User talk:CorbieVreccan

Admins watch while you edit. We saw what you did there.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update

No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching.

This editor is a Veteran Editor IV and is entitled to display this Gold Editor Star.

Veteran Editor IV

If you are new here, and feeling angry, please read Tips for the Angry New User before explaining to us how terribly wrong and messed up Wikipedia is. Would you believe, we probably already know? You can also familiarise yourself with Wikipedia culture via these policy links ->
and helpful essays ^^^

If you've been an admin for a while, and are feeling burnt out, take a step back and take some deep breaths, and don't forget to WP:CHILL

January 2020 at Women in Red

January 2020, Volume 6, Issue 1, Numbers 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153 Happy Holidays from all of us at Women in Red, and thank you for your support in 2019. We look forward to working with you in 2020! Online events: New: Activists / Public domain / Geofocus: Central America / Year-long campaign: Sports! Continuing: 2019 deaths / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

Disruption

Per your final warning here, the user has again returned to Wind River (film) to remove sourced information (their second attempt to remove some of the production companies). Grandpallama (talk) 16:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

And in terms of the previous suspicions about socking, this might be of interest. Grandpallama (talk) 16:43, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. They have clearly earned a block on Wind River. Have any of their edits on the other pages been useful, or have all of them been disruptive? - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 17:45, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Some of their other edits have been what appear to be malicious changes to film grosses and budgets[1][2], so it does seem disruption-only. Since they edit a few times and then disappear for months on end, I'm sure they've long flown under the radar. Grandpallama (talk) 14:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, sorry if I'm bothering you here, but the editor seemed to have returned as another anon in what is apparently the same region based on a IP check, although there isn't hard (like 100%) evidence that it is a sock puppet of the original editor, it seems to be behaving in the same ways. I really have no to minimal experience dealing with socks so can you block, tag or do any other action if you think it's necessary? thanks! Justiyaya 13:25, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Looking into it. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 19:13, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Justiyaya: I've tagged them based on the rather clear pattern. The IP is static, but I'm waiting to see if they disrupt further before blocking. If they do and I miss it, let me know. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 19:21, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

And sure enough, continued identical pattern of edits with zero talk engagements after warnings. Blocked from all pages the drawer targets. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 19:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

September 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | September 2021, Volume 7, Issue 9, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 207, 208 Online events: New: Women writers & their works Contest (Jul/Aug/Sep): Latin America contest Continuing: Women's leadership & empowerment | Olympic & Paralympic Games Women's rights | #1day1woman See also: Interwiki Women Collaboration Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Learn more about our proposed one-day online recruitment initiative in October. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox Playboy Playmate on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Pan Sophic on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

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

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

• Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
• A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
• A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
• A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news

• The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:44, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Naja mos

I habe no idea what this is. From capitalization of indigenous re Squaw. I tried searching, but maybe not in the right place. deisenbe (talk) 20:53, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and Native American Journalists Association Manuals of Style. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 18:41, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Findians

Unfortunately, there is only one English language source I was able to find, almost everything is in Finnish, however they are provided by YLE, which is Finnish government funded, which is a very reliable source, also there is a very old Finnish wikipedia article about it. --ValtteriLahti12 (talk) 16:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

As I said on the articles, if it's notable for en-wiki, there will also be WP:RS sources in English. If there is insufficient notability in English, it's doubtful that it meets inclusion criteria. None of the sources you've added are in English. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:23, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Indigenous peoples of the Americas

Please, explain how that section are "very higly disputed", all text is about evidence of the topic, even none text is about another point of view about the topic. Thanks. Janiclett (talk) 22:43, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Have you read the section? Stop edit warring and take it to article talk. Indigenous identity is not defined by DNA. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 22:45, 13 September 2021 (UTC)