- 1 Another sockpuppet of Phantasus Magician
- 2 Proposed deletion of Household Stone tools of Karnataka
- 3 Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_28#Wikipedia:JUSTAVOTE
- 4 Unprotection request of Justin Gaethje
- 5 Ziad K Abdelnour Wiki Profile
- 6 Black history project being deleted?
- 7 Tanuku
- 8 Thanks
- 9 Sockpuppet investigation
- 10 BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
- 11 Persistent vandal
Another sockpuppet of Phantasus Magician
It appears ETC!ETC! VIP (talk · contribs) is yet another sockpuppet of Phantasus Magician, now removing and restoring parts of EDM artists' discographies that have not been protected (also here and here), with misleading edit summaries yet again. Is there any way an editor with CheckUser can find the IP they're using to block them from creating accounts? Otherwise it appears they'll just keep creating them. I've reverted most of their edits so far. Ss112 19:13, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Ss112: I have blocked the account you mention. You could ask a CheckUser to do what you suggest, but I have no idea how likely they would be to do it. Also, even if they do it, they may not tell you that they do, because of the policy of confidentiality, which means that they won't say anything which may reveal a connection of an IP address to an account. There are lots of "CheckUser blocks" made without any further explanation, and for all I know many of them may be for the kind of reason you mention, but I have no more way of knowing than you. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:36, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- Another sockpuppet has appeared, this time called Cuddly-Wuddly (talk · contribs). Their contributions page is full of misleading edit summaries such as "Updated" and they're editing all the same EDM artist topics. I'm hesitant to ask a CheckUser or do anything SPI-related because in my experience they never go anywhere, or if they do, they take quite a while, and then it's weeks of reverting of IP edits until they do. Ss112 13:31, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Household Stone tools of Karnataka
@ James B Watson, Hello!
I post below the note that I made on my talk page in response to PROD,
" @ JamesBWatson, Hello!
I have removed the Proposed article deletion notice. I will try and attempt to explain the difficulties and peculiarities involved,
- Hitherto till now the first option on search engines for Oralu Kallu was an article on Wikipedia which seems to be removed today. That article was 3 or 4 line and factually incorrect. The implication, I am sure you would realize that an incorrect article was itself the prime source of information to the world. The underlying significant aspect appears to be the paucity of other sources of information available online.
- The best source of information available for the world for 7 years, was a factually incorrect article, unreferenced but yet managed to survive on Wikipedia signifies the importance/relevance of the topic.
- These stone tools are vanishing and will become part of History. A mention of them on this World Encyclopedia would, to some extent serve to inform future generations about the living of passed times.
- However, I will continue my endeavor to find sources/references/back up for this article to improve upon.
Also, for further clarity, I post below my note in reply to PROD on talk page of the article,
"@ James B Watson, Hello!
I shall try to address the concerns raised,
1) No evidence that any of these are peculiar to Karnataka
As I have noted on the talk page, there are almost NIL evidence any which way available online. But the stone tools were/are a daily reality. I have tried hard researching online for referencing even before the articles creation, but without success. Documenting these articles preserves a piece of the vanishing history. The articles were part of every household(some still are) without which, as you can imagine cooking would have been impossible! As regards to Karnataka in the Title page, I did consider India/Southern India earlier. But, that would be unbacked and far too generalized claim . By adding Karnataka, at the least I was certain of the daily reality of the region.
Would changing 'of' to 'in' the title from 'Household Stone tools of Karnataka' to 'Household Stone tools in Karnataka' be of any help for better clarity? Please advise.
2) Concerns that the topic as a whole satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
A page 'Oralu Kallu' had existed since 2009 for 7 years, which now seems to have been removed? That page was the number one link from any search engine on the topic. For better understanding the reason for creation, I add below my initial comments at the time of creating the article,
"I have created a new web page without any references. Heres why,
I happened to come across a page titled Oralu Kallu. It was created in 2009. Last modified was in 2015. Till now it didn't have any references. I looked for references. There are none reliable and accurate till now. But it has managed to survived till now. I corrected and enlarged that page. I grouped similar tools on that page and tried to rename it with a broader name. I was unable to do so. Later I deleted the expanded information that I had contributed myself and created this new page with it. As before, no reliable references for this are available online now too!!
Could you please create a redirect from Oralu Kallu page to this article's page?"
Hope I have addressed the concerns raised by you. I look forward to improve the article, will try even more researching to better it. Regards"
Sincerely --Kireadsalot (talk) 05:58, 2 December 2016 (UTC)"
- I still don't think that this topic is in any way notable. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:11, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- I have your page on my watchlist, James, and the title was too intriguing! So to help the new user I have joined in the discussion. @Kireadsalot: This is a noble attempt to introduce a new article but the subject is very unusual. The first thing I did was to put a link into this discussion, so we can find it easily . I went to the page to see what it was about. As you know (or will soon) a wikipedia edit has three parts. 1. An interesting fact. 2. a reference to say where we can check the fact. 3. A line in the edit summary that will inform your readers of what you have done. Without #2 the edit can/should be deleted.
- The next thing I did was to look at the tool 'What links here'. If there are no links the article is an orphan and is unlikely to survive. so I thought where could you find a link- or add one Cuisine of Karnataka seemed a good place to start. That would need a whole new section #Preparation# so a lot of work. There is a category Kanataka cuisine there too and there may be articles in that which could provide a natural home for a link. I am not an expert- which I assume you are. I added the category to the article
- I looked again at Household Stone tools in Karnataka to examine its structure. Ok there is a lot of work needed to make this look like other Wikipedia articles. I write booklets for edit a thons- and some of the material may be helpful see User:ClemRutter/training#Booklets (.odt format) for some links. please give me feedback on how useful you find the material
@ James B Watson, Hello!
Thank you for your reply. I acknowledge your view.
--Kireadsalot (talk) 15:25, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
@ ClemRutter, Hello!
Thanks for hand holding. Thanks for adding category. Much appreciated.
I specifically need help on uploading photos on another page. I shall post on your talk page for help.
--Kireadsalot (talk) 15:25, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Unprotection request of Justin Gaethje
Request for unprotection: Hello JamesBWatson! I just stumbled upon Justin Gaethje (fighter) and then naively tried to move it to Justin Gaethje, only to find out the target page is salted. Page seems to have been salted because of several re-creations and re-deletions throughout 2014 and 2015. In regards to whether the subject has become notable: By now, I'd argue the subject simply meets the general notability guideline (significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject), irrespective of whether he additionally meets the MMA-specific notability guidline, which he still doesn't. Also, the fact that someone simply recreated the article on a slightly different page and no one had an issue with that seems to point to sufficient notability. Best regards, --D-M (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Ziad K Abdelnour Wiki Profile
Ziad K Abdelnour Wiki profile has been deleted by some one else. And also we are not able to see the history of profile after April 8th 2011. We would like to request you to review Ziad K Abdelnour Wiki profile and Live it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prasad0052 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Black history project being deleted?
There appear to be several black history stubs being proposed for deleted recently, one by you. They all seem to have been created by new users, and all about Spartanburg, South Carolina. See, e.g.,  and  Should these be rescued? Bearian (talk) 15:06, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
The user User_talk:Kapil_shanmukh started again adding errors on Tanuku page. I've reported earlier but it was turned down as stale. Could you watch list the page?--Vin09 (talk) 10:48, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Vin09: Unfortunately, I find that watchlisting is not very effective for me, because I am unable to stop myself from gradually building up a list of thousands of pages, so that I get far too many hits for me to actually check every time I look at my watchlist. Consequently, I have virtually given up using my watchlist at all. However, you are welcome to let me know if you see more from the same editor, and I will look at it. I will also say that at present I would be reluctant to take administrative action against the editor, as there has n attempt to explain what the problems are: simply calling the edits "vandalism" without explaining what is wrong with them is unlikely to help. It does not look to me like vandalism: it looks like good-faith editing, even if it is misguided. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:30, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your help at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/220.127.116.11. I'm sorry for not giving diffs for relevant edits by their past accounts (I thought it was evident in the archived investigation), and will make sure I do this in the future. However I fear that this editor may return and I am not sure if we should keep on using the IP address as the "master account" or we should name one of the earlier accounts as the master? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:15, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Emir of Wikipedia: This time the lack of diffs wasn't important, as there was enough evidence to block anyway, but very often it makes a huge difference. It may seem from your point of view that it was evident in the archived investigation, but for someone new to the case, as I was, that means reading through the previous cases, going from there to the history of the accounts mentioned, looking through their editing history to find what is relevant... It often can take a really huge amount of time and effort. To your question about changing the SPI to a master account, yes, that should be done, and I was intending to ask Vanjagenije if he would look into it, but, as you know, he has already done it. Thanks, Vanjagenije. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi there. A certain IP vandal that you've helped combat in the past has resurfaced – targets cricket articles in general and international squad templates in particular; IP address generally starts with 180.234; apparently based in Bangladesh. The IPs 18.104.22.168, …84.251, …38.86 (and perhaps others) have all been recently blocked. I noticed here that at one point you were able to implement some sort of rangeblock. If it's possible to do something like that again, it would certainly save a lot of frustration, even if it only works for a few months. Thanks, IgnorantArmies (talk) 16:05, 9 December 2016 (UTC)