User talk:GorillaWarfare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
July 2015 – present

August 2014 – August 2015
August 2013 – July 2014
November 2012 – July 2013
April 2012 – October 2012
November 2011 – March 2012
April 2011 – October 2011
December 2010 – March 2011
September 2010 – November 2010
April 2010 – August 2010
November 2009 – March 2010


April Fools? Nope! Welcome to the Women Scientists worldwide online edit-a-thon during Year of Science[edit]

Join us!

Women Scientists - worldwide online edit-a-thon -
a Year of Science initiative

Year of Science Logo.svg
Women Science.png
Love Heart KammaRahbek.SVG

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

Cla68 block[edit]

I'm inferring the block of Cla68 was made in your role as admin/oversight, not as a committee action. Could you verify that for me? Thanks. NE Ent 10:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

No, it was a Committee action. GorillaWarfare (talk) 13:40, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Oh ... ya'll had a discussion and a vote and all that and decided to block? NE Ent 13:57, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes. GorillaWarfare (talk) 13:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Maybe next time use {{ArbComBlock}} instead of {{OversightBlock}}, if for no other reason than avoiding answering stupid questions on your talk page? NE Ent 14:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


Original Barnstar Hires.svg The Original Barnstar
For sticking up for me against that pig. God bless you. Kailey 2001 (talk) 23:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Shhh! Invitation to Women in Espionage[edit]

Hitchcock secret agent.jpg
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women in Espionage worldwide online edit-a-thon

--Rosiestep (talk) 03:54, 12 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)


Thanks for telling me.

I had doubts about why it had been erased but its been helpfull that someone told me the exact reason why.

I appreciate it.

Whith all my respect.


Pd: i dont know if it is possible for you to help about this, but wikipedia gives to many problems when used in an ipad and in my opinion it should try to be changed.

--Danitorres64 (talk) 07:11, 13 April 2016 (UTC)danitorres64


Sock of Jadeveon41? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:58, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Seems to be. Blocked. Thanks! GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


See this.

Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others. The scope of this case is Gamaliel's recent actions (both administrative and otherwise), especially related to the Signpost April Fools Joke. The case will also examine the conduct of other editors who are directly involved in disputes with Gamaliel. The case is strictly intended to examine user conduct and alleged policy violations and will not examine broader topic areas. The clerks have been instructed to remove evidence which does not meet these requirements. The drafters will add additional parties as required during the case. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Evidence.

Please add your evidence by May 2, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. This notification is being sent to those listed on the case notification list. If you do not wish to recieve further notifications, you are welcome to opt-out on that page. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)


I have no idea if you even remember me at all. If you do - I'm guessing you were a bit surprised to see me sticking up for you at all.  :-) — Ched :  ?  03:30, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

You're a familiar face, in that I run into you around the wiki fairly often, but had you not brought it up I would not have gone back to try to remember what you are referring to :) Though in my searching I found your first ever post on my talk page, which was quite nice, though I have no idea what the context was. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


'Prove it with a Kodak'-crop.jpg
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women in Photography
worldwide online edit-a-thon

--Rosiestep (talk) 12:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

A Dobos torte for you![edit]

Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg 7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 18:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Ooh, fancy! Ever since seeing them make them on The Great British Bake Off I've wanted to try baking one... GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
They are deadly delicious. Enjoy! 7&6=thirteen () 20:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png The Technical Barnstar
everything! KgosarMyth (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for the HELP in IRC and the Page Protection --Cameron11598 (Converse) 06:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Anytime! GorillaWarfare (talk) 06:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Women artists of Middle East / North Africa... a WiR & Guggenheim collaboration[edit]

Monir Portrait-exh ph021.jpg
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women artists of Middle East / North Africa
worldwide online edit-a-thon

--Rosiestep (talk) 14:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

You've got mail![edit]

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

Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail[edit]

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

Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown: I don't believe I got a message from you. Can you please resend it? You can email me via Special:EmailUser/GorillaWarfare or directly to; they both end up in the same place. GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
I was referring to the email i sent to ARBCOM and since you are on the list, i thought i should notify you so you can check it at your earliest convenience. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:42, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Ah thanks, we did receive it. Because it was sent to the -b list (because of a current case involving recused arbitrators, of which I am one), there was a bit of a delay in it being forwarded to the full committee. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:59, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
So, i did not receive any reply to that email, no confirmation that whether its being reviewed or not, so i was wondering what is the process like going forward. How long it can take for ARBCOM to review it? Or when would i get any response? Could it happen that ARBCOM might never reply? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:24, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Sheriff, I'm disappointed: do my emails not count? :) Drmies (talk) 00:34, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Drmies: That was sent before I sent the case to ARBCOM but I saw it afterwards so technically it does not count as a confirmation of an ARBCOM case. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 01:30, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

  • I was starting to feel slighted and sad already, Sheriff. Well, in that case GorillaWarfare, who is a much better spokesperson, will just have to respond. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 01:42, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Just noting here that I've responded. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:44, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate your response and consideration for this matter. Thank you. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:07, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Spotlight on women entertainers![edit]

Female singer silhouette.png
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women in Entertainment worldwide online edit-a-thon

--Rosiestep (talk) 02:14, 24 May 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage (To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)


I have a question about your comment on Engleham's talkpage: did you mean block instead of ban? The Quixotic Potato (talk) 01:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Sure did. Thanks for the catch! [1] GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:21, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I noticed you are not addicted to userboxes like some Wikipedians are (I have seen collections of over a hundred userboxes on a single userpage!!!) but you may like this userbox I have created based on a joke I found online. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 02:26, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Aiga toiletsq women inv.svg This user is sick of the stereotype that all women wear superhero capes.
Hah, cute. To be fair I'm probably more likely to be found in a cape than some dress that flares straight out from my shoulders... GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:50, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
I love Noel Fielding, and he has some awesome capes! Please check the latest developments over at Engleham's talkpage; we talked about it and Engleham agreed to change his tone. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 10:29, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
It's unlikely to change your opinion, but at least it may be interesting to you. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 17:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
He also suggested my username made me a sexual harasser, referred to me as a "young chick", said that I was immature and making ArbCom worse for it, etc... I don't really care to follow that conversation. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Your name reminded me of Penny Patterson's work (real name Francine). I've always been interested in human-animal communication (but I am a pretty sceptical person). The Quixotic Potato (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Esoglou socks[edit]

You recently blocked an account and tagged it as a sock of Esoglou.[2] I'm curious whether this action was from observed behavior or from checkuser tools. In either case, I think another account should be investigated. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Esoglou. Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 06:33, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

It looks like Bbb23 already handled the new reports. I did run a CU on Theodoxa and decided that between the CU data and the behavior they were a  Confirmed sock, though Bbb23 seems less confident of this link and calls it "possilikely". GorillaWarfare (talk) 14:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I agree with your conclusion and the block. It think it's a matter of semantics. For me, "confirmed" requires a greater degree of technical similarity, that's all.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Okay, sounds good! GorillaWarfare (talk) 15:04, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Admin The Wordsmith's comments re: "...the ineptness of many current Arbs..." is certainly casting aspersions[edit]

Given the seriousness of this Rfc at User talk:The Wordsmith/GMORFC the ongoing threats to sanction participating editors seem to ring hollow in light of supervising admin The Wordsmith's astonishing comments regarding ArbCom members. The comment, which by any definition "casts aspersions," raises a number of questions that call for immediate answers, given the self-created deadline for comments.

The questions, which I hereby put directly to The Wordsmith, are as follows:

  • Exactly which ArbCom members are you referring to, when you describe them as "inept?"
  • In what way are these current community-elected ArbCom members, as you term them, "inept?"
  • Do you have diffs to support this sweeping claim, and can you produce them? If not, why not?
  • Since the thrust of this extraordinary Rfc seems to be to prevent "casting aspersions," in the Talk pages of GMO articles (as well as precedent-establishing proposed "locked in" multiple article wording regarding GMO safety) is this not exactly what you are doing in the past 24 hours towards members of the Arbitration Committee? Does this not disqualify you immediately from further participation?

To all concerned: I will post the above subsection on the Talk pages of current ArbCom members, per The Wordsmith's declaration, despite substantial objections, that they will be locking down the page a few hours from this posting, making further timely discussion on this page impossible. Jusdafax 11:22, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I've seen the responses from other arbs to your messages on their talk pages, so I'll keep this brief to avoid splitting any discussion further. In the future, please consider posting things you wish the ArbCom to see to one of the several arb discussion boards, or just using the ping functionality. Spreading this across so many talk pages is confusing as hell, not to mention brushing up against admin shopping (arb shopping?) With respect to calling the ArbCom inept, that strikes me much more as criticism of the Committee (which is of course allowed) than as some sort of personal attack or aspersion. I also see that some of my colleagues disagree with me on this somewhat. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:46, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I definitely assume you mean "allowed" rather than "disallowed" there! :) Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:28, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I could pretend that it was some sort of dry humor, but... yes. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:53, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed[edit]

An arbitration case regarding Gamaliel and others has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Gamaliel is admonished for multiple breaches of Wikipedia policies and guidelines including for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, removing a speedy deletion notice from a page he created, casting aspersions, and perpetuating what other editors believed to be a BLP violation.
  2. DHeyward and Gamaliel are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with or discussing each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the usual exemptions.
  3. DHeyward (talk · contribs) is admonished for engaging in incivility and personal attacks on other editors. He is reminded that all editors are expected to engage respectfully and civilly with each other and to avoid making personal attacks.
  4. For conduct which was below the standard expected of an administrator — namely making an incivil and inflammatory close summary on ANI, in which he perpetuated the perceived BLP violation and failed to adequately summarise the discussion — JzG is admonished.
  5. Arkon is reminded that edit warring, even if exempt, is rarely an alternative to discussing the dispute with involved editors, as suggested at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
  6. The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to supplement the existing WP:BLPTALK policy by developing further guidance on managing disputes about material involving living persons when that material appears outside of article space and is not directly related to article-content decisions.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed


Hi, are you an arbitrator? (talk) 02:32, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I have seen your email. So only registered users at least 4 days old and 10 edits can request for arbitration? Will I be considered a sockpuppet if I create an account to request for arbitration? (talk) 03:19, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Are you only 4 days old? Just checking. Irondome (talk) 03:27, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) It is fine to move from editing as an IP to editing as an account, so long as you do not use both the IP and the registered account in a way that violates the sockpuppetry policy (see WP:ILLEGIT for specifics). If you are uncomfortable with doing so or concerned about being able to follow that policy, I can also move a request to the case page for you, although you may continue running into similar issues when adding comments/etc. to the request. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:29, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanctions Question[edit]

Hey GW, I had a quick question on ArbCom's Discretionary Sanctions Regarding Mohammed broadly construed. Would you say Jesus in Islam qualifies under those sanctions? I was thinking yes but thought I'd double check before I advised someone one way or another. pinging @Oshwah: as this is related to a discussion I was having with him. --Cameron11598 (Talk) 06:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

The Jesus in Islam article falls under the discretionary sanctions authorized in Muhammad images, given that (according to that article) "Jesus is believed to have been the precursor to Muhammad". GorillaWarfare (talk) 06:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! ----Cameron11598 (Talk) 06:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Celebrating Pride @ Women in Red[edit]

You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

LGBTQ worldwide online edit-a-thon

Delivered by Rosiestep (talk) 04:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage. (To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Orphaned non-free image File:Free Range Studios logo.png[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Free Range Studios logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Karl E. Brinkmann GmbH (logo).gif[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Karl E. Brinkmann GmbH (logo).gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page and such! Leggomygreggo8 (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Of course. Sorry that's happening to you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:52, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Hall of Fame![edit]

Joska bodenmais pokale referenzen womens world award pokale.jpg
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women in Halls of Fame worldwide online edit-a-thon

--Rosiestep (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage (To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pmc logo.gif[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Pmc logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Basilica of Our Lady of Mercy (Yarumal), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clappers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Admin Barnstar.png The Admin's Barnstar
For your good work; I hope you're receiving overtime for working here on a holiday weekend. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:29, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
And thank you for your cleanup on that page! Yes, they increase my paycheck by 25% for holidays and weekends 😋 GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:31, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
I kind of figured. Any further help you can provide at Lawrence Billy Jones III will be appreciated. It looks like an autobiography, and I'm at the point of not knowing whether to report the editor for vandalism, COI, or just go bowling. Thanks! 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:49, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Ah yeah, I'll take a look. Bowling is never a bad option though! GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:50, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
I've opted for AIV for more rapid response, but at this point any noticeboard could do. Growing tired of restoring templates to the thing. Cheers 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
For what it's worth, the subject of the article does seem notable, and I'm working on cleaning up the article a bit. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:11, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Yes; I didn't challenge notability, but wanted to take the COI account out of the picture so it could be cleaned up a bit. It's worth watchlisting for further activity and IP socks. And thank you, and several other accounts, for helping out. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:43, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

heads up[edit]

Hi GorillaWarfare, you might want to do something -- damage control if nothing else -- re the User:Jytdog thing, where you've been asked to comment at Wikipedia talk:Harassment#Arbs, etc. you owe us an explanation (there's a special section "Arbs, etc." which remains empty).

This kerfluffle doesn't seem to be going away soon. You're also not doing so well on the RfC, although you have a slim lead.

I'm contacting you in particular because you blocked User:Jytdog. I don't know him and it seems quite possible that he was a long-term tendentious editor with whom you and/or the admin corps just lost patience. If that's it then you should say so, I would advise.

Whether or not that's it, whatever you have to say would be of interest, I'm sure. Herostratus (talk) 23:36, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Herostratus:. Thanks for the heads up—I've also just seen your ping over at WT:Harassment. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting it, but if "which remains empty" is a criticism of my slowness to respond, please know that the chances of me responding between 16:03 and when you left this note at 23:36 on a weekday (so 12:03–19:36 EST) are slim to none given my working hours. I will respond over there shortly, once I've had a chance to catch up on the discussion.
You're also not doing so well on the RfC, although you have a slim lead. Can you explain what you mean by this? I have commented very little on the subject as of yet, so unless there's some RfC about me that I don't know about, I'm not sure what you're referring to.
If I was going to block someone as a tendentious editor, I'd have said so. There were no secret plots to get rid of Jytdog here; I blocked for exactly the reason I gave: violation of the outing policy. When I informed the oversight team shortly after placing the block, they endorsed the block. Another oversighter has verified this if you don't want to take my word for it. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:30, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not criticizing you, relax, I assumed you weren't even aware of that thread. It's not a matter of taking your word or that of other functionaries, at this point I think people are thirsting to know in more detail what happened exactly. "Violation of policy X" is insufficiently detailed at this point. You don't have to release any identifying information to explain in more detail.
Don't answer me here, rather make your point over there, at your convenience of course.
I'm not accusing anyone of secret plots, for goodness sakes. For my part, I'm fine with "last straw" as justification for blocking bad editors who seen uninclined to reform, even if the particular offense is not itself that bad. AFAIK this happens from time to time, and fine.
In fact I'd be happier if that was it. You say it's not, so here we have a good, very involved, very long-term, heroically prolific editor, who is terminated and probably without realistic recourse to appeal.
He must have done something very very bad. Tell us what it was! I'm sure once we know the facts people will understand.
In saying You're also not doing so well on the RfC, although you have a slim lead, I jumped the gun and made a false inference (for which I apologize) that you were not a fan of our policy "Posting links to other accounts on other websites is allowable on a case-by-case basis". I made this inference because some people have suggested that Jytdog was blocked for some harmless technical violation, such as showing a link between an account here an an account on a commercial-editing site, or something, in which case the policy "Posting links to other accounts on other websites is allowable on a case-by-case basis" would come into play if it's ever to be operative.
On reflection I realize that that can't be true. I know it can't be true because I know you wouldn't mess up the life of a good editor, an editor who has many more edits (and almost as much time in harness) as you or I, unless he had done some really terrible. I know how much of ourselves people like him pour into the project, and how very depressed editors like him must feel on being summarily banned, because I know how very depressed I would be and how much it would mess up my life.
I believe in you and I know you wouldn't do that to another person, and a good editor on the Wikipedia which you are sworn to protect (if he is, which I guess so), unless the person had done so very much more than a technical violation of a policy which even has a specific exception built in (not even counting WP:IAR).
You don't have to release any confidential information! I'm sure that if you explain that he dug up and released the name and home address and phone number of another good editor, or photoshopped another good editor doing some bad thing and posted it on the internet, or whatever he did, that people will rally to you. Herostratus (talk) 01:29, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Just noting I've seen this reply. I'm typing up a big ol' response to go on the WT page, and will append my responses to your points there as you've requested. Apologies if I misinterpreted some of what you are saying; I do appreciate the assumptions of good faith that you're making towards me and will be more careful to do so to you in return. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:40, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
I imagine you're watching there, but just for completeness, noting that I've responded at WT:Harassment#GorillaWarfare. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:38, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

In case you didn´t notice[edit]

There´s a misplaced usercomment at the top of this page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Gråbergs Gråa Sång! I did see the message, though I forgot to move it from the top of the page after reading it. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:28, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

(moved) message from Gschofer[edit]

Being Jewish is a religion not an ethnicity. Calling Jewish people an ethnicity is like a racial slur. You would never describe a Christian person as ethnicity Christian. Let me put it this way. If a Christian converted to Judaism that would not make them ethnicity Jewish. Their religion is Jewish but not their ethnicity. I don't think any of you are Jewish and old enough to understand this fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gschofer (talkcontribs) 10:51, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia and United Nations Women Project[edit]

Bertha Lutz 1925.jpg
Please join us...
Women in Red logo.svg

Wikipedia and United Nations Women Project
A Women in Red worldwide, online editathon - 12 July till 12 August 2016 - #wikiwomeninred

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) Delivered by Rosiestep (talk) via MassMessage 04:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)


Noticed that you had commented about a previous action involving a certain editor, so thought you may find this discussion to be of interest: [3]. Montanabw(talk) 18:53, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Indigenous women & Polar women editathons[edit]

Inuit women 1907 crop.jpg
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Indigenous women editathon & Polar women editathon
Hosted by Women in Red - August 2016 - #wikiwomeninred

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage


Hi, can you please tell me why this page was locked?

can you please check the source on the date of birth, it is false and not a good source. You are being tricked by vandals into believing a gossip site

here his correct date of birth is listed from a reputable source — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zbb12345 (talkcontribs) 04:55, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello GW. I took the liberty of adding a section header so this wouldn't get lost on your talk page. I would add to Zbb123445 that someone born on July 3, 1993 is now 23 years old so your source either has a misprint or it was written three two years ago. MarnetteD|Talk 05:03, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks MarnetteD. @Zbb12345: It was locked because of the constant edit warring and vandalism. Please discuss this change on Talk:PartyNextDoor so an agreement on the wording can be achieved. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I just added a comment there. I hope this gets cleared up soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zbb12345 (talkcontribs) 05:07, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Young cats.jpg

Another year of this place? You need all the kittens you can get.

Gamaliel (talk) 02:44, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Ehh what's one more :) GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:27, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Legal threats from recently blocked M2016 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Is revision deletion possible (hide the edit summary and the content) as a result of this user's recent contributions? He called the Wikipedia contributors "sexist". This is likely to be insulting to other contributors. Eyesnore 02:25, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

@Eyesnore: I have removed a few revisions that were direct attacks on various people. I haven't seen any legal threats, can you please link me to them? GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:31, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
@GorillaWarfare: What you missed seems to be the edit summaries to the edits made to the Jimmy Wales page. They each have the edit summaries containing the words "sexism" or "sexist". Also, could you please unhide my cleanup edit? That removed all of the insulting material. Eyesnore 02:36, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I accidentally got one too many revisions when I was deleting. As for the Jimmy Wales edits, I don't see the mere inclusion of "sexism" or "sexist" as warranting revision-deletion, and the comments are not directed at any particular person. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:59, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
And finally, the four revisions [4] [5] [6] [7] should be hidden as a result of the page containing offensive content. Eyesnore 03:10, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't really feel those contain much that meets the RD criteria. Accusations of "trolling" are fairly benign and commonplace, and the sexism comments don't really fall under "grossly offensive", etc. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi Gorilla ... I am a feminine identified drag queen with a black boyfriend, we are both wondering what was wrong with the submission. Yes I went to Teachers College & Employment Counselling Schools where people learn their values from what challenges them: inclusion maybe is very controversial. Soyer plus precise, svp. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven Iwanow (talkcontribs) 02:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@Steven Iwanow: Hello. Your addition (as well as the one you made to 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting ) does not meet our Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy. As you'll see in that policy page, Wikipedia is not a place to express your own opinions. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:44, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikisource admniship again[edit]

You're again up for reconfirmation on Wikisource. It's going quite smoothly, however. Just thought you might want to know. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:13, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for the heads up haha. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:00, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thank you! I dealt with this yesterday at Lilly King, but I think the le Clos vandalism was far more aggressive.. Lepricavark (talk) 02:20, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Just to draw your attention[edit]

I saw your recent statement on my WP:ARC case. I have pointed out some relevant things in my section of the thread.[8] I thought I'd draw your attention to it. If this is not necessary, or if this is a breach of protocol, please let me know. Debresser (talk) 13:47, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Should have used subst?[edit]

I admired the way you made a footnote in User talk:Jytdog#Unblock, but I notice that you used {{CURRENTDATE}} which keeps updating for everyone who views it. Was it perhaps your intention to say {{subst:CURRENTDATE}} instead?  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 06:31, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Oops, thank you! GorillaWarfare (talk) 17:15, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Please enforce the word limits[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy/Evidence#Please enforce the word limits in the interest of fairness --Guy Macon (talk) 02:50, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Why are you vandalizing the Margaret page[edit]

? Danoppo86 (talk) 00:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) GW actually protected the page and reverted unsourced, controversial claims about a living person. That's not vandalism. GABgab 00:40, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
@Danoppo86: I have also replied to your question on the talk page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:40, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

I am not a page stalker nor is that grounds for anything the page is written with a humourous spin and she can be directly quoted as being transgender Danoppo86 (talk) 00:45, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

The {{tps}} template refers to the poster, not others on the talk page. If Wambui has been quoted in a reliable source identifying herself as transgender, please provide the source and the information can be added to the page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danoppo86 (talkcontribs) 00:55, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

You claimed that "she can be directly quoted as being transgender". Where are the quotes in those links? Two of them are authors speculating about her with zero proof; one doesn't mention her at all. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

I genuinely apologize for the confusion/bothering you, i misread a quote on one page and thought that the research paper was using her as a foil to the hyperandrogenous athletes and wanted her to get recognition. When i came on the page it was over curiosity over her gender and when i read it it said transgendered athlete. Then a minute later it didnt. The first edit was not me. When it was deleted i mistook it for someone trying to hide the fact that she was transgender (i understand it is uncertain) and wanted her to recieve recognition. That said, its important to have discussions like this even though this was a waste of time. Have a good day, i will avoid doing this on my phone to combat making poor decisions based on not being able to read small type. Have a good day.Danoppo86 (talk) 01:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, "uncertain" is generous, given that from what I can see neither she nor reliable sources even discuss that she might be trans. Thank you for understanding the reverts. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:41, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Upcoming editathons: Women in Nursing & Women Labor Activists[edit]

Florence Nightingale headshot.png
Rose Winslow of New York 158010v.jpg
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women in Nursing editathon & Women Labor Activists editathon
Hosted by Women in Red - September 2016 - #wikiwomeninred

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

Thank you.[edit]

I sincerely appreciate your help yesterday re: the Wayne Dupree draft. I made one edit which was removing my feedback to the editor who had declined the article on the 22nd of August at the very top of the page. I don't think it affected what you did. Again, thank you so much. Cllgbksr (talk) 02:31, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@Cllgbksr: Glad I could help! I saw your changes today, as I've added the page to my watchlist. They don't seem to have changed any of the edits I've made, but certainly feel free to make changes if you see any inaccuracies or omissions. I look forward to seeing how the AfC review turns out! GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:45, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Me too! Can't wait! I'm hoping the next notification I get is that the article has been moved into the Wiki encyclopedia. I think its been 4-5 days now since I resubmitted. Again thank you so much. Cllgbksr (talk) 20:31, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@GorillaWarfare: Hello GW. Hope you are having a great Labor day holiday. Question, I believe I submitted this on the 24th and today is the 5th of Sep.... does it normally take this long? Wanted to make sure it wasn't hung up in the system. Thoughts? Cllgbksr (talk) 19:36, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
@Cllgbksr: Not more hung up than is normal, I guess. It's successfully been submitted, but there are 660 submissions waiting to be reviewed, so it can sometimes take a bit of time. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
@GorillaWarfare: 660 submissions to Understand. Appreciate the reply... All the best... Cllgbksr (talk) 20:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
@GorillaWarfare: Hello GW. Hope all is well..Thought I'd say hello and was wondering how Wikipedia is doing with their backlog?...its been 3 weeks since we visited last...are submissions worked oldest to newest?...again appreciate all your help.... Cllgbksr (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
The backlog is still huge, but yes, many reviewers prioritize the older submissions. It's taking a pretty long time though, so I'm just going to go ahead and move it myself. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you! (30-8-2016)[edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
For your continued help and assistance, perpetrated over the years. Thanks a lot :-) --Dэя-Бøяg 19:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Removing comments[edit]

The person I responded to is some suspected sockpuppet account that's been dormant-- or so it seems-- for six or more years. I very much doubt that they'd see my comment in response in the first place.

With that being said, I do otherwise take issue with the removal. What I said about Eidelberg or whatever his name is seems to fit the bill. What I said about the guy defending a rabid Palestinian-hating fanatic and his fanaticism and hatred at that, fits the bill as well.

It wasn't overly uncivil, it was just calling it as it is. That shouldn't be a problem. (talk) 22:56, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I see that the account has been blocked, so that's a non-issue now. Generally speaking, sometimes Wikipedia does have to include information about and from people who hold controversial and even hateful opinions in order to satisfy neutrality and due weight policies. Keep in mind that people arguing for this information to be included do not always support those views. I am not familiar with the user you were responding to, so I'm just speaking generally. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
I wasn't arguing against the posting of scribblings by some vile little Palestinian-hating Jew pretending to be a professor or a "credible academic". Barring the fact that the comments in question are related to the talk page only and not even the official article, the point of my entire post was to call the "professor" and his supporters out as what they clearly are. Semantics, at best, when you consider that it's a dead account. I just couldn't not see that kind of rubbish and not respond to it.
This is further semantics, but it's pretty clear that the banned user in question agrees with or otherwise is fine with the warped and evil mindset of the "academic" in question. That's why he's defending his character and his "right to his opinions". (talk) 23:11, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Regardless of the opinions of this person, attacks like you've just made on him and on Wikipedia editors are completely unacceptable. I've just removed your latest comment; don't re-add similar commentary. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:20, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
What "attacks"? Name one example of an "attack". As in a baseless and insulting accusation or whatever an "attack" might be defined as. (talk) 00:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Civility#No_personal_attacks_or_harassment. "ill-bred and malevolent person". "execrable scribblings". GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Uris has been dead 13 years. It's fairly clear why I'm calling him those things and what I'm referring to in the context of his literary "work". It's not really a personal attack or harassment, nor is it slander or anything of that nature. But this is semantics again; I've posted indisputable evidence--as quoted from the source by N. Finkelstein-- that the man was a racist of the worst kind, for the talk page. Hopefully that'll settle the matter. (talk) 00:47, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Evidence suppression at TRM's Arb case[edit]

GW, Please advise why this evidence was suppressed? Is it because the author is an IP, a formatting issue, other reason? Thank you in advance for your consideration. 2600:8806:4800:5100:44EC:E58:960F:420A (talk) 19:13, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Well, Bugs called it trolling and I can see his point. It's really up to a clerk to make those calls, though. Drmies (talk) 00:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Yep, should have noted here that I've brought this up with the clerks for review. @Baseball Bugs: in the future it's best to let the clerks know if you think there's a post that should be removed, rather than removing it yourself. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:08, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:RailWorks 3.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:RailWorks 3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:05, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for helping me get back some of the cited info on my author page. I really appreciated your help. Bonniegrrl (talk) 04:07, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing! Glad I could help. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:09, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to bother...[edit]

Hello, I saw your name in the arbitrator list and randomly decided to contact you because my posts/messages to the community are repeatedly being deleted with the technicality of 'sockpuppet' being used as a justification. This means that I am not actually able to address a disagreement through the proper channels and is, I would think, in total contravention of the intention of the wiki policies. Any new account that tries to address the blatant vandalism of several pages that would fall in the category of 'osgoode hall law school alumni' is deemed 'sockpuppet' so that no dissent is possible or even visible. Several of these pages (pages about alumni of this law school) have had recently added category tags ('osgoode hall law school alumni'), as well as other constructive contributions, repeatedly reverted. Anyone who tries to revert the vandalism is then told that THEIR contributions are not constructive and blocked...because some of the people involved in this destructive editing behaviour are actually administrators! Obviously this also puts them at fault for abusing their admin powers in addition to engaging in vandalism. Please make this matter known to arbitrators/other admins if you can...I have tried to address the issue but just find that posts/messages disappear and that I am not even able to post in the dispute resolution boards. You should be able to see an attempt for a reversion dispute resolution request that was deleted about the page Malcolm Archibald Macdonald on the arbitration request page history. This Macdonald page is just one which is being abused by these people: they remove tags about the law school alumni pages. I know you may be busy but even if you do not want to participate in this please let people know about this abuse. Not only is claiming 'sockpuppetry' not a valid reason to a) prevent any posting about a dispute resolution issue or b) protect vandalism, but it is difficult to imagine how this behaviour could be undertaken in good faith. I'm sure that if I try to add something constructive to certain pages of this law school's alumni I will find myself soon blocked and the contributions reverted...reverting the alumni tag?...that's appropriate? Please allow these contributions to remain. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:01, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the Macdonald article, I would guess the original edit adding that category was undone because it also unnecessarily removed links elsewhere. Subsequent accounts did not fix that error, they simply reinstated the edit. Given that the article had not been edited in quite some time before these three accounts came along to make the same edit, it's pretty clear that they are sockpuppets.
I also see from the dispute resolution request (not arbitration, to be clear) that there were concerns in 2015 about promotional editors trying to insert more content about this school into the encyclopedia, which could explain why people are wary of edits such as these.
I see from your contributions that this is not the IP you've been using to edit these articles, so it's hard for me to help you specifically. If you have not created an account already, it would be very helpful if you would do so, as IPs often change and it can be very confusing to know who is who. If you have already created an account, please don't edit without logging in. If you can't edit from your account, please appeal the block on the account instead of editing through other accounts/IPs. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:42, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


A Barnstar!
Box of Kittens

First box of kittens as promised. Box 1 of 2
A Barnstar!
Box of Kittens

Second box of kittens as promised. Box 2 of 2

--Cameron11598 (Talk) 06:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Nice doing business with you! GorillaWarfare (talk) 06:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science[edit]

Hi there. Your revert of my revert on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science reinstated the personal details vandalism / spam. I have reverted you. You may wish to revdel the remaining bits there. Murph9000 (talk) 00:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for all that you are doing in dealing with this jerk. Your efforts are much appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 00:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up, Murph9000. Not sure how that happened, but I've fixed it. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

FoodNotBombs logo now PD[edit]


as the original uploader of File:Food Not Bombs (emblem).png i wanted to let you know that the original author, Keith McHenry released it into the public domain now. See my edit at [9]. Could you help and replace the non-free media template accordingly? We can also upload it to commons and use it on any wiki now. Thanks Mutante (talk) 00:27, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mutante. It looks like you already added it to Commons, so I've just deleted the version of the file that was stored on the English Wikipedia and made a couple fixes to the Commons page. Should be all set! GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:11, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, GorillaWarfare. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons[edit]

Lady Elizabeth Wilbraham by Sir Peter Lely.jpg
Anne Stine Moe Ingstad (1918-1997).jpg

October 2016

Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

Women in Red logo.svg

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

A banana barnstar and a little monkey business[edit]

Had to admit I always thought you were a guy. But I truly believe that the site deserves people like you especially those who handle arbitration. Arbcom decision are a prime example of consensus building so keep up the good work. VegasCasinoKid (talk) 11:05, 28 September 2016 (UTC)