User talk:HJ Mitchell/Archive 125

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 120 ← Archive 123 Archive 124 Archive 125 Archive 126 Archive 127 → Archive 130

Promotion of London and North Western Railway War Memorial

Congratulations, HJ Mitchell! The article you nominated, London and North Western Railway War Memorial, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Block to anon-only?

I suggest the block on Special:Contributions/209.66.192.0/19 should be anon-only, as you indicate people should be able to edit if they sign in. --Yamla (talk) 21:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Yamla, Fixed, thanks. Probably fat fingers on a touch screen! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for Portsmouth War Memorial, introduced: "Fresh from my success with the Royal Artillery Memorial, I bring you another war memorial featuring the realism of Charles Sargeant Jagger. This one was written almost on a whim after I visited Portsmouth in the summer. I found the dedication on it moving, and although I knew of it in passing, I was surprised that such an impressive memorial had no article at all."! - I have a FAC open, btw. And had to deal with three articles of people who died yesterday, - memorial time! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Eostrix

What's the deal with Eostrix? You proposed him for admin, he seemed an excellent candidate, then he got indeffed as a sockpuppet. Will we be reading about it in the next Signpost? Maproom (talk) 19:49, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Beyond a cursory mention Maproom, there probably will not be an article on it in The Signpost. There are not enough people with the time or the inclination to write for the periodical since pressures have been exerted on the editorial team to reduce it to bland newsletter and stay away from controversial areas. You can follow the trail, as I did, to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard where you can sit back and enjoy half an hour's exiting reading. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:40, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Exiting reading -- is something you read while you wait for people to get their luggage out of the overhead bins? EEng 15:43, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I did just that ☹️. And I fully agree about the recent sad blandness of The Signpost. Ok, here are two questions:
  1. Is checkuser applied to all RfAs?
  2. If Yes, wouldn't it be better to do it before 100+ editors have spent time forming their views of the candidate? If No, why was it done in this case? Maproom (talk) 14:58, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Maproom CU is not done on admin candidates, but WT:RfA, now slowly awakening from its longest silence in years, has a lively discussion on this very topic. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Kudpung, Maproom Running a CU from scratch would likely not have helped in this case. In fact, it's not that difficult to evade CU. It takes persistence and diligence more than technical sophistication. (Also, CU is not massively helpful unless you have something to compare it to.) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:56, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Morgan & Morgan

I went to create an article for the law firm Morgan & Morgan and I see that the page has been prevented from being created due to what appear to be some abuses in 2014. I've never encountered this before when attempting to create a page and am wondering how to proceed. Thank you! Marquardtika (talk) 16:54, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, October 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Southampton Cenotaph

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for December 9, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 9, 2021. Congratulations for your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 20:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

FYI

OTRS #2021110510007307 ~TheresNoTime (to explain!) 18:35, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

TheresNoTime, I saw your response too late. Were you planning to start the discussion or do you want me to do it? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:38, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
No worries, I've oversighted and posted to the list - seemed the reasonable thing to do anyway ~TheresNoTime (to explain!) 18:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Lemon

I've just had a very quick google for Philip Sambell, the architect. He seems to have been responsible for several of Truro's finer buildings, including the Methodist Church on Union Place, St John's on Lemon Street, Walsingham Place, and the Royal Cornwall Museum. He was also deaf and dumb. To my shame I've not heard of him before, thought I must have seen his works many times. DuncanHill (talk) 23:05, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

DuncanHill, Interesting. There must be scope for an article there! I don't know Truro well. I'm a Devonian these days but I want to visit every city in England so spent a couple of days in Truro (and Falmouth) in September. I think I've got as far as I can on Lander with the sources I have to hand, but I'm hoping Pevsner has more details; just waiting on a friend to consult his copy. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:35, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Promotion of Old Exe Bridge

Congratulations, HJ Mitchell! The article you nominated, Old Exe Bridge, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Buidhe (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:05, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

The honourable opposer's award

The honourable opposer's award
By the authority vested in me by myself I present you with this award in recognition of one or more well argued opposes at FAC. I may or or may not agree with your reasoning and/or your oppose, but I take a Voltarian attitude towards your right to state it. Thank you, such stands help to make Wikipedia stronger. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:26, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Gog. I don't enjoy opposing but the ultimate aim of all this is to make the encyclopaedia better and I hope my opposes are well-enough explained that they're seen as useful and not just obstructive. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
They are indeed Harry. For obvious reasons this is an extremely rarely awarded honour. But I understand how difficult it can be to go against what can seem "group think" and say "Whoa, let's have a relook at this" and you have done so in an exemplary manner, so a bit of positive reinforcement seemed in order. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:54, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

blocking

Dude, you've blocked 20,000 people and unblocked like 250. Good thing you're not a cop. Kurta Clan (talk) 14:22, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

20,000 vandals etc blocked is a good thing. HJ the only other edit by the Kurta Clan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is an unblock request here User talk:Kurta Clan. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 14:31, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

I apologize for my rude and hasty post. Kurta Clan (talk) 07:12, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Kurta Clan, no apology necessary. You seem to be editing fine but if you have any problems let me know. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

94.175.113.45

Please can you block that user permanently & semi-protect this page permanently as well? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Story_Makers_episodes --Annamargarita0 (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Annamargarita0, IP addresses generally can't be blocked permanently because they can be reallocated. That one looks static though so I've blocked it for a year. I see Ymblanter has granted your request for semi protection HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For fighting vandalism and great efforts to Wikipedia! Severestorm28 (talk) 14:11, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/157.97.81.244

I would like to bring this to your attention that this ip has been removing Content from Volt Europa and Personally Attacked (by calling him a bad name) Kpddg. I also gave the ip an Warning for Personal Attacks and an final Warning for Explained Content Removal. Chip3004 (talk) 15:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)


Yes, that's right...
Kpddg (talk) 15:18, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

@Kpddg and Chip3004:, other than the personal attack, it's a content dispute. The IP has explained their removal. If you don't agree with them, you need to take it to the talk page rather than arguing in edit summaries. The personal attack was unacceptable and if that continues, I'll block the IP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:22, 26 November 2021 (UTC)


Okay, thanks 👍
Kpddg (talk) 15:26, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

ECP protection instead of auto-confirmed for John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories

Hi @HJ Mitchelll, I have a question about a recent admin action. I recently requested semi protection on RFPP [1], and you added it for one year [2]. Unfortunately, it is not enough to stop the recent disruptions, as the relevant SPAs have passed autoconfirmed status. Could you consider adding ECP? See the recent history here: [3] Thank you. And happy Black Friday! — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 13:11, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Shibbolethink, At least one of the editors appears to be engaging on the talk page, so maybe follow the dispute resolution process and if you can't agree amongst yourselves ask for a third opinion or start an RfC. I don't think it would be right to use admin tools to force one side out of the debate. I can upgrade it to full protection so that nobody can edit it, or I can leave it as it is. Of course if it goes beyond the realms of a content dispute and into disruptive editing (edit warring against the outcome of an RfC, derailing discussions, sock puppetry, etc) then we can look at the stick, but let's try the carrot first. There's a chance we might get an improved encyclopaedia from it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Alright, will do. I'll give it the ol' college try, as they say. Thanks for the help. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 18:57, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

RfA nomination

I wish to contribute to Wikipedia in my scarce free time. I'm a BSc Biology graduate from India and soon hope to be a law student and also looking to become a police officer, which has been my childhood dream. I don't have much free time but I appreciate your consideration. I do not have many edits, I think I've around 20 edits but I'm actively procrastinating. Yes, I've read that the community has no formal guidelines to grant adminship, and other guideliness that the community takes RfA seriously, but I wish to run as a candidate for sure for the time being. Thank you.

SgtDrillSgt Sorry, it's not what you want to hear, but you have no chance whatsoever of passing an RfA at this time. As a minimum, you'd probably need 5,000 edits and six months' experience, and even that would be too little for many voters. You'd also need a strong record of article writing and involvement in internal processes like vandalism, deletion, and other admin processes, and you can't demonstrate a track record with 20 edits, unfortunately. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:28, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. I should first work towards achieving my dreams and then edit Wikipedia. Procrastination is bad anyways, especially in developing countries. Thanks!

SgtDrillSgt There are plenty of ways to contribute to Wikipedia without being an administrator. I find writing articles much more enjoyable than the administrative side. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:32, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

My block

Hi, my sincere apologies for my misuse of noticebaords, by no means I wanted to behave disruptively. I thought that reverting without breaking the three-revert-rule was allowed, Can I please ask you how should I act next time something like this jumps on me? Just to avoid this messy situation I put myself in.

Plus, Yesterday I forgot to say that on Adele the editor that i reverted was stating that She Is an R&B singer, faking the source, saying that he put a The San Diego Union-Tribune article, while in reality It was a "Sandiego.com" source, which Is a promotional hotel site. Thank you--Morce Library (talk)

@Morce Library: welcome back. I hope your time out wasn't too intolerable. While the three-revert rule is a bright-line rule and violations of it almost always result in a block, edit-warring without breaking the bright-line rule is still disruptive, especially on a highly trafficked article like Adele. It's important to use the talk page if you get into a disagreement and ask for outside input if you can't agree (eg by asking for a third opinion or starting an RfC). If there's an issue with the content in question, you can ask for help at one of the content noticeboards (like WP:BLN for BLP issues or WP:RSN for reliable sources). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:29, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your time! Morce Library (talk) 19:07, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Block of Hijiri88

The link to the AE thread in Hijiri88's block log is broken - it looks like you typoed "Special" as "Sepcial". Thryduulf (talk) 22:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Thryduulf, I know. That's unfortunate and clumsy, but I'm loathe to make another entry in their block log just to correct a typo in the summary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:33, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
Yeah. I suppose a hacky way around it would be to create that page with a link and explanation and then immediately G7 it with the correct link in the deletion summary. Thryduulf (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
I feel that most people would be able to fix that themselves when trying to follow the link. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 00:59, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for that! Can we block his/her/their IP range too? They seem to be building new sockpuppets as fast as they can (the Alec Baldwin vandal).

Enjoy this cookie for your efforts. Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk) 22:17, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue: You'd need a checkuser for that, but I've semi-protected the article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:19, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Partial block

Hi HJ Mitchell, hope you're doing well. Even tho I felt like my explanation was sufficient, clearly that wasn't the case. I'm very unhappy how things turned out, but you've been around for much longer, so I'm not going to argue or anything. But please, let me explain my rationale for the last time. Yes, I was aware of the DRN. As you can see from the Revision history of DRN, my reply was actually the last message in our back and forth, and an involved editor later agreed with me. As I said, I already planned to report the user, but only had time for it on Saturday during the weekend (it was Saturday in my timezone). If I didn't want to participate or anything, why would I engage in DRN so extensively and reply to every message to the point of my reply being the last one? If I know I'm in the right, I'm generally BOLD with my reverts, but even then I try to not reach 3 reverts. I felt like sourced content was being removed without valid justification, so I made those 2 reverts and separately asked the user to explain their reverts, so it doesn't become an endless edit-war. But when I saw that edit-warring wasn't going to stop and the explanation wasn't sufficient, I didn't engage in any further reverts and thought a report would solve the problems.

I'm ashamed of myself that I had to participate even partially with the edit-wars. I genuinely thought that 2 reverts weren't going to be a problem, but that clearly wasn't the case. Likewise, I hope to better myself, and if you could give any advice on moving forward, that would be appreciated. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:28, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, November 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:26, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

nice job with blocking ppl (very quickly)

The Admin's Barnstar
here ya go for being fast. Lopbunny69 (talk) 15:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Monisha Shah

Monisha Shah is a public person. Her entire career is in public service, and there isn't a single reason to assume she wants or desires privacy. It's depressingly familiar to see a white person on Wikipedia trying to rationalise the irrational. There's only one reason why people like Shah don't get the coverage that their white peers have, leading to absurdities such as Shah being the only non white person on the CSPL that doesn't have a Wikipedia biography. Krypto Massive (talk) 14:15, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Krypto Massive, there's only one reason she isn't covered in Wikipedia: she has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Notability in the Wikipedia sense is not the same as importance, it's about what has been written about elsewhere. Hence Wikipedia's detailed coverage of sportspeople and Pokemon, and its lack of detail on charity trustees and other people who might be considered "important". The standard isn't that high; it would only take a detailed biography in, say, The Guardian or The Telegraph, and at that point, when there would be something to write, the article can be re-created. But in my 12 years' experience as a Wikipedia admin, short articles on living people cause all sorts of problems. They get vandalised by people with an axe to grind (and the vandalism sometimes stay in place for a long time), and any tabloid controversy will be added to the article so it becomes a long series of random factoids rather than a coherent biography. Just have a quick skim of List of Wikipedia controversies to see what I mean. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:44, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
You clearly don't get it. There's a reason why non-white people don't get the same coverage white people do, and that goes for charity trustees as much as any other class of occupation. You claimed Shah is not a public person, so are sports people your idea of public persons? You might want to check that assumption. And I don't know what Wikipedia you are a member of, but this one doesn't remotely expect or require a "detailed biography" in The Guardian before granting people recognition, and is perfectly fine with short biographies. Your argument against Shah applies to anyone, and yet there's an obvious trend regarding who gets to have a short biography here and who doesn't. You are clealry blind to the fact you are part of the problem here, which is especially troubling since if you as an Administrator don't see it, nobody has any reason to. You're in denial. Krypto Massive (talk) 16:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm sure she has been approached many times for interviews, not least by the British-Asian media, but she just hasn't done any. I imagine this is because she was working as a senior BBC manager, & they don't like such people getting individual media profiles. Most of her career was in the highly commercial BBC Worldwide, which perhaps only indirectly counts as "public service". Johnbod (talk) 16:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
The BBC wouldn't dare tell a BBC employee that they can't do an interview, especially not if the reason they're being interviewed is simple biographical interest, and doubly so if the interest was to bring more visibility to successful minority figures. It couldn't be more obvious Wikipedia is being blind to its own racism. It's incredibly ironic that HJ Mitchell doesn't seem to be remotely concerned at the existence of a Wikipedia biography for Ewen Alexander Nicholas Fergusson, Shah's replacement on the CSPL. Where are the detailed biographies of that white man? Where is the concern his biography might be targeted by political enemies? Where is the case made that he is a public person, a career lawyer? Where is the objection to the fact that much of the boring biographical content comes not from independent sources, but his profile on the UK government website, published solely because he is on the CSPL, and an obituary of his father. It's good enough for the white man who clearly has no public profile and probably wishes he didn't have one, not the non-white woman who deserves it and hasn't done a thing wrong in her public life it seems. Her only enemies appaear to be Wikipedia editors. Krypto Massive (talk) 17:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
"The BBC wouldn't dare tell a BBC employee that they can't do an interview" - that's just naive. I'm sure senior executives at the BBC, as with most large corporations, have it in their contracts they must agree such things with the press dept. While the Beeb is generally keen to have front of camera people raise their profile, it's just the opposite with the highly-paid executives they like to pretend don't exist (to avoid fuss about said salaries). Note that Shah has also said she "doesn't do" social media. Johnbod (talk) 19:57, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Would that be the same BBC Press department which regularly carries quotes from behind the camera people for use by the media? It's naive to assume a press department, especially the BBC in this day and age, would be so stupid as to try and pretend their non-white staff simply don't exist. Where are you getting this stuff from? As for not doing social media, what possible relevance does that have? Krypto Massive (talk) 20:48, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Yes, that one. True, they are extending media promotion from just in-front-of-camera people to holding-the-camera people in some areas (but never others), but how often goes the executive producer back in London get coverage (unless its 40 years after the show goes out)? Where do I get this from - experience. Johnbod (talk) 20:59, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Krypto Massive Then where are the interviews? Shouldn't you be adding them to the DRV, or better still to the article last week, instead of accusing random Wikipedia editors of racism? You are conflating two different problems—systemic bias and Wikipedia's inclusion standards. As an administrator, I can only enforce the latter. Wikipedia is a microcosm of society; all the problems that exist in society in general exist on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia is not the place for fixing society's problems. Wikipedia is the place for recording facts that can be verified in independent, reputable publications. If I was to write an article about Shah based solely on the reliable, third-party sources provided in the article, its entire content would be:

Monisha Shah was the only non-white member of the Committee on Standards in Public Life. She stepped down in 2021, leaving the committee all-white. The resulting lack of diversity on the committee, prompting the chair of the committee to express concern about its lack of diversity.[1][2]

That's it. Three sentences, one of which isn't actually about her. Everything else in the article comes from press releases and self-published sources. You're right that systemic bias is a problem, but Wikipedia has to have criteria for inclusion, and Shah doesn't meet them. Being from an under-represented background does not mean that we should have a three-sentence article about her just to counter systemic bias. But if you're going to call me a racist for my lack of concern about two Wikipedia articles about people I've never heard of, this conversation is not going to last much longer. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:51, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Her UK government biography is neither a press release or a self published source. The Asian Express is a third party reliable source. And why are you even pretending Wikipedia requires biographies to be "based solely on ... reliable, third-party sources"? If you genuinely think that, then you need to stand down immediately, because you clearly aren't enforcing any Wikipedia policies that actually exist. Non-independent reliable sources are allowed. Primary and even self published sources are allowed. Context matters. You are perhaps enforcing your own idea of what Wikipedia policy should be, and Shah is the unfortunate victim, and yet Mr Fergusson is entirely unaffected. Two people you may never have heard of, but whose wildly different treatment by Wikipedia, despite their almost identical reason for being granted a Wikipedia biography (serving on the CSPL), is now known to you. If you can't or won't explain your lack of concern over or indeed the mere existence of that disparity, then yes, maybe there is a reason for your reluctance to acknowledge what might be causing it, a reason you perhaps have never through about, and maybe don't want to confront now. It's understandable. But I didn't force you to make the comments you did about Shah. I merely held you to account for them. Krypto Massive (talk) 18:19, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Krypto Massive, You're not "holding me to account". Ms Shah is not notable. The world is unjust. Wikipedia, as a microcosm of the world, is unjust. You know enough about Wikipedia to know that it's not one entity making these decisions but the product of thousands of people writing about what they're interested in. Fergusson attracted enough press coverage that he would probably survive an AfD. Certainly I could write more than a couple of sentences about him based on the reliable sources cited in that article. But I'm not telling you anything you don't already know. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:31, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
You persist in trying to pretend you aren't the problem, but you really are. There are bareley a thousand Wikipedia Administrators, and most of those aren't weighing in on matters such as this on a regular basis. Half are probably retired, awaiting demotion for inactivity. You're a powerful Wikipedia Administrator who on the one hand says they need to see "detailed biographies" in The Guardian before they will accept Wikipedia having a biography on Shah, who is apparently a private person who needs your protection, yet is quite happy to pretend a handful of negative news stories about one single aspect of his life, is enough to justify having a biography on Mr Fergusson. The sheer irony that those stories are referencing Shah too, is glaring. You are standing here asking me to accept you don't see these two cases as identical. That you don't see that in both cases, these are people's biographies, whose sourcing for other basic biographical details, for reasons of independence, reliability or reason for existing, aren't essentially identical. It doesn't wash, and I think you know it. There is a reason why you're refusing to accept these are incredibly similar cases, and you're refusing to accept Wikipedia does have the power to rectify it, without breaking any major policies (after all, the GNG is and only ever will be a guideline, and cases like Shah's probably show why that is wise). My preference would be to give Shah her biography, but it is equally fixed by deleting Mr Fergusson until such time as he can be given a biography that meets your higher standards. I put it to you that if the world is unfair, your reluctance to take your own words to their logical conclusion and ensure Wikipedia either has both or neither, and cannot thus be included in a charge of systemic racism, is a big reason for that. Krypto Massive (talk) 19:06, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Krypto Massive, you persist in conflating notability (based on verifiability) and importance or justice. The simple fact is that Fergusson's article is unlikely to be deleted because there is more verifiable information about him in this one piece alone than there is in all the reliable sources about Shah. Add in the coverage of cronyism and the Bullingdon Club stuff and there's probably just enough that he crosses the line. That line should be higher in my opinion. The last thing Wikipedia needs is more short biographies of living people that no-one pays attention to. We don't have the resources to monitor them and they often end up doing more harm than good. But my opinion is irrelevant. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:37, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
And you persist in pretending you didn't say initially that Shah would merit a biography once she had received detailed biographies in The Guardian, otherwise you would take the view she is a private person who Wikipedia should protect. Now, because you're unwilling to accept there is enough out there in reliable sources to write a short biography for her, and it really is the case she isn't getting one precisely because the GNG is a racist construct and no other reason, you're trying to make me seriously accept that basing a Wikipedia biography for Mr Fergusson, both it's acceptance and the majority of its content, from one single news story that is entirely negative in purpose (the idea he doesn't merit the role and only got it because of corruption), is somehow acceptable? Who do you think you are kidding? It's a slam dunk BLP1E. I could PROD that right now on grounds of "BLP1E/NPOV, only sources provided outside of that one news event comprise an obituary of their father, and a profile published by a non independent entity (gov.uk), neither of which are sufficient to demonstrate notability under the GNG". So come on, Mr Administrator, what is the policy compliant reason to decline that and send it to AfD, where you're apparently OK that it would result in a keep. How do you square this circle, and still somehow deny the obvious reality of what really explains this difference in outcomes? Would you even vote delete in said AfD? And if you did, would you be open about how your vote is a reflection of your personal wish, not actual policy/reality? Krypto Massive (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Krypto Massive, That's because it's not what I said. If she received a detailed biography in a newspaper, she would be notable. As to the rest, I don't. I rarely participate in AfD or other internal processes. I write articles (rarely about people) and block vandals and spammers. I leave the politicking to people who enjoy it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:10, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
And yet you showed up up give your opinion on Shah. I wonder why. It's entirely because people like you manage to learn a few stock arguments and that somehow gets you promoted to Administrator, while others who remember this is an encyclopedia where there needs to be an incredibly good reason why it should ignore the well established reasons why non-white people get less coverage and so should be granted a biography where there is enough to write one from reliable sources (WP:V, WP:RS), and there is no other identified reason why a serious encyclopedia would exclude such a person, and indeed, where there are glaring signs their omission is a disservice to the pursuit of knowledge, that Wikipedia is unable to persuade anyone to see it as anything other other than what an encyclopedia would look like based on what white Western males would think was important. Every single other person on the CSPL has a Wikipedia biography, including the person who replaced Shah, who is clearly less of public person than Shah, and is clearly more likely to suffer harm as a result. That is unjust, and unjustifiable. It's incredible how many words you have used to try and justify it, even though you have time and again, side stepped what I have said, in favour of trying to find some other way to persuade me I am wrong. That is a recognised flaw of Wikipedia. One of many. You have offered only excuses, palming blame off to others, and more worryingly, given ample evidence that you don't know Wikipedia policy as well as an Administrator should. And yet I am quite sure your position here is rock solid. If you had a different name, one wonders if the Wikipedia community would be so forgiving. Krypto Massive (talk) 20:38, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Krypto Massive, I showed up to offer an opinion on the actins of another admin, not on the subject. And for someone claims to be interested in an encyclopaedia, it's remarkable that you haven't actually contributed to it. Under this account anyway. Don't get me wrong, I don't care who you are as long as you're not causing disruption. I just find it ironic that you're spending all this time criticising me for my lack of efforts to counter systemic bias when, if that's your passion, your time would be better spent adding well-sourced content to the encyclopaedia about under-represented subjects. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)


References

  1. ^ Woodcock, Andrew (23 August 2021). "Diversity warning over sleaze watchdog after appointment of PM's university friend leaves it all-white". The Independent.
  2. ^ Allegretti, Aubrey (23 August 2021). "Chair of Whitehall sleaze watchdog laments lack of diversity on panel". the Guardian.

Penny for your thoughts?

Oversighter edit bribery? Surely not? Perhaps just a wind up but probably less than best practice to mix humour with AfD notices. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

Hello, how long is List of Sony Pictures Television programs being protected for? 85.255.233.21 (talk) 16:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

A month. I've fixed the duration now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

southampton cenotaph

hello, Harry! i had a few questions regarding this article and the associated blurb.

  • was this memorial really "the first of dozens by Lutyens to be built in permanent form"? i am assuming that the statement should be qualified by noting that this was the first such first world war memorial, since the anglo-boer war memorial was completed earlier. if so, i am assuming that "of dozens" will still be applicable, as evident from this list of his works.
  • is it appropriate to link to the Pylon (architecture) article? the cenotaph contains an architectural pylon, but the linked article appears to discuss egyptian temple gates. it appears that, over time, the word "pylon" has begun to refer not only to such gates, but also to either of the two towers of such gates, or to a single tower that looks similar to the towers of such gates. however, this currently does not appear to be clear in the linked article.
  • in the quote taken from the biography by brown, did brown actually write "his" in parentheses? if not, i am assuming that using square brackets would be more appropriate here.

apologies for all the questions! i hope they're not too much trouble to address. dying (talk) 10:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you today for the article about "another war memorial in another city, again by Lutyens. This was his first (it was already in progress when Lutyens got the commission for its much more famous sibling in London). In many ways informed those that followed, and in others it's a complete one-off. Either way, it's a big piece of the puzzle in the story of Lutyens and his war memorials."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

A birthday present barnstar for you!

The birthday present barnstar
My birthday present sent to you! Congrats! Severestorm28 (talk) 00:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
December songs

You got the TFA on your birthday? That's cute! Have a happy day for both reasons! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

vacation greetings from Munich, rich in culture, culinary events and meeting dear people. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

today, an Italian opera, my second ever, as the TFA written by two dear people, and a park where I went with dear people, as pictured DYK --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:56, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia (If you reside in the United States)

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 14:25, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Apolo1991, the slightest glance at my user page would tell you that I don't reside in the United States. I hope this lack of attention to detail is not reflected in the research itself. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:07, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Block appeal by User:Free1Soul

See WP:AN#Block appeal by User:Free1Soul. nableezy - 17:15, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

RR rights

Hi HJ, I revert edits by banned or blocked users quite a bit lately.-->[4] I'm asking for rollback rights to facilitate those tasks. Thank you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 16:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

GizzyCatBella, done, but please be careful. Especially in controversial topic areas. Remember that what may be obvious to you might not be to someone else. If in doubt, do it the old fashioned way and leave an informative edit summary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:00, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Yes, noted. I’ll see how it helps me. If I find it not helpful, I’ll ask you to withdraw those privileges. Thanks HJ.- GizzyCatBella🍁 21:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Pali-Aike volcanic field

Greetings, I have nominated Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pali-Aike volcanic field/archive1 for a featured article candidacy but so far it's languishing without much input. Do you have time to review the article? Thanks in advance. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:44, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Jo-Jo Eumerus, I'd be very happy to. I like your volcano articles. But I can't promise it'll be immediate. The day job is insane this time of year and my next day off is Christmas Eve. If I get chance before then I'll have a look, or I'll look over Christmas if the coords are happy to keep it open for another week. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:57, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks anyway. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:24, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Io, Saturnalia!

Io, Saturnalia!
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:55, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Old Exe Bridge scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the Old Exe Bridge article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 20, 2022. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 20, 2022, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:03, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Songs of the season

Holiday cheer
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 HJ. MarnetteD|Talk 15:12, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Promotion of Great Western Railway War Memorial

Congratulations, HJ Mitchell! The article you nominated, Great Western Railway War Memorial, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!

Season's Greetings
Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Kings (Bramantino) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 14:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hello HJ Mitchell: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

The Signpost: 28 December 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, December 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive:
  • On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate:
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.

Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages.

--Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi HJ Mitchell! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

vandalism by PolishBoyInUK and her puppets

From 8 januar 2022 he vandalizes and trolls [5] "PolishBoyInUK" again. His "creativity" is only harmfulness and poisonous deep vandalism. Can't such imbeciles be finally blocked? 2A01:C23:903A:8800:6161:BBB6:7C36:39FF (talk) 19:23, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Great Western Railway War Memorial scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 13 February 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:41, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

old exe bridge

hello, Harry! i had two questions regarding this article and the associated blurb.

  • the blurb and article lead both refer to "the arches across the river" being demolished. were these the arches above the river (and therefore crossed the river), the arches on the bank opposite exeter (and therefore were across the river from exeter), or perhaps some combination of both? on my initial reading, i had assumed that these were only the arches on the opposite bank, though reading the phrase "[t]he spans across the river" in the article body made me question this assumption, as the use of "span" more strongly suggested to me that these arches spanned the river, even though the span of an arch may not be long enough to span a river.
  • were the uncovered and restored arches actually uncovered and restored in 1969? the blurb states this, while the article lead merely states that it happened during the construction of the twin bridges. the article body and the cited sources i can access also appear to be similarly unspecific regarding when exactly the uncovering and restoration happened.

dying (talk) 00:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

January songs

Thank you today for thearticle about "something completely different", saying "This is an ancient bridge in Exeter, south west England, built from about 1190. For 600 years, if you wanted to travel west from Exeter, you did it by crossing this bridge. The River Exe is now crossed by a pair of bridges built in the 1960s but the remains of the mediaeval bridge (by then buried under the river bank and a road) were restored and you can now walk across it again, not that it leads anywhere."! My father loved bridges! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Break?

Your last edit (as of now) was on January 13. Please don't tell me that you are leaving forever, I am wishing that you will be back. Severestorm28 03:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions topic area changes

In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.

The topics proposed for revocation are:

  • Senkaku islands
  • Waldorf education
  • Ancient Egyptian race controversy
  • Scientology
  • Landmark worldwide

The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:

  • India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
  • Armenia/Azerbaijan

Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.

Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. --Barkeep49 (talk) 16:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions topic area changes

In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.

The topics proposed for revocation are:

  • Senkaku islands
  • Waldorf education
  • Ancient Egyptian race controversy
  • Scientology
  • Landmark worldwide

The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:

  • India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
  • Armenia/Azerbaijan

Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.

Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. --Barkeep49 (talk) 04:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, January 2022

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:45, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:20, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for input on a featured article candidacy

Greetings, I have nominated Lake Estancia for a featured article nomination. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. The instructions for the review process are here. Thanks in advance for any comments. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:58, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

TFA

February songs
frozen

Thank you today for Great Western Railway War Memorial, introduced: "This article is part of two lose series that have been on my back burner for a while (railway company war memorials and Charles Sargeant Jagger's war memorials). It follows on from my previous nominations of Jagger's works, the Royal Artillery Memorial and Portsmouth War Memorial."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Valentine's Day edition, with spring flowers and plenty of music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Fixing a double-redirect

I was just looking through the list of double-redirects and one is a sysop protected page list of Power Rangers Dino Super Charge Episodes which looks like it should just redirect to Power Rangers Dino Charge. Cheers! -- MacAddct1984 (talk | contribs) 12:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Macaddct1984, thanks. I've fixed it. And the protection probably isn't necessary any more anyway so I've removed it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

RfA question

Hello! I saw your name over at Wikipedia:Request an RfA nomination, and want to get your opinion on my suitability for an RfA nomination. I really appreciated your straightforward and honest critiques on the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster FAC, and am hoping to get similar feedback for this. Thanks! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 10:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HJ_Mitchell/Archive_125&oldid=1073327609"