User talk:Drmies

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aunva6 (talk | contribs) at 21:47, 18 April 2024 (→‎Scounting camps, councils and such: clarify). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Need a friendly rollbacker

Hi, an editor Villkomoses has been converting fiction narratives from present to past tense.[1] They're probably new, they've done a lot of articles over the last few days, and are charging ahead quite fast. I'm not too fussed about this sort of thing, but noticed because they're introducing other grammatical errors and often leaving loads of present tense verbs in place, so the whole thing is a bit of a mess. I initially sent them a long message via talk-page asking them to be more careful, but I realise that the whole enterprise is fundamentally against MOS:PLOT. I've asked them to stop, but I think given the error-prone editing that it would probably be best to undo the whole lot. I'm asking you as a recently-active admin as I didn't want to humiliate a good-faith new editor with an ANI request. If there's somewhere more appropriate, please do let me know. Thanks! Elemimele (talk) 13:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reversions

Hello. Why are you deleting Presidential results for the cities of Boston and Somerville? The results shown are for the cities in said Presidential elections, they do not show the results for the state of Massachusetts. There is nothing wrong with showing the Presidential results for these cities. If there would be, we might as well delete the election results on every single US county page. ZackCarns (talk) 14:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Interesting that you post here, without simply pinging me from your talk page, where I already explained this. First, oh? Is that so? Because the link you gave isn't to anything specific--am I supposed to start searching in an archived portal? And search for what? Note also that the title in your citation template was "Massachusetts Election Statistics". Second, why should we include that data? Is there agreement on that in the Cities Wikiproject? Third, this is an FA. It wasn't in the last FA version, and I don't agree with its inclusion. If you want it in, you'll have to do a better job referencing it, and you'll have to find some consensus for it. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • That source was already in there. Someone else referenced it, not myself. I can add the references if you want me to. Also, why not include the data? If we have a section about the politics of the city, we might as well include statistics from said city. ZackCarns (talk) 15:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • You used it, so the Pottery Barn Rule applies, I reckon. We can include all the statistics in the world from that city, but I see no reason why. Really, though, you should discuss this on the article talk page or on the Wikiproject page. Drmies (talk) 15:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • This seems to be a growing problem I wonder if we should have another talk like this one>>>>>Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States/Archive 14#Federal election charts in State articles Moxy🍁 15:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thank you for that link and the comment, Moxy. It seems to be part of the continuous movement of making any article all-inclusive. ZackCarns, I hope you saw this comment and the discussion it linked to. For the record, I did not know about this, but it seemed reasonable to me that reasonable editors would have agreed already to keep that kind of material out. Drmies (talk) 17:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
            Alright. Understood. Truth be told, I've lost interest in the information anyway, as I've moved on to other Massachusetts-related elections stuff. ZackCarns (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Time to stop staring at socks, Doktoro!

  • Berlagebrug (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Not Just Bikes. Amsterdam Closed This Bridge to Cars (but not bikes ofc). Event occurs at 2:52.
  • Kruizinga, J. H. (1973). Amsterdam, stad der duizend bruggen (in Dutch). Strengholt. ISBN 9789060102855.

Your services have been called for. We need someone who can read Gallifreyan to get at the good sources. Do you know anyone? Uncle G (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I know someone who used to ride his bicycle across that bridge, every day, for years, to get to work. That person agrees that a park in the middle of that avenue, like in the old days, would make all of it much nicer. See the map at 5:10 or so? I love that color for the housing blocks, the graphics--that person has such a map in his foyer, from 1936, framed--four by four feet. I'll ask that person to get on it; he'll need to finish watching the video first, and have lunch, and a nap. BTW when you win that Powerball, that person would love to have a flat in that part of Zuid, the Rivierenbuurt. How gloriously beautiful that it; it fills my heart with joy and grief. Drmies (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did you give a nod to User:T-Nod? Drmies (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry Uncle--ran into a couple more socks, but progress is being made. Drmies (talk) 16:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have not been there in decades. And even then, I was more familiar with the Nieuwe Amstelbrug in the Ceintuurbaan (my mother grew up in De Pijp). So I will not work on this article.The Banner talk 17:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Churchill

Re Racial views of Winston Churchill -- there is an entire section on Churchill and Jews--the material I deleted was not based on reliable secondary sources and does not fit in this section in the first place. It is based on one editor's reading a snippet from a primary source and his claim that Churchill " was promoting the antisemitic Jewish Bolshevism conspiracy theory. So I deleted it again. Rjensen

  • OK, Rjensen, and I'm not going to argue against that, but that's very different from your initial edit summary. Anyway, thanks for the note. Drmies (talk) 14:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New legal article

I have finished enough of Consciousness of guilt (legal) to go public with it. Further development will be appreciated. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alright! I will have another look later, but so far I see a "thusly" in there, and I appreciate that. Good work! Drmies (talk) 18:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2607:fb91:900::/40

Hi, Drmies. Special:Contributions/2607:fb91:900::/40 has too much collateral to be hard blocked. Soft blocking with {{TMOblock}}, like the previous block, is more appropriate. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see the CU evidence, but it does look like a truly astonishingly wide range to be hard blocked, especially without talk page access. I also know of one apparently (as far as I can see) constructive and innocent editor who appears to be caught by this block. JBW (talk) 13:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • JBW, the CU evidence indicates an astonishing amount of socking/disruption (you should see the CU log), but you are welcome to adjust it. Having had it blocked for a few days may have saved us a bunch already. Drmies (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since you can see evidence that I can't, I certainly don't intend to quarrel with you. As I said, it looks like a wide range to be hard blocked, but I have had a good deal of experience over the years of blocks which look to me like one thing, but with fuller knowledge of the circumstances look like something else, so I don't intend to take any action without fuller knowledge; I merely raised my concerns with you to consider. JBW (talk) 15:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
JBW, I'm not quarreling, and I appreciate your note and your experience. If you say the block is too harsh, it's too harsh--yes there's stuff underneath, but it's not life and death; it's just gross and irritating and we can handle it. Please adjust the block as you see fit: I trust your judgment. Drmies (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
JBW, they came right back with a handful of accounts. Just saying. Drmies (talk) 22:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that just confirms what I said above,about not taking action without further knowledge. I've restored your version of the block, and I'll leave it to you, since you know more about it than I do. JBW (talk) 07:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
JBW, my "just saying" wasn't meant to be coy, like "gotcha"--sorry, maybe that was not the right choice of words. I really meant it quite literally. I'm a bit torn myself over this, and I hate feeling like I have to place hard blocks on long ranges. I can do with some guidance, and you and User:JJMC89 are offering it and I'm learning. I think you two have a lot more technical knowledge than I do, and whatever evidence comes from these glasses of mine shouldn't outweigh every other argument. Let's see if there's more complaints? And then reset the block they way you had it? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think you were trying to be coy, or saying something like "gotcha", I thought you were just letting me know what the situation was. I have no idea whether I have more "technical knowledge" than you or not, but I find situations like this difficult. I believe I am more ready than most administrators to impose substantial blocks on IP ranges when it seems to me that there's unlikely to be much damage to innocent editors, but it becomes a more difficult judgement to make when significant collateral damage looks likely. I don't think there's any "right" answer: it's a question of making a personal judgement. JBW (talk) 16:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I took a gander at this after being pointed here. As a rule of thumb, anything Tmobile aka 2607:fb90 or 2607:fb91 will always be too heavy to hard block. I see that the blocks on the /32s as a whole have expired or haven't been consistent. To prevent the disruptors from just going to another wiki and then coming back, and per our global stance on 2607:fb90/32, I have gone ahead and made 2607:fb91/32 a global block. I also reviewed the CU data, and there is not enough data to substantiate this as a hard block - falls very much below the threshold needed. I'm happy to provide details as to why in places where beans aren't as much of a concern. -- Amanda (she/her) 05:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that, Amanda--when I ran CU on the next sock. Drmies (talk) 12:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't really parse the meaning behind that reply. If it's concern about a new sock already being created, then I'm happy to collab for ways we can shut that down, because new accounts aren't able to be created from that range now, which means something else is going on. Please feel free to reach out via email if that's a concern. -- Amanda (she/her) 12:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just a bit miffed that there's no stopping it. Drmies (talk) 14:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question for you

Is it normal that once a thread at WP:ANI is archived without action, for someone to remove it from archive and restore it? WCMemail 15:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well it's not usual but it happens, yes. I would hope that it came with an explanation... Drmies (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, it appears someone wants me topic banned on anything to do with Tim Hunt. I spoke to you about my concerns there previously. A lot of accusations of misconduct, no actual evidence mind you. Fling enough mud about appears to be the tactic. WCMemail 16:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Here in the US we fling spaghetti, apparently--it's crazy, I know. Drmies (talk) 16:28, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, is it this section? I'm not going to get involved and read all that stuff--I read some of it earlier. User:JayBeeEll, you put that back--I assume (I hope) you gave an explanation in the thread (not just in the edit summary) of what you did and why you did it. Both of you, good luck with it. Drmies (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        Hi Drmies, thanks for the ping; the number of different places in which WCM has carried this dispute is quite exhausting. I indeed left a note in the thread [2]. There is a concrete proposal on which 8 or 10 people have weighed in; in my opinion, it deserves closure (ideally in a way that will either (1) leave WCM feeling sufficiently satisfied that they do not continue to bring the same dispute to yet more pages, or (2) involve a topic-ban that forbids WCM from continuing the same dispute anywhere). I'm sorry that you're not willing to get involved (not that I blame you). JBL (talk) 17:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        P.S. Aside from everything else, the whole "I'm going to put your name in a section-heading at ANI, but when it turns out most people see me as the problem, I'm going to begin leaving a series of whiny messages in lots of places about how sad it is that ANI is being weaponized" shtick is really not charming, even in a British accent. --JBL (talk) 17:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Feel better hen? [3] A tip, if you stop wiki stalking my every move you'll not hear me laughing in British quite so loudly. WCMemail 22:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Mohammed Ali Tayem

Hello Drmies, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Mohammed Ali Tayem, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ivanvector, it's more promotional than most LinkedIn entries--and did you see the first "reference"? Drmies (talk) 19:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I get what you're saying, and it definitely needs work, but the speedy criterion is for pages that serve no other purpose than to promote their subject; unambiguous advertising needing to be completely rewritten to serve as an article, not just that it has some promotional elements. The criterion goes on to say that a promotional draft on a notable topic (a member of Jordanian parliament is I think presumed notable) should be improved rather than deleted. It could be culled down to just what's notable and properly sourced about his political career; there wouldn't be much left but we have plenty of stubs on minor politicians.
    • On the other hand it's also created by a sockpuppet, I didn't notice at the time. G5? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ivanvector, I think my "unambiguous advertising" line is drawn a bit differently from yours, haha. Moxy just tagged it as a resume--that's precisely the thing. Such articles, of which there are hundreds if not thousands, are created for pay and they're just advertisements that look like articles. It's the "looking like" that makes editors and admins not tag/delete them as spam, and I get that, I'm not quarreling. Yes, I got to the article because I was rolling up a sock farm, or a collection of sock farms; it's related to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Isaacrichard, and this one is a match with User:Olakunlepr--but there's so many. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Very interesting case..... whole bunch of these drafts are showing up in the normal watch list. Normally drafts don't show up in the generic watch list. Is there something they're doing differently to make them appear? Moxy🍁 00:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • Moxy I saw your edit summary, but I don't understand what you're talking about, sorry; I don't know what you mean with "watch list" here. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
            • Sorry if I'm not clear they are popping up on the recent changes link on the side panel Moxy🍁 00:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
              • Right--shouldn't they be? That's where I find them--unless I'm sock hunting of course. Drmies (talk) 01:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                Must be a setting I've changed recently.... never seen drafts there before. Moxy🍁 01:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                I'd guess it's your settings. Drafts show in Special:RecentChanges unless you've set your filters to exclude them. You probably don't see them very often because it's a low-volume namespace, there aren't that many edits to show versus article or talk namespaces. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, Drmies. 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.

Jack Petocz

Drmies/admin page watchers, please semi-protect and maybe also do some sock checking? Thanks, Natureium (talk) 01:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • NinjaRobotPirate, Yamla, I'd appreciate it if you had a look at the two accounts, the Lady and the Piano. You've looked there before, according to the log. Drmies (talk) 03:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't believe I've checked these accounts before, but happy to provide a second opinion. I think the two specific accounts are  Unlikely, purely from a technical point of view. From a subjective view, I rather strongly suspect WP:MEAT. --Yamla (talk) 11:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks Yamla--I found you in the log, like I said, but I don't know what brought you there. Thanks for looking into it! Drmies (talk) 22:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic ban for Thmazing

As an anonymous editor, I felt attacked.[FBDB]— Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. Spellcheck did something, I saw it, but I didn't check it. Drmies (talk) 03:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Cornelius N. Dorsette

On 8 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cornelius N. Dorsette, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1890 Cornelius N. Dorsette, often referred to as the first African-American physician in Alabama, founded Hale Infirmary, a hospital for Black patients and staff in Montgomery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cornelius N. Dorsette. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cornelius N. Dorsette), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hale Infirmary

On 8 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hale Infirmary, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1890 Cornelius N. Dorsette, often referred to as the first African-American physician in Alabama, founded Hale Infirmary, a hospital for Black patients and staff in Montgomery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cornelius N. Dorsette. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hale Infirmary), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:John Paul (scientist)

You kindly restored an edited version of the Draft:John Paul (scientist) (removing copyright violations) I worked on it further, and the original editor User:Gcwcd then requested speedy deletion, (they had not actually edited that version of the draft) I should like to carry on working on it and move it to mainspace. Theroadislong (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"not pursue this any further"

Do we give out boomerangs at XRV? The OP isn't coming off in a good light. (he understated) -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • You know if you're coming by here, you might as well congratulate me on the grammar of that sentence! Drmies (talk) 02:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was an immediate and straightforward NOT#3 close. I would have done it in the days before I noticed the close section says "uninvolved administrator". If that had been done when it should have been, if they then didn't drop it, they'd be in another venue where we didn't have to worry about whether a boomerang was appropriate. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, the thing is that Bbb and I have exchanged recipes for chicken enchiladas via email, so I'm not uninvolved really. I mean, we're not really involved, it's not like we discussed steak or favorite books, but still. BTW, Bbb, Publix didn't have tomatillos, so I'll have to go shopping again tomorrow. Drmies (talk) 02:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping regarding User:Saurav0804

Hi Drmies, I think the block should be indef here as I saw the sock notice in their userpage. I guess you might have missed it because of the existing block? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Right--I think some default setting reset that time, but I later discovered the socking so I just not turned it into a CU block. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Production of Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken

Hello, Drmies,

I'm not sure why you reverted the blanking of this draft by the page creator. We usually respect their wishes and see this as a signal that they would like the page deleted. Thanks for any additional information you can offer. Liz Read! Talk! 00:35, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Because they had also pasted this into a sandbox and moved it into article space, and I deleted that--much easier than moving that back into draftspace, deleting the earlier one, merging the history. They did not want the page deleted. Drmies (talk) 00:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of Chicago P.D. season 11

Hi, I noticed you reverted this edit and left a Level 2 vandalism warning template on the IP editor's talk page. Would a {{subst:uw-spoiler}} or {{subst:uw-delete1}} template be more appropriate in this case? The edit summary does have quite some emotion to it, but let me know what you think. Thanks! CpX41 (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi--I didn't know we had a "spoiler" warning; that's a bit too granular for me, and I think it's the first time in a decade that I saw something like this. The language of the level-1 warning is inappropriate in most cases, and this person wasn't experimenting or needing help: they were purposely fucking around. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 12:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that they are clearly WP:NOTHERE and likely it's a one-off case (especially since it's a IP editor) so either way, it's deal with. I just wanted to know your take on this since you are much more experienced that I am. Thanks, CpX41 (talk) 14:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User Imrubygillman

I think it's blindingly obvious this is a sock of Exteahans71. I've raised an SPI case. Barry Wom (talk) 14:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yep, Barry Wom--which is why I saw reason enough to check, and was surprised to find nothing. I mean, I could look again and see if maybe they used the same phone or laptop from a different place, as much as I could see, but I think that that account is going to have a limited lifespan anyway. Drmies (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Jack Chambers (choreographer)

Hello, Drmies,

According to Draftify, we normally don't draftify articles that are more than 3-6 months old and this article was created in 2011. Do you think there are COI issues that have lasted that long? Liz Read! Talk! 02:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The only substantial edits are COI edits, in my opinion. What would you do? Drmies (talk) 20:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you for supporting the removal of unnecessary detail on the Foot fetishism article, I greatly appreciate it. I believe there is a similar amount of excess celebrity detail on the Midriff and Cultural views on the midriff and navel if you are interested in looking at those articles for excess detail to trim. Thank you! GnocchiFan (talk) 12:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oops, GnocchiFan, sorry, meant to get back to you--no problem! There was another one I tackled a while ago but I haven't been able to remember which one that was. Something about position--like squatting or something? Aha: Squatting position. Look at this version! Drmies (talk) 16:06, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Holy shit that Cultural views on the midriff and navel is something else. Drmies (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No worries - I know that editing these types of article is often a thankless task, but I appreciate you taking the time to get rid of all the unnecessary / borderline-obsessive celeb trivia and prurient content in these articles. Basically, thanks for wading through the sewage with me on this one, much appreciated. GnocchiFan (talk) 20:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bali sockfarm

Thanks for handling this incredibly prolific sockfarm. It feels like whack-a-mole. It's hard for Fylindfotberserk or me to catch up with filing new SPIs. Can we give you a short unbeaurocratic heads-up in case the next one flies into our respective radars? Austronesier (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure--though I'm not an expert. These six were easy enough, fortunately, but if I remember Spicy blocked a bunch of them a few weeks ago--maybe include them in your unbeaurocratic heads-up as well? BTW it was good old User:JarrahTree who pointed me that way. Take care, Drmies (talk) 16:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go (*sigh* ← citing JarrahTree's favorite exclamation): Alexandru Go Xai mas. Another day, another sock. -_- Austronesier (talk) 18:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I appreciate your action here. As someone who appreciated the user's anti-vandalism edits, I was seriously disappointed to discover their sockpuppetry. I have left them a message on their talk page explaining the standard offer to them and warning them about the consequences of block evasion, more specifically pointing them to WP:3X. Speaking from my experience patrolling recent changes alongside them, I'd really love to see them return in six months, but unfortunately, if this continues, I don't think that will be on the table.

Once again, thank you for stepping in here. JeffSpaceman (talk) 21:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scounting camps, councils and such

I think local council pages fall under WP:BRANCH and they shouldn't have stand alone articles. What do you think? Merge/re-direct to something already in place or a should new target be created? Graywalls (talk) 21:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) i would think that the general notability criteria would apply. I would expect that few Districts and troops would meet that bar, but councils on the other hand, typically own the camps, and would be more likely to get coverage, but obviously that's a case by case deal... as most notability is... -- Aunva6talk - contribs 21:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&oldid=1219624246"