This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
You had asked me last month about user Radiant Fellow [1]. At the time, I had opinions from his history but tried to see things as "half full". That was probably the wrong answer. His pattern of editing is trending NOTHERE (specifically "pattern of disruptive behavior" and "no interest in working collaboratively") and seems to be getting worse. He only edits a couple of specific articles in an SPA manner and his history indicates OWN by constantly re-editing to his preferred version. He does this "stealthily" - burying it in the middle of small changes making it difficult to notice. Most recently, he was edit warring with Alaska4Me2 on List of The Chosen characters. He does not participate in discussion, which causes conflict with the other editor (see the section I collapsed as offtopic). I tried to intervene, and he seems to have capitulated this time, but even though this instance has stopped, I fully expect a recurrence of the same pattern later.
On a related note, I tried my best to point Alaska4Me2 to a more appropriate venue for discussions of user behavior and was once again accused of "lecturing". I just don't know whether to blow that off or what. There is no discussion with her that doesn't end up degenerating into that kind of result. I have tried to limit interaction as much as possible to avoid it. Maybe I just need a thicker skin?
I hate to bug you with this, but it's just been a frustrating day for me... If you don't have time or inclination to look at it, I understand. TIA. ButlerBlog (talk) 18:48, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@Butlerblog I will but it’s evening here and my wife and I are watching tv. Soitwil probably be 14 hours or so. Doug Wellertalk 19:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
No worries! Enjoy! (maybe I will do the same) ButlerBlog (talk) 19:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I hope you're doing well after today, Doug. Would you be able to look at this additional activity from User:Radiant Fellow with regards to List of The Chosen characters that occurred after our previous messages? If you're not feeling up to it, just say so, and I'll understand.
He reverted all of Alaska4Me2's edits again, to which she objected. He marked all of these as "minor".
I reverted those, with an edit summary asking talk page discussion and posted a notice to his talk page about not marking edits as minor, especially reverts.
He responded by blanking his talk page with the summary "understood and resolved"[2] and immediately reapplied all of his edits to the list article.[3]
I reverted back to status quo ante, noted this in the edit summary and again asked him to discuss it with Alaska4Me2 on the article talk page to get consensus, also posting a notice on his talk page.
He blanked the page again with the edit summary "The consensus is given"[4] and then reapplied his edits with the summary "As far as I understand, it corresponds with everything given"[5] - whatever that means.
I am not reverting back to status quo ante again, not just for 3RR reasons, but because it's going nowhere. I think at this point, he's WP:NOTHERE - not just with disruptive editing but with a clear battleground/ownership mentality. I also have to call into question his use of marking all of these reverts as "minor". I'm willing to AGF on that and say it's possible he didn't know, but combined with all of the rest, it could be construed as gaming behavior. Am I off base here? ButlerBlog (talk) 02:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
@Butlerblog Good day. I'd like to apologize for my supposed attitude. I'll explain everything I did and give the details of the reasons for the revisions. I don't want any conflict and I'll address this with the other user. Thanks. Radiant Fellow (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Doug - I posted this last night after being gone all day. After I quit for the night, I thought better of it based on your health, and so I just moved it to an ANI discussion. If you're up to looking at it, great - but if not, I've moved it accordingly with apologies. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:16, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
@Butlerblog I’ll try. Slept well last night bit although it’s only 1:30 pm here struggling to keep awake. Not feeling at all well bit it’s what I expected and hopefully I’ll still get my treadmill work in. Doug Wellertalk 13:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Hope you're back to feeling better. The ANI report on this did not get an admin response (other than yours) and ended up archived. Should I re-post? Thoughts? ButlerBlog (talk) 13:38, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Butlerblog I think you can unarchive it. Not sure though. Doug Wellertalk 13:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I wondered about that - I'll look into it. Thanks! ButlerBlog (talk) 14:18, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Myth
Hey Doug, I noticed you left a message on my talk page. You said that my comment didn't seem very civil, so sorry if it came across that way, but I am simply wondering if Wikipedia is supposed to offer a neutral stance why can't they simply change flood myth to religious belief to reflect the fact that some people believe it and some people don't. While you might cite scientific concerns, I would just like to say that we can never prove whether not there actually is a God, and there is much evidence for and against the flood, so we should be sticking to Wikipedia's neutral view policy and change it to religious belief. Savagecrybaby (talk) 21:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) It seems you may be interpreting the use of the word "myth" in the sense of "imaginary", which of course is one definition of the term (see a dictionary for the multiple definitions of "myth"). When one refers to "myth" in an academic sense (which would be the case here, in an encyclopedia), it means "a traditional story". It means exactly what you defined - "some people believe it and some people don't" - something that may or may not be true, depending on who hears it. There are several flood myths, and that's the generally accepted academic term for it. It's the absolute most neutral way to define it. ButlerBlog (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I've wanted to fix up that article for a long time, having learned about the concept from a fun but very stupid adventure game that was one of the formative influences on my interest in ancient Egypt (something I'm writing more about here). I know that the Giza fringe theories of the '90s were one of your major adversaries in your early days as an online skeptic, so after I read about your prognosis—well, that's what motivated me to take care of it now, sort of as a tribute to you and your long, tireless efforts to combat misinformation. A. Parrot (talk) 16:09, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
@A. Parrot That is really kind. Did we meet on Usenet? Doug Wellertalk 16:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
No, I was a kid back then! :D
We only met on Wikipedia when I was a newbie—2008 or so—but afterwards, somehow or other, I learned a little about your pre-WP career, maybe initially by coming across old pages on the Hall of Maat site. A. Parrot (talk) 16:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
@A. Parrot I forgot to say how interesting that page is. I didn't know that so many games were based on fringe theories. But then I haven't looked at adventure games for decades. Doug Wellertalk 13:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Glad to hear you enjoyed it. It's even more an odd niche interest than writing about Egyptian religion for Wikipedia—those particular adventure games weren't even played by that many people, so probably nobody else is going around analyzing them for Egyptological accuracy. My next blog entry is going to be about the genealogy of the ideas that went into the Orion correlation/Sphinx erosion/Hall of Records convergence in the '90s, but it's taking a while, because the topic is pretty sprawling. A. Parrot (talk) 14:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Harvici
Hey Doug , It may be early to ask you, but I can remove the block since I did a good job on Draft:December 2023 Libya Migrant Boat Disaster, and I am promising not to revert edits until I get an ECP from WP. PERM.Thanks. Harvici (talk) 10:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
@Harvici There's no rush. You'll benefit from working on a few more projects with User:Toddy1. I'm sure they will let you know, maybe me, when you are ready. Doug Wellertalk 13:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
A permanent block for Radiant Fellow seems over the top harsh to me, especially with no previous blocks. Why not a topic ban with a strong warning that if he violates the ban, then there will be an indefinite block? What I think will now happen as a result of the permanent block is he will create a sock account or evade with a non-account. It could all end up worse than what's been happening with this guy since he created his current account. His edits weren't horrible, or even bad. What was bad is him believing he could continue to edit war and own articles. That was the result of him being allowed to do it over and over again in spite of other editors complaining. The reality is where he got to was the fault of more experienced editors turning a blind eye. Why not try to teach instead of punishing in such a drastic manner? As it is with the permanent block, and because human nature is what it is, with this removal and exile, he's now being set up for failure. If he'd been topic banned, then the teaching/learning would start and he could reshape his perspective as well as his mindset about editing. Create a reason in him to start hating and the anger will turn into more of a reason to game us and become vengeful in action. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 17:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2 If you read the blocking policy, then it would explain that administrators don't block users as punishment; it's only to prevent any damage or harm from being done to Wikipedia. Even if the user creates a sock account, the site has a lot of CheckUsers who can detect any sock and block them indefinitely. Speaking of which, he is not blocked permanently, he is blocked indefinitely. Indefinite only means that the user is blocked for an unknown duration of time. This isn't to annoy you or anything, it's just a heads up. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 17:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I understand the concept of blocking and that it's not to be punishment. At the same time, administrators are human and I think at times they forget the "why". Also at the same time, because editors are as equally human as administrators, when back into a corner or even rejected and banished from something they like/love/enjoy without being given a chance to show they can turn things around, they make rash decisions based on the emotion they feel from the banishment AND the love/enjoyment of what they were doing before the removal from it.
Attempts at prevention should come in the form of teaching, educating, and grace. If THAT is not taken seriously and the grace provided is abused, THEN banish, exile, remove access. Because no warning of indefinite blocking was provided before it occurred, punishment is what this has turned into and what will be perceived. Adults don't respond well to being punished in such a permanent manner without, what seems to be, a reasonable explanation. Again, I think this will turn into more of a problem because of the harsh suddenness and no warning of it coming. So yes, punishment is what the block is now, regardless of what policy states it's supposed to be and not be. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 18:22, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Again - "indef" does not mean "permanent" - it just means that it has to be manually lifted, as opposed to automatic expiration. Any blocked user has the opportunity to make their case in a request to be unblocked. There is also a more formal process including the "standard offer". There's always a pathway forward for those that want one. An indef puts a stop to any further action until the editor makes their case for being unblocked. ButlerBlog (talk) 18:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Whatever. HE is going to see it as permanent. And, in reality, it IS permanent. How many indefinite blocks imposed by a long time administrator have you seen overturned? I haven't been here long enough, or paid attention enough, to give any kind of experience-based guesstimation, but I'm going to wager it happens very, very rarely. Even if he does make a case for himself, I don't forsee the block being reduced or removed altogether. Considering how the editor was allowed to continue violating policy on edit warring and ownership for so long, I can't support the indefinite block. It's equivalent to a recent, quick application of a full body cast on a laceration that has been getting worse for a long time because of neglect. It's overkill, it's unfair and will likely cause more problems than the edit warring and ownership ever did. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 18:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2 You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn’t match my experience at all. A convincing argument might even convince me to unblock, probably with some conditions though which I hope they will suggest. Yes, it might not be removed altogether. Are you arguing that I’ve blocked a good, constructive editor? Doug Wellertalk 19:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2 Just for clarification, if you looked at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Long term battleground pattern of NOTHERE, you would notice that this user made 76% of their edits in WP mainspace, and not only that, but this user reverted in extremely rapid amounts. Finally, he also participated in incivility by adding demeaning edit summaries, and since he also reverted edits rapidly, this is considered edit warring. Because of this user also failing to properly respond to other users on the talk page, they were indefinitely blocked. In general, when an editor persistently makes disruptive edits, an administrator is forced to place a block on them. Again, as I mentioned above, administrators generally only block accounts to prevent them from causing any damage. On some circumstances, administrators are generally hesitant to place blocks, but since this user refused to heed any warnings from their reverts, they were indefinitely blocked. In addition, User:Butlerblog HAD warned him on his talk page, but the user decided to blank it. Since the user had been considered to make long-term disruptive edits, he was blocked. I know this might seem like punishment, but there was nothing Doug could do since the user had the WP:IDHT attitude. I can still agree with your opinion, but the part where you explained that he was blocked as punishment doesn't seem right. Also, when a block is imposed, the user can't edit anywhere except for his talk page. Again, I bring this up since even if he creates a sockpuppet account, there are CheckUsers who can stop this behavior from happening. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2 I literally just agreed to an unblock for some else I blocked indefinitely because they recognised their problems and showed what they would do moving forward to become a better editor. I’ve also told Radiant Fellow I could entertain an unblock with conditions. How about you go advise them on what they should do to get the indefinite block modified? Doug Wellertalk 19:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2: In bringing up this issue on my talk page, you stated I think at this point it's pretty clear he doesn't have the best interest of the article or Wikipedia in mind. If he doesn't have the best interest of Wikipedia in mind, then he's WP:NOTHERE, which generally is going to result in an indef. Doug's been at this a very long time - I trust his judgement on it. ButlerBlog (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2 Even I agree. Before I even STARTED Wikipedia, I had seen this guy before. He knows what he's doing, and he has over 257,000 edits under his belt. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 19:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2 Huh? You complain about this editor saying that you “ think at this point it's pretty clear he doesn't have the best interest of the article or Wikipedia in mind. " and complain when I do something? Doug Wellertalk 19:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) In a lot of cases I know an indefinite block can feel like it is permanent so I understand what A4M2 is saying, however, I've known Doug on wiki for some years now and he has never been unreasonable. If he says Radiant Fellow can be unblocked provided there is communication that provides a convincing argument for unblock by RF and there are some conditions that are agreeable then that is what he means and it is not permanent but is contingent on those criteria being met. I think at the very least RF needs some guidance and they should avoid the topic where their disruption has caused the most damage.--ARoseWolf 21:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
@ARoseWolf Considering nothing has happened to this editor previously, even after or along with several warnings, guidance and a topic ban is exactly what should have happened. THIS time. If it continued after someone was kind enough to make the effort to "help" him when a topic ban was imposed, THEN the indefinite block would have been the right, appropriate course. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 23:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Yes Doug, I did complain with those words. I expressed my opinion then and I'm allowed to change that opinion. Especially when I see an action taken that isn't equal to the no punishment rule and nothing has been done to help steer him the right direction. If anyone had done what you did with an adult employee or a child in the home, someone would be called on the carpet at that job, that parent would have just inflicted a traumatic scar on the child. Your action was over the top inappropriate in my opinion. It could have been done in a way that taught the offending editor something valuable and, if he had an opportunity to turn it around based on a "lesser sentence", everyone would have benefitted. As it is, your choice to indefinitely block just stirred an already bubbling and overflowing cauldron of icky stuff. Mock me if you feel you must, but I know I'm not wrong that there was a better, softer solution that would have made a much better point to him. Unless something proves me entirely wrong, I'm going to stick with where I'm at on your decision. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Just wondering if you read the notices, such as the ones that were posted warning the user - the part where it says "you may be blocked from editing". The user was duly warned multiple times of that as a possible outcome (including from you [6]). The fact that so many other editors view this completely differently than you should give you pause to consider where the disconnect is. I'm not suggesting that you're not entitled to your opinion - you most certainly are. But you should take some time to reflect on what you might be missing here. ButlerBlog (talk) 21:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I saw them. And looking back, nothing was done for more than a year to help this guy truly get a clue. To take teachable moments and turn them into something that might create for him a different set of behaviors and desire to choose the right rather than the wrong. As I said to you elsewhere, the editor in question was given silent permission to continue making bad choices by everyone's non-action in-between notices. I think to many, "You may be blocked from editing" usually means 'temporarily', like what happens when one is edit warring. THAT should have happened a LONG time ago. "So many editors"? I don't see so many truly agreeing with the block, just that they are on Doug's side. I don't need to pause or reflect about anything. You have been trying hard to get me to subscribe to the Wikipedia Group Think and Hive Mind Tribe, but I don't need to do that to abide by the rules and edit collaboratively. There's nothing I'm missing other than why you seem to have a continuous need to imply my cognitive abilities regarding Wikipedia "culture" are substandard and my unwillingness to be part of the club is some sort of defect in thinking. With that, I'm hopeful we're done now. Can't say that being repeatedly railed at for having a difference in perspective, opinion, and behavior management style is giving me a very good taste in my mouth. Perhaps you should consider (and accept) that I just have a different palate than you and a few others choose to have, Butlerblog. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 22:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I think I got your message the first time. All you are doing now is showing lack of good faith at best. Doug Wellertalk 09:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alaska4Me2 In fact they've responded politely. I've made some suggestions, eg a partial block from 2 articles but not their talk pages. A topic ban wouldn't give them the chance to show they can collaborate. Doug Wellertalk 14:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
@Doug Weller Time will tell. Hopefully they will find other articles and article topics to work on which will better show they can collaborate and do it outside their usual SPA bubble. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 20:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
I would like to say I support Doug's block and I support Doug. I also support the editor receiving the ability to edit again provided they acknowledge their errors, accept the guidance others are giving them and the restrictions that may be placed on them until they can show the community they can edit without causing disruptions. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but everyone is not entitled to edit however they want. Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse nor does it entitle one to special privileges.
If any new or experienced editor believes that "You may be blocked from editing" means 'temporarily' then you do that at your own risk. I have always assumed it to mean that you may be blocked from editing for an undeterminable amount of time. In this world we are in control of very little and when we violate the rules we potentially remove that portion we control and place it in the hands of admins and the community.
I saw good points in what A4M2 has stated but I do not think Doug acted inappropriately. I do not portend to know what anyone should or should not take from this discussion and will leave that up to your better judgements. --ARoseWolf 14:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 24
Hello everyone, and welcome to the 24th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter, covering all our favorite new and updated user scripts since 24 December 2021. Uh-huh, we're finally covering the good ones among the rest! Aren't you excited? Remember to include a link in double brackets to the script's .js page when you install the script, so that we can see who uses the script in WhatLinksHere! The ScriptInstaller gadget automatically does this. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!
Featured script
Making user scripts load faster by SD0001 is this month's featured script, which caches userscripts every day to eliminate the overhead caused by force-downloading the newest version of scripts every time you open a Wikipedia page. Despite being released in April 2021, our best script scouters have failed to locate it due to its omission from the US of L. For security reasons, the script only supports loading JavaScript pages.
Newly maintained scripts
After earthly attempts at improving the original have failed...
Ahecht has created a fork of SiBr4/TemplateSearch, which adds the "TP:" shortcut for "Template:" in the search box, and updated it to be compatible with Vector 2022.
AquilaFasciata/goToTopFast is a much faster fork of the classic goToTop script that also adds compatibility for Minerva and Vector 2022.
Without caching. Each script takes 400–500ms. A particularly large script takes 1.11 s! Internet download speed is 50 Mbps.With caching enabled. Each script takes just 1-2 ms to load.
Improve a script
Unfortunately, this section has remained nearly identical. Help us out here!
To a lesser extent, the same goes for PrimeHunter/Search sort. I wish someone would integrate the sorts into the sort menu instead of adding 11 portlet links.
Dragoniez/SuppressEnterInForm stops you from accidentally submitting anything due to pressing enter while in the smaller box, and works on almost anything... except the InputBox element itself, used in subscription lists and the Signpost Crossword! Oh, the humanity!
Doǵu/Adiutor(pictured) provides a nice, integrated interface to do some twinkley tasks such as copyvio detection, CSD tagging, and viewing the most recent diff.
Eejit43 has quite the aesthetically pleasing scripts, all made in TypeScript.
/afcrc-helper is a replacement for the unmaintained Enterprisey/AFCRHS and processes Redirects for Creation and Categories for Creation requests.
/ajax-undo stops the "undo" button from taking you to another page while providing a text box to provide a reason for the revert.
/redirect-helper(pictured) adds a much better interface for editing and redirects, including categorization, for which valid categories are dictated by /redirect-helper.json.
/rmtr-helper helps process technical requested moves without being able to actually move them.
Guycn2/UserInfoPopup(pictured) adds a flyout after the watchlist star on userspace pages that displays the common information you might use about a user.
Jeeputer/editCounter, under userspace, adds a portlet link to count your edits by namespace, put them in a table, and put that table in a hardcoded subpage, all in the background.
Hilst/Scripts/sectionLinks converts all section links to use the § sign, which are known to be preferred over the ugly # by 99% of the devils I've met.
PrimeHunter/Category source.js adds portlet links to tell you where a category for an article comes from and supports those from template transclusions.
Sophivorus's MiniEdit adds some nice, li'l buttons next to paragraphs to edit their wikitext with a minimal interface.
Edit-listings
Dragoniez/ToollinkTweaks adds more and customizable links next to users in page history, logs, watchlist, recent changes, etc.
Firefly/more-block-info optimizes the display of rangeblocks in contribution pages. Doesn't work outside the English locale of any wiki, unfortunately.
NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh/AjaxLoader makes paging links (e.g. older 50, 500, newest) load without refreshing and makes you realize how slow your internet actually is.
Appearance-ricing
Ahecht/RedirectID adds the redirect target to all redirects. For all the WP:NAVPOPS haters. (Do these exist?)
Dragoniez/MarkBLockedGlobal: Remember the "strike blocked usernames" gadget? Now you can use a red, dotted line to highlight rangeblocks and global locks!
Jonesey/common(pictured) has some styles to overhaul your Vector 2022 experience. It reduces padding everywhere, and makes the top bar animation faster.
Aaron Liu/V22 is a fork that narrows the sidebars instead of upheaving them, reverts the January 2024 dropdown changes, and restores the old page-link color for links that don't go outside the current wiki.
Nardog: SmartDiff is a spiritual successor to Enterprisey/fancy-diffs. It makes the page title part of links in diffs clickable, along with template and parser function calls. Unnamed parameters can be configured per template to also be linked. All links are styled based on the normal CSS classes of rendered links.
For the paranoid: Rublov/anonymize replaces your username at the top of the screen with the generic "User page" text. Remember, it is your duty to persuade everyone that editing is an honor.
/AjaxBlock provides a dialog box for easy input of reasons while blocking users.
/Selective Rollback(pictured) provides a dialog box to customize rollback edit summaries and does them without reloading the page. Seriously, why doesn't MediaWiki already do this?
/flickrsearch adds a portlet link to search for uploadable flickr images about the subject.
/randomincategory adds a portlet link when on Category pages to go to a random page in the current category.
Vghfr/EasyTemplates adds a portlet link to automatically insert some of the most common inline {{fix}} templates.
Yes, we're just doing 'em as we go now. Thanks for reading through this looong issue, if you did! I'm sure this'll send a record for the longest issue ev-ah. You may need to wait even longer for the last issue, as our reserve of old-y and goodie scripts have ran out... We encourage you to try and do some of the requests or improvement tasks. See you in Summer, hopefully!
I see unblocked users clearing their talk pages as a way to clear away the old and restart anew. To leave the past behind. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Agreed. But they started doing that by reverting my asking whether they had a relationship with the person they wanted to have an article. Still, I've told them not to worry about past reverts. Doug Wellertalk 16:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
@ We can't check back more than about 90 days. So I can't compare with the master you cite. You mention some other socks, those need links. IPs are always an issue as we are not meant to link IP addresses with accounts. ~!Doug WellertalkDoug Wellertalk 15:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This SPI is still pending, and the user Brittlee1990 is active again! But once again, please devote your time only if you are fine. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 13:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I keep asking about it but for some reason no block yet. I've asked again. Doug Wellertalk 14:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Meant to say that I was told they were a sock by another CU. Doug Wellertalk 14:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Waiting for the block by someone from the CU team, so that the typical POV edits by the sock can be reverted. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 17:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Pls let me know if this would [not] normally be considered worth bothering about. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
RD3 if I recall what I clicked on - "purely disruptive". Thanks. I've blocked the IP also, they'd also hit an edit filter 3 times. Doug Wellertalk 17:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
I may have missed the possible doxing, but I don't think I need to suppress. Doug Wellertalk 17:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Tyvm, I thought it probably wasn't but then realised that I don't act know where the margins are. When does adolescent silliness stop and invitation to stalking start?
@JMF I think it would help if you email me so you can be more explicit. Thanks. Doug Wellertalk 19:31, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Making Everest out of an ant hill. Afaics, it was just some kid putting another kid's phone number on wikipedia "for the lols, it's just banter, innit Sir!" Unless it is bullying. I drifted into WP:RGW territory, so best we let it drop. I really don't think it merits any more time than you have already spent on it. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Ok. Odd though that I didn’t see a number. Still I think this is sorted now. Doug Wellertalk 21:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleting Wahakadha mustakhdim's redirects
I noticed that you mentioned on Wahakadha mustakhdim's talk page that most of the redirects he created would have to be deleted. I was already trying to figure out how to do that. If I follow normal procedures it looks like I would have to put a {{Db-r3}} tag on all 179 of them, which is much more work than I want to go through. Can I bypass this and oh, I don't know, ask you to delete them all? This is the list.
Failing that, do you have any other suggestions? Thanks, Dan Bloch (talk) 19:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
@Danbloch It’s too late in the evening for me right now but there is an Admin tool I can use if I can figure it out. Doug Wellertalk 20:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedied the bunch (WP:G5). First time mass-deleteing, IIRC; so hopefully didn't break something and make matters worse. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 21:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks!
(both of you) Dan Bloch (talk) 21:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
@Abecedare Great. Damn socks. Need to see how I can find the next one, I’m sure they will be back. Doug Wellertalk 21:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey Doug , I have put an edit request on the talk page of Shakespeare plays. Would you review it, tell me whether it is suitable for the article, and do the needful to include it in the article? Thanks. Harvici (talk) 15:39, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
@Harvici Someone who knows the article needs to make that decision, and if they agree they would normally add it. Doug Wellertalk 15:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-10
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
The Special:Book page (as well as the associated "Create a book" functionality) provided by the old Collection extension has been removed from all Wikisource wikis, as it was broken. This does not affect the ability to download normal books, which is provided by the Wikisource extension. [7]
Maintenance on etherpad is completed. If you encounter any issues, please indicate in this ticket.
Gadgets allow interface admins to create custom features with CSS and JavaScript. The Gadget and Gadget_definition namespaces and gadgets-definition-edit user right were reserved for an experiment in 2015, but were never used. These were visible on Special:Search and Special:ListGroupRights. The unused namespaces and user rights are now removed. No pages are moved, and no changes need to be made. [8]
A usability improvement to the "Add a citation" in Wikipedia workflow has been made, the insert button was moved to the popup header. [9]
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 March. It will be on all wikis from 7 March (calendar). [10][11]
Future changes
All wikis will be read-only for a few minutes on March 20. This is planned at 14:00 UTC. More information will be published in Tech News and will also be posted on individual wikis in the coming weeks. [12]
The HTML markup of headings and section edit links will be changed later this year to improve accessibility. See Heading HTML changes for details. The new markup will be the same as in the new Parsoid wikitext parser. You can test your gadget or stylesheet with the new markup if you add ?useparsoid=1 to your URL (more info) or turn on Parsoid read views in your user options (more info).
The Conservative Party selected the MP for Mansfield and Nottinghamshire council leader [[Ben Bradley (politician)|Ben Bradley]] as their candidate in September 2023.[5]
then adding:
Bradley suggested that, if successful, he would only act as Mayor in the future.<ref>{{Cite web|url= https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/ben-bradley-would-probably-stick-8571310 |title=Ben Bradley would 'probably' stick to one job if he became East Midlands Mayor| date= 3 July 2023 |access-date=5 March 2024|publisher=[[Nottingham Post|Nottinghamshire Live]]}}</ref>
I am not a sock/IP block evader, having declared off-wiki to an American cu in Feb 2023. Thanks and regards.-- 82.13.47.210 (talk) 19:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
I had hoped that after resolution of Radiant Fellow's disruptive editing, Alaska's combativeness might subside. Unfortunately, it only took a day or two for me to be proven wrong in this discussion that ends up with her telling me I guess it's true then. You DO see "helpful" and condescending rudeness as one in the same. I try to limit my responses to only what's relevant, but there just is no possibility for constructive dialog on the article when she makes everything combative. As a result, I prepared an ANI report of her most recent history, requesting a TBAN, narrowly construed to The Chosen and associated list articles, with the possibility for appeal at some predetermined point, noting that I have seen constructive editing by her elsewhere. But before I post that, any thoughts or guidance on that? Or do you think I'm wrong on this (which is, of course, a possibility)? TIA for your insight. ButlerBlog (talk) 20:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
@Butlerblog Lots of exercise today, too tired and it’s us time with my wife. Maybe in 12 hours, sorry. Doug Wellertalk 20:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
No rush - the linked interaction was from Sunday - I took since then to think about it before doing anything. It's not pressing.
Hope you got some treadmill in! ButlerBlog (talk) 20:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) User arrogance, wp:ownership and hostility is why I stopped logging-in and abandoned my account and 2.5K watchlist of then-nine years after being attacked (the last of quite a few - it goes with the territory) in November 2022, being called a troll, then for clarity a piss taker, and finally when I mentioned that Packjerkins was obviously Jack Perkins (racing driver) writing about himself, I was accused of insuffcient GF in that it could've been a fan with a hommage/pen-name.--82.13.47.210 (talk) 23:54, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
This is a misunderstanding of my comment to the IP above, which was meant to indicate I would respond today. Doug Wellertalk 13:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Really, Butlerblog? You want me topic banned because you don't like the things I said about you? If you think my editing at articles related to The Chosen have not been constructive, why not just say that to me instead of talking about me elsewhere? As I've pointed out to you and Doug over the last week, teaching moments are to be taken and used constructively. Not thrown away with banning and blocking editors instead of trying to work things out. Now, if you want to talk to me about something I said to you, that you didn't like, just tell me. Ask me questions. Don't assume bad faith. And let's settle this once and for all. Do you really think keeping me from editing articles about The Chosen is going to truly solve anything in a way that works for both of us, for the betterment of those articles? I don't. But I'm certainly willing to work with you and talk with you, not just about you or behind your back. Let's do this the right way, not through a neighbor's back door. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 01:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Butlerblog, reading again what you wrote above, you left out the following comments I wrote to you at the same article talk page a couple of days ago, the place where you only pulled out a short bit of my comments. I think this [13] (starting with "For clarification, I want you to know that being in the camp of good faith...") shows I really am trying to make things work with you. That, and what I wrote on your own talk page earlier this evening. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 04:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
To be clear, my post linked to the entire discussion for context. I realize that what I'm asking about involves you, but right now, the question isn't specifically about you, it's an ask for insight on how I am viewing this. And it's not "behind your back" (obviously, or you wouldn't be here). So, if you would hold off so that Doug can respond to what I originally came here to ask, I will respond to your questions/concerns on my UTP after that. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
If it involves me and our head-butting, and you haven't responded to me trying to work things out with you, two full days before you came here, then I can't see why you would think I shouldn't comment until Doug responds. You seem so sure everywhere you go around Wikipedia when you comment, therefore, it doesn't make sense to me that you would ask for someone else to "interpret" my pretty straightforward comments to you. You portray me above only as combative, leaving out in that characterization how I am clearly hoping for a good working relationship with you and want that, based on my last comments to you at the article talk page. Leaving that part out of your posting here also doesn't make sense. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 14:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
I wrote a fairly lengthy note to Butlerblog about our head-butting and my thoughts on how it's evolved, but also that I'd love to see it resolved (and why). Here is the link to the comments: [14] A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 02:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more. Which is why I wrote what I did at Butlerblog's talk page. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
@Donald Albury: As I stated above, the question I came to ask was a guidance question - for me (i.e. a "can you review my conduct" question). There was no need for any other responses outside of that. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi please intervene and protect the article immediately, in the above article stop his Wikishovel nonsense, and false alarms. This is not the first time he is doing it, this has become a habitual to him nominating speedy deletions, and creating double work to other editors. (talk) Fostera12 (talk) 13:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
You are in the wrong here, Wikishovel is well within their right to nominate an article for deletion and in this case the rationale is correct too. You shouldn't be removing the speedy tag, that is disruption. —SpacemanSpiff 13:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Then you SpacemanSpiff take responsibility, check article, do the needful, remove tag and protect the article. This is my right to contest which i did already in talk page. This is a false alarm, alot has changed in that film festival in past few years. Fostera12 (talk) 13:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Doug Weller pls check the article. It is notable.Fostera12 (talk) 14:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
@Fostera12 I'm not interested although I would like you to tell me how you know that "This article is completely different from previous context. ". Doug Wellertalk 14:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Because I have no idea who created it earlier. In addition to that, the subject matter is well reported by all national media houses in India (Times of India, Indian Express, The Hindu, Hindustan Times etc). A lot has changed since 2019. Since past 5 years the festival is consistently reported in national media, and telecasted in television. And I know this film festival space very much, I am well aware which festival deserves an article.Fostera12 (talk) 14:26, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Fostera12 has been blocked for a month by SpacemanSpiff, after which they deleted most of their talk page. Doug Wellertalk 17:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Blocked, CU blocked, also on a blocked range. I don't know if I have time for the ECP have to go fix dinner! Doug Wellertalk 17:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much, Doug. Cheers! Ekdalian (talk) 17:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Chemo successful!
Looks like I'll be around for quite some time still. Chemo held the cancer back and my Oncologist is very pleased. He says I look very well and that the cancers are still very small. So I'll have some time off and then back on chemo. Blood tests every 2 months to check. His guess was that my prognosis is the same as last year, another 18 months is quite possible. Who knows, if things go well, maybe more. In any case I'll see 82, Christmas, and the inauguration of the next American president - two pleasant things at least! Doug Wellertalk 16:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Very happy news! Hope you and yours have something fun planned. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Doug, Very pleased to hear that good news. As ever, David, David J Johnson (talk) 16:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This is excellent news. So happy to hear this, Doug. You'll be wanting those Christmas decorations back. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
My best wishes for continued improvement over the ongoing treatment...but is looking forward to the inauguration of the next president a bit tongue in cheek? Sweetpool50 (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
@Sweetpool50: Ha. Three things I'll see, only 2 pleasant. I shudder to think of what could happen with the presidency. Doug Wellertalk 17:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
That’s fantastic news Doug! Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 17:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Excellent news, Doug! So happy for y'all. Haploidavey (talk) 19:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
More than thrilled to hear that, Doug. Godspeed on recovery. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This is amazing, Doug! Very happy to hear :) Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 20:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Doug, this is great news! I'm so happy to hear it (and let's hope against hope that the election results will be good news too). --Tryptofish (talk) 22:51, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Fantastic news, Doug!-- Ponyobons mots 22:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Yay, congrats!! DanCherek (talk) 23:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Sorry happy to hear your good news. Hope you get to relax and celebrate! Yuchitown (talk) 00:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown
Great news! Carlstak (talk) 00:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
That's fantastic, Doug. Really great. Thanks for sharing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:40, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Wonderful news ! Hoping for three pleasant things (and many more !). Rsk6400 (talk) 06:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
So good to hear! Make the best of life. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 06:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
That's the only news that has brought a glow to my heart today. Forget about setting your sights on catching the outcome of the McDonald vs Bidet rope-the-dope battle on Nov 4, 24, far too shortsighted. Think of the long term, and do us all a favour by hanging in here at least till Nov.4 2028. Best Nishidani (talk) 08:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Great news, Doug! I am really glad to hear this. Best wishes for you. God bless! Ekdalian (talk) 08:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Doug, I am thrilled by this news. Know you are continuously on my mind. Here's to the wholeness that I hope takes root and blossoms in you, my friend. --ARoseWolf 14:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
That's cheered me up enormously. And on International Women's Day, big thanks too, to your wife, who I'm sure is the biggest element in your progress. And don't forget the NHS! (but one thing you can safely ignore, and should, is the US presidential election) --NSH001 (talk) 19:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Anonsfd37383321 sounded like a WP:ROPE and I have reverted the AIV report for now (which in retrospective should have been posted in ANI). Thanks and happy editing. — The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Update:They are at it again. So I am going to ANI now. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-11
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 12 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 13 March. It will be on all wikis from 14 March (calendar). [15][16]
After consulting with various communities, the line height of the text on the Minerva skin will be increased to its previous value of 1.65. Different options for typography can also be set using the options in the menu, as needed. [17]
The active link color in Minerva will be changed to provide more consistency with our other platforms and best practices. [18]
Structured data on Commons will no longer ask whether you want to leave the page without saving. This will prevent the “information you’ve entered may not be saved” popups from appearing when no information have been entered. It will also make file pages on Commons load faster in certain cases. However, the popups will be hidden even if information has indeed been entered. If you accidentally close the page before saving the structured data you entered, that data will be lost. [19]
Future changes
All wikis will be read-only for a few minutes on March 20. This is planned at 14:00 UTC. More information will be published in Tech News and will also be posted on individual wikis in the coming weeks. [20][21]
My sincere thanks to you for your thanks message, dear Sir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genuinewikiuser (talk • contribs) 01:17, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
With all the health challenges and continued commitment to the 'pedia one can't help but be impressed. Keep on with the winning struggle!! Unbroken Chain (talk) 01:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Strange user page creation of someone you've blocked
Hello! See Special:Diff/1213385400, where a user creates the user page of a blocked user for no reason (with absolutely no way that they'd have interacted). Typing style is somewhat similar. Both editing at Timeline of the far future. Could be nothing, but nonetheless strange. Schrödinger's jellyfish✉ 23:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
@Schrödinger's jellyfish I think I'll wait to see if they respond. Odd, but the edits are so very different. Perhaps they looked at the blocked editor's edits on the Timeline article and then posted the notice. Doug Wellertalk 12:09, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Reasonable I guess. He’s changed the user page post to say Doug Eller did the block.😁 Doug Wellertalk 21:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I
Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:
Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
The notice "Language links are at the top of the page" that appears in the Vector 2022 skin main menu has been removed now that users have learned the new location of the Language switcher. [22]
IP info feature displays data from Spur, an IP addresses database. Previously, the only data source for this feature was MaxMind. Now, IP info is more useful for patrollers. [23]
The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. [24][25][26]
RevisionSlider is an interface to interactively browse a page's history. Users in right-to-left languages reported RevisionSlider reacting wrong to mouse clicks. This should be fixed now. [28]
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 19 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 20 March. It will be on all wikis from 21 March (calendar). [29][30]
All wikis will be read-only for a few minutes on March 20. This is planned at 14:00 UTC. [31][32]
Months later, nice change of IP. Colorado is where it's at! Should check your maths, though. ภץאคгöร 20:59, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
ygm
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.JeffSpaceman (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Revdel request
Hey could I trouble you for a revdel on my user talk page? That tedious Stonetoss obsessed troll sock farm continues to be annoying. Simonm223 (talk) 11:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you!Simonm223 (talk) 12:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-13
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
An update was made on March 18th 2024 to how various projects load site, user JavaScript and CSS in Vector 2022 skin. A checklist is provided for site admins to follow.
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 26 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 27 March. It will be on all wikis from 28 March (calendar). [33][34]
Hi ! @Doug Weller , Kindly , see this user with different ids i.e @/Andey_murrey and @/Mahishya vandalism the same subjects without checking the sources and starting the edit war with every new id. All his edits are same like this user @/Gaur_Samrat_Muhammad_Gauri and this one also @/Ministerofunderworld. I am not posting this with my id as I don't want to indulge in edit war because he checked by user contributions and start writing random things on other user talkpages. I request to kindly do the checkuser test as I think they both are the same person. 103.81.156.158 (talk) 06:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Grievance Regarding Revocation of Extended Confirmed User Rights
I am writing this grievance to express my deep concern and disappointment over your recent decision to revoke my extended confirmed user rights, while revoking you given the following quote "gaming by racing to get 400 with a lot of mostly minor edits" However, i would like to mention here that my minor edit count is only 1.8% [35] of total edits. I edited a total of 131 pages since March-2023. I believe this action was taken without due consideration of my active contributions, dedication, and adherence to the community guidelines throughout my time as an active user since last 12 months.
As an active contributor to Wikipedia, I have consistently demonstrated my commitment to the platform by providing valuable content across various articles, engaged in talk page discussions, created articles etcetra.
I have always respected and adhered to the policies and guidelines laid out by the Wikipedia community. I have also made a conscious effort to engage with other users on talk pages in a constructive and collaborative manner, resolving disputes and addressing concerns in accordance with the community's best practices.
The revocation of my extended confirmed user rights has not only undermined the value of my contributions but has also affected my ability to effectively participate in the Wikipedia community. This decision has left me feeling demotivated and disheartened, as I have always believed in the mission of Wikipedia to provide free, reliable, and accessible information to the world.
I kindly request a thorough review of this decision, taking into account my months of dedication & adherence to policies. I believe that reinstating my extended confirmed user rights would not only recognize my efforts but also encourage other users to continue contributing positively to the Wikipedia community.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I hope for a fair and just resolution.
Sincerely, BlackOrchidd (talk) 12:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
I would take this more seriously if you didn't use AI here and when requesting rollback. Doug Wellertalk 16:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
@Doug Weller Well, I copied and pasted the text, and zerogpt.com says that the text was "most likely" human written, with some parts containing ChatGPT in it. The percentage shows that 36.02% may have included parts by the bot, as shown if you copy the text and then paste it. I'm not sure, but it seems somewhat accurate to detect this. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, but if you leave out the first paragraph, it's 91.83%. Not surprising if someone using AI also adds text that they wrote themselves. The rollback request[36] comes out at 73.36 with zerogpt.com, 97% using [37]. Doug Wellertalk 17:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Dang. It is hard for me to even estimate how much text was copy and pasted. I never realized how much was done like that. Pretty disappointing if you think about it. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 17:47, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
I can see a change in the goal post here, sir Mr @Doug Weller, Earlier, it was "minor edits," now AI. It seems that when i gave stats above for my minor edits, you have switched to AI. By now, It is evidently clear that you have revoked my ECU rights in error.
The request above is in my own words and used AI for grammar checks. Kindly point out if the use of AI for grammar checks is prohibited here.
Well, I, for one, cannot agree with your statement I have consistently demonstrated my commitment to the platform by providing valuable content. I think you haven't; see only User talk:Joshua Jonathan#Plz follow NPOV at article Ram Mandir. Your own talkpage is also telling; for someone with so few edits you've got a disproportiantely large number of warnings. I think that's predictive; I expect you to either be blocked sometime in the future, or to give up on Wikipedia because your pov-pushing will not be tolerated here. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
@BlackOrchidd Why should I believe you only use AI for grammar checks? Show me the initial text and the grammar checker you used. And how about showing me where I mentioned minor edits for a start. Doug Wellertalk 09:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
"Minor edits": diff. But, see also the smaal edits: 40%. In class, a smart kid would come up with a lot of arguments , bending the message to it's literal meaning (+1 for the list of problematic behaviours); a wise kid would hear the intend, understand their behaviour is deemed problematic, and step back. Acting smart adds to the overall impression... (and yes, I'm aware of WP:GOODFAITH. Ah, another one to add to the list). Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 10:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
@Doug Weller Here you go [38]. I am surprised to know that You dont even remeber why you revoked my ECU rights. I have engaged you on your talk in most civil way to point you a possible error you have made. But you didnt even acknowledge my points, instead you have changed the goal post to AI just to make sure that my ECU rights remains suspended. I dont even know what is the criteria of having a sustained ECU rights in terms of counts of big, small or minor edits (if they really exisits). BY now i am pretty sure going through this I wont be going anywhere untill I involve other admins. BlackOrchidd (talk) 11:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
True. I agree they weren't marked as minor edits, my wording was bad. But this isn't taking us anywhere. If another Admin agrees that you should have ECP restored, fine. I was planning to suggest just 100 standard edits (not testing) but using AI always raises doubts whether the editor using it actually understands what the AI wrote. So I don't know what you would have written in your own words. Your recent accusations of hounding by other editors (not me) aren't encouraging either. Doug Wellertalk 11:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, I am glad that you accepted your mistake, Thats not bad either. I have a big concern for your health issue too. I welcome your plan of suggesting 100 standard edits. ECU must be given as per set standard criteria established over a very long consneus discussion involving a spectrum of editors. The current various rights granting criteria are not in a good shape (in my personal opinion).
Well regarding hounding, its a long sad story. There are gazillions of noting here[39][40][41] and comments in various talk pages of especially India related pages. The editing pattern are non-neutral (Politically-Left biased to be precise) and honestly speaking, I didn't like it either. So I tried to balance [42] the articles in terms of neutrality [Talk:Narendra Modi#Covid management under Modi - Successful].
India is a big consumer of wikipedia with its 1.5 Billion population. And, neither the majority Indian population like the wiki pages to be biased.
Routinely Jimbo Wales made donation appeals for wikipedia. As a popular X user i have pretty good sense that Indian users didnt like wikipedia being biased. And intermitently there are trends to boycott donations to wikipedia. As a dedicated wiki user and editor i really dont like that any financial prospect of wikipedia should be affected in any way as it is a very noble project.
Still lot to write, but i really have other works. See you again. And sorry for the grammers BlackOrchidd (talk) 12:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
@BlackOrchidd Thanks very much. Would you note on your talk page please that you accept my plan of suggesting 100 standard edits .Appreciated. Please take care in the India-Pakistan-Afghanistan area, I'd suggest that if you get reverted to discuss on the talk page, which I see you've done. It's a very sensitive area. Doug Wellertalk 12:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. I would certainly do. Try giving definition of "standard edits"
I’m thinking of adding sourced text, adding sources to text, if possible identifying bad sources. WP:RSNP is a great resource or search WP:RSN. It’s good to learn how to use RSN, The WP:HELPDESK is a great place to get advice or the Teahouse. Let me know of you need other sources of advice. And don’t forget accept good faith. I know you felt hounded by more experienced editors but look at it as the content disagreements I saw. There’s also WP:DRN. When you’ve got about 100 edits let me know. This will definitely make you a better editor than vandal fighting. By the way I don’t think Ultraviolet has finished development. Always try to stay calm and take the high road. Doug Wellertalk 19:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
@Doug Weller I think there is a misunderstanding here. As i already quoted above and quoting here again "ECU must be given as per set standard criteria established over a very long consensus discussion involving a spectrum of editors. ". Your suggestion of me having 100 edits despite having 12+ months old account and 500+ edits in order to reinstate the revoked ECU rights gives me a sense of single me out.
And my second point, as I have already asked above and you didn't responded on it "Curious whether I am getting my ECU rights back ?" Plz reply on this before I escalate. Thanks.
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
I know bots don't get replies, but it " Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0" . Doug Wellertalk 16:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
I just want to say good job at the Geopolymer article with these edits [43], [44]. Regards, ---Steve Quinn (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll look more tomorrow. Doug Wellertalk 15:50, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Need help.
Hey, I noticed that you're an admin. I need help, a user is continuously editing and deleting the citation in a biography page of a person, which is a clear case of vandalism. I can't give warning cuz Im new here. So, how should I report this issue, I'm new here. Please, can you guide me? TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 08:46, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. Check out Editor Clovermosses invitation above. I'm sure you will find many friends there. Stop by for a chat. ―Buster7☎
@Valjean: Whatever you feel guilty about it's OK. It can't be that bad. Can it? I am not going to ask you to confess your Wikipedia-sins. At least not here. Have you recently violated policies and guidelines? Let me see if I can find an editor-priest. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 19:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Good one, Steve! LOL. ButlerBlog (talk) 23:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Valjean, I suggest you fess up, before Javert gets wind of this. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Ha! I don't have to worry about him anymore. His conflicted conscience drove him to suicide in the Seine. The "good" cop died in the water and the criminal went to heaven. What a twist of karma! -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 03:48, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Looks great. Excuse me please if I don't have time for this. Between real life, normal watchlist, Admin/CU/OS and trying to write User:Doug Weller/Pinxton Castle for which I have sources and images... Ah, anyone here good at adding images? I'm rubbish. Thanks. Doug Wellertalk 09:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Doug, do you need help uploading the images, or putting them onto the page once they have been uploaded? I'm middling at the former, but happy to help with the latter. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
@Tryptofish I could certainly use your help with the latter once I get time to flesh out the article. Wasted a lot of time today over someone messing with an article. I’ve uploaded one and have written to the local parish council hoping to get permission to use theirs. Failing that I migrant to take my own photos. Doug Wellertalk 19:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good. Just let me know when you have them uploaded (and of course which files they are), and I'll be happy to to help. By the way, KJP1 is very good at articles on that sort of topic. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) FWIW WikiMaps turns up the following Geograph images from the site:
Moat and mound in Castle Wood
Moats in Castle Wood
Moated site near the McArthur Glen shopping outlet
I don't know the site, but it sounds/looks a little like this, Hen Gwrt Moated Site. If I can help at all, just ping. KJP1 (talk) 04:04, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Harvici (talk) 09:11, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
You've got another email
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Harvici (talk) 16:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.JeffSpaceman (talk) 14:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Void of wiki policy
hi @Doug Weller,
Hope you are doing well,may god bless you with good health.Coming to the point ,I joined Wikipedia very recently one user requested one admin to block me in the name of "obvious duck" on the same day! Without even investigation! .I just spent few hours and found except me no one is there in that talk page everyone has been marked as sock of joshi punekar.After seeing the reasons in the sock master page I felt like "sockpuppetry" has been used as a tool by few as that article named "Gaud saraswat" is clearly violating neutrality policy of wiki.I can develop the articles related to konkan very clearly and in neutral POV as my Ph.D is in same field.Now the matter of concern is that,this is my real name,I don't like to get banned for someone's wested interest.So please guide me here.Is there any facility to prove that I am not sock by advanced CU check before someone use sock as a tool?or should I stop editing wiki? Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 05:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
@Rajeshfadnavis I can't do a CU to prove someone isn't a sock, that is against policy. I've mentioned this at the investigation. Can you tell me what brought you to Wikipedia to edit the same articles? Doug Wellertalk 11:26, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
@Doug WellerFor me what's same and different.Just scrolling few pages and contributing where ever I can but I didn't knew this new tactics of classification,Wikipedia tells it should be used with utter care but here after seeing talk page it's clear that possibly new tool for pov push .Hope you have seen as i suspecting already even my name is there in the investigation page!(Before I saw the request in talk page of Regentspark,that too direct request!).Was there any vandalism or multiple accounts issue?Editing Chitpavan page or gaud saraswats page?.My expertise is there in konkan communities this is one in that I can tell openly that edit in gaud saraswat is void of neutrality,I have given my few points there.Hope CU will be done by admin during investigation.Anyhow take care of your health . Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 13:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
@Rajeshfadnavis: I saw that request but I don't think there is enough behavioral evidence for a sock block. It is up to the requester to ask for a CU and I wouldn't worry about it unless they do ask. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
RegentsPark, I already requested for a CU during filing the SPI. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:18, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
@RegentsParkSo nice of you,being admin you replied with a valid point of "lack of behavior evidence".Nice to see the genuine reply. My ambiguity started with the point where without editing even 5 edits some people are lodging complaints.So I strongly feel Some people are using sockpuppetry procedure to satisfy thier wested interest(I found this extensively in bengali caste to hide the reality,In brahmin caste of Maharashtra) concern is it should not happen, in the long run this may damage the ecosystem of wiki.A very nice idea of free encyclopedia will be damaged to satisfy the wested interest.My intension is not to hurt anyone hope I have conveyed my concern @Doug Weller. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 08:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
@RegentsParkOne more point I forgot,Some wested interest editors to create behavior evidence forcefully, whatever comes to thier mind,they will collate and present as a proof.So instead of encouraging editors this will be thier try to end the editing of the page(I can give the example of few pages possibly in the future in front of multiple administrators if the same behavior persists).Cross verify my above information.I hope the current discussion will give positive reply in this issue to control editors with wested interest in the limit of wiki policy.Thanks Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 08:49, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Request
Hi Doug, would like to request you to help expedite the SPI, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar. This has been pending for quite some time now! Would request your intervention as a senior admin as well as CU. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 07:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
@Ekdalian: You'll need to make a strong behavioral case with diffs and I don't see one yet. Looking at the SPI report, except for the timing, you haven't provided enough diffs to justify a CU. I guess it is up to a check user to decide whether the timing is enough but no one seems to have taken it up. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Doug Weller,
I found some difficulty in understanding WP:Raj source rule.kindly guide me in this as I can find usage of Raj source in many caste related article indirectly creating POV issue.For instance let us consider, Raj source published in 1910-1915 used exactly in the new article published in 2010 or 2015.Can they use that part of information? Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 18:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Dear @Doug Weller as per your suggestion I have restrained myself from possible offensive words against any editor of wiki in the boundary of good faith.I believe in mutual respect and constructive work.I do expect the same thing from the other editors too,calling me sock in multiple platform is making me feel embarrassed.You are highly experienced admin,understanding my current mindset is not difficult for you.Kindly tell that user to stop personal attacks.
Don't forget to guide me like this in the future if I do the mistakes.Thanks Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 12:47, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for catching and fixing that. Not an unusual mistake for me especially when I try to use my iPad to cut and paste but I usually preview (not that easy using this reply system). Doug Wellertalk 18:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
A terrorist has recently been active online after 10 years. He has become more silent and giving indirect provocations to violence online. Ten years ago he was recruited by UK based IS group. So as a precautionary measure I created an article which got deleted under A7. (There were citations from three independent news websites. There were few sentences initially.)
What to do in such cases? How can I store (authentic, cited) information about terrorists here on WikiPedia for future reference? Please advise. Kawrno Baba (talk) 11:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
I wen there and clicked both 'Ask question' and 'Add a topic' buttons, both times there was a popup written 'Unable to stash Parsoid HTML.'. What to do? Kawrno Baba (talk) 12:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
@Kawrno Baba try again, it might have been a temporary problem, but I've also asked there. Doug Wellertalk 12:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
The Searchers
Hello Doug, I would just like your opinion on my recent correct on The Searchers and its subsequent reversal by a "editor" with a poor record? I felt that because Wikipedia is read in many English speaking areas, the word "number" was more appropriate? Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
@David J Johnson What makes a man to wander, what makes a man to roam? I don't know Number sign but unsourced. Usage varies so much.. sorry but half an hour turned up nothing useful. You now owe me .5 of an hour. Doug Wellertalk 13:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, Doug, I just felt that the "editor" was being unfair to the many folk who revere The Searchers in countries of the world, other than the US. As ever, David, David J Johnson (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
No problem. Great film. Doug Wellertalk 10:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi Doug. You protected this article back in 2009 due to sockpuppetry, however looking at the SPI archive for the sockpuppeteer, they don't seem to be active anymore. Do you think it'd be worth unprotecting? Thanks, --Ferien (talk) 22:01, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Ferien Done, although I can't find where I protected it, perhaps there was a redirect I protected. Doug Wellertalk 08:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
@Ferien I found it. The last edits before yours were by 2 socks,one with a lot of edits[45], then before that 1 legitimate edit, then another sock or sockmaster. Sorry, I think the protection is clearly still warranted. Doug Wellertalk 16:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
No worries, thank you for checking. --Ferien (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I do not know whether the socks all use the same IP - but if they do, please could you give consideration to blocking article creation by that IP.-- Toddy1(talk) 11:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Toddy1 It's a wide range of IP addresses, so I can't block. I've asked GuardianH about semi-protecting their page. Do you have reason to think they might create articles? Not much I can do about that obviously though. Doug Wellertalk 12:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
They're probably all worth tagging as suspected. Technically, they are all different from another, but they're all different in exactly the same sort of way, if you see what I mean. Going off of the CU logs, and looking at this latest batch, I'm going to revisit my opinion on Korensho as well. Will do the needful, thanks for the heads up. GirthSummit (blether) 16:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Restoring this, must stop the bot from moving stuff I still need! Doug Wellertalk 15:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
@Tryptofish I could certainly use your help with the latter once I get time to flesh out the article. Wasted a lot of time today over someone messing with an article. I’ve uploaded one and have written to the local parish council hoping to get permission to use theirs. Failing that I migrant to take my own photos. Doug Wellertalk 19:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good. Just let me know when you have them uploaded (and of course which files they are), and I'll be happy to to help. By the way, KJP1 is very good at articles on that sort of topic. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good. Just let me know when you have them uploaded (and of course which files they are), and I'll be happy to to help. By the way, KJP1 is very good at articles on that sort of topic. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) FWIW WikiMaps turns up the following Geograph images from the site:
Moat and mound in Castle Wood
Moats in Castle Wood
Moated site near the McArthur Glen shopping outlet
@Odysseus1479 @Tryptofish I went there today with my wife. The underbrush and nettles haven't grown up yet and a lot of tree and bush cutting has been done to clear the visibility. And someone showed us a better way to get really close.Nice to be out in the sun even though the ground was tricky to walk on with steep slopes, my Parkinson's kept telling me it was a bad idea.:) Doug Wellertalk 13:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Good to hear the site is reasonably accessible, even if it’s not as impressive as Moxy (or his chatbot?) would have us believe. ;) Are there any markers or interpretive displays? (Just curious, not suggesting you illustrate the article with photos of them.) I hope the ground-clearance doesn’t enhance the presence of the motorway & shopping centre!—Odysseus1479 22:06, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
@Odysseus1479 Missed this. No markers or indications anywhere as to what this is, other than they have obviously tried to make it more visible. And you can't see the outlet mall, motorway or industrial estate. Doug Wellertalk 19:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Paracas Candelabra
Hi Doug, we have been discussing Wikipedia:Reliable sources in connection with the subject page. On Paracas Candelabra page, the reference for the text Pottery found near the figure has been carbon dated at 200 BC, further leads to page [46]. This end-of-line page does not link the claimed carbon dating to any Original research or Laboratory test report. How do we accept the historicity of the Pottery found at site without a reliable source? I wish to understand. A081950 (talk) 15:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Yep, good catch. I'm pretty sure it's accurate. I'm tired and watching tv, but how about doing some research on Dr Maria Reiche who measured the geoglyph and I think dated the pottery. Be careful, some of the sources might be useless. Doug Wellertalk 17:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello Doug Weller
How are you doing? I saw your revert on Persecution of traditional African religions and clicked on your talk, when I realised you are fighting the C word! Your health is more important than the article or the revert (which was within your right to do). Despite our old differences, I would not wish that on anybody, and I'm terribly sorry you are going through that. I hope the treatment is working, and I wish you nothing but a speedy recovery/remission. You are strong. I know that better than anyone. Lol! You will be fine. Sending you lots of blessings. You will beat this. I'm praying for your full recovery. Have a blessed weekend.Tamsier (talk) 19:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for this. I appreciate your comments but I am afraid it is terminal. i just hope chemo contnues to extend my use-by date.:) Your talk page is still on my Watchlist. If you do appeal and win you need to learn a bit more about editing so your edits don’t look like an essay. Eg language, words like “despite”. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. Doug Wellertalk 19:09, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Oh! No! No! No! I am so sorry to hear that. I'm keeping my fingers crossed and pray that the chemo do its thing and you are back on the mend. There is a lot of research into it, just stay positive. Thank you for your advise. You look after yourself.Tamsier (talk) 21:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
You can nominate your favorite tools for the fifth edition of the Coolest Tool Award. Nominations will be open until May 10.
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 23 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 24 April. It will be on all wikis from 25 April (calendar). [49][50]
Future changes
This is the last warning that by the end of May 2024 the Vector 2022 skin will no longer share site and user scripts/styles with old Vector. For user-scripts that you want to keep using on Vector 2022, copy the contents of Special:MyPage/vector.js to Special:MyPage/vector-2022.js. There are more technical details available. Interface administrators who foresee this leading to lots of technical support questions may wish to send a mass message to your community, as was done on French Wikipedia. [51]
Happy First Edit Day! Hi Doug Weller! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.JeffSpaceman (talk) 21:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Need your insight
Hey Doug, I hope you are doing well. Can you lend me your insight?
"A day of terrible slaughter: The battle of Montgisard, 1177", William E. Welsh, "Medieval Warfare", Vol. 6, No. 1, THEME: Baldwin IV and the Kingdom of Jerusalem (MAR / APR 2016), pp. 28-35. [52]
I'd say no. I'm not convinced the publisher, Karwansaray, is good enough to pass RS. and the author doesn't seem qualified. You can always ask at RSN, neither the publisher nor the journal has been discussed there. Doug Wellertalk 07:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Sorry for the slow response, work has been crazy. Thanks for your insight. Stay well and strong, Doug!--Kansas Bear (talk) 00:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
All the best in this difficult time
I have only been part of the project for a moment, but I just saw your userpage and wanted to express how sorry I am to hear it, and wish you and those who love you strength. :) FortunateSons (talk) 19:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Ahh, I just read the update on top of the talk page, I’m really happy that you got good news FortunateSons (talk) 19:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
@FortunateSons Thanks for this. Blood test and seeing oncologist next week to see if I need to start chemo again, which I will have to do either now or maybe in 2 months as the cancer continues to grow in between a 3 month session of chemo. Doug Wellertalk 13:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Doug, I sincerely pray to God for the best possible outcome! Best wishes. Ekdalian (talk) 13:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
I hope everything goes well and you get a good result, our thoughts are with you :) FortunateSons (talk) 14:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Hope the review shows no administrative action is needed at this time - unless of course you wish to endorse it. NebY (talk) 17:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.JeffSpaceman (talk) 10:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Answer to your question
You asked me how I know that aforementioned policy wasn't applied [53]. Not to make unnecessary clutter, I'm posting it here. I've never seen it being applied. However, it would be possible that I would have missed such a thing. Bilseric (talk) 23:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
@Chetvorno Thanks, although I don't know that that really matters, talk pages aren't to argue issues, especially those covered by CT.. I'll look into it though. Doug Wellertalk 11:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
You have 263 edits since: February 19, 2017. How could you know what happened before you created your account? How many IP addresses did you use before you created this account here. With this IP you clearly suggest you were already an experience editor then.[54] I'm taking this to your talk page to explain single purpose accounts. Doug Wellertalk 11:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Chetvorno. Doug Weller was interested whether the rule was enforced in the past. Maybe you can help him with that inquiry. Or maybe it's not relevant anymore now when you have removed that sentence.
Doug Weller, I apologize if I hurt your feelings in any way. I haven't called your posts clutter. You have asked me a personal question on the talk page and I hastily answered there. Upon reviewing, my thought was , that me answering there would be "clutter". Thank you for your posts on the talk page. Bilseric (talk) 13:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
@Bilseric On the article talk page you wrote "From all the clutter you posted, I don't even understand what you would like to accomplish. If you would like, I advise you to start over and be concise and on the point." Doug Wellertalk 15:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
No, no, I was responding to another editor. See the quote: " First of all, Doug Weller ..<response to you about the rule>. Endy Angello <<response to Endy>>". I was saying to him that he is too emotional and making clutter, and gave him few advices. I feel it did work and that we would have found common ground. Bilseric (talk) 15:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
@Bilseric I’ve apologised on the talk page. You know Endy is page blocked I hope. And unfortunately you have a record of uncivil comments. Doug Wellertalk 16:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the apology. May I ask why I can't see your previous comment in history? Bilseric (talk) 21:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm asking because it was in conciliatory tone. Few hours later I can't see that comment in history and your new tone is quite opposite in tone. Furthermore, I can see you have sent 3 mails? I can only assume what's comming. Can I ask you, what changed your opinion? Is this really needed? I don't know what to say, but to apologize for my previous comments. Years pass, people change. Even I am surprised about the tone some of them have. Please understand that I'm not a native English speaker and sometimes English comes of way to harsh than it sounds in my native language (even now I have to be careful not to be too harsh in tone). Too bad about the misunderstanding that triggered this. Bilseric (talk) 22:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I will try to answer honestly. Yes, it's possible to dig out old comments which are problematic, but those are years in the past.I have become more polite, as you said. You as a long time editor can attest that I haven't been editing any contested topic in the article, nor I have been pushing any edit such to the article via talk page. This is important to mention when saying that I've been pushing an agenda. You have here posted several comments of mine. Please understand that this is a talk page called "Nikola_Tesla/Nationality_and_ethnicity". This is indeed the place to post such comments. SYNTHESIZED is indeed allowed on talk page as are sources that are not directly related to Tesla. It would be against policy to push article content based on that, and I have not been doing this. The topic of nationality is indeed intrinsically nationalist. I tired to apply the beast approach in my opinion. I will ask you please, which approach you would find acceptable, and I'll try to understand and apply your advice. What I'm hearing from this post is that your approach would be to stop discussion altogether. I cannot agree that there isn't a way apart from this what you are suggesting, and I feel that should be the last resort measure. Bilseric (talk) 23:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
1)If WP:SYNTH arguments are not allowed in the article, why are you putting them on the Talk page? The Talk page is only to discuss content that can go in the article, meaning content which meets WP verifiability rules, not endless pontification on what you think sources should say or people should think. See WP:TALK#TOPIC, WP:EXHAUST.--ChetvornoTALK 00:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
You can read about it here Wikipedia:What SYNTH is not, not to prolong discussions about SYNTH. Please have understanding that when you post comments like that, someone might think I'm constantly posting to that talk page, exclusively SNYTC and non topic related content. This is not the case at all. It's unfair to sum up comments from over 6 years and suggest that "I have a record of WP:TENDENTIOUS pushing". One would expect a list of reprimands after such suggestion. I feel that I have been as objective as I can. Of course that can be argued. It is a contested and hard topic to discuss, but in many years I don't remember I have every been reprimanded. This wouldn't be the case if I wasn't at least somewhat objective. Of course, we can all improve. And lastly, you suggesting that I'm WP:NOTHERE is really unfair to do in my opinion, but I will listen to your suggestion and stop posting on this topic. Bilseric (talk) 01:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531
You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.
This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.
Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.
This is a notification that you are being reported for edit warring, and reverting edits with clearly verifable citations.
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. {an3-notice}}
2601:2C7:8580:4920:50EA:87EB:6B19:628F (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I’m being reported? Where? Why? You’re confused. Doug Wellertalk 19:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Can i direct you to the talk on Ze'ev Jabotinsky? Im lost as to why you, and other editors dont accept government websites as trusted sources.
And my sources support my claims verbatim, going as far as to call the Irgun a, "terrorist organization." Word for word. 2601:2C7:8580:4920:50EA:87EB:6B19:628F (talk) 23:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 2601:2C7:8580:4920:50EA:87EB:6B19:628F (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I hope it's not contagious. --ARoseWolf 19:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Don't worry, Doug. I assume they have gotten mixed up on a person they were supposed to report, but did it to you instead. Hope you'll get out of the situation scot-free. :P NoobThreePointOh (talk) 19:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
The evidence is mounting...they posted a second warning. A third warning and it's an automatic ice cream party --ARoseWolf 19:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
can i direct you to the talk on the Ze'ev Jabotinsky page? Youre clearly uninformed on the entire situation, information was clearly cited from government websites. Ive gone as far as to include a FOIA released CIA document that supports my claims, so im not just spewing stuff.
Head there for a scholarly debate. But it seems like the editors engaged in this edit war refuse to do so and would rather just delete information. 2601:2C7:8580:4920:50EA:87EB:6B19:628F (talk) 23:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
@ARoseWolf Its stupid. Or ignorance. No point in warning me as it should be clear I know all about edit warring. I raised the issue of their edits at NPOVN last night. I wonder if they will keep adding their badly sourced edits. Doug Wellertalk 20:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps this person will find a new hobby in the next 24 hours. That should be nice for one and all. Cullen328 (talk) 20:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Yamla blocked them after removing the report they made at WP3rr. But an IP at NPOVN says Ze'ev Jabotinsky should be in the ta-I area anyway so IPs shouldn’t edit it. I guess that’s right and it needs a talk page alert notice? Doug Wellertalk 20:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Nice catch. I'll do the necessary steps, once I figure out what those are. --Yamla (talk) 23:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
You know im required to warn you, so there is very much a point. Otherwise i wouldnt do it.
If cia.Gov and OJP.gov are badly sourced edits, then im at a loss since government websites are widely considered valid.
I know youre not stupid, im sure you've cited government websites as well. Youre just choosing to be ignorant, and pretending as if government websites are flimsy proof 2601:2C7:8580:4920:50EA:87EB:6B19:628F (talk) 23:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
So government websites can't be trusted? Even though they have .gov in them which is considerably more secure compared to .com? I don't even understand how government websites are "flimsy proof" here. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 23:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Also, Doug is only doing the right thing here, with over 258,000 edits under his belt and considerably more than 15 years of experience. You've gotta understand that Doug is an administrator, and was trusted with the tools. He knows what he's doing, and is not ignorant. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 23:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
@NoobThreePointOh See Paul H.'s find below, one of the CIA sources being used is a Penthouse magazine(a soft porn magazine). Doug Wellertalk 07:17, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
@NoobThreePointOh We can't automatically trust government websites for truth. The current government of India being a case in point - a revisionist government trying to rewrite history.How trustworthy are the Chinese and Russian governments? Bottom line, governments are political by nature. And why trust the CIA? The answer is it depends. They can be trusted for instance for stating actions or statements they have made, but not always for the facts. The IP who did the last revert of this IP cited WP:Terrorist which is relevant here. And of course IP's cannot edit the article as it is covered by a contentious topic area that IPs are not allowed to edit although they can make reasonable requests on the talk page. The IP can also go to RSN, etc. Doug Wellertalk 07:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
In response to the remark about cia.Gov and OJP.gov automatically not being badly sourced edits, I looked at the CIA.gov file, The relentless Israel propoganda machine", that was used as a Wikipedia citation. What I found is not an official CIA file. Instead it is a Penthouse article that was for who knows what reason was circulated at the CIA and incorporated into their classified files. Just because either an outside article or publication is incorporated into a government agency's files does not make it a reliable source. "Penthouse" is an unreliable source despite someone at the CIA taking an interest in it. All sorts of unreliable sources, including including publications about UFOs and Earth Crustral Displacement find their way into government file only to reappear later in FOIA requests. Paul H. (talk) 03:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins
Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:
See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-19
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
Example of a talk page with the new design, in French.
The appearance of talk pages changed for all wikis, except for Commons, Wikidata and most Wikipedias (a few have already received this design change). You can read the detail of the changes on Diff. It is possible to opt-out these changes in user preferences ("Show discussion activity"). The deployment will happen at remaining wikis in the coming weeks. [63][64]
Interface admins now have greater control over the styling of article components on mobile with the introduction of the SiteAdminHelper. More information on how styles can be disabled can be found at the extension's page. [65]
Wikimedia Enterprise has added article body sections in JSON format and a curated short description field to the existing parsed Infobox. This expansion to the API is also available via Wikimedia Cloud Services. [66]
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 May. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 May. It will be on all wikis from 9 May (calendar). [67][68]
When you look at the Special:Log page, the first view is labelled "All public logs", but it only shows some logs. This label will now say "Main public logs". [69]
Doug, thanks for acting quickly. Bishonen, I love that, too. Rsk6400 (talk) 20:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
All I can say is bravo to the xkcd philosophical treatise.;-) Carlstak (talk) 20:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
They really need to teach what this means in the first grade of school that mentions the term. O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Agreed. I get fed up with my fellow Americans who haven't a clue what it means. But of course we now see many who have no idea what the Constitution says about so many other things.. Doug Wellertalk 06:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!
Featured script
Newly maintained scripts
.png)
.png)
Improve a script
Requested scripts
New scripts
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
Miscellaneous
Gadgets allow interface admins to create custom features with CSS and JavaScript. The 
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 March. It will be on all wikis from 7 March (calendar). [10][11]
.--82.13.47.210 (talk) 22:54, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Moat and mound in Castle Wood
Moats in Castle Wood
Moated site near the McArthur Glen shopping outlet
Moat in Castle Wood
.jpg)
.jpg)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrative action review regarding an action which you performed. The thread is Indefinite TPA revocation for “proxying while blocked”. Thank you. XMcan (talk) 00:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=small}
Please could you give Guardiansassssisdirty an indefinite holiday. The account is the latest in a family of socks who post similar messages on User talk:GuardianH - see talk page history.
Arbitration
.jpg)