User talk:Rosguill

Sanction

Good evening, Rosguill as the administrator who imposed the restrictions — indefinitely topic-banned from articles related to ethnic minority groups in the former Soviet Union, broadly construed. In my first appeal to AK, 4 admins suggested I contribute on other topics, as I was asked so I contributed. You also told me to work on other topics before the appeal. Please reconsider your decision of 17 February 2023 to restrict the topic. Sincerely Товболатов (talk) 14:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Товболатов, acknowledged. The contributions list looks promising at a glance, but I would ask that you take this appeal to AE as I don't have time to do it due diligence in a timely manner. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Rosguill All right, I'll try again.--Товболатов (talk) 14:36, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Rosguill refused me in Arbitration, yes there is strict judgement, it is always so, I have seen many times how people are judged in the Russian section. Please don't send me to Arbitration anymore.)) After some time I will appeal to you again, if you have free time, you will decide for yourself. Just don't judge me harshly, you can see that I admitted my mistakes and apologised, and after that I had no violations. Anyone can make mistakes, no one is immune to it.--Товболатов (talk) 08:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Rosguill Good morning, can you please reconsider my appeal on the restriction. I haven't broken any rules in 8 months. I have created articles in other areas.--Товболатов (talk) 06:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Товболатов Sorry, after your last and rather catastrophic appeal at AE, I'm not going to touch this sanction unilaterally. I also note that you've made relatively few edits since then, and that your only talk page engagement on en.wiki has arguably been WP:CANVASSing violations of your ban. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Rosguill Judging people is a big responsibility. Maybe it's for the best. Thank you, kind man.--Товболатов (talk) 15:54, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Rosguill once again I would like to contact you regarding my case. Yes I did the newsletter at the beginning of the year, it was my mistake, I admit it and I have apologised. It's been a long time about a year. Could you reconsider the topical ban, remove the blocking, I did not violate. I created 114 articles in the English section. I want to make useful contributions to the English section on Caucasus. Regards --Товболатов (talk) 14:48, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

My prior comment stands, I'm not going to touch this sanction unilaterally. I would further expect that AE would interpret most of the edits you've made since your last request would be dismissed as busybody work. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:00, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

I have no big offences, for spamming violation yes one day or week blocking understand. Other offenders with full blocking you will remove the blocking. I don't understand why I'm being treated like this. I was editing for two years before the violation, no one told me that I am a violator. At the beginning of this case was the administrator Callanecc he warned everyone that it is not inappropriate to violate, I did not violate anything kept away from disputes. It was the other editors who were arguing. Then when you took over the case you took their side, they realised that they could violate the warning of the Callanecc administrator. They immediately started correcting everything in the articles. That's where the big argument came from. Yeah, I got carried away with the argument, I agree, but I didn't do that big of an offence. When Reiner Gavriel disappeared, I was blamed for everything. For my contribution after the offence, I was thanked by many members. You have to understand me too, it's not my fault. Sincerely--Товболатов (talk) 16:35, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Товболатов You continue to have recourse to AE if you want to appeal your sanction. Please do not email me about this further. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

I also think that you may have a fundamental misunderstanding of how sanctions work on en.wiki and the expectations surrounding sanctions appeals. I would recommend reading through Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and related pages carefully. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Хорошо Товболатов (talk) 07:14, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Compromised account?

BurtonReingold (talk · contribs), see this edit [1]? Knitsey (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Not sure it's necessarily compromised given how few edits the account has made overall, but their editing since October is clearly NOTHERE material. Blocked indefinitely. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks for checking. Knitsey (talk) 19:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination

Why do you say it's promotional? Draft:Nomination_(brand) The information is all taken from third-party sources and not direct ones. National newspapers like Repubblica and Il Sole 24 Ore are two important dailies in Italy. I've added new information from other sources and the international trend on TikTok and I delete some sentences. What do you think now? Kaspo (talk) 23:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

The article still has a lot of phrases that read like PR filler, e.g. nearby Florence, a city with a centuries-old tradition of goldsmiths and jewelers. Working as an ice cream maker in youth, he realizes how jewels are a status symbol and decides to create a customizable bracelet just like the flavors of an ice cream that everyone can choose from to create something unique... In the 1990s, after the first big success in Italy, the brand got famous in the North European countries and straight after the United States. Cosi uno scrive annunci nelle riviste, ma non nei articoli di Wikipedia. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:50, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Question

Hello! Could you please check this request of mine at WP:AN? Thank you! Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 05:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Rosguill! It seems that a bot archived the request. What should I do, if the request didn't get any attention despite clear evidence of edit warring and got archived? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 14:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

WikiEditor1234567123 If it didn't get any attention before archiving it's fine to unarchive. But, in this case, you also posted it in the less-than-optimal forum--AN is more for backlog notices and other admin chatter, WP:ANI is the official board for reporting problematic behavior (and as this involves Chechen topics, WP:AE is also an option as that falls under WP:ARBEE, broadly construed). So at this point I would just make a post at AE or ANI, noting that it had previously been posted at AN. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Oops, I completely forgot that WP:ANI is the one where I should make that type of reports... Thanks for noting that! WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 16:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, the same request at WP:ANI received no attention and was archived despite clear evidence. What should I do now? Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

If no one replied to the report, you're justified in just unarchiving it and asking for admin attention. Alternatively, AE may provide a quicker response. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! The report has been archived for the 4th time and no admin has replied so I was wondering if you could take a look. Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 09:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 16:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm honestly a bit surprised that this last round didn't receive admin attention before me, given that uninvolved editors were very clearcut about what needed to be done. I suppose some people just see that Russian topics are involved and immediately skip past to the next problem. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, people don't want to be involved with a dispute related to the topic they're not familiar with. Furthermore, Swalors indicated his intent to do sockpuppetry: "Time to make new accoubt" which is concerning. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 10:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Empty categories

Hello, Rosguill,

After categories are tagged for being empty, CSD C1, they sit for 7 days in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion in case the category is only temporarily empty or has been emptied out of process. Then incorrect edits can be reverted. They shouldn't show up in a regular CSD category so I'm not sure how you came across them. Of course, if the category creator wants to have the category deleted, they can always tag them CSD G7 and they can be deleted immediately. Otherwise, we wait a week before deletion. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:01, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I came across them at the bottom of WP:CfD and had assumed that it collected both CSDs to-be-done and categories that had been cleaned up following a CfD closure. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Shimbra Kure

Hi Rosguill, there's a user who is removing cited content on this article [2] even after I had warned them. [3] Magherbin (talk) 15:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

He’s peddling false information Matan ibn Uthman (talk) 17:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Then it should be very easy for you to make your case to uninvolved editors via WP:3O or WP:RFC. Alternatively, if you have obvious evidence that another editor is misrepresenting sources, you can open a thread at WP:ANI. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Parish

Hi!

I noticed that you had closed this discussion as "no consensus" and left the page live. WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE notes that, in AfDs on entries about relatively unknown non-public figures, the closing admin may be closed as delete if the article subject would prefer the article be deleted. I understand that this language leaves it open to admin discretion, and requires so I'm left to inquire:

1. Was it your reading of the situation that this individual is not a relatively unknown, non-public figure? If so, my questions would end there, since BLPREQUESTDELETE would not plausibly apply. However, if not,
2. Would you be willing to expand upon your thought process around how you exercised discretion in keeping this in the no consensus outcome rather than deleting this?

Cheers!

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Red-tailed hawk, to be honest my initial reading was that there is no consensus on the very question of whether Parish is sufficiently non-public. While I still think this is an accurate description of the extent to which participants disagreed, on reviewing Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual I'm now inclined to believe that editors arguing that Parish is low-profile are on shaky evidentiary ground, and would consider discounting their opinions somewhat in reevaluating consensus. Now, Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual is a supplementary essay so I don't think it's appropriate to a priori discount !votes that are contrary to it, but I think its advice is sound (in particular high-profile:... Need not be a "household name", simply self-promotional.) and suggests that Parish is not low profile due to his self-publication in relation to his legal notoriety.

I'm further disinclined to cite BLPREQUESTDELETE and delete because of the way in which the AfD came to discussion. This came to AfD because of a legal threat raised at a noticeboard, which led to editors investigating and questioning its notability. While it's valid to question the notability, the underlying request from the subject is a demand for censorship backed with a legal threat. And yes, WP:DOLT, but this was hardly overlooked: there was an entire AfD about it, in addition to the noticeboard discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back on this and for providing a comprehensive answer. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

User Aurelius5150

Hello Rosguill, there's a user showing up in other articles I edit after a dispute I had with them on one article namely Imamate of Aussa [4]. They've since been undoing my edits on other articles [5] [6]. I notified the user about the policy of hounding a couple months ago [7]. The user had also been blocked for similar violations of ‎Matan ibn Uthman which was not following BRD and simply resuming edit warring [8]. The second edit since their block has been lifted is entering a content dispute im involved in. [9] Magherbin (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I think that their edits in October do look like hounding, but their recent activity doesn't quite follow the same pattern, and they were blocked for an edit war at Imamate of Aussa in November, so I'm not sure there's any further action that would be appropriate at the moment. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Page created by mistake

Could you please delete pg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gojira_vvv, created by mistake. Tks Caiaffa (talk) 21:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas, Rosguill! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 02:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy Christmas

	Merry Christmas, Rosguill
	or whatever else you may celebrate at this time of year. Thank you for all your work on Wikipedia throughout the year and may 2024 prove to be a happy and successful year for you and your family Josey Wales Parley 22:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

"hyperbolic demand"

Really? As you know, it's standard to propose remedies on AN. Not a demand. That wording is hurtful. Andre🚐 22:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Demanding a warning in response to Any reasonable third party would consider your reverts as irresponsible and borderline harassment of a new editor. halfway down a rabbit hole thread in an AN report is silly. The quoted text doesn't particularly help DMH43's case, but it is Kafkaesque to demand a sanction in response to it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

It was not a demand but a proposal for a warning. Really, you think that's ok to call it a demand? I thought better of you. This whole event has been extremely eye-opening. Andre🚐 23:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Demand, proposal, I don't think that makes a major difference in this context. You're hounding a new editor, that's the issue. Mild hounding, before you take issue to that wording as well. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

It makes a huge difference, I'm very offended and upset by your comment, coming from a long-time admin, and it's quite beyond the pale to double down on it. I object strenuously that I am hounding that editor. All I did was propose that he be warned for incivility and for gaming the system. That is within a reasonable range of what can be said on an AN thread, which I remind you, that editor himself started as an appeal. I find your comments extremely troubling. Andre🚐 23:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

The intent was not to hurt you, but it should serve as an attitude readjustment. In the absence of actual diffs that demonstrate NOTHERE behavior, a new editor's sanction appeal is not the appropriate time to nitpick their tone (barring you know, actual slurs and over the top ad hominem). _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

WP:NOTHERE is already shown in the diffs and SFR's original action, which talks extensively about gaming the system, battleground behaviors and so on. Andre🚐 23:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

A little AGF would go a long way here. Keep in mind, they're a new editor who has stepped feet first into historical Byzantium which is currently at war with dozens of sockpuppeteers. Without the context of why this is being treated as such a big deal I'm sure it looks much different. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I am AGF; did I accuse the user of being a sockpuppet or a POVwarrior? I asked the user to read gaming the system and RGW. Instead they are doubling and tripling down on their problematic behavior and showing lack of clue or understanding why it's an issue. They also accused Dovidroth of harassment - which is incivil, inappropriate, and unsupported here. Other users are piling on saying that Dovidroth should be sanctioned which is absolutely ridiculous and problematic. I stand by my comments, and I continue to be extremely troubled by Rosguill putting their finger on the scale in a way that is deeply hurtful and inappropriate, and which they have shown no self-reflection towards. It is not appropriate whatsoever to characterize my comments as a hyperbolic demand or to attempt to turn this around to sanction me or Dovidroth. Quite inappropriate indeed. As I said, this whole event, the Byzantium as SFR says, has really opened my eyes on a lot of things and not in a good way at all. Andre🚐 23:32, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Topic ban removal

I had appealed the topic ban which you had imposed more than two years ago.[10] The appeal is yet to be formally closed.[11] I hope you will help me out here. Thanks! Ratnahastin (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't have time to action the request at the moment, but I've gone ahead and de-archived the discussion and tagged it so that it will not be re-archived before a formal closure. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Season's greetings

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello Rosguill: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Rosguill: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

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

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Recent AFD Decline and Autopatrolled removal

Hi, you removed my autopatrolled and declined my AFD request in this edit. [12]

Please in good faith reconsider your position and see it from my POV.

I recalled a specific day that I wished to apply for NPP again because of my denial for not doing enough AFD's, so after doing some, I applied for it again without the intention to game the system whatsoever. I also continued to do AFD's after it as well.

What you said about casting multiple delete votes was because of my honest opinion on these votes, including to delete articles that failed common requirements such as WP:GNG.

I believe the removal of such permissions (specifically autopatrolled), without a warning that something like this was not permissible to do per WP:GAME may have not been the correct decision, as it says to assume in good faith.

"A warning from an administrator is usually the best way to prevent gaming, because a clear warning should help correct both good-faith mistakes and bad-faith games. If an editor ignores a warning and repeats their behavior, or if they find new creative ways to achieve the same disruption, it is likely that editor is gaming the system in bad faith."

There also seems to be nothing regarding on "gaming the system" for AFD's, especially towards NPP, so I am asking you to reconsider your decision, thanks for reading. Noorullah (talk) 06:30, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Noorullah21, I understand your frustration, but ultimately I have to consider this from the perspective of protecting the broader Wikipedia project. When it comes to advanced permissions like autopatrol or new page reviewer, it is not enough for me to simply AGF and back off when there is a plausible cause for concern.

Further, the intent in originally recommending that you participate more in AfD the first time around was that you build up a track record of participation that can be evaluated. Jumping into a half dozen discussions right before requesting the permission doesn't do that: as admins considering permissions applications, we wanted to see you participate over an extended period of time so that we could also see the discussions come to a conclusion, and to see your evaluations of sources in a variety of contexts including when editors make counter-arguments against them. Even setting aside the gameing concerns, quickly leaving several comments the same day that you apply for the permission doesn't do that, and essentially leaves the reviewing admin in the same position as the first time around, with insufficient data to assess your relevant skills.

Now, again, I can see how this could have all been a good faith misunderstanding, and for that reason I ask that you don't take these decisions personally. With full AGF-goggles on, you simply mistook what we were looking for and thus unintentionally prepared your edits in the wrong way. But given that these are advanced permissions with high potential for abuse, there needs to be a high bar for receiving the permissions. To that end, if you spend the next three months engaging in the kind of thoughtful, slow participation in AfD that we're actually looking for, I think you will likely receive the permission then. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rosguill I see, I apologize for anything that might've caused confusion and definitely on my part for what happened.

May I at the very least request my autopatrolled back given that the situation has been relatively cleared up? Noorullah (talk) 20:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I believe I have proven myself non-abusive in those permissions, and quite contributing per the pages I've created such as Khalji Revolution, Durrani Campaign to Khorasan (1754–55), etc. Noorullah (talk) 20:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

No, I stand by my decision, for the reasons already explained. It is unfortunately all too easy for someone to make good contributions only long enough to avoid scrutiny. Further, having the permission confers no special advantage to you (unless you're trying to skirt scrutiny), so there's really no reason to request it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:07, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Its to cut down on backlog while creating articles. Am I never allowed to request for it again then on Wikipedia:Requests for permissions? Noorullah (talk) 22:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

While there is no formal sanction against you seeking the reinstatement of permissions, I personally do not recommend seeking it, as that is going to look like WP:Hat collecting/gaming behavior in itself and it confers no actual benefit to you. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

NPP Awards for 2023

		The New Page Reviewer's Bronze Award
		For over 1,000 article reviews during 2023. Well done! Keep up the good work and thank you! Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

		Redirect Ninja Award
		For all your hard work in 2023! Thank you! Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:06, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Question2

Hello @Rosguill! I'm not sure if you're the right person to ask but did I understand it correctly that under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 I can upload non-free images as long as I attribute the author? Best regards, WikiEditor^123… 21:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

WikiEditor1234567123, no, CC 4.0 means that you can upload images posted by someone else under CC 4.0 as long as you attribute them. Maybe the following example will clear it up:

• If someone publishes their original work Foo without invoking CC4.0, it cannot be reused in any context without their express permission.
• If someone publishes their original work Foo invoking CC4.0, it can be used in any context as long as you give attribution to the original and do not attempt to impose restrictions on who can then share the original work.

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Recent draftifications

Hi Rosguill, thank you for your work reviewing redirects and articles. I just wanted to point out that the Wikipedia community decided to disallow draftification of old articles (i.e., articles older than 90 days). I'm quoting the guideline WP:ATD-I Older articles—as a rule of thumb, those older than 90 days—should not be draftified without prior consensus at AfD. So, could you please revert the moves that are against this consensus and bring them to WP:AfD (so that it is not seen as soft deletions). I've identified some of them that trigerred 1076 filter (6 months or older). There might be more because rule is 3 months or older while filter only captures 6 months or older. You may check your move log please.

• Draft:Childhood Yawn
• Draft:Athar Amin Zargar
• Draft:Akbar Nasir Khan
• Draft:Drumeo
• Draft:Medynsky family

Thank you. Have a great day. 2.29.138.75 (talk) 01:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

As the guideline says, that's a rule of thumb. In most of these cases we're talking about articles that made it to the back of the NPP queue without anyone signing off on them, and where there are fairly apparent COI concerns--I stand by my decision to draftify them pending clarification of the editors' COI status. In the case of Draft:Athar Amin Zargar, that was primarily, possibly exclusively, edited by a sockpuppet that engaged in widespread abuse and UPE; draftification there was an anti-UPE measure. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:19, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your action on 125 kilometer

An editor prodded 125 kilometer, and the prod was removed. I was just about to check for Russian language sources as that was called out by the de-prodder, but I see that you found that 125 kilometer was duplicative. I think the redirect is a good move. Bruxton (talk) 18:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I still cannot find anything so it was a good move. Bruxton (talk) 18:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, in Russian I find stations in Sverdlovsk and Irkutsk that appear equally prominent (i.e.: only in timetables and databases, less than notable) to the Vitebsk station that the article was written about. There also appear to be at least two stations in Ukraine by the same name. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

It seems like a rather non-descript rail stop. Sigh, so much to do but thanks for all you do. I was working on a Russian reltated article about a Hanging Stone. And I have to do quite a bit of online translating. Bruxton (talk) 18:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Gepind2024 and others

I felt filing an SPI would take too long. I came across through these speedy deletion request on Commons: c:File:Gepind P. Requierme.jpg and c:File:Gepind Panganiban Requierme.jpg, uploaded by User:Gepind2024. The files were used at five identical sandboxes of different users: User:Samarthvohra/Sample page, User:Fellydino/Sample page, User:Republic of west nelwon/Sample page, User:IFreezeALot/Sample page and User:Itcpeproject/Sample page. ─ The Aafī (talk) 06:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I did it here. ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:29, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Just seeing this now. In general I think going to SPI is the right move, as even if the behavior is obvious enough for me to block on that basis, a CU will be able to potentially link it to a longer-term sockmaster. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Sudipto Sen

You mentioned that I may have COI with the subject, But I wanna ask how it is possible to have contact with such big director. This isn't first time I facing this issue, tired of giving clarification on COI. How a ordinary guy get in touch with such people. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 19:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Your choice of topics and patterns of editing thus far are consistent with that of an undisclosed paid editor. You have not adequately justified how you have come to choose the various topics you write about in response to prior COI inquiries. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Damnnn again the same COI thing, if my work seems like Paid editor than can you guide me how to choose topics :) I'll surely follow that. As per my recent discussion with an admin, I come to know about Paid contribution tag, I'll use that if I will do any Paid work or COI thing in future. But all of sudden you take action on this page with the same COI thing, @Rosguill iVickyChoudhary (talk) 13:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Dmytro Kushneruk

Hello @Rosguill! You wrote "Ukrainian consul generals in the US are not heads of mission; the head of mission is Ambassador Oksana Markarova" - can you please back up this assertion? Intuitively, a consulate is a mission, and Markarova - being 3 timezones away - isn't its head. Of course, this intuition may be wrong, but we need some evidence or rationale. Thank you Qq8 (talk) 16:47, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Qq8, head of mission typically means the head of the entire diplomatic mission, i.e. the top dedicated representative from Country A to Country B. For foreign relations where an ambassador is appointed, that top representative is the ambassador. In situations where there aren't full bilateral relations the top official may be a consul general (e.g. Taiwan–United States relations), but that is not the case for US-Ukraine, which have full ambassadors appointed bilaterally. It's also worth noting that WP:DIPLOMAT only has essay status, and thus is not an ironclad argument for keeping an article that otherwise falls short of GNG (although in my experience, ambassadors are routinely kept per that essay without any issue) _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining, @Rosguill. I don't know if the Kushneruk article falls short of GNG (it has refs about Kushneruk and his official work). But that's a different issue, ofc. Qq8 (talk) 01:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

About the Dutch-Indonesians page

Hi, I see you've redirected the page 'Dutch-Indonesians' to Indos. Would you like to explain why? Sazhetsky123 (talk) 03:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

As can be seen from the page's history, the article was created by a sockpuppet evading a block, and their contributions are thus not welcome on Wikipedia. The article further appears to be a WP:CFORK of the current target, Indo people, so any good-faith recreation of the article would also need to explain why a separate article is warranted. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Permission

@Rosguill, I hope you're doing well. I saw you protect and redirect the page Solanki (Gurjar clan). Against IP disruption/vandalism, I would like to get your permission to restore this page to the last version when I move the page from the inaccurate title Solankis to the accurate title Solanki (Gurjar clan), thinking that Solankis is more close to the Disambiguation page Solanki. and I did this because the subject was well sourced in accordance with WP:RS and WP:GNG. I'd like to expand and improve this page further, so if you will allow me, I'll restore it with your permission, but if you think I don't have the permission or it is against Wikipedia's guidelines, do let me know so I'll not insist.Kokaabi ^talk 16:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Can you address the concerns raised by DreamRimmer and Chariotrider555 that the content of the page was poorly referenced hoax material added by a sock farm? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Nowadays, I notice numerous IPs and new users creating pages about Gurjar clans. Based on my experience, these articles seem to be hoaxes, created by copying existing clan names and connecting them with Gurjars. There are many LTAs trying to push Gurjar POV on Wikipedia by using primary sources published by Gurjar authors. The list is extensive, but I'd like to mention some for reference: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anujror, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bensebgli, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PakistanHistorian, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chauhan1192. In my experience in the GSCASTE area, I want to emphasize that almost all new creations using the term 'Gurjar clan' are likely hoaxes. – DreamRimmer (talk) 17:12, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer, But how are you so sure that this should be related to any sock? We can check through Global Contributions or any related platform to confirm the facts. And I was the one who moved page Solankis to Solanki (Gurjars clan) and I did not take any further edits there, even though I had not made any edits there. I saw this page after a few days, but I don't understand if we don't have proof that this was actually a LTA or not, just as we thought.? It can be. I guess Rosguill can fix this matter. Kokaabi ^talk 17:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rosguill, as not make any edits on the page except a move yet and yes I read

• Chariotrider555 concern that page was poorly sourced but that's not the fact I guess overall there were reliable sources one of them might not be reliable but without mentioning such source hard to understand and
• DreamRimmer raised a concern that content might be posted by IP or by sock but he/she not mentioned the place were we could understand where it's a fact or not and I don't know how last concern can be addressed it's up to you.Kokaabi ^talk 17:22, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Rosguill, I kindly ask for your assistance in deleting Solanki (Gurjar clan) since it was recently created by moving Solankis. – DreamRimmer (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rosguill, I am leaving it to you as I addressed all the issues and I was the one who moved the page a week ago, and I guess DreamRimmer is not quite right here because all the links about random WP:SPI did not prove that such an IP that posted content on Solankis page was actually a sock or related to any sock according to the provided SPI links, but it's up to you whether you want to delete the page moved from Solankis to Solanki (Gurjar clan) or you want to use any trick to find out what the fact was thank you.Kokaabi ^talk 17:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

• DreamRimmer, I'm not sure I see the need to delete the page, as there does appear to be some relevant information at Chaulukya dynasty where it currently redirects. That having been said, to Kokaabi's points there are broad, valid concerns of WP:SYNTH and unreliable sources in the prior revisions of the page, in addition to the underlying context of pervasive sockpuppetry. If you believe that there is encyclopedic information to write on this topic, I would encourage you to start an article in draft space. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Rosguill, This is my first ever talk with any user or editor here, and I always try to maintain distance from edit wars, etc. Before doing anything, I asked your permission. Even here, I respect DreamRidersl's concern, but he has not yet succeeded in proving or explaining whether such an IP was genuinely linked to any sock or not, but in any WP:SPI provided links, such a fact has not been proved, so I would request that you, if you have any spare time, please look into this case and take your decision. I trust you, whatever you think is right would be acceptable for me. Kokaabi ^talk 17:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  I would like to emphasize that the Chaulukya dynasty and Gurjar tribe are distinct entities. The Chaulukyas ruled over the regions of old Gujarat and Rajasthan, collectively known as Gurjaratra. This is why they were referred to as "Gurjararāja" and "Gurjareśvara," meaning "ruler of Gurjara." This information can be verified via sources in the article. They belonged to the Solanki clan of Rajputs. I hope this helps. – DreamRimmer (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  DreamRimmer, understood; given the context of the underlying sockpuppetry, I'm going to treat the initial move from Solankis to Solanki (Gurjar clan) as a controversial move that should be proposed through WP:RM, which Kokaabi can propose if they so choose. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  Kokaabi, I've already looked into it and stand by what I've already said. The fact that there has been widespread sockpuppetry relating to "Gujjar clan" articles being created with very weak sourcing is not up for debate, I've seen plenty of examples first hand without even needing to look through the examples DreamRimmer has noted here. If you want to add content in relation to these topics, you should scrutinize every source and claim in keeping with WP:ARBIPA and WP:GSCASTE. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:49, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Rosguill, alright, so now I should propose the transfer of Solankis to Solanki (Gurjar clan). Should I start with the draft, or should I write a separate article?. In addition, I will obey the policies of WP:ARBIPA and WP:GSCASTE.Kokaabi ^talk 18:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Rosguill, I don't know why DreamRimmer is quite possessive for Rajput or related topics. If I am wrong, sorry in advance, but I want to say that on the Solanki (clan) page, it is said that the Solanki clan is found in more than ten Indian communities. Even on the Rajput page, it is clearly mentioned that the Rajputs are descendants of Gurjars, Jats, Tribals, Shudras, Meena, and Ahir/Yadas. When in the Chaulukya dynasty page in the origin section, it is mentioned that Chaulukya and Solanki were Gurjars. How can DreamRimmer not accept the fact that many communities have the same clan names as Rajput? Even on the Solanki (clan) page, it is clearly mentioned that this clan is found in many communities. Why can Gurjar not have Solanki (Gurjar clan) on a separate page when Solanki (Mer clan) is also another community that has the same clan name.?Kokaabi ^talk 17:55, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  See last reply. You should expect sourcing in this topic area to be held to a very high standard, and are welcome to contribute so long as you can maintain that standard of quality. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Rosguill, alright, so now I should propose the transfer of Solankis to Solanki (Gurjar clan). Should I start with the draft, or should I write a separate article?. In addition, I will obey the policies of WP:ARBIPA and WP:GSCASTE and thank you very much for giving us a nice solution. Kokaabi ^talk 18:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Rosguill, please respond to my last query, if you don't mind.Kokaabi ^talk 18:15, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  Kokaabi I would start work in draft space. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:17, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Rosguill, Okay, thank you very much. Have a great day. Kokaabi ^talk 18:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  Yeah, I have a deep interest in all pages related to GSCASTE and Indian history. Indian history was my chosen subject. Also I've actively participated in several SPI reports addressing Gurjar POV pushers. Through this involvement, I've gained a close understanding of the cases. – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  @DreamRimmer, I appreciate your hard work and dedication throughout the past three years that you have been actively serving here. As a novice, I'm always eager to learn from veteran editors here.Kokaabi ^talk 18:18, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Fantastic job spotting that LTA again! I was also on the lookout for clues, but you beat me to it. Thanks a bunch!

– DreamRimmer (talk) 01:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC)