User talk:Cullen328/Archive 89

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 85 ← Archive 87 Archive 88 Archive 89 Archive 90 Archive 91 → Archive 95

Stacey Pickering

I know you are an active editor at WP:BLP. Could I get your opinion at Stacey Pickering? A few editors have been reverting a very negative incident which occurred recently, and has been added repeatedly to the article. It has only been covered by one media outlet, which described the incident as an "accusation". Please look at the edit history of the article. I also left a message at User talk:John.yossarian222222#Stacey Pickering. Should this be posted at WP:BLP, or is it pretty obvious one way or the other. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Magnolia677. I do not have strong feelings on this one either way. I notice that the Laurel Leader-Call is also running the story with a small amount of additional reporting. I recommend keeping an eye on the local news, and if either party issues a denial, that should of course be added. You are welcome to get other opinions at WP:BLPN. Cullen328 (talk) 16:56, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! Magnolia677 (talk) 18:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

May I ask one more BLP question? How would I go about closing this discussion? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Magnolia677, since I participated in that discussion, I do not think that I should be giving advice about how to close it. Cullen328 (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
How could I request someone to close it? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Magnolia677, please see Wikipedia:Closure requests. Cullen328 (talk) 18:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Boushaki cosmological operator

Hello Cullen328.

This article relates to the research undertaken by Professor Mustapha Ishak Boushaki on the expansion of the universe, and it is listed in the scientific literature under the name Index of Inconsistency (IOI).

The professor's research team at the University of Texas at Dallas is working rigorously on this subject, which has captured the attention of astrophysicists and cosmologists.

If there are third parties or people who are bothered by the highlighting of these results that have been sponsored by NASA and other institutions, it is not acceptable to please and accept their request for deleted article which was noted as being of high importance for the development of scientific research in the United States and around the world.

Sincerely and warmly.--Authentise (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Authentise. Why do you think that "Boushaki cosmological operator" is the best title for this article? Cullen328 (talk) 16:31, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
This editor is a now globally blocked sockpuppet of an editor who focuses on promoting the Wikipedia profiles of all folks in the Algerian family Boushaki, everything they are connected to and other accomplished Algerians. Just a head's up if you see this very specific pattern in the future. It's interesting that an account identifying itself as Mustapha Ishak Boushaki, who is credited with this discovery, blanked the article and wanted it deleted.
From what I've seen from looking at their work, the sockpuppets are educated and seem to know Wikipedia well. It's just that WMF keeps blocking them soon after they show up for cross-wiki sockpuppetry.
Hope you are well, Jim! Liz Read! Talk! 00:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Liz. Yes, that whole situation is quite strange. Speaking broadly, there are a lot of very intelligent people in the world with a screw or or two loose. In this case, although I am not a physicist, I suspect that the article seriously misrepresented the professor's work.
I am just fine with the exception of the usual aches and pains that come along with being 70 years old. I hope that you are doing well. Cullen328 (talk) 01:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Your opinion

Hi, Cullen - since you spend time at The Teahouse, I was wondering what you thought about Template:Skip to top and bottom. I find it to be very useful, but others may not. I can't image what could possibly be considered inconvenient or annoying to the point that one would not make use of the template, especially on long discussion pages, such as my UTP or project talk pages that can, at times, be quite lengthy. Atsme 💬 📧 14:25, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Atsme. After all these years of editing, I was not familiar with that template. My first reaction is that the icons are very subtle. I certainly would not have any objection to anybody using it appropriately. Cullen328 (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Question from SawonMirza (04:55, 20 June 2022)

Hello. How Can I write a article in Wikipedia? --SawonMirza (talk) 04:55, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SawonMirza. I recommend that you get some experience editing existing articles before writing a new article. It can be very difficult for a new editor to write an acceptable article. Please read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 16:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

help desk question

I asked a question at the help desk twice before but I didn't get an answer either time. Can you help maybe? what should I do? [1] 67.21.154.193 (talk) 13:26, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. I answered at the Help desk. Cullen328 (talk) 15:28, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy summer/winter

Sunshine!
Hello Cullen328! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 22:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy first day of summer (or winter) wherever you live. Interstellarity (talk) 22:08, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Seeking opinion

Hi Cullen, hope you are well. I recall seeing you in discussions on related topics, so: Is the Noah Schnapp article going into to much detail on what kind of Jew he is? Also removed some categories, [2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Although I get your point, it seems that his Jewish identity is important to him and affects his acting career. He speaks clearly about that. So, I think it is OK. Cullen328 (talk) 16:41, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough and thanks. If you feel like it, you're welcome to comment on the include-name-of-parents edits/discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft review

I have submitted draft article having title draft:prithiraj rava Please do a review Baruah ranuj (talk) 04:35, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Baruah ranuj. I am not here to help you jump ahead of the AfC queue. I am willing though to make an unofficial comment about your draft. I guess that this is about Draft:Dimpu Baruah. Your draft includes links to unreliable sources and it fails to make the case that the topic is notable. Please read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 05:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
What are the websites which shows an article's notability? Are there any list ? Baruah ranuj (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Baruah ranuj, please consult Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Cullen328 (talk) 16:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration Notice

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Issues with the Operation of ANI and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Carter00000 (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Regarding activity on "Robb Elementary School shooting"

Hi Cullen, I'm not exactly sure if I understand your reasoning in regards to revision 1095171380 on Robb Elementary School shooting. I made the revert as I assumed the intention of the editor was to do what they did immediately after your edit, which was to remove all references to the perpetrator. However, even just for the lead sentence, I'm not sure why their name should have been removed. By my understanding, I would consider the fact that it had already been there as suitable consensus, hence why I am asking here. Apologies for the hassle. Closingbrackettalk 21:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Closingbracket, please discuss the matter on the article talk page. No hassle. Cullen328 (talk) 21:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022

Hello, I'm Le Marteau. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Harrison, Arkansas, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Le Marteau (talk) 01:53, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Le Marteau. You have things wrong. I removed some unreferenced trivia about a non-notable rapper. I do not need to "provide a source" when removing obvious junk. Cullen328 (talk) 01:56, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Misclick. My apologies. Le Marteau (talk) 01:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Le Marteau, thanks for the explanation. We all make mistakes. Cullen328 (talk) 02:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

overt disruption

Please clarify. dif's? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Deepfriedokra, JoJo Anthrax provided a list of diffs. Cullen328 (talk) 15:09, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Allegations of "Overt Disruption"

Given that you have recently made allegations on me causing "overt disruption" please take your concerns to an appropriate venue such as WP:ANI. Otherwise, please cease making such allegations. Carter00000 (talk) 10:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Carter00000, stay off my talk page unless you are required by policy to post here. Cullen328 (talk) 15:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Arbitration request declined

The recent request for Arbitration to which you were listed as a party has been declined, as the Committee felt it was premature. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 15:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

It must be said

From the young man in the twenty second row, permit me to write here that you deserve neither the bullshit or the fact that NO ONE hasn't already shown that editor the door. And by "showing that editor the door" I mean lift, walk, throw. Some of us here understand your value to the project, although we might not write it often enough. Permit me this advice: Oban is the finest kind of medicine. Here's to you. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 14:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

JoJo Anthrax, thank you very much. Cullen328 (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Some references for you.

Jim, I was surprised by your comment that "The notion that "The District" is the proper way to refer to this topic is so bizarre that it leaves me scratching my head in bewilderment."

I'm not commenting on the talk page for DC because one person there _is_ up to ad hominem attacks, replying to my request to resolve WP:DONTREVERT with "As long as you never change..." But I wanted to give you some sources, because you were not dismissive or angry, and so impress me as receptive to seeing some style guides in action.

Here's the first article I found in The Washington Post in the "The District" section. If you're in the USA, you know The Post and know that it's very well-recognized. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/24/dc-primary-vote-count/ Search the page for "Washington" and you won't find it anywhere in the article except in the name "Washington Post". you will find "D.C." about ten times.

Doing the same with the second article on the page right now, https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/23/dc-council-new-members-legislation/ , my word search counts 17 "D.C."s and zero "Washington"s outside of the name of the newspaper. We can keep going down the "The District" page and I assure you you're going to see the same treatment throughout.

I alluded to a style guide that explicitly required D.C.; it was the Washington City Paper. Here's the first link on the City Desk page right now: https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/555691/how-city-desk-reporters-found-their-niche/ and the only use of the W word in the main text is "Washington Monument" (named for George W, of course)

Here's https://dcist.com/ , and I invite you to just scroll the front page. Before it was driven to bankruptcy, DCist was part of the Gawker Network, one of the at-the-time largest online media networks around.

So, there are two nationally-recognized sources and one local paper that deem "D.C." to be the proper way to refer to the area and the W word never proper. [If you're specifically asking about the term 'The District' instead of D.C., you'll find a smattering of "The District"s in those page, probably for variety. [PS: I edited this parenthetical after posting.]]

I put all that here because I hope that was useful to you, and that you're now a little more familiar with the topic. It's not to argue the WP:DONTREVERT issue on the DC talk page, which I am conceding and no longer engaging with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B k (talk • contribs) 15:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Question from Gharps on Wikipedia:Help desk (06:42, 28 June 2022)

How do I change the spelling of my Great Great Great grandmother's surname, Mere Harpur (Pakinui) on the Wikipedia page it has been spelt Harper which is incorrect. --Gharps (talk) has:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Gharps. Wikipedia reports what reliable sources say. In this case, it looks to me like reliable sources disagree on her surname. Some sources say "Harper" and others say "Harpur". I suggest that you discuss the matter at Talk:Mere Harper. Cullen328 (talk) 06:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm new to this and not sure how I send on photo proof to you privately, my last name is also Harpur, I have register documents for my children through our iwi ngai tahu but dont want them on a public forum Gharps (talk) 07:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Gharps, Wikipedia uses published reliable sources, and government documents for great great great great grandchildren are of zero value for the surname of woman who died 98 years ago. The article says that she married William Harper in 1863, an Englishman and a former captain. Do you contest that? Cullen328 (talk) 07:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Gharps, what do you have to say about this source? Cullen328 (talk)

Yes I do contest it but I will need to get it corrected through the government files that have spelt it wrong first, then once that is sorted I will try again on Wikipedia. Thank you for your help. Gharps (talk) 07:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Again, Gharps, we do not use unpublished "government files" on Wikipedia. Was her husband's name "William Harper" or not? Cullen328 (talk) 07:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)6

No, it was Harpur Gharps (talk) 09:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 13:00, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Question from Johdæhfæyfup (00:30, 29 June 2022)

Hello i am frome india and i Will like to give People’s tech support Can i do that here? --Johdæhfæyfup (talk) 00:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Johdæhfæyfup. Any type of self-promotional activity is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. The answer is "no". Cullen328 (talk) 01:06, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

In re Galowiki21

The article as written had a massive amount of information in it that could be used to locate her, and so I sent it to Oversight to be suppressed; another admin (Writ Keeper) deleted it afterwards to make sure it wasn't publicly-viewable while waiting for a responce from Oversight. They were told these precise issues via IRC and seemed genuinely bewildered as to why we would consider the amount of information in the article unacceptable, while at the same time refusing to listen to myself or Dragonfly67 when we explained that even barring the child-protection concerns, the sourcing was not going to be enough for us to have an article on them. They would come back on IRC after their article was deleted (but before the Teahouse post) to verbally abuse us for deleting their article.

I should note that Galowiki has some sort of connexion to the subject (they've claimed they're their teacher; I believe a parent or relative is far more likely), and so I regard this as a high conflict-of-interest situation due to the extreme amount of WP:IDHT here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 03:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

And as an addendum, WP:Teahouse#Redirecting has all the sources Galowiki has proffered thus far (both on-wiki and on IRC). While I did not personally do any source searches, Dragonfly did, and indicated what they found was not sufficient. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 04:01, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Jéské Couriano, in no way do I contest the deletion as I made clear at the Teahouse, and which I agree was necessary and proper. What I did ask you to clarify was your specific claim of doxxing since this person's identity is easily available online, and your thinking that dropping the f-bomb at the Teahouse was a good idea, especially in a thread that might be read by a 10 year old child. So, please address those two specific points, instead of matters where I did not disagree with you. Cullen328 (talk) 04:27, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Is all the information that was in the article available in one source, or a handful of other sources with maybe one data point apiece? Given Wikipedia's outsized search engine treatment, my concern is that having one Wikipedia article for all this information absent both an excellent reason to include it and ironclad sourcing for it is functionally tantamount to doxxing, as it makes the information much easier to find. And again, we're dealing with someone connected to the subject, not the subject themselves, and someone who has refused to listen to softer responces. We should not be expected to continue to lob softballs to people who clearly aren't otherwise listening. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 04:41, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
The draft contained considerably more information about the child than could reasonably be found online (I will not be providing examples, for obvious reasons). Although it's true that "doxxing" tends to be malicious, and this was apparently done with the best of intentions, it was still highly inappropriate. DS (talk) 04:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Jéské Couriano, I notice that you still refuse to respond to my inquiry about your use of the f-bomb at the Teahouse, especially in a thread that may well be read by a 10 year old child. Duly noted. "Functionally tantamount to doxxing" is baloney in this case, since the information is widely available online, in connection with obvious promotion of this child performer's career. Doxxing, after all, is defined as is the act of publicly revealing previously private personal information about an individual or organization. Again, I support the removal of this content from the encyclopedia, so repeatedly saying that Wikipedia should not host it is a red herring. I am asking you two specific very narrowly tailored questions, and so far, you have addressed neither head on. Cullen328 (talk) 04:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Then no explanation I give is ever going to satisfy you. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 05:03, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

To the contrary, Jéské Couriano. An explanation that directly addresses rather than evades my questions will satisfy me. Increasingly, though, it seems clear that you are determined to evade my very simple questions. You haven't even alluded to or hinted at a response to my f-bomb question. On the other question, it seems to me that you are trying to redefine "doxxing" to a meaning which is not used in reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 05:15, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Cullen, you didn't read the content. I did. Trust me, it was much, much more than was available within public sources. Jeske's use of the term "Doxxing" may have been non-optimal, but there's a time for prescriptivism and there's a time for descriptivism. The meaning was clear.
I would also say that your concern about profanity is close to tone policing. We make it clear that Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of children (or, at least, not in the sense you mean - this whole mess is because of the other interpretation). DS (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Agreed. At the most, it's an infraction of WP:CIVIL, but there are times when profanity is appropriate for emphasis, and we are not censored for anyone's benefit. Given the background Jéské Couriano described, I don't see the use of a single profane word as being out of line. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:15, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
DragonflySixtyseven, (and Anachronist), we are all in agreement that the content should have been removed, so that is not the point. The actual point is decorum at the Teahouse. There are specific expectations of people who answer questions at the Teahouse, among them that people are expected to be welcoming, friendly, polite and patient. I do not believe that the phrasing of Jéské Couriano's answer met those expectations. Cullen328 (talk) 19:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Chris Keates wiki edit by @ Warofdreams

@cullen I added reference included the link to the Certification Office decision and these were removed by @Warofdreams Whistling Dragonslayer (talk) 21:39, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Whistling Dragonslayer, you have not included any inline references. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 (talk) 21:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Breach of Statute decision: Parlour v NASUWT (PDF format) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
there is the reference Whistling Dragonslayer (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
it is now included, and I would like to include the relevant newspaper links to TES and Schoolsweek also. Whistling Dragonslayer (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Whistling Dragonslayer, your attempt at an inline reference was not successful. It lacks opening and closing reference tags. You do not add reference numbers manually. The software does it for you when you format a reference properly. Bare URLs are not good practice. You need to add bibliographic information on the source. Cullen328 (talk) 22:35, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
I'm sorry for the inconvenience i have made. Please take this. Thank you. Ryj430 (talk) 06:05, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Ryj430, the barnstar is nice, but it does not affect in any way my notice that you must comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines,. Cullen328 (talk) 06:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I'm new to wikipedia and i appreciate this comment. I will read it. Thank you. Ryj430 (talk) 13:07, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Reversion

Hey, thanks for the reversion of my edit. My internet has been playing up, and somehow that lead to me deleting a chunk of information without realising when making a simple edit... So sorry for that, and thanks again, Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 21:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

No problem, Joe Vitale 5. Mistakes happen. Cullen328 (talk) 21:22, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Happy July 4th!


Colman2000 (talk) is wishing you a Happy 4th of July! On this day, we recognize our independence from Great Britain with the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, which ultimately paved the way to our freedom. Celebrate this day in many different ways, such as hosting a barbecue, watching baseball games, or even attending a fireworks show! Happy Independence Day, fellow American!  
 

Share this message by adding {{subst:Independence Day}} to a fellow American's talk page.

4 (talk) 05:08, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Colman2000. I am the kind of American guy who unapologetically flies the red, white and blue, even though I am deeply concerned about the future of American democratic self governance. In my opion, it is a mistake for those Amerericans who oppose authoritarianism to cede the American flag to the Ultra MAGA cult. That's just my personal opinionCullen328 (talk) 06:17, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
You're welcome, sir. Have a great 4th of July from another unapologetic American. Colman2000 (talk) 13:24, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Draft:Ancient Jaws

Hello Cullen328. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:Ancient Jaws, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article is not in the userspace. Thank you. BangJan1999 21:09, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

You are correct, BangJan1999. I tagged it as G11 instead. Cullen328 (talk) 21:24, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Sock

Thanks for blocking Eunavformedia 2021. However, looking at the page history of Operation Atalanta, it looks like this is actually a sock of the more prolific account Eunavformedia. It's stale now but I wonder if it's worth blocking anyway. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:09, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Drm310. I blocked that account as well. Cullen328 (talk) 21:24, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Alida Goubitz

Hello, Cullen328,

Just a head's up, when you restore a draft or user page that has been deleted due to CSD G13 criteria, you need to make an edit to the page or it becomes immediately eligible for CSD G13 again. I don't know if this tip is written anywhere on a policy page but it's something you learn when you patrol WP:REFUND, where you are always restoring expiring drafts. Thanks and I hope you are having a pleasant summer! Liz Read! Talk! 02:05, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, Liz. I was not aware of that. I rarely respond to requests on that particular noticeboard and have a lot to learn there. Yes, I can now see that a bot would tag the restored version unless an edit has been made. Thanks again. Cullen328 (talk) 03:16, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Otto von Bismarck on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

User

Hello! I noticed you were applying soft blocks to usernames with obvious implied shared use. I left a message on this users talk page, and didn't send it to UAA because sometimes when I do, there's another admin who turns it away based on whether their edits are promotional or not. In this case, you'll see the username and the article they edited on clearly shows implied shared use. If I am interpreting anything wrong, let me know, but I figured I would reach out. Thank you!! SPF121188 (talk this way) (contribs) 18:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Spf121188. I do not consider that username to indicate shared use based on the single edit to date. It could just be an individual who is interested in athletics at that college. Cullen328 (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
Understood, I just wanted to inquire. I'll keep this in mind moving forward. Thank you! SPF121188 (talk this way) (contribs) 18:56, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Apparent block evasion

At The Posies and Ken Stringfellow. Cheers, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:3AA4 (talk) 21:23, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I am busy with various things off Wikipedia right now. Please file a report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. Cullen328 (talk) 22:14, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Technical news

  • user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Can I reply?

No. I was interpreting the username policy. It's your call, I just brought it to light. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

From EyesWhyde (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2022 (UTC) re. Death threats on Bob Avakian made by User:Makewaluigigreatagain

Jim,

I'm writing you because I strongly feel that further action is needed in response to death threats on Bob Avakian made on June 19th by User:Makewaluigigreatagain. These threats were made in three successive comments in the revisions on the View History page for the Bob Avakian article. Good on you for quickly taking action on these threats. But I think that you will agree, after reflecting on the issues involved here, that a 1 month block on User:Makewaluigigreatagain is in no way sufficient or commensurate with the seriousness and gravity of this act. There is no act more egregious on Wikipedia than using it as a platform to threaten someone's life. These threats are not just uncivil discourse, but are very dangerous (and illegal) acts with the potential for bringing serious harm. Posting death threats is a criminal act and Wikipedia should have absolutely zero tolerance for this. Clearly the maximum swift action is required to remedy the situation and prevent further threats. The User:Makewaluigigreatagain should be permanently blocked from editing, their account removed, and the three revisions on the History page for the Bob Avakian entry immediately deleted so as to remove the threats from Wikipedia. The three revisions were made on 00:07, 19 June 2022, 00:08, 19 June 2022, and 00:11, 19 June 2022 on the View History page for Bob Avakian. It is my understanding that as an Administrator you have the ability to take these important steps. I very much appreciate your attention to this matter.EyesWhyde (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, EyesWhyde. I have just revision deleted the two edit summaries that had objectionable content, including the implicit death threat. The actual edits to the encyclopedia consisted of changing Avakian's date of birth, so I left those visible for review. Most initial blocks are much shorter than one month, so that is a pretty significant sanction. This particular editor has been active on and off for about four years and appears to have been mostly productive until this incident. That is why I chose to give them a second chance with a very stern warning. I do not feel comfortable modifying the block ten days later without new misconduct. Please be assured that I will block them indefinitely without hesitation if they resume this type of misbehavior. There is no way to "remove" an account, since the past edits by blocked editors need to be attributed. Cullen328 (talk) 01:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Jim,
Thanks again for your rapid action in response to the death threats that were posted on the View History comments on the Bob Avakian entry. I also want to thank you for your very quick response to my note to you, for removing the threats from the View History comments, and for taking the time to explain the actions you took and are prepared to take should the user post any further threats. As I am sure you are aware, in today’s climate, these kinds of online threats can encourage assorted elements to engage in actual physical attacks. Your ongoing vigilance in monitoring this entry–which is a biographical entry of a living person that has been subject to repeated vandalism –is very much appreciated. EyesWhyde (talk) 22:15, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Jim,
After my reply above I saw that there had been another death threat. Thanks for your monitoring and swift deletion. It sounds like this could be the same person(User:Makewaluigigreatagain), but now posting anonymously since they were blocked. Is there any action that can be taken to stop this person (or someone else doing the same) from continuing these threats? EyesWhyde (talk) 22:50, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, EyesWhyde. The frequency of vandalism at this point, in my judgment, is not at the level that would require the article to be protected. I did revision delete the most recent bad edit. If the frequency of vandalism increases, I will definitely semi-protect the article. Feel free to contact me at any time. Cullen328 (talk) 23:18, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your action and continued attention to this! EyesWhyde (talk) 23:27, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Jim,
I'm writing about more vandalism on the Bob Avakian article. Earlier today an anonymous user (68.197.145.224) added the following to the first paragraph of the article: "Avakian has been accused of being a confidential informant, snitch, and stealing funds from activist fundraising groups." I have reverted this edit. I'm not sure why the vandalism bots etc. did not quickly revert this dangerous smear. This is ad hominem and libelous. And, as you may know, this kind of attack on a political leader can have serious consequences, including being part of and lead to actual physical attacks on them by assorted elements. Given the recent death threats and now this I am concerned that more such attempts may be coming. Do you think that semi-protection of the Bob Avakian article is warranted now?
To add to the picture, on July 8th there were 3 vandalism attempts on the article for the Revolutionary Communist Party which Bob Avakian is the leader of. Three times the same anonymous user wrote in the first sentence that the party is a "terrorist group" . These edits were quickly reverted by the user SunDawn and SunDawn warned the user that any further vandalism would result in the user being blocked. But I do think that this adds to a pattern of recent vandalism.
Again, my concern is that more vandalism could be in the offing and semi-protection of the Bob Avakian article should be an appropriate action. I appreciate your thoughts on this and your continued attention to this problem. EyesWhyde (talk) 00:53, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, EyesWhyde. I have semi-protected the article for one month. My practice is to double the protection if the disruption continues. So, next time it would be two months, then four months and so on. The antivandalism bots are pretty good at reverting obvious vandalism but this wording is a bit more complex. I am not familiar with the inner working of the bots but to me the word "snitch" ought to be an indicator. Maybe it is rarely used in Wikipedia vandalism. Cullen328 (talk) 01:25, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Jim,
Thanks very much for acting quickly on this! And thanks for your explanation of your semi-protection practices. I appreciate the work you are doing very much. EyesWhyde (talk) 01:34, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Admin is being rude and personal

Greetings! I need your advice on a following issue. One of the admins is being rude to me personally about our discussion on cultural appropriation of Russian Empire of Ukrainian art. Unfortunately, he or she decided not to discuss the issue, rather attack me personally. I am new to Wikipedia and don't know how to deal with that issue. Could you please advise me?

Thank you! Elmo1111 (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Elmo1111. I have no idea how you found your way to my talk page on your fourth edit to Wikipedia, but whatever. Your first edit was to ascribe a Ukrainian identity to a 19th century artist of Armenian ancestry who was born in Crimea in the Russian Empire. As I am sure you know, Crimea was part of the Russian Empire from 1783 to 1917, and had no significant Ukrainian identity at that time. Accordingly, it is not appropriate in any way to describe this artist who died 122 years ago as "Ukrainian" unless multiple reliable sources explicitly call him Ukrainian and explain why. Do you have any such reliable sources to offer?
Now, on to your gripe with Ymblanter. You take exception to his use of the term "trash talking". I might instead have used terms like "soapboxing" and "POV pushing". It is simply not encyclopedic to insert allusions to 21st century geopolitical conflicts into the biography of a 19th century artist. You asked Ymblanter I can't help but think that you must be non-objective in this matter. Are you Russian by any chance? Please read Assume good faith and conduct yourself accordingly going forward.
As for your intrusive question about Ymblanter's citizenship, please be aware that every editor has an absolute right to anonymity or to reveal or conceal whatever personal information that they wish. It is considered very rude and utterly inappropriate to interrogate any editor about their citizenship, race, ethnicity, religion, personal ideology, formal education, gender identity or anything similar. I choose to disclose a lot of personal information on my userpage but many editors do not, and that is their free choice. In this particular case, it is clear that Ymblanter speaks Russian and is knowledgeable about Russia. He says on his userpage that he is a Dutch citizen living in the Netherlands. In real life, I am a theoretical physicist specializing in condensed matter physics and quantum nanoscience. That is all the personal information that you are entitled to know. I happen to know that his statements are accurate. Cullen328 (talk) 02:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

The Red Paintings

Unidentified ISPs and/or single-purpose accounts are again disrupting this article. They are deleting content similar to that deleted during/after the article's two AfDs back in March 2022. Could you have a look?

Hello, Shaidar cuebiyar. I have semi-protected that article for six months. Thanks for the report. Cullen328 (talk) 21:45, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt response: much appreciated.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Lock on Red paintings wiki page

Hello, I am wondering why you locked a page I am trying to add unbiased revisions on? It looked like the one editor was adding personal bias information and not credible sources. I was making a case that all the bands Publishing stated MCSWEENEY as writer not “Barrtt” even tho “shadier” claimed that was not the case. I tried to discuss in TALK but he refused to listen. How does that Warrant a 6 month page lock? 46.135.7.225 (talk) 23:29, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

This article has long been subject to disruptive editing. You removed well referenced content with a vague edit summary, which is part of the ongoing pattern of disruption. You are free to make formal edit requests at Talk:The Red Paintings. You can also ask for the protection to be lifted at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection in the section "Current requests for reduction in protection level". Cullen328 (talk) 23:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Also, your comment above is rambling and borderline incoherent. You have made no edits to the article talk page with this IP address. Cullen328 (talk) 23:59, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Uaa

Maybe this will give you some insight as to your queries on the report I posted. Hope this clears things up. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:07, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, FlightTime. I fail to see how my comments about User:SouthernCaliforniaExploration have any connection to the block of User: Cape Marine Engineering, an account that states they are located in South Africa. As a Californian, I can attest that California is a very, very long way from South Africa. Can you please clarify? Cullen328 (talk) 01:28, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, my bad, wrong block. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
It's all good, FlightTime. Cullen328 (talk) 02:34, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:HD § add photo to my page

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:HD § add photo to my page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:31, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jim. Just a courtesy notification about this since you actually added the file in question to William Benton (writer) the writer. FWIW, I did tag the file with c:Template:npd to give the uploader a chance to verify it's licensing, but another Commons user subsequently tagged it as a copyvio and copyvios can be deleted asap. So, if the image is gone by time you see this post, then that probably explains why. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:36, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
No problem, Marchjuly. Thanks for the heads up. Cullen328 (talk) 23:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for your good work! Andrevan@ 07:11, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Blocked galtgroup

Why am I blocked? It said something about being a group I’m not a group it’s just a name there is no group there’s no reason to block me just because of the word group you didn’t even check on anything and I have no idea how to get to you to tell you this so I’m putting it here there’s no instructions in how to talk to you. 2600:1702:32A0:9230:4EC:A531:26BA:B6D2 (talk) 06:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Follow the instructions at User talk:Galtgroup. Cullen328 (talk) 15:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

A Quick Favor

Hey Cullen! Can you do me a favor and please block User:Time2023? They keep on inserting fake information about fighting games, video game companies, etc. See their contribs. Thank you! ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 23:45, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, JCW555. There is no discussion and no warnings on their talk page. Please warn them first, and let me know if they persist. Cullen328 (talk) 23:51, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Have warned, will let you know if they persist. Thank you! ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 23:55, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Hey Cullen, they've just done it again. ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 17:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
JCW555, I am not familiar with that game, so it is not clear to me that this is vandalism. Cullen328 (talk) 18:08, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
There is no hidden boss with that name in The King of Fighters XIII at all. ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 18:17, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
That may well be true, JCW555, but I can't block an editor for vandalism unless I know myself that it is vandalism. I can't take someone else's word for it. Cullen328 (talk) 18:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Message on my talk page

A) was already warned, don't need the redundancy or admins ganging up for a favored user ; b) LittleJerry used just as bad as profanity and even worse personal attacks, yet no addressing the issue with him ; c) also does nothing to address the real issue at hand - out of control users on Wikipedia removing edits because they don't like them and ignoring other third party users when they are asked about the removal. But by all means admins - please continue to gang up on me over it, really nice work. Don't really need to volunteer my free time for edits to a site with such nepotism for users who are that abusive. (Jakobees (talk) 03:57, 19 July 2022 (UTC))

Hello, Jakobees. You have a really unpleasant way of expressing yourself. Didn't you learn as a child that two wrongs do not make a right? Oh, well. You have been warned and will therefore not be surprised if you resume your reprehensible behavior and end up blocked from editing. The choice is yours in the end. Cullen328 (talk) 04:12, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Comparing me to a child - and the bullying continues. Zero addressing of any of my points made. Great community leadership. Been a member for over 10 years, not once has this issue come up. But again, thank you for treating me like garbage! Really appreciated. (Jakobees (talk) 05:21, 19 July 2022 (UTC))

Jakobees, stay off off my talk page and behave yourself. Cullen328 (talk) 05:42, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Beeblebrox reprimanded me first and I then pointed out that the user attacked me first. Also, I'm not related to anybody here so there's no nepotism. LittleJerry (talk) 13:36, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Need help editing a template...

Hello Mr. Cullen,

I'm a relatively new user on Wikipedia & am trying to bring my contribution to a few articles here and there... unfortunately, this is where I got stuck recently.


I tried editing the Template:Infobox economy source, in order to add a new field: "Population at risk of poverty". I feel this is an important addition, bc I have seen important publications/institutions focus on the 'at risk' population, not just the one that is already below the poverty line... however, I was unsuccessful.

In order to try out this change, I added at the end of the label list (in the source code):

"label53 = {{longitem|Population at risk of poverty}}"

"data53 = {{{risk of poverty|}}}"


(Ofc, I would like to place it much higher up in the code, right under "Population under poverty line" -- so: label19=.... data19=... -- but this was just for test.)


Unfortunately nothing happened, the infobox fields didn't change after publishing. The page says it is semi-protected, so only 'autoconfirmed users can edit it' -- but I believe I am one of those, since I was logged in, over 4 days old + had more than 10 edits performed at the time...

Perhaps you can help me to figure this out,

Thank you! 

Dhyana b (talk) 13:02, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Dhyana b. In order to edit a template, your must have the Template editor user right, which is only granted to very experienced and trusted editors. I have been an editor for 13 years and have never once edited a template. An error could adversely affect thousands of articles. I suggest that you propose your change on the talk page for the template. Cullen328 (talk) 14:33, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Thank for our input Cullen328!
Well, to be honest the page isn't that protected -- if you're an "autoconfirmed user" (meaning "user accounts that are at least 4 days old and have made at least 10 edits to the encyclopedia") you can change it. Problem is, I wasn't doing it right:
I asked this question in the Teahouse as well & a couple of users helped me identify the problem -- what I did was only modify the source code & expected the automatically-generated (visual) Template to change, displaying the new field / parameter.
However, it's not that easy: "Optional parameters are omitted from display if they aren't present in a call, so the template documentation uses a special method - '{{Generic template demo}}' - to display them, but it requires the parameter names." -- Meaning, I had to edit the 'Usage' section as well, in order to complete the change.
Anyway, I tried that & now it displays properly: Template:Infobox economy
People can now use this field/parameter it in the Wiki articles they wish to update. :) (thumbs up) Dhyana b (talk) 15:08, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Question from Aaa232355 (17:25, 19 July 2022)

Hello,

I have just made my first article (Ramadapis), on Wikipedia, but I need some help. I understand that you may have other important things to do, but it would be incredibly appreciated if you could help write the article.

P.S. the website is right below

http://www.fossilworks.org/cgi-bin/bridge.pl?a=classify&reference_no=31996 --अथर्व कॉल (talk) 17:25, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Aaa232355. Here is an article that you can use as a reference, and can use to expand the Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 17:37, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much🙏🏻 अथर्व कॉल (talk) 17:39, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Aaa232355, Here is an incomplete version of the scientific journal article that first described the species. Perhaps you can track down the complete article. Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again अथर्व कॉल (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Oh and one more thing, how to add a zip file to the page अथर्व कॉल (talk) 18:08, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Aaa232355, I cannot think of a situation where use of ZIP (file format) would be appropriate in an article. Can you give me a specific example? Cullen328 (talk) 18:21, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

I have found a file with a 3d format of the primates mandible अथर्व कॉल (talk) 18:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
For taking Clambake from this to this. Great article improvement! Schazjmd (talk) 21:47, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
👍 Like-Ad Orientem (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Schazjmd and Ad Orientem. I got motivated after somebody tried to use the website of their clambake catering company as a reference, and started abusing editors who objected. Cullen328 (talk) 22:10, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
👍 Like Maproom (talk) 05:58, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Barnstar concurrence! You are the BEST, Cullen328. I actually have a (photographically hilariously dated, but textually excellently sourced) really fine reference somewhere in my house, but this all happened right when I got to work and I don't always get to come up for air for many hours any more, and I still may not be home and capable of ransacking my "library" until the weekend.

Irma Rombauer and "the Joy" are as unimpeachable as sources get. I still have my parents' copy from the early 1970s that they ultimately "disappeared" from the cookbook shelf because I kept asking when we were going to have a formal seven-course dinner to use all the arcane little forks and cups in the dining room that never came out of their cases.

This was a mitzvah in multiple respects (even if most of the food isn't kashrut)! Take care. MUCH gratitude. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 01:01, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Julietdeltalima. My wife is a cookbook and teapot collector, so I live in a cookbook library/teapot museum. She has the 1975 edition of Joy of Cooking and inherited a well-used copy of the 1956 edition from a much older second cousin who died at the age of 100. The 1975 version has two versions of clambakes, but the 1956 version just has a bunch a clam recipes. The 2019 edition was edited by Irma's great-grandson John Becker and his wife, and I heard a lengthy interview with them on PBS when they were promoting the book. The changes in that book over the years have been fascinating. I lived for 30 years in the Napa Valley, where the Rombauer family owns a winery, which my wife and I have visited. Cullen328 (talk) 01:36, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

SS Red Oak Victory

On the home page of the website of The Restored Burlington Northern Depot & WWII Memorial Museum, in Red Oak, Iowa, is a description of, and link to additional information, about the SS Red Oak Victory, named after Red Oak, Iowa.

The initial paragraph in the Wikipedia entry about the SS Red Oak Victory, describes the high number casualties suffered by servicemen from Red Oak and Montgomery County, during WWII.

A Mission of the WWII Memorial Museum is to help ensure youths and seniors alike honor those servicemen.

And the SS Red Oak Victory also honors those servicemen and all those in uniform.

The story of the SS Red Oak Victory and Red Oak, Iowa is together told by the volunteers at the ship, and at the WWII Memorial Museum in Red Oak, Iowa. Redbullvictory (talk) 17:29, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Redbullvictory. According to Wikipedia: External links, Some acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy. That website does not offer any information about the SS Red Oak Victory that is not already in the article. Therefore, a link to that website is not appropriate. Cullen328 (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328/Archive_89&oldid=1105871717"