User talk:Stalwart111/Archive 19

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Stalwart111. 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 15

←

Archive 17

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
225	Skull and crossbones (symbol) (talk)	Add sources
606	Glossary of French expressions in English (talk)	Add sources
59	Quintessentially Group (talk)	Add sources
218	Henry Jennings (talk)	Add sources
77	Anglicism (talk)	Add sources
157	Operative Media (talk)	Add sources
68	Pope Gregory XV (talk)	Cleanup
36	Pope Clement IX (talk)	Cleanup
139	Hooding (talk)	Cleanup
266	Leo Baker (skateboarder) (talk)	Expand
92	Republic of Salé (talk)	Expand
704	Population decline (talk)	Expand
378	Tent (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,403	Immortals (2011 film) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
26	Jade Esteban Estrada (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
291	Randstad NV (talk)	Merge
344	Capgemini Engineering (talk)	Merge
109	Swag (bedroll) (talk)	Merge
361	Dave Sheridan (actor) (talk)	Wikify
8	Samuel Blommaert (talk)	Wikify
235	United Nations Convention against Torture (talk)	Wikify
3	Julia (clairvoyant) (talk)	Orphan
3	Juvenile justice in Papua New Guinea (talk)	Orphan
62	Graphik (talk)	Orphan
174	Albert Bryan (politician) (talk)	Stub
121	SmugMug (talk)	Stub
12	Long John Silver (comics) (talk)	Stub
584	Coforge (talk)	Stub
10	Silver (Motion novel) (talk)	Stub
16	Sean Sheffey (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Jenny Rae Le Roux

Hello. I'm contacting you because you undid an earlier closure of [[1]] on Jenny Rae Le Roux. The article now appears to have been deleted without proper closure of the debate, following a couple of editors claiming that the article was a hoax. I have left a comment in the debate. While it may well be that the subject is non-notable, the existence of this candidate is clearly not a hoax (though the content added to the article may be), and I think it's been unwise to delete the article as a "hoax" without proper debate. When you have time, please would you re-visit this topic. I think we're unwise to claim that a bona fide candidate (I've checked with the California Secretary of State's website) is a "hoax", as it makes us look like we're getting political. Thank you. RomanSpa (talk) 09:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi RomanSpa. It looks like it's still there, but it has been both prod'd for deletion and nominated at AfD simultaneously. I've asked for the prod to be resolved and for the AfD to be closed. St★lwart¹¹¹ 10:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Angola, Delaware

You closed the DRV regarding this AfD before I had a chance to post my response there. And I was trying to do so but there was an edit conflict. I think you should reopen the DRV. And I should be allowed to post my response there. I had valid reasons for doing what I did. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 09:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Just to be clear. I wasn't an involved editor. And I didn't close the AfD to my preferred outcome. I closed it according to the sources that were added after the nomination. The added sources clearly indicated that the criteria for WP:GEOLAND is satisfied. I don't see how this can possibly close other then keep. So, I question the value of all this drama. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 09:13, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Steve Quinn, thanks for the message. To be clear, I didn't close the DRV, that was an admin by the name of Stifle. Having commented (as I did) I would never (non-admin closure) that discussion, per WP:INVOLVED. I'd suggest you have a read of that policy. You participated in the discussion. Regardless of what you think of other contributions thereafter, and regardless of the result, you shouldn't have anything to do with closing it. If its really that obvious a result, there will be plenty of uninvolved editors capable of closing the discussion.

Beyond that, the fact that you thought I had closed the discussion, the fact that you think it would be appropriate for me to do so having commented, and the fact that you closed the AfD in the first place all suggest you need to slow down, take a step back, and do some reading before jumping in and performing (effectively) administrator functions without the experience to do so.

You absolutely were an involved editor, and you absolutely closed it to your preferred outcome (regardless of why). St★lwart¹¹¹ 10:10, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

OK Thanks. You are probably right. It seems I have been making some mistakes regarding the AfD and DRV. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 14:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Steve Quinn, we all make mistakes. Nobody was calling for sanctions or restrictions and I noted in my comment that you clearly meant well. No big deal. St★lwart¹¹¹ 22:49, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Troll discussion

I noticed your mention of my copyediting the troll article. As much as I would like to see the article kept, I know virtually nothing about the deletion criteria or how any of that works. Just mentioning it in case you think I couldn't be bothered to participate. Primergrey (talk) 19:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

@Primergrey: No, that's fine. It was simply commentary on WP:BEFORE. It wasn't a demand that you participate. Happy editing! St★lwart¹¹¹ 23:21, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Unsolicited advice

Hi there! My apologies: the unsolicited nature of this advice is made more egregious by the fact that we're (hopefully briefly) at odds at ANI. That said, I just want to encourage you to follow the first recommended step at WP:CONDUCTDISPUTE—stating your conduct concerns politely and directly at the other user's talk page. My success with the method has been ... mixed, but I feel it to be worth the time investment. As is always true when I give unsolicited advice, know that I won't be offended if you delete this or don't respond. If you want to offend me, I am particularly sensitive to assertions that comedy is not a worthy art form. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 05:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Firefangledfeathers Not at all. Advice is appreciated. It was my reading (having really had not much to do with that topic area over my 12+ years here) that the talk page of an article subject to specific ArbCom remedies was the last page we would expect an editor to so quickly resort to casting aspersions and making accusations of bias. I tried suggesting we stick to content rather than making personal attacks, and my suggestions didn't specifically reference that other editor (I made my comment explicit once those who supported his editorial POV jumped in to disingenuously ask, "what personal attack?!?"). Honestly, I thought they would take note of a general suggestion and that would be that. I didn't expect them to double-down and try to set fire to the place. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I think I've been about as pushy as I care to be. Thinking only about the future, I hope you'll consider the 'user talk first' advice. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 15:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
514	Piracy in the Caribbean (talk)	Add sources
210	Cosmos DB (talk)	Add sources
28	Pakenham railway line (talk)	Add sources
15	South Gippsland Freeway (talk)	Add sources
15	Burwood Highway (talk)	Add sources
2	Simon Kine (talk)	Add sources
7	1680s in piracy (talk)	Cleanup
37	Westfield Fountain Gate (talk)	Cleanup
16	Flowboard (talk)	Cleanup
31	Patriarch Ponds (talk)	Expand
8	Patricia Forsythe (talk)	Expand
90	Murrumbeena, Victoria (talk)	Expand
1,562	Indo-Aryan peoples (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,731	Piracy (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
33	Upwey, Victoria (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
13	Sneakbox (talk)	Merge
26	Burwood East, Victoria (talk)	Merge
163	Handcar (talk)	Merge
165	Louis, Grand Condé (talk)	Wikify
55	Richard A. Falk (talk)	Wikify
4	Ramy Abdu (talk)	Wikify
30	Andrei Doroshin (talk)	Orphan
6	Helen Minnis (talk)	Orphan
2	Reza Rioter (talk)	Orphan
11	Assam Football Association (talk)	Stub
4	Luiz Nishimori (talk)	Stub
9	Zheng Qi (pirate) (talk)	Stub
33	City of Maroondah (talk)	Stub
62	Brick (band) (talk)	Stub
9	Cricket Association of Mizoram (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:32, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Wikiclaus Cheer !

		Wikiclaus greetings
		Michael Q. Schmidt ^talkback is wishing you get the happiest of Wikipedia cheer from Wikiclaus himself. This message is intended to celebrate the holiday season, promote WikiCheer, and to hopefully make your day just a little bit better, for Wikiclaus encourages we all spread smiles, fellowship, and seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. *Share the good feelings and the happiest of holiday spirit from Wikiclaus* !**

COI Help

Hi Stalwart,

I was hoping you would be able to help me out with something; I think I've stumbled across a large number of COI's related to a single organization, starting at the end of 2015 and continuing until today, peaking in 2016 and 2019, and I'm not sure what to do about it.

I'm approaching you because despite our limited interactions, my relative newness to Wikipedia means that I haven't interacted with many users, and of those I have, you appear to be the best combination of experienced within Wikipedia and neutral on the topic areas this involves - I hope you don't mind.

The organization is Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, and the behavior takes one of two forms:

Developing pages related to the organization, its projects, or its key individuals,
Referencing relevant work done by the organization on various pages

Originally, I believed there was a single, semi-declared conflict of interest by Anassjerjawi, but a recent edit on the page by Emad Shehda, a new editor with just three edits, made me wonder. I investigated further, and believe I can connect that individual to an individual within EMHRM, but I won't provide the details as I'm not sure whether WP:OUTING covers information publicly available on the internet, discoverable with information provided on Wikipedia.

I am reasonable confident that the following seven individuals have a COI related to the organization; two have posted information to that effect on wikipedia, though they have not properly declared their COI. Two more I have discovered other information that connects them to the organization, and the final three are merely connected based on their editing pattern.

I also believe there are individuals beyond these seven that I have been unable to discover; as part of a broader post, Thomas. W posted the following on Anassjerjawi's page Rules that have been explained to other people in your organisation multiple times, and should come as no surprise to you, and I've only been able to find one of those explanations.

Wikipedian	EMHRM Edits	Total Edits	First Edit	Last Edit	Notes
Wiki Enriching	7	8	19 July 2019	24 August 2019	8th edit bluelinking a word in an unrelated article
SarahMaro	4	4	20 September 2019	6 January 2020	N/A
MahaHussaini	23	29	9 July 2019	15 July 2019	Very strong evidence exists that they have a conflict of interest beyond editing pattern; not posting due to WP:OUTING concerns
Anassjerjawi	?	129	18 October 2015	16 August 2021	Mentions they have a COI in relation to a warning for previous recreation of the EMHRM article. In the absence of that comment, I would not have included them in this list; there are other editors with a similar editing pattern that I dismissed as their focus wasn't sufficiently on EMHRM. Was warned about COI editing on the 17th of October, 2016.
Emad Shehda	3	3	17 August 2021	19 August 2021	Evidence exists that they have a conflict of interest beyond editing pattern; not posting due to WP:OUTING concerns. Was partially warned about COI editing on the 21st of August, 2021
Salsabeel Zeineddin	20	25	18 October 2015	25 September 2016	Other 5 edits in user-space, mentions having a relation with EUHRM on their user page, was warned about COI editing on the 26th of October, 2015
NaraForRefugees	5	7	14 May 2016	14 July 2016	Other edits not in article-space

There is an additional user with an unusual editing pattern that I feel is worthy of mention, though I am not confident that they have a COI with EUHRM

Wikipedian	EMHRM Edits	Total Edits	First Edit	Last Edit	Notes
Salhudeena	1	5	9 August 2021	9 August 2021	The remaining four edits are extensive but unsourced BLP's in draft space; the two individuals covered do not appear to be notable on the basis of WP:BEFORE and the photographs of them are uploaded by the user with the copyright information stating "own work"

From here, I am not sure to do. I would just politely point them in the direction of WP:COI as I did with Emad Shehda before I discovered the extent of the issue, but I don't feel that is appropriate any more; the organization as a whole has not heeded the COI warnings, and nor have the individuals who have been warned. Do you believe I should just leave the COI notifications, or should I formally bring this up somewhere (perhaps ANI), and if so could you give a little guidance on how to do so, as well as whether I should mention Salhudeena?

Apologies for any inconvenience this causes; its a long post to drop on your lap without warning - and thank you for any help you can provide. BilledMammal (talk) 05:29, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi BilledMammal. No need to apologise; happy to look at it. Taken at face value, there certainly seems to be some problematic editing going on. COI editing isn't a problem, of course, as long as that COI is declared and it doesn't affect the quality of the edits. The last user (separately) hasn't made enough edits (or enough as a proportion) for me to make a call one way or the other (not that its up to me anyway). EMHRM was nominated for deletion and that draws a lot of attention. People often make drive-by edits to articles nominated for deletion while deciding if they will contribute to the deletion discussion. So one-off edits or small bouts of concentrated editing should probably be dismissed. Two options here (as I see it):

Review edits and identify patterns of behaviour (spelling, grammar, edit summaries, etc) and open an investigation at WP:SPI so that a Check-User can determine if the editors are related.
Transclude the above to WP:COIN, the relevant noticeboard for Conflicts of Interest.

I'll happily comment at either if you like.

Cheers, St★lwart¹¹¹ 00:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

PS. Do yourself a favour and start a user page. It's not required, of course, but its a good place to confirm any interests of your own, conflicted or otherwise

. St★lwart¹¹¹ 00:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for doing so; I've now connected three of the editors to individuals affiliated with EMHRM, so it seems unlikely that the is a sock puppet issue, and so I'll take it to COIN - thank you for pointing out that noticeboard exists.

I'll also look into creating a user page, when I work out what I should put on there. BilledMammal (talk) 01:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good. As a starting point, the userpage banner that appears at the top of mine (and that of many editors) so the page isn't indexed. I'll likely comment on your thread at WP:COIN. St★lwart¹¹¹ 01:55, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Done, thank you :) BilledMammal (talk) 02:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Craig Johnston (politician)

Hello! Thanks for your work on this article! I wonder, do you think it would be appropriate to set up a disambiguation with Craig Johnston the rugby player? Sheijiashaojun (talk) 11:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Sheijiashaojun, no worries! Let's see how the AFD goes. It's probably worth doing, but I don't think there is going to be any immediate confusion between the two. St★lwart¹¹¹ 11:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Sounds good. Sheijiashaojun (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2021 (UTC)