User talk:ferret

Pjesnik21 sock?

Hi Ferret. I think we might have another Pjesnik21 sock with Sk53121. Making Croatian chart updates, and editing Balkan topics like Vjekoslava Huljić, Danijela Martinović, Nina Badrić and Breskvica, which Pjesnik21 and/or their socks (Jovarca1000000 and Drolq) have all made similar contributions to. Ss112 19:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ponyo could you take a look at this one? I see a block you placed that I think is for a different master. What I know of Pjesnik21, this is right ISP but wrong devices. Drolq was the last sock I blocked. Topic overlap, but some other behaviors are different. -- ferret (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

My block is for a different master with a completely different locus of interest.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:17, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Ponyo. @Ss112 right now, I am leaning towards this not being Pjesnik21. Drolq was active at the same time as this new user, and although some topics overlap, there are other behavior clues that differ. -- ferret (talk) 21:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Ferret, I think Pjesnik21 might have used 5.133.158.23 today and have been on that range previously, if the Balkan topics and Charli XCX edits are anything to go by. Could you perhaps check this is them? Not asking for confirmation obviously. If that isn't them, then 95.156.145.50/16 absolutely is. They've been on that range since this edit where they reverted me. This overlinking is classic Pjesnik21. Ss112 10:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ss112 Blocked on behavioral evidence. That is the /16 from before. -- ferret (talk) 13:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Disruptive editing - help

Good Evening, I added added reliable sources/ references to an article, but another editor reverted my edits without a specific reason. What can I do? Mary.Perry.Panda (talk) 02:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Boneless Pizza! you need to respond to editors who ask you why you did a revert. This revert is not well explained. "Unreliable sources" was your edit note, but these are official primary sources and that's not really an adequate explanation to @Mary.Perry.Panda on why it isn't appropriate. Mary, please give a read to WP:PRIMARY. In this case, because the sources are Capcom themselves, we have to use them with care. Claims of a character or franchise being the most popular or well received, coming from the publisher itself, is promotional in nature. We need secondary sources for this kind of content. -- ferret (talk) 02:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I already explained to my last reversion + that article literally GA, not a dumping ground of listicles. We shouldn't definitely cite primary sources at reception section. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 04:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok, so the Nintendo Life is reliable, but it is still isn't worth to add it at lead, especially with a bias tone "Chris Redfield is very popular among Resident Evil fans and one of their highest ranked characters" for a single source, so it should be omitted.

🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 04:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I disagree. It is a fan-survey. and therefore reliable Mary.Perry.Panda (talk) 04:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I already told you Nintendo Life is the only reliable source right there per WP:VG/RS , if you disagree then go to WP:VG talk page. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 04:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Nintendo isn't the only source Mary.Perry.Panda (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Reading comprehension plsss. Ferret the user still added a lowquality sources to the page lead and goes to other pages to remove content. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 05:01, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

is Kotaku a lowquality source? Mary.Perry.Panda (talk) 05:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

According to The six good article criteria, a good article should be neutral and without editorial bias. The "reception" section (Chris Redfield) is based on lowquality sources (Kotaku) and positive reviews from critics are not mentioned/ included. Mary.Perry.Panda (talk) 05:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

help

Good Evening, I added reliable sources/ references to an article, but another editor keeps reverting my edits. According to The six good article criteria, a good article should be neutral and without editorial bias. The "reception" section (Chris Redfield) is based on lowquality sources (Kotaku) and positive reviews from critics are not mentioned/ included. I tried to present viewpoints fairly, but the other user reverted my edits. What else can I do? Mary.Perry.Panda (talk) 02:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC) Mary.Perry.Panda (talk) 05:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mary.Perry.Panda You'll need to discuss this on the article's talk page and establish a consensus before making further edits to this page. Unfortunately, you decided to push forward with editing instead of discussing things to a conclusion, which has resulted in an edit war block against that article. On top of that, I see you started removing unquestionably reliable and accepted sources as part of the edit war. The article's talk page is where you need to be, not on various user talk pages shopping for a different response. If you continue this when your partial block expires, its likely that a harsher block will be imposed. There is no rush. Slow down and listen to experienced editors. -- ferret (talk) 12:32, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

New user and WP:ARBECR

I came across Samesexmerriage (talk about inflammatory usernames) because one of their articles, Martin Kohlmann, was tagged as WP:G10. I declined the g10 because it was sourced, but, even though the user, whose account was created on May 5, has only 98 edits, they were creating (many) pages that involve ARBPIA (Kohlmann is not one of them). I've been thinking about deleting them per ARBECR, but I'm a bit hesitant to do that, mainly because I don't really get involved in arbitration enforcement anymore (too complicated and often too much red tape). Anyway, I think the user's behavior warrants a check. Please let me know if you disagree. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@Bbb23 Friedjof. -- ferret (talk) 01:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

There's a concise response! I'm not familiar with that case. Anyway, made it much easier to delete all their creations. Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 04:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@Bbb23 Lol it took a bit for me to research and decide to check, so then I was ready to go watch TV before bed :P -- ferret (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Regarding edits on Pokémon GO

Hey, noticed you reverted one of my edits in the COVID-19 section of the article. Considering that said section of the article hasn’t been updated since 2021 - and contains extra, irrelevant information, I think the removal of the sources is necessary to prevent citation overkill. TwitchingMovie (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@TwitchingMovie You removed sourced information without explaining why beyond a vague "out of date". Historical events don't get removed because time has passed. You'll need to use the article's talk page to better explain why you believe those details should be removed, despite being covered by reliable secondary sources. -- ferret (talk) 19:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Related to the categories for video games by languages.

Hi. I noticed that you recently reverted my two edits where I added "English-language-only video games" to Helltaker and Pizza Tower. I am not 100% sure what was the meaning of this, but it doesn't really matter now since have nominated main category and subcategories of Video games by language for deletion. These categories are not too defining (I supposed) and more importantly, large numbers of individual titles would alternatively already be located within the subcategories of Region-exclusive video games, hence the fact "Japanese-only-language video games" contains only a single article, nevertheless nearly all titles in Japanese only would be located at "Japan-exlcusive video games". QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@QuantumFoam66 Read WP:CATDEF. The short version though: Categories should be things that are defining traits that a given subject is known for and frequently commented on by reliable sources. Neither game has sourcing that explicitly calls out that they are "english language only" games. -- ferret (talk) 02:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Most other articles located in this category don't mention the fact they're only in English once anyway. (does it really count if reliable sources do however not in the article itself?)

Oh, and please tell me if you really agree with my CfD nominations. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@QuantumFoam66 I simply reverted the category being added on two articles that happen to be on my watchlist. I did not evaluate the rest of the category. Yes, I pretty much believe these should be deleted. -- ferret (talk) 13:05, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Possible sock/disruptive user

Hello, there is a user who I think is a sock puppet. The user in question is "BKeira930". BKeira930 is obsessed with editing composition sections in music articles. Their edits usually consist of them adding original or unreliable information. Administrators typically revert their edits, yet BKeira930 always reverts them back, which causes a disruption. Also, nearly each month BKeira930 is warned by administrators about their actions and they finally got blocked. In the midst of their blocking several accounts popped up such as "Tidalwave417" and "Yogartcups". I think user "BKeira930" is behind those two accounts. OkIGetIt20 (talk) 18:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@OkIGetIt20 I don't think there is enough evidence to check here, sorry. There's some difference between the two accounts and BKeira930 without even checking, and they registered after BKeira930's block had already expired they had returned to editing. Other than editing that one article, there isn't enough to go on. -- ferret (talk) 22:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Alucard edit war

Sorry for bothering but I need to ask a favor. The article Alucard (Castlevania) has had an edit war in regards to the character's sexuality in the Netflix series. People discussed it in the talk page but it has become inactive, leading to removal of a category. I don't want to block the two users especially since the one who added it has good faith in my view and that he kept properly improving most Castlevania's articles in the past weeks. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 01:11, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tintor2 Indefinitely partial blocked from the Alucard article. I almost blocked them outright, as their entire career is on the removing and erasure of LGBTQ characterizations in media. -- ferret (talk) 01:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

thanks Tintor2 (talk) 01:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Help

Hello sir. The user Boneless Pizza! was keep using my name and my quotes as part of his user page. I warned him several times but he keep ignoring me. Although he stopped when he got an email.[1] Regardless, I won't tolerate this behavior. I have some self-respect too, if he wanted to use me on his user page then he should've talked to me and ask for permission. Kazama16 (talk) 10:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

"Self-respect" really? You made a personal attack three times at Wikimedia Common and got blocked for three days [2] and after that you taunted me at my talk page [3] because you're so pissed.  🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 10:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Don't change the topic to Wikimedia Commons. This discussion is currently being discussed on Wikipedia and has nothing to do with your comment. But if you still want to talk about it then alright this is the first personal attack I made. [4] and then I apologized for it, saying "I'm really sorry 😔" because I felt guilty and sorry for you, and wanted to end the argument. [5] but you still proceeded to put a clown emoji on me even after I apologized to you. [6] and that's why I got angry. After all this Oscar winning story. You decided to use my Wikimedia Commons quote on your user page without my permission. [7] Well done that's all I want to say about you. You have a genius mind so please use it correctly and be merciful. Kazama16 (talk) 11:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

@Boneless Pizza! If someone ask you not to mention or discuss them on your talk page, you generally should honor that. This is the type of conflict that can lead to interaction bans, and given your shared editing interests, that would be quite a burden for both of you.

@Kazama16 If I ever see anything like that talk page post to Commons, or a snarky post about grammar that was clearly an attack, on English Wikipedia again, you can expect an indefinite block. Shape up. We're not interested in this kind of behavior. I also suggest you fix your understanding of Youtube and license laundering in regards to Commons. It seems you were outright mistaken entirely, but CC-BY claims on YouTube require a critical eye to ensure the person claiming it is actually the copyright holder with authorization to make a release, and even then, they are still deleted in some cases when its beyond any doubt that a huge megacorporation would free license their main copyrights. -- ferret (talk) 14:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)