User talk:HJ Mitchell/Archive 132

This is an archive of past discussions with User:HJ Mitchell. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 125

←

Archive 130

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 09:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Your block of 171.33.193.172

You might want to put a school block on the entire range as well. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

@Skywatcher68 Done, thanks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:40, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 210, October 2023

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content
Book review: Hawkeye7 on an American general and the first female astronauts, Nick-D on Roman fortifications

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mitchel

Hello Mitchel, greetings :). I want to ask some questions; why is it that when I click on rollback (provided by Twinkle) on a diff page, either vandalism or good faith, It is normally supposed to take me to the talk page of the user who made that edit, with a preloaded message, but, as we speak, that doesn't happen because anytime a window opens it preloads nothing, I check the URL from the address bar on my browser, I see that it preloads a template. Why? and is there something I am missing.

Secondly, I want to also ask if you can give me the pending changes reviewer right because I would love to be able to review (approve or decline) pending changes on pages that have the pending changes protection. Thank you so much. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

FWIW

I think that "person" is in UTRS too. UTRS appeal #79607. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra Well at least they got the punctuation right! There's hope yet! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:31, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

🤔 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Unable to answer

Hi, I will answer in full in AE, but please give me 24h I'm currently on mobile solely Marcelus (talk) 22:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Block of Special:Contribs/‎2001:448a:11a2:107d::/64

Hello. Thank you for approving my request and blocking the IP. However, I do not think it was reasonable to block the whole range. It seems like some of the other IPs within it have done several constructive edits today. The only problematic one was Special:Contribs/‎2001:448a:11a2:107d:e48d:ecd3:ac34:b2dc. Why did you decide to block the whole range? Aspilemetala (talk) 13:24, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

@Aspilemetala it's fairly standard practice to block the /64 with an IPv6 as ISPs often assign dynamic IPs within that range and often larger ones, so a problem editor could hop from one to another with minimal effort. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:29, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Not sure about this article

Hey, I came across this article here. Saud Bin Abdul Majeed It appears to have been made my a new user, a disclosed paid editor. I'm not sure if it qualifies for WP:G11. I think the notability is dubious but most of the sources aren't in English. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

@TornadoLGS being a prince is enough to escape A7 and probably enough that it would survive an AfD. I don't think it's promotional enough for G11, but it is a state. You could draftify it and hopefully the creator will work on it, or leave it and hope they add more, or try and find sources to improve it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:24, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, I wasn't even sure about the significance of the prince thing. I didn't know if that was a real title or something self-appointed like with Queen Latifah. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:39, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Dispute regarding Pedro Calungsod

I'm curious as to why you declined my AIV report regarding Titan2900's edits to Pedro Calungsod (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). I do not believe what transpired there was a good faith content dispute, which is why I broke 3RR and used rollback to revert their edits. They explicitly stated their intent to vandalize the article while making personal attacks, and their edits to the article ([1] [2] [3] [4]) were pretty clearly non-constructive in my opinion. I'd appreciate feedback here. Thanks, — SamX [talk · contribs] 13:47, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

@SamX Perhaps I didn't look carefully enough. I checked their most-recent edit which seemed okay-ish then saw that they had edited the talk page and didn't look much further. I've blocked the user now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:42, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it :) Would it have been better to report this to ANI for a more thorough review? — SamX [talk · contribs] 14:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

AIV was fine. A diff would have been helpful to draw attention to their more obviously unconstructive edits as some of their edits were less obvious and if an admin chooses a random couple of diffs there's no guarantee they'll land on the one you want them to see. If you'd included diffs one and three above in your AIV report I suspect they would have been blocked before I even woke up this morning. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:52, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind for the future. — SamX [talk · contribs] 14:54, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Protection conflict

Hi, Harry. I guess we collided when protecting Waterloo-Oxford District Secondary School. It ended up with semi for a moth, which we both apparently liked, but.. I have to say I don't exactly understand what happened about the pending changes. Did you set that indefinitely, as well as semi for a month? If so, it looks like it's gone now. Could you take a look and see if you want to change anything? Bishonen | tålk 21:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC).

Hey Bish, good to see you! Great minds think alike on the semi duration! I did put it on pending changes indefinitely. Looking further back in the history, there has been quite a bit of vandalism but the edit rate is low enough that I don't think long-term semi is justified, so I went for a compromise. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:24, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, I didn't consciously do anything to your PC - it just happened. Please restore it if you like! Bishonen | tålk 21:30, 11 October 2023 (UTC).

I think your action restored the status quo as it was when you opened the protection screen, minus your settings of course, which reset the pending changes. The software doesn't seem to handle protection conflicts very well! But no bother, I've restored the PC. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:36, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Flying Scotsman (locomotive)

The RM was closed as not moved but since you expressed some support to Flying Scotsman (locomotive) I am wondering if it is worth opening a new RM for this, or just forget it? Polyamorph (talk) 21:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

@Polyamorph there wasn't much appetite for a move but that's what I'd title the article if I was writing it from scratch today and the others already existed. You might get some pushback because there seems to be a convention to title loco articles "[Company Name] Class [###] [###03] Locomotive" (cf. LNER Class A4 4464 Bittern, picked at random) so it might be better to start a broader discussion somewhere. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'm going to leave it, it sounds like something some editors will likely to be very particular about :) I have tidied up the disambiguation page and some hatnotes though. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 08:31, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Evaspire

You may wish to revoke TPA. Cahk (talk) 08:06, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

@Cahk

Done, thanks for the note. And thanks for your efforts to rid Wikipedia of spam. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023

Dear User:HJ Mitchell I saw that some anonymous users were accusing me of harassing them. In fact, he was just dissatisfied with me. I reversed the edit. To keep it the same อย่ามาตบะ (talk) 13:01, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Word limit

Hi, I think exceeded my word limist on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Cukrakalnis already; is that ok or should I trim it a bit? Marcelus (talk) 20:37, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Bickering at ANI

Hello HJ, reviewing that thread, I must say I think you made rather a false equivalence between my tone and substance and that of user nableezy. No need to respond, but I think that was rather gratuitous and adverse. I do appreciate your attention to this. SPECIFICO talk 19:13, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

You were both responding each other instead of presenting your case and leaving it for admins to assess, and any continuation (from either of you) would have been disruptive. I'm interested in maintaining what order there is on a subject where tempers are frayed and emotions are running high, not in levels of wrongness. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:23, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

I just saw that you repeated OP's false assertion that I removed that RfC a second time. Did you just take their word for that undocumented ASPERSION, even after I posted above that this was not true? This is extremely surprising. SPECIFICO talk 19:31, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

And now, as you may not have seen, another Admin has echoed your unsupported accusation of misconduct against me. This is how ANI goes off the rails, time and again. I don't recall seeing this from Admins, however.. SPECIFICO talk 19:46, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Makeandtoss's appeal at AE

Hi HJ Mitchell, Makeandtoss is now appealing their block at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Arbitration_enforcement_action_appeal_by_Makeandtoss. Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:47, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Scientelensia

Hi,

Just to let you know that I have updated my statement on the arbitration board. Scientelensia (talk) 13:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

TalkBack

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at Carter00000's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Carter00000 (talk) 02:30, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Please consider this a request made under WP:ADMINACCT for an explanation of your block.

I would be grateful to receive a reply to my earlier questions and for an opportunity to talk to you further about this block. Carter00000 (talk) 04:38, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Carter00000 I apologise. I will be happy to discuss this with you in more depth when I can get to a proper computer. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:18, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Please take your time and I look forward to hearing from you. Carter00000 (talk) 17:39, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Protected Marc Leder: dynamic IP removing content; short protection to hopefully encourage use of the talk page

That appears to have not worked. A recently registered editor just removed more content without discussion after they noticed the protection expired. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:01, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Scientelensia 2

You’ve been really harsh on me and so want to explain myself: In response to your latest denunciation:

Fair enough on that. I take that point. Also, I invited you to read my statement which proves that I have considered my conduct and found some of it wanting. What you say is in part hurtful and not true, and I’d like you to consider how your message came across. Please read my full statement and do not let that one mistake of mine (my only defence is that I was driven to this by a harsh ban and was sad about how things turned out with this editor who seems to bear something against me despite their own questionable conduct which you have not addressed) make up your entire definition of me. Also, I’ve put so much time into this site, making a list of articles much better and more expansive as you can see on my talk page (User:Scientelensia). I have also created a good page. I’ve put so much effort into this that I would really be sad to be banned because of one desperate mistake when I am being the only one out of a collective group being punished :( Yes, I have done some wrong but looking on the Genocide against Palestinians page you can see that others who are not being punished our doing much worse. I’m anxious of a result and quite unhappy as I believe I deserve another chance and believe that the user who referred me here may also be in the wrong (see all the statements above). Please read my statement… Scientelensia (talk) 21:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

@Scientelensia I haven't read your latest comment at AE yet but arbitration enforcement is not one of the happy, pleasant parts of Wikipedia; it's where we (we being uninvovled admins) decide whether someone has broken the rules, and if so what the consequences should be to prevent further breaches. Unfortunately, topic areas like the Arab-Israeli conflict are so rife with problems that there isn't a lot of tolerance. I would, however, suggest that you focus your statements on your actions and how you're going to avoid problems going forward rather than on anyone else's. You're more than welcome to file a separate enforcement request if someone else's conduct merits scrutiny, because admins can't be everywhere all the time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:54, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, I will desist from criticism of Drsmoo. Thanks for your reply. Scientelensia (talk) 06:47, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Lightning gyatt

Lightning gyatt (talk · contribs · count)

Hey,
What's the deal with this user that Datbot reported and you blocked? I couldn't find any contribs, just some entries about triggering edit filters. Some glitch or it's normal? Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:49, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

@The Herald: it's normal. They made multiple attempts to vandalise and were stopped by the filter. When they triggered some from a predefined five times in five minutes, the bot reported them to AIV and I blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:59, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Lightburst and pronouns

You warned Lightburst one week ago for his comments on GENSEX, but when I politely asked him to use she/her pronouns on his talk page, he replied, saying I'm getting worked up for nothing over using the right pronouns, and says he does not use pronouns when working on the encyclopedia (even though "they" is a pronoun). What's the course of action here? Should I fill another AE request? LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 03:03, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

LilianaUwU yes please. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:41, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell and LilianaUwU: I do not use pronouns and it is not out of spite or some desire to hurt. It is just a formal way of communicating in which I try not to offend anyone. I apologize to LilianaUwU for any perceived slight. I am doing my best to keep my communication professional. When I began editing seriously in 2018 I had several editors correct me about their genders and since then I do not use pronouns for anyone. I have no idea the gender of 98% of editors and before this I had no idea the gender of LilianaUwU. I am doing my best here to keep it professional. Lightburst (talk) 14:11, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

FYI, if someone has set it in their preferences, we have {{gender}}. Eg, {{gender|LilianaUwU}} = she, {{gender|HJ Mitchell}} = he. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:26, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

@Lightburst: Are you trying to say you don't use gendered pronouns? That would be pretty reasonable—it's what I recommend at Wikipedia:Editors' pronouns for those who wish to set a consistent across-the-board approach—but it makes no sense to say you don't use pronouns. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 03:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tamzin: When editing on the project I do not use gender specific he/she pronouns to refer to other editors. I use gender neutral pronouns. I use them in discussions about biographies and when communicating or commenting on other editors. Just 2 weeks ago I referred to HJ Mitchell as "they" in a discussion:“block may have been a bit premature but they explained their motivation”. Lightburst (talk) 03:47, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Right, that's what I figured, given that a usage of "they" is at issue here. My point is that saying "I don't use pronouns" is both inaccurate and confusing. I think if you said "I don't use gendered pronouns to refer to Wikipedia editors" that would probably avoid confusion like this. Just my 2 cents. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 03:51, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tamzin: I explained it better on LilianaUwU's talk page this morning. Lightburst (talk) 04:10, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Smashedpass block

While Smashedpass's edits on Amber alert seemed like vandalism in passing, the citations they added check out. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:12, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

@Curb Safe Charmer the more I look at that account, the more concerns I have. You might be right that they weren't a vandal though. If they want to appeal the block I'll discuss the other issues with them and hopefully unblock. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:39, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		Thank you for processing a bunch of WP:PERM/NPP requests. We have a backlog drive going on right now, and some of those folks applied specifically to participate and had been waiting over a week, so getting them processed was very helpful! –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:14, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: thanks, I hadn't realised how backlogged it had got. Feel free to poke me if it gets that way again and I'll clear it when I get chance. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:48, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

PM request

Greetings HJ,

I was wondering if you could assign me the page mover permission? The books are showing that I’ve moved almost 300 pages. I often close RMs, but many of them require the ability to move over redirects. Because I don’t have that ability, I can’t close most of the requested moves. I also am familiar with how redirects work (I have redirect autopatrolled). I also am frequently asking for page mover help to clean up page move vandalism or various G6 issues. I know users on the NPP discord server can attest to this! Thanks! - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 23:35, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Illusion Flame, if I say yes donyou promise to start slow and not do anything potentially controversial until you've built up a bit of a track record? My impression is that you're eager to help, which is fantastic, but sometimes your enthusiasm overtakes your experience. There's nothing wrong with that, it's much like yours truly started his admin career, as long you're aware of your limitations. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I promise. I agree with your impression, I am eager to help, but sometimes I go too fast. I will start with only closing non-controversial RMs and generally non-controversial things. Thanks! - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 11:02, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello HJ Mitchell. Please grant me rollback rights for a month so that I can remove the vandalism.Every day fight against vandalism. MP1999 ❯❯❯ Talk 13:40, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

@MP1999: Hello, I saw your contributions but I see your revert activity is very low and you reverted edits in past are seem fine but Why are you not editing routinely on English Wikipedia? please can you explain about that? I suggest you please take a time to revert vandalism and after couple of months agains request for rollback on request page and an admin Usertalkpage; english wikipedia need a user who rountinely edit on this wiki and who always interest to reduce Spam and Vandalism. I'm think @HJ Mitchell only decide can he curious to grant rollback right at this time to you?. Kind regards~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 15:30, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

@MP1999 you were denied rollback in July and you've made barely 60 edits since. That's not enough experience for me to even evaluate your request. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:07, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

you were denied rollback in July and you've made barely 60 edits since. That's not enough experience for me to even evaluate your request.
What should I do so that I can experience more? MP1999 ❯❯❯ Talk 03:16, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Well first of all you need to be more active. If you're only averaging 20 edits a month you won't have much use for rollback. If you want to be more active here, you could patrol Special:RecentChanges and use Twinkle to revert and warn vandals. It will also give you a flavour of what other pstrollers are looking for and you might find your own niche. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Follow-up on Talk-Back Request

Hi HJ Mitchell,

I would like to follow-up on this request for further clarification on your recent block of my account. I am looking forward to hearing from you to discuss the reasons for your block. Carter00000 (talk) 10:25, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

News and notes: Where have all the administrators gone?

In the media: Thirst traps, the fastest loading sites on the web, and the original collaborative writing

Gallery: Before and After: Why you don't need to know how to restore images to make massive improvements

Featured content: Yo, ho! Blow the man down!

Traffic report: The calm and the storm

News from Diff: Sawtpedia: Giving a Voice to Wikipedia Using QR Codes

Humour: New citation template introduced for divine revelations, drug use, and really thinking about it

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Remove PCR

I just noticed that I've used the PCR right only seven times in the last seven months, and I don't really see the need for it now. So, could you please take it away? If I decide to review pending changes in the future, I'll definitely ask for it again. -- 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 16:08, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer that's to be expected; I don't use it much myself and I make a point of reviewing pending edits on my watchlist. The log only lists the times you've accepted an edit, and given that we use PC on articles prone to vandalism ... that's probably a minority of cases. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, of course

You're right. But returning to pontificate after throwing the toys out of the pram? Poor. Still, thanks Harry for the reality check :) Serial 18:19, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh absolutely. But that's plain for all to see. There's no need to point it out! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:47, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Industrial agriculture: Case opened

Hello HJ Mitchell,

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/Industrial agriculture. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Industrial agriculture/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 8, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Completeness of "2023" article as the year proceeds

I have been a working journalist but, alas, have not learned how to contribute as a Wikipedia editor (and do see the tutorials how to do this). I am concerned about the Chronology for the current year, 2023. I believe it should include key dates such as Putin's meetings with Kim Jongun on September 18 (https://apnews.com/article/north-korea-russia-kim-putin-summit-c44735b9903e6f30e7e8d673ef4c77f3) and Putin's visit to Beijing on October 18 (https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/18/bri-forum-chinas-xi-and-russias-putin-meet-in-beijing.html). These meeting dates provide context to other events, including North Korea's effort to support Russia's war efforts in Ukraine (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/13/us/politics/north-korea-weapons-russia-ukraine.html). David Jensen (talk) 22:23, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@David Jensen Hi David, you might be right but I don't have any particular involvement with that article. Your best bet would be to post your comments to Talk:2023. Hopefully the editors who are interested in compiling articles like that will take your suggestions on board and will discuss them with you. Feel free to drop me a line again if you run into any problems. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:34, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Query

As an editor with an alternative account I'd like to ask, as this is my main account and my alt account is ihateneo. I have some useful permissions on this account and I have created articles like Ace of Spades (De Mthuda and Ntokzin album) on my alt account and they haven't been reviewed, a task I can do myself (as I'm an NPR and also autoreviewed, meaning I'm capable of creating clean articles). Would it be wrong, abusing my rights and violating the guidelines if I patrolled the articles, or should I just wait dor another reviewer to takeover?
And is it okay if I requested Autopatrolled perm for that alt account?
Sorry for asking such insane question(s), I do not wish to have my main account blocked or faulted for any reason. dxneo (talk) 00:31, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Dxneo yes you can have autopatrolled on your alt. I gave it extended confirmed as well. As for reviewing, better to avoid any appearance of impropriety and just leave it for someone else. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. dxneo (talk) 09:45, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Question about pending changes tool

Hey @HJ Mitchell: is it possible to only allow some of the changes via the pending changes tool? I ask because here there are some honest improvements and then some that have drastic NPOV concerns in my opinion.

I ask because I've only ever used the tool to either accept single real edits or revert single instances of vandalism, not a complex task like this (as a side note, I don't expect I'll be the one to tackle the above linked page, I will probably leave that for a more experienced user, I figured I would just ask for the future).

Thanks! microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish)} 18:53, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@MicrobiologyMarcus No, there isn't. :( You can either accept and then manually remove the problematic parts or reject and manually restore the improvements. If they'd made a series of edits, the system would let you accept some and not others (but you'd have to use undo for the ones you didn't accept; rejecting them or using rollback will revert the whole lot), but essentially your choices are take it or leave it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

An unfortunate limitation to the system but that procedure does make sense! Thanks for the quick response! microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish)} 19:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Scientelensia

The AE thread on Scientelensia seems to have been archived without action, although I think we all pretty much agreed that something was necessary. Unless you want to push for/impose something stricter than a logged warning, I'd rather do that than no action. Thoughts? cc: Seraphimblade :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:48, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine with a logged warning, though it seems like HJ Mitchell was considering some further action. I wouldn't argue with either decision. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:56, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Seraphimblade, @Theleekycauldron thanks for the poke. I'd still prefer some sort of tangible action but if we can only agree on a logged warning, I'd prefer that to doing nothing. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:56, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Dear @HJ Mitchell,

I can assure you that I do respect your opinion on the enforcement of my arbitration and do accept that action may be useful, but I also believe that a topic ban is quite harsh given my good intentions and that others were engaging in worse conduct which went unpunished.

I beg of you, read fully and see that most people (although this is of course not all of the viewpoints in the discussion) do not support such harsh action:

Sorry if the links don’t work (not quite sure how it is done): but you can find the titles which correspond.

Warm regards,

From Scientelensia (talk) 20:36, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

At wit's end regarding Nycarchitecture212

Hello HJMitchell. I arrive here because of the matter of disruptive editor Nycarchitecture212 (talk · contribs), who seems to thrive in a goldfish bowl of ownership behaviour over the Yosef Mizrachi article. For months they have been engaged in writing long walls of text mostly explaining to Samuelshraga (talk · contribs) and myself how they are going to go ahead and insert their own preferred version of every sentence in the article, which somehow cannot be questioned by anyone who tries. Pushback results in more walls of text, pleas to remain civil and lecturing, as just happened to ScottishFinnishRadish (maybe involved, so I didn't want to bother him). And this from an editor with barely 100 edits.

And that is the concerning part. You see, 3/4 of their edits have been spent on whitewashing this article already. But then comes this chilling sentence: [I] expect you to reciprocate the restraint while we wait for input from Wiki Project Judaism on the career section. Unless that is all going out the window and I should move forward with my edits on other sections. [5] So in my estimation, this account rings very close to being a WP:SPA, which to me spells trouble. Now, when I asked about a possible WP:COI, instead of a simple 'no', the first time I got a mini wall of text: Furthermore, let's focus on the content and avoid making assumptions about my motives or affiliations. Accusing me of a conflict of interest or suggesting a connection to Yosef Mizrachi is unfounded and potentially harmful. I have a full-time job and limited time to work on Wikipedia articles. My contributions are made in good faith and adhere to Wikipedia's content guidelines. In Wikipedia discussions, it's vital to uphold a civil and constructive tone, avoid unfounded accusations, and focus on content and sources rather than speculating about personal motives or affiliations. Let's carry forward our discussion with a presumption of goodwill, placing emphasis on content excellence rather than engaging in unwarranted criticisms. Problem is, their edits in pursuit of a pristine image for the subject have consisted of misrepresenting sources and introducing a questionable offline primary source—hardly 'content excellence'. The second time, they answered: Allegations of conflicts of interest or connections to Yosef Mizrachi can be harmful and are inappropriate. My Wikipedia contributions align with the platform's guidelines. (my emphasis). Meanwhile, many of their edits violate guidelines and policies such as WP:RS, WP:OWN (in this case, while reverting an entire infobox) [6] or over their own talk page, which they also repeatedly blank; WP:MOS; [7] misrepresenting sources to favor the subject (he 'revolutionised' something that others also did); and most worrisome of all, WP:DE. Furthermore, they said: If you have original research suggesting they are unreliable, we're open to seeing it. [8] When I asked who we're is, they answered thus: While we anticipate feedback from fellow editors regarding citation rules for accolades and the influence of publishers on credibility, we should avoid making baseless claims. [9] So while it seems that they already find themselves speaking on behalf of the enwiki community, I still found that language to be a bit strange, since they barely have 100 edits. And then came this bit of gaslighting, a common theme: We are currently waiting for input from other editors. I restored some things you deleted again. Please refrain from injecting further changes in the meantime, as it can be perceived as aggressive, and hinders the consensus-building process. I finally wound up here when I had had enough of all the lying (see here for my reply) and personal attacks. I really abhor drama, so that's why I didn't go to a drama board. Havradim leaf a message 12:14, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I was thinking about taking a trip to ANI about this. Their grasp of OR and SYNTH is severely lacking. I'm more of less involved because I did a BLP cleanup a while back. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:13, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

If that is the right place to go, then I am willing to take a Drama-mine. Havradim leaf a message 14:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm unlikely to have time to look into this in detail today or tomorrow so ANI might be better. @SFR, if all you did was BLP cleanup I wouldn't consider you involved. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:54, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I've reverted their edits as well, since I figured I was already too involved for any admin actions. Hopefully I can scrape up some time to throw together an ANI report. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Dear HJ Mitchell, I trust you're doing well. I'd like to discuss some concerns I have regarding the characterization of my contributions. I've consistently approached my edits with good intentions, aiming to seek clarity, understand diverse perspectives, and incorporate feedback. My slow, patient approach to editing should speak to that.

I believe I may be experiencing what's known as 'POV railroading.' It appears that these editors are reluctant to engage in constructive discussions about edits and might be trying to discourage my participation. To provide context, initially, Samuelshraga and I made progress on identifying what sources are needed and after I found them, decided to seek input from Wiki Project Judaism and agreed to await contributions from other editors. Sounds good, right?

During this agreed-upon waiting period, Havdarim made unilateral changes to the article, even after I asked him to stop and wait, seemingly with support from an associate. He then went on to alphabet soup me, and is trying very hard to get me off of Wikipedia, instead of entaging in discussion and answering my responses to his repsonses. They have also occasionally labeled my contributions as disruptive and my well-intentioned responses as overly lengthy, and have made other unhelpful comments, going so far as to call them a 'wall' that isn't worth reading as well as many other remarks. How is that acceptable?

I'm now faced with the challenge of how to proceed when some editors refuse to engage in constructive discourse and attempt to assert control over the article. Despite being relatively new to Wikipedia, I bring over a decade of experience in online communities and have moderated a forum of over 100k members for years, and have a deep appreciation for Wikipedia's role as the internet's encyclopedia, which hinges on responsible and respectful editing. The behavior I've encountered raises questions about their commitment to these principles.

I am determined not to be deterred from contributing constructively to the article, and that's why I'm reaching out to you for guidance and support as the situation escalates. After reviewing the circumstances for 15-20 minutes on your own, I am confident you will reach a similar conclusion. I understand that the situation is somewhat delicate and awkward, especially considering their longer tenure on Wikipedia. Nevertheless, the need for open discourse and goodwill applies to all contributors and how we move forward sets a precedent for the future. I'm confident you'll be able to find a working solution, I look forward to your response and thank you for your time. Nycarchitecture212 (talk) 18:33, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Nycarchitecture212, @Havradim, you both need to state your case a lot more concisely. I don't need walls of text, I need you state your grievances in a few sentences, supported by diffs or links if relevant. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Now at ANI, short with diffs. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I posted there as well with diffs and specifics. I apologize if it is lengthy. Nycarchitecture212 (talk) 02:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

If you have the time to put together an ANI report, that's probably the best bet at this time. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:13, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

64.43.50.185's block

My apologies, I misread User:64.43.50.185 as just coming off a 30 day block enacted 31 days ago, whereas they came off a 30 hour block, 31 days ago; so the return to vandalism wasn't as immediate as I thought. -- MacAddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 12:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Macaddct1984 Your report was good. It looks like the same person, so the block needed to be renewed. I'd have blocked if I'd found the vandalism in the wild. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:34, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

+reviewer review

Last month I said I'd return here for your review since technically my reviewer right was supposed to be a trial. If you want to go over my recent reviews and let me know what you think I'd appreciate it. Deauthorized. ^(talk) 17:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Disable talk page access

Hi, I think maybe you should restrict that anonymous user to appeal by UTRS, as it’s obvious a LTA individual (or at least protect the page temporary). Tropicalkitty (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm reluctant with long blocks. But I will if necessary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

How do you block a bully?

Hi Mitchell. You recently blocked me, which is totally fine by me, it even gave me the only bit of satisfaction I've had lately, so thanks. Now I must ask you for a favour. There's a primitive nationalist blockhead who's edit-warring, with zero skills or understanding for Wiki principles. Please check his 2nd reversal here. Both times w/o edit summary, both times ignoring A. my edit summary and B. my comments on the talk-page. He doesn't like anything non-Albanian in Kosovo, simple as that, so he removes it. That's his entire philosophy.

I'd like to see him blocked. I'm not the type to ask for stuff like this, as far as I can remember I've never ever done it, so I don't know the procedure. I'm not going to study some Wiki manual about it, at most I can copy what my friendly colleague wrote to get me blocked. Can you please take a look into this individual? Thank you. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hi mate, please can you do me a favour and delete the following user pages of mine? They're mainly sandboxes, User Boxes, and other stuff I no longer have use or need for.

Cheers mate IJA (talk) 16:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@IJA sure,

Done. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:01, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Cheers mate IJA (talk) 17:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

You got doxxed on Doxbin

Search Wikipedia Admin HJ Mitchell on doxbin for details. 197.56.7.90 (talk) 19:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Did you find something you couldn't find from my userpage? 😂 HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

It includes information about your partner Laura Johnson and who some of her family members are. 197.56.7.90 (talk) 19:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah she's pretty great. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: 197.56.7.90 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) blocked by Zzuuzz for a week, assuming the IP is "trolling or something". Eyesnore ^talk💬 19:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Eyesnore yeah they're a proxy-hopping vandal. Apparently theyve doxxed me. By finding information I readily disclose! But if it makes them happy... HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm usually unsure if doxxing is really a serious business or not... Like is there anyone who would be so cut up rough by some Wikipedia issue that they'd go and physically harm an admin? I certainly hope not... But it seems like there are enough who pretty much disclose everything about themselves that it can't be that much of an issue. — Amakuru (talk) 20:40, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I would also hope not. But the best defence against doxxing is openness. The information my bew friend has uncovered is a revelation only to them. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you for keeping Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard clean from disruption! 64andtim (talk to me) 20:38, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I second this. A lot of people have been busy today with reverting, blocking, rev/del etc. Thank you all. Knitsey (talk) 20:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Matrika Fertility Centre

You may wish to revoke TPA. Cahk (talk) 07:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Ppmahadevan25

You may wish to revoke TPA. Cahk (talk) 08:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Cahk that one's done. The other doesn't seem to have done anything since the block. Thanks as always. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Clarification request at WP:ARCA: EC protection of Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war

Hello HJ Mitchell,

There is currently a clarification request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment § Clarification request: EC protection of Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war regarding the recent AE decision to protect the page Talk:2023 Israel-Hamas war.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Request

Greetings Mitchell,

I was granted page mover right around four weeks ago, especially for suppressing redirects. During my trial run, I have over 50 suppress redirects and a few round-robin moves. I'm wondering if I can get the permanent right. Many thanks. Maliner (talk) 10:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Greetings @Mitchell. It seems my request will be archived soon. I am requesting that you have a look before it moves to your talk archives. Maliner (talk) 14:20, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Maliner I've had a look and granted it permanently. Apologies for the delay. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Mitchell. Maliner (talk) 14:24, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Revoke TPA of IP User talk:67.81.169.214

You blocked them a few hours ago and now they're vandalizing their talk page. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 02:02, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) All set. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:08, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish Thanks so much! —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 02:09, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Glad to help. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:14, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

TPA revoked by ScottishFinnishRadish. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 02:08, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello Mitchell

Good day, I trust you're doing well. My pagemover right has expired because you granted me temporary back in October. Please, can you now give me permanently? Thank you so much in anticipation. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:31, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Latest sock of LTA

Hey, you blocked Jacob Milton, the latest sock of that LTA that harasses people. One of the latest sock's edits was to recreate the talk page of a blocked previous sock whose username is a blatant attack on me. Please delete and salt that. oknazevad (talk) 17:07, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

@Oknazevad Can you point me to what I'm supposed to be looking at? I'm sleep deprived and you've only given me a link to an account I've already blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:22, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Looks like someone already too care of it, as the page no longer appears in the sock's contributions. Thanks for answering, though. oknazevad (talk) 00:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

Arbitration report: Admin bewilderingly unmasks self as sockpuppet of other admin who was extremely banned in 2015

In the media: UK shadow chancellor accused of ripping off WP articles for book, Wikipedians accused of being dicks by a rich man

News and notes: Board candidacy process posted, editors protest WMF privacy measure, sweet meetups

Opinion: An open letter to Elon Musk

WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2023

News from Wiki Ed: Equity lists on Wikipedia

Recent research: How English Wikipedia drove out fringe editors over two decades

Featured content: Like putting a golf course in a historic site.

Wikidata: Evaluating qualitative systemic bias in large article sets on Wikipedia

Traffic report: Cricket jumpscare

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

Administrator changes

0xDeadbeef

Tamzin

Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

The WMF is working on making it possible for administrators to edit MediaWiki configuration directly. This is similar to previous work on Special:EditGrowthConfig. A technical RfC is running until November 08, where you can provide feedback.
There is a proposed plan for re-enabling the Graph Extension. Feedback on this proposal is requested.

Arbitration

Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous

The Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:PM Right

Dear HJ Mitchell, Nice to meet you again, I don't know if this is sufficient time for requesting the Page mover right, as I only need it for one specific purpose, but here goes: I end up draftifying new articles (mostly un[der]referenced ones) on a regular basis, and always feel a bit bad because some overworked admin then has to come mop up after me with an R2 speedy. So if I had suppressredirect, that would cut down on the mopping-up required, right? I understand who to use pm right. :) ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 17:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Dear Mitchell, can you grant me this right to me, I promising to you, I using this right if required and I decided to woking on NewPagesFeed on regular basis and I only those article without leaving any redirect to article namespace to draft namespace (unreferenced article/non-establish-notability) topic's article.etc. Thanks for your understanding :) Thnx ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 22:48, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for intrupt you, so, can you reply on here. :) ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 01:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Speaking as an admin who deletes CSD R2 redirects from main space to draft space, there are really just a handful a day. It is not an egregious burden to delete these few pages. It helps when editors tag them for CSD but there is a list to track them, User:JJMC89 bot/report/Draftifications/daily, so nothing falls through the cracks. And Aviram7 is not one of our main draftifiers until today. It's not that big a deal to be used as a reason to grant the page mover right. I'd think there has to be a more substantial justification offered. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't think why 398 user with page mover right, In wikipedia every editors have right to make request for permission,This is not a big issue, If user make positive contributions on wikipedia, so admin can trust them and grant permission temporary first on self-discreation, I take this right from self responsibility, Dear HJ Mitchell, I happy to include in page movers if you think, You're an admin, and so you decide, I'm eligible for that or not, Thanks for your understanding. :) ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 03:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

HJ Mitchell has experience reviewing requests for advanced permissions (which I don't have) so they will make their own decision. I was just pointing out that trying to ease the burden of admins who delete CSD R2-tagged pages isn't a strong argument for why you should be granted this permission. I wasn't arguing that you shouldn't be granted this permission just critiquing your argument. But at that, I will step out of this discussion. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:04, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

previous late night I moved a article from article namespace to draft namespace but after moved this page to draftnamespace, then I saw an author of whose article R2 Speedy tag removed the creator of page, and he recreated page but he cannot improve draft article, this is a big reason for need page mover right. :).~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 05:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Query

Hello, HJ Mitchell,

I have a question about your block of User:Oficinas MForce. In their second edit, they disclosed that they were a paid editor on their User page which is what we ask paid editors to do. So, there was no deception on their part. I'm not defending their edits, just that I'm not sure we should penalize editors who try to follow the rules we outline for paid contributors. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Liz I don't remember this one specifically but their deleted edits (the only ones outside their userspace) were unambiguously promoting the company represented by their username. That's what the spamublock template is for and I don't think any other admin patrolling UAA or AIV would have done anything different. Disclosure is not a licence to promote your company on Wikipedia. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:17, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Hove War Memorial scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 9 November 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 9, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2023. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!

Hi Harry, and apologies for hitting you with this at short notice. There were sourcing issues with the article originally scheduled for the 9th and eventually I decided that I needed to press that big red button and swap in my rock-solid first reserve. A strange choice for the anniversary of Kaiser Wilhelm II abdicating Germany becoming a Republic I know. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:46, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild very odd to run a war memorial in mid November but not on the 11th (I suppose that would be a Titanic effort to replace! 😉) or Remembrance Sunday. I'll cope, and the short notice is fine, but Sunday would be a better date to run it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

It is, yes. The history: I prepared the blurb with the thought that it may be useful for the 11th. Then Leonardo DiCaprio was promoted and I was asked if it could run as the TFA on his birthday, 11 November. I agreed, partly because of the Cenotaph being the TFA in 2022. I put Hove to one side as a possible emergency replacement, although given that I had not previously needed to do a late switch this was possibly a bit on autopilot. Then I did need a late replacement on less than 48 hours notice, so here we are. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you today for the article, introduced: "I'm back on the war memorials after a hiatus following the promotion of The Cenotaph. This one is another Lutyens and it's in Hove, on the English south coast."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 211, November 2023

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content
Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at English Civil War logistics and Peacemaker67 at Austro-Hungarian torpedo boats
Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on how WP:SIZE matters

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 18:18, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Zahirkerimli

Hi HJ Mitchell. You just blocked Zahirkerimli (talk · contribs) for spamming. I don't necessarily disagree with it, but I thought that users only get blocked after their last warning (in this case, uw-spam4)? Also, you wrote in the block rationale that his name is in violation of the username policy, but I don't think it is. "Zahir Kerimli" seems like a person's name, not the name of a company. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 16:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Manifestation, there is no requirement for warnings before a block, much less four of them. People adding spam links know exactly what they're doing and that no website is likely to appreciate it. Accounts created for that purpose should be blocked on sight. You may be right about the name, I considered it myself, but at the end of the day they were adding links containing their username, which is what that template is for. An ordinary spam block would have been just as valid. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:26, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Continued vandalism of a IP i mentioned

The user that I had mentioned had continued vandalising on that US route again. Tomafahe (talk) 17:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Update: he had been rangeblocked. Tomafahe (talk) 17:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Tomb of Unknown Warrior

Thanks for asking for a reference which I surprisingly found very quick (I feared it would be a longer search for the reference I had in mind). Please let me know if I did it right 'cause sometimes quoting references correctly is a bit hard for me so please bear with me. If any further reference is needed, please let me know and I will try to find suitable ones. Thanks from over in Germany! --Glamourqueen (talk) 16:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, @Glamourqueen, Twitter is not a great source and I'm not entirely sure that tweet supports your content. If you have better sources it would be much appreciated. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:27, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

The source is not Twitter but The Royal Family who show in this video clearly, that all major Royal brides, even the ones that did not marry at Westminster Abbey (Queen Camilla, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, The Duchess of Sussex etc.) did place their flower bouquet on the tomb. Do you want me to find sources for every single person or just two of them for supporting the claim?--Glamourqueen (talk) 12:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

@Glamourqueen, in an ideal world, we'd have a secondary source that says something to the effect of "all royal brides, including those who don't marry in the abbey, place a bouquet on the tomb" or something similar. It's a bit of a leap from one bride doing it to assuming that all brides do. But the primary source is enough that I won't remove the information again. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that! I did some research: in fact, since the burial of the Unknown Warrior there were only six Royal brides that married in Westminster Abbey at all: The Queen Mother, Queen Elizabeth II, Princess Margaret, The Princess Royal, The Duchess of York and The Duchess of Cambridge. All other did marry somewhere else (mostly at St. George's Chapel in Windsor) and their bouquet was sent to Westminster to be placed there. That would include: Queen Camilla, The Countess of Wessex, Princess Eugenie, Princess Beatrice, The Duchess of Sussex. Special case was Princess Diana who married at St. Paul's Cathedral. But even if we don't have photographic evidence of some cases, most of them are covered in the story. I will continue to find evidence as it pops up. Thanks for your help! Glamourqueen (talk) 22:11, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Page Mover request.

Hi HJ Mitchell,

I often find myself draftifying a lot of articles in NPP and it always leaves an R2 speedy for an admin to clean up, I would like to be able to move pages to draft space without leaving a redirect for an admin to clean up. I have also closed some RM discussions as well that I am able to action. If you have feedback or there are other issues, please let me know!

Courtsesy links: Seawolf35 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Best, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:03, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

@Seawolf35 I'm not sure to be honest. Not a reflection on you, but granting PM solely for draftification seems to be controversial and the admins who routinely mop up R2 redirects tell me that the burden is not that great. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I mean, I would use it for closing RMs and performing page swaps as well when needed, also sometimes I have a need to overwrite a redirect when accepting an article through WP:AFC. I would definitely start out slow and be careful when using it. Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Do you have relevant experience dealing with page moves, including mopping up afterwards? Are you active at RM/TR? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:19, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I do always check for needing to fix links after a page move and I fix them where needed and have fixed redirects to point to the correct targets after moves. I close RM discussions sometimes which can be closed by non PM's. I use G6 sometimes to request help with page moves where I couldn't action it myself, example, Kenmare River which I couldn't move due to there being a redirect in place at the title the draft was to be accepted to. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:26, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

In the case of Kenmare River I had to wait over an hour for an admin to delete the redirect in question. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:47, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

An hour is not very long at all. But nonetheless,

Done. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:50, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Another username I missed in the UAA report

Sorry I missed WAARNG Museum, you might want to know about it too. But it only edited once in 2015 so maybe it doesn't matter. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

@Bri That account made one edit eight years ago. I don't think there's any pressing need to do anything about it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

REVDEL question

Hi HJ Mitchell! I was wondering why this edit was REVDELled as "grossly offensive". On its face, I cannot see anything wrong with it other than regular vandalism. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @EvergreenFir, check the IP's other "contributions"; some of them are more detailed and it's clear they're referring to a specific person so I deleted the whole lot to be on the same side. I'm normally very conservative with my use of revdel but not when it comes to harassment or BLP violations. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:30, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Ah! Okay, that makes sense. Thanks for the explanation! EvergreenFir (talk) 20:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

RevDel

Can I please ask you to undo this edit, and keep the original text online? TaBaZzz (talk) 12:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@טבעת-זרם It's your talk page, so if that's what you really want consider it done. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism Report

Hello, HJ Mitchell,

On the Vandalism report page [10] I saw that a user who was previously blocked for vandalism as a result of a report I submitted appears to be now making false allegations about me, seemingly in retaliation for the block.

The revert instances cited were partially by users who were later blocked for vandalism, one of which was this user. The rest was to revert removal of information without any explanation or uncited information. On the reverts of my own talk page, I was not aware that this was not allowed, as I've seen other users do the same for conversations after some time has passed. On the "misinformation", it was clearly cited and I've referred the relevant section of the article to the user who reverted me.

Could you help me with this? I feel intimidated and surprised by this user's response, as I was not expecting this type of response at all, especially when the background for most of the report was harassment of myself by other users.

I thank you for your assistance in advance. SkylarEstrada (talk) 16:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello @SkylarEstrada, good to see you on the talk page, but I would have sincerely appreciated if you could've just left a message on my talk page before reporting me for vandalism. Also, I had put a message on your talk page before I'm posting this, awaiting your reply.

Talking up would sure have sorted things out, and while I'm not sure of the other users you have reported, I'm pretty much confident that looking at my contributions since the past 12 years on the English Wikipedia does not qualify me as a vandal. Reporting a clear contributive user over vandalism before even talking to them once might seem insulting to the other guy.

However, I have no intentions with regards to retaliating, and I would have reported you even if there was a case that I had encountered you for the first time.

My concerns regarding you are genuine, and you have been indulging in clear 1RR and 3RR violations. Also, there has been quite evident edit-warring from your side, as evident from your recent contributions. Also, regardless of the fact that a user being correct or not, they had posted a civil query on your talk page, and instead of deleting that straightaway, I would have appreciated if you'd simply put an explanation justifying why you think are correct. Thanks and giving Diwali wishes from India. Pg 6475 ^TM 09:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@Pg 6475, @SkylarEstrada, I think if you both took a step back and had a chat you would find that you have more in common than you realise. Please try to work your differences on a talk page. You're welcome to use this one. Pg, as the more experienced editor, please do your best to explain policies etc in plain English. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: user is reporting me for vandalism instead of replying to dialogue, really don't know what to do with this. Pg 6475 ^TM 14:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell users talk page messages were simply orders based on illegitimate reasons preventing me from editing normally. User then made mass removals based on the abovementioned illegitimate reasons, not based in policy. [11], [12], [13]. SkylarEstrada (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Dear, I initiated a discussion on your talk page. Pg 6475 ^TM 14:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Admin Mitchell, what I dont understand is why it took you so long to indefinitely ban and figure out that SkylarEstrada was a sockpuppet and previously banned user = all you had to do was look at the date of account creation (just 7 months ago) and their endless, endless one-sided Pro-HAMA and antisemitic postings and 3RR activity over at Portal: Current Events???2600:8800:FF0E:300:398C:4AFC:56AE:5217 (talk) 09:50, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi random IP, I would have needed something to compare them to. I don't closely follow the current events pages so I don't know the personalities. Who do you think the original account was? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:37, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

sorry but I have given up on trying to trace down an infinity of socks on wiki. Ultimately, they just sock on there other 100 accounts that havent been caught yet and TODAY he is probably creating 100 new ones = what I do know is that certain traits are obvious and that editor had them in spades.2600:8800:FF0E:300:398C:4AFC:56AE:5217 (talk) 14:11, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

what I will say is you caught him on one of the most obvious tells of a sock = he endlessly complained on the admin boards about one editor after another so that he could push his agenda = and that was the tell = the agenda itself

example post

Human Rights Watch confirms that Israel has used white phosphorus in Gaza and Lebanon. (France 24)

What a ridiculous and obviously biased statement to place on wikipedia. And oh, I am sure the sock was able to find an antisemetic source to agree with it. So this sock was implying that Israel was using this weapon and Israel didnt think they would get caught if they had. If Israel HAD used such a weapon the antisemites at the NBC Nightly News would be decrying it day in and day out for weeks of newscycles.2600:8800:FF0E:300:398C:4AFC:56AE:5217 (talk) 14:30, 15 November 2023 (UTC)