User talk:Ivanvector/Archive 17

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 ← Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18

MfD

Hello, I started a MfD regarding Draft:Yemi Davids, your consensus would be appreciated. Thanks. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Slovisk

Thanks for the G12 deletion of Slovisk. There's a copy of that same blog page at User:Ioannesko, but I can't tag it for deletion without an account. Could you please take a look? Thanks. 2A01:4C8:B3:B050:1C79:A64F:5833:3C67 (talk) 14:57, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

One good-faith but malformed edit?

Hi! You wrote here "one good-faith but malformed edit does not a pattern of disruptive editing make", and of course that's perfectly true. I count not one but fifty IP edits to that page since 13 November 2022, some good, some bad; how many would constitute a pattern of disruptive editing in your view? Thanks, regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: fair question; of course you'll get different answers on this depending on which admin you ask. For me, when I'm evaluating a protection request, the request needs to be balanced against preventing new users from editing (which goes against our fundamental principle that anyone can edit Wikipedia), or weighed against other possible actions which would limit disruption while being less restrictive generally (like blocking a disruptive editor). In other words, I need to see a reason to believe that the protection I would place would actually reduce the disruption. I generally only look at very recent edits unless the page has a history of ongoing protection, which this page didn't: it was last protected in 2019 and only for 2 days. I don't generally review every edit, but look for edits that have been reverted - I realize this is less than ideal but I only have so much time. On this page there were two edits from an IPv6 which were reverted but didn't appear intentionally disruptive, and further back on Jan 10 two edits from an IP and the account they obviously created which were reverted. Neither of those two editors restored their reverted edits, so as far as I could tell at the time there was no disruption occurring and so protection was not warranted.
To answer more directly: the "patterns" I look for are intentionally disruptive edits from multiple editors (if not multiple then blocking may be a better solution), multiple editors engaged in revert warring, or disruption that has resumed immediately following recent protection (in which case I also usually tap-dance on the block button). But this is nowhere near an exhaustive list, and each request for protection has its own nuance. I hope that helps. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
That's a thoughtful and detailed answer, thank you. I never suggested that any of these IPs were being intentionally disruptive, just that the repeated mistaken and/or unsourced edits constituted disruption. But no matter, I'm under no obligation to watch that page. Not because of this, but at this point I'm ready to support a proposal to put an end to IP editing in this project; it seems to have worked for the Portuguese, might work here too. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Wikilove for you ~Tallulah (talk) 20:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Adding Tags to Draft

Hi Ivanvector, I didn't know there was an issue with adding COI or Autobiography tags to a draft. Certainly seems like it should be valid to apply them, particularly if the article is going to be sent to AfC at some point. I'm referring to Draft:Mehrdad Biazarikari in particular. Thanks, BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 19:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it is an issue, but those templates do read "this article has issues", and the templates categorize the pages in an article cleanup category. I don't think I've seen them tagged on drafts before but I don't think I could point to a guideline that says one way or the other. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the response! Hadn't thought of the "add to category" issue. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 23:55, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your work

Thanks for correcting my erroneous edits on the Michael Voris page. I'm new to this and very much appreciate the help. You're awesome and helping keep Wikipedia great! Ysys9 (talk) 00:08, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Uncivility

Can you please strike or remove your uncivil comment regarding me in the RFC? Such a comments is completely unnecessary and does not help the RFC in any way. Tvx1 00:44, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tvx1: my comment was a fair comment, and I was not the first editor nor the last to say it. At the time that I posted it, you had just finished rapidly replying to eight comments on that page including all four of the comments above mine in order, with arguments not much better reasoned than "nuh uh!" or just leaving the equivalent of a fart noise. Hence my comment, but as if you weren't already making my point for me, you came back after I left that comment to leave nine more admittedly more eloquent replies, but still seventeen in total, on top of twenty seven at the discussions on the village pumps, as of when I'm writing this.
And you didn't stop there - again after I posted my comment, you followed at least two users (not including myself) to their talk pages for no other reason than to carry on arguments, not to mention the conversation on your own talk page calling out this very behaviour. Bold of you, then, to come here and complain that my single comment was "completely unnecessary", after leaving approximately 50 of your own; indeed you haven't done much else here since late Wednesday (it's Sunday morning here, so a bit more than three straight days) but beat this dead horse.
Yes, I will remove it, it was disrespectful and you're absolutely right that it did not help anything, and I apologize. But maybe take an honest look at your own behaviour here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 09:25, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Sundayclose and unjustified reverting of edits

I see that Sundayclose promised to stop unnecessary reverting of edits on December 30th, after being called out for doing so by you. Sundayclose reverted 2 edits of mine at 17.25 yesterday, once again on the basis that they were uncited, despite one being the addition of a wikipedia link to a term used in the text https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Taxman&action=history My reply is on Sundayclose's Talk page: User talk:Sundayclose Robert P Connolly (talk) 15:48, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Robert P Connolly: my multiple discussions with Sundayclose have been about their removing additions by new users when a plain reading of the source cited supports the material added. In this instance I would have done the same as they did. When you first added the text to the Taxman article you didn't provide a citation, and your contribution was not supported by other sources already present in the paragraph. You alluded to linking to the pound and shilling articles for verification, but I also don't see where in those articles your text is supported: neither mentions the Beatles at all, nor the supertax unless it is mentioned by a different name and I missed it. Thus your contribution appeared to be a novel synthesis to state the conclusion that the supertax rate was the inspiration for the lyric, without a source explicitly saying so. You suggested that an appropriate course of action would have been to add a {{cn}} tag requesting a citation, and it's true that that is a valid approach, however the verifiability policy says in a few different ways that information that fails verification can be removed immediately. Editors (especially new editors, though you appear not to be) add "things they heard", their own personal opinions, or just plain gossip to articles all the time, so many editors do simply challenge these novel statements by removal rather than tagging for verification or attempting to verify themselves, as it is the responsibility of the editor adding new material to supply verification. And while it's not necessary to cite everything nor to cite very obvious facts, your contribution was not obvious with respect to the origin of the lyric, and exceptional claims require exceptional sources.
At any rate, your contribution does add an interesting fact to the article and provides improved context to readers, so thank you for adding a source to support it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:13, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for replying. The supertax reference in the previous sentence of the article doesn't mention The Beatles - the point is that supertax is more than 90%, and the Shilling link from my edit tells us there are 20 shillings in a pound, so one shilling = 10% of a pound; thus with supertax, the taxman subtracts 90% of each pound = 19 shillings, leaving one shilling. So, in the words of the lyric, from the taxman's point of view: "There's one for you, nineteen for me". I thought the supertax/shillings in a pound connection was clear, but I took Sundayclose's point and added a reference. Maybe it looked more obvious to me because I have a pre-existing knowledge of British pre decimal currency. Robert P Connolly (talk) 10:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Correction: 1 shilling = 5% of a pound. Sorry! Robert P Connolly (talk) 10:26, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the RfD closes

Thank you for the closures at the RfD yesterday. The backlog had grown big and no one was touching it! Jay 💬 06:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jay: thank you for bringing attention to it. There normally are quite a few admins who regularly patrol and participate at RFD. I guess everyone must be on vacation! Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
For your placeholder at the 2022 Vector RFC. Cheers — Jumbo T (talk) 17:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Joginder Singh Vedanti

I want to understand that why you reverted my speedy deletion request and why is history merge required? ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 14:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

And I want to say thank you for draftifying the article. Thanks ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 14:39, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
@LordVoldemort728: in general, see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. The "new" article was copied verbatim from the draft and pasted into article space, which breaks the contributor attribution history required by the terms of our site license. Such moves require repair. Your CSD tag was correct, I only reverted because it takes a bit of time to do all the necessary steps to history merge, and I didn't want another admin to delete the article while I was trying to do the repair. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Oh yes you are correct. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 14:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
for taking care of Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and repairing cut-and-paste moves of many controversial articles. Thanks. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 14:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Interview query

Hello Ivan! I was wondering if there is anyway I would be able to interview you for my podcast channel. We are up and coming and trying to find some smaller figures who deserve greater recognition in the world (like our podcast!). If you're at all interested we'd love to chat to you, so please send me a DM on discord! PrivateJazzHands#3983

Looking forward to hearing from you, Patrick Brabazon and Team :) Evanmurphy123 (talk) 21:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Triple Crown

I'm very pleased to present the Imperial Triple Crown to Ivanvector, for your work on "Did you know?" and the good and featured article processes! — Bilorv (talk) 12:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about the FLR (List of national parks of Canada) initially but the Triple Crown wording says, Becoming a major contributor to an article after its promotion will not qualify, unless the work helped prevent the article from losing its good or featured status, such as edits done to address concerns during a featured article review. So I think it's pretty clear-cut. Congratulations! — Bilorv (talk) 12:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

A question about your edits

Dear Vanya, I have seen your edits to the article Greece-Ukraine relationships, and I would like to inform you that the article about the third largest city in Ukraine is titled Odesa. Why did you insist on using the spelling Odessa? Regards, -Rggsxbjysxb (talk) 14:29, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The simple fact of the matter is that I don't care at all. My only interest here is that you are banned from editing Wikipedia because you can't follow instructions, and every time you create a new sockpuppet account I race several other administrators to be the first to block it and undo all of the changes you've made. We have tools for it, it takes about three button clicks.
When you change the spelling from Odessa to Odesa, I change it back because you're banned.
When you change the order of categories in Simpsons episode articles, I change it back because you're banned.
When you post on a noticeboard whining about corrupt administrators, I remove your post because you're banned.
You are not welcome to participate in building Wikipedia, only because you're banned. If you want to be allowed to edit, and for users to stop undoing your edits only because you're banned, you need to get yourself unbanned. The only way you can do that is to log into your original account and make a successful ban appeal. This is all explained in the standard offer, and it will also help you to read the guide to appealing blocks. Even then you will not be allowed to change the spelling, because we don't let new users edit some very controversial topics, and that includes topics having to do with Russia's wars against Ukraine. That's not because we don't trust you, but because we have very often seen that new users get into trouble when they start out in these very heated topics, and we don't want new users to get discouraged. If you had listened when this was explained to you before then you would be well on your way to being allowed to edit that topic by now, but instead you fought and argued and thought our policies shouldn't apply to you, and that's why you're banned.
In short: if you can convince editors that you understand and will follow the rules that everyone else follows, we'll gladly welcome you back and be happy to have you here, and when you get to 500 good edits in other topics, you'll be allowed to discuss changing the spelling. If you still think you shouldn't have to follow the rules that the rest of us have all been following for 22 years, then please go away, I don't waste my time on lost causes. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:45, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Why are they banned again? ;) - Roxy the dog 18:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Teflon Peter Christ

Hello. I saw that you've issued a block for Teflon Peter Christ (previously Isento and Pjotr Jr.) for editing certain articles. This uses has written the Alicia album article and has for a long time been policing the article and reverting virtually every edit made to the article. This behavior is evident if you look at the albums editing history, talk page discussions and my talk page. He regards the page his personal work that no one has right to edit. I have been at the receiving end of his namecalling and he has initiated a number of dispute resolution procedures to get me banned, because he didn't like the chances I made to the article. Can you block him from editing the Alicia article? Samsonite Man (talk) 10:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@Samsonite Man: I am going to reply to this on your talk page. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Lightspeed

That was fast, thanks. Silikonz💬 16:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of first women's ice hockey internationals per country: 1987-1999

Hello, I noticed you implied this article seeming like trivia would seem as if that would be unanimously frowned upon, I don't see why and request clarification. Dweisz94 (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I apologize, I later understood there is a "WP:TRIVIA" that even though is either a soloution to an incurable problem of disorganization arising from such articles or is an authoritative aggression or "culture" of Wikipedia it should still be respected. Dweisz94 (talk) 23:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, do you mind reporting someone on my behalf?

I have no idea how that works but that IP address on the 'Wedding of Catherine Middleton and Prince William' page that you recently reverted the edits of keeps vandalizing the page with nonsensical edits. 174.115.15.87 (talk) 01:24, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

It's customary to provide a link to the article in question if you're asking someone to review something, but no matter, I found it. I had blocked the IP already yesterday: I wouldn't say their edits were nonsensical, but it seemed like they've spent the last few months trying to remove all mention of Harry and Meghan from every article on the British royal family, as well as any information about the Duchess' post-acting career. They didn't explain why they were doing it but it seemed obviously tendentious to me. If you see something like this again, you can report it at WP:AIV, or for very serious incidents you can post at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents. Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Good morning

Good morning, why was it deleted, what is the reason, and it has no copyrights, and I am sorry for the inconvenience 10:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)~~ Jimmy Yelzer (talk) 10:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jimmy Yelzer, welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry but I can't determine which deleted page you're asking about. I had a look at your deleted contributions (which you can't see, the log is restricted to administrators) and I haven't been able to find any pages you have edited which were deleted as copyright violations, nor any which I deleted. Do you remember the name of the page?
Normally, if you visit the location where a deleted page used to be, using a computer and not on mobiile (the mobile view is broken), you will see a screen like this, with a red box explaining why the page was deleted, and by which administrator. If you don't understand the reason or have questions, your first step is to contact the administrator who most recently deleted the page. If that doesn't help, you can ask for the deletion to be reviewed at deletion review, but read the instructions first as there are a few steps that you're expected to follow. Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:48, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Good evening

Good evening, my friend, may God bless you for extending the time of your confinement. I am happy to meet you and your calm words. The world is still fine and God has more people like you. Do you delete, and God knows no reason? We are happy when I write and reflect on the writing. My greetings to your respected person. May I know your confinement. Jimmy Yelzer (talk) 15:05, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

What?

What does this mean? What was the page? StAnselm (talk) 02:46, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

@StAnselm: sorry about that. The deletion is related to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 21#Peter James (Pseudohistorian), which was page-move vandalism that you reverted. For WP:G10 deletions Twinkle automatically posts that aggressive notice on the page creator's talk page, and since your revert left a standard "moved page" redirect under the inappropriate title, you were the page creator. I've removed the notice now but it shouldn't have been posted at all. I'm going to go yell at someone to make that notice optional. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The notice is optional, I just didn't uncheck it. I'll go yell at myself instead. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the apology. StAnselm (talk) 13:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the legwork

I just wanted to say thanks for the extra legwork at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 March 21##Mateusz Grzesiak. I'm also grateful for your assuming good faith in my original deletion. To be honest, I'm returning after a period of relative inactivity; and the last time I was this active as an admin, CSD cases like these weren't quite so controversial. Ten years ago a salted article like this would be binned in a heartbeat. But I'm getting more familiar with WP:PROD, the draft system, etc., and I'm trying to be less bold (for better or worse). I just saw a similar case appear at Renu Raj -- and it's frustrating to agree with the CSD tagger while not always having the time (or heart) to convert it into an AFD for them. Oh well, I'll stop rambling now. Thanks again. --Hadal (talk) 17:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Bayu Aji

Thank you for salting this earlier. Just so you are aware, the editor involved has circumvented the salting by creating Bayu Aji (footballer, born 2000). I'll warn them. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:30, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@Spiderone: looks like they tried again today. I've left a more stern warning and added an entry to the title blacklist that should stop this. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Dmitry Torner

Hi. The author of this draft first created it as an article in October 2022. It was deleted October 14. He turned it into a draft on November 9. He moved the draft into the mainspace on March 21, 2023, not long before the six-month point where drafts can be speedily deleted. The recreated article was speedily deleted on March 22. He recreated the draft on March 31.

Isn’t this back-and-forth between main and draft space a form of gaming the system? Isn’t there some point where this little game ends? — Biruitorul Talk 21:13, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@Biruitorul: the first deletion discussion resulted in a soft delete, which allows anyone to recreate the article or request its undeletion if they so choose, for any reason. Therefore they were allowed to recreate it, and it was not eligible for deletion under the criterion for recreations when it was deleted the second time (courtesy ping Sdrqaz) so the original soft delete still applied and there was nothing wrong with them creating a new draft afterwards. I wouldn't call this gaming the system, they're getting away on a technicality but it's the administrators who were wrong here, and there is purposely very little room for interpretation in the speedy deletion criteria. However, draft space isn't meant to hold draft articles on non-notable subjects forever: if you have reasons that the draft should be deleted (besides it being old, or being a recreation) you can start a discussion at miscellany for deletion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:07, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Ivanvector, my G4 referred to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dmitry Torner, which ended as a "full" delete result. The AfD prior to it (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dmitri Torner) did end with a soft delete, but as G4 puts it, the result of the most recent deletion discussion controls. As the full delete came after the soft delete, the G4 was valid. Sdrqaz (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Ah, thanks, I did not see that other discussion. I'll re-evaluate. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Bayu Aji (2)

you not delete article Bayu Aji please you is crazy Naufalhilmi2913 (talk) 20:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Unprotection: Template:Wikidata redirect

Hello! Now when this this template is used only on WP:soft redirects – for hard redirects {{R with Wikidata item}} is used – this is not WP:HIGHRISK template anymore. Can you unprotect? Nagsb (talk) 23:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

User you blocked

Hi, I noticed this user you blocked was only blocked for a week rather than indefinitely. Was this a mistake? Thanks! Uhai (talk) 05:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

No, not a mistake. We typically don't block sockpuppeteers indefinitely for first offences, except in very serious cases or if there's other misconduct. Thanks for checking. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Pakistan Software export board copyvio

The entire page is directly lifted, some of the stuff wasn't in refs. https://app.techdestination.com has the rest of the content there in subpages. Xxthedeathlordxx (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, i probably should have been a bit more detailed in my csd reason. The article lifts paragraphs from several pages. Xxthedeathlordxx (talk) 15:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
@Xxthedeathlordxx: you'll need to be more specific, you won't find many admins with time to go randomly poking around an entire website like that to find copyvios. The tool did not find anything more. Can you link to the specific pages that content was copied from? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:33, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Never mind, I found an undetected copyvio in the page's first edit, and so I've blanked all of it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Sorry about how I handled this a bit sloppily.
in case you still need these i have these https://app.techdestination.com/vision-missionhttps://web.archive.org/web/20160301100325/http://www.pseb.org.pk/pseb-programs/internship-program.html
Xxthedeathlordxx (talk) 16:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Procedural notification

Hi, I and others have proposed additional options at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC_on_a_procedural_community_desysop. You may wish to review your position in that RfC. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

George W. Bush War on terror

You asked me to add a source, a source was already added. You can make yourself useful and read it. It's quite lengthy, but you asked for it. Please make sure you understand the facts before you remove important sections. I don't care if you're an administrator, it's blatant vandalism. Ethans1234 (talk) 00:51, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I'd also like to add that the part you removed, along with the relevant attached source were a part of the Wikipedia for I believe to be a few years. I'll be adding it back on once you confirm you've bothered to read the source. Again, it's lengthy so take your precious time, administrator. Ethans1234 (talk) 00:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) User:Ethans1234 you can't use a primary source document like the transcript of a speech to put forward a conclusion based on the combination of what was said in the speech and subsequent historical events. That's called WP:SYNTH. Folly Mox (talk) 03:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
@Ethans1234: I'm sorry, but "message me to learn more" is not a substitute for providing a reliable source as required by policy, nor for starting a talk page discussion about your edit that was reverted (per WP:BRD) to work towards a consensus version that fits within our policies. Either of those would have been better uses of everyone's time than you personally attacking an administrator and threatening to continue an edit war that you started. If you think mouthing off is the way that things get done here, I will be happy to note that in your block log. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Grow up. It has been a part of the Wikipedia page for years. Being an admin doesn't make you right. If you think that's personally attacking then you clearly spend to much time on the internet and haven't been outside in a while. Ethans1234 (talk) 14:05, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Sup

Hi Ivan thank you on help with request to deleted draft i was wondering do you maybe know how many votes should have to be deleted? And im sorry if i was rude to you mb. DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 21:23, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry. DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 21:55, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
@DarkHorseMayhem: no worries at all, we got where we needed to be. You did a good job with the MFD nomination, I just fixed one template for you. The discussion isn't a vote in the "majority wins" sense, but over the next few days various editors will leave comments saying that the page should be kept or deleted, and explaining why policies and guidelines support their argument. The discussion is open for a minimum of 7 days, and at the end an administrator who isn't involved (so not me) will read the comments and decide whether the "keep" or "delete" arguments are stronger, and then will say what the outcome is. There's no required number of votes, it's the strength of the arguments that matters, and in fact asking other editors to come and say that they support your argument is generally not allowed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:38, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Reza Goodary

Hello Ivanvector. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Reza Goodary, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G4: not substantially identical. Thank you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Damn you Ivanvector! This is rogue adminning at its worst. I'll have your ass for this! Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia copy

See the crime committed by this website. Because of that Wiki has to suffer, and we can't bring Draft:Ponniyin Selvan: II to the mainspace. Discuss further here please. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:11, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Yep, that's a reverse copyvio for sure. Apologies, I'll make it right. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:15, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Ponniyin Selvan: II

Hi. I'm going to ping Nthep as well, since you both have revdel'd the mainspace article about this draft. Currently, that same material has been added to the draft. Now, I'm unsure about the claims of it being a mirror, but I though you two might like to take a look at it. The draft, other than the copyvio issue, could be moved into mainspace, so we can stop having so many editor's time wasted. Onel5969 TT me 13:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@Onel5969: it's not a mirror per se, they ripped off our content and are claiming it as their own. They even copied our hatnotes verbatim. Wikipedia does not own this content, it belongs to the contributors, and if any contributor wants to take action against the infringing website we have an advice page, but I can't find it at the moment. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Ah, here it is. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:33, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Bravo. Thanks for your help.Onel5969 TT me 13:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting that one out. I was dreading a huge history merge. Nthep (talk) 20:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I am concerned as the closer of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ponniyin Selvan: II. I'm unsure if this draft ever received AFC approval before you moved this article to main space. Liz Read! Talk! 00:18, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
I understand your concern, Liz. For one, I've been told repeatedly that AFC is not mandatory, though I don't necessarily agree. With this draft in particular, the previous AFC declines seemed to be that the film had not established notability as it had not been released, but the film was released on 28 April, so that was no longer a concern. The AFD seemed to raise the same concern, as well as deferring to the draft that already existed. There was another submission to AFC yesterday which was declined because an article already existed, but that article was a copy-and-paste of the draft, and several other attempts to copy and paste the draft resulted in a seriously mangled history on both the article and the draft, which could not be history-merged in any sensible way. Considering that the film not being released was no longer an issue, and seeing as how both the corresponding first part of this movie series and the novel it's based on have articles, as well as a separate article just on the film series' production, it seemed to me to be a foregone conclusion that this draft would eventually be promoted by AFC, and promoting it now was a way to stop the copy-and-paste moves before the contribution history got even more mangled. I do realize it's a hack job but I thought it was the most appropriate course considering the circumstances, and I didn't mean for this to be a back-door overturn of your AFD close at all.
If you disagree, and/or if I've missed something, I would suggest starting a new AFD, only because the situation does seem to have changed significantly since the previous discussion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 02:36, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox legislative election on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Talk:YG Entertainment

Hello. The talk page in question has a history of receiving WP:NOTAFORUM violations. Can you make an edit notice saying that the talk page isn’t a venue for contacting YG Entertainment? Thank you in advance. Zoe Trent Fan🎤💍 23:23, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

This is just a follow-up to my query. I know that you have other things to do, but you have not created the edit notice. I know that there hasn’t been any inappropriate requests on the talk page for the past few days, but I want to be prepared for future ones. I apologize for being demanding, but I dislike it when I do not receive replies to messages I send. Zoe Trent Fan🎤💍 19:16, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
@Zoe Trent Fan: I have added an editnotice for the talk page. This is a weak solution, as editnotices don't display to anyone editing from a mobile browser or the Wikipedia app, but in my experience they may help somewhat. If you think changes should be made to the editnotice it would be best to use {{edit template-protected}} on the article's talk page (although it may complain about being used in the wrong namespace) as only administrators and template editors can modify editnotices. Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:31, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Verbosity

I think I got too used to Arbcom wordsmithing... and then I got started dealing with people in real life who find any wiggle room in anything I say! Courcelles (talk) 17:09, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Sup

Hi Ivan sorry to bother i would like to req deletion of drafts that i req to be undeleted but i no longer wish to edit them for now and neither does author of drafts (they are also stub anywaw):Draft:Tyrell Fortune, Draft:Rustam Kerimov ,Draft:Grant Neal,Draft:Gadzhi Rabadanov and Draft:James Gallagher (fighter) DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 18:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi DarkHorseMayhem. For Draft:Gadzhi Rabadanov, Draft:Grant Neal, Draft:Rustam Kerimov, and Draft:Tyrell Fortune, if HeinzMaster can also confirm here that they want to delete the drafts, then I can go ahead as WP:G7. For Draft:James Gallagher (fighter) I will not be able to speedy delete the page because it has a lot of edits from other users, so WP:G7 doesn't apply, but if nobody else edits it then it is eligible for WP:G13 deletion six months after the last edit, so it can eventually be deleted that way. Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
@HeinzMaster are you okay with that? DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
No, please just leave whatever is up the way it is. Most of those pages were not ever deleted or requested to be undeleted. HeinzMaster (talk) 20:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
I literally asked for them yes all of them to be undeleted you even send me a message why i did that DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 20:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Polyprenyl Immunostimulant Deletion Questions

Hi Ivanvector, I am relatively new to Wikipedia and would like some feedback as to why Draft:Polyprenyl Immunostimulant was deleted. The unambiguous copyright infringement is confusing to me. What violated copyright infringement? I really want this article to be successful if at all possible. Thank you! JLindsey48 (talk) 19:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@JLindsey48: large sections of the draft were an exact copy of this brochure. Wikipedia cannot publish text, images, or other materials that are duplicated from a copyrighted source. That is copyright infringement, and material that infringes on third-party copyrights must be deleted for legal reasons. You are welcome to write a new draft on the topic, but you cannot copy from any copyrighted source. For more information please see the copyright violation policy. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Is there any way I can get a copy of the draft to work on offline so it will be ready when I make another draft? JLindsey48 (talk) 16:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
@JLindsey48: normally yes, you can request copies of deleted pages from the deleting administrator or at WP:REFUND, but in this case we cannot redistribute copyright violating material for any reason, so I cannot provide a copy of this. Unfortunately you'll have to start from scratch. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:17, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ivanvector, Thank you for the detailed explanation. I will need more guidance from you to do the right thing. As I noted, I am an employee of VetImmune, a Sass & Sass, Inc subsidiary. The latter manufactures Polyprenyl Immunostimulant, a veterinary biologic regulated by the USDA. I aim to create a Wiki entry for the regulated medicine used in cats.
(1) The legal status of Polyprenyl Immunostimulant is similar to that of other regulated medicines published on Wiki, e.g., interferon, antibiotics, Clindamycin, etc.
(2) Polyprenyl Immunostimulant is listed on the USDA website (See page 79 [1]https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/vet_biologics/publications/currentprodcodebook.pdf) and in the Drugs Compendium (for animals; ([2]https://www.drugs.com/vet/polyprenyl-immunostimulant.html))
(3) I looked at the Wiki entries for drugs. They feature information from box inserts (circulars), which the US and other governments regulate.
Please advise on the steps necessary to add the information about the regulated medicinal product to Wiki. You may see that the article does not include any promotional content and is only intended to inform the public about the regulated product, its safety for cats, and its indications. JLindsey48 (talk) 15:59, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
It has been almost 10 days since I replied. I am just checking in again. JLindsey48 (talk) 17:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
@JLindsey48: - I don't think there are specific requirements for vetrinary medicine. If you're talking about human medicine, you'll probably want to familiarize yourself with WP:MEDRS. Also, if you're writing about a product that your company is linked to, you might want to check out Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.
Our core policy on wikipedia is WP:V, which basically says information should come from a reliable (and preferably independent/neutral) source. If you're trying to make an article that was solely based on a company's insert, that would likely fall afoul of WP:V. NickCT (talk) 18:43, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, Nick. I have already filled out a conflict of interest disclaimer. I have also added it to the article request list. I have yet to receive any response from that. I was not trying to write an article based just on the medication insert. I have many outside references and studies that have been done on Polyprenyl Immunostimulant. Do you have any suggestions on how to do this correctly? JLindsey48 (talk) 19:52, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello @JLindsey48. I would suggest that you start the article as a Draft, putting those independent references in place. Then, when you are ready to publish it, you can submit it to the Wikipedia:Articles for creation review process or request a review from experienced editors at the Wikipedia:Village pump or Wikipedia:Peer review. Diego (talk) 09:32, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, Diego! JLindsey48 (talk) 17:04, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
@JLindsey48: start with what your sources say, rewriting the important bits in your own words, being careful to avoid close paraphrasing. Make sure every claim you state in the article is supported by one of your sources. You'll also have to represent the topic fairly, so if there are well-known downsides that are touched on in the literature you'll want to include them. Avoid talking about pricing information – which medical editors had a big fight about years ago – and about talking up the product your company sells when discussing the treatment in general. You're allowed to mention something like "available in the US as [product name] manufactured by VetImmune" (or however the specifics of that go). Folly Mox (talk) 13:09, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, Folly Mox! JLindsey48 (talk) 17:04, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Many socks

Hey there, since you are familiar with this case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jha09/Archive would you mind taking a look at the edit history of Pandya Store? New accounts keep popping up to edit the page, such as TanyaMittal79, Advit Das 2010, Parmeet sheoknd, among IPs and others, to edit the page, and I'm pretty sure that like AayatS, they are all linked to one another. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:35, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Durham special counsel investigation on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:32, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
  • As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

  • Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

{{Social democracy}} and {{Social democracy sidebar}} templates

Hello @Ivanvector:! I want to know that you protect both if these templates, but the template protection is too restrictive per WP:TPROT, here's a quote from WP:TPROT that says:

A template-protected page can be edited only by administrators or users in the Template editor group. This protection level should be used almost exclusively on high-risk templates and modules.

It should not be used on less risky templates on the grounds that the template editor user right exists—the existence of the right should not result in more templates becoming uneditable for the general editing community. In borderline cases, extended confirmed protection or lower can be applied to high risk templates that the general editing community still needs to edit regularly.

— Template protection, Wikipedia:Protection policy

For both of these templates because each of these only have a few transclusions so please downgrade it to either extended-confirmed or semi-protection. Vitaium (talk) 23:57, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

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

Administrator changes

added Novem Linguae
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Musk–Zuckerberg rivalry

That page was most definitely not spam/promotion. Was it neutrally worded? No, hence my decision to decline the draft. But the topic is notable IMO, and if the tone of the page was reworded to be neutral and not favoring either side of the debate, I think it would have been acceptable. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 16:37, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I think you didn't see that this topic is already covered at Elon Musk vs. Mark Zuckerberg. The draft was an obvious promotional POV fork, made up almost entirely of peacock phrases like "creating an intriguing narrative of differing visions", "a captivating spectacle for tech enthusiasts", and in Wikipedia's voice described Musk as "a visionary entrepreneur ... renowned for his audacious goals and futuristic ambitions", and Zuckerberg as "a titan in the world of social media and digital communication" and "a figure of immense power". As the criterion says, it would most certainly "need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as an encyclopedia article", and if it was rewritten then it would duplicate the existing article. If you're sure that there's something in this draft that is worth preserving and would serve as useful additional information not already included neutrally in the mainspace article, I will happily restore the draft but I will immediately nominate it for deletion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:56, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Fantastic deletion. (I saw the draft and Taking Out The Trash's decline.)—Alalch E. 17:08, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Course of Freedom on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

ANI: can you help?

Hello!

I opened a discussion at ANI a little while ago and feel it's got away from everyone involved. Is there any chance you could take a quick look and try to re-focus things? It's completely fine if not, you just happen to be a recently active admin. A.D.Hope (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Anna Sorokin

We had bit of a collision there. I reverted to your length-of-protection, but did you really think it was a content dispute, meriting full protection? Looks like plain, old vandalism to me. Favonian (talk) 14:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Ha, we keep missing each other by a few seconds, I just responded on your talk page :) Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Roqui15

Hi! I took a look at the list of recently active admins and your name came up. Would you happen to have the time to take care of WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Roqui15, considering the user in question admitted to it? TompaDompa (talk) 15:19, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@TompaDompa: heh, I hate that list :) I would take a look if I wasn't due at the bank in a few minutes. I'll try to follow up later today if nobody else gets to it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Alright, thanks! I'll keep asking around in the meantime. TompaDompa (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Changed my mind, I hate trolls. But I guess I'll head to the bank now anyway. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:29, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Greg O'Connor

Thanks for the advice about Greg O'Connor. My proficiency in locating archived sources is limited to clicking the link for the archive in a citation. Is there another way? Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 16:25, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sundayclose: the way I do it is to copy the URL out of the citation source, and paste it into the lookup field at archive.org. You'll usually get a page showing you all the dates that they've taken a snapshot of the original page, although sometimes the snapshots have errors. I try to find a snapshot around the time of the access-date. It's pretty reliable for article text, but not so great for multimedia, and some sites just aren't archived. It's usually worth a shot, anyway, if a citation has a broken link. There's some more info at WP:LINKROT, especially the WP:DEADLINK section. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

The Challenge: USA (season 2)

I saw where you deleted this article. There is a season 2 of The Challenge:USA that will be debuting in September, and the cast was announced. What prompted the speedy deletion? Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:02, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: I was mass-deleting a number of drafts that the creator of this one made, because I checked enough of them to see a pattern of creating drafts on movies and shows that ranged from entirely speculative to completely made up. If you say that this one actually exists then I'll go ahead and restore it, but it would be helpful if you could add a source. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I will do that as soon as it's restored. Thank you so much! Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:06, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah I see what happened here, I seem to have been fooled by a redirect and an early page revision. I shouldn't have deleted this in the first place, and thanks for pointing out my error. It has been restored. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:07, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
When there was only one season, the original article was simply entitled The Challenge: USA. When a second season was confirmed, I renamed (ie. moved) that original article to The Challenge: USA (season 1). It's possible that someone else may have created a more general article (now called The Challenge: USA), plus a specific article for season 2. Either way, thank you for restoring it! Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:11, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I see where you moved it to "season 1". Someone else a few weeks after that recreated The Challenge: USA as an article about the series, and there are now that main article and the two seasons articles, The Challenge: USA (season 1) and The Challenge: USA (season 2). That all looks fine to me. What led me to it was a batch of G3 deletion requests that were all drafts about things like a double-digit sequel to the film Avatar which were all clearly made up, and all made by the same IP editor. I should have realized when I clicked on your article that I had been redirected to a mainspace article, but I was deleting too quickly, and that's entirely on me. I also got the request below about a draft that another editor had adopted and put quite a bit of work into which I also should have realized, and that led me to take a look through the other pages I deleted to see if there were any more that I shouldn't have, but all the rest seem to be okay. Always happy to reverse an obvious error I've made, anyway, although of course I prefer not to make those mistakes in the first place! Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft:The Voice (American season 25)

Good Day!

I have been notified that the draft for The Voice (American season 25) has been deleted, citing WP:G3. I would like to refute this, as a cursory search shows that the season is very much real, and from recollection, multiple reliable sources support the article. While it may be too early to move the draft to article space, deleting it would just rob the eventual article of detailed coverage that may not be reproduced when started later. EdrianJustine (talk) 22:06, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Happy to oblige, and my apologies. The draft has been restored. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. EdrianJustine (talk) 22:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Foster Cummings

Why would you remove prolifically documented allegations of corruption from his page? There are many newspaper articles corroborating these allegations which are supported by extensive documentation. He may not have been prosecuted for his financial crimes, but neither have many ruling tyrants of the world who repress their judiciaries - neither should he nor should other tyrants be above criticism on wikipedia. Websurfer868 (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free speech forum for the airing of grievances or the righting of perceived wrongs. Please see WP:RGW first of all, and then please join the discussion on the article's talk page. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:57, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
It is a fact that Foster Cummings uses his political influence to procure lucrative government contracts for his personal businesses, and while he is able to use his influence to evade prosecution, his misconduct has been documented by our 57 year old newspaper, The Trinidad Express, which I cited, among other national newspapers. Which do you take issue with, my source or the allegations? Websurfer868 (talk) 20:22, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
I am not going to respond about this here. See the discussion on the article's talk page. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:23, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023

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

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Shinobi Slime

Hi @Ivanvector. Your message to me in your edit feels quite bitey. Personally, I do not see any clear claim of significance. The article outlines her early life moving to Germany from Kenya, and then has some rather promotional-sounding wording about her "versatile skills" and "loyal following of fans who are drawn to her infectious energy and fierce spirit". Hmm, very encyclopediatic. To me this article clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:SINGER. Yours, Osarius 13:47, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for my tone, but the speedy tag had been removed in good faith by an editor who was not the creator, and a valid CSD tag removal should not be restored (per the policy). The claim of significance is this: "standard magazine Kenya named her as one of the top female artists to look out for in the year 2024". That is a credible claim of significance; it does not have to be a statement that demonstrates notability, it only has to assert significance. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:53, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:St. Joseph's Health Care London

Hello, Ivanvector. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "St. Joseph's Health Care London".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Liz. It's been on my mind to continue with this but haven't had time. I'll restore it myself when I have more time, if that's alright with you? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:09, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Deleted pages

Hello, Ivanvector,

You asked in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bayanni (2nd nomination) if there was a way to search for deleted pages and the only way I know is to use Special:Undelete. Of course, you have to have the name of the article of draft you are looking for or know some variations of it. But it is a resource that is available for editors to use. Liz Read! Talk! 20:38, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Kristin Harila

Hello! Please delete the Controversy section from the Kristin Harila page. Regards Szelma W (talk) 12:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Yumna Zaidi

yumna zaidi date of birth is incorrect her date of birth is 30th July 1992 but in Wikipedia it is 30th July 1989 which is incorrect 02ramya95 (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Can you please provide the source you're getting her date of birth from? Please see WP:RS for more info. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
As a child artist Year:2005/2006 Drama name: Mohabbat Ab Nai Hogi Channel:A TV Director:Amin Iqbal
When she was 8th class at that her age might be 13/14 years 02ramya95 (talk) 17:23, 22 August 2023 (UTC)


help request for Draft:Kristen Harris (actress)

Good morning from Campora San Giovanni, Calabria, I am writing to say hello and know how you are. In addition to this, to ask you for a small courtesy. Would you like to fix the page and make it a bit more encyclopaedic? I tried to create it, it seemed right that the actress too should have her "place in the sun", using an Italian expression. In any case, if I can do something for you, please ask, waiting to hear from you, I thank you in advance. Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 06:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Birth/Deaths and Thanks

Thanks for undoing that nonsense from Brucelee. I don't get why people lie about a policy just so they can vandalize an encyclopedia when it's so trivial to do something like copy the citation from a source article. 76.143.192.237 (talk) 12:50, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Switzerland on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

The oldest Canadian university page vandalized - care to look into it?

As a Canadian senior admin - would you mind taking a look at what's going on with the University of New Brunswick page? Someone who claims to be a freshman there has been making extensive edits (too many diffs to list) without discussing any of those in Talk first. Then after making those edits, they mass-labeled the article for "missing" citations. They were warned on their User Talk to stop, but continued nevertheless (while claiming everything they do a priori improves the page, see for example this diff for an edit removing an obviously notable alumnus from India because they "know" she is not notable, so perhaps there is racial motivation here as well). You would think freshmen would be a bit more respectful and be studying hard - w/o spare time/interest to ruin the page of the university they attand. (But this total lack of respect could also mean they are taking revenge on UNB for bad grades or getting kicked out.) This well-established article on Canada's oldest university has been rated B for quality years back, so I was hoping you would take interest in fixing this obvious vandalism without much ado. RetroTetra (talk) 22:31, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for rolling up your sleeves to straighten out the iPhone 15 mess! My intent was to review a single draft but then ran into one issue/concern after another which you were willing and able to rectify. S0091 (talk) 19:51, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

ACC 335500

I'm confused by your comment on the tool (link), does that mean (1) that IPBE would be inappropriate here, and (2) does this mean I should create, as there's not much point if they can't edit? — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:50, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Alternatively, if IPBE can't be granted here, should we not create the account, since the editor wouldn't be able to edit due to the global lock? SkyWarrior 02:44, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
@Mdaniels5757 and SkyWarrior: sorry for leaving a vague comment. I've responded at ACC. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:59, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I've created the account, though IPBE would still need to be granted (local IPBE should be enough in this case). SkyWarrior 15:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Ah, I should've realized an admin would need to do that. I have granted the new account IPBE for 6 months. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:09, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Anytime...

I see someone else point out that RfA is a vote unless you contort the English language in ungodly ways it warms my soul. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:19, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

A quick question out of an abundance of caution

…before I use rollback in such a case for the first time.

Just wanted to doubly confirm that the accounts (and potentially IPs?) at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Najaf ali bhayo are socks that can be BANREVERTED.

I know this is probably a stupid thing to need confirmation for but I really don’t want my first use of rollback in a banreverting scenario to end up being a mistake/mess that needs even more cleanup lol. So I thought I’d check first out of abundance of caution/to be better safe than sorry.

All the best, user:A smart kittenmeow 16:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@A smart kitten: the presumption is that you can revert unless someone else has objected, and presuming that by reverting you're not restoring anything inappropriate (like BLP or copyright violations). You should indicate in your edit summary that you're reverting an editor violating their block (such as by writing "rv per WP:BANREVERT"), and if anyone reverts your revert it means they are taking responsibility for the content, and you cannot use the same rationale to revert again (no edit warring). I say go ahead - I was going to do it myself but my afternoon is getting busy. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Understood, thank you for the response. All the best, user:A smart kittenmeow 16:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Curious case of Wrythemann

I came across this new user while checking different edits by editors on article Chandrayaan-3. This New editor, created account on 5 September 2023 but surprisingly has all knowledge and information of certain platforms on Wikipedia and boasts with confidence. This user doesn't seem like a new user at all but might be either one of the blocked accounts or maybe a sockpuppet.

  • This user stepped right into discussion on Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics as seen here [3].
  • The way this new editor is familiar with linking a word or sentence with http link on Wikipedia [4], is something a new user doesn't get familiar with right away.
  • Two days later after creating account, new user also took park in discussion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stonetoss (2nd nomination) as seen here [5].
  • On 15 September 2023, user created new article [6].
  • More or less, new users can probably learn to create cite templates from existing ones on the article but to simply add reference using a ref name="_" is not what a new user can implement right away as seen here [7].
  • Further, new user also requests for copyediting an article.[8].
  • More, the new user apparently finds an old discussion which started on July 30, 2023, before the new user account was created, and decides to add his input [9].
  • Continued with Input on Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates as seen here [10].
  • New user also knows how to request move of an article as seen here [11].
  • User also deletes talk page, an action familiar with some other suspected users and is also well informed on how to archive talk page within few days of creating an account [12].
  • Continuing on, this User is also familiar with sending barnstar [13].

This new account screams that this user is not new but either a sock of former blocked account or maybe a sock of an existing account. I have my suspicions on three accounts but do not want to mention any name without much evidence but I think its best for administrators or checkusers to run the investigation. 192.189.187.112 (talk) 17:05, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Taurus Raging Bull

Did you meant to protect this article under WP:BLP? And why did you opt for a partial undeletion as opposed to revision deletion? Ping me when you reply please. Deauthorized. (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Deauthorized: I was responding to a request for protection at WP:RFPP, and found a number of IP editors repeatedly and rapidly re-adding an edit which was a very serious BLP violation. These edits necessitated revision deletion per WP:RD2, but as I explained at RFPP afterwards that would have required individually revdeleting around 280 non-consecutive edits, which would have taken a very long time during which the content would have remained visible. So I deleted the page and restored it without those revisions instead. Now that I'm thinking more about it I will probably go back and figure out a way to revdelete those revisions and restore the history without them being visible in the meantime, otherwise if the page is deleted and restored later those revisions might become visible again. I hope that answers your question. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:38, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
That does make more sense. Thanks for clearing that up. Deauthorized. (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Village pump (WMF) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:32, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ivanvector/Archive_17&oldid=1181942377"