User talk:Beeblebrox

Welcome to my talk page

I prefer to keep conversations in one place in order to make it easier to follow them. Therefore, if I have begun a conversation with you elsewhere, that is where I would prefer you reply and is probably where I will reply to you.

I am an oversighter, but it is generally inadvisable to discuss oversight matters on-wiki. If you need to request oversight, following the process at WP:RFO is the best route to getting your request handled in a timely fashion, but you can email me if you prefer.

Do you actually want to be blocked? I'll consider your request iff you meet my criteria, Click here to see them.

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 18:14, 25 March 2016 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

please stay in the top three tiers

Happy New Year Beeblebrox!

Happy New Year!

Beeblebrox,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Poepkop (talk) 13:58, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to user talk pages.

.

Happy New Year, Beeblebrox!

Happy New Year!

Beeblebrox,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:38, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Beeblebrox!

Happy New Year!

Beeblebrox,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 01:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year!

Amaury (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Amaury (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Beeblebrox

Peppy Paneer (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2016. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2016 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2016 go well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

good faith chaos at Chinese stock market crash (2015–present)

Hey, I don't really pay attention to adminly things, and don't know where to complain, but you seem to have interacted with User:EggyEggPercent, no wait, I mean User:George Ho. If you could add some order to the chaos he.they is/are causing at Chinese stock market crash (2015–present), it would generate good karma for you in your next username. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 01:34, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Lingzhi mistakens me with EggyEggPercent. EggyEggPercent used "financial quake" or something, while I... I'm too tired to deal with slander. --George Ho (talk) 02:39, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Slander? At worst, a simple case of mistaken identity. But the FIRST thing is to stop moving things on your own without WP:CONSENSUS. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 03:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Unblock request. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 20:38, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I didn't know I was supposed to give you notice. Sorry, no offense intended. Since you were the blocking admin it makes sense that you should review it. I hope you will. Thanks. BlueBonnet 21:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

UnbiasedVictory sock

Yet another sock of this blocked user has popped up: Detectionist (talk) came into existence hours after No fear here (talk) was blocked, and is repeating, word for word, the former user's edits to the Battle of New Orleans. HLGallon (talk) 11:03, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Yep, blocked and tagged, page protected. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:50, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help earlier. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Lord Laitinen

I wanted to request the rollback permission. I have been a reviewer (appointed by you) for several months now, and I have used that tool to counter vandalism and many other types of disruptive editing dozens, if not hundreds of times. Also, I have acquainted myself with Twinkle's rollback features so as to prepare myself for the "real thing." If you find my recent contributions lack what is necessary to be appointed a rollbacker, I would appreciate any advice you can spare. I hope you consider my recent contributions to be worthy of a second permission, and I thank you for your time, once again. Lord Laitinen (talk) 00:24, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Lord Laitinen (t · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · wikichecker · xtools · supercount · pages created · non-automated edits · BLP edits · logs ^{(block • rights)} · arb · spi) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · fm · mms · pcr · rb · te)}

Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:47, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Your oversight block

I suspect this is exactly the kind of thing you had suppressed, and had told her not to reiterate. I've revdel'd it, to be going on with, and removed talkpage access. Please undo these actions if I'm barking up the wrong tree.Bishonen | talk 23:00, 22 January 2016 (UTC).

Dunning–Kruger effect

Some good; some bad. Extend PC? --George Ho (talk) 01:05, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

New admin project

Is there any admins interested in policing article content rather than claim OR is a content dispute? We can start a new project for specialty admins to enforce the rules.

I mentioned the above on the talk page for the new essay. I would like to create a new project for admins to help enforce the rules such as OR. What do you think? QuackGuru (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Admins are responsible for stopping disruption, when we start taking sides in editorial disputes, we become involved and cannot take administrative action. On the other hand, if it is clearly established that a specific editor is consistently adding OR to articles, admins can and will block them. I've done it many times. So, I'm afraid I don't really agree with the premise. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:25, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Specialty admins could solve the issue with OR but I do not know how this could be done. How can an admin decide what is OR? I provided evidence on the chiropractic talk page but it was ignored. I am not interesting in getting another editor blocked for adding OR twice. QuackGuru (talk) 18:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Detectionist - Some confusion, wanting your input, please

Hello! So, I stuck my foot into something of a puzzle you could perhaps help me with. I saw you had blocked (and also reviewed and declined an unblock of) User:Detectionist as a sockpuppet of User:UnbiasedVictory. However, looking over User:UnbiasedVictory, they aren't blocked for sockpuppetry at the moment at all - it looks like User:HJ_Mitchell cleared them of any wrongdoing on that front. User:C-3PO, HCR was created and posted an unblock request, admitting to being User:Detectionist and saying they wanted to be unblocked and cleared for normal Wikipedia use. So, initially, since they were apparently requesting from an alternate account to a blocked account, I blocked them. However, I rescinded the block on noticing that the supposed sockmaster, UnbiasedVictory, was not actually blocked. I hope you can grasp why I'm a little confused here, and I'm trying to figure out if I've screwed up or not. The relationship between these three accounts now is pretty confusing to me at this point. I've reached out to C-3PO, HCR for clarification on their talk page, but as the blocking admin for the account they explicitly linked themselves to, I thought maybe you could clarify, and also that I owed you some contact to make sure I'm not inadvertently going over your head on a valid block placed by you. - Vianello (Talk) 07:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm obviously not Beeblebrox, but as I do watch the War of 1812 page I did want to point out that User:UnbiasedVictory has been globally blocked since 22:02, 25 March 2015, three months after that last unblock. UnbiasedVictory's block was by steward Vituzzu. --Noren (talk) 08:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. And User:Noren pointed out the same on my talk page. I understand the situation now. Much obliged, and sorry to bother you, Beeblebrox! - Vianello (Talk) 08:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

No bother at all, I'm always willing to explaina block, even easier if someone else does it for me! Beeblebrox (talk) 19:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

About WP:FLOW

I lodged a protest on the result of Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)'s "Talk about Flow again" section because I am satisfied with the result (the result is "This feature has been strongly rejected by the community, and the WMF isn't even trying to fix it anymore."). I think the WMF should allow all language versions' Wikipedia users to enable Flow feature which skipped the community's consensus, and the current policy on Flow is irrational. So I would like to call WMF change the policy on Flow in your talk page, thank you.--Shwangtianyuan Happy Chinese New Year to everyone 00:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Your comment is kind of hard to parse, but if you want to have a conversation with the WMF about this, you are not only on the wrong page, you are on the wrong website. To start a discussion about global or WMF policy, as opposed to just the english Wikipedia, you'll need to go to the Meta-wiki. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I have sent you an email.

Hello Beeblebrox. Just letting you know that I have sent you an email. I look forward to your reply at your earliest convenience. Regards, --Ches (talk) 18:30, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Self-requested block: WikiBreak Enforcer doesn't work

I would like to be blocked till March 9th. (I have read your requirements). The WikiBreak Enforcer does not work, probably because I'm using Internet Explorer. Peter Sam Fan | talk 20:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Not done. With only five article edits you fail the first one of my conditions for considering such a block. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

rfc & essay

Your essay is quite good. Unfortunately I was not aware of it prior :) Although I had a specific proposal in mind, I was intentionally vague, to allow the plurality of ideas to come out. I was either planning on a magic consensus to form, or a consensus for "something" which would be followed by a multiple choice rfc to actually make an implementation choice. As you rightly point out in your essay tho, the multiple choices often fail to achieve consensus. In any case, I have reformulated to what I actually think we should do. I suppose if that doesn't gain consensus, others could propose other ideas. Thanks for the feedback. Gaijin42 (talk) 22:49, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Lukaslt13

I see that Lukaslt13 has been indeffed, for poor competence with English. I find this sad. Yes, his English is poor, and sometimes incomprehensible. But poor English, where it matters in an article, can be corrected. His intentions were good. He has created at least one article which still exists: Navikai. He is 13 years old, and no doubt his English will improve. I have made what I believe were constructive edits to Wikipedias in languages I cannot read, without being blocked from them. Maproom (talk) 19:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

have winter with a level of people to communicate, but if anything, Lukaslt13 ever will. But stop imagine, that I you help. Never. In this way, you? Well, I thought so. We are honest people enter into some sort of Wikipedia, let's make changes 100000000, Pooh, and we have to block because you do not want to compete with others. I know what you doing.

And that was after the block, when he had to know he needed to show some degree of competence in the English language to be unblocked. Look, nobody enjoys doing blocks like this, but sometimes they have to be done. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

That quotation is from a talk page, where it is harmless (though totally incomprehensible). He could sometimes communicate constructively, e.g. here. Overall, he seemed preferable to the users I come across who routinely ignore attempts to communicate with them – and I have never heard of one of those being indeffed for it. Maproom (talk) 10:08, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have to say I think you are missing the point there. It does not matter that that comment is not in an article, what matters is that it shows that the guy simply can not speak English! And that example you gave was only barely comprehensible and contains such gems as "P.s kind of want to, and the use of such a design. It is important that the copy of the others" - he's using machine translation for anything more than just a few words, for sure. We are developing an English language encyclopedia here, and people who can not speak English tend to be a net negative to the project - even if some of their work actually sticks, they cost more in other people's efforts than they contribute. As Beeblebrox says, we don't like blocking such people, but I really do agree that it is sometimes necessary and that this is one of those cases. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:35, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Also, his article Navikai might well be a copyright violation. The same text appears in a number of places on a Google search, eg http://www.topentity.com/navikai/ - I don't know how many might be Wikipedia mirrors, but the article was certainly not written in his own words as the English is far too good. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:40, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I guess my point is that I doubt difficulty in communicating in English is grounds for an indef. I have edited cs:Wikipedia, and admitted there that I know no Czech, without them blocking me. Editors who refuse to communicate in any language don't get indeffed for it. As for the Navikai article: the English was initially comprehensible, but not good. I helped to improve it. The topentity page includes my improvements. Maproom (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

But how long does it take for someone so young to learn sufficient English? A year? 2 years? Indef doesn't mean for ever, and all he needs to do is make an unblock request when he has improved his English sufficiently, and then he can be unblocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:03, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

• My thoughts on the subject are as follows:

• The block was not for "difficulty communicating in English" it was for gross incompetence and apparent use of machine translation in an attempt to substitute for an utter lack of any knowledge of English at all
• I have in fact blocked several users over the years for not communicating at all, and I'm not the only one. Communication is essential on a collaborative project.
• That this is apparently not how they do things on the Czech Wikipedia is irrelevant.
• Lukaslt13 is free to try and craft an appeal via WP:UTRS at anytime. If you are in communication with him you might want to advise him not to compare a block from a website with bieing raped next time, that certainly didn't help his case.
• I do not believe further discussion here will change the situation, block requests from third parties are generally not considered valid.

I hope that sufficiently clarifies matters. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Bios

I see you recently followed up an edit of mine from 2011, there were a bunch of other biographies that I felt had UNDUE concerns, your recent edit makes me feel as if I didn't go far enough. See [1]. Hope all is well, –xeno^talk 11:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

If he had been convicted of murder or something, or it was a big media thing like when Winona Ryder got charged with shoplifting, I could see it, but a speeding ticket seems like a pretty ridiculous thing to mention even if he was initially arrested for it. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:09, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if I ever got to the bottom of it, but it seemed as if there was some ongoing effort to highlight these little run-ins on celebrity bios, with big paragraphs and separate headings. –xeno^talk 19:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Why dont' we forget that I was late....

...and celebrate that I got there at all?

I'm just finally seeing your very kind comment. Please pardon my tardiness in thanking you for it, and telling you how touched I was to see it tonight.

-Philippe (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Better late than never. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Hello, Beeblebrox. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

_Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 20:09, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

The towers in Alaska

See these edits. It might be worth looking at their other contribs. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:31, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

RevDel request

Hello, Beeblebrox. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dhtwiki (talk) 00:16, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Page Request

Please remove protected block on Ken Sibanda and create page. There are several sources that seem to validate work and negate the need for continued protection. Subject meets the rule for one neutral source at a minimum since there are several places where he is validated including as a blogger for the Jerusalem Post. Subject meets wikipedia's guidelines for notability because he is one of a few (Africans) in science fiction and Hollywood, as well as his work as a Constitutional attorney. He is notable as an African born Constitutional attorney and movie director in Hollywood: (South Africa) and work's appreciation.

As for the work itself,he has several books, see here. But one seems to have gobe beyond the mere published book stage and is well known, The Return to Gibraltar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cindymathers (talk • contribs) 23:42, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Not done. I appreciate that you have tried to present evidence of notability here, but I'm afraid that what you have put forward could not be used in a Wikipedia article. The reason is that we have guidelines about what is and is not a relaible source and IMDB, Amazon listings, and YouTube videos are all the sorts of things that are not considered reliable sources. The one item you did present that might qualify as a reliable source sis a book review, it barely says a word about the author, who would be the subject of the article, so that's nto particularly helpful either.

What I would encourage you to so is to read and ubderstand the reliable sources policy, and then see if you can find some better sources to support an article. If you can create a draft article that meets the most basic stanfards for a Wikipedia entry, the protection could be removed and the draft article moved into article space. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Possible block evasion

Hi Beeblebrox.

I saw that you have previously posted on Only's user talk so perhaps you can help with this. User:MMAGuy8 was indefinitely blocked by Only for vandalism. It seems that Special:Contributions/Mr. Bellator might be being used for block evasion or be a DUCK. The account was created around the same time MMAGuy8 was indefed, and is being used to edit the same genre of articles. It's also being used to edit various sandboxes of MMAGuy8, which seems to be a bit unusual unless there's a connection between the two. I asked Only about this directly at User talk:Only#User:MMAGuy8 , but was advised to seek out another admin since they are unable to act on it at the moment. If there's a better place to post this, then please advise. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:07, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:27, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for doing it. only (talk) 21:21, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Only and Beeblebrox for your assistance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2016 (UTC)