User talk:MelanieN

Archives
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Can't edit Bakarkhani

Greetings Ms. Melanie, I hope you're doing well. I cannot edit the Bakarkhani article anymore because it has been blocked by you. Upon researching, I saw that one editor made a request to block the article based on a false allegation of misleading edit summary. I have only edited with references but the other user is removing them. I even tried to talk in the talk page, you can see there is a section at the bottom of the page. But there has been no response, they are only removing the content I am adding without any response. I am requesting you to allow me to edit the article again. Thank you.

My press

You made the news. Just a passing mention mind, no indepth coverage yet. ;) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 01:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and again here (at the bottom). Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 01:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow, and here it is again [1] in a separate story about the same issue. Think I'm notable yet? 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 00:22, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Multiple mentions in a Slate (magazine) article. [2] Pretty good and accurate article actually. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:56, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

ANI Notification (historic)

This is to notify you that I have opened a complaint about your behavior in the Victoria Pynchon matter here:

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive757#Complaint About Editors' Behavior In Victoria Pynchon Deletion Discussion

Pernoctus (talk) 21:23, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I modified the link for the record when the discussion was archived. --MelanieN (talk) 15:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

AN Notification (historic)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia editor paid to protect the page "John Ducas". Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Recent RfCs on US city names

for reference
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
April 2012: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2012/June#WP:USPLACE was not officially made into an RfC or officially closed. September-October 2012: On another page, Talk:Beverly Hills, California/Archives/2012#Requested move was closed as "No move". An extensive November 2012 discussion involving 55 people was closed as "maintain status quo (option B)". Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2012/December#RfC: US city names. A discussion in January 2013 later was never officially made into an RfC or officially closed; discussion died out with 18 editors opposed to a change and 12 in favor. Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2013/February#Request for comment . Discussion started in June 2013: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2013/June#Naming convention; speedy-closed per WP:SNOW. December 2013-February 2014: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2014/February#Should the article be at Bothell or Bothell, Washington? . Closed as "no consensus to change existing practice (that is, USPLACE)." January-February 2014: Associated proposal for a moratorium on USPLACE discussions. Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2014/February#Moratorium on WP:USPLACE change discussions. Closed as "There is a one year moratorium on changing the policy at WP:USPLACE unless someone can offer a reason that has not been discussed previously." August-September 2018: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Proposal to eliminate comma-state from unambiguous U.S. state capitals. November-December 2019: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#US-centric USPLACE continues to cause confusion

Donkey Hodie (TV series)

It's worth noting that Ripple346 has been indeffed. While cleaning up after their disruption, I noticed a section on their user page which was quite inappropriate and had it removed through request to rfpp, that combined with subsequent incivility on their talk page led to the block being converted to indefinite. As you may have surmised I'm not a fan of 10mmsocket's behavior either. But since Ripple346 is unlikely to be unblocked for some time, possibly six-months or longer. And since the conflict between those editors was the source of the disruption, I see no reason why the page would need to be fully-protected. Admittedly there isn't too much to be lost by it remaining protected for 48 hours either but the default state of the encyclopedia should be unprotected. I hope you'll take this under advisement. 2A03:F80:32:194:71:227:81:1 (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Please see my comment on the article talk page. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:24, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree that talk page discussion should be encouraged, albeit agnostic as to whether the protection is the best tool available for accomplishing that goal. But I just don't see the same level of disruption recurring in the absence of conflict between those two editors.

Like I said, my assessment is that it probably won't make a difference either way, so best restore things to their default state but its just a suggestion and ultimately one I don't feel at all strongly about. I'm certainly not here to badger you over ADMINACT or anything like that, and if your assessment is different I'll respect that. I didn't even know that page existed until yesterday when I dropped by to do a REVERTBAN and I couldn't care less about any of the disputes over it's content. I don't know the first thing about the guidelines that govern TV series to even form an opinion, and I've always thought that getting overly bogged on minutia is silly anyway because nothing is written in stone. Compare the diffs of even the core content policies now to those of ten years ago, and the difference is substantial.

There was a joke a long time ago that the worst thing that could ever happen to you was getting a page to look exactly the way you like it, because from then on you were doomed to revertwar forever with the certain knowledge that eventually it would be rewritten over your objections no matter what you did.

Anyway what I do have an opinion on is that the encyclopedia should be unprotected to the maximum extent practical, even a 24-hour semi should only be implemented when it's the least bad option. But I also respect that some people feel differently and that the community as a whole has become far more accepting of page protection in general over time. Sorry for the length. Cheers, 2A03:F80:32:194:71:227:81:1 (talk) 21:50, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

No apology necessary. Different people do have different philosophies about protection. My own philosophy is here: User:MelanieN/Page protection. Sometimes, as in this case, I think full protection can be justified as an attempt to get people to actually TALK to each other about why they want certain material in or out of the article - instead of just reverting, or stating their preferences in edit summaries. If they (you) do actually use the talk page, so much the better. If not - well, the protection is short term. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:48, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, in response to several requests, and to the fact that the autoconfirmed edit warrior has been blocked, I have unlocked the page. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:47, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

GOBA Foundation

Submitting draft of template protected page from creation Draft:GOBA_Foundation. Is it ok for creation? Thank you. Brainfrogk4mon (talk) 22:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Brainfrogk4mon, and thanks for the note. No, I’m afraid this draft is nowhere near ready to become an article. Not all organizations can have an article at Wikipedia; see WP:NORG. In order to have an article it would need to contain much more information, and it would need to have multiple independent references - in other words, reporting ABOUT this organization by news or other outside sources, not just the organization’s own information about itself. Your draft is one sentence, and the only source is the organization’s own web page. Just now I searched to see if I could find any independent reporting about the organization, and I couldn't. I'm sure it is a fine organization, but not all organizations qualify for an article in this encyclopedia, and this one doesn't. Sorry.

BTW there are multiple other organizations also called GOBA Foundation, such as the Greater Orlando Builders Association Foundation and the one which was originally deleted, the Global One Belt One Road Association Foundation. None of them qualify for an article here. You are new here; I would suggest for now you limit yourself to making improvements to existing articles, until you learn a little more about this encyclopedia and what kind of subjects go into it. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

The Knights who say Nact!

I require two shrubberies (diff)... El_C 02:26, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

No worries. 'Tis but a flesh wound. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Autonomous Collective! El_C 02:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Actually I am not part of the collective; I am Who, the one that lived in that castle. In later years I lived on first base. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

trolling

Hi Melanie. I seem to have attracted an editor who's trolling my contributions and making problematic reverts. Is there any protocol for addressing the situation? Thanks. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 17:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Kent! Thanks for the note but I'm afraid I' not going to be able to help you; I have been online very little this week due to Real Life stuff. A suggestion: if you ask someone else, or at an admin board, be sure to give more information. Names, links, something. Nobody is going to want to search through your contributions trying to figure out what or who you are talking about. Here's hoping the problem goes away! -- MelanieN (talk) 02:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. It was worth a shot. Hope your Real Life Stuff is going well. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 10:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection for Criminal stereotype of African Americans

Hi Melanie, I saw in the log that you protected the article in 2019. It seems its currently needed again. The last 10 edits contain three counts of vandalism. Things like "stereotype (mostly true)". Could you reinstate 30/500 protection? Thanks Trimton (talk) 02:44, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Trimton, and thanks for the alert. The article definitely does need protection, probably long term. I gave it three months for now. But it doesn't need 30/500 protection; regular semi-protection did the job before and should do it again. -- MelanieN (talk) 14:28, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

oh, right, I forgot there's that level. For some reason I thought you had given it 30/500. Many thanks MelanieN, I put the expiration in 3m into my calendar and shall monitor.Trimton (talk) 15:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

RPP

Hi! I noticed that you wrote that William Sneed would be protected for 1 year, though I don't think you actually applied protection onto the page. Would you be able to fix this when you get a chance? — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Oops! I sure did say that - and I sure didn't do it. Someone else has now protected it for a month. Let me (or RFPP) know if it still needs it after that. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Triangle

• Platinum Triangle, Los Angeles (AfD discussion)

This was your argument, originally. Uncle G (talk) 15:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert. I responded there. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Divya S. Iyer

Hello, you had previously protected this article, and today there were several unexplained deletions by an IP, so I am wondering if you could protect the article again. Many thanks, Beccaynr (talk) 21:12, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Beccaynr, and thanks for the alert. Yes, the article definitely does continue to need protection. I gave it two weeks this time. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:50, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Beccaynr (talk) 21:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello one discussion

Hello MelanieN.I'm Mathew Munna.I want to ask one thing.Why Wikipedia didn't publish ASHWIN KUMAR LAKSHMIKANTHAN'S Wikipedia page.Is there any problem?Can you tell me the problem? Mathew Munna (talk) 04:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft AKL

Dear MelanieN and Spaceman,

Could you please review the draft again, I've added additional info on his latest works and references. Hopefully the updates should help his WP:GNG this time. Considering that he is the popular upcoming talent, could you please help us in moving the draft to the main space. I am always grateful for all your valuable inputs and your help in publishing his article will always be much appreciated. Thank you so much. Adapongaiya (talk) 21:54, 23 April 2021 (UTC).

Thank you so much Adapongaiya. I also told to MelanieN to publish ASHWIN KUMAR LAKSHMIKANTHAN'S Wikipedia page publicly.Thank you again for your edits in ASHWIN KUMAR LAKSHMIKANTHAN'S draft page. Mathew Munna (talk) 01:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your notes, Adapongaiya and Mathew Munna. I agree that it is ready to go into the main encyclopedia and I have moved it there. You have done good work expanding this article. I have added hatnotes to distinguish him from Ashwin Kumar.

There are some things you need to do, now that it is an article. You need to add some categories; if you don't know how to do that, ask me. Also, you should try to find other articles where he is mentioned and link them to the new article. How to do that: where the article mentions Ashwin Kumar Lakshmikanthan, add brackets like this: [[Ashwin Kumar Lakshmikanthan]] . -- MelanieN (talk) 16:09, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear MelanieN,

This is my first Wiki page and I am so emotionally attached to it. Thanks a Million for moving it to mainspace. sure, i shall work on the article mentions. Thanks again, you made my day. Adapongaiya (talk) 16:14, 24 April 2021 (UTC).

Dear MelanieN

I'm Mathew Munna.Thank you so much MelanieN.I'm big fan of ASHWIN KUMAR LAKSHMIKANTHAN.That's why I want to create and publish publicly ASHWIN KUMAR LAKSHMIKANTHAN'S Wikipedia page.But Adapongaiya create ASHWIN KUMAR LAKSHMIKANTHAN'S Wikipedia page and you MelanieN moved it to main encyclopedia.Thank you so much again to Adapongaiya and MelanieN. Mathew Munna (talk) 08:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

IP editor violating NPA

Melanie N, would you please look into this IP editor [[3]]. They attacked me on the Andy Ngo page as well as on the IP page. Thank you. Springee (talk) 00:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Law firm page review

Hi Melanie. I noticed you participated in another law firm page and thought you might have an interest in helping at Armstrong Teasdale. I requested some changes here a month ago and was looking for a volunteer willing to review and consider them. Mkriegel4141 (talk) 17:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I replied at the article's talk page. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

A little intervention

Hi, Melanie. Hope all's well. When you get a chance could you have a look at this edit in the Talk:Sex#Sex: Other odds & ends thread? Such rhetoric rolls off my back with neither ill effect nor urge to reply, but I'm concerned not only about its immediate effect on others (including CycoMa, who might need a timeout), but also on prospects who might be the target of similar outbursts. So, no - I'm not asking for a ban or block, but if you could amplify Mathglot's warning on CycoMa's talk page that might do the trick. Cheers. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 04:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. It looks to me as if Mathglot's admonitions may have made the point sufficiently for now. I don't see a need for admin intervention at this point. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

AKL

Dear Melanie,

This page AKL is currently locked with Semi-protection. Updates to the page were made during this 'Lock' period, can this latest good version be backed up or saved before the Lock protection expires tomm please ? Appreciate your help. Thank you so much. Adapongaiya (talk) 20:43, 7 May 2021 (UTC).

Adapongaiya, there is no need to "back up" a Wikipedia page; every previous page is still available in the History. Let's see what happens when the semi-protection expires. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:41, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Melanie, sure. thanks so much for this update. Adapongaiya (talk) 16:59, 8 May 2021 (UTC).

Review New Proposed Content

Hi, i wanted to create an article about Nikka Starr, can you help me with that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itisthebio (talk • contribs)

Probably not. After a quick search I doubt if Nikka Starr meets the requirements for an article here, namely that they have been been written about - received significant coverage - from multiple WP:Reliable sources. The requirements are spelled out at WP:Notability, and in particular at WP:NBIO and WP:NMUSIC. And I doubt if you are in a position to write an article yourself, since you have made fewer than 20 edits in your time here. But if you would like to ask someone to write an article about her - or help you write one - you can suggest her name at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Chopin protection

Hi, can you please re-protect Chopin? There have already been at least 7–9 vandalism-related edits in the past week or so... Aza24 (talk) 23:42, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

I gave it another year of semi-protection - based on its long history of needing protection and its status as a Featured Article. BTW we are talking about the article Frédéric Chopin, not the redirect Chopin. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

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

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

- Aoidh (talk) 19:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Kate Moss

Hi, I noticed that Kate Moss has been indefinitely semi-protected after previously being PC protected but the PC settings were never reset. Would you kindly reset the pending settings changes on that page? Thanks. Skip Malone (talk) 15:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

This message was brought to you by yet another WP:HAND sock of User:CalebHughes, whose IP socks were responsible for the vandalism causing the Moss article to be protected. Favonian (talk) 15:50, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert, Favonian. But no matter who they are (or were), their request was justified. I have removed the PC protection since the article is indefinitely semi-protected. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

That's as it should be, but it's good to be aware of his MO which also involves requesting protection (at RfPP) of articles that he vandalizes. Favonian (talk) 15:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

But how will I recognize him at RFPP? Actually don't tell me here. If there are telltale signs to recognize him by, you might email them to me. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

RfC

I see you participate in this discussion. You may want to comment at Talk:Southern Methodist University#Image gallery of former students. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump

I've seen you provide helpful outside opinions on the talk page here, and was wondering if you may chime in on the section regarding the Middle East agreements. I have run into two editors who, like they have multiple times before, continue blocking edits based on their personal opinion and provide no logical response to why WP:SS and reliable sources should be ignored here. I fear that it is a matter of personal opinion that the section should remain on the negative aspects of his foreign policy that is leading to us not being able to summarize well here - but I am hoping that you can provide your opinion or guidance on the topic regardless of what that may be. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 23:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Citation Needed

• @MelanieN: I am bit new to Wikipedia but have created a couple of articles. You seem like a pro from your Talk and profile page. I need your help, I saw this person on wikipedia where someone has placed a lot of Citation Needed tags (another mod I think). I wanted to know from you if there's some time limit or can I remove those sentences? But I don't want to get ban or something. I tried searching for the citations but couldn't find it. What should be done next? Cyanex (talk) 18:58, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Cyanex. If you can't find any citations, there is really nothing you can do except leave the tags in place and see if someone else can find something. I just did a quick search and I couldn't find any acceptable sources. Wikipedia requires Reliable Sources - published sources with editorial control and a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. All the sources I found - instagram, twitter, youtube, linkedin - are not accepted as sources here. Based on the one Reliable Source in the article, Sportstar, she clearly is what the article says she is - a rhythmic gymnastics champion and accredited judge. But the article does need more sources, especially for dramatic claims like holding a Guinness world record - in a search I couldn't even find evidence that Guinness actually has such a record. It's possible - probable - that there are non-English sources available about her. Maybe one of our Hindi speakers could find sources. @QEDK, Winged Blades of Godric, and Titodutta: Any interest in looking up a few sources for Akshata Shete? -- MelanieN (talk) 15:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Law firm page review - checking in

Hi MelanieN. I just wanted to check-in on this and if you had any interest in reviewing the proposed content? No rush. Best regards. Mkriegel4141 (talk) 16:05, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm pretty tied up with Real Life things right now but I will try to take a look at it later this week. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:09, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Melanie. No rush, but wanted to see if this was still on your radar. Let me know if you aren’t going to have the time. Mkriegel4141 (talk) 13:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi MelanieN. Just checking in on this regarding the infobox of the Armstrong Teasdale page per our prior conversation. Mkriegel4141 (talk) 01:16, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

A plate of Baingan Bharta for you

		A plate of Baingan Bharta for you
		Here is a plate of Baingan Bharta for you. Baingan bharta is a part of the national cuisines of both India and Pakistan. It is primarily a vegetarian dish that comprises bharta (minced vegetables) made from eggplant (baingan) which is grilled over charcoal or direct fire, to infuse the dish with a smoky flavor. Thank you. Titodutta (talk) 22:44, 25 May 2021 (UTC) For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

Thank you, Tito, that looks delicious. I'm not familiar with Baingan Bharta but I'll have to try to find local sources for it. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

SCOTUS Pages

It might make sense to apply some level of protection to all of the currently serving and recently serving justices, given how partisan views of the court and its members have gotten recently. Don't like the idea of pre-emptive protection, but it feels like that or constantly fighting fires. I added all of them to my watch list, but I'm only just getting back into Wikipedia editing. zchrykng (talk) 21:13, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, zchrykng, and thanks for the suggestion. I just took a quick survey of the nine sitting justices. All of them are currently semi-protected: five of them indefinitely, three for a year or more, and one for less than a year. I made sure the latter four are on my watchlist. That's how I spotted the need for protection for Justice Barrett. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:32, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Ah, cool. Hadn’t gone through and checked protection status on them yet. Ignore me, carry on. zchrykng (talk) 21:41, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Donald Trump

Hey I noticed you self reverted per 1RR.[4] But just a heads up, the article is not under 1RR. Though if it were, referring to a strong consensus like the one you cited for the original revert is an exception generally. Reverts made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus. In order to be valid, such a consensus must be documented on the talk page, and the edit summary should link to the discussion. per WP:3RRNO and Template:American politics AE. Laters! PackMecEng (talk) 18:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

FYI

I have no doubt you think you are enforcing policy, but it is indisputable that the risk to Marek Kukula in a BLP sense, is extremely low, if not zero. By contrast, there is a far higher, albeit still quite low, risk of this incomplete biography being used to assist in further online or real life child abuse. The correct outcome here, is clear and obvious. You have probably put children at increased risk, and for no good reason. Not that there ever could be a good reason for that. I would say reconsider, if I remotely thought you were even capable of it. What you have done, was done for reasons of prejudice. You actually want those reports to be false, and you refuse to accept all evidence that they are not. And that is why you would never consider the possibility that you are wrong. I'll be keeping an eye on the court reports, and if a child is abused and this man's name is involved, and it turns out they used this biography to help groom his victim, I'll remember this moment well. Nobody would ever forget this. You have acted unconscionably. Christian Murray (talk) 00:39, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Blocked sockpuppet. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Brian K Horton --Guy Macon (talk) 05:32, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Here is something that you might be interested in

It is a report in Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard regarding these ip's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:8800:4003:ED00:69EA:B3E4:6D68:AEF8, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:8800:4003:ED00:FC38:3B6D:8293:98DD, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:8800:4003:ED00:C0B0:998D:5CBC:7DFB and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:8800:4003:ED00:99E:5BD0:15BF:9053. I and Another Editor (JDC808) agree that The above editors (identified as Tevin21) has used multiple IPs for several months to continue to try and add false information, despite talk page posts, warnings, etc., for why the information they're trying to add is false. We believe it is in fact the same editor as they have made the exact same, or very similar, edits across all of these IPs. Having seen them do this multiple times now, the warnings have become useless as they just continue to make the same edits from different IPs. It's been ongoing since March 2021. Chip3004 (talk) 02:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC) [5]

Looks like it's been taken care of. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Sunshine

		Sunshine!
		Hello MelanieN! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 19:54, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy first day of summer, MelanieN!! Interstellarity (talk) 19:54, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Why Jhalkari bai protection page..???

Helo melina, I have not getting any options to talk. I want say that you have added information about jhalkaribai page. And you are protected to that page why.? Jhalkari belong to our community and we decided what should added on her history.. Who are you to edit it. I am requesting that protected to unprotected that page. Other wise I will take action against you Yuva Sangh (talk) 07:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

I replied at the article talk page. -- MelanieN (talk) 14:59, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Opal Lee

On 8 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Opal Lee, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Opal Lee is often referred to as the "grandmother of Juneteenth"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Opal Lee. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Opal Lee), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Trump's hair

Melanie, I feel hurt in response to your comments to me at Talk:Donald Trump#Personal image: hair. I understand this is an article you're tremendously invested in, and you have no doubt protected it against vandals and trolls and other disruptive editors, but I have good intentions. I think my proposal is reasonable, and I would like to have a respectful conversation evaluating the noteworthiness of the subject based on sources. I respect that you feel it is not noteworthy, and maybe you've read biographies which only mention his hair in passing. I haven't read any of his biographies; I'm just going on press coverage. Can we start over? Kolya Butternut (talk) 16:19, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you felt my comments were personal. I know you have good intentions and your proposal is reasonable. I totally agree that we need to evaluate the noteworthiness, or perhaps the DUEness, of the subject, and that's what everyone has been doing from the beginning. So I did feel that when you posed a rather self-evident policy question ("would we include it if it was one of the most noteworthy things about him?"), it just amounted to a distraction from the discussion of noteworthiness that was already going on. But let's move on, let the discussion continue, and see what the outcome is. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:33, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Why did you block me from editing

Hello as you know there is false information being presented on this page i request you to either edit it or provide where the information that Al laat was daughter of Allah is coming from. This hurts religious sentiment of muslims. Helenwardak1 (talk) 21:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

• Helenwardak1, instead of complaining to other editors, you should make your case on the article talk page. Drmies (talk) 21:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
  • It is extremely rude of her to block me from editing they are putting wrong information and not even citing where they got this info from. It is hurting the sentiments of muslims. She is abusing her power here and she needs to be called out on this. Helenwardak1 (talk) 21:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
    • Well, you can try your luck at WP:ANI, but it's probably going to end up with you being blocked for edit warring and then cussing out other editors. She is not abusing her power, and she's actually not blocking you--Melanie protected the article from disruption. That's not the same thing. Drmies (talk) 21:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Request

Please move the page I wrote Uthiyur to draft. I added very poor citation fully from Google maps and geosite. I am sorry I want to improve.

Hello, and thanks your note. I’m sorry, but I can’t move the page Uthiyur to a draft. The town of Uthiyur is a valid subject for an article, and it has been edited by many other people besides you, so it should stay in the main encyclopedia. You are right that the article could use a lot of improvement. I'm glad you want to improve it. You now understand that you must not copy material from somewhere else and paste it into the article. And you now recognize that some of your references are not good. You might want to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources.

I understand your problem: now that the article is protected, you are not able to edit it. You could fix that by registering a username with Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Why create an account? After you have made 10 edits under that username and waited four days, you will be WP:Autoconfirmed. Then you will able to edit the article. In the meantime, or if you don’t want to register, you can make edit requests at Talk:Uthiyur. For example, you could ask to have everything that is sourced to to Google maps and geosite removed. I see that other people are responding quickly to those requests. Or you could just wait until August 2 when the protection expires. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion and request

Hello! I noticed that you removed the protection from the Kalaripayattu page a few days ago. The page was initially given extended confirmed protection till the end of 2021 in light of a sockpuppet investigation. The page protection removal request was given under the impression that the sockpuppet is no longer active and will no longer make disruptive edits or vandalize the page. Unfortunately, I believe the sockpuppet in question is still active, albeit under another anonymous IP. They have contacted me on my talk page on a few occasions to add non-neutral, and POV pushing information to the article, while citing sources that were often unreliable, or not in English. Their most recent attempt at this on my talk page was made today on July 30th, 2021, and can be found here.

Other attempts to contact me to make the exact same changes to the Kalaripayattu page can be found here as well as here. I suspect this anonymous IP may be the sockpuppet who was banned, as some of the things they mentioned are related to some of the views the sockpuppet presented in their edits on the article, as well as in talk page discussions.

I've been taking care of and maintaining this page for over a year now, and have seen many instances of vandalism, sockpuppetry, and other disruptive editing done in violation of WP:NPOV. Most of this sort of editing was done by anonymous IPs, some of which made sockpuppet accounts in order to bypass semi-protection and continue vandalising the article.

I cannot claim to be the most experienced editor in the world, and I am still being trained in the CVUA. While I try to follow WP:AGF for all editors, including anonymous IPs, I can't help but think that removing protection entirely for this page would be a good idea. I am well aware of the policy within WP:PP regarding pages not being protected preemptively, but I can't help but think that it isn't a good idea to leave this page totally unprotected, so I wanted to reach out and ask you directly.

As such, I would humbly request that you restore extended confirmed protection to the page, at least for the duration it was initially given (to the end of 2021), or maybe some extended, long standing form of protection, be it pending changes, or even semi-protection (though this may not work, as many anonymous editors in the past have made accounts, simply made 10 edits and quickly bypassed semi-protection). Dealing with vandals, constant violations of WP:NPOV and related issues have honestly been quite stressful, and I honestly do not want to deal with it on a constant basis again unless I have to.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and for considering my request.

Kalariwarrior (talk) 04:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kalariwarrior, and thanks for your note and your input. I’m going to pass this request to the administrator who originally protected the page. @RoySmith: You are the administrator who imposed the extended-confirmed protection in December 2020, extending through December 2021, so you should probably make this call. Your concern was sockpuppetry, citing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adhithya Kiran Chekavar/Archive. On July 27 there was a request for unprotection at RFPP, and you said you did not see any current problem with socks, so I unprotected it.[6] Since then, there have been just two edits to the article, made by an extended-confirmed user, AleksiB 1945, who seems to be an established user unsullied by sockpuppetry. Their two edits were to add a pronunciation guide, using a script that I’m guessing is Malayalam. They were reverted by Kalariwarrior. I don’t know enough about the subject to interpret that exchange. There was a sockpuppet investigation on July 28 [7], but it did not seem to implicate this article.

However, Kalariwarrior says he has been contacted on his talk page by IPs trying to get him to make edits to the Kalaripayattu page - see the links he posted here - and he feels the socks are still active. He is requesting re-imposition of the extended confirmed protection. I will leave that decision up to you, but my own inclination would lie on the side of re-imposition of EC or at least semi-protection, based on the approaches being made on his talk page. Since protection made sense in December 2020, and since Kalariwarrior's evidence suggests socks are still active, it may still make sense now. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:56, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kalariwarrior The general rule is that page protection should be at the minimum level and the shortest amount of time to deal with disruptive edits, and should not be WP:PREEMPTIVE. While I understand your concern, nobody's actually made any disruptive edits to the page since it was unprotected, so for now we should just leave things as they are. Should disruptive editing start up again on the page, the best thing would be to file a request at WP:RFPP and also ping me so I see the request quickly. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:56, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for replying so promptly you two. I apologize for the late reply, but life got pretty busy. I'll keep your advice in mind and will file another request at WP:RFPP and ping you if anything comes up on the page again. Thanks! Kalariwarrior (talk) 00:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Help...page move and then page move again and then another one and...

What is up with all these recent page moves at 2021 United States Capitol attack. Wait, no, it's 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. No, wait! It's 2021 United States Capitol attack! Wait, I'm getting whiplash from all these page-moves, see talk page history and article history. Is there some place that this can be discussed/reported/whatever?... Help. Shearonink (talk) 02:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Shearonink: Yes. A new move discussion has been opened at the article's talk page. Meanwhile I have move-protected the article because of the recent move warring - which was brought about by the closing and unclosing and reclosing of a previous RM discussion. "Whiplash" is a good analogy, it was wild. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:05, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Melinda French Gates v Melinda Ann Gates

Is Melinda French Gates's last name Gates or French Gates? Re: Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, is now divorced from his wife, Melinda French Gates (née Melinda Ann French). Is this similar to Christine Blasey Ford or Hillary Rodham Clinton? cookie monster (2020) 755 02:10, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, CookieMonster! I too had noticed that publications were starting to refer to her as Ms. French Gates but I hadn't looked it up. So I looked for an explanation, and I found this: "...Ms. French Gates, as she now prefers to be known, wrote in her book."[8] So it's not like Ford or Clinton; she is using the double last name. Good question! -- MelanieN (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Wassim Dhaouadi

Hi, Melanie. Good to write you and to the Wikipedia community. I would like to let you know that Wassim Dhaouadi is not known enough to have a Wikipedia page. Many thanks and best regards, Ibrahim.

Hello, Ibrahim. Several unregistered users have said this at the Wassim Dhaouadi page over the past few days. Six times by my count. But multiple people have disagreed and removed the claim. Saying this has gotten disruptive. That's why I protected the page. The article page is not the place for this kind of comment. If you would like to discuss this, you can do so at the article's talk page Talk:Wassim Dhaouadi. I suggest you have a stronger argument than "no one has heard of him". The eight references on the page suggest that some people HAVE heard of him. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:32, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

MelanieN, I believe you may have pinged me on accident. Just wanted to let you know. I think the person you meant to tag was Ibrahim Boukris. Kalariwarrior (talk) 01:41, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry. I misread the history. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:02, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Reply

To answer your question. Yes. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 00:17, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

You got it. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Hzhxbdbxj and User:Hssjsnnssh

Can you do a check on these two users- Hzhxbdbxj and Hssjsnnssh?

I believe these two accounts are the same and i believe that this user are Abusing multiple accounts. , please also check this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Extreme_Rules_(2021)&oldid=1040194586) what this user is doing is wrong! Chip3004 (talk) 04:48, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Hzhxbdbxj https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Hssjsnnssh

Hello, Chip3004, and thanks for the note. Unfortunately I can't help you very much, because I am not a WP:Checkuser, and only checkusers can compare one account with another. @TonyBallioni and Oshwah: Maybe one of you could help straighten this out?

Meanwhile, Chip, I corrected your links to the two users you are talking about (you had left off the final letter) and I did a little basic research. It's quite possible that they are the same person - certainly the usernames are similar, and both have focused a lot of their editing on the article Extreme Rules (2021). The Hssjsnnssh account has edited only at the Extreme Rules article, with a single exception; it appears that most of their edits have been constructive. The Hzhxbdbxj account has been here longer and has edited several other articles in addition to Extreme Rules; some of their edits have been reverted. The usage by the two accounts has overlapped in time. That's about all I can report.

One thing I can do to help: I see there has been a lot of disruptive editing at that article Extreme Rules (2021) lately, so I have semi-protected the article for a month. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for fixing my sources. Appreciate it Elasticwealth7 (talk) 00:33, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my sources on the hochul page Elasticwealth7 (talk) 00:33, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Elasticwealth7: You're welcome. You are new here, but you will learn about things like WP:Reliable Sources and other Wikipedia policies. You have been editing in good faith and that's what matters. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:47, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

What?

So because I do not like the use of a word, you think it is ok to ban me from editing Wikipedia. This is extreme.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't care if you dislike a word. I do care if you call other editors hateful, bigoted, spiteful, etc. Particularly when you do it repeatedly. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:09, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi MelanieN, mind taking care of this please. Also have a request at RFPP. S0091 (talk) 21:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, S0091, and thanks for the note. Looks like other people have already taken care of both issues - isn't it wonderful how things like that work out at Wikipedia? So I'll just wish you a good day/evening, and hope that maybe next time I'll be online to respond to my talk page. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank MelanieN. You are right about how things work out which is one of things I find amazing about Wikipedia. Good day/evening to you as well. S0091 (talk) 00:50, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding MKBHD

hello I want to update information on MKBHD wiki page. He made a controversial video on Oct 16, 2015 about apple chipgate. can you help me with this because the edit shows " This page is semi-protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit it. If you need help getting started with editing, please visit the Teahouse". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sg54sg (talk • contribs)

I have replied at your talk page. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

can he be banned again please

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Messi_Khar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.242.112 (talk • contribs)

Hello. I see that Messi Khar is a very active editor at articles about Indian football. Last October, when they were fairly new here, I blocked them for a week for adding unsourced information. Since then they have made hundreds of edits without a problem. Very few of their recent edits have been reverted. You reverted three of their edits at one article a few days ago, but overall I don’t see anything in their editing history that calls for any investigation or action. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:08, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Yarnell Hill Fire & John N. Maclean

Do you have any info about the long expected Maclean history on the YHF? Has publication been delayed for some reason? --216.169.91.83 (talk) 15:42, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any information about this. -- MelanieN (talk) 20:34, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Some intervention, please

Hi Melanie. Would you please counsel Just plain Bill about 3RR as it relates to Rotation? Additionally, he seems to be WP:STALKING me by making initial edits (i.e. reversions) to articles he's never before edited prior to his seeing my own edits to a given page. The Rotation article is the third such incident. Cheers. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 22:55, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Kent Dominic. You and Just plain Bill are engaged in an edit war there. I'm not sure which of you has violated 3RR, probably both, but I will full-protect the page for a few days to stop it. Meanwhile, Bill has started a discussion at the talk page. You should join it. That's where the two of you should be working out your disagreements. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:18, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

P.S. If you believe you can make a case that you are being stalked, WP:ANI is thataway, but I caution you that without firm evidence ANI can be a two-edged sword. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:21, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your interest, efforts, and counsel, Melanie. Just plain Bill started the talk page discussion after I alerted you. Before the page protection, he'd subsequently posted an edit that's not half bad. The thing is, for whatever bugs him about me, I suspect he would have reverted what he posted if I had posted it instead. Whatever. His stalking behavior is what disturbs me more than anything. I posted my grievance at WP:ANI. I had tried to mitigate his interest in me by talking him to death thinking he'd leave me alone rather than suffer my volubility, but that didn't work. Maybe I made matters worse. Oh well. I'm no psychologist; just a lowly writer. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 00:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Umaria Sinhawansa page protection

Hi. I saw your reply. That is ok and fair. But it is good to do something for that article. Because those IP address editors are just making unreferenced as well as promotion material. Due to BLP guidelines, self promotion and info without citations is a serious thing. I am continuously deleting them, but no any improvement. You can check those inclusions and decide the future of that article. Cheers.. Gihan Jayaweera (talk) 19:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, Gihan Jayaweera. I took another look at the article. When I looked at the history earlier, I saw lots of unreverted edits by IPs, and I took that for a sign that the edits were helpful, so the article should not be protected. But just now when I looked more closely, I realized that all of those edits were probably by the same person using shifting IP addresses. Many of them were unsourced and promotional, and they were getting removed by you and other editors, even though they were not formally reverted. Also I saw that the problem has gotten worse in the last 24 hours. So I now agree with you that these edits are disruptive, and I have semi-protected the article for a week. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your valuable work.. Cheers GihanJayaweera^TALK 04:43, 28 September 2021 (UTC)