User talk:Favonian/Archive 58

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

Archive 58

Foreign born samurai page

You might want to semi-protect the foreign born samurai page like you did for Yasuke's for the same reasons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign-born_samurai_in_Japan Theozilla (talk) 19:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done – Favonian (talk) 19:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you delete the

"It is important to note that despite popular myth and modern depictions there are no historical writings nor evidence that Yasuke was ever granted the rank or title of samurai, he was never given a fief nor referred to as one in any writings. Most of our knowledge of his life comes from these messages written by missionaries and locals."

line since it was only just added on 15:21, 15 May 2024‎ (likely due to the new Assassin's Creed video game reveal)?

And as others mentioned on the Talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yasuke#RE:_Repeated_Edits_and_NPOV is not written with a NPOV. Theozilla (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Categorically: no! This has to be settled at Talk:Yasuke. Favonian (talk) 20:11, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay then, how is it determined if the issue has been resolved on the talk page? Because I imagine that can also easily devolve in repeated back and forth "no you" replies. Theozilla (talk) 20:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

It that case, the long and winding path of WP:Dispute resolution has to be followed. Favonian (talk) 20:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

How long does a Talk section debate have to go on for before one should submit to something like say https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring ? Theozilla (talk) 20:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

That noticeboard is where edit warriors are sent on their road to perdition, a fate you narrowly escaped. I actually don't know the recommended duration of the various steps on The Road. Maybe some of my benevolent stalkers can be of assistance. Favonian (talk) 20:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

So would posting to this noticeboard be more fruitful? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard Theozilla (talk) 22:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

ANI for Talk:Yasuke

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry

Only after clicking save did I realise that this edit by me implied that your pervious one was no good. That was in no way intended. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

No worries! Favonian (talk) 18:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Persistent reverts

Hi. There is an anon. user who insisted to keep their revision on nickelodeon on CBS, despite several attempts by me and other autoconfirmed users undoing their edits. Do you consider protecting the page?197.3.215.25 (talk) 15:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

 User blocked – Favonian (talk) 18:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

"Dread" vs "dreaded" in the Conrad bio

Hello. From thefreedictionary.com:

Usage Note: The adjective dread meaning "causing terror or fear" is often supplanted by the participle adjective dreaded. In our 2015 survey, 88 percent of the Usage Panel found the use of dreaded acceptable in the sentence After communicating with the enemy, Corporal Adams was labeled with the dreaded epithet "traitor." By contrast, only 69 percent of the Panel found the use of dread in the same sentence acceptable, while roughly one-third found its use unacceptable. It seems that dreaded is not merely gaining ground as an alternative to dread but actually replacing it as the adjective of choice to mean "causing fear."

Please reconsider your change and restore the term "dreaded." 76.128.41.166 (talk) 21:26, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary gives the current meaning of the adjective "dread" as "Terrible; greatly feared; dreaded." https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dread#Adjective

Hence, as Favonian points out, in the "Joseph Conrad" article there is no need to replace the adjective "dread" with the adjective "dreaded". Indeed, "dread' reads the more gracefully.

Nihil novi (talk) 13:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I rather prefer the sound of "the dread Tenth Pavilion". As it is an accepted usage, I see no reason to defer to some panel on the internet. Favonian (talk) 15:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Hermes

Hello mr Favonian. Ive asked sorry what else Should i do??? Why did you deleted my edits??? Hermes is also the god of Magic and Sleep. He was closely associated with Magic and his caduceus is said to induce Sleep to persons. 2A02:1388:2091:BF38:0:0:9E35:E196 (talk) 18:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

You and your socks have been blocked repeatedly. My advice? Stop editing Wikipedia! Favonian (talk) 18:47, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

We're red, we're white

You excited yet? Drmies (talk) 16:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Sure. One goal. The trophy is practically bagged! Favonian (talk) 16:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah that's maybe what the Albanians thought too. Didn't know there was a Schmeichel family tradition! Good luck! Maybe in a few weeks you'll party like it's 1992. Drmies (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you.

That was the first time I've ever seen vandalism on that scale.

		The Original Barnstar
		For being the cavalry. Squeeyote (talk) 05:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Porchetta

Dear @Favonian, I would like to understand why you blocked me. I was restoring referenced information deleted by @JackkBrown. You can see that this user removed content for no reason here for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Porchetta&oldid=1218557819 I tried to talk in the talk page, I even provided a new reference supporting the version that I am trying to restore (it is in the talk page).

Could you have a look in the talk section too? the content removed by JackkBrown was supported by references and it is not fair to delete it and block me when I was just trying to restore it.

In any case could you tell me how to proceed in this case, seeing that I am doing something wrong. 81.185.168.74 (talk) 14:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

You kept edit-warring using IPs from the range 81.185.160.0/20 (which has previously been blocked for similar disruption on the Macaron article), and when I put a stop to that, you switched to 77.205.152.210. When you can't take a hint, more forceful methods are applied. I have no stake in the discussion, which will talk place at Talk:Porchetta and nowhere else. Favonian (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Ok I understand it was not correct to edit-war, but i was not alone so why am I the only one to be blocked? It is not fair 81.185.168.74 (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Italy vs France? Cooking? Fighting over who invented what? That sounds familiar. There's an SPI, there's a user who promised to be better. Drmies (talk) 20:52, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Failed unprotection request

I was actually requesting a downgrade in edit-protection (not move-) from template- to semi- access. However, I am still unconvinced by the decline reason. Please take your time and explain to me.197.2.244.222 (talk) 10:53, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Then you should probably ask the administrator who rejected the request. In spite of our usernames having the same initial letter, we are not identical. Favonian (talk) 11:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I was attempting to get input from another administrator (i.e. you) who is more responsible at handling RFPP requests, however I am drawing Firefangledfeathers's attention in this case.197.2.244.222 (talk) 11:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I understood the request was for a downgrade in protection. I'm sorry to hear you're unconvinced by the decline reason. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:00, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Please unambiguously explain as soon as possible before those hooligans who are "best known for" creating – well, this edit summary explains everything.197.2.244.222 (talk) 12:08, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

This discussion does not really concern me, so I must ask you to continue elsewhere. One of our perennial gits appears to have embarked on his weekend pastime, so the page is about to be protected. Favonian (talk) 12:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

perennial gits. You do have a way with words, User F*.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:25, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, User Multi-B, I aim to displease – some people. Favonian (talk) 12:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Why don't you score an f-ing goal against the f-ing Germans, sir. Drmies (talk) 20:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

On advice from counsel, I take the fifth. Favonian (talk) 20:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry F. Drmies (talk) 21:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

NoBull

@Jcostas81 had reached out to me on meta (of all places) after I closed an RM/TR request of their's as not done. After evaluating further, and I find that it may be possible to move to Nobull, given that there is some inconsistency in how the brand is written in the news (NOBULL, NoBull, and Nobull). This alternate move is also reflected/supported in some comments in the RM discussion. Would like check if you have any issues if we have NoBull be moved to Nobull, given that you had closed the recent RM discussion as 'not moved'? – robertsky (talk) 03:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Robertsky: As you have pointed out, Nobull and NoBull both found support in the discussion, with the former leading by a small margin, so I'm fine with either name. Favonian (talk) 11:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Will be moving it then. – robertsky (talk) 12:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:PP protection for TALK:Nina Power due to ip vandalism

There have now been 9 reverted edits by this (i assume) singular troll over the past two days, and they had been doing edit wars on the original article for two days earlier before it had been ECP'ed I know its rare to escalate protection for a talk page, but it seems the IP vandal is insistent.

If the vandalism does not stop within the next few days, could we just WP:AUTOC protect the talk page for a week or so? Bluethricecreamman (talk) 23:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

 Already done by Johnuniq. Favonian (talk) 10:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

troll is back Bluethricecreamman (talk) 14:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Protected – again. Favonian (talk) 17:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

WP :PP for "Bakhtiyar Khilji's Tibbet Campaign " due to vandalism

There are many reverted edits over two months from unknown users. Please protect Bakhtiyar Khalji's Tibet campaign.Thanks Hejkl (talk) 05:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

University at Albany

You keep reverting to older versions that are INCORRECT. The University at Albany does NOT have a headmaster. Robert J. Jones served as President of the University at Albany from 2013-2016 before assuming the Presidency at the University of Illinois. Financial information from 2015-16 is also woefully out-of-date. Additionally the Foundation has listed as "assets" a "headmaster's residence" which is again an erroneous term. The previous edits need to be reinstated. 169.226.135.72 (talk) 14:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

"Wolf man" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Wolf man has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 23 § Wolf man until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

nickelodeon on CBS

That user is back, but under another address. Is there anything you can do?102.158.7.86 (talk) 11:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

 User blocked – Favonian (talk) 12:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

your block of 149.50.169.97 (the numbers SPA)

Thanks, Nice timing. I was in the middle of writing this up when you blocked. Meters (talk) 07:40, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

My pleasure. It's one of our faithful customers, expressing their need for a renewed block. Favonian (talk) 07:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah yes, the editing style is just what I was coming here to mention. User 103.217.156.169 is partially blocked from Catherine Howard, etc. They have returned to Mary Ball Washington - they seem to have a preoccupation with Washington family members - adding unsourced content about MBW's ages/birthdate/etc. Maybe a range block or a block from MBW is in their future?... Cheer, Shearonink (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

And now - suddenly! - there's [this editor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mil1090], editing preoccupation seems somewhat familiar, adding ages at time of death to various American history articles... Shearonink (talk) 15:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Interesting. Guess the Washington and Adams families are like the Tudors and Stuarts of the U.S. I'll try to keep an eye on the two (which I'm not convinced are the same) to see if retribution is required. Favonian (talk) 16:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Favonian

are you a admin of Wikipedia? Pluto The Feather Family Player (talk) 11:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Yes, he is. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 12:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

LTA again I suspect

Help again: 178.166.148.65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Decrease. Suspect it's the same idiot/proxy. You just blocked on another. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:38, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Already dispatched by one of my colleagues. Favonian (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

And another: 89.185.68.16 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Guessing the page needs to be protected for a little while now just so it can breathe. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Barnstarz

We really need one for fastest blocks. Knitsey (talk) 20:23, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! The man who shoots faster than his shadow. Favonian (talk) 20:25, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

This is so weird. I remember seeing an album with the same character in it. Too long a story but, my friends dad was part of the liberation of Belgium WW2. He was in the tank regiment and met with some of the Belgian resistance who assisted with intelligence about ammunition dumps and charges that had been laid on some of the bridges.

His dad kept in touch with one of the resistance leaders after the war, he was invited each year to the liberation celebrations. Over the years my friend was sent several cartoon albums, his favourite was Asterix but he was also sent some of Lucky Luke ones. You've just reminded me of our poor attempts at translating them when we were kids. I couldn't remember the name of the Lucky Luke albums...until now! Knitsey (talk) 20:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I have kept all my Tintin, Asterix and Lucky Luke albums. Classics don't die. Favonian (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Milu(?) He was sent some of those too I think? Or maybe his dad bought them. My friends dad was involved in denazification in Germany for a while then worked in France so he might have picked them up there. I'm not sure about that.

I'm going to e-mail my friend later to tell him about this conversation. Knitsey (talk) 21:00, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

What to do?

197.14.160.126 (talk · contribs) was warned, but persisted in non-constructive edits.102.156.34.17 (talk) 16:37, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

The IP hasn't edited since the final warning was issued. Favonian (talk) 17:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Request to Unblock Website URL betterauds.com

Dear Favonian,

I am reaching out regarding the global block of my website URL, [https://betterauds.com/]. I understand that this action was taken due to un reletead one page create some one. Since then, I have made significant changes to address the issues, including changes.

I kindly request your assistance in reviewing my case and considering the unblocking of my website. Your guidance on how I can further ensure compliance with Wikipedia’s guidelines would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best regards Seoexperteam (talk) 05:09, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Discussion in progress at User talk:Marksmes. Favonian (talk) 12:12, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

New, longer block needed for 84.240.22.114

Last July, you blocked 84.240.22.114 for 72 hours. They are evading the 2-year block placed on their original account. They have resumed their block-evading, disruptive edits so a much longer block seems appropriate and necessary. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 11:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Already blocked, both locally and globally. Favonian (talk) 16:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #91703

I wonder how you feel about my comments for this appeal since you are the blocking admin. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@0xDeadbeef: I have commented at UTRS, though the privilege rightfully belongs to 331dot, as I merely removed the applicant's talk page access. Favonian (talk) 18:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocked user is evading again

Hello, I noticed that you reverted some edits by this user. They are back on a new IP account and are reverting edits again with no explanation. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Uh, thanks...

... but also, what the hell hahaha. So random. I'm barely active these days. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 17:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Our enemies have long memories. Favonian (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm truly baffled, this behaviour is frankly eerie. The fake selfnom text is almost spooky in how credible it is. I think I'd much rather have insults hurled at me. 😅 Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 17:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Maybe it was done with the help of ChatGPT or one of its ilk. Steeling a line from Leonard Cohen: "I've seen the future, brother // It is murder." Favonian (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry and BLP violations

Further reports/discussion should take place elsewhere, e.g. WP:SPI.

Hello Favonian, I have witnessed disruptive editing by User:Παλαβός in the article of Karel Komárek. It ticks too many boxes and I'm not quite sure how to deal with it, as it is sockpuppetry, and a violation of BLP, and possibly also undisclosed paid editing. Frankly, I wouldn't know which noticeboard to use which is why I'm contacting you on your talk page instead. I'm also pinging User:Ymblanter and user User:Daniel Case in this matter because they are already familiar with one aspect of the case. User:Edwardx, who is one of the article's main authors, has also been contacted, but this was of no avail (cf. User talk:Edwardx#FYI). Since 27 August, Παλαβός has been trying to add a "Ties with Russia" section to the article of Karel Komárek. This section is a violation of Wikipedia's WP:BLP policy, cf. Special:Diff/1240235073/1242518602; the edits have also been automatically tagged as possible BLP issue or vandalism, and this becomes especially obvious if the revisions are filtered for edits tagged as that, cf. [1]. Why do I believe that the addition is a violation of WP:BLP? The text is negative in tone, makes ridiculous claims, and is largely based on questionable, unreliable, biased Ukrainian-language and Russian-language sources. Furthermore, it contains multiple duplicate references, and even if we pretend the sources were citable, the text addition has added heavy WP:UNDUE weight to a single point of view, considering that the article was increased from 18,000 bytes to 30,000 bytes. If it wasn't so severe, I would be amused by the fact that the only reliable English-language sources (The Telegraph and The Guardian), added in that set of edits, are contrary to the section's claims; The Telegraph's headline reads Billionaire "cuts ties with Kremlin-backed Gazprom", and The Guardian writes "Komárek publicly condemned Vladimir Putin after the invasion of Ukraine". Παλαβός's "Ties with Russia" text reads that "Russian special services" agents currently hold positions in Komárek's Moravia Gas Storage firm, or that Komárek owns the Russian Samara terminal which provides the Donetsk People's Republic with oil. The grammar errors Παλαβός has made are atypical of native English speakers, and per WP:SPADE, I say that most of the text was written by Chat GPT or DeepL. I doubt that Παλαβός is able to compose a text compelling enough for (English) Wikipedia. That said, Παλαβός passes the WP:DUCK test, i.e., his account is undoubtedly a WP:SPA account, and the sockpuppetry is so obvious that a WP:SPI is not required, cf. Special:Contribs/Παλαβός: on 8 January, the account was created and immediately started editing random Greek articles to obtain the autoconfirmed user right. Note that someone spent about one and a half hours of uninterrupted editing, i.e., the account was just used once in a single account levelling event. From 8 January until 27 August, the account went dormant; on 27 August, the account was reactivated to perform these edits (Special:Diff/1240235073/1242518602) in the article of Karel Komárek. After Παλαβός's edit was reverted on 28 August, an edit war took place ([2]), in which Παλαβός logged out of that account and used the Hungarian IPs 78.131.76.168, 80.98.145.168, and 195.38.102.149 to perform disruptive edits. The edit summary he has used is so unusual — "ties with Russia returned", especially the verb "return" in that context — that I argue this is proof for sockpuppetry per the WP:DUCK test. Interesting to note is also that immediately after the edit warring started on 28 August, Παλαβός used the 80.98.145.168 IP address to request page protection for the article ([3]). When User:Daniel Case asked Παλαβός whether he would be okay with the fact that he wouldn't be able to edit the page using the Hungarian IPs, Παλαβός used the 195.38.102.149 IP to write "no problem at all. I'm OK with that" knowing that he would be able use the autoconfirmed Παλαβός account to circumvent the silverlock. Another interesting note: the text that Παλαβός has written on WP:RfPP using the 80.98.145.168 IP address suits the text in the Komárek article very nicely in terms of grammatical errors. The last detail is the editing of the user page and user talk: Παλαβός quickly created a user page and a talk page prior to resuming the edit war on 30 August, presumably to avoid having a red-link user page and talk, cf. ([4], [5], Special:Diff/1243102062) The editing pattern that Παλαβός has shown is too sophisticated for someone who is just trying to edit a page. I doubt that a newcomer would make use of WP:RfPP, and, in addition to that, deliberately blue his user (talk) page prior to entering into an edit war. It's highly likely that Παλαβός is an undisclosed paid editor whose job is the opposite of "enhancing" an article on Wikipedia. On 2 September, an increase in protection level to bluelocking was requested at RfPP (Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2024/09#Karel Komárek), but eventually, the protection level wasn't increased. I believe this may be a misunderstanding; User:Daniel Case wrote "The edits reverted were made before [the silverlocking]" but it's actually that the disruptive edits to be reverted were made after User:Ymblanter had silverlocked the article. What do you think and how can this be remedied? I certainly can't edit the page because it's silverlocked, entering talk page discussions has proven fruitless, and I also think that Παλαβός would simply create — or already has created — new accounts to continue the disruptive editing. Thank you. 63.67.4.175 (talk) 11:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC) I apologize ... you are correct. I had confused the editor you were complaining about with the one making the complaint. But at the same time this isn't a cut-and-dried case of disruption. Facially, the edits are sourced reliably; I will have to actually look at the articles cited. Daniel Case (talk) 17:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC) @User:Daniel Case: Don't worry, it's not easy to spot. You're making a good point here, facially the edits are sourced reliably, but on closer inspection they aren't. If you take a second look at it, you will see that, most footnotes refer to Ukrainian-language and Russian-language sources that are not well-suited for a BLP, with most drawn from social media posts with the outlets disclaiming any liability for publishing. I have analyzed the referencing in the first three paragraphs of this revision: Reference 10 refers to Radio Prague International. At the point it is used, the Wikipedia article reads "in 2006 Karel Komarek initiated cooperation with the Russian monopoly Gazprom". The source says that negotiations between MND and Gazprom took place. The source doesn't say that Komárek initated a cooperation. In fact, the source mentions Komárek once in an explanatory comment in the last sentence, i.e, this is at least a failed verification. Per WP:FAILV and WP:BLP, the sentence thus "should be removed immediately". Unfortunately, most references in the text addition are built like this. Reference 11 refers to polpred.com which seems to be a database, i.e., a primary source, and it is forced into line with Russian state media. Including Komárek's article, Wikipedia has just three BLPs in which this source is used. It is definitely not a reliable source for a BLP, and also not for any other article on Wikipedia. Reference 12 is used for this sentence: "Komarek lobbied for the construction of a gas storage facility to store Russian gas in the Czech Republic, bypassing Ukraine's gas transportation system." The source doesn't mention Karel Komárek, it doesn't describe lobbying, and it also doesn't discuss a "bypassing of Ukraine's gas transportation system". Actually, the sources discusses that MND and Vemex agreed to build a gas storage facility in the Czech Republic. References 13, 1, and 17 (The Guardian) refer to the first proper source cited, but, it was used in a very misleading way. The Guardian writes "Komárek has condemned Russia’s “brutal” invasion of Ukraine", and "Russia’s all-out invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 is understood to have kickstarted efforts by KKCG to extricate itself from the co-investment with Gazprom". Παλαβός's text doesn't mention that, and per WP:SPADE, I say this was done on purpose. Reference 14 refers to a Gazprom press release; I hope it doesn't need explaining that sources like that should be omitted in a BLP. Reference 15 is used for the following sentence: "The board of directors of Moravia Gas Storage a.s. includes (...) Russian managers of the Russian monopoly, many of whom have been identified by Russian opposition media as former or current employees of Russian special services." Source 15 is an article written by Hennady Sikalov (Геннадій Сікалов) who in fact makes the described claim. The problem though is that no other reliable sources seem to support what he claims. He is an unknown figure, English Wikipedia doesn't mention his name once. But what can be said for sure is that Sikalov seems to be a Pro-Ukrainian activist, i.e., has apparently been convicted of fraud, and presumably supports a heavily biased opinion, and it cannot be established whether or not he is a reliable source. Therefore, the source should not be cited in a BLP. Reference 16 (Proekt) is a reliable source, but it doesn't mention the subject's name, i.e., it discusses something totally unrelated. Reference 17 is a duplicate of references 1, and 13. Reference 18 is a court register excerpt, a primary source. Reference 19 (also a duplicate of 21, and 22) refers to NEXT.io, a source that is cited in just one other article on Wikipedia. That is because prior to 2023, NEXT.io didn't exist. The source describes itself as "a content-driven events, media and publishing company that delivers news and insight to investors and iGaming professionals". However, I doubt that. Just look at its "about us" page; I think it's obvious that it was composed by AI. To be clear: NEXT.io appears bogus. Reference 23 refers to Radio Liberty, but, again, the claim "In turn, Radio Liberty noted in its own investigation that Karel Komarek owes the success of his business to the Russians" is not supported by the source. Even if it was, "Komárek owes the success of his business to the Russians" is not an encyclopedic sentence. I hope this suffices to demonstrate why the content is so problematic. I have already explained why the editing behavior is also problematic; it doesn't need repeating at this point. I don't want to produce a wall of text by also analyzing the second half of the added paragraphs, but I guess the results wouldn't be any better. Thank you for having a look at this! Best wishes 2603:3003:E81:C000:344B:3F59:37E7:BDC6 (talk) 18:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC) Sorry for continuing this, but as expected, User:Παλαβός has created a new sock, Special:Contribs/Ymberlen which I first confused with User:Ymblanter. It continues to vandalize the article, see Special:Diff/1244494669. I have reverted the changes with a referral to this talk page. Also, I requested bluelocking at WP:RfPP. Best regards. 31.30.111.66 (talk) 08:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Clarification on Edit Reversion

Hi Ravi3270 (talk) 18:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Which one? To my knowledge, I haven't reverted any of your edits. Favonian (talk) 18:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your clarification

Ravi3270 (talk) 19:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Page protection

Could you please reply to the protection request here Trade (talk) 21:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

The user, whose remarks I suppose was the real issue, has been blocked by another admin. Favonian (talk) 08:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Page Protection

Hi, sorry to disturb but can you please protect these pages.

• Increase - Anura Kumara Dissanayake
• Increase - President of Sri Lanka

IDB.S (talk) 02:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

IDB.S You may get a faster response if you request page protection at the designated location, WP:RFPP, instead of approaching an admin directly 331dot (talk) 08:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, though it's been running up bit of a backlog. In any case, I've semi'ed both articles for a week. Favonian (talk) 09:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)