This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Ben MacDui

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

If you leave a new message on this page, I will usually reply here unless specifically asked to reply elsewhere.

Category:Rock lighthouses of Scotland has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Rock lighthouses of Scotland, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).


Administrator changes

added Muboshgu
readded AnetodeLaser brainWorm That Turned
removed None

Bureaucrat changes

readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

So nice ...[edit]

After a momentary feeling of trepidation when I saw an edit to the talk page of Bute witches, my feeling turned to pleasure at seeing your user name active again. More work on that article is next on my list now that Eric and I have more or less finished with Witchcraft in Orkney and some of the other witch stuff. I hope you are well and doing fine? SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:23, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

You are most kind and it is good to hear from you. I am just noodling around at present but I will pay your above-mentioned coven a visit in due course. All the best for 2018. Ben MacDui 10:34, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
At some risk to my faith in human nature I did so venture as I am sure you have seen. Witchcraft in Orkney remains 'Start' class which is unduly modest of it. Are you and your familiar planning to GA it or similar? If not I will bestow a small promotion on the talk page... Ben MacDui 18:08, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks for your edits, they are always very much appreciated. I chanted a little spell and, hey presto, it was added to the [long] GAN queue. ;-) These poor abused women deserve to have their stories told; the things they were subjected to are dreadful. Gowdie was a story-teller and it seems her fertile imagination was used against her; Janet Cornfoot, one of the Pittenweem witches, was killed by a mob over 300 years ago on 30 January (The historian Lizanne Henderson described the events surrounding the case of the Pittenweem witches as "one of the most extraordinary and truly horrific outbursts of witch persecution". I pinched that from the article ...); but those are only scratching the surface of the horrors - in Bute, an unknown number of women were locked in the dungeon of Rothesay Castle and just left to die . SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:51, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Good luck with the GAN. I quite agree with your sentiments; although to be fair Bute has improved a little of late. Ben MacDui 19:07, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Also glad to see you back.  – Corinne (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks. I doubt I will manage to be as productive as at some points in the past but I'm hoping to find a few hours here and there. Ben MacDui 18:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
@Sagaciousphil: Congratulations. The bunting will be out across the main street of Auldearn. Ben MacDui 09:51, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! There's more of the coven heading off to GAN now too. SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC)


I think you were going to sign your comment after the last sentence here. Lorstaking (talk) 09:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

If you mean after the PS, I don't think that's strictly speaking necessary. I'll move the PS up a line however. Ben MacDui 19:13, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).


Administrator changes

added None
removed BlurpeaceDana boomerDeltabeignetDenelson83GrandioseSalvidrim!Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
  • Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

  • A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ApostleVonColorado[edit]

Hi MacDui,

I'd like to point out a few things without enumerating them at the SPI or at ANI. You may have already thought of them, but ...

You've blocked MSW for one week pending the investigation of their possible relationship with AVC. Having suffered through that SPI for about a month now, what makes you think it will be resolved in a week?

Assuming there is a finding that MSW and AVC are the same person, things flow a bit more easily. AVC is the master, and MSW plus the other two accounts you blocked are puppets. MSW is indeffed, and if they want to edit again, they have to request an unblock from AVC (unless they've forgotten the password).

However, if no one makes that finding, the oldest account is Lisa.davis, not MSW. In other words, MSW is still a puppet and should be indeffed. An unblock request would come from Lisa.davis.

That means that regardless of any finding connecting MSW and AVC - if there ever is one - MSW should already be indeffed, and the ANI discussion is premature. If there is an unblock request, a discussion could be started at that time to see whether the community thinks the request should be granted. I personally would never have asked the community what to do after an SPI block unless, at a minimum, there is an unblock request. However, even though I disagree with having brought this to ANI, it would be difficult to pull it at this point.

Finally, MSW hasn't edited Wikipedia since your block. I'm curious, as I imagine you are, what they'll say.

Although irrelevant, I'm kinda curious why you plunged into this. Doesn't seem to be your area of expertise. I hope you'll patrol SPI in the future. We could always use the help.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Exactly what I am thinking.[1] ANI is not a place for solving these matters and especially not something as clear as this case where no one no one has any doubt over suspected socks. Ben MacDui, I appreciate your efforts that you assessed the SPI. I would like to ask though if there is anything really left to do except indeffing Weyburnfarm (I hope you read this edit) and Ms Sarah Welch. Lorstaking (talk) 02:22, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I will try to be as brief as possible here.
  • Why did I so plunge? I notice that we train SPI clerks but the training for admins seems to be limited to the advice to “try not to mess up too badly and learn from your mistakes when you do”. I am new to SPI and if I had known how difficult the case might be at the beginning I wouldn’t have started it. Once I was in, no-one else bothered to offer much assistance.
  • I understand that SPI is not run by consensus but the ANI gambit has pulled in some new voices, which (and I include this dialogue) I find helpful.
  • Point taken about Lisa.davis but in the circumstances I don’t think indeffing MSW was (for me) a realistic starting point. Maybe in more experienced hands it didn’t have to be, but this is a case where IAR applies, at least for now. (If you (plural) know of any similar cases I’d be interested.)
  • Per Silver Blaze, sometimes the absence of evidence is the most important. Ben MacDui 18:22, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Even long term productive admins have been site-banned as per the policy and standards described by Bbb23, as recent as this example. Even if we are attempting to find sense in the ANI, editors have supported indef block than opposed it. I know that this is not a usual SPI case, but not a hard one either. There are many more SPIs, that involved much bigger accounts. It could be controversial if there was any convincing argument that MSW is unrelated to these accounts, however no one has disputed the strong connection between these accounts, not even MSW, because it is as obvious as sky is blue. Talking about disputing the connection between accounts, I can also recall those SPIs where CU has shown "confirmed" connection between the accounts, still some people have attempted to dispute the connection. Doesn't means that the policy and standards would be renounced for these trivial arguments unless there is a strong consensus to change them. Again, ANI is not a venue for such arguments, village pump is, and until these standards are not changed, we will have to abide by them. Lorstaking (talk) 05:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Well, MacDui, as a Sherlock Holmes fan, you were probably best placed to handle this case. Thanks for your efforts. I look forward to more of your help with SPI cases! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Well thank-you to those of you making encouraging noises about my future participation at SPI. @Lorstaking: whether or not you are right about ANI, what's done is done. We will, I am sure, be moving back to SPI on this topic soon. Ben MacDui 16:26, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Sanday, Orkney[edit]

As I “talked” with Mutt Lunker about this, the Living Orkney magazine article cited (not the OIC link) says that SC was the community council negotiator with SSE, which successfully secured the wind turbine community benefit mentioned in the Wikipedia entry. So he is certainly relevant as a person associated with Sanday, and the entry on Sanday is incomplete without mention of SC. Local notability is relevant in an article such as this, for example John D Mackay (also listed under “People associated with Sanday”) is "notable" because "he is remembered locally for writing to The Times in 1967".

It is not often I contribute to Wikipedia, but almost whenever I do, it is a battle, which puts me off bothering. The whole project seems to be WP:OWNed by the regulars, which is a shame for those of us interested in the dissemination of knowledge and the recording of facts. Therefore, I am reinstating this good faith contribution to the article in the hope you will treat it with good faith and allow it to remain for the reasons given in the paragraph above. (talk) 21:37, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Joél Filsaime (rapper)[edit]

Hi. You deleted and protected this page, but there is an AfD discussion. Perhaps you can speedy close it? Onel5969 TT me 20:19, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Done. It was deleted under WP:G5 after an investigation at WP:SPI - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Prince-au-Léogâne/Archive. Ben MacDui 22:06, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 02:33, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thorfinn the Mighty[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thorfinn the Mighty you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Iazyges -- Iazyges (talk) 15:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Queries on block log[edit]

Ben MacDui (talk · contribs) I have noticed Varunbhatkt1997 (talk · contribs) has been blocked because of Sock puppetry of RohithKumarPatali (talk · contribs). But I personally know RohithKumarPatali (talk · contribs). When he got blocked he contacted me and asked why he has been blocked. I explained him Wikipedia Policies, what should do on Wikipedia and what not. After that he stopped contributing. User:Varunbhatkt1997 been blocked assuming User:RohithKumarPatali and himself is same. But they are different person. They are not same. What could be the solution for this? --Gopala Krishna A (talk) 12:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Varunbhatkt1997 is still able to edit their own talk page. You should ask them to read WP:UNBLOCK carefully and follow the instructions. I notice that you edited Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RohithKumarPatali/Archive but as the case is closed this isn't going to have any effect there. I am afraid sockpuppetry is a difficult topic to grapple with, but if Varunbhatkt1997 does request an unblock than an uninvolved admin will take a look at the issues. Ben MacDui 18:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Incidentally, Shravanshravi, another suspected sock of RohithKumarPatali emailed me with a similar request. I don't suppose you know that individual too? Ben MacDui 19:44, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. I really appreciate your concern and dedication towards English Wikipedia. I have given instructions to sock not to write an E-mail to admin who blocked you and request to unblocking (Because you cannot unblock). I already told him he can edit his talk page and read about WP:Unblock. Thanks. Regards --Gopala Krishna A | (talk) 06:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thorfinn the Mighty[edit]

The article Thorfinn the Mighty you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Thorfinn the Mighty for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Iazyges -- Iazyges (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).


Administrator changes

added Lourdesdagger
removed AngelOfSadnessBhadaniChris 73CorenFridayMidomMike V
dagger Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.



  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Ye hivnae gone efter a’[edit]

Good to see you popping up on my radar once again and good to see Thorfinn’s up a well deserved notch. Hope you’re well. --Bill Reid | (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Bill - good to hear from you. Happy to see the gold star shining from the top of Moray's finest. I'm good and hope you are too. Ben MacDui 18:26, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

A possible sock of RKP[edit]

Hello Ben MacDui, can you please look at Varunkanthila. His username is very similar to Varunbhatkt1997 you blocked as a sock of RohithKumarPatali and was registered after 10 days Varunbhatkt1997 was blocked. He is editing in the same area and made his 3rd edit at Paramvah Studios where he delinked a wikilink exactly same as Vb97, creating the same kind of articles and if you look at articles he created it looks like created by Varunbhatkt1997 e.g. this appears to be a copy of this by Vb97. Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 12:06, 14 March 2018 (UTC)