User talk:Edgar181/Archive19

Please add new topics to the bottom of the page. You can use the "new section" button above to start a new topic.
In general, I will respond here to comments, rather than on your talk page, so that the conversation isn't scattered.

Block request

Hello. This is not related to the Indonesian vandal, but can you block 68.39.208.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)? This vandal's MO is putting ridiculous Dragon Ball and weapon-based info on Sanrio-related articles. He comes in sporadically, but seems to have done so long-term since last April. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 14:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I blocked the IP address. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:01, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Protected page

Ed, Yesterday (August 1st) at 12:36 you protected the page Trevor Hemmings, there is a profanity on line 1 in the brackets. As you protected the page I am unable to edit the page to remove this profanity, could you please oblige.Paul1909 (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks like User:Topher385 has already removed it. If you encounter this type of problem again, you can place the template {{Edit semi-protected}} on the talk page of the article and explain the problem, and someone should help out more quickly. Thanks for helping to spot the vandalism. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Judas12345 Block

Although I understand why you blocked the user based on WP:BLP however the user made three edits, was warned for all three, and stopped editing at that time. Your block (coming as it did ~9 hours later) seems punitive rather then preventative. I'm not saying that Judas would have come back today and decided to actually constructively contribute... but it's possible. Crazynas^t 22:52, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think we should have any tolerance for individuals who are only here to attack people. It is not unusual for administrators to block such editors on sight, and that's what I regularly do. It's not punitive, but rather prudent action to prevent further violations of Wikipedia's BLP policy. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:06, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I suppose, and this really has nothing to do with you specifically but, I'm trying to figure out in my own mind where BLP and not biting meet, and where the happy medium is. I wonder what the false positive rate is on blocking users that made apparently unconstructive edits but would have returned to the project as a positive contributors. Although it was a different time, my own start to Wikipedia was a bit rocky and if I had been labeled I might not have stayed around. (Note that this isn't, at this point a request to unblock the user or commenting on anything specific on that block, but an attempt to clarify/understand and put my two cents in).
Crazynas^t 18:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

At the risk of sounding like a lawyer, I would note that BITE is a behavior guideline while BLP is a policy. BLP is in fact one of the policies that the Wikimedia Foundation takes most seriously. See for example Resolution:Biographies_of_living_people. Therefore whenever BITE and BLP are at odds, BLP should take precedence. From a purely ethical standpoint, I believe that because Wikipedia has such a prominent online role and consequently has the power to do real harm to individuals when negative material is present, Wikipedia has an obligation to minimize that potential harm. Being firm (even bitey) in dealing with individuals who violate our BLP policy is entirely consistent with that view. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:41, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Trump vandalism

Hi, I found your id associated w/ the recent deletion log for Donald Trump; I assume you were an involved Admin who dealt w/ recent vandalism?

I have a related question, perhaps you can help me... Several months ago Bearian took off protection level from Trump (out of spite no doubt – he's a liberal who detests Trump, which isn't a personal attack I'm sure he would agree if it is not plain to see. Since then there have been hundreds of IP valdalisms to the article. And not even one valid contribution (if I'm off, then it's not by much, maybe only one edit was not reverted due to vandalism).

Bearian's action to de-protect was after failed attempt to have the article deleted, calling it "hopeless mess". His request was rejected ala SNOWBALL. His justification to de-protect was stated as allowing more input to clean up the article by attracting "more objective" editors.

I hope my question is obvious. Since nothing positive was achieve by his act to de-protect, and there isn't any reasonable expectation for something positive (if history is any gauge at all), then why hasn't his act be reversed by a conscientious Admin?

A separate issue (but one I'm not asking you), is why isn't Bearian's act seen as vandalism itself? (I think there is every reason to conclude that it was done out of spite. For example, he doesn't bother to doubt his decision based on the results, and revert the de-protect himself.)

I would like to get some understanding of this, right now it makes no reasonable sense to me. Can you help me? Thank you. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I think you are being too harsh on Bearian and making unfounded accusations. I would encourage you to read the guideline at Wikipedia:Assume good faith and tone down your accusative attitude. The article had been semi-protected for three years, and was apparently forgotten about by User:Acalamari who had protected it (see User_talk:Acalamari#Change_protection_level_for_.22Donald_Trump.22). That's a very long time for an article to be protected and articles tend to stagnate somewhat when they are protected like that. I think it was perfectly reasonable for Bearian to remove the protection at that time to allow more potentional improvements to the article. Having said that, and looking back at the article's history, it seems to me that edits from anonymous and unconfirmed editors have been almost universally unconstructive and commonly in violation of our BLP policy when the article has been unprotected. Therefore, I agree with you that it would be a good idea to reinstate the semi-protection, so I have now done so. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me understand the protection history, and for action taken! Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Why you deleted a page

Hi There, my name is Zina Nelku and I'm trying to create a bio page for a notable professor, scientist, doctor and researcher Dr. Abdallah Daar. His bio is also on the McLaughlin-Rotman Centre for Global Health and he has received numerous awards and recognition in the Global Health field: http://www.mrcglobal.org/abdallah_daar

I'm open to suggestions on how I can improve this bio so that it can be published on Wiki, as I think it would be a valuable bio to have on your website. Would referencing his CV help?

This is the page that was deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abdallah_daar&action=purge

Many thanks, Zina — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.116.199.114 (talk) 18:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I deleted Abdallah_daar because it was taken word-for-word from a copyrighted website. Wikipedia simply cannot accept such material (see WP:COPYVIO). If you think that Abdallah Daar meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines (WP:BIO), please feel free to recreate the article using text written in your own words. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

additional question

I work with Dr. Daar and so I could remove the (c) off the bottom of the website, would that help? Or is there a disclaimer we could add to his page to give wikipedia permission to use content on this page? I really don't want to re-write it, because it's accurate and perfectly written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.116.199.114 (talk) 18:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Try having a look at this page: Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The section titled "Granting us permission to copy material already online" seems to answer your question. I hope this helps. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:02, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

u deleted kalika mandir named page

hello chemist do not again delete that page

Note

Note that I use endless IP's. Try banning me.