Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive361) (bot
Line 268: Line 268:


:@[[User:OverlordQ|OverlordQ]] you might want to list it at the [[WP:Copyright problems]] board using {{tl|copyvio}} so editors can assess and remove any violations. – [[User:Isochrone|<span style="color:#042559">Iso</span>chrone]] ([[User talk:Isochrone|talk]]) 09:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
:@[[User:OverlordQ|OverlordQ]] you might want to list it at the [[WP:Copyright problems]] board using {{tl|copyvio}} so editors can assess and remove any violations. – [[User:Isochrone|<span style="color:#042559">Iso</span>chrone]] ([[User talk:Isochrone|talk]]) 09:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

== Request Review of Topic Ban imposed by Novem Linguae ==

I request a review of this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=1218384444 closure] by {{ping|Novem Linguae}}.

The allegations made were (A) Forum Shopping and (B) a refusal to drop the stick on [[Tim Hunt]]. Allegations were made by involved editors unsupported by evidence, reference to my contribution history shows them to be untrue. 2 other editors supported that allegation also without reference to any evidence of misconduct. 1 editor cited one of my comments as evidence of bad faith.

[https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch.py?name=Wee+Curry+Monster&page=Tim_Hunt&server=enwiki&max=] My contribution history on [[Tim Hunt]]. 100% of it reverted. 0.7% of all contributions on the article.

Note: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=1213530779] <nowiki>{{npov}}</nowiki> tag added 13 March 2024, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=1213539288] single revert to restore. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tim_Hunt&diff=1215465703&oldid=1215415712] 25 March 2024 - one single edit adding context and information in [[WP:RS]] per [[WP:NPOV]]. That is ''all'' of my contributions to the article.

[https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch.py?name=Wee+Curry+Monster&page=Talk%3ATim_Hunt&server=enwiki&max=] My contribution history on [[Talk:Tim Hunt]].

Note: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=1213533575] 13 March 2024 - comment on NPOV tags, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=1214230612] 17 March 2024 - [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=1215481759] Further comment, 25 March 2024 - Comment on revert of my contribution. I had not made any comment in talk since 12th February.

Since 12th February, I've made 3 comments in talk, 1 contribution to the article in total. This is hardly the actions of someone who can't drop the stick.

In talk, I raised concerns over the neutrality of edits in the context of a [[WP:BLP]]. Comments that the closer of the RFC noted were valid concerns [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ATim_Hunt&diff=1213481488&oldid=1212250920] I am specifically mentioned in the close.

I have not raised the topic of [[Tim Hunt]] in any forum. I raised a tangential issue that <nowiki>{{npov}}</nowiki> tags were being removed by edit warring at [[WP:ANI]] on 13th March. I can't link a diff because the edit has been oversighted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Wee_Curry_Monster&target=Wee+Curry+Monster&offset=20240319190002].

The allegations made are demonstrably false.

As regards, the accusation of bad faith [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=1215785490&oldid=1215785236] That took a talk quote taken out of context, which was a response to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AS_Marshall&diff=1213522530&oldid=1213355874], where the editors responsible for the RFC indicate they do not feel the need to respond to the closer's comments. Reference to misogyny is not my comment but for example [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tim_Hunt&diff=prev&oldid=1204016425] {{tq|he's just another misogynist}}. Further I did not oppose the RFC but complimented the closer on a difficult close in the circumstances.

I have in fact, already committed to disengage on [[Tim Hunt]]. My concerns ref [[WP:BLP]] are shared by {{ping|Isaidnoway}}, {{ping|fiveby}}, {{ping|Elemimele}},{{ping|Springee}} and {{ping|Nemov}}. I note the concern expressed by Isaidnoway {{tq|I believe there are legitimate BLP concerns as well about the Hunt article, but after seeing the way Thomas B has been treated in this whole shameful debacle, I'm afraid to say anything for fear of proposals like this being thrown my way.}} This was also my my motivation for disengaging. I am concerned of the chilling effect that an editor can receive a topic ban with evidence of misconduct; assessing consensus should be based on strength of argument and in the absence of evidence there is no such strength of argument.

I request a prompt review of this closure by an uninvolved admin. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Wee Curry Monster|W]][[Special:contributions/Wee Curry Monster|C]][[User talk:Wee Curry Monster|M]]</span><sub>[[Special:EmailUser/Wee Curry Monster|email]]</sub> 15:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:43, 11 April 2024

    Welcome – post issues of interest to administrators.

    When you start a discussion about an editor, you must leave a notice on their talk page. Pinging is not enough.

    You may use {{subst:AN-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.

    Sections inactive for over three days are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.(archivessearch)

    Open tasks

    XFD backlog
    V Feb Mar Apr May Total
    CfD 0 0 40 2 42
    TfD 0 0 1 6 7
    MfD 0 0 3 0 3
    FfD 0 0 3 1 4
    RfD 0 0 52 30 82
    AfD 0 0 0 0 0


    Pages recently put under extended-confirmed protection

    Report
    Pages recently put under extended confirmed protection (71 out of 7723 total) (Purge)
    Page Protected Expiry Type Summary Admin
    Assembly theory 2024-05-09 01:47 indefinite edit,move Persistent disruptive editing from (auto)confirmed accounts; previous protection level has not been sufficient; requested at WP:RfPP Daniel Quinlan
    Dumraon Raj 2024-05-09 00:34 indefinite edit,move Contentious topics enforcement for WP:CT/IPA Daniel Quinlan
    On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians 2024-05-08 19:28 indefinite edit,move Community sanctions enforcement: per RFPP and WP:RUSUKR Daniel Case
    Jaffa riots 2024-05-08 04:31 indefinite edit,move Contentious topic restriction Johnuniq
    Russia–Ukraine relations 2024-05-08 03:05 indefinite edit,move Enforcement for WP:GS/RUSUKR; requested at WP:RfPP Daniel Quinlan
    Rapunzel's Lantern Festival 2024-05-08 02:35 2024-05-15 02:35 create Repeatedly recreated Liz
    Dhadhor 2024-05-07 19:28 2024-06-07 19:28 edit,move Addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content Ponyo
    Background of the Rafah offensive 2024-05-07 18:39 indefinite edit,move Arbitration enforcement ScottishFinnishRadish
    Sophie Anderson (actress) 2024-05-07 13:21 2024-11-07 13:21 edit,move Persistent violations of the biographies of living persons policy from (auto)confirmed accounts; requested at WP:RfPP Daniel Quinlan
    Draft:Karintak operation 2024-05-07 12:48 indefinite edit,move WP:GS/AA enforcement Firefangledfeathers
    Reactions to the Israel–Hamas war 2024-05-07 06:54 indefinite edit,move Arbitration enforcement Robertsky
    Wikipedia:Deletion review/Userbox debates/Archived/Archive 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Connormah 2 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/February 2009 election/Oversight/Lar 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/WJBscribe 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/White Cat 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Dmcdevit 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/AntonioMartin 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Everyking 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Grawp 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Lesser General Public License 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Filiocht 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/BillMasen 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Candidate statements/FayssalF/Questions for the candidate 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jvolkblum 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Snowspinner 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Kmweber 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Hemlock Martinis 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Fish and karate 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Lifebaka 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Vassyana 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2009/Candidate statements/AGK/Questions for the candidate 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Dream Focus 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Blankfaze 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Merovingian 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    User:Halibutt/Archive 15 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Shell Kinney 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation/Proposed decision 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Date formatting and linking poll/Year-linking responses 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Elaragirl 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia talk:Flagged revisions/Trial/Votes 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SlimVirgin-Lar/Proposed decision 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Wikilobby campaign 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Wizardman 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/Wizardman 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Dbiv 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2012/Option 2 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Coren 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Rlevse 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/Alexia Death 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Privatemusings 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Charles Matthews 2024-05-07 06:26 indefinite edit lower protection to allow for WP:LINT fixes Primefac
    User talk:Leonidlednev 2024-05-07 03:26 2024-10-08 05:50 move Persistent disruptive editing: per RFPP Daniel Case
    Yusufzai 2024-05-07 02:34 indefinite edit make ECP indef Daniel Case
    Islamic Resistance in Iraq 2024-05-07 02:15 indefinite edit,move Contentious topic restriction: per RFPP and ARBPIA Daniel Case
    Palestinian political violence 2024-05-07 02:12 indefinite edit,move Contentious topic restriction: restore previous indef ECP Daniel Case
    Battle of Beit Hanoun 2024-05-06 22:14 indefinite edit,move Arbitration enforcement ScottishFinnishRadish
    A-1 Auto Transport 2024-05-06 21:06 indefinite create Repeatedly recreated ToBeFree
    Killing of Sidra Hassouna 2024-05-06 19:17 indefinite edit,move Contentious topic restriction: WP:CT/A-I ToBeFree
    China 2024-05-06 08:12 indefinite edit Persistent disruptive editing: upgrade to WP:ECP due to long term and sustained disruption from multiple confirmed accounts El C
    Module:Chart/Default colors 2024-05-05 18:00 indefinite edit,move High-risk template or module: 2583 transclusions (more info) MusikBot II
    Module:Chart 2024-05-05 18:00 indefinite edit,move High-risk template or module: 2578 transclusions (more info) MusikBot II
    Draft:Cheese 2024-05-05 17:41 indefinite create Repeatedly recreated Pppery
    Revisionist Zionism 2024-05-05 12:54 indefinite edit,move Contentious topic restriction: WP:CT/A-I -- requested at WP:RFPP Favonian
    Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2024 2024-05-05 12:22 indefinite edit,move Arbitration enforcement ScottishFinnishRadish
    Universities and antisemitism 2024-05-05 07:00 indefinite edit,move Contentious topic restriction: inextricably tied to WP:PIA, WP:ECR El C
    User:Zee Saheb 2024-05-05 06:19 2024-06-05 06:19 create Repeatedly moving drafts to User space Liz
    User talk:Fathia Yusuf 2024-05-05 06:03 indefinite edit,move Foolishly moving a User talk page Liz
    Battle of Krasnohorivka 2024-05-05 04:30 indefinite edit,move Community sanctions enforcement: WP:GS/RUSUKR El C
    Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure 2024-05-05 03:40 indefinite edit,move This does not need to be indefinitely fully-protected Pppery

    Reporting @Juli Wolfe

    Reporting this user @Juli Wolfe

    Trying to delete articles that I've contributed to in bad faith. This user is disruptive and needs to be removed.

    I donate to Wikipedia insane amounts of money and do not want to see users like this on the platform. Please delete and remove @Juli Wolfe Yfjr (talk) 19:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    First off, when coming to WP:AN you need to realize your own actions will be under scrutiny. Including where you called another editor a clown and tried to vandalize their user page. Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello @Philipnelson99 thank you for reverting back my talk page to normal. And thank you everyone for stepping in, This user @Yfjr has been using personal attacks towards me for no reason, and mentioning things like if I try and edit any articles that "he will have me removed from Wikipedia" saying things like that under my talk page. And if you take a look at my contributions I contribute very well and fairly to help make articles better and then this user creates this thread under the Administrators' noticeboard for zero reasons claiming that I am "trying to delete articles contributing to bad faith, and that I am being disruptive". Which you can see is clearly not true, my mission to to continue to to make meaningful contribution whereas this random user has no user page is, trying to say because of the use of their "claimed" donations they can enforce editors off the website, using personal attacks seen here calling me a clown, single handedly making edits adding certain images that are copyright violations under articles like Luca Schnetzler & Pudgy Pengins. It's safe to say that this new User @Yfjr is potentially a troll and needs to stop.
    @JustarandomamericanALT @Phil Bridger @Schazjmd @Lepricavark @CambridgeBayWeather What should I do now with this thread noticeboard that the troll @Yfjr made under my name? Thanks guys, Juli Wolfe (talk) 02:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't need to do anything further. It's clear that this was a frivolous report. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 03:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Obvious boomerang indef for incivility, given the diffs provided above. JustarandomamericanALT (talk) 19:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (after edit conflicts) I have not looked into the matter, but I must say that the amount of money that you donate to the WMF (nobody donates anything except time to Wikipedia) is both unknowable and irrelevant to an editor's presence here. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This report seems a bit exaggerated. Juli Wolfe nominated a single article for deletion, and Yfjr's only contribution to that article was adding an image. Yfjr's comments at the AfD and Juli Wolfe's talk page are overly aggressive. Schazjmd (talk) 20:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For clarity, I had warned Yfjr about personal attacks prior to their most recent edit at the AfD and this report. Philipnelson99 (talk) 20:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support boomerang indef of OP for trying to use their purported donations to influence these proceedings. Yfjr, your sense of entitlement is pathetic to those of us who have donated countless hours of our lives to this project, a far more meaningful contribution than you will ever make. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 21:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The single edit you made to Luca Schnetzler was to add an image that was a copyright violation. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 21:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Yfjr, I must say that I simply have came across the article for "Luca Schnetzler" that was newly made simply had false information in the career part of the article, all I did was correct it. Making edits to Wikipedia you must have notable articles cited for things placed. And you decided to Report me for being disruptive? Is quite I must say outlandish. And not to mention you called me a "clown"? For what? Following the rules and making Wikipedia a better place?@Yfjr Juli Wolfe (talk) 23:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You nominated an article for deletion because you “thought” that a fact is false, when it fact it was true.
    It is shocking to see how many came to your support despite making my case very clear.
    You have not done your research on Luca Schnetzler and made a false report and nominated the article to be deleted.
    This should be punishable considering you never even took the time to review what you are reporting, thoroughly.
    It honestly embarrasses me to say I’m part of this community after seeing the few people who were quick to respond in such a haste and unfair matter.
    I will no longer be donating to Wikipedia and will be reporting all the users who took action to reverse my reports which were made in good faith.
    I’m passionate enough about Wikipedia to stand and defend articles I’m passionate about and contributed to.
    you will not take that away from me.
    You deserve to be banned for your lack of awareness and thorough research before nominating articles to be deleted @Juli Wolfe
    You are a literal danger to this platform, I am the one speaking up against you. You are not allowed to take this and turn it against me. 2001:1970:4DA3:D300:0:0:0:7C56 (talk) 17:16, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fairly certain this is just @Yfjr editing logged out... Philipnelson99 (talk) 17:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It honestly embarrasses me to say I’m part of this community you aren't a part of this community. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Wow! you are still here?.. Thinking logging out would we wouldn't know it was you... Listen this person or whoever you are working for or even if it's you paying for press WILL NOT get you on Wikipedia so you can continue trying... You are going against Wikipedia's rules!! And I wont stand for that as to why I opened up a "discussion" to see if it's notable. Since you made things worse gonna make sure you don't get it & I can definitely speculate that you are associated with that said individual in CA/LA wherever you/he is... Plus you are trying to use the use of your purported donations to go against certain rules, you thinking you are entitled to is piteous to those of us who have donated countless hours of our to actually make this website a better place. Juli Wolfe (talk) 21:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In retrospect, the hypocrisy is a little staggering. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 17:20, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Honestly, this whole thing felt off to me after viewing the interactions between Juli Wolfe and Yfjr. Philipnelson99 (talk) 17:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support boomerang indef. The donations' joke tipped the balance. M.Bitton (talk) 17:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hasn't this cryptospammer been blocked yet? Why not? Phil Bridger (talk) 19:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I blocked Yfjr indefinitely. If Yfjr hadn't attempted to vandalize someone's user page, I could see starting off with timed blocks or even warnings, but the totality is just a bit too much, I think. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The OP target has been blocked for two weeks for socking. That said, the AfD has been NAC by an obviously involved participant, for incorrect reason. (Blocked for two weeks, not banned). The way I see it the close should be undone, and the sock vote stricken. I’d do this myself but I don’t think I’ve dug deep enough into it to be 100% sure, and I’m about to disappear for 3-4 days, so if I muck it up it’ll just make it harder to rectify. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I've reopened it. As you say they were involved and the nominator was not banned. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 17:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      A short block (two weeks) for socking to vote in the same AFD is extremely generous. M.Bitton (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @78.26: The OP is Yfjr, not Juli Wolfe. --JBL (talk) 17:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Boomerang and indef Rarely are they this simple/clean. Buffs (talk) 21:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      The OP is already indeffed. Did you mean someone else? LEPRICAVARK (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Nope. Was concurring with it. Buffs (talk) 16:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    What's going on here?

    I'm beginning to think that this whole thing needs more eyes. Juli Wolfe's talk page access should probably be revoked since she's using it to pursue a battleground campaign against DIVINE, who merits some scrutiny as well for trying to close the Luca Schnetzler AfD despite being the article creator. Meanwhile, with Juli blocked for socking, Bhivuti45 has taken up the crusade by opening Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DIVINE and taking two of DIVINE's article creations to AfD (1, 2). Curiously, Bhivuti45 had not edited in two months prior to wading into the middle of this dispute. At this point, it's not clear which of these editors, if any, are acting in good faith. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 19:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, I havent checked up on Bhivuti45, but I'm pretty sure that none of the other protagonists are editing in good faith. The fact that Juli Wolfe has been blocked for sockpuppetry doesn't mean that Yfjr and DIVINE have been cleared of any wrongdoing. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They seem to be parrying accusations of socking, meatpuppetry, and UPE back and forth. Maybe they are all guilty. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 19:46, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is honestly extremely worrying as there is a lot of missing context. Both articles are clearly notable and were instated at the same time.
    The user @juli wolfe saw something in the article that she didn’t approve of.
    then she nominated the article for deletion falsely.
    this is what caused this whole ordeal.
    editors should not be harassed whatsoever and these things need to be resolved more amicably. 199.7.157.86 (talk) 20:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, the article subjects are not "clearly" notable so there is no fault attached to nominating them for AfD, which is where things are usually resolved amicably. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:32, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You can bump up the article i don’t have any issue but as a creator of the article its my responsibility to defend them. If it weren’t notable or didn’t seem to be notable i would have not created those articles. But the act which i have been around and the mental pressure which i am handling without any wrongdoings is really not that good. I cannot agree on upe just because of someone’s personal assumptions again and again if i haven’t especially done UPE and yes i also don’t know what’s going on here and why this personal attack on me. DIVINE 04:27, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And about closing the AFD discussion: Yes maybe i did mistake there which i can agree on and two wikipedians told me about that i closed because the sock were block but i forgot to check the word where i was involved. I close that on good faith but another editor re-opened it which i don’t have any problem with. And about good faith i have contributed alot of my time to wikipedia while fighting with vandalism or reviewing new pages which i got award of too. But due to some dispute on ANI my NPR was revoked long back and due to that circumstances i asked my Rollback and PCR to be revoked. Thankyou if anyone need to know anything you can ping me now i will just be in peace with my personal life. Have a good day DIVINE 04:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DIVINE, every day I review dozens of AFDs and while I know it is not a good feeling to have an article you created nominated for a deletion discussion, I'd estimate that 95% of the time it is not personal. An editor stumbles upon an article that they don't believe meets the standards of sourcing demonstrating notability which is expected of main space articles. That other 5% is when an editor notices that there is a possible problem with an editor's page creations and does target their articles for review but that is not what happened here. I don't know anything about your "personal life" and why you have brought that up or your revoked permissions or why you think a discussion on two blocked editors is a personal attack on you. Editors were saying that you shouldn't have closed that AFD but you were not the subject of the discussion here. It's fine to defend an article you created in a deletion discussion but this AN discussion was about two other editors (and possibly some IPs) and I thought had reached a natural conclusion was going to be archived soon until your recent comments. In a roundabout way, you admit that the AFD closing wasn't a good idea and so, if I were you, I'd step away from this noticeboard and go back to your own editing routine. If you were seeking support from your fellow editors on your work, AN/ANI is the last place I'd go to find that. Liz Read! Talk! 06:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • DIVINE has been a paid editor since oh so long ago. This just looks like rival UPE farms fighting, if you ask me. One of the editors DIVINE was coordinating with once upon a time, Ozar77, was determined to belong to the Vivek.k.Verma farm. Which group DIVINE belongs to or if they belong to any group, I do not know. But they have created articles for Nepalese subjects, Indian subjects and Western subjects. Now, that can happen with actors and musicians, sure, but minor businesses and businesspeople? I see that they even tried their hand at declaring one of their clients. What a coincidence that the one editor I had been accusing of UPE for five years happened to get a paid job! The harassment of OP with socks and IPs sounds familiar. The last time DIVINE was trying to get me removed from Wikipedia[1], there was an off wiki campaign to find out my identity with assistance from journalists and Nepali Wikipedia admins.(still live:[2][3][4][5],[6]) If you noticed that one of those gentlemen was named Prakash Neupane, you might find these interesting:[7][8] You may also want to search for "Prakash Neupane" at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gaurav456/Archive. Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:19, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's surely enough here to CU compare Yfjr with DIVINE. You will note that, when I was taken to ANI back in 2019 by DIVINE, it was over my dispute with Ozar77, not DIVINE. Who knows why? Maybe they just forgot to switch accounts.[9] — Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:34, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        Doxing is a big NO! If you have any further evidence regarding socking, please post at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DIVINE. Regards, Bhivuti45 (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        That's... not doxing. Sheesh. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 18:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        Right, a failed doxing attempt[10][11]. Bhivuti45 (talk) 07:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        My mistake. I thought you were accusing Usedtobecool of doxing. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 15:59, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lepricavark@ I am sorry you had this feeling but I am not here to carry a crusade against DIVINE or anyone else. I genuinely stumbled upon his AfD and shocked to see such a promotional article about a non-notable individual was created by an experienced editor like DIVINE. That was a red flag so I asked him to use AfC. Then Juli Wolfe pinged me on their talk page and provided me with the diffs. That grew my interest and I am pretty sure Yfjr is a sock and there may be more. So, far I only opened AfD for 2 of his articles that I think are not passing the criteria and opened a SPI case and informed about UPE on the Spam Talk page. If you find anything problematic then let me know. Bhivuti45 (talk) 17:45, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Your first edit back after a 2-month absence is timestamped at 18:47 29 March. You voted in the Schnetlzer AfD at 18:53, having already concluded that it was a UPE creation. Within three minutes, you were draftifying the Pudgy Penguins article. Now I'm aware that coincidences do happen from time to time, but your claim that you just happened to stumble across those pages is stretching the limits of my AGF beyond the breaking point. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 18:31, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I cannot help with that, sorry because what I did so far based on my findings, align with the guidelines. You are free to report me if you think I acted in bad faith. However, I am finding it surprising that a frivolous thread was open by a seemingly sock @Yfjr (after 7 years of absence) and now what @Usedtobecool has posted with diffs, specially[12] and [13], they don't merits some scrutiny for closing a AfD but a lot more for possible violation of Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use given the coordination with other UPE farms that are already blocked. Bhivuti45 (talk) 07:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Bhivuti has suddenly become very interested in AFD, participating in 36 different AFD discussions over the past 3 days despite never having participated in one before. (afd stats). Their participation speed indicates to me that they are highly unlikely to be interacting with sources, which is reflected in the bulk of their AFD comments being a couple words, saying that an article fails a guideline without saying how. [14] occurs 60 seconds after [15], [16] 69 seconds later, [17] 46 seconds after that, [18] 44 seconds later, followed by the Schnetzler AFD [19] 2 minutes and 34 seconds later. ~ A412 talk! 07:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Indeed, I am interested in AfDs now but I do check the sources, not in all cases but in some cases when I feel it is necessary after looking at the article's contents, for instance[20] or [21] etc. Bhivuti45 (talk) 07:59, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      This might be my last response here at AN per @Liz: suggestion while there’s many thing going on here and @Usedtobecool: have already concluded that there’s enough to CU me & YFJR or something whil SPI case is still pending against me and CU are checking. Usedtobecool filed SPI against me so long back, usedtobecool do have their own list of WP:RS Nepali sources which hasn’t been passed by anyone neither Wikiproject Nepal nor WP:RS (like that any editor from Nepal can come and claim the source to be eligible as most of them are in Nepali language). Still @Usedtobecool: is trying to connect with me somewhere or with someone per their personal assumption/opinion ( please listen to me again personal opinion) which can be seen here[22] while @UtherSRG: has responded them. While everyone is arguing here i want you all to check into deep about the previous contributions of Bhivuti45 and the articles they have created and the way they went missing after multiple users and administrators warn them to disclose their COI/UPE without any response & @GSS: might be watching out those problems mostly on Wikipedia. As @LEPRICAVARK: notified me on my talk page, i came here to response from my end. Also Bivhuti have filed case against me on wiki project Spam where i have provided link to their COI warnings before[23]. If administrators want to know something from me further please ping me or if I still feel suspicious to you: You can take any action which is preferable according to Wikipedia policy against me. Thankyou DIVINE 12:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      PS: Take “Arguing” as “Discussion/Discussing” DIVINE 12:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I just want to leave it beacause i don't want too much mental presuree and my anxiety is not helping me DIVINE 17:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • So, what seems like the most likely explanation here is a turf war between at least two different UPE rings/purveyors. Overall, Bhivuti45's participation seems like a mostly WP:GOODHAND account which on March 29, 2024 decided to participate frantically at AfD and to chase after DIVINE. I am on the fence about a wikispace partial-block to head off the disruption at AfD. signed, Rosguill talk 19:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I honestly was looking at Bhivutui45 earlier and thought the same thing. I think a partial block isn't a bad idea. Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Is there a compelling reason why an admin shouldn't just indef Bhivutui45? LEPRICAVARK (talk) 21:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      At first glance I was under the impression that some of the gnome/referencing work they had done in article space was ok, but on a closer look I'm seeing that the reference work looks questionable (e.g. Special:Diff/728934564) and that there are fairly clear UPE articles sprinkled throughout in their deleted contributions (Allegiant (finance services), Jesu Segun London, Emmessar Biotech & Nutrition Ltd, Byron Cole). Blocking indef as UPE. signed, Rosguill talk 14:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    DIVINE and Tulsi: COI/UPE/quid-pro-quo editing, association with threats and harassment

    DIVINE (talk · contribs · block log · change rights · rights · deleted contribs · logs)

    Tulsi (talk · contribs · block log · change rights · rights · deleted contribs · logs)

    The oldest account I've identified for DIVINE is Dansong22 (talk · contribs · logs) ([24][25]). Dansong22 created an article for Arun Budhathoki[26]. Then, they created an article for The Applicant many times[27]. It was apparently an online magazine founded by Arun Budhathoki[28]. They stopped editing in July 2013, but they were still trying to protect the Arun Budhathoki article only weeks before[29]. They were evidently successful as the articles remained until 2019[30][31].

    They came back with the DIVINE account, previously Azkord and Owlf, in June 2014 because they had found an actual paid-editing job: promoting Kenneth Beck (the deleted version)[32][33]. They created articles on Kenneth Beck[34] and CEO Connection[35], founded by Kenneth Beck[36]. Note that they're doing the same things previously attempted by CEOConnection (talk · contribs · logs), an obvious paid editor and SPA. On the same job were SPAs Salvatore.emery (talk · contribs · logs) and Radicaldoubt (talk · contribs · logs), around the same time and after. Xtools also lists CEO Connection Mid-Market Convention, CEO Connection Mid-Market Awards and CEO Connection Mid-Market 500, created within the same week. Next article that may be worth looking into is SkillBridge (deleted version), the last article they created that July before all but disappearing.

    Ozar77 (talk · contribs · logs) appears on the scene in October 2016. They create Anna Note, which was "[t]he digital newspaper ... looked by its senior correspondents, Brabim Karki and Arun Budhathoki" (see en.everybodywiki(dot)com/Anna_Note). They then create, in order, Brabim Karki, the aforementioned senior correspondent, Rameshwor Thapa, employer of Karki and Budhathoki[37], Annapurna Media Network, the parent organisation, Kathmandu Tribune, a "digital newspaper" whose editor-in-chief is Arun Budhathoki (see now blacklisted kathmandutribune(dot)com/about/), Nepal Tribune Media, the organisation founded by Arun Budhathoki that owns Kathmandu Tribune, and Nepali Tribune the Nepali language version of Kathmandu Tribune if I remember correctly. In November 2019, they accept paid-editing job for the Vivek K Verma UPE farm and are promptly indeffed as a sock of theirs.

    Gaurav456 (talk · contribs · logs) came to Wikipedia to write about Gaurav Adhikari and Y8.com. But of note is their persistence with Prakash Neupane, first created in May 2015 probably[38] and still live in draftspace, which is mentioned 15 times at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Gaurav456/Archive. It's plausible that Prakash Neupane socks are a different case from Gaurav456 socks[39] but I will refer them as Gaurav456 anyway because it doesn't make a difference. Gaurav456 sock SeytX (talk · contribs · logs) nominates some of those Ozar77 articles for deletion in February 2018.[40][41][42][43][44] There are no related live edits by Ozar77 during this incident, but it does bring DIVINE out of semi-retirement. They respond to the AFD notification for Kathmandu Tribune on Ozar77's talk page within two minutes of it being posted[45]. They edit-war to remove an AFD template, characterising Nepali Tribune Media as independent media, calling its nomination an attack, and in general taking great personal offence at the suggestion that it should be deleted[46], and say the very same about Kathmandu Tribune[47]. Their participation in the AFDs was somehow worse[48][49]. See also the full thread at [[50]]. They are next seen in December 2018 in a hat-collecting run, doing anti-vandalism work and writing legitimate articles, which pays off spectacularly as they are by 9 January 2019, rollbacker, pending changes reviewer and new page reviewer, though not autopatrolled[51].

    Meanwhile, Gaurav456 has given up on Prakash Neupane as their attempt to come clean and get unblocked fails and their sockpuppet investigation stops receiving new reports. Instead they're keeping their nose clean with NecessaryEdits (talk · contribs · logs)[52]. The February 2018 targeting of Arun Budhathoki articles by Gaurav456 starts to makes sense in December 2018; by all indications, Gaurav456 is out and DIVINE is in.[53] DIVINE has an advantage; they can get Prakash Neupane covered by Kathmandu Tribune. Prakash Neupane himself is an editor for Kathmandu Tribune now (see kathmandutribune(dot)com/author/prakash/]. DIVINE is still at it at Draft:Prakash Neupane. It's been created and deleted so many times in between, even I gave up at one point, though thankfully not Praxidicae.[54]

    In June 2019, while I was still figuring things out, I found myself in opposition to DIVINE, having found Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nepal Tribune Media (2nd nomination) from watching deletion sorting for Nepal. On 6 June, Arun Budhathoki tweets attacking me(speaking from memory, the tweet is now_restricted) and DIVINE reports me to ANI the same day (see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1011#Account_compromised_and_User_Should_be_checked_clearly.). Prakash Neupane responds to the twitter conversation assuring that he will have Wikimedia Nepal find out and disclose my identity[55]. Evidently that didn't work out. There are some troubling aspects about how Nepalese Wikimedians, including those receiving salaries, grants and scholarships, operate. See, for example, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/1990 Nepalese revolution. But, I am focusing on Tulsi's conduct here, who on 7 June, the same day as that tweet from Neupane, meets him in person to take his pictures[56][57]. They'd done the same in the past[58] and do so again in the future[59] While Tulsi has gone on to add Neupane's pictures to ten Wikipedias that have his article, not missing even a stray userspace draft on enWP[60], DIVINE has tried to repay with Tulsi's very own article on the English Wikipedia[61]. Tulsi was caught doing UPE work, creating previously known UPE articles, advertising his Wikipedia services on social media and using the NPR right to exclusively pass articles from one UPE editor who's since been blocked. After he was caught, on initiative from enWP, his global sysop and global rollbacker PERMs were removed. However, he continues to edit here, under no restriction against, for example, participating in marginal AFDs or the project space, and he remains admin at Commons, meta, mediawiki, neWP and maiWP, and irl agent for WMF and WMF scholarship awardee.

    DIVINEs interactions with other editors leave much to be desired; ANI and threats of ANI are constant.[62][63][64] And they continue to waste volunteer time with the likes of Sandip Bista (Mr. D), Paul Hernandez (musician), Sangita Swechcha[65], Scott Woodward (marketer) (we're starting to look silly with this one)[66], Luca Schnetzler and Pudgy Penguins. After I posted here earlier, I received a cryptic message from Bangkok[67], a city which has no conceivable reason to care about me except for the fact that Prakash Neupane goes/went to university there[68][69] (DIVINE has created Bongkosh Rittichainuwat, Ozar77 had created 2019 Bangkok bombings). Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    ANI and AN are the options where we can go through. This is not your first attempt to link with me to that above gentleman in your own words and SPI has been closed. You requested that ANI to be closed fast and still you’re behind me after 4-5 years. DIVINE 03:38, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Usedtobecool: just few days back you concluded me with YFJR now Tulsi & i request you to file SPI again it might work with your personal assumptions. Run Xtool and check the pages that i have created (in your own words it might be like i have COI or UPE) with them all? DIVINE 03:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In 2019, I tried without knowing much about how anything works. This time I've got the problem that much of the evidence is in deleted pages. DIVINE, I promise you, if nothing comes of this one, I will leave you alone, I might even leave Wikipedia. Twice in 5 years isn't too many to raise concerns about paid editing, I'm hoping. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Usedtobecool: FYi: you are really good editor here in Wikipedia which Nepalese community needs and i request you not to leave Wikipedia and this is not any personal attack and you don’t have to leave me alone neither you have to favor me of anything here. Last year/two years back i was about to leave Wikipedia and still i can leave as i do have many works and many things with my own personal life where i am too much busy. I asked User:Primefac to block me and asked them can I start fresh and they said they cannot do anything later if i will face CU. Let me clarify Dansong isn’t me. So below i would state my personal opinion or debate as per your above personal opinion.
    I am into the research field, and I never wanted or want to reveal my identity. Now, thanks to you, my path is clearer. You might know me as your professor, your boss, or someone you've disliked for a long time (none of which is me). Someone dragged me to SPI just because of voting to AFD, whether it was my AFD or previous AGD, both are one. You also voted on Mr. Gentleman's delete discussion, even though User:Suryabeej argued that I was Mr. Gentleman. Looking at your links above, Mr. Gentleman's Facebook profile indicates that he also studied at Harvard Medical School. If you received a cryptic message from Bangkok or Mars, I cannot help you with that. And what's the difference between Mr. Neupane, Mr. Budhathoki, and you? They discussed their own personal assumptions a few years back according to the aforementioned link provided by you, and now you're discussing them here on Wikipedia, mentioning their names multiple times. Why don't you email them to let them know they are being discussed here? Is Wikipedia/AN a public forum? And still, your reliable source list hasn't been approved by any of Wikiproject Nepal and WP:RS. In this whole conversation, what I can agree with you on is that yes, Wikipedia Nepal does have a gang, they have their own groups which they apply in their own communities, something I complained about before if you research in more depth. DIVINE 04:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DIVINE, none of your story explains anything in the evidence I presented above. But maybe it will convince others, because you should have been blocked in 2012, more so in 2013, and absolutely, definitely by 2014, yet you're still here. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Look how you much rage you have against me i wasn’t even here in 2012 and i didn’t even knew what Wikipedia was. Review,revise your own texts above before you concluded me as SPI of YFJR now you’re providing many things which i don’t even know and i am just laughing here (which i can only do). I will rest leave it to admins and i would like to request @UtherSRG: please provide them with deleted materials for their in-depth research against me. And @Usedtobecool: please take time to check on User:Bibhuti too they also appeared like same as you appeared few years back if someone will check on your history. Hence i have requested admin to help you with your research here. If someone wants something please ping me thankyou. DIVINE 05:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have no interest in this. Please stop mentioning me. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's something definitely going on with Prakash Neupane. I noticed in the 3rd AfD a respected editor voted keep in part because sources said Neupane had 2 million YouTube views. There is one song he did with others that has 1.4 million views but the links to his social media accounts go to accounts that no longer exist. Looking at his YouTube channel today, he has 46 subscribers and the video with the most views is only 1.5k. He says "This is the new channel of Prakash Neupane as the old channel got deleted". The only link to his other social media accounts listed, which are different from the ones in the song above, that works is Facebook. The others go to accounts that no longer exist. Also, his website in Draft:Prakash Neupane, which is a different address than the one used on his YouTube channel, does not work. S0091 (talk) 15:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Man after reading all of this I can see how much of a problem @DIVINE on this space breaking guidelines and continuing to get away with it. And no administrators doing nothing about is, soon his day will come. 2601:589:4E00:BE40:AD42:7786:D3A0:9ED7 (talk) 15:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Usedtobecool: I am your Mr. Gentelman and i am Prakash Neupane. Admin please take action against me. DIVINE 16:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @DIVINE I noticed you just now requested G7 deletion (since reverted) for Justin Jin (entrepreneur) but that was created by @Deondernemers: (will also leave them a note). Are you saying you are Deondernemers?
    For those following (or trying to), see also WT:Administrators' noticeboard#I am Prakash Neupane. S0091 (talk) 17:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No but there is huge UPE farm out of wikipedia they asked me to join them which i denied an i do have proof of it. I am Prakash Neupane but leat me clarify i have never used any additional account. DIVINE 17:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In light of the above, either DIVINE's account has been hacked, or they're a long-term self-promoting editor with possible UPE and sockpuppetry as well. Either way, an indefinite block is appropriate recourse, so I've done that. I have not closely investigated accusations against any other editors at this time. signed, Rosguill talk 17:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you @Rosguill. I have no idea what's going on here but I think this was a sensible call on your part. Philipnelson99 (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I managed to edit-conflict with Ivanvector while applying the block; separately, Ivanvector ruled out the possibility of a compromised account, and also identified a salient legal and outing threat by DIVINE. So we're still in indef-land. Because the legal/outing block can easily be appealed with a simple disavowal, it bears mentioning that DIVINE's admission of being Prakash Neupane is tantamount to an admission of extensive amounts of undisclosed self-promotion, and likely collusion with UPE farms and/or less organized sockpuppetry, and that a successful unblock appeal must address all of these concerns. signed, Rosguill talk 18:11, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This also raises some serious questions about @Tulsi who clearly knows Prakash Neupane but has not yet responded. S0091 (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the ANI filing that just keeps on giving apparently. Philipnelson99 (talk) 18:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is anyone opposed to just indefinitely blocking Tulsi for the essentially-unresolved UPE concerns, described on meta where they resulted in a loss of global rights, and at User_talk:Tulsi/Archive_2#Paid_editing where they were left hanging other than Barkeep49 following up on everything to remove advanced permissions here. Now, strictly speaking, no one has presented new evidence of UPE since then; the collaboration with Prakash to add new photos of him to wikipedia projects carrying an article of him is relatively tame as far as actual editing goes, even if it is evidence of incredibly poor judgment. But, given the past behavior and the wikiflu, I don't know whether this much benefit of the doubt is warranted. Even if we decide against blocking here, we should notify the various projects where he still holds advanced permissions once we come to a decision here. signed, Rosguill talk 18:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rosguill I'm not opposed to this based on everything you just described and the above. Philipnelson99 (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Having said that, I'd like to hear what @Barkeep49 thinks. Philipnelson99 (talk) 18:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd have to review too much information to say what I think. I do remember being quite upset at the time, which is why I took the actions I did around their NPR patrolling and their permissions. Barkeep49 (talk) 18:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Given the history and ongoing concerns, I support blocking. Indef is not forever if they can make an convincing unblock request. S0091 (talk) 18:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I definitely support blocking indefinitely and don’t change it. This guy has been creating paid articles for years thinking he was going to get away with it, and then being cocky about creating sock accounts and then making remarks like “I can literally get you banned off of Wikipedia”, And looking at his history he has many current paid articles that needs to be in the process of deletion because none of the articles there are reliable. 2601:589:4E00:BE40:8946:F528:3975:8678 (talk) 19:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    His page curation log should have been entirely enough for an indef, as far as I am concerned. But we had divided concerns then, and no threads at AN/I. He also comes here in bursts. And other projects have no interest in doing anything about him. Even the WMF seems to be flying him off to their conferences still, so... rot from the head or something. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Per the above discussion, I've blocked and opened a discussion on metawiki. Based on past experience with metawiki admin recalls, I expect that it may be beneficial to write a Signpost article about this to encourage participation, as the other RfC about other-project admins doing UPE currently hasn't received any participation other than from involved parties. signed, Rosguill talk 19:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Yeah @DIVINE has done so much unfaithful contributions to Wikipedia with doing undisclosed payments under the table making articles that have no reliable sources. His actions were so pathetic and glad that justice has been served for those that has been involved because I have been seeing everything these past days and no one should be accused of false wrongdoings. Great job on the administrators for the consistent effort for making this a better place for editors. 2601:589:4E00:BE40:8946:F528:3975:8678 (talk) 20:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just catching up with the twists and turns of this long discussion thread. And now I'm very depressed. But I do applaud the diligence of editors like Usedtobecool who somehow kept track of all of this misconduct that occurred over years of editing. I'm sorry for what you've had to go through. I've been doxxed (twice) and it's not an idle threat when it is directed at you. Liz Read! Talk! 06:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am sorry to hear that happened to you, Liz! I feel like quitting even contemplating the possibility. And thank you, it did take me a lot of time; I rarely investigate and write up ANI reports so long (you can probably tell). I have been careful about my anonymity from the beginning, but of course there are no guarantees. It caused me irrational stress for a moment when they said they'd reported me to the Police, because in Nepal, they arrest first, investigate later. But I don't think WMF will betray me that easy; I hear good things, at least regarding this particular issue. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    To be blunt...

    1. Contributions from an anonymous IP who suddenly jumps in to WP:AN smacks of someone who is blocked trying to inject their thoughts. Whether it is someone who is block evading stemming from actions prior mentioned in this section or from somewhere else, I'm basically going to discount those opinions, but I'll listen to anyone in good standing who agrees with those thoughts.
    2. An SPI for DIVINE would be appropriate to see if there are problems elsewhere. I concur with the block as well based on the aforementioned notes; if nothing else, it is preventative and a break will not hurt things in the long run. Buffs (talk) 15:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I 100% agree on both points. I am especially concerned about the IPs contributing to this conversation with little or no prior editing at all. Philipnelson99 (talk) 15:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • UTRS appeal #87097 is open. For your consideration, DIVINE is requesting unblock on UTRS. Thanks-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      In their first UTRS appeal which they pretty clearly did not write themselves, they mentioned that they emailed me. They did not. In their second one that's linked above they mention emailing an admin, that also wasn't me but I'm not sure what they meant, their English is not great. I have not corresponded with them off-wiki, anyway. I did not see evidence of socking when I checked yesterday, but checkuser cannot prove a negative. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      He's said, he's reported me to the Police. So, that needs to be resolved. He needs to explain his relationship with Arun Budhathoki, his friends and businesses. He has claimed to be Prakash Neupane—who's borderline famous—and done a lot of things that may be unflattering, so he needs to get verified, or we risk BLP harm through impersonation. He's claimed to have received payments for AFD votes, so he needs to be topic banned from mainspace and AFDs. His threatening behaviour needs to be addressed. He needs to explain quid pro quo editing with Tulsi outlined above. He needs to make many COI/PAID disclosures. He's claimed he knows multiple other editors are UPEs, and has evidence of such. It would seem important to get that evidence from him, and not unblock him until we get proof for every accusation, or they remain aspersions and harassment. It would also be important to make sure he doesn't OUT anyone if unblocked and uses private channels. Why does he want to get unblocked? We didn't arrive to a block here from my evidence directly. He imploded before others had responded. Clearly, he wanted to quit then and was burning bridges on his way out. Has he decided within days that undisclosed paid editing is bad, and now he is a complete convert to our mission? If he starts writing more articles that look paid, what will we do, wait for definitive proof that he's been paid again? — Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I told him in a UTRS ticket to email any evidence of UPE to the PAID people. If someone could look and see if there are replies on the UTRS 87097 ticket that need attention, I'm off for the weekend. Or maybe someone could action the 87097. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Much has transpired since last I posted. I will carry over from their talk the most recent and perhaps from the UTRS ticket. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Legal threat is resolved on user talk. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Unblock request carried over from DIVINE's user talk

    "Please check UTRS appeal #87097 too as my TPA was revoked before. Just to note that most of the users to whom my tagged at COI notice has been found using multiple accounts and has been blocked by CU. About legal threats I have personally apologized user:usedtobecool about my actions and behavior. About their all concerns which they mentioned on AN I have made them clear that I haven’t filed any official complaint against them anywhere and will not do that also you can verify that in my talk page. Also, I request you to note that whenever I get into AN my anxiety level rises too much which I had also mentioned in AN. While user: Bivhuti45 was dragging me off being a sock puppet and was making personal attacks at me, I requested admins to check them out multiple times but finally rogusill has blocked them too due to their UPE and ignoring multiple COI warnings. Also, I cannot deny that I haven’t made mistakes. I Have done many, but I want to contribute further to keep those mistakes in my mind and disclosing all of my previous coi/upe editing which I have done. Please consider my unblock request thankyou. DIVINE 4:53 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4)"--  Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    
    UTRS appeal #87097. It's too convoluted to carry here and rehashes ground already covered. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    UTRS appeal #87097 pasted contents, only minimal formatting
    I want to request my account to be unblocked because: 1. I have accepted my mistake of self-promoting myself (which i consider as a biggest mistake which i ever made but i tried to hide because i didn’t wanted to reveal my identity) but creating autbiography was my bad. 2. I have created few UPE articles, few COI articles which i accepted but to show the proof or verify them i don’t have much evidence so i can’t blame me much but during off wiki communications with a admin who didn’t reveal their identity, they suggested me to keep those in my mind. 3. I am willing to disclose all the paid works or COI previously done by me which are just few in numbers and most of them are already deleted or about to get deleted anyway. 4. I didn’t threatened to post public information on User:Usedtobecool but i mentioned that i might/know them but i wont dox their identity as doxing is big no which is OS’d now but can be checked by any reviewing administrator. To note: 1. I have never missued my previous rights being NPR, Rollbacker or PCR and my efforts to fight vandalism should be atleast remembered/recognzied. 2. We all make mistakes and the mistake was a legal threat but that only came in my mind because User:Otucha used word killing and User:Usedtobecool mentioned my facebook profile, my university name on ongoing discussion multiple times at AN to the public which i felt was doxing. 3. I quited arguments and accepted that it was me with all of myself where the topic was quite different about the connection. 4. My connection with user:Tulsi has been shared to the admin who communicated with me on off-wiki via email which i provided on User:Usedtobecool talk page which was OS’d and i created their draft only because they used to ping me every time to create their draft which i ignored most of the time but at last i submitted on Draft space. 5. I have been on wikipedia since 10 years at the age of 16 and i tried to learn but i started being active with contribution mostly and the starting articles which i created were the act of learning phase and i have never ever missused or use multiple accounts or has violated Sockpuppet policy. I have been reported to SPI multiple times but nothing has been proven yet but still checkusers can re-check from depth. To conclude myself: I want to apologize to the community for my numerous mistakes which i did, i had done before and i will try to avoid or not to do in future but cleaning up draftspace, checking upon new articles, fighting with vandalism were my favorite work if i get a chance i will be back and continue doing that. I also think in deep about Spicy comment before and declining suggestions but we all learn from our mistakes, we are human beings. Please also check the articles which i have created for the community and the time and effort which i have given to the community. I have given my almost half of the age while volunteering here at community and i would like to continue doing that without any afraidness of getting caught or without being afraid of revealing my identity which has been already done by others and by me myself. Thankyou very much for re-considering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DIVINE (talkcontribs)
    No one threatened to kill you. Perhaps your ability to understand English is insufficient.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepfriedokra (talkcontribs)
    Additionally: User:Tulsi personally requested and ask my photos to send them for commons purposes. I sent them with my willingness before. I also want to clarify that i have never met them in personal life but yes has communicated via social media.
    In my first UTRS appeal i wrote it myself than asked ChatGPT to rewrite it in grammatical order which i often does to make my grammatical error clearer. I got the email same time after getting blocked from name Suka Ratom which was quite different but this was it and they claimed to be an investigator and they also mentioned they cannot reveal their identity but while they sent me email it was written IVAN so i thought it was Ivanvector.: Hi, Thank you for providing an avenue to discuss with you off-wiki. I'm curious — could you submit any and all evidence to me here? Appreciated. Ivan
    Additionally here is another part of their email who called themselves Suka Ratom on email: By gang, do you mean a UPE group? Could you provide evidence that User:Otuọcha has threatened you? Otuọcha has brought on issues but that is a problem for a different forum. The reason I am contacting you via email is to remain anonymous. I'm sorry, but we can't disclose much as this is an on-going investigation.
    Just to note that most of the users to whom my tagged at COI notice has been found using multiple accounts and has been blocked by CU. About legal threats I have personally apologized user: usedtobecool about my actions and behavior. About their all concerns which they mentioned on AN I have made them clear that I haven’t filed any official complaint against them anywhere and will not do that also you can verify that in my talk page. Also, I request you to note that whenever I get into AN my anxiety level rises too much which I had also mentioned in AN. While user: Bivhuti45 was dragging me off being a sock puppet and was making personal attacks at me, I requested admins to check them out multiple times but finally rogusill has blocked them too due to their UPE and ignoring multiple COI warnings. Also, I cannot deny that I haven’t made mistakes. I Have done many, but I want to contribute further to keep those mistakes in my mind and disclosing all of my previous coi/upe editing which I have done. Please consider my unblock request thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DIVINE (talkcontribs)
    You have an open appeal of this block on your user talk page on Wikipedia, which means your appeal will be handled there. Please be sure to monitor your talk page for updates on the status of your block appeal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamla (talkcontribs)
    • Decline with the option to enact the WP:standard offer. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Decline. Other issues aside, DIVINE's English fluency looks to be insufficient to edit productively here. I am not impressed with the intelligibility of their comments at Special:Diff/1217936829#Unblock, in particular the comments beneath the unblock request. Apologies if this sounds harsh. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      They want me to copy over the UTRS ticket. Please. Somebody. Anybody that wants to. It looks like a big mess to me. And people will hate me if I do that. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I will do so. --Yamla (talk) 20:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Decline their comments are too difficult to parse, and at this point it is impossible to trust them. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 21:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Decline per Novem, Lepricavark, and at the pace that they've been pinging participants of this discussion, removing TPA again may be in order. Also noting that they've sent me two unsolicited emails via the Wikipedia interface--I have not bothered to read them. signed, Rosguill talk 21:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Decline per all of the above. Rosquill's point about unsolicited emails and pinging participants of this discussion is worrisome to me and indicates to me nothing about this editor's conduct would change if they were unblocked. Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:52, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      There may be replies at User talk:DIVINE#Unblock which I do not understand, that might be worth looking at. Or they might be something else. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Another " Suka Ratom" reference, whoever that might be. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Yeah, those confused me too... Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Tentatively decline Without some clarity, I'm not seeing a reason to unblock at this time. I think a specific timeframe should be given rather than indef if the editor in question would like to come back. He seems to be willing to engage and change. 1 week? 1 month? 3 months? 1 year? WP:standard offer after that per UtherSRG. Buffs (talk) 14:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Is the standard offer or a time-limited block a good fit in this situation? This editor may have WP:CIR (language fluency) and WP:UPE issues. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Novem Linguae the WP:UPE issues alone make me feel wary of a time-limited block and the standard offer in this case. Philipnelson99 (talk) 14:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      SO doesn't mean they would automatically come back; it just means that we won't look at their unblock request for a minimum of six months, in which time they will have to demonstrate their improvement via work elsewhere. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I understand that. I'm just saying in this situation I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the SO. Philipnelson99 (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      After thinking about it a few minutes, I think I agree with you @UtherSRG on giving the SO after the requisite amount of time. Philipnelson99 (talk) 14:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Both CIR and UPE can be overcome in time; their fluency can improve, which will help CIR, and they can divest from UPE issues and edit for the love of editing. Hence, the standard offer applies as that's the earliest reasonable showing for that kind of improvement. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I'm strongly opposed to reducing the block to a specific timeframe. This editor will need to do a lot of work to convince us that they can overcome their CIR issues, not to mention their UPE untrustworthiness. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 15:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Decline, time sink who lacks the English-language competence to edit here, as the convoluted replies to the unblock indicate. Coupled with longterm PAID issues, SO is the least time that should be considered. Star Mississippi 23:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Technical issue with pdfs?

    Not sure where best to take this question - I uploaded the pdf below on commons but I cannot get it to show here as a thumbnail in an article. The below should be a thumbnail picture:

    Test caption

    The only clue I have is in the Dimensions data:

    Any suggestions welcome. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    As nobody (including me) reading this seems to know the answer, my suggestion would be to try asking at Wikipedia:Help desk or Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Thryduulf (talk) 22:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Onceinawhile, I think it's the period in the filename that's messing up the way it displays. If I try with the filename without the period, it does a thumbnail (that doesn't resolve because there's no file of that name, of course). Try renaming the file without using a period until the .pdf portion. Schazjmd (talk) 22:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Schazjmd: that solved it! Thank you! Onceinawhile (talk) 22:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Glad it worked! Schazjmd (talk) 22:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia's Force logging out NEW users...

    Real recently, I have joined as Aliens' Probes only that I can't log in at all, and FORCED to use a possibly bad numeric designation. I tried everything as directed here short of creating another account, and IF I did, some idiots would scream SOCK or some others shit. What is your recommendation? Is there a bug on here? Can a referral of this be kept in the event that someone cries "SOCK", so that people knows that this option of creating a account is a result of a glitch and not a sock or worse?! - and can I use the new account to get back to you all, so that the other can be secured? I have a Android phone that is a real mess at times. It also has a real shitload of Emojis as well. 216.247.72.142 (talk) 04:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    what is "a possibly bad numeric designation"? An IP address? Screenshots would help and although you have a good point about creating a new account, the help desk is now probably your best place for help with a technical issue Elinruby (talk) 04:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    IP edits:
    1. 05:37, 8 July 2023 comment by the OP's IP about not being able to log in as Unfriendly Aliens, who was later CU blocked - the IP was, too, separately;
    2. Current post by the OP here and at ANI about not being able to log in as Aliens' Probes, who is not blocked;
    3. Accounts similar.
    I'm just leaving this as a note for future eyes (as potentially the less attention feedy option), though I am going to revert the ANI one. – 2804:F1...9E:9592 (talk) 04:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Appreciate the help in this matter. I was concerned about a bad IP and a glitch on here. Why is there a limited set of IP designations?216.247.72.142 (talk) 04:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure what you mean by a limited set of IP designations but reading the IP address article might answer your question. Thryduulf (talk) 14:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Long story short. Fenerbahçe team abandoned the pitch, but Galatasaray is not awarded the cup yet. However this user already edited 50 pages, editing stats, add honours to players, etc. violating WP:CRYSTAL. [70] here his edits he claims win awarded to Galatasaray nowhere told, Mauro Icardi being Man of the Match (infobox). Reverting all may seem weird, thus something should be done. Beshogur (talk) 16:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Doremon9087 has a new Account

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



    Doremon9087 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Is now active with the Account Manoj Singh Gaur (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) WikiBayer (talk) 16:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Blocked, along with a sleeper Fateh Singh Gaur. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:43, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Reporting User HughMan532

    This user has put "Kill Yourself" what you should do NOW" On the "Kill Yourself" Wikipedia page, I am not completely sure if it is still here but it is disruptive.

    - ShibaNation — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShibaNation (talkcontribs) 17:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You did not notify User:HughMan532, which you are required to do. Additionally, this user has zero edits, zero hits on any edit filters, and zero entries in the logs apart from the account's creation. – dudhhr talkcontribssheher 18:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see any way SN could know about HM532 without the two accounts being operated by the same person, and it's very suspicious for an hour-old account whose first edit was vandalism to post on AN immediately after. Should the two accounts be Checkusered? – dudhhr talkcontribssheher 18:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry for what I did, it was my attempt at a joke lol. Me and SN are friends but aren't the same person. HughMan532 (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    IP editor

    151.2.203.215

    Zenomonoz (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I think this is the most blatant case for a NOTHERE block I've ever seen. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 02:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Blocked for a month, edits on John Money revision-deleted. Black Kite (talk) 03:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Messy CopyVio History

    So Roberto Sabatini has a long history and I'm not sure what would be the right version to revert to since most of the content seems to be copypasted from here Q T C 22:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @OverlordQ you might want to list it at the WP:Copyright problems board using {{copyvio}} so editors can assess and remove any violations. – Isochrone (talk) 09:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Request Review of Topic Ban imposed by Novem Linguae

    I request a review of this closure by @Novem Linguae:.

    The allegations made were (A) Forum Shopping and (B) a refusal to drop the stick on Tim Hunt. Allegations were made by involved editors unsupported by evidence, reference to my contribution history shows them to be untrue. 2 other editors supported that allegation also without reference to any evidence of misconduct. 1 editor cited one of my comments as evidence of bad faith.

    [78] My contribution history on Tim Hunt. 100% of it reverted. 0.7% of all contributions on the article.

    Note: [79] {{npov}} tag added 13 March 2024, [80] single revert to restore. [81] 25 March 2024 - one single edit adding context and information in WP:RS per WP:NPOV. That is all of my contributions to the article.

    [82] My contribution history on Talk:Tim Hunt.

    Note: [83] 13 March 2024 - comment on NPOV tags, [84] 17 March 2024 - [85] Further comment, 25 March 2024 - Comment on revert of my contribution. I had not made any comment in talk since 12th February.

    Since 12th February, I've made 3 comments in talk, 1 contribution to the article in total. This is hardly the actions of someone who can't drop the stick.

    In talk, I raised concerns over the neutrality of edits in the context of a WP:BLP. Comments that the closer of the RFC noted were valid concerns [86] I am specifically mentioned in the close.

    I have not raised the topic of Tim Hunt in any forum. I raised a tangential issue that {{npov}} tags were being removed by edit warring at WP:ANI on 13th March. I can't link a diff because the edit has been oversighted [87].

    The allegations made are demonstrably false.

    As regards, the accusation of bad faith [88] That took a talk quote taken out of context, which was a response to [89], where the editors responsible for the RFC indicate they do not feel the need to respond to the closer's comments. Reference to misogyny is not my comment but for example [90] he's just another misogynist. Further I did not oppose the RFC but complimented the closer on a difficult close in the circumstances.

    I have in fact, already committed to disengage on Tim Hunt. My concerns ref WP:BLP are shared by @Isaidnoway:, @Fiveby:, @Elemimele:,@Springee: and @Nemov:. I note the concern expressed by Isaidnoway I believe there are legitimate BLP concerns as well about the Hunt article, but after seeing the way Thomas B has been treated in this whole shameful debacle, I'm afraid to say anything for fear of proposals like this being thrown my way. This was also my my motivation for disengaging. I am concerned of the chilling effect that an editor can receive a topic ban with evidence of misconduct; assessing consensus should be based on strength of argument and in the absence of evidence there is no such strength of argument.

    I request a prompt review of this closure by an uninvolved admin. WCMemail 15:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]