User talk:Rosguill

Request for help with a rewrite tag

Hello User:Rosguill: I am seeking your informal advice regarding a rewrite tag added to the Facet theory page that says it is too detailed and technical. I am a professor of statistics & psychological measurement interested in multivariate research methods for behavioral research. I have written quite a few scientific articles in printed encyclopedias and have made several edits in Wikipedia. This article on Facet Theory is my first full article in Wikipedia. What I’m wondering is – what qualifies as too detailed and technical? When I look at similar pages like Factor analysis (from which Facet theory emerged) they read a good deal more technical than facet theory. I would like to improve the article and have the rewrite tag removed. But since the tag is too general and offers no specific suggestions for improving the article, it is not clear to me how to proceed. I’d also like to make some additions to the article including a mathematical ("technical") section explaining how, historically, Facet Theory evolved from factor analysis. Given your experience in Wikipedia, I was wondering if you could assist me with this page? Thank you for your consideration! Harpbar (talk) 18:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Harpbar, when glancing at the article, I do notice a few issues, but I don't agree that "too technical" is one of them. This is a technical subject, and making the article non-technical beyond the first few paragraphs of the lead is going to be difficult-to-impossible. The bigger issues that stand out in my opinion are:

1. Overuse of bold text, particularly in the lead (see MOS:BOLD)
2. Some overly informal tone in the body (e.g. Suppose you get a successful SSA map, with a partition-pattern that matches a content-classification of the mapped variables. So what? Does this map qualify as a theory? (see MOS:TONE)
3. Wikilinks in (sub)section headers should be removed
4. There's a lot of content that's presented in list-form. While this may be helpful to demonstrate some concepts, when not strictly necessary it's better to use prose paragraphs (see MOS:PROSE)

Taking a cue from similar pages is a good idea. A great way to find top-quality articles about related topics is to go to a relevant WikiProject (in this case WP:WikiProject Statistics. You can also usually find links from the talk page templates). Go to the "articles by quality and importance" chart and look through some of the examples that come up for articles rated B-class or higher. Following these steps, I came across Correlation and dependence, which at a glance looks like a very well laid out article about a technical statistical topic. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

User:Rosguill, Thank you so much for your suggestions. I will certainly follow your advice! Harpbar (talk) 18:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Rosguill, Thanks again for the helpful links and for your remarks on my article facet theory. Indeed, I found your suggestions very useful and made appropriate changes in the article to better comply with WP style & tone. I also simplified the introduction, hopefully making it clearer and more attractive. However (having read the relevant WP page on prose), I found that list-form contents, specifically in this article, seem to contribute to clarity and in some cases reflect the essential Facet theoretical logic. I hope the improvements I introduced are sufficient for removing the rewrite tag. And I certainly intend to continue improving the article along the lines suggested by you, by others and by the various WP links you mentioned. Now, since I am not at liberty to remove the rewrite tag on the article myself, I wonder if it is OK for me to ask you to remove it? In considering my request, please take into account that the main comment on that tag, namely, that it is too technical, was not justified since this is a technical subject. The removal of the re-write tag now is important because the growing interest in Facet Theory is likely to direct people to this Wikipedia page. But, because of this tag, potential readers may disregard it or take it lightly (even though I am an expert in this subject and have written quite a few printed encyclopedia entries on this and related subjects). Moreover, I don’t see how this rewrite tag is ever going to be removed, given that rewriting the article requires both, technical knowledge of its subject as well as competence in Wikipedia style. Thank you very much for your consideration! Harpbar (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Harpbar, thanks for your hard work, I've gone ahead and removed the template, although I'll note here that the lead of the article is currently a bit too long. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Rosguill Thank you! I will try to shorten the lead without compromising clarity. Perhaps the last paragraph of the lead (describing the sections that follow) is unnecessary? Harpbar (talk) 12:06, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Harpbar, yeah, I think that can safely be cut. Reading through it again, the bulleted portion where the article discusses Faceted-SSA and POSAC seems a bit over-detailed for the lead as well (and bulleted entries aren't in keeping with the manual of style for leads). If there's any unique information related in that segment, it should be moved into the body of the article. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:49, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Rosguill, Done. Thank you.Harpbar (talk) 00:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Rosguill, In response to your suggestion I have trimmed the lead considerably. Thank you. Harpbar (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

FYI about an editor adding unsourced info, with no edit summary

Hi - I saw that you just blocked Ageringpoker, and thought I'd run this by you as well. A relatively new editor (January 2021) has been adding info without sourcing or edit summaries. He's been asked politely multiple times, including by me. I had to go and clean up some of his damage. I added this comment to his (her?) talk page User_talk:Guillermo_Alonso_Martínez_Espinoza#Adding_unsourced_info_without_edit_summaries. You can see others have also asked him to not add unsourced info, and many of his contributions have been reverted. The only response I've seen from him was a flippant reply to another editor (Dormskirk), who just cleaned up subsequent sloppy edits [[1]]. At least he used a source this time, but still no edit summary. This reminds me of the Yoodaba sock farm where the editors made edits to articles in a single industry, probably to create a history of being involved in that space. Or you can look at the acronym of his name (GAME) and assume WP:NOTHERE. Perhaps you might have more luck getting a response with a 24 hour block. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:27, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Timtempleton, I've gone ahead and blocked them, they made additional unsourced changes at another article since your warning. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi - he's at it again. I think he's trying to insert links to macrotrends.com as financial refs to promote the site. He's sloppily introducing template errors that he has to fix, and isn't leaving edit summaries. I asked him again on his talk page to leave edit summaries and he never responded. WP:RADAR and WP:NOTHERE TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Timtempleton, at this point I think you should open an ANI or COIN discussion to investigate the macrotrends spam. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

That's what I'll do then. Cheers. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:44, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Untitled

Why you deleted all article of Maharaj Atithi and redirected to kusha ramayana please kindly tell me the reason . Srimant ROSHAN (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Srimant ROSHAN, I explained in my edit summary, you need to provide secondary sources that discuss the subject in detail in order to meet notability guidelines. As it was, the provided sources only had mere mentions of Atithi, not significant coverage. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok thank you to me reason Srimant ROSHAN (talk) 02:55, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

LoveKhan69

Hey, I saw you were reviewing the block referenced above but wanted to note that it is more than just an accidental "forgot to disclose" paid editing schtick, they presented themselves as an experienced editor who understands policy to their clients and though I can't link or disclose it on-wiki, this was not an innocent mistake, so I hope that is taken into consideration in this case. CUPIDICAE💕 18:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Praxidicae, that is concerning, can you send me the info by email? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:59, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, I'll forward it to you. CUPIDICAE💕 19:02, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For taking a chance on me. Thus far I have received numerous Barnstars pertaining to new page reviewing & Defending the Wiki, all which wouldn’t have happened had you not taking a chance on me. Celestina007 (talk) 20:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007, no need to thank me, it seems you've more than earned your perms. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:20, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:Storm598

Just wanted to say that I'm always pleased when someone uses singular they as if it's the most normal thing in the world--which it is. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 01:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Drmies, pretty sure I've been using it consistently for my entire editing career, but appreciated nonetheless. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Estefanía Soto

Looks like Estefanía Soto should probably be re-redirected and protected? Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:46, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Plastikspork, if you think that protection is necessary, you should mention that in your comment at the AfD. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Guy you blocked doing the same thing yet again

He was blocked for edit warring in some text into a section of an article, and now that the block expired, did it again. Seems to be a simple purpose account. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Dwilliamphilip83 Dream Focus 21:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill. I was going to post something about this as well after seeing Special:diff/Dwilliamphilip83/1012706667 and then finding Talk:Wonder Woman 1984#User Masem deleting in bad faith. It doesn't seem that this editor has learned anything from their block and has decided that continuing with WP:USTHEM and WP:BATTLEGROUND is a better course of action than continuing discussion at Talk:Wonder Woman 1984#Who keeps deleting my edits??. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Just for reference, I removed the disputed content and left a note about this on the editor's user talk page (right below the block notice you left). Hopefully, they will now decide to use the article talk page to resolve this. If they revert again, I won't re-revert; however, I think their doing such a thing would be a clear indication that they're unwilling to WP:LISTEN and are going to continue to try and WP:WIN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Marchjuly, Dream Focus I re-blocked for another two weeks, although they should be able to still edit the talk page as it is a partial block. Hopefully that's enough to get the message across. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Understand and have no problem with that. I've left another post explaining some things on their user talk page, but the proverbially ball truly is now really in their own court and what they decide to do next will probably indicate whether they want to be WP:HERE or whether they continue to want to try and WP:WIN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

After Masem pointed out that his edits appeared, at least in part, to be self promotional, I'm not as confident they're here to improve the encyclopedia. Two weeks should be enough time for them to get the hint, but if they resume again I'd suspect they're WP:NOTHERE. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

They've now been fully blocked for a week by Drmies. The best that anyone can do is try to follow WP:BITE and explain things as politely as we can, but at some point the other editor needs to make an effort to (at least pretend) to WP:LISTEN. Three administrators (Masem, Rosguill and Drmies) are now probably watching to see what this person does next and also watching the article to make sure there's no further disruption; so, there's probably not much more that can be done here other than to leave it up to them to deal with if it starts up again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

I blocked indefinitely after the editor continued to complain about a smear campaign waged by a couple of people, which I think means you, Rosguill, and ... well, it doesn't matter. Drmies (talk) 01:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Can you review my request

Hello, I would be grateful if you have a look at my application for the new page reviewer rights. I have already reviewed more than 110 drafts submitted via AFC. (Cleared complete backlog of old submissions related to Wikiproject India and cleared half of the backlog in Wikiproject football). Now I want to reduce the backlog here. Im also well experienced in participating AFD discussions because I took plenty of time learning about our notability guidelnes. Kindly have a look at my submission and tell your opinion, so that in case I got rejected, I can make necessary improvements to get the right in future. Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 06:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Sajan Mani

Saw your message being marked as unreviewed. May I know why? Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 17:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Kashmorwiki, the article has several hallmarks of paid editing. While it's possible that the subject may be notable and that accepting it to mainspace was thus the correct move, I think it needs a second look from a new page reviewer. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Rosguill, please correct me if Im wrong. There are no issues with notability. I checked all the sources and he has been covered in depth in several reputed sources like The Hindu as well as in some other reputed local newspapers. Yes, there is high probability it might have been created for an undisclosed payment. But if the article is fine in all aspects and has a chance of survival in AFD, any reviewer can accept it right.? There were no other issues like, neutrality, copyright violation or puffery. Thats why I accepted it. Regards Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 17:53, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Kashmorwiki, I wouldn't describe an article that has been WP:REFBOMBED and reads like a promotional CV as fine in all aspects. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:47, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Rosguill, like you said it may be due to my inexperience in AFC. I will reapply for NPR right after gaining some experience. Regards Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 03:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Adopting

Hello,

I have been inactive for three months and would like to train under you. I took time off to reflect as I was way too overconfident and involved in places where I shouldn't have been. I would love to learn under your mentorship and grow as a Wikipedia editor! Thanks, Mr. Heart ^(talk) 04:14, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

HeartatSchool, what kind of editing are you interested in doing? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Rosguill, I am interested in creating articles and editing them to improve them. Mr. Heart ^(talk) 15:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

HeartatSchool, is there a specific topic that you're interested in? I'm trying to assess whether I would be a good fit to be your mentor. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Rosguill, no, I am really versatile. Mr. Heart ^(talk) 15:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

HeartatSchool, well, then are there any specific parts of article creation that you feel you need guidance on? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Rosguill, the content of the article. I usually deal with vandalism and would like to expand in creating articles. Mr. Heart ^(talk) 16:03, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

HeartatSchool, I'm not sure there's much I can offer as a mentor at this time. While I'm quite familiar with article creation guidelines and such, I'm don't know that there's anything that you need me to tell you that you couldn't learn from reading through WP:YFA and related help pages. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Maharaja Atithi is in deletion

Hello , you have started the discussion on deletion of Maharaja Atithi I have to remind you I have left message in that discussion . Please see that when you get the time. Srimant ROSHAN (talk) 06:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:03, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Reviewer Barnstar
	Thanks a lot for the reviews of so many redirects! It helps a lot. 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 16:37, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Long NPP rights wait

Hi Rosguill,

I don't mean to be a bother, but I recently reapplied for NPP permissions and at this point it has been at least a week. This also happened when I requested them for the first time around. I assumed that you or someone else were checking my contributions, but the weeklong turnaround seems excessive, and makes me feel weird seeing that others who posted after me have been approved or rejected. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 18:13, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Etzedek24, sorry for the wait. I can explain my decision to skip over you earlier, which is that I usually avoid reviewing the re-application of editors whose trial runs I granted. If no one has reviewed your request by the end of the week I'll take care of it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:31, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi again Rosguill (I'm using this instead of making a new thread), and thanks for extending the NPP right. I saw you noted a couple articles with potentially unreliable sources but I might have only been watching one. Could you specify the others, by chance? I'm also grateful for any other feedback you might be willing to offer to become a more efficient patroller. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 23:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Etzedek24, the ones I'm thinking of are Mahmud Shakir and Jordan Fein, the latter of which I've nominated for AfD. Those and quite a few other BLPs you reviewed had pretty clear signs of COI (sometimes declared), although for three or four of them I dug through the pile of sources and did eventually find enough to meet WP:GNG, so in the end you made the right call most of the time. If you're aware of the warning signs and also dug through the sources on articles like Michael Kagan (artist) and Matt Amato before deciding to accept them, then I think you're doing fine. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Points well-taken. I know at least on a couple of them, I was working off of my understanding of some content-related SNGs (with Fein and Kagan at least), but maybe I need to review those SNGs more closely. I appreciate the feedback.

Etzedek24, For Fein, the article puffed up some accomplishments that I think themselves fall short of meeting notability and thus don't contribute toward meeting the SNG. For Kagan, IIRC I think I came to the conclusion that he does meet the SNG, but figuring out whether a given exhibition or gallery should contribute to the guideline is quite difficult and this article was on the borderline._signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Reviewing some articles

Hi, could you perhaps review Draft:Gamora (Marvel Cinematic Universe) and Draft:Peter Quill (Marvel Cinematic Universe)? They’re not my articles btw, they have been created by a fair few users, about relatively notable characters. Thanks. IronManCap (talk) 18:33, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

IronManCap, sorry, I don't review articles on request. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:59, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, that’s fine. IronManCap (talk) 17:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Harari people

Hi, can you chime in here [2], User:Ayaltimo is removing content that was on the page for atleast 2 years and requesting consensus by reverting. This user doesn't undertstand the BRD process Magherbin (talk) 21:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

You blew my mind with that AfD

I have never swung so hard between being sure someone was notable, and being sure someone was actually two someones, to having no idea at all if Jordan Fein is just a cat in a box that isn't being observed and I will never know if he's a film director or a theater director or both. Some sources seem to refer to him as the same person, but the two websites which feature pictures of someone who could easily be the same person, show completely separated fields of art. I just wanted you to know that you managed to confuse and bewilder me without even having to address me in particular. Have a great day! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:15, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, yeah, I had to think about it for a good long while too, but the theater accomplishments of the other Jordan Fein were simply too significant for it to make sense that they weren't included in the existing article revision. There's an essay about cases like this, WP:FRANKENSTEIN. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:24, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

That's a good essay. I think this example is probably a bit beyond most of the examples there, however. They both look the same, around the same age, attended the same school and work in fields that generally have overlap anyway. Also with the bard.edu page combining the two of them it threw me for a loop. I was going to keep looking at AfDs, but I think that did me in for the day. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Great work!

"Sunflower Award"

This sunflower award represents all the bright sunshine you bring to the project, and I THANK YOU! Your work as an admin is not being graded, But it certainly is much appreciated, To know that you see with vision that's clear, A shining light of integrity we tend to hold dear. We may not always align at WP:RSP but that's what helps make WP align with NPOV, and in the end, that's what matters most. Your work at WP:NPP and the selfless hours you spend as an administrator have not gone unnoticed. Atsme 💬 📧 17:02, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Orthodox Christians

When you retargetted Orthodox Christians to the DAB page Orthodox, you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS. The change broke over 1,800 links, which will have to be fixed by hand. You might like to invite the retarget !voters in the RFD to help. Narky Blert (talk) 09:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Narky Blert, thanks for the note, pinging participants in that RfD Daranios, Veverve, Omnipaedista, CycloneYoris. I'll put some work into this myself as well later today. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Narky Blert: I tried to fix a link using the tool you linked, and it told me: "A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred." Veverve (talk) 17:52, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Veverve, yeah, the script isn't working for doing the fixes, I've been using it to just list the pages that need edits. Most of the way through the A's now and will be working on this for at least another hour, so if you want to work on it now I would recommend starting from the bottom of the alphabet. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:53, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

just noting that I'm taking a break for now, made it down to the L's on the list. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: The DPwL link is working ok for me. Just pick off the low-hanging-fruit - entries which haven't been struck through. DPwL refreshes every 12 hours.

This was a change which definitely needed to be made. Unlike some moves/redirects, it's unlikely to throw up many real horrors; but still. If you're not immediately sure about a link, just leave it. In big changes like these (I remember vinyl, which IIRC broke over 3,000 links), every bit of effort helps. Narky Blert (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Wow, you really have been busy solving this! Thanks for pinging me, I've done a few, but thumbs up for all your work! Daranios (talk) 07:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Autopatrolled permissions

Hi. Don't misunderstand me. You changed my autopatrolled rights by citing that too many deleted articles recently. But actually I saw only three articles have been deleted recently. Earlier some of my cricket centurion articles and 5-wicket haul articles were deleted. Out of my 4,295 articles, only 168 articles have been deleted. Also, I have created many notable articles in zoology, botany, cricket and cinema. So, I am bit confused about your revert. Thank You. Have a nice day. Gihan Jayaweera (talk) 21:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Gihan Jayaweera, autopatrol is reserved for editors whose new article contributions are near flawless. Even a low deletion rate can be disqualifying for that permission. Moreover, even articles that don't end up deleted may benefit from further review if there are sourcing or neutrality issues. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Kurayami no Hate de Kimi wo Matsu

Hello! I am curious as to why you felt this article did not meet criteria. The citations included two professional reviews as well as a news article confirming a sales record - is that not enough to establish notability? I understand that other editors who cannot read Japanese were accusing me of using fan blogs (and others claimed that the professional magazine B's Log, which is run by Kadokawa with an editorial department easily accessible from the bottom of the main page lacked editoral oversight), but that is not the case. Londonbeat41692 (talk) 01:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Londonbeat41692, I reviewed the redirect, not the article. My assessment that the redirect is valid is no comment on the decision to remove the article, as I have not reviewed it. You should take this up with Onel5969. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Bania (caste)

Hi, it is regarding this protection. After the protection expired [3], IPs and a user (who had been adding unsourced content) started again [4] [5]. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, I extended protection for 3 months and notified the registered user about IPA discretionary sanctions. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Looks like the article needs extended protected like you did last time. The user (non EC) wouldn't stop from adding unsourced content and mentioning unreliable sources in the edit summaries [6]. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

NPP

Hi. I hope all is well with you. I think I need to take a break from NPP. Whilst the majority of article creators take tagging their articles well, I'm finding it more and more difficult to be civil and objective when replying to those who take it as if it was a personal insult. Last night I got told how I should be doing things by a recently created patroller at Talk:Allan Day, after writing a long reply that would probably have warranted a block, I checked myself and deleted it before pressing publish. Hopefully a short break will enable me to "refresh the batteries" and cope with the more difficult aspects a little better. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

John B123, I'm sorry to hear that, but it seems like a reasonable decision on your part. Hope you feel up to jumping back into the queue soon enough. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:33, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
• Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

• When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
• Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

• A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Diesel 10 the Evil Diesel Engine

Do you mean that this article can be exist in Wikipedia?--General electric p30ch (talk) 06:51, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

General electric p30ch, no, I marked the redirect created at this title as reviewed because the redirect seemed valid. I have not reviewed the article that existed at this title before the redirect was created. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

NPP school

Could you check my npp school? I added a few more things to it. Best, Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I've Done.)} 16:27, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I really started working on Copyvios and CCI and stopped working on npp, so I'm not suprised that I failed. Thanks for your time and all the things you taught me. Best Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I've Done.)} 20:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Ambarish Bhattacharya

Hi, Rosguill I have started a page about a well know Bengali actor. I have drafted the article per WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR norms. Since an earlier version was deleted and I cannot see what were the shortcoming so created from scratch. Please review if you can. I also declare that I am neither paid nor have a COI. I am just a follower of his recent works. Thank you. 2402:3A80:1132:ED7B:50E1:E33D:D455:A040 (talk) 19:45, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

IP, I can confirm that the new version you wrote is significantly different from the previously deleted copy. I can't say at this time whether I think that it sufficiently meets notability guidelines as I do not review pages on request. At a glance, the lack of information beyond a list of roles is a bit concerning, as this may indicate that there is not enough in-depth coverage in reliable sources to justify the creation of an article. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:14, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the confirmation. Will seek help from editors active in Bengali TV and film space. Thank you once again for the quick overview. 2402:3A80:1132:ED7B:CED0:AE74:C862:B8A6 (talk) 02:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Governor Bruce Rauner

Hi Rosguill, thanks for reviewing this redirect I created in 2016. Do you have any idea how it slipped through the cracks to remain unreviewed all this while? I'm curious because User:DannyS712_bot_III has been quite diligent in reviewing my redirects since it was created... Airbornemihir (talk) 09:04, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah, never mind. My watchlist tells me it was unreviewed by MER-C on account of unregistered paid editing by the previous reviewer Jikaoli Kol. Airbornemihir (talk) 09:08, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Mohamed Henni

Hello. Could you please review Mohamed Henni? Thank you. Paul Vaurie (talk) 21:16, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Paul Vaurie, sorry, I generally don't do reviews on request. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

That's ok. Thanks anyways! Paul Vaurie (talk) 15:32, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war

Hey Rosguill, could you help to reach a consensus on the number of Armenian soldiers killed during the war? Although no final number of casualties has been provided by the Armenian authorities, as I see for now we have different numbers by the "Armenian Health Ministery", "Armenian Prime Minister" and "Artsakh Defense Army" and the editor's WP:OR with trying to sum up the number of bodies. Would be very thankful for you help! Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 10:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

I responded at that talk page. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:ANI comment

Hi, and thank you for your comment on WP:ANI. I am just wondering if there are next steps to be taken, or if I should just assume the other editor will have noted your (implicit) warning about his conduct? I am not necessarily asking for sanctions to be taken, I am just wondering what the normal process is in these sorts of situations. Thanks. --JBchrch (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

JBchrch, ANI is a bit open-ended as a process, so there's a few ways that this can play out:

1. If the editor whose behavior is being addressed ignores the conversation...

a)...and does not repeat problematic behaviors, then we can consider the problem solved

b)...and does repeat problematic behaviors, they can be brought back to ANI, at which point someone will probably recommend sanctions

2. If he editor whose behavior is being addressed engages with criticism...

a)...constructively, then we are essentially in the same position as 1a where we can consider the issue resolved as long as the behavior stops

b)...non-constructively, then there is a high likelihood that someone will propose a sanction

3. Regardless of whether the editor engages with criticism, editors can propose sanctions if they believe that the behavior already warrants intervention, at which point we'd essentially have a snap poll on whether the sanctions are appropriate (and in extreme cases, an admin could unilaterally impose a block for serious NOTHERE violations or to enforce discretionary sanctions)

So, I'd say that right now it's probably going to come down to the editor's response, with a small chance that an uninvolved party will show up and decide that the behavior to his point already merits sanctions. Regardless of what happens in the interim, if disruptive behavior continues, the editor will face a less charitable review when brought back to ANI. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this very precise and complete explanation of the ANI process. It makes perfect sense. Cheers. --JBchrch (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

RFD Muscle fiber

I just noticed there are also Muscle fibers and Muscle fibers, fast-twitch, Muscle fibre, and Muscle fibres. MB 00:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

MB, oh boy. We should probably relist it and add the other redirects, but at this point dab seems like the only option. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:54, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Are you going to list the others? I would do it, but I only know how to use Twinkle to list individual ones. How do you add others? Manually? MB 01:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

MB, done. You can use Twinkle to list them and then just move the templates on the discussion page around to group them. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hi, could you maybe check out Talk:The Falcon and the Winter Soldier#Explore Madripoor, and give any advice on whether to include the link in the article? Thanks. IronManCap (talk) 16:55, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Adoption Request

Hello! Can you please adopt me? Thanks in advance 🙏🏼 ♠Devan Lallu ^Talk 07:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Devan Lallu, what sort of editing are you interested in doing? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't know much about editings. I want to become a page reviewer and so on. For that, how can we start, sir? ♠Devan Lallu ^Talk 16:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Devan Lallu, no need to call me "sir". At any rate, right now I think it's a bit early to be worrying about new page reviewing. I would suggest that you take a look at the WP:Task center and see what strikes your interest. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoenix man/Archive. Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 04:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Kashmorwiki, yeah, I kinda had a feeling they were a sock, but I figured that steering them towards something more productive would be a more tactful way to decline in the off chance that they were here in good faith. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 04:31, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I knew this was a sock from the beginning itself. Because Im very familiar with their editing behaviour. What I wonder is that this user's socks has been caught like infinite number of times and they are still making the same mistakes. So I have a doubt to ask you. If a user has been blocked for sockpuppetry, does that mean they can never use wikipedia again from other account if their intension is not to abuse this project again? Because Devan Lallu seems to had been making some good contributions. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 04:37, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Kashmorwiki, in principle, not until they make a successful unblock request at the master account, no. That having been said, a non-trivial proportion of editors and admins are willing to turn a blind eye if an editor has genuinely put their prior problematic editing behind them. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 04:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Heimin

Hello, could you go ahead and delete the redirect for Heimin so that I can move the draft article into mainspace? Cheers. Loafiewa (talk) 20:36, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Loafiewa, done, thanks for putting in solid work on the draft. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in DS Consultation

Hi Rosguill. I'm not sure if you're aware of the current community consultation around Discretionary Sanctions but as someone who has participated in DS related activities recently I'd like to invite you to participate. You have the opportunity to participate at whatever level you wish; there are questions that are higher level (theoreticaly) in scope as well as opportunities to give feedback about specific areas of DS. The consultation will run through April 25th and I hope you'll participate. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:36, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Barkeep49, thanks for the nudge. I had been following the discussion early on (and could have sworn that I had left a comment) but lost tack of it more recently. I'll try to chime in this week. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback needed

Hello Rosguill. Its been around 2 weeks since I was granted the NPP rights on a trial basis for one month. I hope Im going in the right direction with the rights. I hope I had done nothing wrong till this time except some fee mistakes at the start. But I would be grateful to hear from you regarding my patrolling ability. I just want to know whether Imgoing in the right direction, is there specific areas that I need to improve? Something like these. Please leave your feedback when you are free so that I improve myself to become a better reviewer. Thanks a lot in advance. Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 19:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Feda Almaliti neutrality flag

Hi Rosguill! I wanted to get the specifics of what you wanted removed on this page in order to remove the neutrality flag. Are they the section on Applied Behavior Analysis and the advocation for separate spaces for autistic people? --Rednikki (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Rednikki, I believe you already asked me about this, you can read my prior response at User_talk:Rosguill/Archive_22#Feda_Almaliti_neutrality_flag _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I have seen your prior responses and was hoping for clarification. Also, are we breaking Wikipedia rules by discussing this on your personal page rather than the Wikipedia page? The Neutrality flag you posted says all discussion must take place on the Wikipedia page and I don't want to break this rule. Rednikki (talk) 23:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

User:CejeroC

Are you willing to convert CejeroC's block to a partial block, blocking them only from the article+draft space? If they try to edit anywhere else, they would be doing exactly what's needed for a full unblock anyway. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 23:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Alexis Jazz, seems reasonable enough. Consider it done. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

BAD BLABLUBBS

Sorry, CU came up empty. Drmies (talk) 18:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

It's this lovely chap – thanks for the quick blocks, Rosguill. :) For what it's worth, I wouldn't bother tagging that one, he seems to enjoy that a little too much. Blablubbs|talk 18:06, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Drmies, well, I think we've got them on NOTHERE grounds anyway. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

That dude is a total... Well. I'm about to get busy. This is some seriously stupid shit. Drmies (talk) 18:15, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Let's see if what I just did helps. Drmies (talk) 18:17, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Drmies, at least we're running up the clock to make it harder for the next troll to impersonate me _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:17, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

OK User:Rosguill69420. Drmies (talk) 18:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, there goes my bad hand account name. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

They're up to four. I wonder if I get paid extra for rangeblocks. Drmies (talk) 18:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, can I just say that I didn't expect that a functionary would ever create a section heading called "BAD BLABLUBBS"? I'm not complaining, though I would have preferred GOOD BLABLUBBS instead. Blablubbs|talk 18:26, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

(FWIW they're all at SRG). Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 18:27, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

And the new ones too. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 18:29, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I think number 5 drove a couple miles to hang out with his cousin. Drmies (talk) 19:14, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 14#Template:R rcat

Hi, could you please explain how you ended up closing this as delete? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

1234qwer1234qwer4, I think I missed that you suggested retargeting and read it as an unopposed nomination that would default to delete. Feel free to recreate the redirect with the target that you suggested. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks.  Done. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Francisca James and Nguyễn Trần Khánh Vân

Suggest for deletion or redirect the page; Francisca James and Nguyễn Trần Khánh Vân are not a notable beauty pageant winner, the page was not giving the readers much more information, many unsourced miss-leading information and lack of sources legitimacy, and lack of interest for Wikipedian user to discuss about this page. Please delete those non-notable person pages.--125.164.51.144 (talk) 13:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

IP, you can file deletion requests by following the instructions at WP:AFD. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Uwe Martens

Given that it was you that blocked Uwe Martens, you might like to comment here [7] on what to me looks like a potential IP sock. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Vote in AfD Tobias Broeker

Hy Rosguill! I’m wondering why you have crossed out my vote on AfD Tobias Broeker. Could you please explain why you suspect a "striking sock"? I came in here after this discussion was linked in the German Wikipedia, where I am quite active from time to time. For various reasons, I prefer not to use an account. Since I have a static like/dynamic IP, my IP changes from time to time, but this doesn't mean automatically that I maintain sock puppets. Anyway, I kindly request to undo your edit! Thanks and best regards, --77.116.211.76 (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

That IP address was blocked as a likely sockpuppet of Uwe Martens per this discussion. You can appeal the block at User talk:178.113.28.33. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:13, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for this info! I didn't even realize there was a discussion going on at my talk page. Unfortunately, I don't really have any control over the time span of holding one IP. After taking a look into the issue, I saw that this user was banned on 22:06, 20 April 2021, but my vote was from 14:40, 20 April 2021, so "block evasion" couldn't have been met at all. Also, I saw that this user discussed quite "a little bit", so why would he have made a vote on WP:CREATIVE afterwards? At all, does it really make sense to request unblocking of an IP that is no longer in use? If so, I can link this discussion section. But I'm more worried about my vote and the article, to be honest. Thanks and regards, --77.116.211.76 (talk) 15:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

If you successfully appeal the block (which would still be valid from a sockpuppetry basis, even though you're right about the timing of the block), I will reverse the striking of the comment. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:59, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Thanks so far! --77.116.211.76 (talk) 17:26, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

As expected, my request got a "procedural decline", an attempt to explain it again was reverted. As I wrote in my request you might see in the server log files that I've never been online with any account. If you have access to the logs, please check it and restore my vote! By the way, a presumed double vote in a deletion discussion wouldn't make sense anyway as not the votes are counted, but the arguments. Nobody would need a sock puppet to bring in new arguments, isn't it? Regards, --77.116.211.76 (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Cup Foods for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cup Foods is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cup Foods until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

John B123 (talk) 22:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Pencilmation Page

You had a good mind to delete the "Pencilmation" page. Most of the content was not only unsourced, but it was also false. Pencilmate is voiced by Zach Braff, Sean Hayes, and Hayden Rolence. Pencilmiss is voiced by Dannah Phirman and Emily Stone Heath. Mini Mate is voiced by Kathy Waugh and Nancy Cartwright. The series was originally animated by Soup2Nuts and The Hatchery (with help from AKOM). 2603:6080:A740:C00:35C1:2779:A800:D5B8 (talk) 23:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Adopt me!

I want to be adopted. I've been editing for a month but I keep making mistakes. I only edit outer space related articles. There is a discussion about me at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents - Wikipedia. When you respond, please {{mention}} me. Starship SLS (formerly IP 64.121.103.144) (talk) 18:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

StarshipSLS, I don't think we have sufficient overlap in our editing interests to make me a good fit to be your mentor. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@Rosguill Too bad. Anyone you could recommend? Starship SLS (formerly IP 64.121.103.144) (talk) 20:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

StarshipSLS, sorry, not off the top of my head, no. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:01, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to say thank you for the work you're doing on new page patrol. You're filling up my notifications at the moment as you tick off the redirects I made when I was working on the Memory of the World Programme pages and I very much appreciate it. › Mortee _talk 16:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Mortee, thanks for your work as well. I actually just added you to our redirect whitelist, so the bot should be checking your redirects off starting at the next hour mark. If you'd rather not get notifications for that, you should be able to turn them off in your preferences. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh! Thank you very much. I've no problem with the notifications but that's also good to know › Mortee _talk 17:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Could you train me?

Hello, could you train me for the NPP school? Siccome il mio inglese non è molto buono ci sono termini che non potrei comprendere. Dr Salvus 21:25, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, I'm willing to in principle, but if you're concerned about your English skills this may not be the best role for you. Part of new page reviewing means assessing whether articles need copy editing and tagging accordingly or fixing it yourself. Pensi di poter fare questo labore? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

A questo punto meglio di no. Il mio inglese non è buono e commetto frequentemente errori grammaticali Dr Salvus 06:04, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, allora, forse te piaccera lavorare in Articles for Creation? It's a similar line of work, but spotting grammatical issues is not part of it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Va bene Dr Salvus 17:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, AFC also has a lower barrier to entry. You can apply after reading the instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. Based on your AfD record I don't think you'll have any trouble, but feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Ho appena fatto richiesta Dr Salvus 18:23, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

I lost the link to my NPPschool

Dear Rosguill,

I lost the link to NPPschool, I am unable to locate or remember what it was. Could you please guide me on this? For the last month, I studied well and I believe I am ready to take on some testing.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Angus QuantumRealm (meow • telescope) 10:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

QuantumRealm, here you go, User:Rosguill/Angus1986_NPPSCHOOL _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much! QuantumRealm (meow • telescope) 15:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Tvashtar

Can the page for Tvashtar which redirects to Tvastar be deleted?

"Tvashtar" is closer in pronunciation to the actual Sanskrit word, so I want to move (rename) the "Tvastar" page. But I can't do that as long as the redirect page exists.

Any help would be appreciated.

Yuyutsu-69 (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Yuyutsu-69, based on some quick Google Scholar searches, "Tvastar" appears to be the more commonly used spelling in English, and thus is the more appropriate title per WP:COMMONNAME. Results for "Tvashtar" are primarily about a volcano on one of Jupiter's moons. Thus, I won't act on your request myself. If you would still like for your move suggestion to be considered by other editors, you can file a request at WP:RM. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Olympic Park Stadium

Since this was converted to a redirect shortly before I sent it to RfD, shouldn't a "no consensus" mean reverting to the "status quo" of the past 15 years and keeping the page at its old title? Thanks in advance! SportingFlyer T·C 20:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

SportingFlyer, given that part of my reason for the no consensus were concerns that the discussion was being had in the wrong venue, I'm treating no consensus as being "no consensus with respect to the RfD discussion", rather than no consensus on the underlying question. As the issue appears to be more about a page move than about a redirect, at this point you should proceed to WP:RM as a controversial move, noting in the opening statement that you are using the process to contest the prior move. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

±== Was I edit warring or being disruptive? ==

Hi Rosguill. I saw you on active admins and I felt like I need an admin opinion. So I was recently trying to stop an edit war by stepping in. I undid an edit twice on Marvel Cinematic Universe. Just to link WP:3RR for him. I wouldn’t have reverted again. Anyway this happened with a different editor. So I discussed it with him about what my intentions were on his page. Though I fail to reason with him. It results to him even removing my one explanation in his discussion page. Anyway I was just wanting a second opinion on the claimed “edit war” we are being disputed of. If I did edit war and disrupt I apologize. I just didn’t see it that way. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Jhenderson777, eh, I don't think you were too far out of line, but it would have been better for you to just report the incident to WP:AN3. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:18, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Ok thanks for your honest thoughts. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:30, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Wow!. Much confusion lolJhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

For article reviews

Thank you for taking time in reviewing some of the pages I created. Best wishes of good health! Crear2000 (talk) 02:13, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
• The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.

Technical news

• The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

• The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Apologizing for a T ban violation

I felt like I needed to tell an admin before it got brought up by one of my contribution watchers in an ANI. I am under a post 1992 US politic ban. I saw 2021 Colorado Springs shooting become a current event stub article and get afd'ed fairly quickly. I added my !vote and watched the afd. After a decent amount of speedy keep votes, I did a non-admin closure per WP:SNOW. After the closure, I found out the article was put under the post 1992 politic ban, so the closure, not my !vote was a violation of my TBan. Wanted to say sorry for it and I hope this won't get me a longer tban. It was an honest mistake since I was watching the afd and not the article itself. Elijahandskip (talk) 02:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Ignoring the TBAn issue for now, you should never close an AfD you participated in, no matter how obvious the result may seem to you. I'll reopen it, please let someone uninvolved decide on it instead. Fram (talk) 08:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

As for the TBan violation, I guess this, updating an article with Joe Biden declaring a state of emergency, was an honest mistake as well? Fram (talk) 08:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Fram going to be just straight up be blunt. Get off my back. I contacted an admin once I realized it. I was honestly wanting you not to comment and I was doing it retroactively to avoid my contribution watchers, you included, from commenting on it. In all politeness, fuck off from watching my contributions. Elijahandskip (talk) 10:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Stop making so many mistakes then. And read WP:CIVIL. Fram (talk) 10:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I made 1 mistake, and yes, it was 1 mistake since our last encounter. I actually take high offense to your comment. Please don't make false personal attacks against me. You tell me to 'improve' but any mistake I made, (even weeks from the last) make you get all crazy. Right now, I feel like you are a massive hypocrite, since all editors make mistakes. In short, you commenting on this, to me, seems like a personal attack in an attempt to discredit me (Especially the 2nd part when you mentioned the pipeline attack since that isn't under my tban violation). Our last encounter was a month ago, and since it, I have made about 400 good edits and 1 ban edit, which I told an admin instantly. So please with all respect, fuck off, since you clearly were looking to pick a fight and made a personal attack against me. Elijahandskip (talk) 10:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You came here, somewhat acknowledging one mistake (that your closure of the AfD was a TBan violation, but your comment in it somehow not): I then posted two further mistakes, closing the AfD when you were clearly involved in it, and a different TBan violation you made. How writing about things Joe Biden does can not fall under a TBan from post 1992 US politics is not really clear. "Our last encounter was a month ago"? My last post on your talk page was from 6 May, or 4 days ago, and before that it was from 27 April.

If you really believe that you can have a US politics topic ban and still can edit anything about Joe Biden, then you probably lack the competence needed to edit here. Fram (talk) 10:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I mean the encounter about my t-ban violation. That was a month ago. We have encounters weekly it seems like, but your message wasn't about my tban on May 6. I am ending our discussion here since my original message to the admin was literally a notice. Elijahandskip (talk) 11:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Elijahandskip, sorry to be the bearer of bad news here, but the diff that Fram provided is a clear cut violation of your tban, even if I were to dismiss the violation that you came here to confess. Once your block expires, you need to be more careful about editing topics that may be covered by your TBAN. If the content or article you are editing is in any way related to American "in the news" topics or politicians, you should consider that to be out of bounds for the duration of the ban. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:51, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Sidebar

Rosguill, I hope you don't mind the sidebar. As I said at AE, I'm happy to get good, constructive feedback/suggestions as I did with Awilley. They were right, acting like you have a 1RR limit isn't a limitation and actually can make you a more effective editor. I'm less clear as to what to do in this case but if you have a suggestion that will make my editing more effective I'm all for it. I don't think my standards for RS vary that greatly depending on what I'm supporting/opposing. Other than confusing similarly named sources, which I do pledge to be more aware of, what should I be doing differently? OK, one other one, use fewer words :D Open to feedback, Springee (talk) 19:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Springee, I think that regarding the edit objecting to the Daily Signal, being more precise about a source being insufficiently reliable in context, rather than reverting with the more opaque response of just calling it unreliable, would help avoid misunderstandings that could be interpreted uncharitably. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm happy to be more careful and explicit when saying something isn't a RS. I think a good take away would be to pledge to use the talk page to explain RS objections rather than just reverting. In this case it would have helped because if I said, "Daily Signal has been deprecated" then someone could have challenged me, "You are thinking of Daily Caller" and the confusion would have been sorted out quickly (as I rule I don't use - or read - Daily Caller/Wire/Signal). Springee (talk) 20:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Ifat

User:Ayaltimo, is failing to adhere to WP:BRD once again on the Ifat Sultanate despite several editors expressing concerns with their edits. [8] [9]. It is becoming a recurring problem with this user. Magherbin (talk) 22:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Magherbin, I would suggest you file a report at WP:AE as I don't have time to look into this carefully at the moment. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)