Jump to content

User talk:Just Chilling/Archive 10: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Just Chilling (talk | contribs)
55,421 edits
VeenM64 (talk | contribs)
298 edits
Line 614: Line 614:
[[User:Mosterbur|Mosterbur]] ([[User talk:Mosterbur|talk]]) 00:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Mosterbur
[[User:Mosterbur|Mosterbur]] ([[User talk:Mosterbur|talk]]) 00:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Mosterbur
:My colleague Admin Gilliam has already modified the block to allow account creation. [[User:Just Chilling|Just Chilling]] ([[User talk:Just Chilling#top|talk]]) 14:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
:My colleague Admin Gilliam has already modified the block to allow account creation. [[User:Just Chilling|Just Chilling]] ([[User talk:Just Chilling#top|talk]]) 14:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

== Your adamant refusal to unblock me ==

Why didn't you unblock me?! Was my request not convincing enough for you? [[User:VeenM64|VeenM64]] ([[User talk:VeenM64|talk]]) 17:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:09, 16 January 2018


Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

I will respond on this page to comments, unless you ask that I respond on your talk page. Likewise, if I post on your talk page I will watch it for any reply.

Dawn Nicole Macandili

Why did you deleted the page, Dawn Nicole Macandili? The page indicates a real person that plays volleyball and the only Libero to win MVP and currently part of the Philippines pool of players. Mmhuang (Talk)

The reason why I deleted the page is given here. If you can establish notability per Wikipedia:Notability (sports) please feel free to write a new page. Just Chilling (talk) 15:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

UTRS appeals

Hi Just Chilling; there have been many instances where I've logged into UTRS and seen that you've "reserved" appeals hours earlier. Is there a reason why you don't leave them open for another admin to review if you aren't acting on them immediately? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:17, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Fair point. What happens is that I get real life call away but I'll make sure I release in future. Just Chilling (talk) 21:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
No worries, it just seems a shame to leave them hanging longer than necessary, especially with the no-brainer declines. Also, they still show up at CAT:RFU as outstanding. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


Thanks, Just Chilling, but I've already waited about 8 years without sockpuppetry. I fully understand what went wrong. For years, I've appealed once per year. I am in very good standing. What's the special delay, for me? I have never vandalised or used bad language, or been a tyrant to anyone and my sockpuppet account was merely my normal username postfixed with a 1. It's hardly the crime of the century, so why all the uptightness?

Cheers, basingwerk

Good Girl Gone Bad Tour/version 2

Could the protection on Good Girl Gone Bad Tour/version 2 be removed? You had placed permanent protection on that page about 10 years ago when the contents of that page were at Good Girl Gone Bad Tour, so I'm in belief that the protection is no longer needed since Good Girl Gone Bad Tour is now an article. Steel1943 (talk) 02:16, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Done. Just Chilling (talk) 18:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 20:37, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Current problems that I am having

Hi, I am currently having a lot of difficulties with Wikipedia, Can you please help me out with some problems that I am having? Some of the other administrators that I have contacted only sometimes get back to me, which doesn't allow me to solve my problems. Davidgoodheart (talk) 23:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

If an issue relates to a matter that I have dealt with, or is a straightforward admin action, then I should be happy to help. However, if it is a more complicated issue then it is better taken to WP:AN where it is likely to catch the eye of an interested admin. It needs to be borne in mind that admins, as with all editors, are volunteers and they have to prioritize demands on their time. Just Chilling (talk) 00:13, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for responding so quickly, I will stick to two current issues at a time. The first being is about sources that I was using. For some reason ycdtotv.com was put on the spam list and I don't know why. I don't think it shouldn't have been and would like to see it removed from there. I need to use sources from that website for some Wikipedia articles that exist as well as one that I am currently making. If I can't be removed for some reason can I ever use it a sources for Wiki pages? The second is other sources that I have used and am currently using. On the Disappearance of Dorothy Forstein page that I created I was using websites that people though were not creditable but I think they are, so could you please check out the pages history and old sources and tell me if you think they are suitable to use. And some editor asked me not to use a YouTube video for an article (the page is wrestler Bambi Hall which I also created) and said is wasn't creditable, yet the video was an add from the wrestling company itself so it was creditable, as YouTube videos sometimes are reliable sources. Please let me know what you think. I will address my next issues in my next message to you. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:39, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

URLs that have been blacklisted cannot be used either as sources or external links. If you want to have a source removed from the blacklist then you should follow the procedure at WP:BLACKLIST. Your editorial dispute should, first of all, go to the article talk page and then, if necessary, you should use one of the procedures at WP:DISPUTE. Just Chilling (talk) 20:28, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for responding, I will get back to you in a few days. Davidgoodheart (talk) 01:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

The Family Building Society

Hello Just Chilling,

Thank you for your message on my page, I appreciate the COI although I feel as if I'd like to raise a few questions re. my editing on Family Building Society. I was particularly conscious of being fair and impartial regarding this article, so planned to take any additions and major changes to the article to the talk page. I removed the section titled 'Reception' from this page as it was uncharacteristic of other building society Wikipedia pages and, although factual, gave a rather imbalanced view of the Society. As for any other edits, I think you will find that none of them were promotional and included changes such as the addition that the Family Building Society is a member of the Building Societies Association and cosmetic changes, such as the movement of Mark Bogard as CEO from the Organisation section to the right hand side.

Moving forward, I am keen to refresh the page and provide a balanced article for wiki users. I will be adding the logo again with proper authority and will take further amendments to the talk page of the Family Building Society.

Kind Regards Hinchley1995 (talk) 08:15, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

The reception section is properly sourced and seems fine. That this section is or is not in other building society pages is not a factor, however, the way forward is to update it by the addition of subsequent, reliably sourced comment. Just Chilling (talk) 21:10, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

renames

Is there really a need to tell editors requesting a name change that they can't start with lower case? Since there's no possible ambiguity or functional difficulty (jpgordon parses identically to Jpgordon), I'm not sure what problem your efforts are helping with. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 14:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Not a 'need' but a 'courtesy'. Someone who wants to be renamed 'eddiesmithers' might prefer to 'Eddiesmithers' (the rename default), 'EddieSmithers' or 'Eddie Smithers' and as a new user may not know the options. Just Chilling (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

Administrator changes

added Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
removed Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Lewisthejawhawk

Looks like he's also editing from a different IP address: 206.188.36.147. Upon review, most of the IPs identified as likely sockpuppets have been active within the past month or so, which leads me to believe he'll be back sooner than later unless proactive IP blocking occurs. Thoughts? Jrcla2 (talk) 17:48, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. 206.188.36.0/24 has now been rangeblocked. Please advise if you spot further sock usage. Just Chilling (talk) 17:40, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Yahadzija

Thanks for taking a look at that one. You might want to yank TPA though else they are just going to continually refile unblock requests without actually acknowledging what they did wrong. As they already have. This already happened at Commons and their talk page access had to be revoked over there as well. --Majora (talk) 21:10, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

We have a protocol and TPA will probably be pulled after the next appeal. Just Chilling (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Impressive AGF

I can't imagine what song and dance was given to have talk page access restored here, but they continue to sock with gems such as this and this rev deleted death threat from just a few days ago. Many of the socks are globally locked, so an unblock here would be a miracle.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:20, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Oops. Talk page access re-revoked. Just Chilling (talk) 02:34, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I would hate for you to invest too much time on an issue that's a non-starter. There are plenty of blocked users that could use some good faith and a second chance, but this is definitely not one of them. Cheers,--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:28, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Changing username

Hello Just Chilling! I want to change my username, and as you are an admin, can you help me with this? Thanks in advance ShoushaSama (talk) 01:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Possibly. What would you like your new name to be? Just Chilling (talk) 01:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Give a username a another change

On February 25, 2017, you block User talk:Lg16spears for copyright violations, he made one mistake and i think that user should get a another change so that the block should be lift. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.178.88 (talk) 01:21, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Firstly I did not block this user (I did though revoke their talk page access and I was one of several admins who declined to unblock them) and secondly if you wish to make representations on their behalf please do so on their talk page. Just Chilling (talk) 00:45, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

added Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn
removed ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Humberto Valle - changing user name

hello! I'm responding to your message here. I would like to rename my user to ' Humberto Valle ' - thank you! Are you handling that for me? I'm not sure if I did the request right already. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikdotcom (talk • contribs) 22:20, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Renamed. Just Chilling (talk) 00:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

What is the right format, didn't I have it right before?

Hi, I am currently experiencing a lot of frustration with my editing as my edits to the Sloppy (disambiguation) page were removed by and editor who claim they weren't right. But if you look at these disambiguation pages Spider (disambiguation), Wonder (disambiguation), Beast (disambiguation), Dirty (disambiguation) and Boston (disambiguation) you will see that under wonder is the wonder years, small wonder, and wonder woman, under spider is spiderman and spider woman, and under Beast is Beast Man (I had put Beast Man on "The Beast" disambiguation page, but it was moved to Beast page by an administrator) and under Boston is the title Boston pizza which is the same format that I was using, and under Dirty (disambiguation) there is Dirty Mountains, so why then is my formatting wrong? If the Wonder Years and Small Wonder can be included on the wonder page, than why can't the Sloppy Sobs or Super Sloppy Double Dare be included on the Sloppy page, and if title Boston Pizza or Boston cream pie is on the Boston Page why can't Sloppy Joe or Sloppy seconds (disambiguation) or Sloppy Meateaters go on the Sloppy page. They could go in other uses or a see also section on the sloppy page. Also another editor removed my edits to a disambiguation page because just because they didn't find them notable (that was just there opinion, which shouldn't count and many people would disagree with them, and that they are notable!), which I will address in my next message to you. So how should the page really be set up, and can I restore my edits to the page? I will really need your help to solve this one, and thank you. Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:06, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

I regret that I don't have the time to work through all this. If you have questions on the principles or structure of disambiguation pages then these can be put at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation. Issues on the specific page should be taken to the Talk:Sloppy (disambiguation) page. Just Chilling (talk) 13:45, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi, you said you don't have time to help me, so I guess your really busy. Do know any administrator that could help me with this issue and some other issues I am having right now? Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think that admin attention is needed. My suggestion remains to take the issues to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation where editors with the necessary interest/expertise hang out. Just Chilling (talk) 17:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Okay, thats what I will do, as I also need help with category pages is there a site for that one as well? Davidgoodheart (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. Just Chilling (talk) 19:08, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, do you have the links for recent deleted and merged pages? Davidgoodheart (talk) 06:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

A duck quacking into a megaphone turned up to boombox level

Lewisthejayhawk (talk · contribs) who was banned, is back as Lewisthejayhawk1993 (talk · contribs) who is also editing as 192.103.194.166. This passes the duck test easily. Want to block this account since you put the ban into effect on the first?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:17, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Blocked. Just Chilling (talk) 22:40, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Can you possibly handle two other matters?
Gary Player needs protection. I put in a PPD request.
Category:Baseball people from Chicago should be deleted. It was previously deleted at a CFD here[1].
Thanks for the help....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:15, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Those two requests are in the system so I am going to let them run their course; my hands are currently full reverting sock edits! Just Chilling (talk) 23:25, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

WBB Articles

Why are you reverting all the edits on WBB articles? Now they are all wrong and outdated. Please stop or at least look at what you are reverting before you do it. Mjs32193 (talk) 15:30, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

The edits that I reverted were made by a sockpuppet whose master account, that creates socks prolifically, has been Community banned. It is important to note that I have only reverted edits where no subsequent substantive edits have been made by a good faith editor. This is normal practice. The problem with leaving the edits unreverted is that it encourages the creation of further socks compounding the problem. Conversely, if the sockmaster sees that their hard work has been removed then, hopefully, they will be discouraged from further socking. If a specific edit is appropriate then there is no problem with an editor re-establishing the edit in their own words but simply re-reverting is sub-optimum. The argument can be made that if certain edits are important or essential then perhaps they could have previously been made by a good faith editor? In particular with regard to last year's pages, if the sock had not made the edits then there is no indication that anyone else would have made them and, in effect, what I have done is simply to restore the pages to the state that they would have been had the sock not being editing. Having said all this, I fully understand the concern but we have an overriding aim of trying to rid ourselves of this sockmaster. Just Chilling (talk) 21:50, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

UTRS 18656

Hi Just Chilling; note that Elockid hasn't edited in a year (coincidentally their last edit was a year ago today). I don't expect you'll get a reply from them regarding the open appeal.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:33, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

added Happyme22 • Dragons flight
removed Zad68

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
  • A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
  • Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Re: Unblock request

Thanks for replying to my unblock request. I had forgotten that I was testing a VPN plugin on one browser, which was causing the problem. (D'oh...) Trivialist (talk) 14:46, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

No problem; I'm glad it's resolved. :-) Just Chilling (talk) 01:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Unblock

About this answer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:%D0%91%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B4%D1%8E%D0%BA_%D0%9E%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B3_%D0%AE%D1%80%D1%96%D0%B9%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87 Can you check Ukrainian Wikipedia about my contributions?--ol_b (talk) 17:16, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

It would not help because I do not have the language and would be unable to evaluate your contributions. However, the key point is that since you have posted here you are able to edit and therefore the question of an IPBE is moot. Just Chilling (talk) 20:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).

Administrator changes

added Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
removed Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Re: Speedy Deletions

Hi, Can you undo your "speedy deletion" of my sandbox unpublished page. SMITHGuyTy. I fail to see where and how it was "unambiguously advertising or promotional" . I was making edits to it then stepped away only to return to find that it's gone with because of a seemingly ambiguous reason. All content is neutral and factual from the Smithoptics.com website. If there was a specific section that seemed to be promotional then please let me know and I can edit that part but I have to contest the reason for deletion. And request you undo that deletion. SMITHGuyTy (talk) 18:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC) Hey Just Chilling I think I understand how the article seemed promotional. I will create a userspace draft for editing the article. If I understand correctly, the issue was creating the article under my username instead of as neutral free standing article. If you could please help me retrieve the article I can properly edit and publish it as a separate entity from my username page. I understand better after seeing your page setup as well as that of other administrators. Please and thank you! SMITHGuyTy (talk) 19:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@SMITHGuyTy: I am travelling this week but will replay in the next couple of days. Just Chilling (talk) 13:58, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
@SMITHGuyTy: This page was deleted pursuant to WP:G11 since it would need to "be fundamentally rewritten". Firstly, there is no indication that the company is notable, see WP:ORG. Notability is established through independent reliable sources (WP:RS). There were no such sources in the draft. Articles must be balanced with the negative as well as the positive. Phrases such as "Smith has utilized the last 50 years to revolutionize the outdoor optics world", "seamless product integration and eco-friendly manufacturing efforts", "most scientifically advanced polarized lens technology", "Through innovation and design Smith has become an industry leader in eyewear and helmet technologies with the sole purpose to "fuel fun beyond walls." and so on are, without good independent sourcing, just marketing hype. Also, the laundry list of products is unencyclopaedic and must go. The other fundamental point is your conflict of interest (WP:COI). We strongly discourage people writing about the company they are connected with because, as you have found, it is very hard to write objectively. If you insist on writing this page then at least use the Article Wizard linked from WP:FIRST. I hope this helps. Just Chilling (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Fuller explanation

The Refdesk troll (AKA Soft skin) has taken to asking questions that a simple perusal of the relevant articles would immediately answer but which answered in the context they framed would result in users blaming Jews or the Allies for something. WP:RBI is standard for him, with many admins revdelling his contributions so he can't edit war to restore them. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: Very helpful, thank you!. Just Chilling (talk) 13:56, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Talk page access

While obviously my oppinion matters nothing, i would ask allowing blocked user Joobo to regain talk page access. He was simply interacting with criticism of potential/probable continuation of problems in light of his request by Jytdog and particularly me. And while it was perhaps argumentative, so was i and he simply responded. I am not even sure why i am sticking up for him in this regard but remaining indeffed should be enough. If he actually goes on rants now that his request was declined the matter would of course change though. It just seems a little punitive for reacting to comments in my oppinion, even if he was blocked for a whole alphabet soup. I mean it has no effect on me either way as he asked me stay away, which i of course would do in any case, but does seem a little heavy handed to me. Perhaps you have good reasons for it i have not seen but would ask to at least think about changing it again. I just feel somewhat responsible for it happening i guess. But obviously whatever you decide is absolutely fine. And sorry for even bothering you with this, just thought it is the right thing to at least suggest it due to my involvement. Maybe i am being a bit naive here, i don't know. Have a good day anyway and apologies for bothering you with something so trivial. 91.49.91.18 (talk) 01:03, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

The purpose of allowing blocked users access to their talk page is to enable them to appeal their block not to enable them to debate editorial matters with other users. If Joobo is unhappy with any aspect of his block then he can still appeal at WP:UTRS. Just Chilling (talk) 13:54, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Alright then, fair enough. As i said, due to my involvement i thought it fair, or the right thing to do, to at least suggest it. And again sorry for even having bothered you with it. Good day to you. 91.49.83.79 (talk) 15:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for quick reply (re: request to unblock Lupa)

Just a quick thanks for your reply, and the explanation that accompanied it. Helpful. I've turned off the VPN, and everything works. lupa (talk) 13:19, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).

Administrator changes

added Nakon • Scott
removed Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
  • Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
  • In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration

  • Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Felipe Smith

Have a look at the history of the article and the contribution history of the article creator... --Randykitty (talk) 17:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

I agree that there are clear SPA/COI concerns but that would be a matter for a deletion discussion. The instructions, WP:CSD, state "Administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases." I take this to mean that if significant consideration is needed to decide whether a page should be deleted then it should not be. This case is not sufficiently obvious to justify a speedy. Just Chilling (talk) 22:17, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

David Saks

Please undo the deletion of David Saks page. Numerous articles and links are available attesting credibility. The deletion in question was originally the result of vandalism and posted eleven years ago. This error should be corrected. A bio of Mr.Saks is available through the University of Memphis at Http://www.memphis.edu/wumr/profiles/profile_saks.php His reception for inclusion in Wikipedia was vitiated by delusive fact and sham assertion offered as evidence by rude and impertinent cyber roughnecks (of which Wikipedia sadly harbors and entertains in abundance) inclined to take willful, wanton and malicious editorial liberties. Thank you. Stampcollecting (talk) 05:37, 14 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stampcollecting (talk • contribs) 02:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I regret not. Even apart from the previous deletion the article fails to credibly indicate his importance. Further, it comprehensively fails WP:BIO. I note that this article has been your only contribution; what is your connection with him? Please be aware of WP:COI. If you wish to rewrite the article I suggest you read WP:FIRST and then use WP:WIZARD. You will need to establish notability by the use of independent, reliable sources. If it is that "Numerous articles and links are available attesting credibility." then, provided these are reliable and independent sources they should be added to any new draft to help demonstrate notability. Just Chilling (talk) 03:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
I value your kind reply. I erroneously expected a hasty comment demonstrating intolerance attributable to a lack of involvement evidenced by the notes regarding those involved in 2006 of which I have reviewed this day. As a new user, I would respectfully ask for your assistance and encourage that you research Mr.Saks. I'm a life member of the American Philatelic Society, Memphis Stamp Collectors Society, Tennessee Postal History Society, philatelic judge, and I fully appreciate his tireless contributions to our hobby. His web pages are devoted to philately. http://DavidSaks.Com As Wikipedia bills itself as “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit”, it’s no wonder that Wikipedia has earned so much bad press. It's hard to imagine that millions of anonymous users could accurately maintain a factual and unbiased living encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a non-profit site that is policed by these anonymous users and volunteers, yet very few of these people have the experience and knowledge of a professional writer or editor. Bias looms over many entries on the site, as evidenced by the many talk pages, characterized by undue haste and lack of thought and deliberation. This partiality prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation and subjects authenticated, credible information that conforms to criteria for inclusion with quick deletion, i.e., the removal of a snippet of information attesting to notability which obviously could accurately be researched and edited by a responsible admin. And, of course, the matter of vandalism which the site is apparently always susceptible to. These problems, coupled with the almost obsessive behavior of many of the anonymous admins made Wikipedia a forum for cyber bullies and a threat to factual data regarding this fine man in 2006 as I have, rather appallingly, learned today. Crooked attorneys should be audited for commingling client funds with personal expenses. So should Wikipedia be audited for malicious deletion of notable inclusion undertaken by the irresponsible editorial hacks in 2006 that today subjected my inaugural entry to succumb to what appears to be a prejudicial invalidation giving offense to moral sensibilities, frightfully more than eleven years later. Perhaps you can correct this problem and create the article with a little systematic investigation to establish the facts that you've demanded. In closing, I fully appreciate your assistance and respectfully request the recognition of David Saks. I'll review the WP:WIZARD and other links as you've kindly suggested. Thank you.Stampcollecting (talk) 05:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
You may wish to take a look at WP:WikiProject Philately where you can link in with people of a like interest. If you wish there to be an article on David Saks then you will need to carry out the necessary research. Firstly, though you should familiarise yourself with WP:FIRST, WP:BIO, and WP:RS. Then create the article with WP:WIZARD. Once you have a workable draft then it should be submitted for review which will avoid the create/delete cycle. Just Chilling (talk) 15:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your kind assistance and consideration. You've been very helpful. Please have a fine day.Stampcollecting (talk) 04:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

UTRS linking

Hi! Thanks for your work in responding to UTRS tickets!!

As I'm sure you know, UTRSBot's "admin notify" function has been disabled for now. When you leave a note to the blocking admin, you might want to use [[utrs:19319]] or {{utrs|19319}} to provide quick, easy to use access to the ticket being referenced.

Hopefully this makes life easier for you and for blocking admins while UTRSBot is in the garage. ;)

Thanks again for your help! :D

Your friendly neighbourhood UTRS Ambassador, Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 20:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

Administrator changes

added Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem
removed Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
  • A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks kindly for the email, what just happened?

Hi admin Just Chilling,

My name is Scott Perry. First I would like to thank you kindly for the email regarding my recent block-appeal. By the time I received your email, and replied on my talk page, it now appears that the appeal had already been closed. Elsewhere I read that such appeals generally take 24 to 36 hours to process. To make a long story short, am I now blocked indefinitely by a request from a user who I have pointed out with good reason is almost certainly a sock-puppeteer, regarding the article in question, without anyone caring? Just wanting to know for sure what really just happened.

Thanks kindly,

[[user:scottperry]

PS: Please reply by email if you do (or here.)

@Scottperry: I closed your appeal at WP:UTRS, without assessment, since it needs to go to your talk page. You may create a new appeal on your talk page; see WP:GAB. UTRS is solely for instances where talk page access has been revoked or there is private information; neither of which applies here. Whilst you are blocked you are not permitted to create new accounts nor edit from an IP address. Consequently, creating User:Contemporary42 constitutes block evasion and that account has been blocked. Just Chilling (talk) 23:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Revert...

I think that this revision and the subsequent revision may be of some importance to you.In the list of schools regarding mad-rush, all it got was a trivial mention, in a bunch of names.So, a subtler mention is warranted.Also, AFAIK, winning a school-level basketball or other sports tournaments is never a fact encyclopedically notable enough.And the ISA award is just one of the typical promotional schemes in the school-business.But, that being said, they can prob. save the AfD. Thank you!Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 07:52, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@Godric on Leave: My aim was to get the article into shape to be a valid stub and for it to be kept. Those aims have been achieved so I am happy to go along with your changes. I have, though, re-established the full cites as I see no reason to abbreviate those. I beg to differ on school tournaments. In this case the school didn't win so there is no issue. However, over the years I have edited hundreds of school articles and tournament wins are considered encyclopaedic enough for inclusion. For some schools sporting prowess is a significant feature of their notability. Just Chilling (talk) 15:15, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Unnecessary deletion of articles is completely uncalled for

Hi, I can't begin to tell you the inconceivable frustration I feel as of late, as people have been recently deleting a lot of articles unnecessarily and for no apparent reason at all, as I feel that those who are doing this are not right in doing so. How can this possibly be beneficial to anyone is incomprehensible and in my opinion is totally unnecessary, what can be done to solve this dilemma that we are faced with?..........I hope we can find a solution to this and hopefully all can be resolved. I will share more info in my next message to you. Davidgoodheart (talk) 21:21, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion policy is given at WP:DELETE. If you consider that an article has been wrongly deleted then your first stop should be to speak with the deleting admin. If you are still unhappy then you can take the page to WP:DRV. Just Chilling (talk) 23:55, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, who exactly is the deleting administrator? Can you please list his contact info? Thank you very much for the information which you have supplied me with. Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:06, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
The deleted page shows a red box with a line „X deleted Y“; X is the name of the deleting admin. JoJo Eumerus mobile (talk) 11:00, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Email?

Would you consider enabling email? - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 19:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

I regret not; I spend long hours here but I also have a busy and responsible real life and I don't have time to deal with Wikipedia emails outside my extensive periods on here. However, if you have something to discuss that needs to be handled off-wiki then I shall send you an email, to confidentially disclose my email address, and I should be happy to correspond with you. Just Chilling (talk) 22:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Yes, please drop me a line. Ironically, it concerns just these sorts of issues with the WP email system. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 22:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

AnnalesSchool

Hi, Just Chilling. I was looking at unblock requests this morning and came across Pacemaker007. I agree that their original name was a problem, but I think that it would have been better to get their sockpuppetry issues resolved before renaming, if for no other reason than that it makes following the chain of evidence more difficult. It's a bit of a moot point, though, because after this threat, I don't think that there's much reason to consider unblocking them. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, you are quite right, I thought afterwards that it was a bit early. Just Chilling (talk) 18:33, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi there Just Chilling, I have decided that I am no longer interested in resurrecting AnnalesSchool or any other account, as I have been blackmailed and abused by the other editors on the Greco-Italian war article, where this whole sorry business began. I have decided to become a "criminal" and continue editing Wikipedia articles as an anonymous user, and no longer wish to be hackled to an account that others can abuse. Therefore, I am giving you notice that I will be using sock and meat puppets at will - that I will open up various Wiki accounts over time, and proceed in such a way that I will have total freedom to edit articles as they should be. I have tried to be as patient as possible and my offer to come back under the Wikipedia umbrella and continue with an account in whatever name was suitable, was a genuine one. But when my application was declined, I finally gave up. No longer will my account be used as a shackle and manipulated by unscrupulous editors/administrators who know how to manipulate their powers, who are well versed in all the rules and regulations, to halt freedom of speech and proper editing. Do you know how all this started? Do you even care? It started because I simply wanted to put a fully referenced and truthful sentence in the Greco-Italian War articled that Greece surrendered to Italy at such a time and place. This was simply too much for the Pro-Greek lobby of editors who have edited the article in such a way that it seems to the reader that in fact, Greece had won that war, which it clearly did not. A simple statement that Greece surrendered to Italy was far too crystal clear and truthful for their liking. Well, be it as it may, I will now declare myself a willing "renegade" and choose to become the "puppet master!" It is a real pity but the freedom and benefits NOT to have an account overweigh the disadvantages. They will forever be guessing when an edit is made: "Could it be AnnalesSchool behind this edit or that edit?" Several times I had almost rolled over with laughter when editors were getting themselves into knots over it on their Talk Pages, especially because the edit wasn't made by me at all. They are extremely paranoid about me so now I will give them real reason to be paranoid henceforth. So long Just Chilling. Chill out and don't worry too much. Sockpuppertery and having several accounts isn't a crime you know - it's only thinking that makes it so (Hamlet). AnnalesSchool — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.143.89.171 (talk • contribs) 12:18, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Just Chilling, could you please reverse this rename request? AnnalesSchool is de-facto banned, and changing their user name contributes to their long term disruption and socking by raising a degree of confusion over who they are now and in historic threads. Nick-D (talk) 21:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Done. Just Chilling (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Nick-D (talk) 21:30, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, JustChilling. Thanks for re-re-naming AnnalesSchool back to their original username. I wouldn't have thought of it, but clearly it's easier to keep track of them that way. They're quite well-known under their original name. (I know you accepted their re-name request in good faith, before it had become obvious how untrustworthy they are, so I don't mean to criticize that.) Bishonen | talk 21:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC).
I'd also echo Bishonen's comments above regarding the renaming - noting also that the relevant guideline is silent on this issue. Thanks for handling this matter. Nick-D (talk) 22:15, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Creating a new username under a softblock isn't block evasion

Hi, Just Chilling. I had already removed tpa for User:Cuckmaster, and they had as you know already created a new username, SailingOn. I don't see that as block evasion, as my softblock template had explicitly invited them to create a new account (and I had also told them on my own talk that it was all right[2]). Unless you know something bad about them that I don't, please unblock SailingOn. Bishonen | talk 19:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC).

@Bishonen:The pointy nature of the new UTRS request asking for a different username, made just before the creation of the new account, with its explicit attack on you, somewhat threw me but, in the circumstances, I agree that it is better for this user now simply to use their new account. Unblocked. Just Chilling (talk) 19:55, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. So it was the UTRS request? The user seems to be a bit of a Jekyll and Hyde, then — look how nicely they write on my page. But let's give Mr Hyde a chance. Bishonen | talk 19:59, 30 October 2017 (UTC).
@Bishonen: For the record, at UTRS, they said "requesting my name be changed to "WikipediaMadeMeChangeMyName" " and "Bishonen is overstepping his (sic) boundaries. Review Bishonen's administrative privileges". Anyway, all is now resolved and thanks for giving me a kick! :-) Just Chilling (talk) 20:06, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

User talk:ScorumCom

Hi. This looks to be a promo user name making questionable if not promotional edits. May now be ScorumME (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) as well? Just trying to figure it all out. Cheers, -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

Administrator changes

added Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93
removed Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Sock Puppet suspected (almost certainly)

Hello, I believe you have unknowingly allowed a blocked user back to our boards. User:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WhatsUpWorld - I believe to be:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BlueJoshua300. He also used the name:What's Up?, The Ultimate Boss, as well as others. He is back to his old habits, and since you approved him back, I'm asking you to undo all of his current edits, and block this new IP he is using. Thanks- Pocketthis (talk) 16:22, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

@Pocketthis: What behavioural evidence makes this likely, please? Just Chilling (talk) 22:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Too rich for my blood. my suggestion would be to present a less personal attack version at WP:SPI, with difs of the suspected user. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:28, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
@Pocketthis: I have redacted your comments because defamatory statements are unacceptable on here. I took a second opinion from Dlohcierekim, who made the initial block, and he has confirmed my opinion that taking to WP:SPI is the way to go. Just Chilling (talk) 14:13, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

@Pocketthis:You are the one with the knowledge of the pattern and the dif's. We are not familiar with either. It would be best if you open the case. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:14, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

  • I made Just Chilling aware of a possible sock puppet issue because he was the one that happened to approve the suspects new name. I also made the admin aware that originally banned the suspect before his new name was approved. You folks can keep your eye on his edits, and if he is who I think he is, he will have a talk page full of complaints, and "none if any" responses by him. I am not opening anything. I am here to educate, not prosecute. You guys are now aware of a potential problem, and I'm sure you will monitor the situation. That was my goal. I wanted those in the wiki police dept. to be aware of a potential criminal in the neighborhood. If his name shows up again on any of the pages on my watchlist, I will monitor every edit made by him, and make the appropriate reverts or corrections as needed. I can't help out in any of the articles he edits concerning areas of knowledge that is not in my area of expertise, such as his European edits. If you have any further questions for me, I'll be happy to oblige with whatever answers I can provide to help you. Pocketthis (talk) 23:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
@Pocketthis: YOU believe this user to be a sock? This is a serious charge. I do not see incontrovertible evidence of socking. I am not familiar with the original sockmaster and have no basis for accusing the user in question of being a sockpuppet. If YOU believe this user is a sock, the original account is User:Redgro, then YOU should report the user to WP:SPI. Thanks, -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Never heard of the user:Regro. Either way, I feel as though I have done my job by raising a red flag. When Yamia returns from vacation, he will see my post on his page, and he will know if it's the same guy. Happy editing!Pocketthis (talk) 18:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Just Chilling changed group membership for Cmglee

Thanks, Just Chilling – works now. cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 20:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #19668

Hi. A student in a class I work with is the subject of UTRS appeal #19668. The block appears to be active - she just sent me a screen shot of the block message - but like you, I can't figure out how to find the range block in question. Which is extremely weird.

Since I can't figure this out, I'd like to just grant her an IP block exemption for the remainder of the semester. Would you be opposed to that? Ian (Wiki Ed)/[[User:Guettarda|Guettarda] (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

@Guettarda: Hi, I notice that they have edited today and for several school days previously so any block on an IP address is not now affecting them. The best way forward is for them to edit normally and, if they hit a block, for them to copy and paste the block message. This will give us the information we need and we can then sort out the best action to take. Just Chilling (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
They said they're hitting the block at home, and can edit normally at school. They sent me a screen shot, and it's a standard {{webhostblock}} template text. It clearly lists the IP range which is the same one they submitted in the UTRS appeal. Like you said in your reply to their ticket, I can't find any record of a block on that IP range: 196.52.0.0/16. Guettarda (talk) 19:50, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
@Guettarda: Block found. I have given them an IPBE until 22 December. That also gives them time to sort out a clear home IP if they wish to edit after that period. Just Chilling (talk) 00:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Guettarda (talk) 18:04, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of old re-directs

@Just Chilling: Hi, I would like to delete some old redirects on a page which I created and I tried to delete them, but a user advised me not to. I don't see why they should be kept as they just take up website space. Can I have you permission to delete them? Davidgoodheart (talk) 04:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

@Davidgoodheart: Unless they are harmful in some way redirects should be kept - see WP:RHARMFUL. If you still want to delete them then you can list then at WP:RFD. BTW there is no need to ping me on my talk page! Just Chilling (talk) 13:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

The reason I pinged you is to get a faster response, as people sometimes do often take a while in getting back to me. I will see what I can do about the redirects soon. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:45, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Iqra AlI

Iqra Ali keeps messing with their declined unblock requests, changing "decline" to "accept". They were warned to stop it, but did not listen, so it may be time for them to lose talk page privileges (as they already did on the talk page of their other blocked account). --bonadea contributions talk 17:59, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. Just Chilling (talk) 18:30, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Just Chilling! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 21:20, Saturday, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

added Joe Roe
readded JzG
removed Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:58, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Just Chilling. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

UTRS 19982

Not sure if you're aware but the user is also globally locked. Their appeal needs to be heard by a steward on Meta to appeal that lock before we can do anything with their account (not that the unblock would be warranted with the legal threats) RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy holidays and new year

Happy holidays and new year, and all the best in 2018! Davidgoodheart (talk) 23:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you and Happy New Year to you and yours. Just Chilling (talk) 00:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

Administrator changes

added Muboshgu
readded Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned
removed None

Bureaucrat changes

readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

What to do with a UTRS

Hello Just Chilling. I was just poking around with CAT:RFUB and noticed that User:Arijeet Patil is now waiting for a response to their UTRS. Does the UTRS status imply that it's reserved by you? If so I was going to suggest that you consider declining their unblock, since their edits at the two fan Wikias don't suggest they have improved in the area that they were originally blocked for at ANI, per WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive287#Arijeet Patil and long-running pruning on young adult fiction. For example, look at their contributions on the Harry Potter wiki. The user has never posted to an article or user talk page on that wiki. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:56, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Hi, looking here the user did make postings, as they have been asked to do, but I agree that their contributions are not substantial enough to give confidence in their editing ability. You will see from the UTRS appeal that I have declined the unblock but suggested that they re-appeal in 3 months when they have made more substantial contributions and, this time, addressing the reasons for the block. On the question of my reservation of this appeal this is recorded in the log in the second column of the UTRS page. HTH. Just Chilling (talk) 01:51, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Fethi Sekin

So, an obvious sockpuppet listed this at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 January 11, where he was quite rightly denied a hearing. Deletion of the article's perfectly ok by me. The redirect it replaced seems harmless, though. Would you object if I restored just the first four edits here? —Cryptic 14:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cryptic: No objection, I am happy for you do to what you think is best. BTW It would be helpful if you would keep an eye open for Finley socks on this page!! Just Chilling (talk) 17:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I've got no compunctions against fully-protecting a redirect forever. Problem solved. (Getting my fingers to type "BIO1E" instead of "BLP1E" is another matter.) —Cryptic 19:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Yup; that's the way to go. Just Chilling (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Unblock of BTZorbas

Hi Just Chilling,

I saw that you fulfilled the request to move User:ASKechris to User:BTZorbas, but it appears you have not unblocked the account. It was blocked only for a username violation. --Trovatore (talk) 20:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Done. Just Chilling (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Unblock Request 69.129.190.2

I appreciate the need to block anonymous posts from the IP address of the university but the block on the creation of new accounts is a substantial barrier to student participation in the Wiki Education program. Also, upon review of the edit history associated with the IP address, it appears a single incident associated with a German sports league trigger the block. The edit history over the last year consists of just 6 edits. I would like to further petition that the block from new account creation be removed while the block on anonymous posts remain. Mosterbur (talk) 00:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Mosterbur

My colleague Admin Gilliam has already modified the block to allow account creation. Just Chilling (talk) 14:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Your adamant refusal to unblock me

Why didn't you unblock me?! Was my request not convincing enough for you? VeenM64 (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Just_Chilling/Archive_10&oldid=820792907"