User talk:Bbb23

Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on this page. Please include links to pertinent page(s). Click New section on the top right to start a new topic.

Deletion

Hello. This is Sandeep Bhatnagar. You deleted my page Sandeep Bhatnagar on 14:42, 4 July 2014 because of no proper validation. Please active my page. I have several links and images as a reference . And I want to add more discription and work to my page. Thanx. Please reponse and help me.

Time for another block?

Hello Bbb23. See User talk:Wearypoet#November 2014. Wearypoet is continuing with more of the same reverts at R. Kelly, with no discussion as usual. I am wondering if it is now time for an indef block. (Another possibility is one month but he might just wait it out). An indef could be lifted if he would agree to follow Wikipedia policy in the future. Thanks for any opinion, EdJohnston (talk) 05:00, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for review

Greetings. If you have a moment, I request that you please review the situation/conduct here and here. Thanks for your time. Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I see this has already been addressed. Thank you for your time in any case. Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:31, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

UTRS 12404

Can you please leave a little more info here: https://utrs.wmflabs.org/appeal.php?id=12404 ?--v/r - TP 21:50, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I can't, TP. I don't have a UTRS account.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:24, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

You could sign up for one. C'mon, all the cool kids are doing it! --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:31, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Heh, putting aside the fact that I'm hardly a cool kid, Ponyo, won't it just be more work? Not that I'm lazy, but I already feel a bit pushed. Ironically, another administrator wanted me to look at a request recently. It's a conspiracy.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:35, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

But "more work" is why they pay us the big bucks! Right? Speaking of more work...--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:02, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

You read my mind. I was going to talk to you about my ping as I know that you usually respond fairly quickly but didn't in this instance. I'm not sure Dennis is right, though. If he is, this should be brought up somewhere as a bug. Anyway, I'll address your findings tomorrow. Although you did a wonderful job, as usual, I won't have enough energy to finish the clerking until then. Getting back to UTRS for a moment, there are so many warnings and disclaimers on the create an account page it makes me feel like I'm getting an FBI background check. The cautious/anonymous in me shies away from that sort of thing. Nonetheless, I'll give it some thought, although I'd much rather look forward to Thanksgiving and the wonderful meal that awaits me (homemade stuffing, yum!).--Bbb23 (talk) 01:10, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

The block is User:Consultant Princewill Samuel Udo. You said they were abusing multiple accounts?--v/r - TP 05:53, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

See User:Consultant Princewill S Udo. Look also at deleted contributions.--Bbb23 (talk) 06:00, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

38zu.cn

Hello. This is ApparatumLover. You deleted my page 38zu.cn on 06:02, 21 November 2014 because you thought the subject was unimportaint. Please activate my page. I have 2 links as a reference. [1] [2] I want to add more info to my page, and maybe even an image. Thanks. Please respond and help me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ApparatumLover (talk • contribs) 14:51, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Those two refs won't get it past an A7.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:31, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

More refs. [3] [4] [5] [6] ApparatumLover (talk • 21 November 2014

Please take a few moments to read on pages on notability which any article must meet and our page on reliable sources, which shows what kind of sources are needed for articles. None of the sources you just provided meet the reliable source standard. They aren't even close. Ravensfire (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Everything Is Made in China deletion

Hi,

Why does the Russian band Everything Is Made in China qualifies for notability on the Russian, Polish, and German Wikipedias but not on the English one?

I would say that: a) being listed on Spotify; b) having released three albums; c) being active since 2007; d) being known by people outside Russia; e) having been named as "one of the most promising post-rocks bands" by the Russian edition of Rolling Stone; qualifies the band for notability.

Some references in addition to the aforementioned Wikipedia articles: [7] [8] [9].

Edit: Are you commenting on this issue? Thank you. xDCDx (talk) 10:51, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I noted that the band had articles on other wikis, but that in and of itself doesn't make it ineligible for an A7. The article here had nothing to it. It mainly said: I am a band and here's a list of my records. I also note that it was prodded in 2013 and deleted for lack of notability, and that version of the article had more to it than your version. Finally, some of the editors who had a hand in creating the article also created the article on the other wikis. Wonder why. It's also odd after a long hiatus from editing at Wikipedia (not that you've edited much), you came back just to create this article.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

==Deletion review for Everything Is Made in China==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Everything Is Made in China. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. xDCDx (talk) 11:38, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I just discovered the band, liked it, thought it was notable, and created the stub (with the idea of improving on it later and/or hope of somebody else contributing). My mistake for not including more notability claims. I am providing these now in this discussion, and you do not address their validity.

I find your mild conspiracy accusations amusing. Maybe the original editors created the page because they like the band? I'm in no way related to the original creators of the page nor to the band. I wish I could have rescued more text from previously deleted page. Also, how my past Wikipedia editing habits affect the notability or lack or thereof of the band? I like to create band pages of small but (what I think are) notable bands. I find rising Wikipedia elitism appalling, that's why I contribute less and less. xDCDx (talk) 11:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Undeletion

Please, undelete Nazar Voytovych and Oleksandr Kapinos, because new information has come to light since the deletion. This people have been presented with the title Hero of Ukraine (21/11/2014) --YarikUkraine (talk) 13:25, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't see them listed in this section. Do you have sources?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:34, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Of course — Official web-site of the President of Ukraine. In ukrainian Nazar Voytovych — Войтович Назарій Юрійович, Oleksandr Kapinos — Капінос Олександр Анатолійович. Also english version (without name) --YarikUkraine (talk) 15:07, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I can't even machine translate the Ukrainian site, but the award is not the same as the one we have an article about, and I'm not sure if that makes recipients automatically notable.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:27, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Hero of Ukraine — is the highest Ukrainian state awards. The article List of heroes of Ukraine is not update (Information as of 3 November 2014). Kapinos and Voytovych have been presented with the title Hero of Ukraine only 21 November 2014. --YarikUkraine (talk) 15:56, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

That's not the way I read the English version of the Ukrainian president's website. It says: "Petro Poroshenko stressed that under the procedure, the title of the Hero of Ukraine couldn't be given to three foreigners killed in the course of the Revolution of Dignity. That's why they will be awarded the Order of the Hero of the Heavenly Hundred." And even if he's talking about some other people who died, I don't see any indication at Wikipedia that just because one has been awarded the honor, that makes the person notable (none of the recipients seems to have articles).--Bbb23 (talk) 17:24, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Disclaimer: The post following is a bit emotional, but no offence meant. The Moon goes around Earth thus water boils when heated to 100°C (under 1atm). What has a sentence about foreigners (=not Ukrainians) do with Ukrainians awarded? You can just check List of people killed during Euromaidan where there is a nice colourful flags next to each person's name meaning their nationality. (You can also click on it if you don't know a flag you see (it's done with left click of mouse while the cursor is on the flag, or by touching it if you use a touch-screen device) I feel like you need the detailed instruction, I beg your pardon if you need it not). Ukrainian is a language supported by Google Translate ( http://translate.google.com ) and you can also use Romanization of Ukrainian#Tables of romanization systems (and that's not mentioning the fact that YarikUkraine already done transliteration for you) so I can't see why you have such big problems with reading the Decree in Ukrainian even if you are uk-0 and Cyrillic-0. Your statement "none of the recipients seems to have articles" in undeletion request of articles about recipients seems kinda genius — how do you suppose them to have articles while articles were deleted and not yet undeleted? I'm pretty sure that the highest title of Ukraine could be what the second item of Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Any biography, which is an additional criterion, says about and there also are secondary sources about them some of which you can see in the the articles about these people in ukwiki: uk:Войтович Назарій Юрійович, uk:Капінос Олександр Анатолійович so in my opinion the basic criteria are met as well. --ᛒᚨᛊᛖ (ᛏᚨᛚᚲ) 18:35, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Gee, and all this time I thought the earth went around the moon. Maybe I'm confusing it with the nursery rhyme. Becoming an administrator requires a lobotomy (apparently according to you). Anyway, if the creator of the two articles wants me to WP:USERFY them, he can ask. Nice hearing from you.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Declined speedy on NAIL Distribution

Hi Bbb23. I saw you declined my speedy nomination of Nail Distribution. I hadn't seen the previous speedy nomination - good call on that. However, your comments seem to imply that even if that was not the case, you would have declined it and I don't understand why. I don't see any assertion of importance.

As a distributor, I don't believe you inherit notability or importance from your products. As an example, consider Andrews Distributing Company a local beer distributor in Texas. They distribute quite a few notable and important brands like Pabst Blue Ribbon, Miller Lite and so on. Yet, they appear to be a run-of-the-mill company that would easily fail any measure of WP:CORP. It seems to me to be a perfect analog to Nail Distribution. Am I missing something?

The Dissident Aggressor 15:59, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I understand your point, and it might very well fail notability guidelines, but I think it's not speedy deletable. Why don't you take it to AfD and give me a heads up when you do? I'd be curious to read the discussion there.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:14, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. I've done so: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NAIL Distribution. The Dissident Aggressor 17:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

HOW DARE YOU!

No, I never mind you correcting my spelling, beware, it is a full time job. I kept EC'ing, but it looks like you and I had the same idea at the same time. The problem is, it might look like they punted and just passed him because that was easiest, but it is a very defensible action, it could have gone either way. I had one fail at 75, it isn't the count. I get the feeling the Crats will do just this, and he will end up with an admonishment at Arb if they pursue. You can close what you vote in. As an admin, I would put a spank on you for doing it AFD, certainly we can't do it there. Not bit strip worthy, but a bad mistake. Dennis - 2¢ 23:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I normally don't correct other people's typos, but in that instance yours created a different word, so I thought it might be helpful to correct it. I've gotten the impression that more RfAs are being promoted in the 70s than before. Maybe because we need more admins? I haven't done a statistical study, and I'm not going to, either. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 23:20, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Theopolisme 2 didn't, and while I disagreed with it, obviously I had a dog in the fight. Dennis - 2¢ 23:29, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Heh, that wasn't very recent (one and a half years ago).--Bbb23 (talk) 23:34, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

• And there IS more way that could resolve this situation cleanly and clearly without any questions, but I dare not speak it. Dennis - 2¢ 23:31, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

• How cryptic.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:34, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

• All this could have been avoided if NA gave up the bit, the Crat reversed, another Crat closed it. There was risk that he wouldn't get the bit, however. It would have been more or less in process, instead of what we are dealing with. Hopefully it is winding down. Here in a about a week, I'm on wikibreak for a while anyway, breaking to vote only.....I need it. Dennis - 2¢ 02:48, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Enjoy.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:29, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Deletion review for Nazar Voytovych

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Nazar Voytovych. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Anatoliy (Talk) 01:48, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Deletion review for Oleksandr Kapinos

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Oleksandr Kapinos. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Anatoliy (Talk) 01:48, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Janagewen

Hiya Bbb23, Hope your fine and well,
You recently blocked this user but he's now using his talkpage to still vent his anger [10] [11],
Although talkpages are given leeway when blocks occur it just seems like he's getting worse and isn't going to pack it in anytime soon so perhaps revoking talkpage access may help?
Thanks and Have a nice day :)
Regards, –Davey2010 • (talk) 16:00, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I know, I was cleaning things up as you were posting this message. The only thing you should be on the look-out for is block evasion. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Ah right :), Cheers, –Davey2010 • (talk) 16:27, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Bbb23. Seeing your name in my Watchlist has never made me happier! Still, I am very much wondering what led you to this user.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 00:50, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Codename Lisa, User:Janagewen filed a bizarre report at WP:AN3.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Again?! Wow! This guy really needs a hobby. Or a lady friend. (:sarcasm:) Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 01:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Armaan.haider

Regarding your comments at the bottom of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ahtasham.dogar3:

I totally trust your judgement. If you are reluctant, it is for a good reason. Should I reconsider? (And of course, if there are sleepers, all will be blocked because I asked him to declare all at his talk.) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:15, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Anna, thanks for the vote of confidence. However, I think we should plunge ahead as you planned and contemplated by my CU endorsement. Regardless of whether you are being overly optimistic, as an administrator you made a commitment to the user. Although that commitment may not technically be binding, I prefer to respect it. One step at a time. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 23:34, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough, my friend. Let's see how it goes. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:36, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Enforce

You lost me on your SPI comments? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Ponyo said she would let the edit stand and mark the editor as a SPA. I said I wouldn't "enforce" that, meaning I wouldn't administratively restore the edit, etc. Is that clearer?--Bbb23 (talk) 05:34, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I had no idea Ponyo was a she lol, thank you it does make it clearer just trying to not make problems so I wanted to ask first. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

No worries.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Block review

Hey! Was looking over CAT:RFU and I saw that you'd blocked Hotelnothouse as a Jfmisha sock. However, my cursory glance over that SPI doesn't show any CU confirmation that there's a link. I'm assuming I'm not looking in the right place - what's the scoop? m.o.p 16:25, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Master of Puppets, long time no see. I - and other administrators - frequently block editors as suspected socks without a CU confirmation, both at SPI and outside SPI based on duck. Actually, if you look at the list of suspected socks, there are several others I blocked without requesting a CU. It would be no different than if evidence was presented at SPI, and I, as a clerk, blocked based on duck. If you have concerns that this particular account is not a sock, you could request a CU, although a non-confirmation doesn't rule out meat puppetry (there are obvious COIs with these accounts).--Bbb23 (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, decided to pay my dues given that I've been working too much.

If it's a DUCK block I'll trust your judgment - I'm not familiar with the alleged master's MO. I'll decline based on your reply. Thanks! m.o.p 17:10, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Working too hard as a student or at a paying job? If it's the latter, it beats working too hard here. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 17:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Did I break anything by moving an SPI report?

I moved Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ Sandyunderhere (note the leading space that must have been inadvertent) to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sandyunderhere. Was this safe to do? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:34, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

That's a new one. You didn't break anything. Normally, there's one more step that needs to be taken. You can see what I did if you look at the redirect page. Frankly, I think in this instance I could have just deleted the redirect, but I figured it couldn't hurt to follow the normal procedure when moving a case, which is when you determine that the master is another account, not when you find an odd space in front of the master's name.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, I also had to take the space out of the master's name in the body of the new page. It occurred to me after I left my first reply here. You can see where I removed it by looking at the history. The title of the page has to match what's in the template in the body.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. If I do want to move a case in the official way, what are the steps? EdJohnston (talk) 05:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

If it's a simple move, meaning the case was filed under the wrong master, you would follow the steps here. That said, although the procedures page isn't explicit on this point, it would be my view that only a clerk should move a case (view is also supported by implication as the moving subsection is under "advanced clerking"). Therefore, I'd leave a note asking a clerk to do it rather than do it yourself. Now, if you want to become a clerk, we could use all the help we can get. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 06:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

He's baaaaack

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sarower Sigh Bhati [12] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

The IP has been blocked by Mike V - was there anything else?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:07, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Nope. Probably switch to another IP tonight. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:37, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Al-Karaji

Since the edit warring broke out on Al-Karaji, again, how can we get Seanwal to participate on the talk page? He has now reverted 4 different editors. I am still waiting for him to use the talk page, which he has not used since Oct 14. Seanwal's continued statement, "You have to explain and justify your edit with respect to the MOS:BIO guidelines.", is starting to sound like he owns the article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

He's only made a couple of edits since his block expired. However, I can't force him to use the talk page. I would ask him to participate in any discussion on the talk page. If he doesn't do so after a few days have elapsed since your request, come back here and let me know. I'll consider reverting him myself as it's not fair for his version to remain if he won't cooperate when the rest of you are prevented from reverting based on my warning. Another possibility after the few days have elapsed is for me to give him a final warning so it comes from an administrator. You start the process, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:03, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok. The only problem I foresee is Seanwal simply repeating the same sad statement, "You have to explain and justify your edit with respect to the MOS:BIO guidelines", and not bringing anything to the discussion. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

That doesn't count as discussion in my book.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Here is Seanwal's opening paragraph and, I might add, false accusation.

"You have re-inserted the problematic addition about twelve times over the last 45 days. It is incumbent on you to to explain and justify it with respect the MOS:BIO guidelines for a biography's opening paragraph. Here again is the guidelines:"[13]

I have "re-inserted the problematic addition" only 3 times since Seanwal decided to start removing Persian from the article.[14][15][16] I can only conclude from Seanwal's tone that he is accusing me of sockpuppetry! --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:58, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Unless there's a clear accusation of sock puppetry, I'd ignore what you think are the implications of his remark. Has there ever been a clear consensus on how to handle the lead? An RfC? Something with more than just a few editors?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:17, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. His interpretation of MOS/biography is his argument at this time. His initial argument was a link to this. When that did not work he then dictates MOS/biography, then keeps making statements like, " I note that you haven't any concrete historical fact to offer bearing on his ethnicity; rather, you just assert a label." and "Now, you propose to add mention of an (alleged) previous nationality or ethnicity." The "alleged" ethnicity which is supported by 2 Cambridge University sources, among others, clearly posted on the talk page.[17] So his continued assertion of "alleged" and "haven't any concrete historical fact" is Seanwal ignoring published sources to continue his disruptive editing. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:12, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I understand your point, but without delving much deeper into this, which I don't want to do, I also understand his. I don't see how you can justify reverting him without a clear consensus. I suggest a neutrally presented RfC to resolve the issue.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I have not reverted him since October 26th. Since then, he has been reverted by 3 other editors. Prior to his recent post on the talk page, he had not posted on the talk page since October 14th. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:15, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

If he edit-wars, he can be sanctioned, but at the moment, those warned editors, including you, don't have to edit-war to be sanctioned. To get yourself out of this mess and, more important, to resolve the content dispute, take my advice.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of New Zealand Christian Counselors Association

Please could you reinstate this page for at least a short time? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Christian_Counselors_Association This entry was written by a student at the University of Canterbury as part of his course assessment. I can assure you that it was not intentionally advertising. The creation of the page was discussed in class. I can't grade his work if I can't see it! This is one of the most awkward "dog (Bbb23) ate my homework" moments ever, lol. If you want proof of identity, send me your email address and I'll contact you through my staff account. P.S. It would be great if you could correct the spelling of the name: the creator is good student, but not a perfect speller. Anarchia (talk) 21:13, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Anarchia, I've userfied it for your student. I've put it in their user space at User:Turtleball/New Zealand Christian Counsellors Association. At the same time I fixed the spelling error in the title of the page. I had to comment out the categories as article categories are not permitted in user space. Let me know if there's anything else you need, and when the assignment is done, you could let me know so I could then delete it (no point in letting it lie around).--Bbb23 (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Anarchia: You may get a quicker response from WP:Refund, and perhaps ask them to userfy it instead as it probably still won't warrant inclusion in the main article space.- McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 21:26, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Complaint at WP:AN3 which concerns you: reply

That was sarcasm, since a user above that comment kept calling me a Croatian nationalist that believes in Croatian primary school POV. I thought it was obvious, but OK. Tzowu (talk) 02:10, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll accept that was your intention, but from an "outsider" who's looking at an egregious edit war in which you were one of the parties, it never even occurred to me it was sarcastic. I've read the post above yours, and although I can kind of see where you're coming from, it's not even like the other user mentioned you by name.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:32, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

redaction and page protection request

hi,

thanks for reverting this edit by a troll who has been hounding me for the better part of the year.

could you please redact the edit summary and the edit itself? i am requesting this since this since racial pejoratives are being used.

thanks

also would you consider temporary page protection? from my talk page revision history you will notice that this user has been repeatedly harassing me by abusing multiple ip's, the only way to stop him atleast temporarily seems to be by page prot. thanks Pvpoodle (talk) 04:10, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Pvpoodle, I've rev/deleted the edit summary and the text. I've semi-protected your talk page for a month. If you want a different duration, let me know and I can change it. Do you have any idea who the person is?--Bbb23 (talk) 05:34, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Advice please

A new editor, Suraksha Paudel showed up at List of World Heritage Sites in Nepal right after Amrit Ghimire Ranjit was blocked. Aside from the sock/meatpuppet issues, there's an attribution issue as the content was copied from List of World Heritage Sites in Southern Asia. I and others don't agree with the split but should I ignore the obvious socking and place an attribution note on the target talk page? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

EdJohnston what you have to say? Blocking sock and leaving a formal warning on talk(page) of Amrit Ghimire Ranjit would work. I don't know if he knows Wikipedia:SOCKLEGIT or Wikipedia:ILLEGIT. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Just an observation. The revert by the new user came shortly after the block of Amrit. However, the new user's account was created two days ago.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:56, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

I reverted the last change by the probable sock and put semiprotection on List of World Heritage Sites in Nepal. Since this is just a redirect we could put full protection on it if it turns out to be needed. Further edits by User:Suraksha Paudel will tell the tale. EdJohnston (talk) 06:05, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

What is meant by sock? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suraksha Paudel (talk • contribs) 07:08, 27 November 2014 (UTC) I was just surfing over recent changes related to Nepal and undoed the revert.Why is the edit taken such seriously? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suraksha Paudel (talk • contribs) 07:12, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

MariaJaydHicky's return as Special:Contributions/CREAAMCheese

MariaJaydHicky's return as new user. Can you sockpuppet him/her? 183.171.183.77 (talk) 07:05, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Jordan Belfort edits

Firstly, i'm not sure what your agenda is, but why did you remove my previous section on your talk page without responding to it. Secondly, i have restored the 2 sources you removed. You claim one was offensive when it is the product of a Jewish news site! Very strange! The 3rd source you claim doesn't have the reference to his Jewish background; well if you actually entered the source with an objective outlook you would realise that the article has multiple pages and the relevant info is within the following pages. I have already warned you about your unexplained behaviour and if you resort to more cunning to simply remove info that, for some reason, doesn't fit your agenda then i will simply report you and your actions. The matter should be closed: Belfort is of Jewish origin and this is backed-up by three good sources. Cheers to you.58.106.224.21 (talk) 13:10, 27 November 2014 (UTC)