User talk:AmandaNP

Wikipedia:Babel

en

This user is a native speaker of the English language.

fr-3

Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau avancé de français.

es-1

Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español.

Search user languages

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Contact information
Email: Email me (Email rules) IRC: @wikipedia/DeltaQuad, under nicks similar to DeltaQuad or Izhidez. (See IRC channel at the top for my home)

Block evasion: More logged-out editing

125.164.50.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
125.164.28.116 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

I think the beauty pageant fan I Nyoman Gede Anila is still editing while logged out; this Java IP began the day after you blocked them (with Huggle, even). - Bri.public (talk) 20:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be whack a mole for a bit, but I dealt with this round. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 12:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello AmandaNP, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,
History DMZ ^{(talk)+(ping)} 02:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Page move query - "Seeman" to "Senthamizhan Seeman"

I am not taking administrative action against either user. That is what WP:ANI is for. My talkpage is not a place for you to argue your differences (single BLP violations or not) and frankly i'm tired of the back and forth. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 13:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi. Can you explain this move [1]?

As per some Indian names, the individual is known mononymously. Think Rajinikanth, Vijay, Vikram etc. His major work is in cinema (where he has been credited as nothing other than 'Seeman'), and politics, where again its varied between the unconfirmed names of Senthamizhan and Sebastian. Please note that "Senthamizhan" is literally translated into English from Tamil as "Pure Tamil" (which coincidently is what his party protests for - Tamil nationalism). It is a moniker rather than an actual name.

Please note we don't include monikers in titles. Again, we don't say things like 'Superstar Rajinikanth' or 'Makkal Selvan Vijay Sethupathi' despire it being mentioned widely in the media. The article should be reverted to Seeman (politician)

Neutral Fan (talk) 16:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Senthamizhan" is a name which is found in all his social media networks, in his party's official website and in multiple reliable sources in Tamil and in English.[2][3][4][5] [6][7][8][9]. The subject is not a very notable politician therefore most sources for the name are in Tamil Language. "Unconfirmed" is vague here as you must provide any evidence to prove that this name is unconfirmed. Names do have meanings in almost all languages. If that's a moniker, you must prove it.

His father's name is also mentioned as "Senthamizhan" from several sources. The subject has never ever mentioned his name as "Sebastian" or "Simon", these names where mostly used by his political opponents with no evidence to target him. He himself states it in an interview that those names are used mostly by the Hindutva to target him.

Seeman is definitely the most WP:COMMONNAME but this was moved per WP:NCP. SUN EYE 1 17:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) When I ran the brief checks to see what is shown in the sources, my first look was seeing both names being referenced. I can't tell you exactly what I saw that night though. Without a fair amount of reliable sources countering the amount of links Suneye1 gave, WP:COMMONNAME does prevail that the full name should be used. Do you have more? Ideally this would be a discussion best for the talkpage though and a requested move to establish a consensus before moving it back again so it can be linked and not done again. Personally, I have little opinion in this except policy as I just saw the page on passing. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What his party says is irrelevant. As mentioned, "Senthamizhan" (English: Pure Tamil Man) is a propaganda-based moniker to further the cause of his party which staunchly supports Tamil nationalism. No different from 'Chairman Mao'.

From your examples, sites like Wire and Scroll work off independent contributors and thus editorial standards cannot be verified. The name "Sebastian Seeman" is also seen here from far more reliable sources (as early as 2009, when "Senthamizhan" was nowhere to be seen) - [10][11][12][13][14]. Please note that these sources, also have direct quotes from his lawyer and national agencies - and are likely to be accurate.

The first recorded instance of "Senthamizhan Seeman" on the web is here [15] - where a user includes "Senthamizhan" in inverted commas, and enquires if he has seen a film which features some elements of nationalist propaganda.

The article should either be just Seeman (politician) or Sebastian Seeman (which now clearly seems to be his actual name) Neutral Fan (talk) 19:22, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to note I edit conflicted with you above. Again, this really isn't the place to have this discussion full on, so I would recommend the use of the talkpage please. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AmandaNP, One question, Can we change the name of a BLP to a name which is refuted by the subject himself? SUN EYE 1 19:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Take the example of those who change name ever so regularly. Think Prince or Silambarasan (who becomes STR, Silambarasan T. R., T. T. Silambarasan, Simbu, Chimbhu) etc every few years. Wikipedia can't listen to them? Neutral Fan (talk) 20:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AmandaNP - by the ongoing discussion on the page, I think the page should return to Seeman (politician) until further notice. Not sure how familiar you are with Indian politics, but it is very clear from Suneye1's edits that he is also trying to take part in Seeman's cover-up act of being originally called "Senthamizhan" (English: Pure Tamil Man) [which corresponds to his party's pro-Tamil nationalist policies]. Suneye1 has introduced propaganda-based sources from the party website to back up unverified claims [16] and [17], removed sourced information which may 'give away' Seeman's real identity with invalid reasons [18], and his early edit history suggests he has a general bias towards anti-Hindu policies. I would go as far as suggesting a topic ban. Neutral Fan (talk) 11:36, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to jump into Indian politics (something I know nothing about) and start trying to take unilateral action. You can take that to ANI if you think it's worth a topic ban, I can't even impose that myself. That said, I recommended you initiate the requested move process as it would bring neutral uninvolved editors into the mix. You haven't done so. I'm not going to disruptively move it back without policy backing (and I don't mean the ones already motioned as they are in dispute) or established consensus. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 11:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I will begin this. By the way, where was the earlier consensus and discussion? The talk page is full of claims against the title (which only one editor seems to back) Neutral Fan (talk) 12:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There wasn't one, and there doesn't need to be one on the first edit. I don't know if you realize it either, but your comments seem to be coming across as that I'm violating policies and established practice. You have yet to point to an established policy, and are using the fact that other stuff exists to justify your arguments - something that is normally discouraged. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 12:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you that isn't the case. Neutral Fan (talk) 12:43, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Fan, Im not going to respond to your WP:ASPERSIONS and personal attack and Senthamizhan is a boy name in tamil, see G. Senthamizhan

AmandaNP, This user seems to be very interested in defaming the individual. They have "After receiving social media attacks for her comments about Seeman" to " After being harassed by Seeman" in Vijayalakshmi (Kannada actress) while she claimed she was harresed by seeman and his followers. This is a clear BLP violation. When I raised this in the talk page, they don't seem to understand it. see Talk:Vijayalakshmi_(Kannada_actress)#Harresment SUN EYE 1 13:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I merely reverted this vandal anon edit here which changed the original meaning which had been quoted in the source [19]. Best. Neutral Fan (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Skiyomi

Thanks for catching that Legend Nevada was Skiyomi. I'm pretty familiar with that troll but hadn't caught this one. --Yamla (talk) 12:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I got it along with a few others. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 12:50, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sony Sab 's TV series "Kaatelaal & Sons"

Hi , You have protected the page of sony sab's tv series "Kaatelal & Sons". I want to create the page of this show with the same title. So Can you unprotect the page ? Mann Rocks (talk) 08:14, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:SALT, please create a convincing draft that would go in it's place. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 13:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Found the disruptive sock

Hello Amanda and I hope you're doing well. I just want to say do you remember recently banning this sock user with multiple accounts? [20] Well he's back now damaging the same articles as before. He threatened he would change the Bale Sultanate article [21] and he did with his new account named Silverhorn68. [22] and if you look closely at the view history you'll see another new account named Hayaa20. It's the same user because he has two numbers in the end and focuses on Oromo history and vandalizes pages like on here. [23]

He also restored Fetegar which was deleted after he was found for being a sock puppet. [24] Wej was never a kingdom but a group of people and he made an article titled Wej province then he proceeds to mention it as a kingdom. [25] He denies Oromo expansion and goes into every article with original research with "however" without placing a source. [26] This user is very disruptive and all his false articles should be deleted and I'm sure he has more than two accounts currently that deserve to be banned. I would really appreciate it if you could look into it again since you've dealt with this user in the past and did an absolutely amazing job. Ayaltimo (talk) 15:30, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked the first user as them. I don't thing you have presented enough evidence at this time (because most of it is history links instead of diffs) for me to run a check on Hayaa20 with such a low edit count. If you wish to pursue this further, I would request you do it through SPI instead of my talkpage. This allows people to attend to it faster than I may be able to (and relieves my obligation to chase down the evidence in a timely manner) and get more eyes to see what I may not see. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AmandaNP Thank you so much for blocking this troll. As for the user Hayaa20 he's editing through a mobile web the same way as Silverhorn68 did so I think running a checkuser on them would be suitable since you managed to link several accounts through his IP. Here's another suspected new sock named Driver2152. It has a random name and numbers in the end and uses mobile web when editing. [27] not only has he edited an article created by Silverhorn68 but he edited an Ethiopian ruler page [28] the same thing Silverhorn68 did [29] but if that is not enough then sure I will do what you said instead. I would like to request one thing. Can you please delete the articles created by the sock puppet (Silverhorn68)? They are Fetegar and Wej province. Thank you so much and happy new year! Ayaltimo (talk) 21:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re. the articles Fetegar and Wej province, I can't just delete them. The criteria for deleting that you are referring to is WP:CSD#G5. That clearly states that only articles that have no substantial edits by others can be deleted under the criteria. @Elinruby: actually made significant edits to Fetegar and the sum of edits to Wej province likely don't meet the threshold. It's not meant to punish regular contributors who have spent time and energy into writing the article.

As for your claims about Hayaa20, by your logic, if I run a checkuser on them I could essentially run a checkuser on Neils51 who only did grammar edits in the article (and has 38,000 edits). They also could have easily decided to use a mobile device. Having numbers on the end of your username and editing the same article using mobile edits does not provide evidence that it's more likely that it is the same person than two different people. That is the bar required for the use of CheckUser. It is not something I can use when I wish. Beyond that, I already checked the relevant IP address from when I just blocked Silverhorn68. If there were other users, I would have blocked them too, but it's the only other account that came up. That means they will not be on the same IP. They will be on a new one which would require even more evidence to block then. So at this point i'm going to officially

Check declined by a checkuser it.

By that same point that I have already checked the IPs with Silverhorn68, I again would have seen Driver2152. Therefore editing the same articles using mobile edits is not enough to meet the evidence level required for a checkuser at WP:SPI. This does not change simply because we are on my talkpage. You have also commented now that you may take the same evidence for someone else to review to SPI. I have issue with that because I have now had to look into it further despite my request to take it there. Therefore I will now go and file the SPI on your behalf and make my comments there (now filled Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shit233333334). This keeps it on the same page so that we know Silverhorn68 was a sock and we can use that to compare in the future, whereas on my talkpage, it simply just gets lost in my archive. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 22:14, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about anybody being a sock. A series of pages about former Ethiopian peoples or kingdoms showed up in the uncategorized queue and that is what I know, period. I did what I could for them and as far as I can tell from 10000 feet, the information is accurate. I did not check every single assertion however, so I can't say I know them to be error-free, but blurring between a people and a kingdom is quite common for articles about the period. Bottom line, i think that if there is some question about them, they should be reviewed by a topic expert. Elinruby (talk) 20:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ek Duje Ke Vaaste 2.jpg

Hey User:AmandaNP, I hope you're doing well. I'm writing you here because I have received a request to upload File:Ek Duje Ke Vaaste 2.jpg from an IP 69.169.18.24 on my talk page; which has been recently deleted by you under G5 criteria, I suspect the request was made by the banned user using IP. However, I'm writing you here to ensure that I may upload an image under Fair use. Thank you, happy editing and happy new year :-) Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) 17:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pratyush.shrivastava: Please do not upload this for this user. I have blocked the range you mentioned, and they are actively evading their block. Unless you want it for an article you are using, WP:PROXYING applies. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:35, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Empire AS ^Talk! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2020 and tomorrow will be 2025. Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive 2025. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Empire AS ^Talk! 18:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello AmandaNP: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Kaatelal & Sons

Hello @AmandaNP: Happy New Year, I hope you're doing well. I came across List of programs broadcast by Sony SAB where I see vandalism going on with Kaatelal & Sons. I would like to work on the article, but found out you were the last admin who deleted this page as violation. So I thought to have a word with you and take your advice before I proceed. Thanks for your consideration. --C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 04:20, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see what I wrote above for the last user. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 14:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions. I will create a draft and would submit it for afc. Happy New Year, Stay safe. --C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 14:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Komala sockpuppets

Hi AmandaNP! I'm writing directly to you since I see you protected the Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan page. I'm not sure if SPI is the best venue for this, but Keywan faramarzi is evading a block with a new account Keywankomala. The new account just created what appears to be an autobiography at Kayvan Faramarzi. Thank you and happy new year! --MarioGom (talk) 17:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:22, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IP block

hello Amanda I'm hoping you can help me with something. I recently switched my cell provider and upgraded to a new phone, only to discover the ip address associated with it is blocked, and it says you authorized the block. I can also see edits that I didn't make. It looks like the account I use for edits (this one) is unaffected but I am afraid of being falsely accused of sockpuppetry and losing that account. The ban is unappealable and expires in March. Let me know what I should do and if you need any additional information from me. Thanks! Anon0098 (talk) 00:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This block is not meant to target you and only affects people not logged in to their account. See Wikipedia:Advice to T-Mobile IPv6 users. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:40, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

oh gotcha. thanks :) Anon0098 (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, AmandaNP. 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.— Silikonz (💬 | 🖋) 07:14, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Kaatelal & Sons

Hello @AmandaNP: I hope you're doing well. As you said in last reply, I tried to follow your suggestions. I created a Draft:Kaatelal & Sons please have a look when you can. Thanks for your consideration. --C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 08:30, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Got two weeks permission while was away

Hello, Amanda! On December 17th, 2020, you have granted me two weeks permission to review pending changes, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=995354648#User:Maxim_Masiutin

That term has expired on December 31st, 2020, i.e. three days ago.

While, unfortunately, I was away from Wikipedia since December 6th, only manage to make a very small edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MEDLINE&oldid=993965067 on December 13th, however, this was just a regular edit, not related to the reviewable pending changes list, as obvious.

Now I'm back and can review pending changes. Could you please reinstate my review pending changes reviewer's permissions, preferably for a longer period, say, two months?

Thank you in advance! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 11:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely understand your situation. I have reinstated it for 1 month. That being said, I don't feel comfortable with the two months. The initial short timeframe is to sort out any issues that may arise early on and is why I give the trials to begin with. If you are two months into using it and we don't notice the issues till then, it is harder to fix at that point. I do understand 2 weeks can be short though, so that's how I settled on the month. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Hello A and happy new year. You blocked 197.83.246.141 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) last month. It looks like they have returned to editing as 197.89.10.25 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). There is also a thread about them here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:197.89.10.25 reported by User:Beyond My Ken (Result: ). This is mostly a heads up in case any other editor asks about the original block. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 18:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, but I do think this is a false positive and not the target of my rangeblock. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:09, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your info as well. Always something for me to learn around here. Have a nice week. MarnetteD|Talk 19:23, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An IP editor was blocked for evasion of one of your rangeblocks

Hi AmandaNP. Please see this closure of a dispute about the Baby Esther article. The IP in question seemed to be evading a one-year block that you previously placed, marked as a checkuserblock-wide. I'm letting you know because I don't know the background. Though the 3-month block of the new IP will presumably suffice for the moment. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:08, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ed. I took a look at this in the above section and i dont think its mt target. Thanks for the FYI. -- Amanda - mobile (aka DQ) 21:11, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]