User talk:Ymblanter/2020

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

MMXX Lunar Calendar

Ymblanter,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap year – news article.
– Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

– Utopes (talk) 04:33, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, also best wishes and happy new year to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:23, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		for adding protection to Diet In Sikhism a ravaged article 80.195.50.235 (talk) 15:28, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:34, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Keep going and make Wikipedia more useful Ninjas.Warrior (talk) 18:17, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, it is always great to see brand new users expressing appreciation.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:21, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guillermo Kahlo

Hi,

got tired on the article, user ignores talk page, discussion, pushing slowly on and on the same without explanation. Please revert and protect the article. Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 12:37, 6 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

No, I can not, this is against the policy. You have to discuss with them. Try leaving the message at their talk page first, if they do not react, then something can be done.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:40, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, however as I knew, the article's talk page where the dicussion has to be made (even another admin many years ago directed me there as a first place instead of the user's talk page, so in case this policy would change, inform me about that...I opened the discussion in the talk long time ago...).(KIENGIR (talk) 21:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

The talk page of the article is a good place to start, but if they do not react but continue editing their talk page is the next stop.The policy is Wikipedia:Edit warring.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:39, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, now it is clear, that means depending on the situation administrators may to chose to act earlier than a personal warning has been made if necessary, but this case you judged the situation like it worths a warning and it's possible positive consequences. I already made a notification.(KIENGIR (talk) 19:28, 7 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, indeed. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:30, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately no response, no result, but ([1]), ([2])...(KIENGIR (talk) 13:11, 11 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I blocked for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 13:15, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Out of block, again the same with the total ignorance of anything the past ([3]), ([4]), ([5])...(KIENGIR (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I blocked for a week--Ymblanter (talk) 08:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request - Article History 2020

Hi, I was wondering if you could do me a favor. Would you be able, if at all possible, to scratch out the 4 edits of LubnaFarhan on the history page for The Apprentice (British series 15)? The editor made disruptive edits, with a reason claiming they were a person from the show and that they "lied" about the information that they removed. However, its clear that's false. GUtt01 (talk) 14:54, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not think it is possible. The edits are clearly bad but I do not see anything which would require revision-deletion (if this is what you mean).--Ymblanter (talk) 14:59, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Europe Business Assembly is not correct

Hello and happy new year. I noticed that the article is about Europe_Business_ Assemblies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe_Business_Assembly) is respond to reality. I also noticed that some people tried to change the article to false information. The reason you have blocked an article for change is that vandals. I found information that is true I guess- https://nagolos.com.ua/news_/europe-business-assembly-proveli-v-oksforde-debaty-na-temu-budushchego-razvitiya-meditsiny-i-obrazovaniya-1668 ( but this article is in Russian)

I have a lot of evidence in favor of this article:

Europe Business Assembly held a debate in Oxford on the future development of medicine and education https://nagolos.com.ua/news_/europe-business-assembly-proveli-v-oksforde-debaty-na-temu-budushchego-razvitiya-meditsiny-i-obrazovaniya-1668 http://arenanews.com.ua/novosti-partnerov/biznes-i-finansy/6692-europe-business-assembly-proveli-v-oksforde-debaty-na-temu-buduschego-razvitiya-mediciny-i-obrazovaniya.html https://vremya.eu/stati/obrazovanie-i-nauka/europe-business-assembly-proveli-v-oksfo.html http://www.abcpost.info/europe-business-assembly-proveli-v-oksforde-debaty-na-temu-budushhego-razvitiya-mediciny-i-obrazovaniya.html https://parlament.biz/europe-business-assembly-proveli-v-oksforde-debaty-na-temu-budushhego-razvitiya-meditsiny-i-obrazovaniya/ https://mykh.com.ua/biznes-i-finansy/europe-business-assembly-proveli-v-oksforde-debaty-na-temu-budushhego-razvitiya-meditsiny-i-obrazovaniya.html

Europe Business Assembly Director Ivan Savvov Gave A Keynote Speech in the UN Headquarters https://www.indiagazette.com/newsr/9838 https://medium.com/@vivacious_chest_mule_973/europe-business-assembly-director-ivan-savvov-gave-a-keynote-speech-in-the-un-headquarters-b42909b9c518

Директор Europe Business Assembly Иван Саввов выступил с докладом в штаб-квартире ООН https://vremya.eu/vazhnoe/relizy/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-s.html https://nagolos.com.ua/hype/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-vystupil-s-dokladom-v-shtab-kvartire-oon-1682 http://arenanews.com.ua/mir/6691-direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-vystupil-s-dokladom-v-shtab-kvartire-oon.html https://mykh.com.ua/biznes-i-finansy/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-vystupil-s-dokladom-v-shtab-kvartire-oon.html http://www.abcpost.info/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-vystupil-s-dokladom-v-shtab-kvartire-oon.html https://parlament.biz/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-vystupil-s-dokladom-v-shtab-kvartire-oon/

Europe Business Assembly Held the Oxford Debate on the Future of Healthcare and Education http://vectornews.eu/news/society/188445-europe-business-assembly-held-the-oxford-debate-on-the-future-of-healthcare-and-education.html https://www.malaysiasun.com/newsr/9847

Europe Business Assembly Has Established the Centre of Malta in Oxford https://www.thegremlin.co.za/2019/11/05/europe-business-assembly-has-established-the-centre-of-malta-in-oxford/ https://medium.com/@myrlen12/europe-business-assembly-has-established-the-centre-of-malta-in-oxford-29fc19fc1ffe http://vectornews.eu/news/technologies/190063-europe-business-assembly-has-established-the-centre-of-malta-in-oxford.html

https://vremya.eu/vazhnoe/relizy/europe-business-assembly-otkryla-maltiis.html https://nagolos.com.ua/news_/europe-business-assembly-otkryla-maltiyskiy-kulturnyy-tsentr-v-oksforde-1704 http://arenanews.com.ua/ekonomika/6704-europe-business-assembly-otkryla-maltiyskiy-kulturnyy-centr-v-oksforde.html https://mykh.com.ua/biznes-i-finansy/europe-business-assembly-otkryla-maltijskij-kulturnyj-tsentr-v-oksforde.html https://obzzor.com/340-europe-business-assembly-otkryla-maltijskij-kulturnyj-czentr-v-oksforde.html http://www.abcpost.info/europe-business-assembly-otkryla-maltijskij-kulturnyj-centr-v-oksforde.html https://parlament.biz/europe-business-assembly-otkryla-maltijskij-kulturnyj-tsentr-v-oksforde/

Europe Business Assembly: 20 Years of Leadership with Oxford Summits of Leaders http://imbaragaradio.com/?p=22253 https://nagolos.com.ua/hype/europe-business-assembly-20-let-liderstva-blagodarya-oksfordskim-sammitam-liderov-1714 https://vremya.eu/novosti/europe-business-assembly-20-let-liderstv.html https://mykh.com.ua/biznes-i-finansy/europe-business-assembly-20-let-liderstva-blagodarya-oksfordskim-sammitam-liderov.html http://www.abcpost.info/europe-business-assembly-20-let-liderstva-blagodarya-oksfordskim-sammitam-liderov.html https://parlament.biz/europe-business-assembly-20-let-liderstva-blagodarya-oksfordskim-sammitam-liderov/ https://obzzor.com/359-europe-business-assembly-20-let-liderstva-blagodarya-oksfordskim-sammitam-liderov.html

На Кипре под эгидой Europe Business Assembly прошла международная медицинская конференция «Best Medical Practice» https://nagolos.com.ua/news_/na-kipre-pod-egidoy-europe-business-assembly-proshla-mezhdunarodnaya-meditsinskaya-konferentsiya-best-medical-practice-1773 https://mykh.com.ua/biznes-i-finansy/na-kipre-pod-egidoj-europe-business-assembly-proshla-mezhdunarodnaya-meditsinskaya-konferentsiya-best-medical-practice.html https://vremya.eu/novosti/na-kipre-pod-yegidoi-europe-business-ass.html http://arenanews.com.ua/ekonomika/6741-na-kipre-pod-egidoy-europe-business-assembly-proshla-mezhdunarodnaya-medicinskaya-konferenciya-best-medical-practice.html http://www.abcpost.info/na-kipre-pod-egidoj-europe-business-assembly-proshla-mezhdunarodnaya-medicinskaya-konferenciya-best-medical-practice.html https://parlament.biz/na-kipre-pod-egidoj-europe-business-assembly-proshla-mezhdunarodnaya-meditsinskaya-konferentsiya-best-medical-practice/ https://obzzor.com/429-na-kipre-pod-egidoj-europe-business-assembly-proshla-mezhdunarodnaya-mediczinskaya-konferencziya-best-medical-practice.html

Europe Business Assembly Hold International Medical Conference in Cyprus https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mgmSnH6JE9_I36QPTfAMsLn-5XDkzRHCoSPIeTFtFI4/edit#gid=51630883 https://medium.com/@myrlen12/europe-business-assembly-hold-international-medical-conference-in-cyprus-ccb12a62d80 https://www.hongkongnews.net/newsr/9929 http://vectornews.eu/news/technologies/190063-europe-business-assembly-has-established-the-centre-of-malta-in-oxford.html

Еurope business assembly director ivan savvov will speak at the un headquarters in geneva http://pietercloete.com/europe-business-assembly-director-ivan-savvov-will-speak-at-the-un-headquarters-in-geneva/ http://vectornews.eu/news/world/196954-europe-business-assembly-director-ivan-savvov-will-speak-at-the-un-headquarters-in-geneva.html https://medium.com/@myrlen12/europe-business-assembly-director-ivan-savvov-will-speak-at-the-un-headquarters-in-geneva-2250937d7840

Директор Europe Business Assembly Иван Саввов презентовал Международный Саммит Лидеров в Оксфорде https://nagolos.com.ua/news_/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-prezentoval-mezhdunarodnyy-sammit-liderov-v-oksforde-1812 https://vremya.eu/vazhnoe/relizy/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-s-19099.html http://arenanews.com.ua/ekonomika/6760-direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-prezentoval-mezhdunarodnyy-sammit-liderov-v-oksforde.html https://mykh.com.ua/biznes-i-finansy/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-prezentoval-mezhdunarodnyj-sammit-liderov-v-oksforde.html https://parlament.biz/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-prezentoval-mezhdunarodnyj-sammit-liderov-v-oksforde/ http://www.abcpost.info/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-prezentoval-mezhdunarodnyj-sammit-liderov-v-oksforde.html https://parlament.biz/direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-prezentoval-mezhdunarodnyj-sammit-liderov-v-oksforde-2/ https://obzzor.com/478-direktor-europe-business-assembly-ivan-savvov-prezentoval-mezhdunarodnyj-sammit-liderov-v-oksforde.html

Europe Business Assembly провела Саммит Лидеров 2019 в Оксфорде https://vremya.eu/stati/yekonomika/europe-business-assembly-provela-sammit-.html https://nagolos.com.ua/news_/europe-business-assembly-provela-sammit-liderov-2019-v-oksforde-1830 http://arenanews.com.ua/mir/evropa/6769-europe-business-assembly-provela-sammit-liderov-2019-v-oksforde.html https://mykh.com.ua/raznoe/europe-business-assembly-provela-sammit-liderov-2019-v-oksforde.html http://www.abcpost.info/europe-business-assembly-provela-sammit-liderov-2019-v-oksforde.html https://obzzor.com/506-europe-business-assembly-provela-sammit-liderov-2019-v-oksforde.html

Also Europe Business Assembly maintains pages on various forums:

Europe Business Assembly Will Host the Summit Of Leaders 2019 in Oxford https://www.iranherald.com/newsr/9982 https://medium.com/@myrlen12/europe-business-assembly-will-host-the-summit-of-leaders-2019-in-oxford-9529523c3ceb

EUROPE BUSINESS ASSEMBLY HELD THE GRAND PARADE OF RECTORS AND HONORARY PROFESSORS OF THE ACADEMIC UNION, OXFORD https://bobrtimes.com/europe-business-assembly-held-the-grand-parade-of-rectors-and-honorary-professors-of-the-academic-union-oxford/63566/ https://medium.com/@myrlen12/europe-business-assembly-held-the-grand-parade-of-rectors-and-honorary-professors-of-the-academic-fb896cd1780b http://vectornews.eu/news/world/199101-europe-business-assembly-held-the-grand-parade-of-rectors-and-honorary-professors-of-the-academic-union-oxford.html https://bestindinews.com/world/europe-business-assembly-hosted-the-summit-of-leaders-2019-in-oxford/ http://www.ankol.com.pl/nagrody/anna-kolisz-ambasador-europe-business-assembly-2019 https://angelfmonlinegh.com/2019/12/10/angel-group-ceo-dr-kwaku-oteng-grabs-top-european-award/

I ask you to change the article, or give access to change the article to correct the text. I am a simple user and I also condemn vandalism, and I want to help Wikipedia be honest and accurate. I am for peace and free information. I wish you and wikipedia success. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergio Briony (talk • contribs) 18:52, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain this at the talk page of the article. My talk page is not a correct venue.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hope

I hope everything works out.[6] WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, my aunt died, and we were pretty close. Nothing I can do at this point, but obviously this is not a good period for taking serious closing work.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:35, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Please don't say I was edit warring when I've only ever made one revert to the Black Sabbath article (ever, not only that one day). Then others will get the impression that I was actually edit warring because you are a respected administrator. I don't want you to have that impression either. It's not the same as a false accusation made by an editor who is involved in the article. Dartslilly (talk) 12:55, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted a revert of your edit, which is, technically speaking, edit-warring. You subsequently reverted yourself, which is commendable, and this is why I assigned the flag, but my point is that doing this using a rollback (which you have not done) is an absolute red flag and may result in a rollback removal.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:04, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, we should never edit war. Sometimes one revert can escalate a dispute. That wasn't my intention here and I'm so sorry if that is what happened. In this case, I did not foresee that the editor falsely claimed he was enforcing a consensus when there isn't one, or I certainly would have started a discussion. I wanted to review the previous discussion for a few reasons. If it was a recent consensus I was not going to initiate a new discussion. I wanted to review the previous arguments and ping past participants if I did open a new discussion. I was surprised when the editor became more aggressive and templated me for edit warring. I think he was aggravated by my requesting the link by edit summary and I made a mistake because this is not the intended use of the revert function. In a perfect world all the editors would follow a BRD cycle, or just discuss when they disagreed with new changes - that burden is on us. Anything to de-escalate, so I will make this type of request on the talk page from now on. Thank you for this advice, I think it will help to prevent edit wars. Dartslilly (talk) 14:32, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection at Language coaching

Not sure why twinkle asked for indefinite extended confirmed here. Must have selected the wrong option by accident. Anyway semi-protection is fine. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, please let us know if disruption resumes after the protection has been expired.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:17, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes hard to manage

Greetings Ymblanter. A few days ago you applied pending changes protection to Nationwide opinion polling for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries. As that page is frequently updated, often concurrently by several editors, I feel that this process imposes too much burden on the regular page maintainers compared to simply reverting vandalism when it happens, so I'd like to suggest switching to semi-protection instead. — JFG ^talk 18:43, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, now I do not remember what I had in mind but probably I wanted to apply semi-protection--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! — JFG ^talk 23:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opened

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/Kudpung. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 28, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyoko^talk 05:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About User:Cwf97

I noticed that you participated in a WP:ANI discussion of this user. He/she has continued to constantly spam categories that are outright false or impossible, like film series/video games that were "disestablished". There is a heavy WP:CIR issue here or possibly just stealth vandalism. I was wondering if you came to a conclusion about this user and what to do._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, but this would require a serious investigation, and I currently do not have time for that. I do not remember anything about the user, which likely means I never crossed with them again.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Wulong bohaiensis

Hello Ymblanter. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Wulong bohaiensis, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: It would appear to me that the note on the talk page is correct: this wp article appears to have been quoted (without attribution) in the online forum shortly after this article was created. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:50, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I did not delete it myself exactly because I wanted to have a second opinion. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:37, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

Здравствуйте! В этом списке большинство статей ожидают оценки. Если вас не затруднит, подскажите, пожалуйста, есть ли какие-то способы привлечь внимание проверяющих к своим статьям или просто надо ждать, когда всё произойдёт само собой? --VLu (talk) 13:37, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

По-моему, нет. Можете сами сделать.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:44, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Да? А я из WP:Autopatrolled так понял, что должны патрулирующие проверить. --VLu (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Есть две разные вещи - патрулирование и рейтинг. Патрулирование - всегда не больше месяца, задержки бывают только в исключительных случаях. Но ссылка, которую Вы дали, на рейтинки (важность и качество), этим занимаются Википроекты. Если проект активен, рейстинг ставят быстро, если нет - могут и вообще никогда на поставить, но, в принципе, этим может заниматься вообще кто угодно.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:04, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо большое за подробный ответ, значит, я додумал, что это как-то связано. --VLu (talk) 14:16, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Патрулирование - это флаг, если у Вас его нет, то Вы и отпатрулировать ничего не сможете, так что не беспокойтесь.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:18, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Это как раз я хорошо понял. )) И даже АПАТа получить нереально. --VLu (talk) 14:29, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо! --VLu (talk) 14:33, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CCI nitpicking

While I'm not thrilled with the convention, the convention in CCI individual entries (as opposed to groups of 20) is to use a red X to mean you didn't find a problem and to use a green checkmark to mean you did find a problem. I can overstress that I don't like this convention — I prefer green means good and red means bad, but that's the convention. I'm referring to this edit S Philbrick (Talk) 21:16, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I actually already figured it out and used red crosses in my later edits. I probably used to know this but last time I was active at cci was a few years ago.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter, got it, thanks for helping out (here and everywhere, I see you a lot). S Philbrick (Talk) 15:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing Dorchester!

Reviews are necessary for the health of the Wikipedia - appreciate you doing it! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:53, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is requested

at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view before Friday.

Only 100 or so words. It should be fun and serious at the same time.

All the best,

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it is unlikely I cn write anything but I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:24, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

See https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q8028&action=history

this admin علاء edit many pages like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16A2:95F8:AD00:60F3:B8EF:FEC6:17E (talk) 03:15, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Natalia Sokol

I see your talk page heading and assure you this is not that important and in fact feel free to ignore it if you wish. I just want to highlight what I did there as I am about as far removed from Russian politics as you can get and you were the first person I thought of that might be able to advise if I took the right cause of action. Anyway. I came upon this article after doing some cleanup on Pussy Riot and getting sucked down the rabbit hole that is Voina. This is what it first looked like. Normally I would just trim the promotional stuff back and then salvage what was left, but not long after going into the sources (the ones I could anyway, Russian is not a strength) decided it was beyond saving. I invoked WP:TNT and stubbyfied it. This is my first time doing that. I don't know if anything more needs to be done. These user contributions might need further investigation too. Regards AIRcorn (talk) 03:07, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think it is in a good shape now. I can recollect a couple of things I have heard about her which are not in the article, but I can check Russian sources later.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:37, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Finest People Are Us

user:Finest People Are Us is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 13:55, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:57, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Go search for your username

in Google books. Doug Weller talk 20:08, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, interesting, though not much surprising--Ymblanter (talk) 20:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That was my response when I read it. ¬¬¬¬ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 19:09, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Our Homeland Movement

Hi,

at the article IP disruption is ongoing, the seventh (!) attemtp despite not just me, but other users noticed. I even opened a discussion in the talk much earlier, that the IP ignored and even introduced misleading edit logs to push his/her additions...I was planning today to leave a warning for edit warring on the user's page, but as soon I noticed the IP already made 3 new reverts in almost a half-day...please revert (last stable 00:50, 26 January 2020‎) and protect the article. Thank you(KIENGIR (talk) 11:56, 26 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:41, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on group of editors editing on the same BLP pages

Hello, I noticed that you semi-protected Jaggi Vasudev, but that's not what I'm here to discuss :)

I've been digging around this page's history and that of some other pages, and wasn't sure if what I found merits action or it's just my nonsense.

I noticed a pattern of edits on Jaggi Vasudev by editors user:Harshil169, user:Winged Blades of Godric & user:DBigXray. My observations are that most of these edits fail NPOV, V & NOR. They use opinion pieces extensively throughout the article from sources that might fail WP:RS to push a specific POV, synthesize OR from these sources and have also included this POV in the lead paragraph. I have placed a note detailing this on the BLP noticeboard.

However, further investigation of the users' past history via the Intersect Contribs tool revealed that these 3 users have edited 27 mainspace articles together (40 if talk pages are included). A lot of these pages are BLPs. Some other pages are about highly controversial topics in India, such as Babri Masjid. A large majority of these pages are subject to some discussion/debate in India about politics or ideology (especially right-wing, left-wing). I looked through a few of these page histories, and a lot of the edits I saw seem to follow a similar pattern of adding a particular POV. Then opposing POVs are thinned out. Then the particular POV is inserted into the lead. Sometimes each of them adds different aspects of a POV to build a POV narrative. A lot of the edits I looked through and their cited sources fail the rigorous standards of BLP in my opinion.

At first I thought this was sock-puppetry, but looking at the volume of their individual edits, I don't believe so. Also they seem to have differing POVs in some articles, which can be seen on the talk pages of some articles (eg: 1). However, consensus building seems to be generally disregarded if suggestions are not in line with the intended POV. Edit suggestions or red flags seem to be stonewalled or waved off with comments to read so-and-so Wikipedia policy.

I'm not quite sure which of the below these are

sockpuppets
editors with similar ideological slants
editors collaborating to push a POV
editors collaborating with good intentions but with troubling results
just my nonsense

I don't edit much on Wikipedia, and it took me a whole day of digging around to figure this stuff out. I'm pretty sure this is the limit of my investigative capabilities, and I'm not sure what to do here.

Any advice is appreciated.

Tamilmama (talk) 13:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recognize all three names, these are editors with a large contribution each, and it is very unlikely they are sockpuppets. I would guess just similar views and general interest in Indian topics. For the rest, I am afraid, I can not help - I understand very little in most of the Indian topics and have generally little interest in them, and I do not have any opinion on who is right and who is wrong. If you want to change something in the article, you could try opening a discussion at the talk page - though this one is not guaranteed to go well.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:53, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks. I dont believe talk page discussions would go well either. I've seen some of their responses on talk pages. Tamilmama (talk) 14:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

premature

I do not think your notice about a block was premature. This user has a habitual problem with bad moves/copy pasta moves/general editing issues which go ignored and are reverted without discussion. At 20k+ edits, I personally expect editors to know better, particularly when their only response to such messages is a combative attitude and ridiculous accusation. Anywho, I wanted to thank you for being direct, which is why I originally came here before you reverted. :) Praxidicae (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I do not see them cut-and-pasting today after warnings. Their reaction on the warnings was certainly not ideal, butb I think we should wait what they do next and see whether they really got the message.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:12, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You weren't the first to warn them about this, nor the first to be ignored.[7][8][9] And I imagine several more. Praxidicae (talk) 21:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But at least now I have their talk page on my watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:37, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Ymblanter, you seem a reasonable person. We can talk if you want. Unlike the other guy, you were polite in approach to open up a discussion to the least. Hemant Dabral^Talk 21:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It does not really matter whether I am reasonable or not. Cut-and-paste moves are not really acceptable, and I do not see how this is negotiable. You just need to stop doing them and start using the move button instead.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not even in diambiguation pages? And yes it matters when a person is reasonable enough to hear from other side too. Hemant Dabral^Talk 21:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not even in DABs, because it is a copyright violation anyway. The only situation I can imagine when this is not a problem is when you are copying and pasting text which is entirely written by you. (It is still not nice because it does not preserve the editing history, but at least this is not a copyright violation).--Ymblanter (talk) 21:58, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright! thanks for clarifying. I'll be more careful in future regarding these issues. Hemant Dabral^Talk 22:10, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ban on Wikimedia Commons

Good day. Please unblock me on Wikimedia Commons, I am already corrected. Here are my photos that I uploaded locally to Ukrainian Wikipedia.--Максим Огородник (talk) 08:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid after years of uploading blatant copyvio and sockpuppetry it will take longer for you to convince anybody that you are "already corrected"--Ymblanter (talk) 08:31, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please give me one last chance. I will no longer break the rules.--Максим Огородник (talk) 14:00, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From my point of view, you had already enough chances. I think your best option is to ask another Commons admin.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:08, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Nobel laureates by country

Hi,

again a protection needed - you once did on 26 October for two weeks, but since again IP disruption follows in the same manner recurrently... and please revert as well the last 3 edits as the IP is pushing the same fringe material ignoring the talk page since almost 4 months...Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 01:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 07:34, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for 2020 Nakhon Ratchasima shooting

On 8 February 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Nakhon Ratchasima shooting, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ad Orientem (talk) 21:21, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 21:28, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Budapest

Hi,

long standing IP disruption, adding recurrently oceanic climate...since a half year for sure, in not a one already...more of us delaed with it, was even at talk at March 2019, but we have no chance...please revert and protect. Thanks again for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 03:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I blocked the IP and configured pending changes for a year.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:17, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, unfortunately immediate block evasion ([10]). I reverted the pending review.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC))[reply]

And again ([11])...(KIENGIR (talk) 00:19, 10 February 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Blocked this IP as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:39, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiMan1272

Blocked user, user:WikiMan1272 is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk)

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 15:51, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ask for advice

Hello mate! In December I had requested a page protection and you added a semi-protection for one week [12]. As I explained there, a sockpuppet who has all his accounts blocked [13] perform the same editing behaviour using dozens of different IPs, insisting on the same things no matter what the others say and edit-warring for months. He has also insulted me. Could you please tell me what's the best way to cope with this, since he uses so many IPs? - Sthenel (talk) 14:32, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added pending changes for a year, may be this would work--Ymblanter (talk) 16:10, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - Sthenel (talk) 21:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 23:18, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request to categorize

Hi. Álvaro Arzú Escobar was also a president of the Congress of the Republic of Guatemala. Thanks in advance! Thinker78 (talk) 15:57, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, you could have done this yourself.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:07, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I could but I know learning new things in Wikipedia can take time and right now I don't have time to dedicate to that. I am barely editing due to time constraints. Thank you for categorizing it. --Thinker78 (talk) 17:25, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question about alphabetical order

I noticed the entry of Alvaro Arzú Escobar was automatically placed under the letter E in the Category:Presidents of the Congress of Guatemala page. But his last name is "Arzú", "Escobar" is his maternal last name which is generally not used in daily life. Just bringing it to your attention. --Thinker78 (talk) 17:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, fixed--Ymblanter (talk) 17:52, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother again, the Category:Presidents of the Congress of Guatemala,/no page now has some entries whose last names are used for the alphabetical order and other entries whose first names are used. I wanted to fix it myself but I don't know how. Thinker78 (talk) 23:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was only Allan Rodriguez who was sorted by the first name, I fixed this article as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:42, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You added yourself to the list of presidents?--Thinker78 (talk) 20:34, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually, you added me. I will correct it now.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LOL sorry! Thinker78 (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question about "reviewed"

Hi Yaroslav,

I see at the page curation log that you "marked Zambia Information and Communications Technology Authority as reviewed", a few minutes after EranBot "marked revision 941216864 on Zambia Information and Communications Technology Authority as a potential copyright violation".

I'm not asking anyone to take a side in my dispute (and hopefully soon further discussion) with the administrator that deleted the previous version of the article, but I am wondering what "reviewed" means in this case. Thanks.

Groetjes.

--Craig (t|c) 09:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is strange, I clearly checked the version I had for copyright violations and did not find any. I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:42, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'm heading for bed soon in this time zone, so if I don't see a reply before then I'll check in the morning. Maybe by then the other administrator will have replied. Thanks. --Craig (t|c) 10:30, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I actually checked it again, I do not see any copyvio.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright material was commented out; that's likely why you did not see it. I am not sure if Earwig's tool would see it either. — Diannaa (talk) 14:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this explains it. Indeed, I did not go to the code of the page.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhhh, so all of this palaver was about the "mandate" list?! Would have been nice to know that at the start, then this could have been addressed immediately and painlessly. --Craig (t|c) 11:06, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kyiv

I wasn't picking a fight, by the way, and certainly not with you - I was just explaining why I didn't think twice about the move to match the opening definition. It looked as if it had been forgotten about. Guy (help!) 22:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and I certainly did not mean you were going to fight with me. It is just all has been discussed to death, with all possible arguments provided, and, despite this, we have driveby editors changing Kiev to Kyiv on a daily basis. I sustect the origin of Kyiv in the lead is the same, if it is still there I will change it now, because the article has to be consistent.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:21, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi,

a short question, on this picture, on the legend of the top right, could you wirte to me in plain translation what is exactly written? (I recognize Karta and 1871 roki that I undestand, but what is between XXKO-Russ??? YYYYY ZZZZZ). I want to decomponate if Russian, Little-Russian, Ruthenian, Rus' or exactly how it is called concerning the dialects. Thank you for your precious time!

Image here-> [[14]](KIENGIR (talk) 03:18, 21 February 2020 (UTC))[reply]

It says "The map of south-Russian accents and dialects as of 1811"--Ymblanter (talk) 06:18, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance Needed

Hi Ymblanter,

Sorry to bother, but I've been having an issue on a report I made here, the account I reported even vandalized said report by trying to switch the account details. I'm sorry but I just need your assistance on this; I can't believe even the report I made on vandalism has been, in itself, vandalized by the said account. Looking forward to your speedy attention and action on this one.

Thanks so much. Migsmigss (talk) 11:19, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The account is already blocked--Ymblanter (talk) 11:53, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you. And sorry for the bother. I appreciate the speedy reply. Cheers!Migsmigss (talk) 11:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rebellion of the Pilots

Hi. You created a POV template on this article after the edits I made. The only non-neutral sounding statement in the whole article is the first sentence of the second heading which states "The Trujillo dictatorship was a totalitarian system, which violated public liberties, and treated the Dominicans as a slave people, whose work served to enrich the personal coffers of the dictator and his family". I do not think however that this is a non-neutral statement because we are talking about a bloody dictatorship here.

Can you be more specific about which statements need to be or sound more POV? Everything else besides the first sentence of the second heading are facts backed by legitimate sources.AeroCap (talk) 22:39, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to what you mention, the text you introduced routinely refers to Trujillo as "tyrant". Did Ramfis Trujillo really "murder" the plot executors? Why do not you write then that they previously murdered Trujillo? This is not really acceptable for a Wikipedia article. Before your edits, the article was more or less neutral.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:20, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should read the article of dictator Rafael Trujillo and see how POV it sounds. Yes, Ramfis Trujillo executed all of the men responsible for the assassination of his father except two that got away. To your question Why do not you write then that they previously murdered Trujillo? I did write a whole heading about the assassination of the dictator.AeroCap (talk) 15:29, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have an impression that your understanding of our neutrality policy is pretty poor. I will put the POV template beck.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Putting the POV back without specifying why is violating the policy as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NPOV_dispute#Adding_a_tag_to_a_page specially after I have fixed it the more non neutral sounding part. And no my understanding of the POV policy is not poor. Calling a dictatorship a tyranny is not a biased/original research thing. You also revealed that your knowledge of this historical event/article is poor which makes you more likely to misjudge what is non neutral sounding and what is not. The facts are cited with reliable sources in this article.

I will remove the word tyranny/tyrant from the article in order to make it more "neutral". However if this is not enough for you, I will have to report what seems to be irrational and stubborn behavior. AeroCap (talk) 15:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can start with reporting me, because you clearly do not get what I am trying to explain you. Again: for the sake of the argument, let us imagine I believe that President Trump is an idiot. There are millions of people who also believe he is an idiot. If I add to Donald Trump a statement that he is an idiot, or if I even write "this idiot was elected the US president in 2016", it will be a pretty clear POV statement (in addition to being a BLP violation). --Ymblanter (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ban evasion

Hi. A user that was recently banned for edit warring and making personal attacks against me has made a new account, continued the edit war and attacks and posted an unban request on the master's talk page before self-reverting it. Could you deal with it please?

Lazer-kitty (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Zestkick (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 06:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 07:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 07:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious bad moving to draft namespace by user:DGG

Sorry for interrupting, but please revert the situation: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Toomas_Sulling&action=history It is obvious that it is suitable for namespace 0. The reference by Estonian Encyclopaedia Publishers is definitely reliable--Estopedist1 (talk) 09:47, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why do not you talk to DGG? --Ymblanter (talk) 10:00, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Estopedist1, I may have been too fast. But if there's a link to the Estonian WP, add it,. DGG ( talk ) 10:07, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Totalitarianism

Hi, by the article an IP with misleading edit logs and the ignorance of the talk page commited 5 (!) reverts within 24 yours, the last one even after more users warned him in his/her talk page as well. I kindly ask your intervention, the last stable revision is the one of Thepenguin9. (Rjensen's later edits are unrelated). Thank you(KIENGIR (talk) 23:01, 10 March 2020 (UTC))[reply]

The IP is at 5 reverts (4 reverts within 24h), so I could have blocked him without further warnings, but they have got the last warning after their last revert and have not edited since. I would suggest restoring the last version, and if they continue reverting without discussion, I can block them.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:20, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I see they reverted after the last warning. I will block them now, anybody can restore the last version.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of block, edit war was continued: ([15])...(KIENGIR (talk) 13:47, 14 March 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

unfortunately the IP returned, but as a registered user now "IndigoFenix" (self-admittedly), and just harmed the 3RR ([16]), ([17]), ([18]), ([19])...Thank you for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:50, 7 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I blocked indef--Ymblanter (talk) 21:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the page and geolocation, and/or other investigation about user HoboKenobi47...his argumentation, continous removal of the same subject is suspicious...Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 01:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I am afraid this is material for SPI. I am not a checkuser.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Why do you insist on using the Greek letters on the Phi Gamma Delta page (which are sacred to brothers) when the English wording of the letters and the image of the flag work just as well in place? There could also be a link to the Greek alphabet. I don’t believe it to be censorship because all of the relevant information is still there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.185.138.152 (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And Latin letters are sacred for me, please do not use them. And btw do not write black on white, and please do not use electricity when you are contributing to Wikipedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, this is a little coutesy post in order to thank you for your swift page protection on Al-Farabi. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem --Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kazakh names

By law, on the page of each country or city, it is customary to leave the name in those languages that are present in the region. You do illegal things by adding names in Arabic. Please, stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JackAtkinson22 (talk • contribs) 08:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand your logic. Why are you adding the name of the cities in Arabic on the English page? Create a hotel page in Arabic and write everything in Arabic there. The English page should only contain names in those languages that are present in the region. In these regions there is no Arabic language, and never was. For that matter, why do you add the name in Chinese there? Or in Japanese? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JackAtkinson22 (talk • contribs) 08:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop immediately and read our policies. Kazakh was written in Arabic alphabet before the 1930s--Ymblanter (talk) 09:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop vandalizing, and explain to me your logic. Why are you adding names in the "Arabic" language, and specifically in the "Kazakhstani" cities and regions? 3 languages are common in Kazakhstan: Kazakh, Russian and English. Therefore, city names can only be in these languages, period. I know better than you about the country in which I live. JackAtkinson22 (talk) 09:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

responded at your talk page, If you keep removing the names, I will block your account for vandalism.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic script is not an official script of Kazakhstan. Indeed, it was used until 1929, i.e. 90+ years ago. Please explain why should we add it to the opening sentence of Kazakhstan-related articles? I don't see it in MOS, upon a quick look, on the contrary, I see MOS:NICKCRUFT. Materialscientist (talk) 10:00, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did not add it to the articles, and I think it should be some general discussion on whether this script should be there or not (and I would probably support removing it). But mass-removing without discussion but with edit-warring is certainly not ok.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOSGEO says old names could be listed, whatever we understand by old names.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And, if I remember correctly, the argument (again, not given by me) was that Arabic script is still being used in Kazakh in China (which is kind of official since they have an autonomy there).--Ymblanter (talk) 10:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:16, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great thanks!

Sorry for this message, but great thanks for reviewing my articles of Estonian village! All existing Estonian villages should be in enwiki--Estopedist1 (talk) 07:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. I hope once the one-line stube have been created, you would go ahead to fill them with more information.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:30, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:55, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:56, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:34, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:36, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend de-escalation, not escalation

For this topic area. Please see my analysis at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Statement_by_Piotrus. With the most problematic editor in this topic area gone, we should bury the hatchet, and mend fences. (For the record, I haven't reported anyone to AE or such in years; the wiki-world would be a better place with more AGF). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:09, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, I will have a look again.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ignaz Semmelweis

Hi,

an IP is POV pushing and ignoring the BRD principle, did not remain in the talk page...what is concerning in its last edit log he is accusing me with various epithets, although I demonstrated in the talk the problem at every point. Please restore the last stable and protect in case, unfortunately the IP seems not very calm...Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 19:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I fully protected the article for 3 days, which is pretty much the only thing I can do at this point.

Thank you. I have to inform you the IP reported me as a vandal ([20])...I reacted there that already administrator action happened...agh, this cases are...boring...Thank you for your time!(KIENGIR (talk) 19:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Drug price RfC closure

Hello Ymblanter, at the drug prices RfC I noticed that you had some time ago put a "close in progress" message. I know you've gotten rather busy since then; will you still have time to do that or would it be better if we asked at AN to see if anyone's available? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Wugapodes and I agreed on the principles and we have a draft text. With some luck, we should be done in a day or two. My apologies again.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No troubles, and much appreciated for you guys tackling that mess. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:24, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done now.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

!! Urgent !!

Can you please block 123thejoker1234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as this user keeps on trolling despite warnings. I am now just playing a game of whack-a-mole now. A a s i m 08:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Newyorkbrad got there a few seconds before me, we block-conflicted--Ymblanter (talk) 08:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent Request

Hi @Ymblanter: Can you perform edit protection on these two pages for a specific time. I have added the request at the Page Protection area, but it is still pending. These two pages have been victim of disruptive editing from few days. An edit protection may stop edit wars and possible vandalism. Then main editor is in an ANI discussion also. Thanks - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 12:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have just declined the request. These article are not eligible for protection. This is a content dispute, you need to sort it out with your opponent at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:49, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your extraordinary effort

		The Admin's Barnstar
		With appreciation, to Barkeep49, Wugapodes, and Ymblanter; thank you for your tireless (and underappreciated) work in seeing through the pharmaceutical drug pricing RFC. It was admirable of all of you to have taken on this necessary admin task when no one else would touch it. And sorting through my verbosity could not have made a difficult task easier! Be well, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:56, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

+1 and have a cupcake. -- Colin°^Talk 16:50, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of ATK players

You have fully protected List of ATK players as an edit war was taking place with regards to whether List of ATK players should redirect to List of ATK (football club) players. Since then, this question has been resolved through an AfD. Please consider unprotecting the page. --MrClog (talk) 18:22, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:25, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback rights request

Dear Ymblanter

I would request you kindly provide/approve rollback rights. I intend to use this tool to stop vandalism. I have gone through WP:VANDAL and WP:ROLLBACK and have reverted few times vandalism and helped in increasing the page protection on the basis of attacks. I have also made a Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback. Thank you. Amkgp (talk) 18:38, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) You don't need to contact individual administrators with your request. Filing it at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback is sufficient. --MrClog (talk) 18:43, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, there are two requests filed before yours. Please wait patiently. I have closed one request, but I can not really close all three. I or somebody else will act on your request soon.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MrClog and Ymblanter. Next time onwards will follow the procedure only. Thanks. Amkgp (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest (COI) message

Hi, hope you are fine. I have added and edited few information in this content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid_Askari. I was add his recent pic. And some newspaper column which is published in famous newspaper. All the information i added is correct and there is a source for it. But I saw a notification above his page that is "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page."

He is not my close connected person. I know him well because he a famous person in our country.

How I can remove this message "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page." from his wiki page.

please remove that message from his wiki page. If you want I will clean up my editing from his wiki page.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehedi-iu (talk • contribs) 16:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were systematically rewriting the text in a style completely inappropriate for an ancyclopedia. It is in fact an agiography. IThe readers have a right to know that this is not a proper encyclopedic text.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Mehedi-iu. I've taken off the tag about you possibly having a connection to the subject, and added the ones about it not being written in the correct, WP:NEUTRAL WP:TONE. Tone can be a difficult problem to solve, but you can probably find ways to make it less hagiographic if you look for specific facts. Consider He had occasions to work and mix with multinational and multicultural academics and scholars as a good sentence to re-write with specificity. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Legal threats by A.Savin. Obi2canibe (talk) 19:37, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I have seen it already.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:37, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection request

Hi Ymblanter, You added a protected page template for Abiy Ahmed and thank you very much. I have already arranged the prime ministers postion numeral observed at List of heads of government of Ethiopia. Then I see their postion chronology list. Could you please secure the page Abiy Ahmed with temporary semi-protection in order to avoid further abuse with controversial page? The Supermind (talk) 19:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am sorry but I do not think the current level of disruption merits semi-protection, pending changes protection works as intended.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how I remove "The neutrality of this article is disputed. "

Hi hope you are fine..First this article(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid_Askari) have no notification above the article. I was added some information from various strong source and I rearranged the article that's looks good. There was few miss information like his short story was in article section thats why I make a short story section there. Also I have added some reputed article from various strong source actually he has houndred plus article published but i took few( from strong source).

I am too much disappointed when I see the notification above the article that is"""The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (April 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)"""

I was jut try to complete the article but now its looks bad.

Please let me know what I have to do now for removing that 2 notification. If you want I will delete all the things which is added by me.

Please let me know the exact things..

i am waiting for your kind response.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehedi-iu (talk • contribs) 20:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were told several times what to do but I am afraid you just did not listen. Please read WP:MOS and act accordingly. If I see more new single-purpose accounts editing the article introducing puffery language I will fully protect it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter, the template on the article has been removed once again... — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:21, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I restored and added COI again. It is clear that we are dealing with COI editing and possibly with undeclared paid editing, when the customer is unhappy with the result.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Could you please also revert Łazar P‘arpec‘i, Ełišē, and Koriwn. Thanks! ----Երևանցի ^talk 11:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am planning to revert all these moves.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COI Issue

As a contributor I do not have close connection with the subject Rashid Askari. But I know from various authentic sources that he is a renowned person in Bangladesh in many respects. I added some sources/references to help maintain the encyclopedic tone with a view to removing the template messages.

Also I have noticed that another wiki person has changed Rashid Askari’s content to keep it in the encyclopedic tone and now it is in perfect encyclopedic tone. And hence I removed the notification “tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia”. I am sure that no information about the subject is incorrect and all the information is strongly documented. So I would request you to remove the template messages at the top. As a wiki volunteer, I am trying to make the concerned content error-free. So I request you to encourage me to help contribute to the new contents by way of making them error-free.

Thanks

I responded at the talk page. I believe the article does not conform to the Wikipedia style. Also I find extremely troublesome that this article is almost exclusively edited by single purpose accounts who are extremely preoccupied by removal of maintenance templates.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

neutrality of this article is disputed

Hi, hope you are safe from corona.

As a contributor I do not have close connection with the subject Rashid Askari. But I know from various authentic sources that he is a renowned person in Bangladesh in many respects.

I am a new wiki contributor. As I am Bangladeshi that's why I know about him from newspaper because he is renowned person in Bangladesh in many respects. So I just try to improve his wiki. Is it my fault. really I am too disappointed you thought I break the wiki rules. I love wiki thats why I want to be part of wiki.

May be his article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone but neutrality of this article is disputed is wrong. I am not personally or officially connected with this person.

Before my editing there was no templte like neutrality of this article is disputed. When I try to improve it now showing this. its make disappointed.

Please adding this "article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone" and remove this two templte " neutrality of this article is disputed" and "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject.""

If there is a problem I will never edit his article but my request is remove that. really Its makes me disappointed.

Thanks

I am sorry but I do not have an impression you are listening to me. Also, you persistence on removing the templates without the article being improved and the issues fixed actually suggests you have a conflict of interest. I am even afraid you might be an undeclared paid editor, and your employer is unhappy with the presence of the templates.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Error in processed CFDS request

I just noticed that Category:Rose-Hulman Fightin' Engineers basketball was nominated to be renamed to Category:Rose–Hulman Fightin' Engineers basketball players after you processed it, but the target shouldn't have "players" in its title. Could you fix this on WP:CFDW? Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:30, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also Category:Rose-Hulman Fightin' Engineers football players shouldn't be renamed to Category:Rose–Hulman Fightin' football players but Category:Rose–Hulman Fightin' Engineers football players. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:34, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, fixed the second one. As for the first one, the category was listed twice. I think the idea was to move Category:Rose-Hulman Fightin' Engineers basketball players to Category:Rose–Hulman Fightin' Engineers basketball players but it does not exist, so I have just removed it from the list.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:43, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the second one as well--Ymblanter (talk) 07:08, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COI Issue

Hi, I’m hoping you are fine and safe from coronavirus infection. I’m little upset that you have got me wrong. You know I am not that an old and experienced wiki editor, and didn’t know all the rules of the wiki edit. As I became interested in becoming an editor and was looking for a topic, I spotted the wiki content of Rashid Askari. I thoroughly read it to know about him and found that the content was short of info which are available in different newspapers. I felt that his wiki needed improvement. So, to begin with as an editor, I selected him as my subject. I started studying him and added his short stories, articles and books from many strong sources from home and abroad. I had the idea in me that if I use authentic sources I must quote and unquote the statement as it is exactly found in the original sources. But now I have come to know that the wiki content must not be written in any flowery or high-flown language even if it is there in the sources. Besides, one day, I, quite unknowingly, reverted to the content more than thrice to separate the short stories from the articles to classify them into a new category, which you did not accept very well. I thought I would begin with a new one after I am completely done with the Rashid Askari one. As a matter of fact, I want to gradually grow as an expert volunteer wiki editor. And this is my first attempt. So, the appearance of the template messages (“neutrality of this article is disputed” and “A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject”) at the top of Rashid Askari wiki content, which resulted from my erroneous edit, has disappointed me. So, I repeatedly added info and took several attempts to remove the template messages. But rest assured that, I am, by no means, a paid editor and I have on connection with Rashid Askari. How far is it justifiable to pay an amateur and unprofessional editor like me? Please be kind to me on this ground that, for my own inadvertent mistakes and for no fault of the subject, his entry is having burden of the error messages. Hope, you’ll understand the situation. Therefore, I earnestly request you to remove the two above mentioned messages and keep only the “tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia”. I’ll keep trying to further edit very carefully and meticulously in keeping with the wiki rules and then submit that to you for review and only after you confirm, I will remove the third error message. Finally, I earnestly request you once again to help me grow as an expert wiki volunteer and oblige thereby. Thank you so much indeed. Stay safe and have a nice time

I am waiting for your kind response.

Thanks

No. I am not going to remove the templates. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:22, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic body music

User Gentlecollapse6 removes permanently sourced content and calls it "unsourced". He adds his personal view. For example "Electro Disco Terrorist Music" is not an established term. Try Google. You will not find any proof that Front 242 ever used this term to describe their music. Furthermore, he permanently adds this Disco nonsense. Not a single source includes "Eurodisco". So please, revert the version.

I do not see any discussion at the talk page of the article or the talk page of the user, and I do not see why ( should be conducting edit-warring in this article.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:19, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, there is a discussion. But it's useless. This guy is stubborn. He removes older souces to add his nonsense.

No, I do not see any talk page discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Electronic_body_music#"Electro_Disco_Terrorist_Music"...

Ok, you made a point, in 2018, they disagree in 2018, you disagree in 2019. Whay I should just revert the edits in a protected article based on your opinion? Try to convince the user, if it does not work you can ask at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Music. I do not have any special knowledge in the field and I am not going to listen to you, nor to your opponent. My role was to stop ongoing disruption in the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously don't know this user. Again. It's like talking to a wall. Add my sourced content back to the article. And remove this "Electro_Disco_Terrorist_Music" nonsense. There is not a single source. Some kind of journalist used it in one web article. It doesn't prove anything.

Sorry, I am not going to be involved with this article beyond pure administrative intervention. I am not going to decide who is right and who is wrong.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:34, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eh?

These were not listed for 48 hours, just 7. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:31, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right, I returned them for the discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Saif Ben Ammar

Hello,
Thank you for your action. Is it possible to hide the change description too due to the fact the section header appears there for everyone? Moumou82 (talk) 21:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, no problem. I have written to the oversight, they will do if smth else needs to be done.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I saw that I put wrong the moving categories, sorry for that. :( I have also a merge proposal here -> Talk:CS Mureșul Deva and here -> Talk:LPS Cetate Deva, if you want to express your opinion, you're welcome. :) Rhinen.

No problem, I should have been more attentive. I will have a look if I have time, but generally I am not an expert in Romanian football.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:42, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Special:UncategorizedFiles

Hi!

Im'm trying to empty this category and it's a little tricky because there is a few local file pages that is redirected by a redirect on Commons. So it is not easy to find them and not easy to link to them. There is an example here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Messier%205%20Hubble%20WikiSky.jpg&action=edit

Can you delete it? --MGA73 (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just found this Wikipedia:Database reports/File description pages shadowing a Commons file or redirect. I think it may relate to some of the files. I think it is best to take one file and see how it works before deleting more files. --MGA73 (talk) 19:21, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly can technically delete the file, but I do not understand whether it fits our criteria of speedy deletion because I do not actually understand what the local description means. It would be better to ask at WP:AN--Ymblanter (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would say F2 but will ask at AN.--MGA73 (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh fixed https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Messier_5_Hubble_WikiSky.jpg&redirect=no --MGA73 (talk) 06:44, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 06:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We need help for Genghis Khan's controversial dispute for the talk page

TrynaMakeDollar suggested we asked a admin for help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genghis_Khan#Edit_request please help out sort out this problem. Hunan201p keeps doing original research with vandalism and manipulating text references. Queenplz (talk) 19:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I replied there. I can not really resolve this content dispute, and it is not yet at the level of bad behavior which requires admin intervention.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a blatant list of bad behaviour from Hunan201p. He just deliberately removes essential words and sentences from it's reference. He is basically just cherrypicking the parts he likes, placing the order of dates of information all wrongly. All which are against wikipedia's policy; original research, neutral point of views https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genghis_Khan#Edit_request I replied at the bottom Queenplz (talk) 03:31, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is a content dispute. They remove content which you do not like citing reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editor making slurs against another editors Ethnicity

Hello,

Can anything be done about the editor who made this edit summary [21]? He's been attacking Iryna Harpy for being of Ukrainian origin for years now, as can be seen for instance Talk:Religion in Russia#About the unreliability of the Arena survey and making bizarre claims such as that we're trying to diminish the number of Orthodox Christians in Russia as a form of Russophobia. He doesn't edit very often though.--Ermenrich (talk) 01:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked for 2 weeks. If they start block evasion as they promised feel free to file SPI.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Jong-un protection downgraded

~~I'm pretty sure you intended to semiprotect rather than fully-protecting. But I thought I'd drop you this note nonetheless. Regards,~~El_C 03:47, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it's been pointed out to me that I was in error. I've re-upgraded the protection. My apologies for the mishap. El_C 03:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I indeed fully protected it becase there were bad edits by experienced users, and we will need to catch a moment when the full protection expires to prolong it or to restore semi--Ymblanter (talk) 06:46, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ymblanter. I agree that careful monitoring will be needed moving forward. El_C 06:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very quick question

Hi Ymblanter, thank you for reviewing the page I just created at Mugnone River. How do I see the results of the review? Or where on the page is it listed as a stub/etc.? Thank you, Ikjbagl (talk) 07:55, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the article. There are no result of the review, I do not see any issues with the article except for obviously it is a one-line stub. Somebody will stub-tag it at some point, you can also do it yourself if you want.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:00, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on Electronic harassment page protection request

Hi, I belief this decision was made based on a mistake. There was no IP making a constructive edit. The IP edit that was accepted was a self-revert of a test edit by the same IP. I did check the version history carefully before I made the request. We had no constructive edit from an IP or new user for a long time. This was the last edit that was (a) not from an established user (1000+ edits, >1 year) and (b) not obvious vandalism, and this was the last non-vandalism edit from a user who might have been not autoconfirmed at that time: September 2019. That's 6 months or 38 separate vandalism+revert events ago. And half of these 6 months the article was semi-protected, so we have one vandalism event every 3 days on average and a constructive edit maybe every 6 months. --mfb (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I now protected for 6 months--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I Don't No How To Put A Request For Protecting An page KumarVenati (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFPP--Ymblanter (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request

I Saw Your Edit For Protecting A Page Named Rajya Sabha

I Am Requesting You To Protect The Following pages

Sir,Please Protect The Pages Same Manner Like Rajya Sabha KumarVenati (talk) 15:23, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I protected the last one for a week. In the first one, I do not currently see the level of disruption which would justify orotection. In the second one, if the user returns, they must be blocked.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a sockpuppet

...as two or three seconds of thought would have told you. I am making substantive (and intelligent) additions to an edit that was added by a Politico sockpuppet to Pat Toomey's page. It is an edit designed solely to draw attention to a trivial Politico story. Several foolish and/or naive and/or self important other editors stepped in to insist that the trivial sockpuppet story had to remain in place just because they said so. No evidence or argument provided to justify their demands, and the were willing to edit war to maintain the sockpuppet's editorial insertion. When I gave up trying to convince people who couldn't be reasoned with, and instead added factual context revealing that the added story was trivial, they began doing the reverse -- edit warring to remove the offending context. This isn't about reason or evidence with them. It's about asserting power. Hence their false claims that I, rather than the Politico editor, am a sockpuppet.72.86.138.120 (talk) 22:28, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sure. Materialscientist and JzG are both sockpuppets of Politico. What a smart person to have two sockpuppets who are both administrators.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:23, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No they're fools. As you seem to be.72.86.138.120 (talk) 05:31, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 31h for personal attacks--Ymblanter (talk) 05:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pelasgians

Hi,

unfortunately an editor in this page recurrently disregarding our policies, it started with two bold edits ([22]), ([23]), after I indicated shortly there are problems and no consensus, issue has to be discussed. I've tried more solutions, opened a discussion - and was very patient anyway - but the systematical reverts continued, now the user is at 8 (!) reverts ([24]), ([25]), ([26]), ([27]), ([28]), ([29]), ([30]), with totally disregarding WP:BRD, lack of WP:CONSENSUS, or any dispute resolution policy, what really concerns me the last two reverts have been made after I left an edit-warring notice on the talk page ([31]) and literally explained our policies even much earlier...

The editor argued in the talk that his edit-warring is anyway justified and applying the rules of WP is just a vicious bad faith attack against him (??)...in his last revert, even misleading statements he did in the edit log, accusing me not responded, (he did not even wait me to react), on the other hand he still cannot understand that restoring a page to a status quo ante per policiy does not equal with deletion...last but not least, he stated I falsely accused him of edit-warring, that is obviously hilarious, and if the remain in the talk page would be my desire, not a dispure resolution policy...

This is the point when an admin should intervene, the last stable version is the revison of 13:33, 10 April 2020‎ Rich Smith, although I restored earlier not all of the contributions, but only the disputed ones, but still WP:ICANTHEARYOU is ongoing from the user's behalf...(KIENGIR (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I fully protected for three days--Ymblanter (talk) 18:13, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Hi, thanks for semi-protecting Portland International Airport. Could you please revert the edit made by IP 107.242.121.24 on that page, which was made just before you applied the semi-protection? That was the type of disruptive editing that the semi-protection was meant to stop. Thanks. 172.58.44.167 (talk) 18:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive Editor at Expulsion of the Germans from Czechoslovakia

Can anything be done about the user who made all these diffs? Refusing to go to talk and adding POV material in various iterations. [32], [33], [34], [35], [36] [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42] (He appears to sometimes edit as an IP as well, cf.: [43]).--Ermenrich (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted to the pre-war version, protected the article for three days, and gave the user a discretionary sanction alert.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Germans arrived to the Czech Lands in every century, including many since 1850^[1]. Yes or No? If No, Please give references.

The U.S. commission to the Paris Peace Conference issued a declaration which gave unanimous support for "uniti of Czech Lands"^[2]. Yes or No? If No, Please give references. --Posp68 (talk) 18:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a proper venue to discuss this, and generally I am not interested in a discussion of this issue.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you censor then?--Posp68 (talk) 18:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not censor, I stop disruption. So far I have chosen protection, my next choice will be a block.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not interested you should not have the authority to block, because then there will be censorship--Posp68 (talk) 19:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your opinion, but Wikipedia policies say otherwise. May be you should read them before continuing your disruption.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Is Cambridge Univerity Press blocked from Wikipedia? Why are you accusing me of disruption?--Posp68 (talk) 19:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you need to read WP:RS, WP:POV, WP:V, and WP:WEIGHT. After that you can go to the talk page of the article. As I have already mentioned, this page is not a proper venue to discuss the content dispute you have been involved into (and I have not).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is Cambridge University Press blocked from Wikipedia. It was I who was disrupted. See View history for the article: Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia if you are interested.--Posp68 (talk) 19:30, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You started editing, and,m when reverted, you had to go to the talk page and try to find a solution. Instead, you continued edit=warring. This is disruption.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So Cambridge University Press is blocked and Wikipedia is cencored.--Posp68 (talk) 19:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which means you have not understood a single word of what I have written here. This, moreover, means that you should not be editing Wikipedia. I will likely block your account as soon as you resume disruption, be it under your username or as IP.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So I have to ask permission from Talk Page to quote Cambridge University Press in Wikipedia. It reminds me of censorship --Posp68 (talk) 20:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:DDima

Dear Ymblanter, I would kindly ask you to prove the activity of User:DDima. In how far it was necessary to make these contributions? See: [1], [2], [3], [4] etc. Best regards, Ушкуйник (talk) 09:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is an administrator, and administrators usually (though unfortunately not always) know what they are doing. You would probably need to discuss with them first.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:55, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my edits, I have responded at Ушкуйник's talk page. § DDima 14:18, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Ponyo#Problematic_remnants

Hi,

see the subject and the discussion there. We are waiting to your opinion to resolve the issue. (my opinion is, (technically) that the page was created in coherence with the sock's various POV edits that have been all systematically reverted by other admins, regarding (content), addressing Kievan Rus' as ancient Ukraine is disputable, because the territory of modern Ukraine is not covered fully by the earlier entity, on the other hand the manner as it is meant (regarding more nations claim their heritage from the Kievan Rus') is fitting into the political battleground involving the Ukraine-Russia conflict. Thus I think the page should be deleted. Thank you for opinion and time.(KIENGIR (talk) 23:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Replied there. I think it should go to MfD.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the ARBPIA template

User:Ymblanter, I wanted to ask you if it is usual for a non-administrator to add the "ARBPIA" template to the Talk-Pages of articles, particularly when, in the case of that article, there is a doubt whether or not such a template is fitting. My question concerns Talk:Hebraization of Palestinian place names where the template was not placed by an administrator, and where the article itself, primarily, concerns itself with place names in Palestine from a historical perspective. Please advise.Davidbena (talk) 05:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This remedy says any user can add templates. The actual sanction, such as extended-confired protection, can be of course only imposed by an administrator.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can You Please Review This Page

Draft:2022 Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election KumarVenati (talk) 14:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am sorry, I currently plainly do not have time for this. I see though that it is unsourced, it has no chances to get out of the draft before it gets sourced.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guillermo Kahlo again...

Hi, see the two recent edits...the user you sanctioned once for 31 hrs, and then for 1 week, again reintrodicuing the same disruption...however ([44]), ([45] is really something ("loser dawg", "retarded", "idiot")...(KIENGIR (talk) 07:32, 15 May 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 07:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moncef Slaoui

Thanks for protecting the page. Could I please trouble you to undo his final edit (the removal of sourced content)? Thanks Kingoflettuce (talk) 07:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I already reduced the protection, however, the removed content is not in the source.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that you reduced it too. Last I checked it explicitly stated that he's fluent in those three languages. Kingoflettuce (talk) 07:35, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeahh it says "Overall, he has written more than 100 scientific papers, and is fluent in English, French and Arabic." Thanks anyway!! Kingoflettuce (talk) 07:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

But why this racism? Djo900 (talk) 07:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why you are talking about. You need to read WP:BLP and subsequently WP:RS which you apparently have not done.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Moncef Slaoui he's from my city agadir the people here they speak Berber not arabic you can check that online. Djo900 (talk) 08:07, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the policies I cited above, because I ambout to block your account per WP:CIR.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agadir city people they speak Berber (amazigh )

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agadir Djo900 (talk) 08:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Elizabeth Wiskemann, Czechs and Germans, 1938, ISBN-13: 978-1443729819
^ Bruegel, Johann Wolfgang (1973). Czechoslovakia Before Munich. p. 45. ISBN 9780521086875. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)

Signature

Hello. I noticed your signature didn't work over here [46]. I'm hoping you can fix it. Regards, ---Steve Quinn (talk) 09:01, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do not worry, the bot takes care of it.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil rail stubs

Don't forget to add Brazil-railstation-stub to the stubs. † Encyclopædius 11:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It does not make much sense. We do not need there users willing to just increase a number of edits by adding nonsense to the articles. What we need are users who know the topic and can add something which requires a special knowledge. Everything else I already added. And they are not coming via stub templates.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No but other editors need to know which articles are short stubs and need expanding if you're not going to write more for them. Santa Efigênia station points to Portuguese wiki article pt:Santa Efigênia (Belo Horizonte) which is actually an article on the neighbourhood not the station. We'd be better off having a fuller article on the barrio but these articles do need to be created at some point.† Encyclopædius 11:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I probably screwed up, I am usually very careful about only connecting stations to stations. I will have a look now.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it was not me but someone else who added the interwiki links, and it was wrong.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a fan of stub templates or any tags either but the Destubbing Challenges and contests I'm running feed directly off stub categories, so it might mean articles don't get expanded from not being tagged. Brazil as you can see has a gigantic amount of content missing and most of the rivers and municipalities are still short stubs. It could do with a big contest (or 50) at some point!† Encyclopædius

Ok let me know when you start preparing anythging in Latin America, I will add the stations (I have created a lot over many countries, and most are in a similar state - Imy strategy here is first to create and then start expanding).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:54, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda depressing in a way that after 14 years of existing articles are still like Igaci. The Summer Challenge I'm running at the moment originally had a week scheduled entirely for just Brazil because I know given the size and being off the Anglosphere it's one of the weakest areas of Wikipedia. I had to revamp it though because I don't think we'd have got much done. Thankfully Aymatth2 put in a tremendous amount of time getting the national parks and reserves into shape. † Encyclopædius 11:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I might have all metro stations in Brazil by Summer created and possibly all older articles cleaned up (references and history added; this is what I have already done to all other systems in Latin America, finishing now Santiago, and the only Brazil is left).--Ymblanter (talk) 12:02, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well there is Wikipedia:The 50,000 Destubbing Challenge, there's a £25 voucher for most destubs on Latin America by the end of July. Best I can do right now given this irritating virus situation. If you felt like expanding a few stubs for Mozambique or Brazil, whatever, you'd be most welcome. Any work done on Brazil is a good thing anyway..† Encyclopædius 12:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I was working through protected areas of Brazil I found there were three sources that gave standard information for most of them. Some of it, like coordinates, dates, size etc. did not need translating. Then there were newspaper articles, conservation plans and so on that gave more detail. With settlements in Brazil, I seem to recall coming across a government source that gave fairly comprehensive standardized information. https://www.ibge.gov.br/en/cities-and-states/al/igaci.html gives some, but I am sure there was one that gave more. Seems to me it should be possible to use a bot to create and maintain standard data like population, rainfall etc. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhism protection level

Hey, just registered to leave a message. As the article Sikhism has been locked, I'm not able to edit a frivolous edit made by an address here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sikhism&diff=956104746&oldid=956068955

Clearly, according to the citations on that sentence, Sikhism is a "monotheistic" religion, not "pantheistic". Please make the necessary change. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barryontheclouds (talk • contribs) 15:05, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the "pantheistic" fronm the lede. The article says it is not clear whether Sikhism is a pantheistic or monotheistic religion; if you have monotheistic written in the lede you would need to discuss at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hunan201p, more evidence of disruption

Since I can't reply on the admin board. I want to report more evidence Hunan201p disrupted edit with the intention to mislead,

Hunan201p decided to remove Uyghur girl with red hair

00:45, 14 May 2020

which had been edited since 7 years ago by user Khestwol )

15:56, 27 April 2013

He removed the Uyghur girl with red hair which had existed for 7 years in red hair wikipedia, That picture was created since 2008.. Why didn't he just left a proper comment by providing evidence in edit summary or open a page discussion first. The way he does it seems intentional to confuse people as being realistic. I believe Shinoshijak did the right thing to restore the picture. That description says " Uyghur girl in Kashgar, in China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. The striped clothing material is that traditionally worn by Uighur women, never by men".It is gathered at the shoulders in the style of dress favoured by Uighur women. ", anyone can check it's Uyghur clothing. It also provides strong evidence of East Asian looking people with red hair. Hunan201p in 00:45, 14 May 2020 removed it and said "failed to verify, removing two pictures to clean up clutter". While picture of Hulagu Khan (edited by Hunan201p on1 3:30, 7 April 2020 (view source) wasn't removed by him, that mean he cherrypicked. He obviously looks like black hair east Asian looking with white skin, there's no historical description of him having red hair during his life time and I don't see any red hair, more like black hair with lighter shades. Queenplz (talk) 22:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I do not see at this point why I have to be further involved in this.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:11, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of the article

Dear Ymblanter, I hope you are well and staying safe. I have a little request regarding one specific article (Turkmen tribes) which needs some sort of protection, especially from one user (Kami2018), who constantly reverts well-sourced info and asks for "reference" 1. Though 3 verifiable, neutral sources are present there, he seems to ignore them and act according to his own views. I kindly ask to give a hand with this, many thanks. --Esperanto97 (talk) 08:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but we do not protect articles against one user. You need to discuss the issue at the talk page of the article, if there are behavioral issues the user could be eventually blocked but I do not see anything even close to this situation. It currently looks like content dispute.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:22, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to edit genetics on Turkmen

Since you have locked up the page, I want to know if I can add the genetic studies reference on Turkmens unfettered. After my edit was removed by Beshogur and was accused of being a sock, I responded by following wikipedia rules so I could do it the right way, I have been waiting for several days...

I first left a discussion on the Talk:Turkmens, and I have waited for more than 3 days; ever since the 20 of May, but have gotten no responses.[47]

Then in the User talk:Beshogur, I left a message about him accusing me of being a sock without evidence, it was a serious accusation and that he should open a sockpuppet investigation, I also posted a link to the talk page discussion of Turkmen genetics, suggesting a response.[48]

I've gotten no response from Beshogur in neither the Turkmen talk page or his personal talk page, the only response I got from Beshogur was a sockpuppet investigation, in which he had accused me of being a sockmaster of WorldCreaterFighter. The conclusion of which is that I'm unrelated to WCF Closing. Meaning I'm not that banned sockpuppet WorldCreaterFighter that Beshogur accused me of being.[49]

I have not checked, but I already stated in the sockpuppet investigation that even if the banned sockpuppet WCF did indeed edit a similar genetic study he does not own any of the genetic material with multiple sourced references. I added some more genetic references which was from Haplogroup Q-M242, in the sections of Central Asia and Southwest Asia, which also mentions the Turkmen haplogroup genetics.

I did all that I could. If he is not doing anything to respond back, then that means he doesn't want to; I checked on his edit history, and he has had a lot of time to respond to different wiki pages but did not respond to mine, and even removed my message to archive 6. Kezo2005 (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I am not going to be involved into this content dispute. Please add a protected edit request at the talk page of the article, somebody would react.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly does a protected edit request do? I don't need anyone to lock the page up, if that's what it means. I just want to be able to edit on the Turkmen page without my work being removed. Although, I don't mind if it's removed if there's a good reason for it.

Beshogur removed my edit and has not responded at all these past several days in neither the Turkmen talk page, or his own personal talk page which leaves me confused. Can I edit back my previous work? As I need to see if it's removed again by Beshogur because I really don't know what his opinion is. Maybe he is fine with it ,maybe not. The problem is that he should explain why he removed my edit in the first place... Kezo2005 (talk) 17:43, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can not edit the article now because it is protected, and I am not going to unprotect it just because of your edit. The protected request is a request for someone to edit the page. I will add a link in a second.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:46, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What you need is {{Edit semi-protected}}--Ymblanter (talk) 17:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Little help needed: from draft to mainspace

see User_talk:HeartGlow30797#From_draft_to_mainspace--Estopedist1 (talk) 07:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 07:39, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding a request

Hi Ymblanter, Can you please unblock me on Wikimedia Commons. Give me one chance. Thanks - MRRaja001 (talk) 15:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but this would be the fifth chance. You have been blocked by thee different administrators. You need to appeal on Commons and convince the fourth administrator that you have learend something from your blocks. --Ymblanter (talk) 15:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unable to request for unblock request. Please give me one chance. I want to upload best images took from my camera. I'll never upload these copyright things. Please understand me. Thanks - MRRaja001 (talk) 19:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not believe you. I will not unblock your account.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish Curling Hall of Fame Inductees

This was a legitimate category. The national curling association, funded by the Swedish Olympic Committee and the Government, recognizes curlers after nominations and applications based on their career achievements nationally and internationally. The rationale for deleting it is very unclear. Swedish curlers are the current World Champions for the Men, European Champions for Men and Women, and World Champions in Mixed Doubles. Swedish curling is legitimate and the deletion was not respectful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosjöberg (talk • contribs) 07:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably talking about Category:Swedish Curling Hall of Fame inductees. This category was nominated for deletion, see the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 11. It was closed as deleted, and I, after checking that the closing was valid, deleted it.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User potentially editing while logged out

Hi Ymblanter,

This concerns 84.209.61.213 and Posp68. You blocked Posp68 before for personal attacks. I think they are likely to be editing while logged out, see [50]. Compare also e.g. this edit [51] with edits Posp68 has made, e.g. [52] with the same "Yes or no" thing going on. This might be to make it look like their position has more support than it does, or it could be a genuine error. Posp68's been on WP since 2015 though, so you'd think he'd know better if it were a mistake. They definitely share the same POV, as they have been editing together and say similar things.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since the Ip has edited POsp68's remarks, they are prosemably the same pereon, but I do not see anything wrong in theior edits such as coopeating to trick 3RR or similar. If edits by Posp6 today are problematixc, they should be investigated on their own right.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit concerned about these edits [53], [54], [55]. I'm not sure that they rise to the level of a policy violation, but they betray a certain degree of racialist thinking.--Ermenrich (talk) 16:21, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The last one is not particularly nice indeed but I guess it would be better to raise at ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:26, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Yury Ponomaryov

Здравствуйте!

Прокомментируйте, пожалуйста - мою статью без какого-либо обсуждения перенесли в черновик с обоснованием Undersourced, incubate in draftspace. Terrible referencing. First 6 refs are non-existent. Поскольку это далеко не так, я хотел бы получить ещё одно мнение - что именно в ней не так. Например, по книге я не понимаю претензий - да, её текст на английском языке не выложен в открытый доступ, но от этого она не перестаёт существовать, тем более что русский вариант на протяжении нескольких лет был доступен для скачивания на сайте автора: [56], и только сейчас с этим сайтом возникли какие-то проблемы, и до сих пор может быть скачан с сайта, где вряд ли соблюдены АП: [57]. Относительно статьи в "Ведомостях" - [58] - претензии вообще выглядят как минимум предвзятыми, если не абсурдными. Если участник не владеет русским языком, это едва ли позволяет ему принимать такие решения. С уважением, --VLu (talk) 05:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have accepted the draft, I think the current sourcing is fine.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Большое спасибо! --VLu (talk) 06:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note on File:Test Template Info-Icon - Version (2).svg

Thanks for your edits to File:Test Template Info-Icon - Version (2).svg.

I cannot figure out how to reupload the file, hiding the file on Commons. I get this error for some reason when I tried. Can you try? Note how it still says "View on Commons" and it still says for me "Edit this page" and "Edit local description source". A a s i m 00:35, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The file is upload protected at the template editor level. I protected it yeaterday following your RFPP request.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

3RR question

Hi, I'm asking you this question because you were the one who protected Donny van de Beek (thanks!), so you understand the situation. If this is not the correct place to ask a question like this, please tell me. Anyway, my question is, does my reversion here count as a violation of the three-revert rule? I think that it qualifies as the vandalism exemption; it appears that the original vandal (who caused all the other vandals to come by posting on their social media) changed the team name to something that was incorrect, but after checking the sources, I made sure that the vandal had not made a factual edit. Thanks, --GalaxyDog^{talk • contribs} 21:32, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and by the way, I'm not asking this because someone told me that it was; this is on my own accord. --GalaxyDog^{talk • contribs} 21:36, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, vandalism reverts are exempt from 3RR, and your edit was clearly a vandalism revert.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks. The reason why I was concerned was because WP:3RR emphasizes the "obvious" part, but this clarified my concerns. Thank you for taking the time to reply! :) —GalaxyDog^{talk • contribs} 11:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but if the vandal changes the birth year from 1998 to 1924, it is pretty obvious vandalism to me.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal to ARBPIA topic ban

User:Ymblanter, shalom. I have just now submitted an appeal to my topic ban in the ARBPIA area, which you can see here. The procedure requires of me to inform the one who imposed the topic ban.Davidbena (talk) 15:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:50, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Churchill war ministry

Hello, I just want to apologise for anything I said which you may have taken amiss. I was not blaming you for anything – it was frustration with the whole situation which seemed for a while to be running away from me and I just couldn't see an end to it. I decided in the end to use the SPI facility and there has been a positive result with the other account blocked indefinitely because its controller is a serial offender. I probably should have gone to SPI straightaway – after all, it is there to be used. Anyway, all the best and take good care. No Great Shaker (talk) 06:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, no problem. I am happy that it was resolved. I will unprotect the article now.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:31, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 08:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Posp68 again

Hi Ymblanter, Posp68 has persisted in using talk:Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia to argue in favor of the expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia despite having been told that the talk page is wp:notaforum, see [59], [60], [61]. Does this warrant any further action?--Ermenrich (talk) 13:53, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the easiest is probably if you open an arbitration enforcement case against them. They have previously received a DS alert, which is still at their talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ymblanter, I've never actually done that before. Can you point me to where I file?--Ermenrich (talk) 15:08, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is here: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. I would recommend to look at several past cases, in particular you are interested in the situations when this is the first enforcement.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here's breaking his topic ban, both logged in and logged out [62], [63], [64]. Do I have to take this back there to report it or to SPI or can you deal with it? I've never had to enforce measures against anyone before. Thanks for your help!--Ermenrich (talk) 12:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, blocked for a week, also the IP--Ymblanter (talk) 13:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now an IP 46.15.140.230 (talk · contribs), claiming to be Posp, is running amok at Munich Agreement and Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 72h--Ymblanter (talk) 12:32, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The game of whack-a-mole continues: Norwegian IP (Posp's IP was Norwegian) deleting chunks of texts at Expulsion of Germans 89.8.76.69 (talk · contribs).--Ermenrich (talk) 15:55, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 16:01, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. You might want to page protect Munich agreement as well, he was trying to delete things there too.--Ermenrich (talk) 16:18, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That one is at the edge for me, but I have protected it for twe weeks.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He's back editing Talk:Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia again as 171.23.6.111 (talk · contribs), one of the IP's he's used before and it geolocates to Norway and is re-adding his forum-y posts about ethnic cleansing.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:07, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He appears to be editing Munich Agreement again on two IPs that geolocate to Oslo 46.15.74.106 (talk · contribs) and 89.8.148.217 (talk · contribs).--Ermenrich (talk) 13:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I semi-protected for a month--Ymblanter (talk) 14:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Iliochori2

Hi. I noticed your block and warning at Iliochori2 (talk · contribs)'s Talk page after I had to revert dozens of edits of theirs because of unsourced additions. I placed a warning on their page. Does anything else need to be done? Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 13:21, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, probably not. I believe they just lack competence to edit Wikipedia, and I do not see a learning curve. This probably means that at some point they will be blocked indef, but I guess we are not there yet.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:58, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Transport in Smolensk Oblast

A tag has been placed on Category:Transport in Smolensk Oblast requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will write something and then remove a template.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2019 Ballon d'Or and 2019 Ballon d'Or

Never mind. Seems to be taken care of already. Cheers. - DVdm (talk) 08:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is in the workflow.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:52, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Protection Of Page

Please Protect This Page

Manipur Legislative Assembly

Many Are Editing This Unnecessarily

Presently A Political Crisis Is Running KumarVenati (talk) 04:14, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So Please Protect This KumarVenati (talk) 04:14, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, protected for a week--Ymblanter (talk) 05:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Last of Us Part II

Hi there. Can you revert to the status quo? Thanks. −αΣn=1NDi[n][Σj∈C{i}Fji[n − 1]+Fexti[(n^−1)] 20:33, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I would prefer a talk page discussion, per WP:WRONGVERSION--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We are not close to a consensus on the talk page unfortunately, so is it possible for you to remove unsourced content (Praise was directed at the improved gameplay over its predecessor and visual fidelity, while its plot and the presentations of its themes through violence received a polarized response.), and change "a near universally positive critical response" to "universal acclaim" per Metacritic? −αΣn=1NDi[n][Σj∈C{i}Fji[n − 1]+Fexti[(n^−1)] 20:45, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry again, but this is content dispute. I checked thet neither of you introduce vandalism or BLP violations. In this situation, I do not want to be involved into the content dispute. Nobody is going to sue us if unsourced content would stay there for 3 days.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please watch your dirty language and verbal agression, Ymblanter

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ke an (talk • contribs) 19:44, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for notification, even if you have not learend to be civil.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IP hopper adding unsourced/poorly sourced content despite numerous warnings

Hi Ymblanter,

Thanks for semi-protecting the Generation Z article. There's an IP hopper that keeps adding unsourced/poorly sourced content to articles despite numerous talk page warnings on their multiple talk pages: [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] [75]

They were blocked a week ago [76] for this, but are still continuing with this disruptive behavior and are now misrepresenting sources [77] which I had to revert [78].

Do you think a rangeblock is necessary? The IP hopper in question: 2605:6000:1526:450B:0:0:0:0/64. Thanks, Some1 (talk) 14:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid I can not decide: I see some good edits from the range, and I have no idea how much damage would be to block it. You probably would need to take it to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:41, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hello, hope you are doing well. I don't think we have talked much earlier (I can remember two occasions though). However I have read your posts and seen your works and learnt a lot from those. Thanks for all your contribution. Good wishes. -- Titodutta (talk) 13:04, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:07, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Last of Us Part II

Hello. I noticed that you implemented the full protection of The Last of Us Part II. I tried to report that page to RFPP around two weeks before, but my request for temporary PC protection was declined by another admin. Another user came up and made a request for a more stringent level of protection, which you acted upon. I'm not challenging the decision to apply full protection since it was the best thing to do. From the time that I first saw the edits to that page in RC some weeks ago, I felt the need to look through the revision history from time to time. Other people have since tried to add misleading information there, only to descend into edit warring. There was one user there in particular whose edits I saw at RC and had to revert with the help of a few other users. Then, I kept an eye on his editing history. It turns out that while he was eventually slapped with an indef block on enwiki, he has since continued to edit the same page on dewiki, where he is not yet blocked. Because you have a much longer experience with dealing with such situations, I am asking for some advice here. First, is it possible to have him investigated there due to his editing behavior? Second, is it possible an SPI or another kind of discussion at the appropriate noticeboards can be opened, because there might be some users who have edited the article on enwiki that might actually be socks of others? Thanks. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 17:24, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@LSGH:, I am not sure I fully understand the context but if you suspect someone is evading a ban and have reasonable arguments, you should open an investigation. If you just have a bunch of users who you think are not evading block but behave inappropriately, the best is probably to start from WP:ANI, where you would have to guess a good length of your request - not too short so that you have sufficient arguments to support the accusatiions you would be making, and not too long because otherwise nobody would read it.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll try to look at the revision history again and see if there's anything that I could bring up there. There could be users there who are trying to push similar narratives without backing up their claims using reliable sources. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 01:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re

[79] - well, I do not think that was funny. Fortunately, no one ever died in the numerous trips I participated, even though some of the people were poorly prepared and there certain risks and mistakes. My very best wishes (talk) 20:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this was not supposed to be funny. I just happen to know a guy from this institute, who roughly at the same time was hiking in Caucasus and could be described as "relatively inexperienced". I have seen him last time about ten years ago, but I believe he is alive and well. Now I just realized that he has a Russian Wikipedia article, ru:Бодров, Алексей Эдуардович. But you response suggests you were not with him, and in fact that you do not know him. No problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:47, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ups, sorry, for some reason I thought you were talking about Sergei Bodrov Jr.. My very best wishes (talk) 20:59, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia

Hello,

I am writing to you today because you write at m:Requests for comment/Should the Foundation call itself Wikipedia that Wikimedia should not be renamed. Now It is possible to take part in an official online survey until June 30th. Please take your time and save Wikimedia!

Thank a lot and best regard! --JohnDoe06.2020 (talk) 11:26, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and I made done this useless exercise last week, though I would appreciate if you would use your main account for this canvassing.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:32, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

Can you protect this it has 36 reversions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 07:37, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Glen has already protected it while I was away.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed speeding category renaming

I clearly opposed the speedy renaming of categories that are for disambiguated genera, as BrownHairedGirl is well aware, both at the speeding renaming page and on BrownHairedGirl's talk page. I notified relevant WikiProjects of the proposed speedy renaming, so that there could be discussion. I then discovered that one case I had used as an example, Category:Dracaena had been moved to Category:Dracaena (plant) regardless of my request for discussion by members of the relevant WikiProject, so I moved it back. I am now accused of improper behaviour and threatened. How is this "due process"? Peter coxhead (talk) 09:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please nominate this category (or multiple categories, if relevant) for full CFD discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:11, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter, see the discussion on my talk[80] and on Peter's talk.[81], as well as my earlier reply[82] to Peter's blanket objection at CFDS (the objection which was rightly overruled and removed by Good Ol'factory).

Peter has been trying to simply block the entire CFDS process, and there is no basis for doing that. So your suggested remedy is correct: if Peter wants to make the case for creating or restoring ambiguous category names, he is free to open a full CFD discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are three different issues: (i) whether CFDS is reasonable and needs to be changed; (ii) assuming it does whether my (effectively) administrative action was correct; (iii) whet to do with this particular category. I guess (i) needs to be discussed at WP:VP/P, for (ii) I do not see any issues since I just moved what was listed there for 48h and did not get any objections (like I always do several times per day), and (iii) needs a full discussion. As easy as this.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good summary. I'd just add that if under (ii), if Peter coxhead isn't satisfied with your response, he does have the option of WP:DRV. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:45, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was not "trying to simply block the entire CFDS process". I did not like the blanket nomination of such a large number of categories of different kinds, and asked for those involving disambiguated taxon names to be discussed further. I do not normally participate in CfD, and so may not have made this request in the right way. However, BrownHairedGirl clearly understood what I was asking, as they have made clear elsewhere. Since the move was contested, and I had tried to use Category:Dracaena as an example in raising the general issue with relevant wikiprojects, I thought the move to Category:Dracaena (plant) should not have been made before the discussion took place, and that the main thrust of BRD applied. It seems I was wrong to think this. Further discussion is pointless. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:13, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peter, that is simply another way of saying that you believe that a particular topic area should be exempt from CFDS. There was no "blanket nomination"; there were a lot of carefully-scrutinised individual nominations. I have made several hundred such nominations this week, but that has been the product of over 60 hours of individually scrutinising each category in the list. The use of term of terminology like blanket nomination seems designed to create the false impression that there was some lack of scrutiny. That is untrue, and it is an assumption of bad faith. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:28, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hi there. I would like to know what I did wrong. What I did was just simply show 3 uncontested proofs that supports my edition. https://archive.org/details/tratadodelimites00port_0/page/n15/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/AlexandreDeGusmaoEOTratadoDe1750/page/n2/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/tratadodelimites00port/page/n6/mode/1up I'm not sure where that vandalism came from — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roqui15 (talk • contribs) 13:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop edit-warring and reach consensus at the talk page of the article (which still is very far from consensus). I meant to say sockpuppetry, not vandalism. I will check now, and if I indicated the reason wrong I will amend it.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:10, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to reach a consensus when we're talking about a fact. The documents I provided are right that, a fact, no historian or politician can't change that. However Sasan Hero and TompaDompa still refuse to accept this, which by the looks of it is an act of vandalism/trolling. Please yes take a deep look at what's happening in that page, you'll see that all this time I was trying to correct a wrong information. Roqui15 (talk) 13:18, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is always need to reach a consensus. If you continue edit-warring without reaching the consensus I will just block your account. And your other account are not yet confirmed (and will be blocked on sight). As easy as this.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:21, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah blocked because I'm trying to help wikipedia. That's how things work here? And I have only this account.Roqui15 (talk) 13:25, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By edit-warring you are not helping Wikipedia, you are disrupting it.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't understand. Those users will always say that we haven't reach a consensus, did you see the sources I'm using? Tell me aren't they proof? It's the ideal wikipedia source. Rare indeed. Please, it looks like you have the "power" to convince them they are wrong, you can do it if you really take a look at the page. Roqui15 (talk) 13:29, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to be involved in the content dispute you are having at the talk page. Not on your side, and not on the side of your opponents.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:32, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so don't send me warnings without knowing what's really happening and who is right or not.Roqui15 (talk) 13:33, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am about to change my mind and block you anyway per WP:CIR, because I do not think you have enough comnpetence to edit Wikipedia . I would strongly suggest you not to explain other users that you know the ploicies and they do not, and not to teach them ahet to do, in particula when they clearly have more experience on this site, but to read and try to understand some policies, starting from WP:CONSENSUS.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:38, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for that. We're talking like full grown adults, I'm just defending myself, which every human has the right to do it. Threats don't help anyone, specially in a situation like this. I'm sorry If I offended you. And yes I do have comnpetence to change, I just provided 3 perfect sources. But ok I won't talk anymore here. Roqui15 (talk) 13:42, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possible appearance from User:Tobias Conradi

Nothing outwardly harmful but starting to show up and bark orders to get what he wants. [83] and [84] TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 17:01, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is most certainly Tobias Conradi, but they always use short-living dynamic IPs, usually it does not make sense to block.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance

I'd appreciate if you could take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zotur. The relevant user has admitted to owning the accounts. His main account is globally-locked, based on something he did on the Russian Wikipedia, but I have no way of figuring out what it is that he did, so your assistance as a Russian-speaker would be greatly appreciated. RGloucester — ☎ 17:49, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The account has been blocked in ru.wp for block evasion, but the blocking rationale does not say who is the master. The blocking admin is a checkuser. There are no suspicious edits from this account.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:55, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Ukrainian Wikipedia has him linked to user:Servansky, another locked account. However, I still can't figure out what's actually going on here. RGloucester — ☎ 17:59, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This one is also blocked on ru.wp for block evasion.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:01, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Apparently, this guy has been at it for a long time...see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dolyn. RGloucester — ☎ 18:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq

You've reverted not only the 'Kurdistan GDP (ppp), which I can partially see where it was coming from but also Iraq, I've fixed the number based on the country's GDP per capita (ppp) multiplied by it's 2020 population (40.22M). the results were fairly more accurate that way using data from 2020, The current number contradicts to data shown in other sites.— Preceding unsigned comment added by A3syrian (talk • contribs)

Do you have a direct reference which confirms the number you have added? Not multiplying something with something else, but the number directly.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maxim Berezovsky

Dear Ymblanter, I would kindly ask you to take into account the article Maxim Berezovsky. Based on such sources as Greene's Biographical Encyclopedia of Composers, Adler's Handbuch der Musikgeschichte, Encyclopedia of Eighteenth-Century Music, Great Russian Encyclopedia etc. I have clearly shown that Maxim Berezovsky is considered as a Russian composer in the most part of the modern research literature all around the world. Howether, after all, Lute88 tries to neglect all the information from these reliable sources. Even more: He tried to use them as if Maxim Berezovsky was considered in them as a Ukrainian musician. See: 1. It is a pure falsification. I tried to explain him that in fact there is no information about Berezovsky's life before working in Oranienbaum and that it is still unclear for the science, whether Berezovsky was born in the area of Ukraine. To push his point of view Lute88 included in the article such sources as 1, 2, 3, 4. I can hardly imagine these sources as reliable and would be glad to hear the third opinion. Ушкуйник (talk) 19:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lute88 must have been topuic banned from everything Ukrainian years ago. I will go to have a look, and if they continue probably take them to the arbitration enforcement.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:11, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ymblanter, now I have to do with KHMELNYTSKYIA... again. See: Maxim Berezovsky. Best regards, Ушкуйник (talk) 10:07, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I protected the article for a month, and if it continues after the expiration of the protection, I may protect it as arbitration enforcement.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gorky Railway has been nominated for deletion

Category:Gorky Railway has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:18, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request for your comment

Hey Ymbanter. Seeing that you have worked both with me and with RGloucester in the past, would you mind having a look at Talk:War_in_Donbass#Recent_controversial_edits? There is a rather unpleasant content dispute going on, hopefully a pair of fresh eyes would help. Heptor (talk) 06:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to find time today.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Google translation) Hi, Yaroslav! The article War in Donbass is on my watchlist seventh year. In my opinion, the conflict began after Heptor's edits on July 6 (before that, Heptor was April 22), which, frankly, it’s hard for me to agree, IMHO is a violation of WP:NPV. Perhaps, for starters, apply WP:CONS, fix the controversial parts of the article in the consensus May-June version? Last pre-war version is July 3, diff=965836686. (Russian original). Доброе утро, Ярослав! Статья War in Donbass седьмой год в моём списке наблюдения. На мой взгляд, конфликт начался после правок Heptor-а 6 июля (до этого Heptor был 22 апреля), с которыми, честно говоря, мне трудно согласиться, IMHO нарушение NPV. Быть может, для начала применить CONS, зафиксировать спорные части статьи в консенсусной майско-июньской версии? Последняя довоенная версия 3 июля, diff=965836686. — Yuri V (t•c) 09:58, translation 10:08, 8 July 2020 (UTC).[reply]

I have written at the talk page whatever I thought is useful.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:56, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think... Heptor (talk) 14:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо за внимание. Написал википочтой конфиденциальное письмо. — Yuri V (t•c) 19:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Pending changes

Hi Ymblanter! The Last of Us Part II was semi-protected until August. Hence, would it be possible to disable pending changes on this? It's currently useless and it's a little bit annoying in the page history to see all of them being highlighted / "automatically accepted".[85] ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes are just an insurance. Indeed, it does not do anything now, but if vandalism starts right after the protection has expired (which I would estimate as a quite possible scenario), then it does not go directly to the article due to the pending changes. Of course I can switch them off now and switch on one day before the protection expires, but I am sure I will not be able to remember that.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection?

On the page Kai Havertz you protected the page until 29 July. Truth is, ALL of the unsourced material is surrounding his proposed transfer to Chelsea. Would it be a better idea to set an editnotice instead? That editnotice can clearly tell users NOT to add transfer speculation on Havertz leaving Leverkeusen/going to Chelsea. Is it okay? Eumat114 (Message) 15:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid all my experience on Wikipedia tells me that the users are going to ignore the editnotice if they want to add transfer news.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But when the transfer materialized (by that I mean the official statement on Chelsea) I'm going to tell you ASAP. Eumat114 (Message) 15:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Or, if I am not available, request at RFPP.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Thanks,A beer for you! Nd12052010 23:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:31, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page - Disruptive Edits about Croatia

Hi,

an IP adress went over a limit I have to ask admin intervention. Everything started at the Heads of former ruling families, when I undid a former bold edit and urged the user to discuss in the talk page. Instead, continued reverts and started to heavily accuse and abuse me on my talk page, literally that I have lied stating I initiated a discussion in the talk page - despite I provided the diff as a prove for this user, he continued, after 7th time he/she called me a liar stopped counting....but if we would assume the user would be very novice, after I warned him about edit warring and to avoid personal attacks, this nonsene "gift" I got with plenty of bad-faith mendacity: ([86])....

The typical case of WP:ICANTHEARYOU, and the serious harming of WP:CIVILITY, I was very patient and polite assuming a newbie user, but what furthermore concerns me the IP is mixing/twisting roles:

- "I am right, you are wrong. Accept it and move in or I will personally permaban you, this is your final warning."

- "I will permanently ban you. I will personally permanently ban you."

- "You have one last chance, one more wrong step and you will never be allowed to edit again, so start taking this seriously and start admitting when you are wrong.", etc.

? WP:NOTHERE?(KIENGIR (talk) 02:51, 10 July 2020 (UTC))[reply]

The IP continues, solicitating uninvolved editors ([87]) filled with same personal attacks and defamations....(KIENGIR (talk) 03:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Curious that the IP has dropped a message on my TP of all places since I haven't been all that active for a while. Especially since I'm not an admin. Blackmane (talk) 04:56, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, blocked the IP and protected the page--Ymblanter (talk) 05:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed, block evasion ([88]), ([89])...(KIENGIR (talk) 12:09, 10 July 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Blocked this one as well--Ymblanter (talk) 12:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concubinage in Islam

Thank you for protecting the page but could you revert what MCPhury has added a lot of what he said is up for dispute. CircassianBilyal (talk) 14:34, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, please see WP:WRONGVERSION.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:35, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

india

please fix atk fc capacity to 85,000 as in text.

and on mohun bagan page remove coach/players, its on new page atkmb — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.31.202 (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not understand.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

atk fc page - stadium capacity 85,000

mohun bagan - no longer football club, move players (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATK_Mohun_Bagan_FC) new page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.25.121 (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I still do not understand, and the coming week I will be on holidays. You may want to leave the edit requests at the talk pages of the corresponding article,s but please be more precise, what exactly edits you want to be made.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:17, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ok look https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATK_(football_club)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Lake_Stadium

see capacity difference??? fix at least that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.64.253 (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Both numbers have sources. Someone has to go and look at the sources and see which is correct. I am not willing to do it for the topic I do not understand. Please leave a request at the talk page as I advised above.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

last thing i said is add atk in merging request here: if u dont know sorry

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mohun_Bagan_A.C.# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.64.253 (talk) 19:09, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am sorry. But this you can do yourself, the talk page is not protected.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:12, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

so why dont you update stadium capacity on atk page...are you vandalising on purpose? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.64.253 (talk) 20:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid we have to stop this. May be you should learn to express yourself civilly and in an intelligible way.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:57, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

you protected page but keep wrong sources, unlock at least — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.184.17 (talk) 18:44, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

and atk kit manufacturers (2019-20) another detail to fix, no more their kits — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.184.17 (talk) 10:04, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Nobel laureates by country again

Hi,

an IP is again recurrently pushing POV editing that has been already discussed, refusing enter to the talk or other warnings. After warned to avoid edit warring ([90]), the IP continued reverting and still pushed the 5th time ([91]) its edit.

Afterwards another problematic edits were introduced by a red link editor and another IP started as well disruption, so the last stable version should be 14:31, 15 July 2020‎. Thank You for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 02:58, 17 July 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 05:33, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi yes i blanked the page because administrator told me to make draft again so the editors can review it, can you look into this draft Draft:Turki Almohsen and move it to main space?

Thanks

Memon KutianaWala (talk) 10:25, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 12:04, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dominant-party system

Hi,

please check this edit ([92]), are the IP's argumentations and edits correct? United Russia article says ruling party...Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:50, 17 July 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I do not know, and I will not get involved into this one. If the text is long-standi, they woul need consensus to change.--Ymblanter (talk) 03:08, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, thanks, I restored the long-standing, opened a section in the talk and asked the IP to explain.(KIENGIR (talk) 21:57, 20 July 2020 (UTC))[reply]

"Consensus required"?

It was brought up at WP:AE that the restriction you imposed at War in Donbass deviates from the usual form, as documented at Wikipedia:Consensus required. Was this intentional, and if not, perhaps you can remedy it? As an alternative, you might considered "enforced BRD", as described at User:Awilley/Consensus Required vs Enforced BRD. RGloucester — ☎ 03:15, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but the coming week I do not have time to look at it. Any administrator can modify my restriction if needed.--Ymblanter (talk) 03:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Russian templates

What was the issue with the Russian templates, out of curiosity? I've checked just one, Template:Infobox Russian federal subject, and can't find discussion of it on the talk, so I'm not sure which template you're referring to. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 20:14, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The data was imported from Wikidata had bad provenance and was plain wrong. I had an extensive discussion starting from WP:VPP, going to the Wikipedia Talk:Wikidata, to the talk page of the template and finally to ANI, but I do not have time now to look for it. I believe it was {{Infobox Russian settlement}}, in any case the template user in Taldom.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Since I myself have heard of the issue of importing bad data from Wikidata, I looked up some of the links. The Wikidata discussion was at:

Wikipedia talk:Wikidata#Template:Infobox Russian inhabited locality and import of bad data.

For the follow-up to the Wikidata discussion see:

Template talk:Infobox Russian inhabited locality#Unsourced data. The recent ANI was at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1041#Self-reporting.

A prior discussion happened at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 November 3#Template:Infobox Russian inhabited locality but I don't know its significance. I believe that the thread mentioned above was an attempt by User:RexxS to address the problem but I don't know what the final outcome was. A person who joined that discussion was User:Jonesey95 and they seemed to grasp the technicalities well, in a post beginning 'The root problem appears to be...'. I don't know if there was any final agreement in that thread to put in place a solution to Ymblanter's original problem. EdJohnston (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: If it's any help, the problems arise because English Wikipedia editors insist (quite rightly) that data fetched from Wikidata must be sourced, in order to comply with our policy on verifiability. There are three main modules used on English Wikipedia and I'm the principal author of Module:WikidataIB, which I wrote specifically to address problems faced by editors importing Wikidata into infoboxes, such as default filtering to allow only data that is sourced to something better than a wiki-project. I don't want to be seen as promoting my own work, so I try not to interfere when template designers use another module. Nevertheless, using WikidataIB as Jonesey95 suggests should meet the concerns about verifiable data (in other words, it won't import the value for an area from Wikidata if its only source is the Russian Wikipedia). I'm always happy to explain how to use the tools I've written when asked, but as I said above, I'd prefer not to be the one implementing them in templates. --RexxS (talk) 17:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both of you, I am travelling this week and have very little internet time. The template was finally reverted to some intermediate version which does not import Wikidata, and I was accused (not unexpectedly) in disregarding consensus. It is all documented at the talk page of the template.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask who is the user behind certain IPs?

As I saw the revision history of Heads of former ruling families, you mentioned that some anon IPs belongs to a "blocked user formerly active on the page". May I ask who the user and the other accounts are supposed to be? Because as the IPs were blocked, I were concerned what kind of trouble that user was getting into - also they appear to be from the UK - George6VI (talk) 03:36, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Several (later) blocked users edited the page this year, I probably meant Chisnallmarty.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:34, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes @ Clement Freud

Thank you for the quick response at RFPP; regarding the page you protected Clement Freud for pending changes, I think you accidentally semi-protected it rather than pending changes protected it as you intended.   Kadzi   (talk) 19:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I indeed intended to configure pending changes and corrected it now. I am not sure what happened.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm John B123. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, 1946 in El Salvador, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

John B123 (talk) 07:37, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm John B123. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, 1943 in El Salvador, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

John B123 (talk) 07:39, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@John B123: would you please explain what is going on?--Ymblanter (talk) 07:41, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The two articles were unreferenced. --John B123 (talk) 07:48, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so what? You have added an unreferenced tag. Good. Why have you marked them as unrevieuwed?--Ymblanter (talk) 07:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments to Konutka

I can't read what you wrote to Konutka but I assume that they can. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This looked like a case of an editor who just didn't understand the rules in English. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I pretty much have written what you suggested: that they should name the bio articles as First Name Name, should not create duplicates, and ask me if they run into issues. Let us see what happens, I added their page on my watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop un-argumented anti-LGBTQ, anti-Western and anti-Ukrainian removals in the List of Ukrainians.

Hello, I'm 2601:646:8500:2DD0:8C77:6DE6:BCBF:E371. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

Please stop un-argumented anti-LGBTQ, anti-Western and anti-Ukrainian removals in the List of Ukrainians.

If you have anything to say about these important matters, please explain your POV and arguments in the Talk of the article first.

Be a good Wikipedian, please.

It is sufficiently well argumented and was told to you in pretty uncertain terms by three different people, but you do not get it. I will make sure the page gets protected.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:21, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is not just me. Nobody understand your homophobic edits and censorship. Indeed, as you put it yourself, the justifications of your edits and deletion are formulated "in pretty uncertain terms".

The ip blocked for 48h. Nobody can through around unfounded accusations in homophoby here.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:05, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cory Booker

Hi, can you please do me a favor and block the two trolls on Cory Booker? Back and forth reverting has been going on for nearly 20 minutes now and no other admin seems to notice my report on the AIV. The list of most recent active admins brought me here. Thanks, ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 06:48, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 07:02, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Khans

Hello, I notice that you undid one of the name changes performed by Megzer. The user changed numerous pages, though, and they need to be changed back. For instance, Kublai Khan is now a redirect page. Thanks, Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 16:12, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The user has already been blocked from the mainspace, and we need to undo all the reverts. I will help, however, an admin flag is not needed for this.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I've attempted to undo such moves in the past and ended up making a bigger mess, so I will defer to someone with better experience at that. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 16:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saky

My apologies and thanks for the clean up. --Coldtrack (talk) 19:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. There is a good reason we have these templates in every article.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Submitting an appeal to my Topic Ban in the ARBPIA area

This notice comes to inform you that I have submitted sn appeal to my Topic ban in the ARBPIA area, which you can see here. I was asked by the administrator EdJohnston to inform the previous administrators involved in my earlier topic bans when submitting a new appeal, which I take the time to do now. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 01:11, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification--Ymblanter (talk) 05:14, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pálinka

Hi,

distruptive IP at the subject, ignoring talk, misleading edit logs, however interesting what he/she means by we will address this issue officially (legal threat?). Btw. I kept the source added, but even pushing identical entries at more subsections (legal stuff...). Warned for edit warring. Thanks for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 18:42, 1 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Sorry, I got stuck without internet and likely will not have time for a week. Please try usual channels.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I wish you a successful week then!(KIENGIR (talk) 12:05, 2 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Closing my AN Appeal

Hi, Ymblanter, can either you or another administrator please close my AN appeal, before it is accidentally archived? The appeal can be seen here. Thanks.Davidbena (talk) 22:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It can not be me because I imposed one of the previous restrictions. You can just post in the topic asking for closing, I am sure someone will do.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Rural localities in Bizhbulyaksky District

A tag has been placed on Category:Rural localities in Bizhbulyaksky District requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, clearly an error, reported at the BHB's user talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GE

On your userpage you say that one of the US states you have been to is GE, however, there is no state with such a two-letter code. Did you mean GA (Georgia)? --2604:2000:1280:1BA4:E9D0:DBAA:6089:A96E (talk) 03:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed, thanks for noticing.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appealing to you

I would like to politely ask you to unblock me from editing “Heads of former ruling families” and also restore Croatia to the list. KIENGIR removed this edit as apparently you need a “discussion” and the pretenders aren’t valid. However I provided this source https://royalcentral.co.uk/europe/croatians-asked-about-a-possible-return-of-their-monarchy-114841/ which states in exact words that the two people I added are pretenders to the throne and thus my edit was valid and no discussion is needed.

I urge you to please read through the source I provided so that you can see that KIENGIR is not only in the wrong but has lied and manipulated you. -- 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 09:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody here can manipulate me, this is not possible. Please start a discussion at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:12, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t because you restricted me from doing that after I added a valid source, so agreed again I am asking you politely to unblock me. -- 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 09:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what you mean. If you can post here, you are not blocked.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:18, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You restricted me from editing the talk page of the article in question, thus I can’t start a discussion. But again I would like to urge you to read the source I have given you, that shows that no discussion is needed in the first place — 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 09:24, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see any blocks on this IP, and Talk:Heads of former ruling families is not protected either. This is content dispute, I am not going to be involved into it.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:39, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You yourself blocked me as can be seen in this screenshot https://imgur.com/a/jqAOZC2 I can’t edit at all. Besides I already posted a section on the talk page before I was blocked and it was completely ignored. — 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 09:57, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can not edit the page, but you can edit the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:05, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are now two sections on the talk page, the first which I already mentioned was completely ignored and a new one which will probably be ignored too. Even if by some miracle some admin agrees to restore my edit I don’t see how it will solve the problem of me being restricted from editing that page. — 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 10:35, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not get any reaction within reasonable time (say a week), you can try Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t submit a dispute resolution, every time I try I get an error [that looks like this], so I don’t know what to do. — 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 15:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not know. I can not open your link, and the page is not protected. You should be able to open a DRN request.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well for some reason I just get “Error: Unknown result for API” on any device I try. — 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 15:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies but I do not see how I can help here. Try posting at the talk page of DRN.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:30, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a remark, as I see I was "mentioned" here, the very similar IP User:2A02:C7F:1484:5500:CCC4:5D8B:ED1D:C45F made a huge rally with full of awful and fake accusations against me on my personal talk page more than a month ago, instead using the article's talk (saying as well "I will permanently ban you. I will personally permanently ban you"...). So the IP was not blocked because "adding a valid source", but several policiy violations, edit warring, personal attacks, etc. Now this "new" IP did use the article's talk. Let's see this time our policies would be taken into account.(KIENGIR (talk) 00:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Dude, Ymblanter is the admin who blocked me and therefore he knows the reason why, and I did add valid sources, I was blocked before I spoke t you on your talk page trying to be civil and give you a warning to stop disruptive edits. Also because Ymblanter knows the real reason I was blocked I am in the process of proving my innocence. By replying to this you have only made yourself look more guilty by accusing me of things, that the very admin you are talking to, knows I didn’t do.

Also the “similar IP” is called the same IP on a different device, because unilke you some people actually have lives and don’t spend all their life in one room.

One final note is that made no “awful and fake” accusations against you, I mentioned all the previous complaints from people on your talk page about you deleting information about Croatian history. All the complaints can still be found on your search page to this very day. (Redacted) — 2A02:C7F:1484:5500:FC60:4FA5:6689:CE55 (talk) 17:03, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I just told the facts (and if you are mentioning me and distorting things, you may expect a reaction), diffs talk, I really won't spend more time with your weird an inaccurate contemplations and insults, incivility or PA. Ymblanter, I've got this just now ([93]), it starts again...but as I see @Ponyo: already dealt with this.(KIENGIR (talk) 18:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

List of current members of the Rajya Sabha

This Page Was Heavily Disrupted

List of current members of the Rajya Sabha

One Of The User Assuming Disruptive Edits As Real Ones

Real Ones As Disruptive

Please Restore The Page To It's Orginal Condition On August 14 Please

The Page Is Fully With Distruption Ayan 2019 (talk) 13:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please Protect This Page

The Page Has Been Restored To It's Orginal Version

Please Protect The Page List of current members of the Rajya Sabha

Thank You Ayan 2019 (talk) 13:21, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I do not know who is right and who is wrong here. Please discuss with your opponent at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:38, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can You Please Project The Page!

I Solved My Issues With My Opponent

Some IP Address Accounts Are Misleading

Thank You Ayan 2019 (talk) 14:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can You Please Protect The Page Ayan 2019 (talk) 14:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I protected for 3 months--Ymblanter (talk) 14:40, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You For Protecting For Three Months Ayan 2019 (talk) 15:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I give up

Hi, Ymblanter! At RFPP the other day I had a situation where there were four articles listed for protection in one request. I protected three of them but declined the fourth. The bot kept complaining that one of the items hadn't been protected. I struck out the bot comment but it kept coming back. Then you fixed it. How did you do that? Thanks! -- MelanieN (talk) 15:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MelanieN: You just need to add {{rfpp|do}}, it usually does the job. Striking does not work, the bot does not understand it.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll remember that. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Protection Of These Page

Maharashtra Legislative Assembly : Presently A Political Crisis So Please Protect This Legislature Ayan 2019 (talk) 15:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. For the future, a proper place to ask for protection is WP:RFPP.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You For Advicing Ayan 2019 (talk) 15:32, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article about a russian locomotive

Can you please create a article about a russian locomotive VL60. See https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/ВЛ60. --93.76.61.138 (talk) 07:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am sorry, not my area of interest.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please Protect This Page

K. Annamalai Heavy Disruption Is Going On

I Don't Knew Where To Apply For Protection Of An Page So I Asked You Sir Cherry2008 (talk) 12:15, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. For the future, you can ask for protection t WP:RFPP--Ymblanter (talk) 12:25, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Block notices?

What is the meaning of writing this on my talk page?: "I think this one is still missing in your collection. This will probably be the last Ds alert on your talk page, block notices are about to follow.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)" I have not violated any editing rules. I did 1 (one) edit reversal on the page for RT, in-line with the page's 1RR rule. I also opened a discussion about the edit on the RT talk page. Therefore, I am perplexed at what block notice you would think that I would be at risk of and why you felt a need to post this message on my talk page. Nozoz (talk) 11:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was not just one revert, it was first removal of a text which is the result of long-standing consensus, and then a revert when this text was restored. For the rest, I replied at your talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Poor Judgment and Abuse of Wikipedia

Hello. I have written responses to your, frankly, invalid assertions on my talk page. Please read them and take note from them so that you don't repeat your mistakes. Nozoz (talk) 16:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to hear from someone who does not even know how to use talk pages. I will see now, may be it is enough to block you.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:56, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The user has been blocked indef.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bukhara Page

Привет Вы по моему русский/русская, поэтому я буду писать на русском. Я не знаю, вы ли главный редактор статьи о Бухаре на английском языке, но я видел, что вы исправляли множество поправок об вышеуказанной статье, и поэтому я думал обратиться к вам, с этим вопросом Несколько часов назад, я добавил несколько абзацев к этой статье в главе “Naming” и введении. Но какой то Qahramani44, пришел и удалил все 2000 байтов информации на которую я потратил целых 2 или 3 часа для исследования. Его причина была в том что мол это не этническая предвзятость, если это информация взята из нескольких источников. Но это все еще не оправдывает, тот факт, что он удалил целые абзацы, которые не были вообще не связаны с народностями и языками Бухары. Я сам не из Средней Азии, поэтому мне нет разницы на всякие этнические междоусобицы, но меня ве еще поразило то что, этот чел удалил всю информацию просто так, даже информацию из аккредитованных сайтов и даже само произношение IPA. Я не знаю, сможете ли ва мне помочь с советом или с восстановлением аккредитованной информации, но я ценю любую помощь с этой проблемой, потому что я все еще новый в публикации и поправках в Википедии, по често говоря это кажется ОЧЕНЬ не честно со стороны того чела. Pigeon de Ville (talk) 23:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! At first i thought you were russian, so i wrote in russian, but apparently you’re not, so i’ll just translate what i said, for the sake of clarity So hey, i don’t know if you’re the main editor of the page for Bukhara, but i’ve seen you edit quite a lot of things in it, so i thought i’d ask you for help/advice So, a couple of hours ago, i edited the page about Bukhara, in the naming section and introduction, to give more background info, and to make the article more informative and concise. But a user called Qahramani44, just removed every single thing i wrote, which frankly took hours of editing. His pretense was something about ethnic bias, but the thing is, 99% of the information wasn’t even about the ethnic groups, but the history of naming. Even the IPA pronunciation got deleted. So i was genuinely shocked, because im not even from Central Asia myself, and i don’t really see much in these ethnic disagreements, however the fact that he plainly removed all the information not even related to ethnic groups without giving any proper explanation really did really startle me. So in conclusion, i’d like to ask, is there any way you can help me restore the accredited information and/or give me advice on what to do in this matter?

Thanks in advance Pigeon de Ville (talk) 23:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Just to make it clear, i’m not trying to do any manipulation or soothe you over. I just sought to ask someone more experienced than myself for an advice on restoring or discussing the edit.

Thanks again! Pigeon de Ville (talk) 23:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to find consensus with the editor at the talk page of the article. Wait until they respond, and if they do not within a couple of days, contact them at their talk page. The fact that the information is accredited by someone is irrelevant.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About DS warnings

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

Template:Alert says It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. It's meant to be a notification to any user who might be unfamiliar with discretionary sanctions. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

However, a DS alert is mandatory for future WP:AE proceedings. If I see serious misconduct not raising to the level o a block, I still need to give a DS alert, and I have to say that there was misconduct. I appreciate you blocking the user though, I estimate that communication with them would cost me several days of my life.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, one of the IP address got blocked just for posting the trout here and 3 other user talk pages. --37.29.162.221 (talk) 17:30, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

re: ANI request

Hey - I looked at those three users. That's Kingshowman, and while there are already soft blocks for the ranges he uses, I can't make them into hard blocks because they're all too busy. He's creating the sleepers a couple months in advance on different networks, then he moves the editing (usually) to big wireless IPv6 ranges that we can't hard block. I wish I could help more but feel free to block on sight with TPA/email revoked. Sorry. :-( Katie^talk 15:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Katie. I just blocked Doran84, the problem is just that before their coming out (requesting to block ST47 at ANI) they for whatever reason vote at AfD and close some of them. It is usually tricky to revert, and blocked socks are not supposed to closed Afd. Nothing to do about it anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:18, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry for the block notice, it was meant for your latest fan. – bradv🍁 18:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I guess we need to expect a couple of more soon (I have already blocked five of their socks today, and they are apparently pissed off).--Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow you've gotten real popular the last couple hours. I'm jealous, I've only ever had one impersonator. :) Canterbury Tail talk 19:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I just happened to be the only active admin today in the (European) morning at ANI and blocked four socks. I hope they will be out of combinations soon, and that nobody blocks me indef in the meanwhile.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was closer than I'd care to admit. – bradv🍁 22:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably have managed to survive even in this case, but getting me blocked for vandalism or for block evasion was clearly the goal of the whole exercise.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection of Bad Girls Club pages

You've indefinitely protected the page Bad Girls Club and many other related pages a few years back. In the mean time since the show's ended the edit volume has gone down a fair bit. Would it be possible for you to reduce the protection to pending changes or remove the protection altogether? Full list of pages you've protected:

Thanks. Chess (talk) (please use {{ping|Chess}} on reply) 02:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look a bit later and come back.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done except for the first one, which I have not protected.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:23, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May i selectively re-protect some pages? Over on season 13, for example, IP editors have started up again with the "voluntarily left" to "was removed" changes. I've sadly been following these pages for years and there are a handful of persistent sock masters that target these pages. Please ping in reply. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:51, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@EvergreenFir: yes, sure, feel free to re-protect whatever you feel is needed to be protected --Ymblanter (talk) 07:05, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 04:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tarick Salmaci

Hi Ymblanter. I'm wondering if you'd consider re-protecting Tarick Salmaci. A new SPA has showed up now that the PP has expired and has basically gone back to try to force images into the article, etc. which is what led to the page being protected by you back on August 21. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:24, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, now for a month--Ymblanter (talk) 05:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 07:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Ymblanter. Now that the PP has expired, a different IP has showed up to try and re-add the likely copyvio images. I thought progress might be being made per User talk:Boxingdet#Image use on Wikipedia, but I guess not. Not sure what to do now since whomever is behind the edits seems to simply wait unti the PP runs out before coming back to trying to edit the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:00, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I protected for a year--Ymblanter (talk) 07:05, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking at this yet again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem--Ymblanter (talk) 07:12, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Ymblantnr

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as User:Ymblantnr, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kleuske (talk) 11:07, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kleuske:, thank you for the notice but please review the way you leave the notices. I obviously have not created this page. I have just deleted it though.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for the inconvenience. Of course this wasn’t intended for you. I was thwarted by a redirect, apparently. Kleuske (talk) 11:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If it is Twinkle than it is probably the same problem as reported by Bradv above, but they said the problem has already been fixed.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:23, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What can I say? Apparently not, since I use twinkle. I will take great care when nominating anything resembling another users name, though. Kleuske (talk) 11:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I hope they will deploy the fix soon.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Malplaquet

Hi,

IP with various addresses ignoring the talk, reverting-pushing inappropriate info. Prtection needed. Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 16:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 16:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello, why do you keep changing the date you will be busy up to? You happen to do this as often as several months/days although you always edit your talk page. Just asking in interest. --94.73.34.131 (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is difficult to predict how busy I will be because of my job.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Those Russian railway lines

We seem to be getting nowhere in the discussion. The best way I can think of to deal with these is via WP:RM, with a separate discussion for each line rather than a mass nomination. If they get moved, then move protection can be applied. Mjroots (talk) 10:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is possible, but unfortunately these RMs do not attract a large number of voters. The previous one had two, and I was one of them, and the current one has two, and I am again one of them. It just becomes random, depending on whether a particular person was around during a RM. A RM for all of them to consistent names would be a reasonably good option, however, I am in principle fine with the current name, and people who are not fine ignored my suggestions to open such a RM. May be we should indeed move them to Moscow-Foo railway line or smth similar, even if this is not an obvious COMMONNAME. At least it has a chance of getting some support.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May be we should wait for a few days with the current discussion, we had a new participant yesterday, may be they could argue for their proposal in a more convinving way.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

Hello, you've taken care of lots of protection requests, so I'm asking you if you could take care of this too: Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Dredg. 151.21.71.166 (talk) 05:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cities and Towns in Russia

Hello Ymblanter,

It seems the issue of this page and the "edit-warring", which the other contributor is also guilty of if I am, stems simply from whether the article is written from the point of view of the majority of UN member states or from the perspective of Russia.

As this is en.wikipedia surely this article should be using the directives and rulings made by the United Nations.

FormalRS (talk) 19:02, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We do not have a policy which says "Wikipedia reflects POV of the United Nations". Russia obviously thinks these cities are part of russia, and this is reflected in the article. The UN and many other states think these cities belong to Unkraine and not to Russia. This is reflected in the article as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The POV of the UN and 100 of it's member states is not adequately reflected in the article. The article has a small footnote next to Rostov-on-Don (a Russian city) that mentions the annexation. At no point in the main body of the article, or inline next to the Ukrainian cities in the list, does it mention the viewpoint of the international community.

Also, the other user who was participating in the trading of edits has not received any notice of this. Please could this be rectified?

FormalRS (talk) 19:15, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, your edit is clearly bad, and another user was reverting it. I am not going to give them a warning. You can try to find another administrator though.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you see, the article is there since 2014, it is very well visible. If some information, which you think is clearly contrary to the policies, survived there for six years, there should be a good reason for it.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And what you say is even factually incorrect. All Crimean cities have a grey background and a footnote saying that Crimea is internationally recognized as part of Ukraine.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain in what way my edit was 'clearly bad'?

The article was only updated to include Ukrainian cities in August of this year (10.08.2020) - previous iterations of the page as far back as 2015 have excluded Ukrainian cities as it is not recognised by the international community.

The small footnote is not adequate to represent the 'POV', as you put it, of 100 UN member states. Especially considering the beginning of the page states that Ukrainian cities such as Sovastopol are not included on the list (which they are).

If, for example, I edited the opening blurb to have a clearer and expanded version of the footnote to represent the viewpoint, would this be an acceptable 'good edit'?

FormalRS (talk) 19:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid with this type of edits you would need to have a prior discussion at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see however that these cities have 2010 census numbers which is clearly incorrect. I will remove this data now.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be avoiding explaining in what way my edit was "bad".

You also seem to be avoiding the fact the that article was only very recently changed to include Ukrainian cities on the list, and that for years the list has excluded Ukrainian cities, contrary to what you stated.

FormalRS (talk) 19:37, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The edit was bad because it removed valid info. Moreover, instead of going to the talk page, you started edit-warring.

Now, indeed, I see that the list was only added in August 2020. However, it has been in the high-traffic article for a month, seen by many users, and not reverted. Per WP:BRD, if you try to change the article and see that other users disagree, it is your responsibility to go to the talk page and discuss. So far, you failed to do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining your reasoning.

Considering the fact that the adding of Ukrainian cities was a recent change, could it not be seen that the other contributor who was reverting the changes without going to the talk page was not also in the wrong? I now understand the process that should be followed with the talk page, cleanup tags, etc. However, I feel that the other contributor has not acted any differently to how I originally did.

FormalRS (talk) 19:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were removing valid info (invcluding two times removing Rostov from the list). Your opponent did not remove valid info.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:58, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The removal of Rostov-on-Don was done in error and was rectified by myself. My 'opponent' still engaged in edit-warring.

However, I can see you have chosen your side in this, so I will not bother you any further. I will ensure to read any Wikipedia articles concerning Russia and it's activities with a more careful eye to ensure they are unbiased and factual should I require any information on the subject. FormalRS (talk) 20:08, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What about this?

Did they really abuse the email function that you have revoked it from them? You have revoked email access in a period of 7 minutes. --37.29.162.221 (talk) 17:21, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This was in 2015. I do not remember anything about this incident.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:38, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For the reviewing work. Here! Thanks. Kambai Akau (talk) 21:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protection level on Rashida Tlaib

Hi Ymblanter – would you consider reducing the protection level on Rashida Tlaib from ECP to semi (or perhaps setting an expiration date for when the current dispute blows over)? I understand the need to enforce the 500/30 PIA restriction, but I think that can be done without locking the entire page. For comparison, the articles for Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – who have attracted far more national attention than Tlaib – have generally been semi-protected, with only intermittent escalations to ECP. Best, Conifer (talk) 02:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In principle, the arbitration decision, WP:ARBPIA, mandates me to protect the article indefinitely at the extended confirmed level, however, since there is no indication yet that the disruption is coming from confirmed users, I have reduced the protection to indefinite semi - and the article is not anymore protected as arbitration enforcement. If disruption from confirmed users comes, it would need to be reprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:01, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, appreciate it. Conifer (talk) 13:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Czech Republic

Hi,

newbie user performing mass deletions and modification in the article. I objected a little part, but failing to conform our policies, continuing mass reverts ([94]), ([95]), ([96]), ([97]), ([98]), ([99]), ([100]), ([101]), ([102]), ([103]), while introducing foxy edit logs and invents pseudo-arguments why he/she should not follow our policies or to be exempt of it:

"This doesn't require consensus since your edit does not provide any relevant arguement and just snipping around."

"Your edit has intention that violates Wikipedia: Neutral point of view, therefore it is not protected by consensus-related rules"

All of them invalid, nothing to with NPOV since I restored the page to status quo ante, and more of us reinforced it in the talk page by real arguments (even a post RFC were open, but this did not made the user stop trolling.. Warned for edit warring two reverts ago ([104]). Thanks you for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 06:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I blocked for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 06:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly note

While doing random page patrol I ran across a sockpuppet, Perry Pat Etic Poleaxe of a sockmaster that was giving you grief. I think I mostly reverted them, excepting an edit request on Talk:Battle of Stalingrad that is still pending. Anyway one of their signature moves seems to be a bizarre plastering of {{Use European English}} on random articles to the point of occasionally overwriting articles that have {{Use British English}} on them to which it redirects. So while reverting them I also went to other pages that transcluded the template and tried to replace them with a more specific one wherever possible. Hence Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Use_European_English is nearly empty and it should be easier to spot future sockpuppets if new accounts start rapidly expanding the number of transclsusions. Be well, 74.73.230.173 (talk) 22:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thamks, I remember indeed the sockmaster, they were very annoying--Ymblanter (talk) 05:12, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DS editnotices on talk

Hi. I'm a bit confused, did you mean to place the talk notice rather than the editnotice? Talk:Frank Rizzo, Talk:Nathan Phillips (activist), Talk:Kerch ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 03:39, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think this was my attempt to explain that the articles were semiprotected as arbitration enforcement. Putting them as editnotices does not make much sense as the articles are already protected. The notices are probably even not needed at all, I believed I logged all protections to the AE log--Ymblanter (talk) 07:12, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I agree that they're probably not required for just article protection. Do you mind if I replace these notices with general {{Ds/talk notice}}s? I don't want to modify them without asking you first. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:41, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, sure, please do.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some help

Hi Ymblanter, firstly, i hope that you're doing well. Since you are a native speaker of the Russian language, i would like to have your opinion about the reliability of the sources of this article. Stay safe.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I obviously do not have access to any of them, but they seem to be all have published within the Azerbaijani academic tradition. They might contain usual systemic bias (such as failing to mention a role of Armenians in the history of South Caucasus) but other than that they should be fine. One (Nabiev) seems to be a PhD thesis.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same problem, i could not access any of them either. Thank you very much for your insight. Take care.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moro, Papua New Guinea

Can you please create an article about Moro, Papua New Guinea. You create articles about places such as localities so can you create my proposed one. --217.113.243.81 (talk) 10:51, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I know literally nothing about Moro, Papua New Guinea, and if I need to invest my time into researching the subject then this is not my first priority.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please research and think about it then. --217.113.243.81 (talk) 11:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have a long queue of things I need to do before. It is unlikely I could come to the subject any time soon--Ymblanter (talk) 11:04, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI topic about T0mk0us

I have answered to your accusations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#T0mk0us_and_WP%3ANOTHERE (T0mk0us)

Yes, I have seen this. Not a bit convincing to me.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:44, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bokhan

I was specifically refering to the population info, which should be formatted differently (also maybe add an infobox?) Remagoxer (talk) 10:58, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do not you feel that before formatting the population info differently we should add some information to the article? Which I will also do at some point, but not today or tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:04, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert at Voice of Russia

Hi. Please undo your revert. This is not a historical article and it is not a “historical usage.” The sentence refers to an event ending 2014, and the name is in a current translation of a foreign title. —Michael Z. 19:21, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever asked yourself when Mussorgski lived?--Ymblanter (talk) 19:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There’s no need use bitter sarcasm to belittle my reasonable request. I’ve checked, and Mussorgsky hasn’t registered his opinion at talk:Kyiv. Since there’s a one-year moratorium on changing the title back, Wikipedia should translate foreign titles using our preferred spellings. I guess I’ll start another discussion to see what the consensus is. —Michael Z. 21:57, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We already have a discussion at Talk:Kyiv, I do not think there is a need to open a new one at every single page.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:01, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Boxes

Per your comments at ANI, I also like the Babel userboxes, in case I need language assistance. Boxes stating a user's country are good, as they may be able to help with a particular article. My "Tutnum userbox" has a note of humor and whimsy, matching The Elusive Wikignome on my page! (The Veteran Editor Iron Star seemed too grand, so I exchanged it for a userbox.) But my "This user uses reFill to expand bare references" userbox seems fine to me.

This is a difficult situation, but I have seen many/mostly absolutely innocent and quite useful useboxes. An Admin, whom I respect, has now removed all of their boxes: WikiProject, Editor of the Week, favorite dog breed, helps at Teahouse, etc., in response to Admin AO's retirement. I guess I have been lucky to have never seen objectionable userboxes. And I am not emotionally invested in the two boxes that I have. So, now what to do? No easy answers, and I am very sad to see good people distressed. Thanks, and kindest regards, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 06:06, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just provided my personal opinion. I am not going to implement it, certainly no in any way in my administrative capacity, and if there is an infobox RfC I will likely not even vote. I would say if you think the userboxes you have on your page are useful and not offensive to anyone, just keep them.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:16, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute at Lithuania proper

Hello - I don't know if this will interest you, or if you might want to comment. From an initial Teahouse post (see here), I have been drawn into trying to resolve an ongoing content dispute at Lithuania proper over this map and caption which is repeatedly being added and removed. I'm way out of my depth in terms of understanding the geo-political issues, but have stated on the talk page discussion that the image should not be re-added until discussion has resolved. The image has since been put up for deletion as a 'hoax', and the editor who insisted on adding the map and caption has now been reported to WP:AN3 (see here). I am reasonably confident I have made the best decision in terms of article stability (keeping the map out until discussions are over), but have wanted to avoid handing out edit-warring blocks as I have no idea if this gives support to a faction which might be correct, but which is being shouted down - or vice versa. If this matter interests you, do please take a look and let me know if my decision was appropriate. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think your decision is absolutely correct. We have a nationalistic dispute about the location of a historical polity (or may be not even a polity) with the borders unknown or ill-defined. The map probably is not going to be deleted from Commons (at lest not on the basis that it is false, I am less sure about the copyright claims), but still good sourcing is required before it can be added to the article, So far the sourcing has not been provided.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for taking a look - it's reassuring to know I wasn't accidentially inflaming a situation by drawing all the wrong conclusions. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:38, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 07:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Locked the page for no reason?

The one who has been vandalising this article Marek Reichman for long is the user LechitaPL not me if you look at edit history, and he even accusing me and others with no reasons He wants the article to go his way and views without letting anyone to change it, His claim been proved as irrelevant and fake information, the User LechitaPL has been blocked so many times from vandalising and stubborn behaviour and couldn’t even come discuss in the talk page He can’t just ask the administrator to lock the article for no reason without discussing in the talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theregan (talk • contribs) 08:09, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May be your words had more credibility if what you wrote were not factually wrong (everybody can check whether LechitaPL has been blocked "so many times"), and you attempted to discuss the issue rather than to revert their edits with an edit summary that they are a troll.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:18, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BITE

Whatever you personally think of a new Wikipedians’ specific contributions, it is not appropriate to denigrate their work or belittle them for their language ability. I’m asking you to delete, strike or modify this comment. You think their hundreds of edits could be better, then help out or ask someone else to, but please don’t express what sounds like sour grapes over an article move all over the newcomers. —Michael Z. 14:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the user has to use Google Translate they can not be net positive for Wikipedia. This one clearly has agenda and no interest outside this agenda. This is not a newcomer, they actively edit the Ukrainian Wikipedia, and they only showed up here to push their POV. I am not going to strike my comment. We must discourage participation of such users, and their votes in the discussions must be disregarded. My problem is not with the article move - I do not particularly care - but with the disruption which followed up, which was entirely predictable and which unfortunately you actively promote.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is to start using Kyiv to some degree. Attacking contributors for it, including an energetic newcomer whose sixth edit was ten days ago, instead of helping them, is disruptive and uncivil. —Michael Z. 15:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, this is an energetic agenda editor, who already got their last warning (not by me). At this point net negative, and, since they do not speak English, without any perspective to become met positive.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) This would be a lot easier to follow if you referred to a diff, User:Mzajac, and not to a whole talkpage containing many contributions by Ymblanter. I'm still not sure which of their comments you're referring to. Please supply the diff. Since you're an admin, I expect you know how to create a diff; if not, please see Wikipedia:Simple diff and link guide. Bishonen | tålk 15:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Sorry, updated browser started copying links “smartly.” This comment. —Michael Z. 15:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Unsmart browser! Bishonen | tålk 15:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]

confusion about Ambo Tv

Dear Ymblanter, you are absolutely right, I wanted to request a speedy deletion, which I actually also did diff afterwards, and the request was successful. I also reported diff the editor of the article and he was blocked as well. I removed my request at the category move page. So I see the issue as solved. Is this ok for you /wikipedia?Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you do not want to move any category then we do not need to handle the move at CfD. Thanks for taking care of this.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Sock.

Hello seems Blocked SP. GoldyMcDonald came back with a new Sock.Mr.User200 (talk) 00:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have seen this, but I am not a checkuser, and there is not enough evidence for me to block yet.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could Check again, more activity have been reported on other users TP.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

“these changes”

Why did you revert my change here and threaten action? This is not a historical article. Where is consensus being discussed over the use of the name in non-historical articles? —Michael Z. 17:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at your talk page--Ymblanter (talk) 17:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Q

Which exact country do you currently locate in? Just interested to know. --37.29.169.133 (talk) 10:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you disregarding my question? --37.29.169.133 (talk) 13:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are not expected to ask such questions, and actually to post on this page since you are evading a block.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look, they were removing nonsense what so what is the point? What is this they have created while blocked. --94.73.36.20 (talk) 08:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Umberto's cats

Thanks for the restoration. I became confused because it was an IP reverting the (essential) vandalism of a registered user, the opposite of normal. -- GreenC 12:18, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I reacted on a talk page request, which seemed reasonable to me.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles by you on projects other than en.wiki

On which projects have you created articles besides the English Wikipedia? --94.73.36.20 (talk) 21:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May be you should (i) stop evading block (ii) do the research yourself.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Evading a block when I have made an unblock request for someone who I believed was attempting to request an unblock? Like it is block evasion to post on talk page of a blocked user? I am not even the same person as the block user. --94.73.36.20 (talk) 08:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orthogonal state

But, please, do not opt like Ad Orientem recently. Quantum laser-brains the projects needs, I also experience a lot of stress and abuse, but in the end the objectivity, and precisity should trial. I tell you as a fellow engineer. Take care(KIENGIR (talk) 16:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks, for the time being I am not retiring. I will likely woork less in admin-related areas and more in articles though.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:37, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

“POV pushing of Ukrainian ultra-nationalists”

Enough is enough. I’m almost willing to try to ignore what you’re saying about me, but I have seen enough of comments along these lines getting progressively normalized and tolerated on talk:Kyiv, a page under EE sanctions, over months, and now starting to spread to discussions elsewhere. The next guy who sees this and comments by others about “the Ukrainian government imposing on us” and “Cossacks from Ukrainian Wikipedia” or whatever crap is going to start in even worse. I have ended my tolerance for this road to you know what.

I’ll make you a deal. I won’t make another edit or move in article space involving the name K**v for a full week, and you can get your beauty sleep. If you visibly strike this entire comment and publicly acknowledge its harmfulness. Thanks for listening. —Michael Z. 20:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. I will not strike the comment. I am not going to return to the topic though. Whatever shows up on my watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, after a second thought, I will do. Not because I find it incorrect - I stand by every word - but because I do not care. You can make any edits you want. I hope someone will have enough energy to topic-ban and desysop you. I do not have this energy.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sorry to see that. A strike that draws attention while reinforcing your own message is not a good-faith retraction but a protest, and not what I asked you for. Go ahead and revert your strike if you want, because making yourself out to be a Christian Martyr while broadcasting a message that looks like promoting a hateful stereotype is not the deal I offered. I’ll ask you to reconsider. —Michael Z. 21:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I was clear I am not interested in your deal.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, (I as an editor on all things Ukrainian over the years,) I noticed many edits of Ymblanter on Wikipedia in Ukrainian related Wikipedia articles and not one came across as anti-Ukrainian. Never had problems with Michael Z either.... I think we all are a bit fed up with the endless Kyiv/Kiev-discussion on Talk:Kyiv (actually I dropped out years ago).... Especially since the people complaining about it on this talk page never seem to make any useful edits on Wikipedia..... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious new user

Hi Ymblanter, I don't know if you still want to be even peripherally involved in Ukrainian topics, but a new user has shown up who is obviously not a new user RogueRickC137. He jumped into the RFC on Kiev in other articles on his first day of editing [105], also started moving things in the list of RFC's there [106], used one-click archiver [107] and has also edited at WP:List of cabals [108] - all things it's highly unlikely that a user on his first day and week here would do. I wasn't really paying attention to the Kiev-Kyiv name change RFC, but I know there was some socking going on then too - would you be able to look into this more or else point me to someone who might be able to identify this user?--Ermenrich (talk) 00:39, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is a blocked user Piznajko (who is also the same person as the IP who started the last Kyiv RM and was pretty active across the project doing all kinds of stupid edits so that I had to take them to AE). However, I promised to step down from Kiev / Kyiv issue, since I was already accused by multiple users that I am pushing my personal views (rather than dealing with project-wide disruption, like I saw it myself), and I can not really take any further risks. Probably SPI would be a good way to proceed.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:47, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Why are you making mistakes in page creations such as in this revision and this revision where you fix these mistakes. Just interested in knowing. --31.221.169.95 (talk) 11:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can not do everything in one edit. Doing it like this is the most efficient way.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now, I have another quastion. Why are you following my edits? Weren't you told that you will get blocked if you do not stop?--Ymblanter (talk) 13:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a different IP from the ones you were recently referring to. Who cares if this is the same person or not. Just forget about it. --31.221.169.95 (talk) 13:56, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shushi population

Hi! I was updating population statistics on numerous Artsakh towns using this source: https://web.archive.org/web/20200912090543/http://stat-nkr.am/files/publications/2015/LXH_tverov_2015.pdf for my edit. It seems like the two sources are in contradiction - however it's not a great difference - 4,064 vs. 4,200. AntonSamuel (talk) 19:01, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have a strong opinion which source is better to use, but the number must correspond to the provided source. If you change the number, would you mind changing the source as well? Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput

Please reconsider your semi-protection of Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput, which will not expire until 25 October 2020. With today's publication by Slate of Stephen Harrison's "The Wikipedia Battle Over the Tragic Death of a Bollywood Star" we can reasonably expect visits from non-disruptive Wikipedia users who lack autoconfirmed or confirmed access but whose edit requests or other observations may help improve our BLP of Sushant Singh Rajput. NedFausa (talk) 19:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I unprotected, but the previous disruption was intensive and long-term, so I am not really looking forward.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notification

Hi, This is just a quick heads-up that Vaan23 has opened an ANI thread about you here. Best, — Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, great, I was waiting for this. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. I also just realised I messed up the link. The correct one would be this. — Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I found it anyway. Thanks again.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:02, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to edit Seventeen page

Hi Ymblanter, I would like to add information on Seventeen page about:

Seventeen's Japanese comeback in September 2020 with mini album 24H, source: https://www.seventeen-17.jp/statics/24h

24H's achievement to top Japan Oricon chart, the first non-Japanese international male artist to achieve a fourth-consecutive win on the weekly album chart, source: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20200915000374 and http://www.koreatimesus.com/seventeen-earns-fourth-consecutive-oricon-album-chart-win-with-24h/. The same album receives platinum certification from Japan Recording Industry association, source https://www.seventeen-17.jp/posts/information/cgrybe and https://www.riaj.or.jp/f/data/cert/gd.html

Seventeen Joshua and DK's collaboration with US based singer, PinkSweats, source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tamarherman/2020/09/24/pink-sweat--seventeen-discuss-coming-together-on-17-remix-in-age-of-corona/#263097005519h

Unfortunately you have the page protected. Can you help to change the protection or help make edits, so the page is more enriched?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarbaraUkulele (talk • contribs) 10:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was significant disruption going on at the page, this is why I had to apply long-term protection. At this point, I am not willing to lift this protection, since I am afraid disruption will return. However, you are welcome to ask for an edit at Talk:Seventeen (South Korean band) by using {{edit semi-protected}}.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kovanja

User Kovanja has been making edits of questionable POV in topics around Rus' and medieval Russian history for a while, in particularly adding questionable material emphasizing that Rus' and Russia are the same and challenging in particular Ukrainian claims to descent from Rus'/the Rurikids. Do you think any of his edits have reached the level of sanctionability?--Ermenrich (talk) 15:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edits do not look good, but I think at this point it is best if I stay away from everything related to Russian-Ukrainian conflict topics.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:59, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there another admin active in the area you'd recommend me to try?--Ermenrich (talk) 16:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, and this is a problem. If you feel confident enough, you can make a AE case, then someone has to close it anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ganei Tikva ECP

Hi, can you please remove ECP from Ganei Tikva? As I pointed out on the AN, if any ARBPIA rulings should apply, you can put an edit notice for that one sentence on the article, but you should not lock down an article that has nothing to do with the conflict. Huldra has been trying to insert conflict into Israeli place names when if any conflict area applies, it is just that "one sentence" in those villages. But under "anyone can edit" and partial ECP that we can do with the edit notice, we should not be applying full protection when it's not needed. Thanks. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 22:03, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but in my opinion it is needed because we just had an instance of ARBPIA edit warring in which one of the sides was not extended confirmed. However, I will be happy to have a second opinion from uninvolvred administrator. Would you mind bringing this to AN?--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Block review

A user you blocked (and whom I reported to ANI, which led to said block) has had their block expire, and has immediately resumed edit warring at one of the relevant pages by reverting to their preferred version, after dropping a personal attack on the talkpage. Could you please take a look and determine whether the block should be reinstated and extended? Grandpallama (talk) 00:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer to wait longer. Whereas their behavior is indeed not exemplary, on South Korea they clearly get support of other users at the talk page, and blocking for one diff with borderline personal attacks for month would probably not be taken positively if someone drags me to AN for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking a look. Grandpallama (talk) 13:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is an LTA?

In one of your comments "One user is relatively new, one is an LTA" what is an LTA? LaceyUF (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, but (i) I am missing the context (ii) I would rather not discuss possible block evasion with a user who has 89 edits. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you for reviewing transgenerational. The sections, although separated, have significant overlap and I could not think of a non-overlapping section head for them.

If you have changes to suggest, please let me know.

== Memdmarti (talk) 23:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. There are no so many items anyway, so the easiest would be to put all of them next to each other so that there are no sections--Ymblanter (talk) 05:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

How do I delete an account in Wikipedia? University Gee in Claude (talk) 09:37, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is not possible. One can rename an account.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

71.204.53.77

Can user:71.204.53.77 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 14:50, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 14:53, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stub

Hi

Could you please put this article as an Australian Road Article stub

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giinagay_Way

Thanks,

Thent1234 (talk) 21:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It already has the stub template.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help with report

I'll send a message now to Arbitrators, if that's it? Mikola22 (talk) 08:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I would expect them to come back to you and either ask for more information or to explain why they are not going to deal with the case.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. When something new happens, I'll let you know. Mikola22 (talk) 08:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw the report to arbitrator committee for false accusations against him because he admitted mistake. Thank you. Mikola22 (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

changing the name

Well, where is the place where I can change my name University Gee in Claude (talk) 15:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

meta:Steward requests/Username changes--Ymblanter (talk) 15:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank, the name has changed Jerry Kyoni (talk) 01:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 05:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zubryckiy's activity

Dear Ymblanter, I would kindly ask you to draw your attention to the Zubryckiy's activity. He has renamed a number of articles on the history of art and culture in the Russian Empire. See: [1], [2] etc. He did it despite a number of sources contradicting his contribution. It seems to me that his activity does not have the purpose of making a valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Best regards, Ушкуйник (talk) 18:51, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked them short-term on 17 October, and they never showed up after the expiration of the block.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please Ушкуйник do this all the time; so I don't have to correct your errors (Kharkiv is the common English name for Kharkiv for at-least the last 20 years by the way, in fact Odessa seems to be the only city left in Ukraine were the Russian name of the city is the is the common English name). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, also Chernobyl, and Gurzuf went through a RM. Historical usage might be different though.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well as long as the Inquirer Bandera does not go through a RM.....

— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:49, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes...--Ymblanter (talk) 20:54, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reviewing page Manipur State Constitution Act 1947 do give suggestion to further improve it as a notable wiki article.Thank youꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 08:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Now it is a one-line stube, I expect it can be extended to explain what the content of the act was, what was the historical backgroung, and what were the consequences, citing reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter I have added some more info but user User:ChunnuBhai is repeatedly trying to add unrelated topic and removing quote from reference,kindly review this conflict too.ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 17:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have added RfC template on the talk page to keep any discussion at one place. I have explained my edits.ChunnuBhai (talk) 17:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Could you please specify the reason for you revert at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ymblanter&oldid=986272699? There truly was a mistake so I decided to get rid of it. --217.113.241.188 (talk) 21:48, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are not supposed to edit other users' responses.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How is this editing a response when I removed a broken header. Isn't this considered editing other users' responses? --217.113.241.188 (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just do not edit anything which is signed and which is not what you have written.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category replacement

Since you protected the page Bahrain–Israel normalization agreement, please, replace category:Treaties of Israel with category:Peace treaties of Israel on it. Also, is autoconfirmed protection not enough? Maybe protection level can be lowered now? MBH (talk) 10:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The protection is arbitration enforcement per WP:ARBPIA, I am afraid there is very little I can do about it.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Case for edit warring or AE?

Hi Ymblanter, does this user look like they should first be reported for edit warring or just go straight to AE Natalia Bargel Lviv?--Ermenrich (talk) 12:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let us see whether they do anything after warnings. If they resume, I can block myself.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:57, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Frequent disturb on wiki pages

Hi admin,does this userChunnuBhai and ChunnuBhai expect me or other editor to write concoted texts for articles, afterall some words from sources can't be ignored as it the sources that inspired me or other editor to contribute on wikipedia ,he reported every pages I contributed as copyright violation.He put copyright violation on pages Khagemba,Yaosang,Manipur State Constitution Act 1947,Loiyumbaetc Kindly help me in this matter,to me this seem like a personal attack by the said user violating WP:NPA or do correct my mistakes if I made thank youꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 05:01, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello , Luwanglinux, many of your edits are simple copy pastes from the sources I have mentioned. I have not added copyvio notice without reason. Please read WP:COPYVIO to have a better understanding.

I have not made any WP:NPA in any of my edits. Please point out , if any.ChunnuBhai (talk) 05:19, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ChunnuBhai and ChunnuBhai: your way of trying so hard to find fault on articles I contributed seems a personal attack to me.If that is not the case then thank you.ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 05:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Luwanglinux, Please read WP:WIAPA ChunnuBhai (talk) 05:50, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CFDS processing error

It seems that you accidentally removed from Category:User apache when processing speedy renamings, because it's not in the batch you added to CFDW. Could you fix this? Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:37, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks for noticing--Ymblanter (talk) 14:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of wars involving Russia

Hi, you protected List of wars involving Russia over the edit-war that was just two editors failing to see the obvious - one added the invalid file File:Flag of the Khanate of Khiva.svgg the other just removed the invalid file. Solution just remove the typo double g to get File:Flag of the Khanate of Khiva.svg - if you could fix all should be fine and probably no need for the protection. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:51, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you unlock the "2024 United States presidential election" namespace?

Hello Ymblanter, On the talk page of the 2024 United States presidential election draft, there is a strong consensus to move the 2024 page to the mainspace now that we know the winner of the 2020 presidential election. However, after a discussion in November 2018, you locked the "2024 United States presidential election" name until November 28, 2020. However, consensus exists to move the page now. In all past presidential elections, we typically would have the next election's page up by now. Would it be possible to unlock the name so the page can be moved? Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:50, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see a formal closure, ideally by an administrator, who can then move the article. I unfortunately do not have time right now to review the discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:59, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war

Found this while wondering about closing WP:AE#Beshogur. I know almost nothing and don't want to learn about this area, but I'm wondering if this article should have 1RR. Ping me please if you reply. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 11:04, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: yes, I think it should have 1RR, clearly since there are a lot of Armenians (understandably) unhappy with the conditions of the truce we will see a lot of edit warring in the coming days.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have time to add it? I'd have to search through a lot of stuff to find out the details of adding it, and don't have a lot of time. Doug Weller talk 11:52, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can add it (possibly later today, I hae to teach in 20 minutes).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:54, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: I have set it up--Ymblanter (talk) 12:11, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great. The AE can be closed now but if he continues to be a problem.... Doug Weller talk 15:42, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: The whole topic now is a big mess because the situation was stable for 30 years and now has suddenly changed. Even in the normal situation, most Armenians do not count Azerbaijanis (and Turks) as human beings, and most Azerbaijanis do not count Armenians and human beings, and now this even got worse.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:03, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what articles are affected, but at least they all need to be brought under DS and an attempt made to give alerts. I can add DS if you tell me which articles. Doug Weller talk 17:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Off the top of my head, all geographic articles pertaining to Nagorno-Karabakh. Shusha and the Republic of Artsakh are urgent, others I can do before or over the weekend.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shusha had it, I've done Artsakh. Doug Weller talk 19:31, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Great, thanks a lot. I will try to do the others. I am sitting in the middle of an intensive teaching period, but should have a bit of time left.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List_of_Nobel_laureates_by_country

Hi,

the IP is pushing recurrent edit-request's on a case that has been already raised and discussed earlier, I asked to stop and formulate only new edit requests which ignores Goodenough. This is already disruptive...the pp-semi you once set on the main page expires on 05:32, 17 July 2021, but it seems already the talk page needs similar conduct (the 11th (!), edit request I won't answer, maybe you should revert it). Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 19:21, 13 November 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I protected for a week--Ymblanter (talk) 19:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for the review of Artem Novikov. Best wishes from Los Angeles, // Timothy :: talk 11:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:01, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another revert warrior

[109] Ghirla^-трёп- 18:40, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, probably one of our banned friends.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine de Zegher's Wikipedia page

I am affaird that your text on the Torporosky affair on the Zegher Wikipedia page exceeds all standards of encyclopedic formats. In addition, the case is listed including the suspension, and details of the legal matter are on a separate page. Please note that this lawsuit has not been finalized. It is unethical to "take sides" on a Wikipedia page in a lawsuit, debate, or controversy, as Wikipedia wants to have a strictly neutral stance. Your text insunifies that Ms. de Zegher is guilty, although there are no conclusions on this trial yet.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Curatorslog (talk • contribs)

Well, I happen to be a little bit familiar with Wikipedia standards. What I see that you, in one edit, completely rearranged the article, and all mentions of de Zeghe being suspended and fired magically disappeared, though they clearly belong to the article. Moreover, the reliable sources talking about her suspension, disappeared as well. I strongly suspect COI editing.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have no interest at all, I am a simple editor and work with Wikipedia guidelines and the facts. I actually had the impression that you have a COI conflict of interest. The way you have focused on this page and topic transcends any interest in creating a balanced page. I am not saying that this case should not be mentioned (which I did by the way), but the full description of the person should still be objective and balanced. Can you explain to me why you focus so much on this one aspect of Ms de Zeghe's career and blow it up as this is the only thing this person has done in her career

Actually, I do not, you have probably seen that I have left intact all other sections of the article which talk about the rest of her career. However, understandably, in the last several years she got attention mainly due to the criminal case and the fact she was fired, and that it was related to forgery. We write Wikipedia based on reliable sources, and we give sufficient weight to the events which were more prominent in these sources. If you think I have a COI, you are welcome to open a topic at WP:COIN, I am really curious what arguments you have not to prove this (which you obviously can not) but at least to motivate this absurd proposition.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not catch this earlier, but I am amazed by the editing done by Curatorslog. This is not acceptable at all. It seems he removed almost everything about the Toporovski scandal. He did not even link C. de Zegher her page in the new page he created regarding this scandal! And an important 'detail' about de Zegher lying about researching the work was removed. I have added this back. But it is obvious this is not written in a neutral way at all. I agree there is a serious COI from Curatorslog.Garnhami (talk) 16:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Generic IP distruption Government of National Unity (Hungary), Fascist Italy (1922–1943)

Hi,

please see the subject and respective talk pages. Now the IP are around the 7th revert each pages, starting to boomerang the policies I told him, repeating everywhere "you failed to make a case for your edit" despite everything has been demonstrated in the talk. Unfortunately I get since a time really unserious answers, at this time is already disruptive. I think it is very easy to understand what is a state article, and what is a government one...(KIENGIR (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I configured pending changes for both articles--Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protection reduction request

People with COI (such as User:Kalariwarrior and User:Kalari Poothara, they are practitioners, are they the same person?) are misusing the pending-changes protection of Kalari Payattu, they are tweaking, whitewashing and removing content as they wish without sourcing, also removal of sourced content. This is an encyclopedia, not a personal blog, but some are treating as such. Please remove the protection. 2409:4073:2E90:725B:588F:21B0:BEDB:7BB4 (talk) 08:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sprry, but your message does not make sens to me. If there is disruption in the article, why should I reduce the protection? To give you an opportunity to edit-war in real time?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:06, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it is pending protected they are not going to participate in discussion, but misuse it. Currently this is propaganda article. BTW, I see no edit-warring going on there. Look at that article, mostly poorly sourced and half of the content is unsourced. 2409:4073:2087:C2C5:1DA2:976B:21B1:520B (talk) 10:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to be involved into the content dispute related to this article, and I do not find your argument convincing. You are welcome to request unprotection at WP:RFPP. If you are sure these people have COI they must be reported, prtobably at WP:ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:04, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Article

How on earth could you gain the right to have an article about yourself here on the English Wikipedia? --93.78.35.45 (talk) 10:22, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May be because I am encyclopedically notable? I have not touched the article, let alone written it.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:25, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What guidelines do you meet for this? --93.78.35.45 (talk) 10:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You should ask people who have actually written the article. WP:NACADEMIC I guess.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:29, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits to this section, you have deleted multiple revisions. Why would you do this? --93.78.35.45 (talk) 10:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because I do not publicly reveal my real name in relation with my Wikipedia account. It is not on my user page--Ymblanter (talk) 10:33, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for blocking that crazy reverter! I couldn't keep up with the reverts! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 17:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:36, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

Hi. Can you protect the article Ismail Kadare? An IP known for edit warring in SQwiki is vandalizing it. Thanks!--Udha (talk) 19:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough disruptive activity as far as I am concerned.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That IP just reverted me in that article after I posed this comment See here.--Udha (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry bu6t this looks like content dispute to me. Their arguments are not unreasonable. If they continue reverted they must be blocked at some point, but protecting the article is not really appropriate in this situation. Try to start a talk page discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do consider the user that asked for protection is a blocked user in sq.wiki along with other IP at his disposal due to continued editwarring and wikihounding along with WP:OWN, WP:I just don't like it, WP:Drama and then some. Please consider this before any of his requests. Peace --217.73.133.82 (talk) 20:08, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to study long discussions in a language I do not speak. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:09, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 reverts. As I pointed out earlier, that IP has caused edit warring in SQwiki for two years,( here) and it seems to behaving the same here.--Udha (talk) 20:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now blocked for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 20:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Much appreciated.--Udha (talk) 20:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Babel

IMO, from a native English-speaker, you could raise your {{Babel}} rating to en-4. Narky Blert (talk) 22:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I prefer keeping a low profile. I would not like people saying than I am overselling, and it does not matter so much anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do recommend you raising your level to 4. I do not tolerate false content. --93.78.29.3 (talk) 20:52, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I do not think this is any of your business. This is not content.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, you are the same IP. Time for the block.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfD for deaths due to COVID-19 and related RfC

Hi. Thanks for commenting at the recent AfD for the above list. There is now an ongoing discussion around the best way to split the list, if any, if you wish to comment further. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:42, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:06, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Block Request

Can user:2a02:c7f:6c2d:f300:1cf:4c0b:94d8:bd93 and user:99.153.140.102 please be blocked asap. CLCStudent (talk) 22:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 22:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look

Hi,

Why my changes to the article Kalarippayattu are not auto accepted even if I'm an extended confirmed user? Outlander^07@talk 16:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know, your revert should have been indeed auto-accepted. Would you mind asking at WP:VP/T?--Ymblanter (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

O.K Thank you.Outlander^07@talk 17:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proper name

It is recognized worldwide as the SandyGeorgia syndrome. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. Is there a link somewhere I can use next time?--Ymblanter (talk) 20:42, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will write it up as soon as I publish the MEDRS paper. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good, looking forward to it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recreate Our Wikipedia Page and Delete the Current Page

Dear Team,

We would like to recreate our Wikipedia page (Vellore Institute of Technology) in an innovative and professional manner and would request you to kindly delete the current page or assist us in identifying the admin of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vellore_Institute_of_Technology page as soon as possible Amuthukumar1988 (talk) 12:55, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, please use the Draft space or the talk page for this.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove the below text in our Wikipedia page :

Gender discrimination has been a common issue raised in universities across India.[30] VIT allegedly use their restrictive rules and regressive practices to market to conservative parents of Southern India, particularly in their home state of Tamil Nadu and neighboring Andhra Pradesh. These practices include much more restrictive rules on women hostelers, moral policing, shaming by an all-round security force and special committees to look into moral paternalism.[31] The Hindu reported that often women would find themselves checked at hostel rooms and asked to stop talking on mobile phones and sleep or study. Over time, videos and articles have emerged online about the same. VIT officials, however, maintain that stricter female hostel rules are a necessary safety precaution given the rise in crimes against women.[32] VIT officials have stated that, while they agree that men and women must be treated equally, they have at times been faced by irate parents who have insisted on stricter codes of conduct.[31] VIT despite calling itself a progressive educational institution committed to excellence, still ensures strict gender segregation at official events and fests.[31]

In October 2013, two female students were suspended after they helped to organize an online opinion survey of female VIT students, focusing on issues of safety and inequality.[33] Commenting on the issue, VIT vice president Sekar Viswanathan said: "The students started a campaign based on the misplaced notion that the university discriminates against women, which is not true. They were taken home by their parents".[33]

In 2019, Indian news outlet The Print carried a story which alleged that the government was delaying according the Institute of Eminence status to VIT due to an alleged anti-Modi government stance by its Chancellor and an official Intelligence Bureau report alleging gender discrimination of students.[34]

Lack of freedom of speech VIT allegedly makes students sign an affidavit which prohibits them from speaking out against university management.[31] The university code of conduct prohibits any form of protest or action within premises or outside which may spoil repute of the institute and prohibits passing out information to any media group without prior permission of university officials.[35] In 2015, Indian stand-up comedian Papa CJ was banned from the campus for taking up issues related to gender discrimination and moral policing during his show at GraVITas. He put up a video about his ban on his Facebook page and tweeted about the same[36] describing his ban and a video recording of his show.

Amuthukumar1988 (talk) 17:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see why I should remove sourced information. Please raise the issue at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of best selling books

Hello

Can I ask why you locked the best selling books article? this seems unfair as it privileges some editors over others.

Could you unlock it.

Happy to discuss

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.85.156 (talk) 10:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have protected the page because there is too much disruption coming from non-autocinfirmed editors. I am not going to unprotect it. You can always register an account, in a few days and after a certain number of edits you will be able to edit this article.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replies in own section

Hi, I feel like putting replies to others' comments in different sections here is confusing and would be hard to understand for the admins reviewing the report. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 09:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously need to indicate whom you are replying to, but this is the procedure which has been in place for many years, possibly from the very beginning (btw the same as for the arbitration cases).--Ymblanter (talk) 09:35, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thank you. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 09:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Map of India

@Zoozaz1, ChunnuBhai, and Ymblanter:, I strongly believe that this user Kumarkk1203 on Talk:Bhutan–India relations#Omit the disputed area entirely is Aghore that Ymblanter blocked, [110]. Please take a look on the thread. --Walrus Ji (talk) 13:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I recently blocked another sock on Commons--Ymblanter (talk) 14:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1k out of 75k survived???

Regarding the article History of the Jews in Latvia.

That figure does not seem reliable to me, when you compare it with the other data (censuses etc.) regarding the amount of Jews in Latvia. I don't know what you think of it... --Spafky (talk) 14:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know, but there is a source in the article which says this. My reading of this number (consistent with other numbers) is that of 75 which stayed there under the German occupation only 1k survived - which does not seem improbable to me. In any case, we can not just remove sourced material, it requires some discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, but another source in the article says that there were 95k Jews in Latvia in 1939, when I do the math it still doesn't make sense to me. --Spafky (talk) 16:20, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the difference, 18 = 95-77, are people who were forcibly resettled or voluntarily moved out in 1940 or evacuated in 1941. I personally knew someone who was born in Riga and survived the war by moving out of Latvia in 1940/41.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fidesz

Hi,

persistent IP vandalism ([111]), ([112]), ([113]), ([114]), ([115]), edit warring notice previously here ([116]), still continued (please note that talk page discussion ongoing is about another issue especially, IP tried in one of the edit logs to dumb us) Thank you for your time! (KIENGIR (talk) 20:29, 14 December 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I protected for 2 weeks--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Miklós Horthy, Viktor Orbán, Russophilia

Hi,

a user unfortunately is ignoring or policies and does weird (?) things.

- first of all he does not stop edit-warring, despite discussion is ongoing in the talk the user failed to build consensus (already 7 reverts): ([117]), ([118]), ([119]), ([120]), ([121]), ([122]), ([123])

- in the other page, the user completely ignores discussion, and as previously do not understand that category is for other purposes, even it's mother page is linked in the other discussion, which he denies (5 reverts) ([124]), ([125]), ([126]), ([127]), ([128])

- Finally, at the third page the user is performing weird addition, already the third time campaign that Joachim von Ribbentrop would be Russophile, which is awesome, and the sources referred are really against (or see even my edit log about the wikitionary the user tried to use as a source)...([129])...edit warring notice here: ([130]). Thank you for your time!(KIENGIR (talk) 10:22, 16 December 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Blocked for 31h, this is a long-term problematic user.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCake!

Yulia Romero • Talk to me! has given you a WikiCake!

I am presenting you this WikiCake as a sign of appreciation for your updating of the raions of Ukraine. I noticed that all the "C"(-named)-Oblast are all updated Good work and I hope that you will keep up this good work! If you are looking for appropriate background music during updating Wikipedia articles of the raions of Ukraine, I suggest the song "Rayon" by alyona alyona ft. Fatbelly

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks a lot. Actually, no, they are not yet fully updated - still Zastavna Raion to do, and also the raions of Chernihiv Oblast will later need to have the hromadas added, nut generally, yes, I reasonably expect to have the first passage finished by the end of the year.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NNP in Transcarpathia

While translating some articles about nature conservation into Ukrainian I spotted Uzhanian National Nature Park article. I wonder, do you mind if I rename it to Uzhansky National Nature Park according to the name on the page of the Ukrainian Natural Resources Ministry [131]? Thanks, by the way, for all what you′ve done in Conservation. A lot of work! Mykola Swarnyk (talk) 20:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am not particularly attached to the name, which I found in some template or a page full of redlinks, I do not remember now. The Ukrainian government really pretends that they spedk English while they actually do not (see for example this publication full of gems like "stlmt Dashava" or "city Chyhyryn"), so I would just ignore what they write in English. However, if you think Uzhansky is better than Uzhanian feel free to rename. Following WP:UKR in this case it probably should be Uzhanskyi.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the main entrance info board there is Uzhanskyi. So I′ll go with that. Thanks a lot. Mykola Swarnyk (talk) 02:58, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Ho Ho

Ϣere SpielChequers is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Thank you, also greetings to you and your family.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vraagje...

Hallo meneer Ymblanter,

Mag ik eventjes vragen: Hoe kan ik een admin worden? Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:02, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Je moet zich voor WP:RFA vordragen en dan een week wachten. Dat is waarschijnlijk kanselos met minder dan 10 duizend edits te doen.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dank u wel! :) Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Graag gedaan.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:45, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need Input

Hello Ymblanter , I hope you are having a wonderful day. I need your input. This one user will not concede that Miklos Horthy and Fidesz are nationalists. He is basically using original research to justify his claims. I have. tried to look up sources for what he calls Hungarian Nationalism vs Hungarian Nationalism and I have found nothing. He is trying to segregate that category for far right and fascists, even though other categories under this umbrella are not held to that standard. If there were a far right group called Hungarian Nationalists than I can forgive it but there is no such group called that. National Conservatism is a form of nationalism, it even says so on its wikipedia page. It embraces both Conservatism and Nationalism. So by definition if you are a national conservative than you are a nationalist and a conservative. I am holding this category to the same standard as all other nationalist categories. Let us go south from Hungary for second and go to the category, Serbian nationalists. This category includes the Chetniks, the fascists, The Milosevic era politicians, the Serb Democratic Party (Bosnia and Herzegovina) which is a national Conservative party and Aleksandar Vučić who runs a conservative and populist government. Are these all the same? No. The Chetniks- The Chetniks were Royalists, however the Milosevic politicians were communists. You don't have to be a certain political orientation to be a nationalist. Or let us use Romania. There was Ion Antonescu, the fascist leader of Romania, and Nicolae Ceausescu the Communist leader of Romania, both were nationalist just had a different way of implementing it. However it would be inappropriate to NOT call either one a nationalist. Just because you are not a fascist or a far right winger, doesn't mean that you aren't a nationalist. There ar things like National Communism and left wing nationalism, I don't have to love them or support them, but I have to acknowledge that they are forms of nationalism because that is how they function, just like national conservatism. If categories similar to this one include figures that are both far right and far left and in between but in this category, they only allow far right, that simply is not fair and is biased. Wouldn't you agree? I also used sources to back my claim and here they are. They are all good and credible sources by wikipedia standards. Horthy and Orban were even listed under figures of nationalism before I even found that page. Horthy: Reuters:^[1] The Economist:^[2] BBC:^[3] Fidesz: The Economist:^[4] Reuters:^[5] It even says in the article right wing nationalist. It does not say "far right". However, is it right wing? Yes. Is it nationalist? yes. Foreignpolicy.com: ^[6] The Guardian:^[7] BBC: ^[8] WSJ:^[9] You have a great day. Thank you for your timeFenetrejones (talk) 16:36, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think this is my business. If you can not agree, you probably need to try Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:41, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you regardless. Have a wonderful day!Fenetrejones (talk) 17:48, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Thanks, also greetings to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:51, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic editor

Hi Ymblanter,

First off, happy holidays! Second, would you mind looking into this editor Noraskulk. He's been edit-warring about very questionable info he's been adding at Rurik dynasty and Slavicism and doesn't use talk pages.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and also happy holidays to you. For the time being, they are still using talk pages, including their user talk page, so that there is some hope still.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, I find edit summaries like this as well as talk page use like this and this somewhat concerning. That and trying to pass off a ninth grade paper as an RS.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are absolutely concerning, and I have given them a Ds alert, but I do not think we are at the point yet when a block is needed.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ermenrich, I'm sorry, what's wrong here? Noraskulk (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to read WP:RS to get the answer.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:53, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. And consider how ridiculous your statement appears considering that Agricolae has been on Wikipedia since 2006 and you joined earlier this year.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-article edit war

There seems to be a multi-article edit war going on between User:Vyaiskaya and User:Danloud, and there had been a report at WP:AN3. You left an ARBEE alert for one of the parties. Have you formed any impression of who is more likely to be right in this? EdJohnston (talk) 03:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. Vyaiskaia is a new user, and she claims the other two are reverting their edits for nothing calling them names. I looked at some of the reverts and could not find anything particularly bad about them; on the other hand, I have not looked through all the articles, and I would need to have done this to see whether the claims are at least partially true. I will try to take another look today.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:36, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of Nobel laureates by country

Hi, the IP simply does not stop the disruptive edit requests, a more severe restriction would be needed than set last time. Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is National conservatism a variant of nationalism? Fenetrejones (talk) 18:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, one needs to look at reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did that and the guy I am debating still refuse to concede.Fenetrejones (talk) 19:03, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then you need to open an RfC or seek third-party mediation. Opening RfC is easier.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I do that? Fenetrejones (talk) 19:15, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFC, but make sure to formulate the question in an appropriate way, otherwise it will be very difficult to close--Ymblanter (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be worth a report?

I am in an argument with a user. -His argument is based on original research which has no wikipedia article or credible sources to back it up

-Claims I am uncivil yet, he calls me problematic

-refuses to accept that I am citing my argument with Sources, and I mean sources like WSJ, NYT, The Economist ETC

-Called me an accuser and that he never said that yet, it can simply be disproved from a simple command f click.

-Claims that my citing of text is irrelevant, yet it is crucial in understanding the topic(s) at hand.

Fenetrejones (talk) 23:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should stop this behavior, indeed more of us noticed the problems I referred (and yes, people can read and verify statements, and after more then 3-4 trials the result is a question of competence). However, what you did recently may very likely end up in a boomerang, per ([132]), ([133]), where you repeatedly referred me as a liar, although I asked you to remain civil earlier ([134]), but I am sorry you ignored it.

Ymblanter, I let on the user's talk this notice ([135]).(KIENGIR (talk) 01:59, 29 December 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@KIENGIR Simply I deleted that because that information was not needed but you did lie. Let us look at what you said "The traditional Hungarian nationalism is covering the far-right/extreme viewholders and their relevant theories, at any historical time, openly. It is not the same to be simply patriotic, or moderate nationalism." It is okay, nothing wrong with that, I literally used your quote for an argument. You said "Besides that, you as well address/insist allegations to me I never said." You are accusing me of making up quotes that you never said but a simple command f says otherwise so you lied. Just accept that you TOO messed up on something.Fenetrejones (talk) 02:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You lied because You denied saying that and you did. Imagine this scenario, I said something offensive to you, you call me out on it and I deny saying it. However, You have easy proof on me saying the offensive comment, than you have proof that I was lying. Fenetrejones (talk) 02:31, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, as I said in the article's talk I won't play your games further not understanding or pretending not to understand is the worst you can do in our community, even here you are adressing misleading statements like "You are accusing me of making up quotes that you never said", although I never stated such, and anyway anyone may easily check how many times you stated like "you refuse to accept..." and other similar statements where you address things I never stated, and I won't explain the third time it was not about the literal quote, etc.

But because now again called me twice a liar (4 in total), despite the second warning, prepare for the consequences. (I will as well stop responding your messages here)(KIENGIR (talk) 02:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Fun Fact did you say that I was false accusing you of saying something? Yes. Did I have the item and not make it up, yes. It is okay to be wrong sometimes. You said that you never wrote anything like that but I found otherwise.Fenetrejones (talk) 02:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deceased Wikipedian

Hello, could you please fully protect the user page User:Aditya Kabir as per Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Deceased_users? Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 02:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Report on KIENGIR

This user is trying to cover up on his actions when I caught him red handed.

To quote him, "Look, you continously put words, examples to my mouth which I did not say, and since the beginning did not grab exacly what I said, but pushing your own considerations all around and presenting that it would be mine, with unnecessary repetitions and flooding the talk page disruptively. I won't explain it the nth time, may be read above."

I called him out saying that moderate nationalism is nationalism, using his quote in this paragraph All groups listed are diverse on the political spectrum a nationalist communist and a fascist may both be nationalist even if they are not allies. AND don't make any excuses, "The traditional Hungarian nationalism is covering the far-right/extreme viewholders and their relevant theories, at any historical time, openly. It is not the same to be simply patriotic, or moderate nationalism." Moderate nationalism IS still a form of nationalism. A moderate republican and a Radical Neo Nazi republican are both republicans. A stalinist socialist and a democratic socialists ARE both socialists even if the former is more extreme than the ladder. (The quote in the middle is his quote.)

I may have been a little unprofessional by saying nice try lying, the first time, but He insists that he did nothing wrong. "No, everything may be read above (including what I said and what I did not, among them what you erroneously claim to be said although I did not, etc. - it's not about the literal sentence in quotations marks, but I referred to others as I just explained), but this discussion is over because of the continuous lack of comprehension and competence from your behalf, which is apparently recurrent, I won't play such games." I did not play with his words, he just explained the difference between Hungarian Nationalism vs Hungarian Nationalism to Nigej. There was no change in his words. He was however, lying when he said that he did not say it and that he said it. I found it with a simple command F. He still acts like he never said it and that it never happened, which means he lied by every definition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Miklós_Horthy

His argument of Hungarian Nationalism vs Hungarian Nationalism is Original research. I have tried searching this topic and have not been able to find anything. Moderate nationalism is still nationalism.

I did research on National Conservatism and according to wikipedia, National Conservatism is a variant of Nationalism.

I also used many sources in saying that Horthy and Orban were Nationalists, including WSJ, The Economist, Reuters, the Guardian and many other credible sources. I may deserve a warning, but he does too.

He accused me of accusing him yet I caught him redhanded with a simple command F.

Fenetrejones (talk) 02:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a warning, because I do deserve it, But give him one to for all I listed above.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:00, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You should just stop, you will get blocked. However not able to interpret appropriately English sentences, either you do by pretence or not is the lack of WP:CIR. Above you said "You said that you never wrote anything like that but I found otherwise", although I was not speaking about the literal quote you presented here (and now you literally qoute as well where I reinforce I did not refer to your lireally qouted sentence), so you just contradicted yourself, etc., the rest is useless, everyone may carefully read the facts. With this I finished any further discussions with you on the subject.

Ymblanter, the user presented me a liar in this post, and started to troll my talk page ([136]), telling the same, it is (overall the 6th time), please end this, enough what is enough! Sorry for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 03:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I am not trolling you, I am calling you out for accusing me. You want professional behavior sure, than apply it to yourself and not accuse other users of making accusations.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let us see what you said "Look, you continously put words, examples to my mouth which I did not say," Yet the quote I used is from he, himself. Yet that is a quote from you. When I said that you were lying, I did not mean it as "You are liar" or any derogatory comment like, but that your claim was false and what is the most common way of saying that a person said false statements, the common phrase is that the person was lying. It does not inherently mean that the person is a liar, just that they stated false information at the time. If you thought I called you a liar, than I am sorry on that account, I was writing it that your statement was false.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Ymblanter, The first time I was called out by a user, it was you and I was doing what was essentially original research. This time I am the one in the two parties using sources for our argument. And they are credible sources. So nothing like Alex Jones or whatever else it may beFenetrejones (talk) 03:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He also refuses to acknowledge when I mention his claims appear to be original research, he always dodges it and never gives me sources.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And he claims I was trolling. Maybe he did not think he was being rude when he was accusing, but he came off as rude when he was accusing me. Also would a troll, admit at times that they were unprofessional?Fenetrejones (talk) 03:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Elizabeth Wiskemann, Czechs and Germans, 1938, ISBN-13: 978-1443729819

[2] Bruegel, Johann Wolfgang (1973). Czechoslovakia Before Munich. p. 45. ISBN 9780521086875. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)

[3] ttps://www.reuters.com/article/us-hungary-nationalism/hungarians-hail-horthy-as-recession-fans-nationalism-idUSBRE85F0O520120616

[4] ttps://www.economist.com/eastern-approaches/2012/06/18/does-hungary-have-a-new-hero

[5] ttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51612549

[6] ttps://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2018/04/05/why-is-hungary-turning-to-nationalism

[7] ttps://www.reuters.com/article/hungary-fidesz-mep-idINKBN28C2S9

[8] ttps://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/10/nationalism-conservatism-hungary-viktor-orban/

[9] ttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/13/trump-latest-viktor-orban-hungary-prime-minister-white-house

[10] ttps://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-43675398

[11] ttps://www.wsj.com/articles/hungarys-orban-wins-right-to-rule-by-decree-during-coronavirus-crisis-11585584669

[1]

[2]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]