User talk:Acroterion

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2600:1012:b042:b106:5d42:b518:a8dd:5fc (talk) at 00:17, 13 March 2020 (→‎Refactoring: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Signpost

RevDel

It looks like there is a revision on Jack's Big Music Show that looks like it should be revdeled. --Rlin8 (☎·✎·📧) 23:20, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
  • Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

regarding the warning on "Tatwamayi News"

Dear Acroterion, Tatwamayi News is a well-established media company ( www.tatwamayinews.com ) from Kerala state, India and is owned by Amiya Multimedia Private Limitted. This article that I tried to post was only to give an information about the News TV channel (Tatwamayi News ) and nothing for promotion or advertising. Can you please provide me some guideline which I can adopt to publish a wiki page for Tatwamayi News ?

Kind regards RAtheesh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratheeshvenu (talk • contribs) 13:28, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then write it without copying promotional content from an external source - you lifted it complete with copyright notices. And you'll need to proviode references substantiating the content and substantiating notability. Acroterion (talk) 01:18, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

French Bank of California v. First National Bank of Louisville

An editor who created this article, The C of E (talk · contribs) keeps putting things into the article that aren't supported by their inline citations. As I said on his talk page-

1- Your source makes no mention of the movie The Rainmaker 2- You cite one case citing this decision as a precedent but the article says cases.

There is no mention of the Rainmaker at all.

On a side issue, the User's name may violate user name rules. The C of E I have heard as shorthand for The Church of England. I will let you handle all of this....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:27, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, already dealt with. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not concerned about your username, but I didn't see anything in the sources provided to support your edits, and the reference to a primary-source legal document isn't appropriate. Acroterion (talk) 00:25, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@The C of E: Despite what you said above, C of E went back and reinserted[1] the reference that makes no mention of the Rainmaker....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He added it again[2] and now he's forum shopping[3] and totally disregarding what you wrote above. I am about to take this to ANI. Please weigh in again or tell me what else I should do if you want to step away from this. Thanks....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked on his talkpage. I suggest that you disengage, it's getting more heated than it really warrants. For my part, I'm developing a cold and am cooking dinner for multiple people, so I'm trying to do some article writing while waiting for things to cook and not savage anybody while feeling cranky. Acroterion (talk) 19:48, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Run amok editor

Can you please take care of this[4]? Thanks....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:21, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of this. I didn't check every edit. Just five and all were wrong. Other editors found 3 other edits to be wrong. I doubt even one was legit....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:28, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I seriously doubt that there are that many typos in that particular part of our aviation articles. Acroterion (talk) 00:30, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My content was in draft it was not completed

Hello,

My article was in the draft it was not published. I did not add this code as written in wiki article link " ". SO why did you delete it?

Leo

92.41.191.183

Hi Acroterion! I'm just sending you a quick note to let you know that I updated the block reason for this IP user. This is definitely block evasion given the timeline between the abusive account and that IP's edits to the article. If you have questions or object for any reason, please let me know (ping me so that I get notified). Knowing you as well as I do, I doubt that you're going to mind - I just wanted to let you know nonetheless. Call it professional courtesy. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem here, cheers! Acroterion (talk) 03:09, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello. Thank you for leaving a note about not adding inappropriate external link to wikipedia. I sought personal pages were okay since I have since other users doing it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Talgalili for example. Is this just an enforcement issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JDRUVINI (talk • contribs) 20:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are a long-established user whose links relate to their activities on Wikipedia. In general, it's a poor idea to post links to external sites on Wikipedia when there's no obvious relationship to what they do on Wikipedia, and it's not obvious why you would need to post a link to an Ebay tech blog here. Acroterion (talk) 03:33, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A mistake I made

I mistakenly uploaded an image for a golf tournament article. I meant to upload one for this year, but I accidently uploaded one from last year. So, this upload is not needed. Will you delete it for me? Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2020_Women%27s_British_Open_logo.png Johnsmith2116 (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consigned to the memory hole. Acroterion (talk) 02:05, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 11:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Soros disagreement

I disagree with you. False is a loaded term and implies that it is absolute. Should it not be so strong in a biography?

  • Smears should not be tolerated. This is a BLP, and if you reinstate that without a consensus on the talk page you will be blocked. Drmies (talk) 01:10, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, noted, I will use the talk area next time for BLP. Did not see this a controversial change, I thought it was more neutral- but will use talk area. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allsparkwars1 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As Drmies has noted, when something's false, we say so, we don't tiptoe around it, particularly when it concerns a living individual. Watering it down like you've done can become a violation of the biographies of living persons policy - it implies that maybe those Internet rumors are somehow true, or maybe not, wink, nudge. Don't do that. Acroterion (talk) 02:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CLXV, January 2020

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You got mail

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

EvergreenFir (talk) 02:28, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

174.84.161.252

Hi,

It looks to me like wants his TPA revoked. Adam9007 (talk) 02:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amend Protection for Page

Hi Acroterion,

Would it be possible to reduce the protection you placed on 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak from WP:SEMI to WP:PCPP? The page is well patrolled by editors and there are quite a number of timely and valid updates by IP/ unregistered users from Asia. Several requests for help in editing have surfaced on the talk page since the WP:SEMI was imposed. Thanks. PenulisHantu (talk) 03:19, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I just noted at RFPP, I'd suggest that you ask other editors on the talkpage whether they're OK with the current protection, or whether it can be unprotected. Having been thanked for protecting, I'm not convinced that your impression is universally shared. Open a discussion on the talkpage. I protected because there was unsourced speculation creeping in among the rapid-fire editing, and such articles often turn into a frenzy of scorekeeping, sourced or not. Acroterion (talk) 03:24, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your message?

What are you talking about? I asked a perfectly reasonable question about article protection at the Talk page, and I'm now going to put it back. 31.52.163.28 (talk) 16:17, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article talkpages are for specific discussion of article improvements. They aren't fora for speculation or for asking "perfectly reasonable questions" about conspiracy rumors. Acroterion (talk) 16:19, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What!! Please read my edit. 31.52.163.28 (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for fixing it. Obviously a misunderstanding. Apologies for being a bit terse. 31.52.163.28 (talk) 16:22, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment about protection is reasonable, and I'm happy to remove protection if there's general sentiment for its removal. I don't understand the politics sanction notice either and will look into it. Acroterion (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yes, let's see if there's a general view for unprotection. BTW, it was another editor who put in the forum chat stuff. 31.52.163.28 (talk) 16:27, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I found the mistaken AP notice source, it was placed in his edit [5], probably by mistake. There are so many edit conflicts right now it's hard to tell which end is up. No worries. Acroterion (talk) 16:32, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Michigan has a vaild reason to be listed on the Map of the US and reported cases of the Chinese coronavirus

@Acroterion: Hello, i was placing a source in it when i was editing the page. If you don't really believe me here is a link to info about it in Michigan. https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2020/01/24/michigan-health-officals-confirm-three-dealths-related-to-corona-virus/. --Godmanhalo (talk) 22:09, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on your talkpafge, keep it there, and don't jump to conclusions. Acroterion (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

American Airlines Flight 77

Hi,

You rev del'd this page today and you removed all the editors names.

However, ClueBot NG had reverted the editors and their names were still visible in its edit summary?

I'm assuming this was an oversight/error so I've rev del'd ClueBot NG's edit summaries but thought I'd also drop you a line here to let you know -- 5 albert square (talk) 21:24, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was mainly concerned with taking the fun out of UnderArmourKid's edits, I suppose we could delete the edit summaries, but mostly I was applying some DENY to UAK's actual edits. I'll go over and see if it's worth it, thanks for the note. Acroterion (talk) 23:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock?

Hi, there's a new entrant, SignorUgarte across at Greta Thunberg who has claimed they are "new to editing (less than 20 edits)" while showing much more familiarity with the topic and with editing. Also some "idiosyncrasies". Could this be a sock of MartiniShaw? Would you mind having a quick look, please? Esowteric+Talk 11:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Berean Hunter ran a CU on the 26th, so I would have expected somebody registered on the 23rd to appear, but I'll defer to his judgment. Acroterion (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. Esowteric+Talk 12:09, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Might you unblock a user you blocked?

Greetings, you recently blocked and deleted User:Aphrodite27. This is a legitimate user who is in a college class I am teaching. I'd love for her to be able to resume editing in good faith. Also, what was it that made her seem suspicious? I'd like to avoid whatever that is, in the future. Best, Stevenarntson (talk) 00:47, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've unblocked her. Her userpage was very similar to those created by some spammers that have been problematic - there's a format that tends to be repeated that hers kind of matched. Sorry about that! Acroterion (talk) 01:25, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for unblocking her. Looking a little further into it, it seems some of my other students have been caught up in this sweep. This morning I found that User:MoAbbasi23 has been blocked as well. I am wondering if I should go through all 50 pages to see if any others are? What could I do to keep this sort of thing from happening in the future? Would a notification at the top of the pages be helpful, explaining that these are students? Thank you, Stevenarntson (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'll go back through the logs and look for other similar blocks. That was the problem - I think your class was copying the format of each other's userpage profiles, and it looked like a series of spambot posts. We get some doozies - "my hobbies are papier-mache and making chain mail and I'm trying to learn Portuguese" and so on, from spambots trying to look human. I saw a bunch with more plausible variations on the same theme and took them for automated edits. Acroterion (talk) 16:20, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've unblocked User:Noecal2020 too - I think that's all. If you look at their userpage profiles, the similarity is rather striking, leading me to believe that an automated template was being used by a spambot. Acroterion (talk) 16:27, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for helping me here. I just noticed your request that I respond to you on my own Talk page to keep things tidy here, and I apologize for not doing that! I haven't used Talk pages very much. I went through all of my students' accounts, and there are a few more that were blocked:
If in the future I added a notification to the tops of the pages that these are students, maybe including a link to my own Talk page, would that make them seem a little less spammy? Stevenarntson (talk) 16:39, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That would help greatly - the appearance of seven or eight nearly identical userpages in short order, each with an external link, looks very much like a spambot attack - there have been concerns about external links to malicious downloads in the past weekor so after a story appeared in Wired, and adding sort of random links on userpages that are almost identical in format looks decidedly peculiar. Sorry for the trouble, there's no way you or they could have known that. Acroterion (talk) 16:47, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can see that the two redlinked userpages were caught (and all were flagged) by the spambot detection filter. The attempted edits on the redlinked userpages were the same format as the others. Acroterion (talk) 16:49, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And you are welcome to discuss here, since the conversation started here and it's most convenient for us both - the notice just means that if I initiated the conversation on your talkpage, we should stay there - that wasn't the case in this instance. Acroterion (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this information--in the future, I'll post a notice on all the student userpages linking back to my own page. W/r/t/ User:LL0801 and User:SanQuintana--could those two pages not be restored? Those students had posted some content on them before they were taken down. Stevenarntson (talk) 17:07, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Both restored. Acroterion (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Stevenarntson (talk) 20:42, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
  • The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

  • Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
  • When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [6]

Arbitration

  • Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Purpose of revert

Hello, what’s the purpose of this revert? If the image is a copyvio the old version, now a redirect, is involved anyway and it will (or should be) deleted, as well. So, your revert is quite useless. — Speravir (talk) – 02:39, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The second revert took it off the page entirely. Acroterion (talk) 02:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry. I didn’t notice this. — Speravir (talk) – 02:51, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I was wondering why my revert didn't work the first time, then I figured it out. No worries. Acroterion (talk) 02:52, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Content.

Good day. Regarding the removal of content for not being a reliable source, the addition you removed was in the same paragraph having two citations to the Washington Post and The Guardian and was sourced to James Lyons-Weiler, PhD who is as qualified as the editors are to these two newspapers with particular political slants. Also, James Lyons-Weiler, PhD is very well known for the subject matter and is a subject matter expert. The citations he includes are also to reliable scientific institutions.

It is critical the public understand the origin of coronavirus outbreak as it implicates the Wuhan lab HAS NOT BEEN PROVED and the paragraph this was added to indicates matter is 100% closed, as it relates to the phrase "that there was no evidence that the virus was genetically engineered". When there is and from many reputable sources.

1. Can you tell me what constitutes a "reliable source." 2. The phrase "that there was no evidence that the virus was genetically engineered" should be omitted as well then as there is evidence to the contrary by equally authoritative sources to the contrary of the Washington Post and The Guardian entries.

Thank you for your efforts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanspan (talk • contribs) 23:50, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia relies on major published sources with a reputation for fact-checking, such as the Washington Post and the Guardian. We do not accept the views of individuals published onb their own domains as reliable, unless they are widely recognized for expertise in major publications, still less if they're being cited for self-published promotion of conspiracy theories. See WP:RS, WP:V and WP:FRINGE. Acroterion (talk) 23:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. This is an entry about the Wahun Institute and the post I had probably was not contextually best here, as it would implicate the Institute. The cite phrase you have allowed to stay, "that there was no evidence that the virus was genetically engineered" is a supposition as a number of authoritative "non conspiracy theory" scientists have shown this to be true with as much as, if not more, evidence as the Washington Post and Guardian editors cites. Perhaps these citations would be best under the virus entry itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanspan (talk • contribs) 03:44, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't a congenial home for conspiracy theories or for speculation on fringe theories. Acroterion (talk) 04:39, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And, it shouldn't be! I have defended Wikipedia as a credible source from the beginning because of "peer condemnation." Thank you for your service. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.229.70.31 (talk) 15:38, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the cited article from the Washington Post (#4), an individual has to be a paid subscriber to see that cited material and the link redirects to their home page, and The Guardian cites the same exact article. Is there a policy about citing sources where the individual has to pay to read it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.229.70.31 (talk) 20:21, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. Paywalled sources are acceptable. Acroterion (talk) 21:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.229.70.31 (talk) 22:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Katy Tur

Hi Acroterian, can you help out with a user block and rev/deletion/ Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:19, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, thanks for reverting that crap. Acroterion (talk) 03:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. MSNBC employees are getting noticed here tonight [7]. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:25, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nice. I'm close to signing off, so you may need to flag down some West Coast admins if it keeps on happening. Acroterion (talk) 03:28, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Same here. Or east coasters with insomnia. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:40, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possible block on 120.21.180.180

Hello Acroterian - IP Address 120.21.180.180 is same individual who was vandalizing "Battle of Saragarhi" article. And now he is vandalizing "Tirah campaign" and "Mohmand campaign of 1897–98" as well as "Afghan–Sikh Wars" with personal views, misusing references and removing content without discussion on talk page. Can you please have all pages protected from vandalism? Not sure if there is a way to ban this IP Address as he comes back with different one again and again. But 120 is the common beginning digit in all his IP addresses. Any help would be appreciated.

From Tirah Campaign, he is taunting: 13:07, 14 February 2020‎ 120.21.180.180 talk‎ 10,682 bytes 0‎ Personal opinions once again hahaha undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit

From Mohmand campaign of 1897–98, same taunts: 13:06, 14 February 2020‎ 120.21.180.180 talk‎ 7,801 bytes -4‎ Personal opinion once again 😂 undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit

WorldWikiAuthorOriginal (talk) 13:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possible block on 120.21.57.81

Sorry to bother you time and again. IP Address 120.21.57.81 is same individual. Vandalising article "Afghan Sikh wars". I mentioned that his views do not justify this particular article and welcomed to talk page before making any changes but the user keeps adding his changes again and again. WorldWikiAuthorOriginal (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and I agree. As long as valid reference is provided and the views are not source misrepresentation, I have no problem welcoming changes. Also we have talk page to discuss about it. But in the case of Afghan-Sikh wars where the IP provided this link as reference to state that the over all war was a stalemate. If you read Page 296, there no such mention of it. Please take a look if you have time. https://books.google.com/books?id=AzG5llo3YCMC&pg=PA296#v=onepage&q&f=false WorldWikiAuthorOriginal | talk 11:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request some Admins to review the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

In good faith i been trying figure what going here on ANI. I like to speedy request some Admins to review the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for unusual activity from IPs on a ANI report that i inserted myself and other report that i started for a disruptive user. I do not want start like 100 ANI because of this. The last line of both reports. 1 2 Thanks. Regice2020 (talk) 05:42, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if they are coming from other ANI reports. Regice2020 (talk) 05:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will not have time this morning before I go out to review the apparently lengthy discussion. I'll look in this evening if it's not resolved by then. Acroterion (talk) 12:53, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: IssueICLXVI, February 2020

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ilhan Omar

Hi, I just nominated a redirect that implies that Ilhan Omar father name is the same as her husband father name. This name is based on the conspiracy theory made by right-wing and alt-right media. It is totally inappropriate. Could you remove the redirect? Thanks.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 04:36, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pol Pot

Hi Acroterion. Would you mind taking a look at Pol Pot. This a bit of disruption going on with the infobox image, and there's a good chance it's probably the same person using multiple accounts. I thought about WP:RPP, but I suggested something similar at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1030#Death threat and I'm not sure if this is another case where RPP wouldn't really be warranted. The file that keeps getting added is currently nominated for deletion at Commons, but it might be awhile before it ends up deleted. If RPP is OK for a case like this, please let me know and I'll make the request myself. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked both the IP and the account for trolling, and I'll keep an eye on the article, since the IP was probably a proxy. Additionally, I've added the picture to the badimages list until it gets deleted. Thanks for your diligence in pursuing this. Acroterion (talk) 12:38, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking a look and stepping in. — Marchjuly (talk) 13:23, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The person doing this is just creating new accounts to keep re-adding the file. I guess accounts can keep being blokced as they show up, but maybe WP:PENDING would be better at least until the file is deleted from Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:20, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're probably right, I'll do that now. I've added the current spelling of the image to the badimages list too. Acroterion (talk) 13:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are around

Hello A. There are some more edit summaries that need r/d. Thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 21:03, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article on asexuality

Regarding the removal of the Asexual Manifesto - This source is not actually about asexuality as it should be understood as a lack of sexual attraction. Instead it is a treatise on abstaining from sex as a feminist political movement and argued that women are compromising themselves and their time.

Regarding the removal of David Bowie - I have read the arrived article 3x and Bowie notes that others have referred to him as asexual but that they don't understand him and that he does not. As such it is false representation to not him as an Asexual figure.

Regarding the removal of the Off Our Backs article - It is an article concerning the lack of lesbian representation in the National Organization for Women, a custody hearing where a lesbian almost had her parental rights taken, and a general feminist meeting. The only mention of asexuality is the reference to the availability of the Asexual Manifesto which is not a good source.

I take a great deal of issue with a number of these sources. I don't think they are presenting asexuality in good faith. Stellarburst (talk) 05:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have some reasonable points. Use the talkpage to make your case, and please proofread your edit summaries. Acroterion (talk) 12:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coronavirus

I have a email from my work, it isn't in the news yet but is true. not sure how to source an internal email. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.128.233 (talk) 04:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can't source an internal email - it's not a published reliable source in major media. Don't post rumors, wait for reporting to take place that we can verify. Acroterion (talk) 04:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March Madness 2020

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RevDel request

Hi Acroterion, I recently rewrote a section at Mandy Powers Norrell regarding some controversial remarks she made; in reviewing the page history, I saw that some of the edits between December 24 and 27 added language in this section that I think may be potentially libellous. I saw that you are willing to handle RevDel requests -- would you be willing to take a look at these edits and determine whether this needs to be done? Thank you, –Erakura(talk) 04:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely malicious, zapped. Acroterion (talk) 04:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NkassFourteen

Hi Acroterion.

You recently blocked User:NkassFourteen for advertising, but they are now using their talk page to carry on advertising [8]. I have reverted their latest, but may need TPA removal. Thanks. Agent00x (talk) 13:54, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Hey you deleted my "SA Franchise" Page and i'm not sure why. I worked REALLY hard on it, could you please put it back? Or can you at least let me see it real quick so I can copy the coding? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 01:04, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't a free webhost. Does the content have an application for an article? Did you mean to move the content to article space? Acroterion (talk) 01:07, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey this is Jm363490 again. I promise I will take it off but can you PLEASE put it back real quick so I can save the codes. I worked for hours on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please please please put it back I'm begging you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to wikipedia but if that's what it tkaes to get it back then yes you can move it there. Thank you I would really appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you move it to article space and is there any way you can get it back? I really need it it's for my final grade in school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jm363490: Does User:Jm363490 have what you're looking for? —C.Fred (talk) 01:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:C.Fred @C.Fred It has some, I managed to retrieve it, but there is a lot that's missing and I really need it to pass Graphic Writing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will put it into your sandbox if you can explain what relevance it has to Wikipedia - personal projects for school or otherwise aren't an appropriate use of the encyclopedia. Otherwise, I can email it to you. Acroterion (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you email the link to the full coding of what you deleted. Thank you and I'm so sorry if i did anything against the terms, in the future I will seek confirmation before proceeding — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Acroterion (talk) 02:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Is there any way I can keep it on Wikipedia without going against the terms? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain what relevance it has to the encyclopedia? Acroterion (talk) 02:36, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. it isn't educational really. It is just basically a spreadsheet/table/description of a "Survivor" season I did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then, no, the encyclopedia isn't a free webhost for stuff like that. In any case, there has been a lot of abuse of reality/contest shows like that, people have been blocked for posting showcruft tables, so it's best kept somewhere else. Acroterion (talk) 02:42, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Well thank you for at least sending it to me and clarifying. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jm363490 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Loycarmo

Hi there, just to inform you that cross-wiki-vandal Loycarmo has been blocked indefinite in deWP. Cheers --−Sargoth 09:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate Discussions

Thank you for informing me of my imminent blocking, but can you please explain to me what, in my situation, constitutes "inappropriate discussions"? Because as far as I can see the descriptions on the page you linked me could just as easily apply to the posts left by your Wikipedia moderators responding to my post. I'm interested to hear your explanation as to why my posts in particular were deemed "inappropriate" but those left by the moderators and other users were not. I already know the answer - Wikipedia has a deep seated Leftist bias and agenda, and any user fighting the cause of Leftism will always be given a free pass to break the guidelines if it helps the cause of Leftism - but I'm curious to see how you would attempt to explain it without admitting to your agenda. Thanks. Des22z (talk) 19:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Des22z (talk • contribs) 19:03, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop abusing talkpages to soapbox about your dislike for people you perceive as leftists. If this recurs, you may expect to have your editing privileges revoked. Acroterion (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Does a topic ban for post 1932 American politics extend to discussion too, User:Doug Weller left them a notice about it[[9]]? It might be the best way to handle this. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:05, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since this user appears to be focused solely on fighting those they perceive as leftists and demanding that conspiracy theories be treated as fact, I doubt there's much point in all the paperwork associated with a topic ban. A topic ban is more useful if an editor is involved productively elsewhere. Acroterion (talk) 20:10, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:11, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some stroopwafels for you!

Thanks for the quick rangeblock. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 05:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I hit the easy pitches - when the first four hex groupings are the same, it's a /64 block assigned to a single router. Acroterion (talk) 12:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

Ah, the amazing refreshing rollback link doesn't just hit me? :-) SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did it load? Did it load? Ye ... aw crap, accidental rollback. Drives me crazy. Acroterion (talk) 22:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I rarely edit on my phone because I hit the link to look at an edit and it rolls it back instead. I've given out my share of apologies and I don't edit on the phone much any more! Liz Read! Talk! 22:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If I was an interface designer, I'd complain about it. I just cuss instead. Acroterion (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

I don’t know why I can’t just keep my stuff on my own Wikipedia page Jm363490 (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn’t a free web host for personal projects, and the user page belongs t9 the encyclopedia, not to individual users. Please do not reinstate the content. Acroterion (talk) 19:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How is it bothering anything? Jm363490 (talk) 20:09, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) As concisely explained to you above, Wikipedia is not a free web host for personal projects, it is a encyclopedia. Please do not reinstate personal content, or you may face further action. Thank you and regards, David J Johnson (talk) 21:11, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

where else could i put it Jm363490 (talk) 00:42, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 00:44, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i just don’t understand how it’s bothering anything. I’m not vandalizing wikipedia or sending false links. I just like having it here Jm363490 (talk) 02:04, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the fifth time, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free web hosting service for everybody to use as they please. The system is a finite resource whose servers are solely for improvement of the encyclopedia. Find somewhere else, and stop looking for a way around the terms of use and site policy. The answer is no. Acroterion (talk) 02:09, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

anywaysss... k Jm363490 (talk) 02:21, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Missed a spot

In your recent revdels, you missed this. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mapsfly

Hello, Acroterion,

While I think this editor made some disruptive edits and lacks a certain amount of clue, there was edit warring going on at Josh Norman both yesterday and today by a number of editors. I think indefinite is very severe for a first block and I was wondering if you would be amenable if I changed it to a 1-2 weeks or a month. Here is their contribution history if you want to check it out although it looks like the most damaging edits were posted on the ANI complaint. Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By all means - I was not encouraged by the absence of clue from somebody who had been around for so long, but I would regard this block as indefinite in the literal sense, not the infinite sense. Acroterion (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reconsidering this block. I hope they make a more clueful unblock request. Liz Read! Talk! 02:21, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by user Ash Salvatore in Enrique Iglesias articles

Hi Acroterion,

Since March 4, 2020 an user called Salvatore appeared here in Wikipedia and inflate Enrique Iglesias's albums sales and revert sourced edits by some members, including myself. I tried to talk to him many times in his talk page and even in the Talk:Enrique Iglesias, but he doesn't care to anything and change all other members edits in the articles and warnings in his Talk page. He even includes fake certifications in the table of some of Iglesias's articles like Quizás (album), and changed sourced sales like here Enrique Iglesias (album) without providing any source, only to keep the Enrique's sales very high and inflated. I would like to ask you to do something with this user, I think he's gone too far.--88marcus (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing living former representatives from US Congressional District pages

Hi Acroterion,

The edits to remove living former reps came about as a result of a discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U.S._Congress#Lists_of_living_former_members

I will wait a few days then reattempt.

Thoughts?

Benawu2 (talk) 02:25, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine to remove if there is consensus, just remember to reference that discussion in the edit summary - it's hard to tell what you're doing otherwise. Feel free to carry on. Acroterion (talk) 02:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Loycarmo socking again

Hello Loycarmo's socks have continued to destroy other versions of wikipedia. I have opened a sockpuppet investigation into his case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Loycarmo

Since you have blocked him (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Loycarmo) if you wish to provide comments on the spi investigation, please do.

Thanks so much for your time! Hefty hyde (talk) 15:52, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Acroterion, I have blocked Hefty hyde as a sock in an unrelated matter. The report they filed is a mess. At the moment, I've put it on hold. I would appreciate your commenting about the merits of the report, either here or at the SPI, when you have time. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:53, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Refactoring

My understanding was refactoring was discouraged except in cases on vandalism or BLP-violations. When I was 6 or 7 years old I took a Matchbox car and rolled it up and down the hood of his recently purchased truck, scratching the paint. When he arrived home I literally couldn’t sit down for three days and was out of school for a week. My father later told me “I am not proud of what I done but I am not ashamed”. Bottom line, bad things happen to good people and vice versa. It wasn’t a backhanded compliment or insult or passive aggressiveness. It was a genuine comment to a valued contributor.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Acroterion&oldid=945286195"