This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:GB fan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
User page   Talk   Links   Sandbox   Dashboard    
System-users.svg This user is the owner of one other Wikipedia account in a manner permitted by policy and it is registered with the arbitration committee.
Please note: If your message is related to a disputed edit, the best thing to do is open a discussion on the talkpage of the article instead of leaving a message here. This way we may involve as many editors as possible instead of confining the discussion here. Wikipedia is a community effort. Let's use this community component. Thank you.

Troll Mike MacRae[edit]

It seems you are more generous than I am. I was going to block Comedian Mike MacRae indefinitely - in fact I did so, but then decided that since you got your block in a minute before me, I would bow to your decision, which was 48 hours. Even if there were no other considerations, the last three edit summaries in Special:Contributions/Comedian_Mike_MacRaeSpecial:Contributions/Comedian_Mike_MacRae would convince me that this is an editor who does not need a short block. However, we'll see how the 48 hours go. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I looked a little more and was coming back to reblock indefinitely when I saw you had. Now I see that you went back and reverted back so i am going to go back to indef. -- GB fan 21:13, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
So within 17 minutes each of us has blocked twice, once for 48 hours and once indefinitely! The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Well, it's now 5 blocks in 20 minutes. As you probably noticed, I had removed talk page access, but having thought about it I decided that I ought to give the editor a chance to request an unblock, so I have restored talk page access. However, that's the end for me: I'm leaving it at that, unless he starts abusing talk page access. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
And now a CU confirmed sock. -- GB fan 23:53, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not remotely surprised. For several reasons, I thought all along the account had the hallmarks of a sockpuppet, but I had no idea whose sockpuppet. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:17, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

My CSD G7 nominations[edit]

Hey there GB fan, thanks for looking over my CSD G7 nominations! I just had one question; you stated that userspace subpages don't fall under the CSD G7 criterion, but this was only for the sandboxes I nominated, you deleted all of the other userspace subpages. Did you mean to say that sanboxes don't work with that criterion, or was it a mistake deleting those alternative pages (to see what pages I'm talking about, look at the most recent SD nominations at my CSD log)? —Skyllfully (talk | contribs) 03:50, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Skyllfully, I am not sure what ones you are talking about in your csd log. I only see two entries that are in your user space that you tagged as g7. Looking through my contributions I didn't say that g7 does not apply to user space subpages. I said that blanking in user space is not considered a deletion request. I did say that g1 does not apply to pages within user space. -- GB fan 12:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Oh, sorry about that. It may have been the font on the device that I was using—making the 1 look like a 7. —Skyllfully (talk | contribs) 16:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


Dear GB fan; Would you please send this page contents to me or return it? I wanna complete and correct it.--Freshman404Talk 16:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

The article is available at User:Freshman404/Fargum. -- GB fan 16:31, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

How to alert administrators of username violation?[edit]

Hi there, thank you for blocking User:Fuckyouwikipedia777, how can I alert administrators in the future of such offenses? Thanks!
-TheCaliforniaKansan (talk) 18:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

TheCaliforniaKansan, I see you use Twinkle. Click the arv tab and choose the Username report type. --NeilN talk to me 18:28, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict)You can report them to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. Also if you have never looked at WP:Twinkle is a very useful tool. You can use it for among other things to warn users and report them at the same time for username violations with just a few clicks. -- GB fan 18:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
@NeilN: and GB, thank you for informing me. I will definitely have to investigate the other uses for Twinkle! -TheCaliforniaKansan (talk) 18:38, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

I realised that unregistered users are not able to nominate articles for deletion. Thank you for helping to start a discussion for Punggol North MRT Station. Can i also request your help for nominating Hume MRT Station too? I have my reasons to believe that this article should be nominated too. Afterall, a deletion discussion is better, for the people to decide whether to keep or delete. Thank you. - (talk) 01:30, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I have created the afd. -- GB fan 16:04, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Bad link for contentious info about a living person[edit]

Hi GBFan, I noticed that you reverted an edit I made to the Chris Dold article because the link I used was a "bad link for contentious info". Can you explain what makes a good link for contentious info? I'm not interested in disputing this specific case but want to know for future edits I might try to make. The link came from which is the website for "The Kingston Whig-Standard" which is Kingston's local newspaper and reputed enough to have its own Wikipedia article Do local newspapers not warrant inclusion for contentious info specifically? ifeelitinmyfingers —Preceding undated comment added 04:39, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I removed it because the link itself was bad. When I clicked the link to see if it verified the information it said the page was not found. Just checked again and it says the same thing. I didn't do any investigation past clicking the link. Even if the link was good I would probably remove it as there its no back story, just a one liner with no other information seems out of place. -- GB fan 11:54, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Carniolus vs IPs[edit]

See User_talk:Carniolus#IP_vandal_making_up_information. Materialscientist (talk) 22:34, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Ishtiaq Ahmad[edit]

I see that you've deleted the page Ishtiaq Ahmad (fiction writer) based on WP:GNG and WP:Notability (people). Although, whoever created the original article failed to cite verifiable sources, it was infact about a notable person. The local media has covered the person in question recently and the article may have been improved over time. This page should be reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

The article has been restored. -- GB fan 16:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Redirect loops[edit]

Hello, User:GB fan, you reverted some of my requests for speedy deletion on redirects to Blattisocius. The article Blattisocius contains a list of species of the mites in the genus Blattisocius. All of the blue wiki-links there are redirects, that immediately link to the list in Blattisocius itself. So no new information can be gained by this loop. On the other hand every reader has the impression, that there were many written articles about those species. That such articles do not exist is blurred by the fact, that there are red wiki-links too in the list, showing that no article exists about these species. In my opinion all links have to be blue or better, like in lots of other articles with lists of species, should show blue links only if there is a real article and not a redirect to the list in the article of a taxon of higher level. We could redirect millions of species names to generic names without writing any articles. That's not how redirects should work. So please revert to my SD request and delete those unuseful redirects. --Regiomontanus (talk) 22:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

You tagged those redirects that the target was not there. That was incorrect, the target exists. If you think the redirects should be deleted as not useful the correct venue is WP:RFD. Redirects not being useful is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. -- GB fan 23:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


There is a current discussion for the deletion of an article titled Jorge Alberto Rodríguez which appears to very similar titled to an article Jorge Alberto Rodríguez (disambiguation) which was deleted earlier in the year 10:53, 6 May 2015. I'm just curious is this a recreation of that article that was deleted --Kigali1 (talk) 13:11, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Here is the whole article that I deleted
Jorge Alberto Rodríguez
It is not the same. -- GB fan 20:37, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Question about redirect[edit]

I'm not the expert here, so I'm seeking more information about your edit here.

When I see the actual result (about diacritical marks), it makes no sense at all. It used to, when we redirected from English to the Swedish spelling. Then it made sense. Now we don't use Tommy's name at all in the title, and there is no place at Wikipedia which uses this redirect, so it no longer has any value.

No page links to it, making it an unused orphan. That's why I wish to delete it. If there isn't a better criterion to use, can't you just IAR and delete it anyway? There is no point in keeping it. In fact, we should add "unused orphan" as another WP:Criteria for speedy deletion.

I'd like to learn more about this. Please ping me. -- BullRangifer (talk) 04:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

BullRangifer, The criterion are very specific as to what admins can delete using the process. There is no speedy deletion criterion that allows me to delete that redirect. I won't ignore the rule as I don't see how deleting the redirect improves the encyclopedia. While not directly applicable to CSD you should read this section and the subordinate ones. It discusses why we do/don't delete redirects at WP:RFD. In a nutshell the major reason we delete redirects is because they are harmful. This redirect is not hurting anything and it is possible that it might help someone at sometime. If you think the redirect should be deleted you can nominate it for deletion using WP:RFD. -- GB fan 11:38, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Also if you think there should be a new or modified criterion the place to propose it is at WT:RFD. Be sure to read the top of the page where it discusses the reasons for new criterion. -- GB fan 11:52, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the great response. -- BullRangifer (talk) 15:50, 20 November 2015 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Request topic ban for CheckersBoard. Thank you. NeilN talk to me 17:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.[edit]

Thank you for your help in resolving the large deletions at Danbury, Connecticut. I feel so affirmed that the Wikipedia community responded and that the guidelines are so well designed that they can handle a case like this and find a good resolution. Thank you also for finding two sources for inmates at the Danbury Correctional. I appreciate the goodwill. The article will be much improved as a result of this resolution. Maybe it needed a little stirring up. There is indeed some cruft there, it's just that there is a lot of good material that simply needs sourcing and some love. Thanks again for your time and caring. SageRad (talk) 20:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

SageRad, I don't believe the right decision was made to wholesale restore the content but I will not get involved in that. You could have saved much time by just looking for citations for the information and adding stuff back as you found them. You should also assume good faith of other editors that they are really trying to improve articles not vandalize them to get revenge on you. -- GB fan 21:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Western dressage[edit]

Hey, noticed you commenting on Elatu's talk. I've been in WikiProject Equine for a couple months now, and western dressage is a notable topic. I've offered to help them recreate the article so that it meets inclusion criteria, because I had been thinking about writing it myself for a while. ☺ White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 00:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Ok, the only problem I had with it is the article was almost a word for word copy of a blog. If we could get a referenced article that would be good. -- GB fan 00:59, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
I have a reliable magazine with a full-length article about WD; I'll see if I can use that as a source. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 01:20, 25 November 2015 (UTC)