring starts with defining what the content issues are. If I don't get answers from them within 24 hours, I will fail the dispute and tell them to go back to WP:ANI, and, then, if they do go back to WP:ANI, I will tell WP:ANI that it really is a conduct dispute. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC) In other words, you were right that it should be a content dispute, but any editor can always turn anything into a conduct dispute by bad conduct. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks for what you're doing. It's too bad if they miss this opportunity.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 12:26, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple individuals same page

AB! Good catch with incorrect sources. My bad. Good stuff! Teddy012 (talk) 04:39, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding

Hi A. B. -- Thanks for all your thanks about my recent deprodding sprees! Sometimes it feels as if I'm alone in trying to at least get AfDs to decide whether some of this old unreferenced content is of any value, so genuinely grateful for the support. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 22:59, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noted an unusually large batch of questionable looking PRODs and put them on my watchlist to come back and investigate later. When “later” came, I found you’d already dealt with them.

You have really good judgement about what to keep, what to delete and what to discuss. I appreciate what you do.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

cheeeeeeeeeeeeese burgerrrrrrrrrrrr

brger defaultkid99 (talk) 16:18, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

News and notes: Where have all the administrators gone?

In the media: Thirst traps, the fastest loading sites on the web, and the original collaborative writing

Gallery: Before and After: Why you don't need to know how to restore images to make massive improvements

Featured content: Yo, ho! Blow the man down!

Traffic report: The calm and the storm

News from Diff: Sawtpedia: Giving a Voice to Wikipedia Using QR Codes

Humour: New citation template introduced for divine revelations, drug use, and really thinking about it

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kenneth Lutchen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Interim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

With regard to this: it's true that the article was started before User:Zayani55 was blocked, but they created it while socking to evade a block (they also used another sock to edit the draft). Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/VICTOHH1/Archive for more info about the sockmaster. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 02:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you haven't restored the tag. Is there a reason for that? M.Bitton (talk) 09:17, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

Arbitration report: Admin bewilderingly unmasks self as sockpuppet of other admin who was extremely banned in 2015

In the media: UK shadow chancellor accused of ripping off WP articles for book, Wikipedians accused of being dicks by a rich man

News and notes: Board candidacy process posted, editors protest WMF privacy measure, sweet meetups

Opinion: An open letter to Elon Musk

WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2023

News from Wiki Ed: Equity lists on Wikipedia

Recent research: How English Wikipedia drove out fringe editors over two decades

Featured content: Like putting a golf course in a historic site.

Wikidata: Evaluating qualitative systemic bias in large article sets on Wikipedia

Traffic report: Cricket jumpscare

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Rami Meir Un-PROD

Hey there! Just responding to the edit note on the Rami Meir article, I'm still pretty new to this so I appreciate the contribution! I'm just popping in here to give you a heads up that I plan to AfD this article and I'd love to have more input once I do (I just have to go over the policy a little bit first, like I said, kinda new lol).

In retrospect I probably should have made a post on the Talk page for the article explaining my reasoning a little more in depth, as STMEGI was actually a source I looked into and found to be a potential CoI for this, but that wasn't really made clear by me. According to a quote from their executive director in Source 15 STMEGI "invited them to unite into a professional Union at the site of the Community Center of Mountain Jews in Sokolniki,” them being the Mountain Jewish Union of Artists, of which Rami Meir was then elected chairman. Additionally, STMEGI seems to be an ongoing financial backer of the group and Meir specifically.

I'm still learning all the Wiki-etiquette, but hopefully this reads as appreciative of the feedback as it's intended to!

-KJGinger (talk) 17:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch about STEGMI - I didn't pick up on that. I think you did a really good job. It will be interesting to see what happens at AfD.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:50, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

G5 for socks

Hi A. B.,

About this comment/rejection. The earlier, incorrect, G5 placement was based on a temp ban that the page creator had received and thus rejected. But I re-submiited it (having seen the previous rejection) for CSD under the criteria after it was confimed that the creator was indeed a long-term sockpuppeteer (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oriental Aristocrat) i.e. creation in violation of a ban which as far as I can tell covers this (esepcially with no significant edits by others here).

Do reconsider the CSD in light of this.

Thanks Gotitbro (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Idol Destroyer was the only account definitively linked to Pirate of the High Seas. It was impossible to link either of them via checkuser to Oriental Aristocrat.

I see a valuable, well-referenced stub (Karim Shahi) that we can use. I'm reluctant to delete it even with its suspect provenance. WP:BANREVERT does not require we speedy articles created by banned users; it says they can be.

This is a gray area and I am more content-oriented than most; I suspect 55+% of editors would side with you, being more editor-integrity focused. I suggest you maybe take to AfD?

In any event, I'm not going to revert my tag removal but I'm not edit war if it goes back.

I appreciate your care for Wikipedia's integrity.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Midwest Program on Airborne Television Instruction

Nice job with those refs. Guess it is indeed notable enough, my mistake!RedundancyAdvocate (talk) 04:44, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're all working for a good outcome. If you hadn't tagged the article, it wouldn't have gotten improved.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Goodwill message

I've encountered a few of your comments in the wild lately. I wanted to simply say again that your editing consistently impresses, both in terms of content and compassion. Thank you for your quality contributions to this project. All the best ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:57, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That makes my day. I appreciate your thoughtful edits, too.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfD comment

Hi, regarding your suggestion at the AfD that an RfC be created; I was about to create one, but it feels like such a silly thing to request comment on, when the guideline is crystal clear. In other words, I would feel like an absolute fool asking something like "Are Asian Games medallists sufficiently notable on that basis alone to receive standalone articles?" Davidindia even says (here, for example) that placing in the top 8 at an Asian Games is somehow sufficient for notability, which is even less defensible. As I said in the AfD, the guideline (WP:ATHLETE) is very clear that no one is notable because of an achievement alone; they must pass WP:GNG (i.e., receive sufficient coverage from reliable sources). Even as noted on the talk page here by someone else, even Olympians are not automatically notable; they must pass WP:GNG. For this reason, I'm strongly inclined to open the [~30] individual AfDs, without holding an RfC first. I will no doubt be faced with the same arguments, but I surely cannot be alone in realizing the absolute ridiculousness of the arguments from the others, as they contradict WP:GNG and WP:ATHLETE. Do you have any opinion on how I should go about this? Rowing007 (talk) 19:38, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly see your point about an RfC.

I'd definitely wait for another AfD to let any negativity die down. After that, I would take the weakest article to an AfD and see how it goes.

The variability in AfD outcomes can surprise me.

I used the talk page archive search box on the upper right side of the Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports) to look for prior discussions of the Asian Games.[9]

Other than passing mentions of the Asian Games, there were substantive discussions associated with the existing rules at WP:NTRACK and WP:NGYMNAST. These are two sports categories where the Asian Games are associated with probable notability.
It seems like each sport has its own constituency and passionate editors; this leads to variability in guidance for different sports.
See Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)/Archive 15#Sportspeople who aren't notable. There were 2 related AfDs with different outcomes:
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wu Shu-fen
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louise Allen (tennis)

Take a look at this discussion, too, as a potential precedent:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability

I'll think about this some more.

Thanks for caring about our content.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 00:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Hi A.B., I've been seeing you around more often lately and it's a bit visually distracting because your signature includes not only a line break but a new paragraph that adds additional space. I've never seen anyone else's signature need to be its own paragraph before, and I kindly request that you remove that formatting from it. WP:SIGAPP specifically says "Do not add line breaks" and "Do not include <div>...</div>s because those cause the surrounding text to make a new line." The use of <p> goes against these instructions, but you can use a "nowrap" span instead to avoid the signature itself breaking. Thanks, Reywas92^Talk 15:55, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reywas92, thank you for bringing the WP:SIGAPP policy to my attention and your technical advice. I have changed my signature accordingly. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:27, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, have a great weekend! Reywas92^Talk 17:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New challenge: breaking an old habit now embedded in muscle memory. Bear with me going forward. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Broad Sound North Entrance Channel has been accepted

Broad Sound North Entrance Channel, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

In the media: Propaganda and photos, lunatics and a lunar backup

News and notes: Update on Wikimedia's financial health

Traffic report: If it bleeds, it leads

Recent research: Canceling disputes as the real function of ArbCom

Wikimania: Wikimania 2024 scholarships

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 59

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023

Spotlight: Introducing a repository of anti-disinformation projects
Tech tip: Library access methods

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Afd agendas

I do have a problem with editors who put a mighty effort into getting articles deleted in a particular area for which they seem to have utter contempt. If someone makes a large number of drive-by nominations without showing any interest in trying to improve the articles first, that is surely unbalanced, especially when the deletions are then celebrated, like a row of animal heads fixed to a wall. Very few professions are deemed by WP to make people inherently notable. If I were trying to get large numbers of pages about opera singers deleted, with the argument that opera singers are "not inherently notable", I hope that would seem laughable. In this case, as in many others, there is no proper assessment of the sources, and then fellow-travellers have piled in to support deletion who show no sign of having looked at them (except to snipe at sources that do not go to notability, which is again unbalanced). In theory, the closing admin or non-admin should not be led astray by a clack, but most are. As a content-creator, my humble opinion is that the WP AfD process is not fit for purpose. Moonraker (talk) 01:26, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

90+% of AfD decisions boil down to reliable secondary sources and the notability guidelines. If you can find the appropriate sources, you can usually stop a deletion.

If you’re not getting AfD outcomes that you like because the sources are only primary (such as the UK Foreign Office or the US State Department), then the problem is not with AfD, it’s with the guidelines.

In my limited experience, the majority of ambassadors don’t get sufficient press coverage of themselves to meet notability requirements. Obviously there are exceptions for major posts but neither the UK high commissioner to Botswana nor the Canadian ambassador to Kuwait are likely to get an article.

You’ll have to get the WP:BIO guideline amended to change our ambassadorial coverage.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

G11

Hi - I’d like to explain my tagging rationale, and why I reverted you. I can see that all the sandboxes link into one another, and are all relating to the same, non-notable person (a "Yommy Lee Money Banky"). As such, I am of the impression that this all ties in to a wide-scale attempt at self-promotion. However, I'm starting to suspect that these sandboxes form a large hoax of some sort, given I cannot find any evidence of this person existing, there are no sources in any of the sandboxes, and the only website linked to in a few of them is simply "official.com". Patient Zero^talk 04:11, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’m about to go offline for awhile. I just left you a note on your talk page as you were leaving yours here.

I don’t see a compelling need to delete all these user space pages. There’s certainly no need to rush.

Regards —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given these were hoaxes, I personally do see a compelling need to remove them; indeed, that’s why ”speedy” deletion exists - in order to quickly remove harmful, disruptive or nonsensical pages (there are also other criteria, but these are the “big” ones that come to mind) without the need for an AfD. Regarding there being no rush - I use a semi-automated tool to tag pages, so I appreciate that my edits can generally come across as being rapid in nature, however when it comes to removing content like this, the sooner the better, in my view (and I think it’s safe to say this is the view of the wider community too, given there haven’t been any attempts to abolish the speedy deletion system). Patient Zero^talk 04:25, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

News and notes: Beeblebrox ejected from Arbitration Committee following posts on Wikipediocracy

In the media: Turmoil on Hebrew Wikipedia, grave dancing, Olga's impact and inspiring Bhutanese nuns

Disinformation report: "Wikipedia and the assault on history"

In focus: Tens of thousands of freely available sources flagged

Comix: Bold comics for a new age

Essay: I am going to die

Featured content: Real gangsters move in silence

Traffic report: And it's hard to watch some cricket, in the cold November Rain

Humour: Mandy Rice-Davies Applies

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:07, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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!

Sunnya343 (talk) 21:56, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You removed deletion tag

Hello @A. B. you recently removed deletion tag from Communist Party of India (Marxist) campaign for the 2024 Indian general election saying remove CSD G4 tag - looks like multiple refs are dated after the close of the AfD, so this can't be the same article here Revision as of 07:16, 18 December 2023. You could have contacted me atleast once. Anyways the previous deletion discussion was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Communist Party of India (Marxist) campaign for the next Indian general election which means the article was Communist Party of India (Marxist) campaign for the next Indian general election. Now this article is Communist Party of India (Marxist) campaign for the 2024 Indian general election. There is just one change in title of the article that is next is replaced with 2024 which is not a rocket science to understand as the Next Indian general election too is 2024 Indian general election. This new article was created by XYZ 250706 who is the only one to have voted to keep that article in that discussion. That was deleted on 29 January and this was created on 22 March. Are you now able to understand now that both the articles are same and cover same topic? If yes then please restore the tag or if you want to know more then ask me here only I will tell you. ShaanSengupta^Talk 08:37, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's very simple, Shaan Sengupta. Here's our policy:

Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § G4. Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion:

- "This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, and pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies."

Have you looked at the copy of the article that was deleted and compared it to the version you tagged for deletion? I don't see how you could compare the deleted article to the current article unless you're an administrator; non-admins like you and I can't see deleted articles.

As I noted previously, it's very clear the current article is not exactly the same as the old article since there's text in the new article that's supported by references published after the 29 January 2023 AfD closure.

As a result, the tag had to be removed per our policy. There's no discretion allowed for CSD-G4 deletions.

Also, the CSD-G4 process cannot be used if "pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies.". The old article was deleted due to lack of notability; based on the new refs, it appears the subject now meets our notability requirements.

If you still feel this article should be deleted, you are free to use the Articles for Deletion process.

I hope this is helpful. Regards, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 09:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bot Task Idea

Hey @A. B., I had an idea for a bot task and wanted to get your feedback before I went and made a submission. I was thinking about the shared ip templates on IP editors talk pages that gave me a minor headache awhile back. What are your thoughts on adding one of the shared ip edu templates to the IP talk pages tied to educational institutions. I figure it wouldn't be that much work but I wanted to make sure that this would be something useful and not just a solution looking for a problem. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 04:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea but how would your bot know which IPs are tied to which educational institutions without running a whois, traceroute and or geolocate on every IP?

When I was an admin faced with blocking an IP for vandalism, it helped to know if it was associated with a school. If it was, then I'd block for as long an interval as possible since these were vandalism-only IPs. Otherwise, I was more cautious about block lengths.

This is just a guess but I'd say I tagged at least 1000 schools to save subsequent admins the hassle of figuring out who owned the IP.

I'm not an admin anymore, so I don't know whether current admins would still find this helpful. (I was automatically desysopped for inactivity during my 10-year editing break). --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Single-purpose editor, बिनोद थारू|बिनोद थारू (“Binod Tharu”)

Executive Summary
Thanks for weighing in on the AfD of my entire user page and an associated sandbox there. You wrote that you are busy but still took the time to participate and speak your mind, and for that I am grateful.

~~Is there a way to snowball the AfD on my user pages? I shouldn’t let it weigh on my mind, but I have a lot of material there and I can’t help but feel like it’s something hanging over my head.~~?

In my opinion, the aggressiveness of बिनोद थारू|बिनोद थारू (“Binod Tharu”) and his willingness to wikilawyer to evade revealing his true goals—but still achieve those goals—is disruptive to the project and is the paradigm example of a Wikipedia:Single-purpose account.

Details
On my AfD, he criticized my omission in my sandbox-based article of KK monopole [1], D1 or D5 branes, or even brane itself. However, given Tharu’s user contributions history (User contributions for बिनोद थारू) he lacks any interest in science-related subjects so it is highly doubtful he would recognize the difference between a D5 brane and a PTFE membrane. It’s far more likely he just cherry picked those buzzwords off the {{string theory}} infobox at the top of the article.

I actually had another editor take over the Fuzzball (string theory) article because I had too much tangential material in the article. That’s why I moved to my sandbox; to work on it there. And then here comes Tharu trying to get my user page deleted by ostensibly targeting the sandbox which I had linked to from my user page. And his reasoning? He resorted to the argument that I had too little tangential (entirely off-topic) material in my sandbox.

Given Tharu’s history of nominating AfDs on pro-Israeli articles, like All-woman Israeli tank crew fight (2023) and anti-Russian articles like Death of Anatoly Klyan, it’s become clear to me that he resorts to any convenient tactic he stumbles across to achieve his goal of simply eliminating content that offends his sensibilities and world view. For instance, he posted “Academic paper and book source possibility of misuse” on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, where he wrote as follows:

Academic paper and book source possibility of misuse
Journal paper and books are not a reliable source because the book publisher does not correct scientific mistakes rather mostly grammatical. academic papers are not reliable because the peer reviewers only reviews the experiment's integrity not whatever explanation or small talk is in the introduction and conclusion. yet this is what is always cited out of them (since the experiment is a primary source).

In a way, I agree with part of his sentiment about books; I’ve seen wikipedians completely fake a book citation (actually four in a row) purporting that they all said something when the books, in fact, said nothing of the sort. But still, the proper remedy to citing to books lies in improving the method of citing them.

What is unique about my user page is I practiced the art of writing engaging narratives (I’m an engineer and authoring isn’t really in my DNA) by telling of my son’s experiences in BUD/S (Navy SEAL training). I’ve got some patriotic stuff there. It never dawned on me at the time I was writing it that one day people from far corners of the planet who don’t embrace the concept of “The proper response to bad speech is better speech,” would one-day engage in wikilawyering to expunge the expression of thought with which they disagree. In order that he could expunge from existence my primary user page (the one with the account of my son at BUD/S), he took aim at one of my sandboxes where I was working on an abstruse scientific concept beyond his grasp. That is so disruptive.

Greg L (talk) 23:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greg L, I can't judge whether that editor is a returning nuisance, but technical evidence does not suggest any foul play. Drmies (talk) 23:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Greg L (talk) 23:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think बिनोद थारू|बिनोद थारू’s edits were misguided, not malevolent. Hopefully, he’ll take folks’ advice and avoid initiating CSDs, AfDs, and PRODS until he make a few 1000 more edits. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

Special report: Did the Chinese Communist Party send astroturfers to sabotage a hacktivist's Wikipedia article?

News and notes: The Italian Public Domain wars continue, Wikimedia RU set to dissolve, and a recap of WLM 2023

In the media: Consider the humble fork

Discussion report: Arabic Wikipedia blackout; Wikimedians discuss SpongeBob, copyrights, and AI

In focus: Liquidation of Wikimedia RU

Technology report: Dark mode is coming

Recent research: "LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less" with Wikidata

Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols

Comix: Lollus lmaois 200C tincture

Crossword: when the crossword is sus

Traffic report: What's the big deal? I'm an animal!

From the editor: A piccy iz worth OVAR 9000!!!11oneone! wordz ^_^

Apocrypha: Local editor discovered 1,380 lost subheadings in ancient Signpost scrolls. And what he found was shocking.

Humour: Guess the joke contest

BJAODN: Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello A. B.: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 15:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you. The same to you and yours! --02:34, 26 December 2023 (UTC) A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:34, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

बिनोद थारू using redirects to delete information to get around PRODs

A. B., I noticed you had reverted a redirect बिनोद थारू created. There were two other articles he did that to that you should know about. Both amounted to pure & simple deletion of content because the articles he redirected to mentioned nothing from the ones he redirected. Please see User_talk:Liz#Only eleven hours later for details. Greg L (talk) 06:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the message you put on Binod's page. His editing is creating real problems and I appreciate what you've done. I'm traveling but hope to contribute to your messaging as well.

I have a hard time understanding what "makes him tick". What brings him to Wikipedia? What's his motivation? I'm not saying he has any malevolent intentions- just that I'm puzzled by his behaviour.

I saw someone left him a message about gay men freezing their eggs. That's a real puzzler.—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 14:44, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Binod made yet another redirect, Live Lounge Special: Difference between revisions, redirecting the article to BBC Radio 1, which only mentions “Live Lounge” with links to the article but doesn’t cover “Live Lounge” like the 6,357-byte article does. Once again, this leaves readers with the situation where they click on a blue link, only to be taken to the same article they’re on.
He did this, again, after I alerted him here on his talk page to the negative consequences of redirects like that.
Binod’s motives are quite clear and we needn’t pretend that we don’t fathom the curious manner by which Binod is trying to wash the feet of the orphans. He wrote here on the discussion thread “Previous account(s)” on his talk page (in response to User:Liz) that his first article got deleted in an AfD. Binod’s edit history and the remainder of his response to Liz makes it perfectly clear that he’s now exacting revenge on en.Wikipedia and is constantly trying different tactics to evade the directions of you and Liz to accomplish his ends. AGF in this case is like catching some guy in a bar after he spit in your beer as you were looking away, only to find he next tries dipping his finger in your beer after spitting on his finger. It would be foolish to think he’s going to respect you and your beer the third and fourth time—and the 100th time.
I propose it is time to give him a three-month-long block (along with the associated I.P. address) in hopes he will learn to add value to the Hindi version of Wikipedia. Maybe he will come off his block with a resolve to improve en.Wikipedia instead of trying to tear it down. Greg L (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I support you. I wondered if maybe his MfD of your user page was some sort of "payback" for your opposition to one of his attempted deletions. That said, some of his PRODs and AfDs have seemed reasonable to me.

Ultimately, whatever motivates Binod, we have to think about what's best for the project. His current activity is unsustainable for Wikipedia's content and community.

I find the personalities and interactions on Wikipedia fascinating in a way, but only at a distance. This really is the island of misfit toys.

What do you think the next step should be? ANI? —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My first interaction with Binod was his AfD on my user page; that AfD was not the result of prior dealings. I quickly looked at his contributions history and could immediately see it wasn’t just rotten luck. There was a clear pattern to what he was doing, it was purposeful, and was intentionally disruptive to the entire project.
Binod has had more-than-enough warnings that what he is doing is disruptive. The fact that 10–20 percent of his edits prove to be worthwhile can be chalked up to just shooting into a barrel and getting lucky; it doesn’t make up for the 80–90 percent that wears everyone down and makes them feel like they’re a retailer in a crime-ridden city and should just call it quits. Further disruption from him beyond this point would be clear evidence that he A) is disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point and B) is immune to peer pressure (as evidenced by dismissive wikilawyering like this).
I’d wait at least three more days to see if Binod continues to initiate any form of deletion of content (initiating AfDs, PRODs, or Redirects without ensuring the content is first transferred). If so, an ANI is in order, which I propose to be a sufficiently long time-out to allow him to discover life outside of en.Wikipedia. Greg L (talk) 18:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While you were writing the above message, I posted what I meant to be friendly advice on User:बिनोद थारू’s talk page. He deleted it as ”misinformation” 3 minutes later. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the unsourced statement of saying "the majority of your edits have no merit", as it could mislead potential watchers towards ganging up against me. If you make a post that is sourced or that circumvents saying such a thing then I will respond. Here is the link to the relevant talk page guideline WP:OWNTALK. बिनोद थारू (talk) 19:00, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Binod, this is specifically what I wrote to you:
”Some of your PRODs and AfDs have merit but too many don’t. If you don’t have a success ratio of at least 80%, you should not be initiating deletions.”

I stand by this comment and a statistical analysis will bear this out. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you only had posted "the success ratio is greater than 80%" I would've not hidden the comment. Saying "the majority of your edits have no merit" circumvents the possibility of some of those being vexatiously reverted or voted against, for example by someone tracking down my page after an argument. बिनोद थारू (talk) 19:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your quote above is incorrect; this is my entire post:
”बिनोद थारू, please slow down and reflect on what administrators and other editors are telling you, both here and in deletion discussions. I detect frustration and, increasingly, exasperation with your work here on Wikipedia, particularly with regards to deletion. Some of your PRODs and AfDs have merit but too many don’t. If you don’t have a success ratio of at least 80%, you should not be initiating deletions. Normally only more experienced editors initiate deletions.”

“Some of your comments and edit summaries are also grating on your colleagues’ nerves as they’re informing you.”

“If you continue on your present course, I expect one of these other exasperated editors will probably report you at WP:ANI within the next week.”

I hope you will take these comments to heart. I sense trouble brewing. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So you want me to stop making deletion discussions because I am not an experienced editor? बिनोद थारू (talk) 20:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting: Special:MobileDiff/1192670804 —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

he will learn to add value to the Hindi version of Wikipedia

I am pretty sure this violates a rule against racial prejudice. बिनोद थारू (talk) 18:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh… desist with your wikilawywering. Race has nothing to do with your disruption. Disruption has everything to do with your disruption. If you’re referring to my suggestion that you should be blocked from en.Wikipedia in hopes that you would focus constructively on the Hindi-language version of Wikipedia, maybe that was a pipe dream of mine. If someone—anyone anywhere—can provide evidence that you are disruptive there too, then I’d be more than happy to help them deal with your disruption at other versions of Wikipedia. Please state for the record what accounts you edit under at the Hindi version of Wikipedia and any other-language version of Wikipedia so we can see whether this pattern of yours is more widespread than is so-far evidenced. Greg L (talk) 18:32, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greg, for what it’s worth, a large majority of our South Asian editors only edit here on our project. The English Wikipedia draws more readers and editors in South Asia than any of the South Asian Wikipedias. Binod may not have accounts elsewhere. Another editor has suggested he’s previously edited here under another account (due to the “precocity” of his editing) but I have no opinion on that. I just want to see him work more collegially with the rest of us but now doubt that will happen based on my interaction with him a few minutes ago. I don’t think he realized I was possibly his last friend here.—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In that proves to be the case, A. B. (that Binod is only interested in en.Wikipedia), a time-out from en.Wikipedia may give Binod an opportunity to discover interests beyond his computer monitor. The community doesn’t care what he does so long as it doesn’t entail disrupting Wikipedias anywhere. He has had more-than-enough warnings from admins and, as evidenced by his deletion of your caution on his talk page (with a snarky response that amounted to “where’s your evidence?”), he seems dead-set on continuing on his current path, which won’t end well. Greg L (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

I have notified you as required by the instructions below

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. बिनोद थारू (talk) 18:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 893: / Line 893: @@
 :::::Greg, for what it’s worth, a large majority of our South Asian editors only edit here on our project. The English Wikipedia draws more readers and editors in South Asia than any of the South Asian Wikipedias. Binod may not have accounts elsewhere. Another editor has suggested he’s previously edited here under another account (due to the “precocity” of his editing) but I have no opinion on that. I just want to see him work more collegially with the rest of us but now doubt that will happen based on my interaction with him a few minutes ago. I don’t think he realized I was possibly his last friend here.—<span class="nowrap"><span style="font-family:Futura">[[User:A. B.|A. B.]] <sup>([[User talk:A. B.|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/A. B.|contribs]]  •  [[Special:CentralAuth/A._B.|global count]])</sup></span></span> 18:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 ::::::In that proves to be the case, A. B. (that Binod is only interested in en.Wikipedia), a time-out from en.Wikipedia may give Binod an opportunity to discover interests beyond his computer monitor. The community doesn’t care ''what'' he does so long as it doesn’t entail disrupting Wikipedias anywhere. He has had more-than-enough warnings from admins and, as evidenced by his deletion of your caution on his talk page (with a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:बिनोद_थारू&diff=prev&oldid=1192671779 snarky response that amounted to “where’s your evidence?”),] he seems dead-set on continuing on his current path, which won’t end well. [[User:Greg L|Greg L]] ([[User talk:Greg L|talk]]) 18:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
+== Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ==
+I have notified you as required by the instructions below
+[[File:Information icon4.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> [[User:बिनोद थारू|बिनोद थारू]] ([[User talk:बिनोद थारू|talk]]) 18:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)