Jump to content

User talk:Malinaccier/2017/August

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Administrators' newsletter – August 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).

Administrator changes

added Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
removed Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Malinaccier/2017. 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.

Kipala (talk) 07:31, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

@Kipala: Let me know if that worked for you. Malinaccier (talk) 07:35, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
@Kipala: I changed the block settings for User:Mtongori as you requested. If there is still an issue, please post here for a fast response since I will not be online for some time. Thanks! Malinaccier (talk) 07:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Àngel Guimerà

Hi. Thanks for the protection. Would you mind to revert to the previous version of the IP edit wars? The IP manipulated some sourced information. I know what Transporterman said about accents (it seems reasonable), but the IP manipulated too some information of the note and also the bolded spanish form of the name. Manuchansu (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

@Manuchansu: Hi! Which version are you wanting to restore? I am not going to "pick a side" by reverting one side or another's edits, but if there is something that must be changed to be compliant with Wikipedia policy or style conventions, I can make that change. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 19:28, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Of course not Malinaccier. Well, that's exactly ("pick a side") what the IP did, because he (or she) knew very well what he/she was doing. As you can see, at the entrance the IP has removed the bold of the spanish name; as you can see on the talk (I mean my first statement), that was his given name and it is currently used by many sources or authorities. Later, on the notes section (which I created to reflect the complexity of the case), the IP manipulated the original «Born as Ángel Guimerá y Jorge, which used by most of Spanish sources» to «Born as Ángel Guimerá y Jorge, before the Catalan spelling normalization of Pompeu Fabra». The rest are changes about the accent, but I agree with TransporterMan criteria. Manuchansu (talk) 19:56, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
@Yeza: @Unapersona: As @Leptictidium: said, this version (the version of the page before any of us touched it) is the logical starting point for the discussion.--Andiport (talk) 20:06, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
It looks like additional sourced material has been changed since the 14th of June (comparison). Do you still want me to go back? Malinaccier (talk) 20:12, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Sourced material has been added by both sides in the debate (initially by me, then that was replaced with different material by Manuchansu). That's why I agree with Andiport that the starting point should be the version right before either Manuchansu or I touched the article.--Leptictidium (mt) 20:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
That okay with you, @Manuchansu:? Malinaccier (talk) 20:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
No, that's not correct. Leptictidium added non-neutral sources, deleting and manipulating other information with his change. I have provided a compendium of sources from national libraries and literary authorities (as the Library of Congres), so there is no comparison. For two weeks he has only asked for one thing: to return the article to the previous version, but he has not rebuffed all the academic sources that I have provided or have given strong arguments.
The argument of Leptictidium and other users coming from ca:wiki (which casually they have little edits in en:wiki) is to return to the original edition, because they seem to want to remove certain facts from this person. But it's difficult to believe the previous manichaean and manipulated version of the article when Biblioteca Nacional de España (1) and the Bibliotheque nationale de France (2) catalog him as «Ángel Gimerá y Jorge» or just «Ángel Guimerá», the Library of Congress (3) and the National Library of Australia (4) catalog him as «Angel Gimerá». Even the Encyclopaedia Britannica recognized him as "Ángel Guimerá" (5).
So, Malinaccier, I understang your point, but in this case...if the previous version is recovered, that will be to recognise as good all for what the other part has fought. Having the article locked and under control, in 10 years you will not see that these users have interest in this biography, except to keep the version according to a certain point of view. Manuchansu (talk) 20:54, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Okay everyone, let's take this discussion to the article's talk page. I am not going to make a change to the page that is not supported by a broad consensus. Is there a way you can reach a compromise? Malinaccier (talk) 20:58, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree with taking the discussion to the talk page.--Leptictidium (mt) 08:09, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Malinaccier, precisely the changes of the IP that I have indicated to you are not sustained under any consensus...precisely the person which edited under IP did in that way to be able to introduce changes knowing the problems of this article. Anyway it's ok, I accept your statement. Manuchansu (talk) 21:02, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Christian Guzman

Hello! Your submission of Christian Guzman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 16:42, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Relisting AfDs

Please review WP:NOQUORUM before relisting more AfDs. This is in reference to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gareth Roberts (ice hockey). ~ Rob13Talk 17:53, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I am aware of the "no quorum" close and in some cases I will close discussions as a "soft delete." Depending on the case I will relist if I think the discussion could benefit from more participation. This is a judgment call and I expect different administrators have different "styles" and thoughts when it comes to this procedure. Apparently both SoWhy and I both felt that more attention would bring clarity to the discussion while you did not. Malinaccier (talk) 18:19, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
SoWhy previously had a misunderstanding regarding whether a single !delete vote in addition to the nominating statement prevents NOQUORUM from applying. If you believe the nomination is likely to be controversial, you're welcome to relist, of course, but you should explain why it is controversial. Note that NOQUORUM received an update recently that requires admins to treat these like PRODs (see this RfC). That can mean relisting (equivalent to de-prodding) if you feel processing the PROD is inappropriate, but this does require a rationale. ~ Rob13Talk 14:46, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
@BU Rob13: Thanks for the link to the RFC; I understand the history of the policy better now! Malinaccier (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

who on “Open Web Foundation”

[1]. There have been accusations made[who?]. see ref, "Back at the end of July, Microsoftee Dare Obasanjo attacked the Open Web Foundation for ...", I think the "Microsoftee" is typo, see Google searches.--YFdyh000 (talk) 14:33, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@YFdyh000: I reverted it because of the grammar, but now I see what you were trying to say. I restored your edit and copyedited for clarity and grammar. Thanks for the note! :) Malinaccier (talk) 17:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Question Regarding BLP Images

Hi there - you recently responded to my request for revert rights, and given that my list of known contacts for help is relatively small, I was hoping you could help point me in the right direction regarding a recent edit. After reverting page-blanking vandalism on the Anna Faris page yesterday, and placing it on my watchlist, I have noticed that the primary image used was changed by an anonymous user. I've read over various guidelines (WP:MUG) regarding images, however, the one used there does not apply.

However, it is my personal opinion that the new image used is of lower quality than the previous one... what steps would you recommend I take in the future with issues such as this? Would my judgement in this case (lower quality image) be correct, and therefore it should be undone?

Thanks for taking the time --Hunterm267Talk 18:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

@Hunterm267: Sure, I think the previous image is more flattering. There is nothing wrong with using the "undo" button and explaining in your edit summary that you liked the first image better. In this case, though, you could always move the new image down into the article text somewhere and restoring the infobox image. This page describes a perspective that might be useful to your understanding. Malinaccier (talk) 18:27, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate your reply! Most of the edits/undos I have made thus far have been ones that I consider to be obvious - that is, almost undeniably necessary. Working to become more comfortable in being BOLD is my next goal, and I appreciate your confirming that my intention in this case was correct. --Hunterm267Talk 18:32, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
And the thing is that the same anonymous editor (or somebody else) might come back and revert you again. I have learned through the years on Wikipedia not to get too attached to any one version of an article. It will be changed again soon! Stay in touch as you have more questions. Malinaccier (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kelly Starrett, Juliet Starrett

Hello! Your submission of Kelly Starrett, Juliet Starrett at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 15:17, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Casablanca2017 username

@Malinaccier: there is a ceiling fan company called Casablanca, and that is what I thought this account was named after. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Cold and Spicy 00:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Coldandspicy: No worries! There is also a city named Casablanca as well as a really old movie Casablanca (film). When evaluating whether an account's username represents a company it can be useful to look at the user's edits. A hypothetical User:Chipotle might represent the Chipotle Mexican Grill or the person may just like Chipotle peppers. If they are editing promotionally on the restaurant's article, that is a much more clear sign. Malinaccier (talk) 00:09, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Ruh roh!

I edited the Henrik Steffens Professor article and made it a redirect to Henrik Steffens, and noticed right afterwards that you declined the speedy tag stating that these are two entirely different things. I just wanted to leave you a message to let you know and apologize for the goof :-). I didn't mean to step on your toes and didn't realize that you declined the speedy before I made the change. Please feel free to revert my edit without the need for my approval; I trust your better judgment here :-). If you have questions or need anything, please let me know and I'll be happy to help. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Oshwah: I actually tried to block Kjelltyrid right after you did, so it looks like we were on a similar track :). The professorship is a different topic than the person it is named after, so I do not think it should be deleted per WP:A10. I don't think it should be speedily deleted based on notability alone either, though I do think an AFD would inevitably result in a "delete" or a "redirect". My thought was to nominate the article for an AFD to give Kjelltyrid the chance to make an argument for notability (though I do think it is heading for a redirect). Maybe I am being too charitable. What do you think? Might as well notify Alex Shih who protected the page :). Malinaccier (talk) 01:23, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
That sounds perfectly fine to me! I thought they sounded similar, so I just made that article into a redirect. Feel free to undo and proceed with the PROD or AFD tagging, and thanks for getting back to me :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 Done Malinaccier (talk) 01:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

User:86.19.139.96

Hi mate, I saw you blocked the above-mentioned user for making bad edits a couple of weeks ago. Well, he's back. Any chance you could do the honours and dispose of him again please? – PeeJay 12:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

 Done Malinaccier (talk) 13:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Kelly Starrett

On 23 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kelly Starrett, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Juliet Starrett, a world whitewater rafting champion, and her husband Kelly Starrett, a national whitewater champion, co-founded one of the world's first CrossFit gyms? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kelly Starrett), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Juliet Starrett

On 23 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Juliet Starrett, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Juliet Starrett, a world whitewater rafting champion, and her husband Kelly Starrett, a national whitewater champion, co-founded one of the world's first CrossFit gyms? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Juliet Starrett), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Malinaccier, I would like to tell you about a user that I am having a hard time with. His (or her, idk) name is Quinton Feldberg. I keep asking Quinton questions, but he (or she, I'm just going to assume she) either keeps ignoring me or keeps saying "I already answered that question.". Would you please talk to her and tell her to treat me with a little bit more respect? Thank you. (Btw, I don't mean more respect than anyone else, I'm just saying she is not respecting me that much) --Gibberish eaters (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

???????? Quinton Feldberg (talk) 16:32, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for the slow reply. I can see from Quinton's talk page that he has not been responding to you, but this is likely because he was operating an illegal bot on his account and editing while not being there. Hopefully he is more responsive now. Malinaccier (talk) 17:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Usernamekiran/Archive 6#Alt account

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Usernamekiran/Archive 6#Alt account. —usernamekiran(talk) 19:28, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Malinaccier/2017/August&oldid=1218092470"