User talk:A. B.

Archives

(Periods are approximate. Exchanges have been kept together across periods to avoid breaking continuity.)

A quiz:

Spammers, friends and critics can't agree -- is User:A. B.:

A. "She (because clearly she's a bitch) is just doing her thing up in New Jersey. No one likes you, mother of three. No one." ^[1][2]

B. "Worst of all this user is very offensive to females." ^[3]

Same user also edits as Tony.dean ^[4]

C. A stalker "from birmgingham england." ^[5]

D. A "lesbian feminazi."^[6][7] … wearing her "undies in a bunch?" ^[8]

E. A "robot." ^[9][10][11]

Oh no!

F. Hiding a pornographic fire-parrot in Wikipedia's sandbox.^[12]

G. Living in Minnesota, USA.^[13]

H. Canadian, eh? ^[14] Tamil, no?^[15]

I. A Yankee?^[16] A Tennesseean?^[17] A Yankee and a "Kerry freak"?^[18]

J. In the American Air Force or maybe the Navy^[19]

K. Just stupid.^[20]

L. A kid sitting on a bean bag chair in Mom's basement eating Cheetos

M. A mom with a kid in the basement living on Cheetos

N. All of the above.

O. None of the above.

P. Somedays one, somedays another.

You decide.

•answer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Merry Christmas

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

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

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

बिनोद थारू using redirects to delete information to get around PRODs

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

I have notified you as required by the instructions below

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

Kalwe Galago

Article at the time I tagged it for speedy copyvio:

"It is only described from two specimen collected in the Misuku Hills of northern Malawi. It is much larger and brownish then Zanzibar Galago (which it was first identified with), with a dark brown tail tip and notably short ears. Recorded vocalizations from Kalwe are distinctive and merit further study."

Source[21]: "Finally, the “Kalwe Small Dwarf Galago ,” which is known from two specimens collected in the Misuku Hills of northern Malawi, may also be G. granti . It is much larger and brownish, with a dark brown tail tip and notably short ears. Recorded vocalizations from Kalwe are distinctive and merit further study"

How "Does not look like a violation"? Fram (talk) 16:24, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the current copyvio report. Copyvio is rated as 8% likely.
This is the speedy deletion criterion:
- "This criterion applies only in unequivocal cases, where there is no free-content material on the page worth saving and no later edits requiring attribution."
Here is the copyright notice at the page you cite:
- "No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation."
Here is the Creative Commons statement

A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's plagiarism, not copyvio. Fram (talk) 16:58, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Good thing nobody deleted it. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, but giving a good explanation of why you reject a csd is mire helpful than your terse edit summary. Anyway, thank you for taking an interest in my and only my afds, in one case your comments were even relevant. Fram (talk) 08:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)`[reply]

Blueprints at Addison Circle journal article link

You recently added a link to an article in Sculpture to the Blueprints at Addison Circle Wiki page. The link takes me to the EBSCO login screen; I have access to some EBSCO resources through my local public library, but it won't pull the article up. Presumably the library isn't subscribed to the correct collection, and I suspect that many readers will have this same problem or won't be able to access EBSCO at all. Can you permalink the magazine article, or use a different link to a more accessible web archive? Carguychris (talk) 21:26, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to access EBSCO via the Wikipedia Library if you've signed up (I highly recommend it!). Let me see if I can fix the problem for others; I'm not sure I can. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris, I'm not sure I can produce a link that gives others free access to EBSCO; I've tried without luck but that doesn't mean it's not doable. In the meantime, I've emailed you a copy of the Sculpture article text. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:59, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel Ibru

Please help create subsection format (background and education, career) on the Emmanuel Ibru page. I don't know how to do that yet. Thank you. Jay Kenechukwu (talk) 09:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again!!! Jay Kenechukwu (talk) 08:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note on Agrippa Masiyakurima

Hi, you removed the PROD I placed on this article, with an explanation that there are news articles about it. I didn't tag it for lack of news articles; they just do not suffice for the subject of the article to meet the General Notability Guidelines WP:GNG. You've also not mentioned them. While a PROD can be removed for any reason, a good reason is always helpful, especially when disputing the content of the nomination. Best Megan B.... ^{It’s all coming to me} till the end of time 15:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Megan B. Here’s what I wrote:

"remove PROD tag. There are additional news articles out there - possibly notable. At the same time, nominator's concerns about reliable sources seriously considered - recommend AfD”

PROD is for obvious, non-controversial deletions. If in doubt, articles should go to AfD for further discussion. That’s how I see this case.

I think the quality of news coverage in some countries is really iffy and it makes these cases hard. I appreciate your care for our content! —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the thanks

Good to know when people agree with me so I know I'm not being ridiculous. JM (talk) 19:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asking about the reliability of a author.

In the List of converts to Hinduism from Islam, that one source you retained for "Bukka I" by some obscure author Y. G. Bhave, I think it can also be removed as the author is not a historian nor any form of recognition or WP:Notabilty in this field. 182.183.7.252 (talk) 22:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]