User:FlyingKiwi/Dash
CAVEAT: all the |show= parameters have been set to 7 days.
AB = Administrative Backlogs
[edit]Administrative backlog
[edit]AIV= Administrator intervention against vandalism
Reports
[edit]- Rajarmmohan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – Tripped filter 1320 (LTA 1320, details). Report false positive. DatBot (talk) 10:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Insufficient recent activity to warrant a block. And really all they seem to need to do is move what they're creating to userspace. Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
User-reported
[edit]
CSD= Candidates for speedy deletion ; PROD= Proposed deletions
| Candidates for speedy deletion | Entries |
|---|---|
| User requested | 0 |
| Empty articles | 0 |
| Nonsense pages | 0 |
| Spam pages | 3 |
| Importance or significance not asserted | 1 |
| Other candidates | 12 |
The following articles have been proposed for deletion for around 7 days:
( source / chronological order / expired )
{{CSD backlogs}} 7 backlognav + 2 + 5 single cat
| BLP articles proposed for deletion by days left – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files with unknown source – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files missing permission – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Disputed non-free Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Replaceable non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Proposed deletion – No backlog currently |
|---|
Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons – 5 items
Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons – 10 items
Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old – 1 item
Requested RD1 redactions – 2 items
Expired proposed deletions of unsourced BLPs – No backlog currently
UAA= Usernames for administrator attention ; RFPP= Requests for page protection
- Need an username (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
- Magwanka (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
This username matched "wank" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 08:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- GabriellagarcíaAlexandrajenkins (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
- PapaStinka (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 15:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)- This username matched "stink(|s|ing|er|y)" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 15:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Note on file the word "stinky" is not of itself sufficiently offensive to be blockable -- DQB (owner / report) 15:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- LoooonelyyyyyHeeeaaartsCluub (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
- Ars364235 (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
- Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 19:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- This username matched "Used 3 instead of e attempting to skip filter: arse. Violating string: arse642e5" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 19:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
User-reported
[edit]- Deez nut$445 (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as an inappropriate username. Johnj1995 (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Wait until the user edits. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 20:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Eve Tera (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. See contributions and abuse log. --Ratekreel (talk) 20:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Not a violation of the username policy. Stage names and pen names are permitted except when they imply that the editor is a specific living person they are not. Consider filing a report at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Cullen328 (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Cullen328, I just want to make sure I understand the policy correctly. It states, "
This is not considered promotional, even if commercial performances or publications are made under such a name, unless the user makes promotional edits within Wikipedia about themselves, their projects, etc.
" Unless I'm mistaken, my interpretation is that Eva Tera clearly violated username policy because he did make promotional edits within Wikipedia about themselves (see the now-eleted Draft:Eva Tera) --Ratekreel (talk) 07:05, 20 October 2024 (UTC)- Ratekreel, yes, their edits were promotional which led to their draft being deleted. That is why the template I used said
Consider filing a report at the conflict of interest noticeboard
. If the editor had not written promotional content about themself and had instead reverted vandalism or written neutral, well referenced content about their home town or a nearby park or a historical event, then we would not be having this conversation. The promotional draft was the problem, not the username. The username policy specifically allows pen names and stage names. Cullen328 (talk) 07:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)- Cullen328, sorry, I'm still not getting it. I agree that stage names are allowed but the policy goes a step further by saying, "
unless the user makes promotional edits within Wikipedia about themselves, their projects, etc.
" Eva Tera made "promotional" edits about himself within Wikipedia and hence username is against policy. My interpretation of the policy is username (I mean WP:USERSTAGENAME) becomes problem when a user makes promotional edits about themselves. --Ratekreel (talk) 09:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)- Ratekreel, the name is Eve, not Eva. If the name were a stage name, you may have a point. If it's their real name, you don't. There doesn't appear to be any evidence one way or the other on that. Things did not progress to the point of the user establishing that they are notable, in which case a well-known block might have been appropriate. In the meantime, wait and see. Cabayi (talk) 10:05, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Using your real name is never an username problem. It might be a conduct issue if they are spamming, but it's not a problematic username. Secretlondon (talk) 15:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Cullen328, sorry, I'm still not getting it. I agree that stage names are allowed but the policy goes a step further by saying, "
- Ratekreel, yes, their edits were promotional which led to their draft being deleted. That is why the template I used said
- Hi Cullen328, I just want to make sure I understand the policy correctly. It states, "
- Reefamusic (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a misleading username. LR.127 (talk) 14:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Stale: This account has not been used in the last 2–3 weeks. Or actually not since 29 June 2022. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for increase in protection level
[edit]Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Reason: Disruptive and High level IP vandalism, changing the content of articles as per own whims and fancies, violating the discussion on talk page. Imsaneikigai (talk) 06:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent disruptive editing from multiple IPs. Continuously inserting flag icon into infobox. Annh07 (talk) 16:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent disruptive editing from multiple IPs. Continuously inserting flag icon into infobox. Annh07 (talk) 16:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent disruptive editing from multiple IPs. Continuously inserting flag icon into infobox. Annh07 (talk) 16:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Vandalism, WP:CT/AP 2601:282:4700:272:50F0:E7D6:AFEA:BC4C (talk) 17:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. See WP:ATPROT. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 18:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 18:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Very High level of IP & non-IP vandalism. Perz00 (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. As WP:KURDS. El_C 18:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – Per ARBPIA. Controversial subject and matter related to current wars in Middle East. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Round 2. El_C 18:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent removal of well-sourced content by what appears to be an IP sock. — Your local Sink Cat (The Sink). 19:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: For 12 days now, two IPs have been revert warring over something in this article. Some time off may be beneficial to both. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:6826:7ED6:69A8:AF98 (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. FMSky (talk) 19:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
[edit]Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
- To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
- Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
- Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
- If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Current requests for edits to a protected page
[edit]Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
- Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among
{{Edit protected}},{{Edit template-protected}},{{Edit extended-protected}}, or{{Edit semi-protected}}to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed. - Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the
{{Edit COI}}template should be used. - Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
- If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
- This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
My suggestion is to leave out the following 2 sentences in the "German complicity" paragraph as they seem to be based on misunderstandings:
"She also highlighted police suppression of pro-Palestine protests throughout Germany[509] as evidence of state complicity.[508] Karen Wells et al. highlight how Germany has entrenched its complicity in Israel's actions by banning use of the word "genocide" in reference to Israel.[471][better source needed]"
1. In general violent protests are not allowed in Germany. As some of the first pro-Palestine protests were violent, they were sometimes forbidden by courts, if they were expected to turn violent. But that is common policy in Gemany with all subjects and not special for pro-Palestine protests.
Meanwhile, there even is a calendar concerning pro-Palestinian protests[1] with daily up to 20 protests all over Germany. Thus, there is no general police suppression of pro-Palestine protests as is suggested by the current wording.
2. The word “genocide” is not banned in reference to Israel in Germany - maybe that was a misunderstanding: What is not allowed in Germany is to call for genocide against Jews. The slogan “From the river to the sea” is seen as such call and banned. Gilbert04 (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @FortunateSons: A quick browse shows at least for the first part support for removal, can you add any additional incite? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed #2. But there does seem to be evidence that pro-Palestine protests have been banned in parts of Germany at times.[2][3][4].VR (Please ping on reply) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[5]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately that source seems incomplete. Germany has indeed suppressed peaceful criticism of Israel.[6] And Washington Post says "A planned photo exhibit in southwestern Germany was canceled as a result of social media posts by its curator, including one describing “genocide” in Gaza."[7] VR (Please ping on reply) 22:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[5]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Consider changing "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations, and accused the court of being antisemitic, which it often does when criticised" to "The Israeli government has been accused of consistently weaponizing antisemitism against it's critics, including in the ICJ ruling." Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Weaponization of antisemitism page hyperlinked over "often done" has many sources to draw from regarding the accusations' consistency and nature.
- My main concern with the original text is that it's voiced as if it's an observation made by a Wikipedian. The benefit here is that the weaponization of antisemitism has a clearer consistency grounded outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps other ways to word this out include adding a time scale (increasingly accused since Oct. 7th) or specifying the critique (against critiques of their actions since Oct 7th).
- If a lead paragraph change is necessary, there may be reason to outline Israeli motives and conditions for the genocide, including Zionism and anti-Arab racism. Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[10][11] and a form of Holocaust erasure[12], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[13][14][15][16]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not as familiar with the Holocaust erasure claims, but I'm happy with that reworking! If that weaponization of Holocaust denial detail isn't on the weaponization of antisemitism page already, it might be a worthwhile phenomenon incorporate if there's more citations you can find. I might look into it myself. Thanks! Ecco2kstan (talk) 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- That does sound quite balanced. +1 from me. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[10][11] and a form of Holocaust erasure[12], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[13][14][15][16]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Inform readers of the distinction between the dagger symbol and the cross symbol in the infobox.
Under "Commanders and leaders" in the infobox Yahya Sinwar has a dagger next to his name, but others such as Marwan Issa have a cross next to their name. The distinction between these symbols is not immediately clear to someone reading the article, I feel that this should be explicitly noted on the page. The Elysian Vector Fields (talk) 20:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @TheElysianVectorFields: That isn't the article page, that's the infobox template. I changed the target for you above. It seems the dagger means "killed in action" (KIA) and the cross means "assassinated". I honestly don't know how I'd add a note to that effect. Maybe someone smarter than me can figure it out. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
The last few sentences of the second lead paragraph regarding assassinated Hamas leaders are too detailed for the lead. I don't believe including all of their names without reason is appropriate when the Infobox can convey a simpler understanding of their demise and state. Instead, figures of utmost relevance should be accounted for with reasons outside of their killings.
My suggestion is to change this:
In January 2024, Saleh al-Arouri, the deputy political chief of Hamas, was assassinated in Beirut, Lebanon. In July, Israel claimed to have killed military leader Mohammed Deif in an airstrike in al-Mawasi. In August, Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas was assassinated in Tehran, Iran. In October, Yahya Sinwar, the chief and preceding political leader of Hamas, was killed in a shootout in Rafah.
To this:
Throughout 2024, Israel has killed many of Hamas' political and military officials. Prominent figures killed by Israel include Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar, who have collectively served as political leaders for Hamas since 2007, and supposedly[citation for clarity] Mohammed Deif, who led Hamas' military branch, the Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades, since 2002.
This connects to Israel's goals described prior to this section, while establishing the impact of those killings pertaining to Hamas and Palestine as a whole. The readability of this is a bit wonky though, so if you have any better ideas, please let me know! Ecco2kstan (talk) 04:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- OOPS! I made a mistake in the title. This DOES NOT pertain to the Gaza Genocide article! This is about the Israel-Hamas War. Ecco2kstan (talk) 04:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Move Saleh al-Arouri from military to political due to him being the Deputy Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau before his death ElementalKnight987654321 (talk) 06:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Handled requests
[edit]
| 24 protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Updated as needed. Last updated: 14:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC) |
| 9 template-protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Updated as needed. Last updated: 18:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC) |
RFA= Requests for adminship
RFP= Requests for permissions
Autopatrolled
[edit]- Rubystaramaryllis (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Meets minimum criteria, no articles deleted, no behavior issues Mach61 17:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is borderline... no deletions, but quite a high proportion of their articles have outstanding cleanup tags. I might have granted it if it was a self-request but as it is,
Not done. – Joe (talk) 13:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Originalmess (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Meets minimum criteria (by a hair), no articles deleted Mach61 17:38, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Haha hi, thanks. I'm not very active anymore due to the need to continue getting my life together but will probably return to creating articles someday. I occasionally review pages and always check GNG, policies, etc before creating articles. I have no interest in wasting time or causing trouble! originalmesstalk 07:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- StuggerMax (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Hello, I’m requesting Autopatrolled rights to help reduce the New Pages Patrol workload. I focus on classical Greek topics and have translated many pages from the Greek Wikipedia, having created over 50 pages so far. With these rights, I could streamline my contributions and make the review process easier. Thank you for considering my request. StuggerMax (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Done, I see there were some issues with copyright and sourcing when you started editing, but they haven't reoccurred recently. – Joe (talk) 13:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yummifruitbat (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I have returned to editing after a looooong wikibreak (life happens). Before that I was a reasonably active user in good standing for a couple of years and created quite a few articles only one of which was deleted (while I was on wikibreak so not around to add the additional sourcing, from specialist publications, that it needed to confirm notability).
I'm in the process of updating many out-of-date articles about carnivorous plants, including filling in large gaps in the taxonomy, so I have well over 100 new pages on my to-do list. To reduce the burden on NPP, I'd like to request autopatrolled before I start churning through those please. YFB ¿ 16:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
(oh, edit conflict proved me correct)
- Well, that's been a wikibreak of extraordinary length. Welcome back! As you will appreciate, Wikipedia has moved on in the 17 intervening years. I've had a look at the nine articles that you have produced since you've become active again. The expectation is that articles by autopatrolled editors are clean and don't need attention by others. However, that's not the case for the stubs that you produce, with recurrent issues being lack of categories, tagging for single source or orphan status, DEFAULTSORT missing for bios, and a variety of WP:MOS issues. I suggest that you keep a close eye on how other editors tweak your articles and if you take all those things on board, your articles will be clean enough for becoming autopatrolled in no time. Not done for the bot. Keep up your good work! Schwede66 20:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I hope that you don't perceive the words above as patronising, Yummifruitbat. Schwede66 21:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Respectfully, yes I do. The combination of the manner of your review of my contributions, the edit summaries you used, and the points you chose to pick up on (dashes and subtleties of date formatting; missing linebreak before stub tag; an incorrect accusation of including an unsourced DoB in a BLP where the date was actually ref'd but the ref wasn't repeated directly alongside the date; downgrading another reviewer's assessment from 'Start' to 'Stub') led me to decide to withdraw my nomination as I already felt patronised and demotivated. You replied to my query on your talk page (about the DoB comment) in a way that implied I might not be able to figure out why you, an Admin active on this backlog, were suddenly reviewing my recent contributions. Your comment here reads as though my additions have been borderline worthless. 'The stubs you create', 'recurrent issues', 'lack of categories', 'tagging for single source or orphan status' (the latter both transient one-offs). My understanding was that NPP was supposed to catch and address articles with major issues - BLP problems, serious POV/COI, GNG, WP:NOT, vandalism - not trivial issues of formatting? Perhaps I had the wrong end of the stick. Either way, the net effect is that I feel pretty bitten / tag-bombed and strongly regret placing a request here. YFB ¿ 22:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear that you feel like this, Yummifruitbat. However, I have to respond to those accusations:
combination of the manner of your review of my contributions
– I've reviewed all of your articles created since you became active again last year. What is wrong with that?the edit summaries you used
– when I review editor contributions for autopatrolled, I try to be clear and informative so that it's helpful to the editor going forward. Which edit summary or summaries did not sit right with you?the points you chose to pick up on (dashes and subtleties of date formatting
– whenever I review an article, I run a couple of scripts that fix dashes and date formats. You may notice that I have not commented on dashes or date formats above, and in fact, I don't think I ever have as part of a review. I do not consider that relevant to autopatrolled flags.missing linebreak before stub tag
– that's something that's useful to know; it wasn't like that 17 years ago. Are you suggesting that you don't want to know when you are editing outside of what MOS prescribes?an incorrect accusation of including an unsourced DoB in a BLP where the date was actually ref'd but the ref wasn't repeated directly alongside the date
– thank you for posting about that on my talk page. I acknowledged that I did misunderstand that and proposed a way to resolve this. Isn't that normal editor interaction?downgrading another reviewer's assessment from 'Start' to 'Stub'
– I downgraded the assessment because it was wrong; Andreas Fleischmann is a stub and very far from being start class.tag-bombed
– I didn't place a single tag, so how can you possibly feel "tag-bombed"?
- As I said before, what we are looking for at autopatrolled is editors who can consistently produce clean articles that don't need attention by others. If you have further thoughts on my responses, please don't hesitate to bring them up. Schwede66 00:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I won't leave a long reply here as it doesn't seem appropriate to clog up this page. I recognise and accept that you have not intentionally patronised me, and to be clear I'm not accusing you of anything (apart from the DoB thing which we have discussed and resolved). What I've intended to describe above is the impression that your approach to the review gave me as a returning editor - and it did give that impression, whether or not you intended it, otherwise I wouldn't have been in the middle of withdrawing my request when you posted your response. I will explain more fully on your talk page. YFB ¿ 01:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear that you feel like this, Yummifruitbat. However, I have to respond to those accusations:
- Respectfully, yes I do. The combination of the manner of your review of my contributions, the edit summaries you used, and the points you chose to pick up on (dashes and subtleties of date formatting; missing linebreak before stub tag; an incorrect accusation of including an unsourced DoB in a BLP where the date was actually ref'd but the ref wasn't repeated directly alongside the date; downgrading another reviewer's assessment from 'Start' to 'Stub') led me to decide to withdraw my nomination as I already felt patronised and demotivated. You replied to my query on your talk page (about the DoB comment) in a way that implied I might not be able to figure out why you, an Admin active on this backlog, were suddenly reviewing my recent contributions. Your comment here reads as though my additions have been borderline worthless. 'The stubs you create', 'recurrent issues', 'lack of categories', 'tagging for single source or orphan status' (the latter both transient one-offs). My understanding was that NPP was supposed to catch and address articles with major issues - BLP problems, serious POV/COI, GNG, WP:NOT, vandalism - not trivial issues of formatting? Perhaps I had the wrong end of the stick. Either way, the net effect is that I feel pretty bitten / tag-bombed and strongly regret placing a request here. YFB ¿ 22:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Not sure what magic template is required to awake the bot, but happy for this to be archived now. YFB ¿ 19:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Confirmed
[edit]- Casa del Espiritu Santo (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Reason for requesting confirmed rights Hello, I am unable to move article from sandbox to main page. I have had the account for more than 4 days and have made the 10 edits. Please advise thank you Casa del Espiritu Santo (talk) 19:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not done You made exactly one edit before making this request, and you haven't created a sandbox pages on this Wikipedia, so I'mn not sure what you are even talking about. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 19:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bramnickatriot (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Hello, I have another account that is semi-confirmed, I have this account mainly for image uploading, and I need to edit some semi-confirmed articles to update the images. Bramnickatriot (talk) 03:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bramnickatriot what other account? Please use that account to post a reply here, so we can confirm that it's you. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:03, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- User:12.47563.OH Bramnickatriot (talk) 05:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bramnickatriot can you please confirm from that account that you are the same person? Also, you should disclose your alternative accounts on your userpage. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Elli I can confirm I am the same in both accounts. 12.47563.OH (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bramnickatriot can you please confirm from that account that you are the same person? Also, you should disclose your alternative accounts on your userpage. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- User:12.47563.OH Bramnickatriot (talk) 05:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done Elli (talk | contribs) 18:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Page mover
[edit]
- Nuvolet (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I'd like to get this right to delete unnecessary redirects (i.e. move pages over existing single revision redirects regardless of target). Additionally, I would also like to try to harmonize some pages of Spanish municipalities with the name of the country and the province (when necessary) instead of other subnational units (such as comarca). Moreover if a double denomination exists in some cases, I shall use the slash with spaces in between to enhance visual effect of different linguistic nomenclatures. However if an English form is more relevant I shall use it instead of double and local denominations. Other than that I could help elsewhere to move pages if necessary. Thank you, Nuvolet (talk)
- A reasonable number of moves, but I not seeing any WP:RM/TR requests and am concerned by this RM which – based on the previous RM – seemed doomed to fail in the first place. This discussion also looks to be going against you. Primefac (talk) 18:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I only can say I'll be responsible if you grant me this right. I can participate in more TM, I just need to get usedd.to them. Yes it failed however I understood the norms and moved similar articles to Countryname. I opposed to Anatolian plateau because there are other geographical units that use capitalization in similar contexts. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 01:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer
[edit]- DM5Pedia (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I've been doing RC Patrolling (as a part of Anti-Vandalism) on Wikipedia for a while now, and I think that having the Pending Changes reviewer permission could be a good idea - there have been numerous instances involving a pending changes edit that I look at while looking through Special:RecentChanges that i wanted to accept/deny/etc, and i feel that this permission would be beneficial for my efficeincy. DM5Pedia 04:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Legendbird (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Hi! I believe that I'd be a good Pending Changes Reviewer, as I have a good amount of time on my hands, and can do monotonous tasks, like denying obvious vandalism, and the like. I meet, what I believe are all the requirements for this right, and humbly ask to receive this privilege. Thanks in advance! Legendbird (talk) 09:06, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Legendbird. Thanks for your enthusiasm. The good news is: you can already revert obvious vandalism! If you'd like to help out, you can go to Special:RecentChanges and revert obvious vandalism. There are a few tools you can install, like Wikipedia:Twinkle to make this easier, and automatically warn vandals too. I'd be happy to grant you PCR once you've gained some experience with these tools. For now, I can't see a track record yet to see if you've understood vandalism enough, so I'll be marking this as Not done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Cactinites (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Reason for requesting pending changes reviewer rights: I am an Wikipedian for more than three years and part of various wikiprojects I need permission to expand my works on Wikipedia and also to observe Wikipedia articles. Cactinites (talk) 15:28, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Gonzafer001 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
To review pending changes on Wikipedia Gonzafer001 (talk) 09:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yovt (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I’d like to request pending changes reviewer rights. I have been active on Wikipedia for a while, focusing on improving content quality and helping maintain the integrity of articles. I am not new to reviewing edits, as I use edit-request tools to answer several requests by unregistered/registered editors that wish to see changes on several articles. I have read all policies on how to handle this right and know the responsibly that comes alongside it. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 16:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Imconfused3456 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I like helping out and reviewing recent changes, and I would like to be able to contribute further by receiving pending changes reviewer rights. Imconfused3456talk 01:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Rollback
[edit]- Cooldudeseven7 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Reason for requesting rollback rights: I have done TWO rollback rights request, and I am happy to say that I have surpassed 200 mainspace edits and have also surpassed 1 month of Recent Changes Patrolling.I love the ability to help, and I already love to prevent vandalism with the help of Ultraviolet and Twinkle. I am ready to join the rollbacker force to get access to more tools, like AntiVandal and Huggle for even faster response. Don't worry, I won't bite the newcomers unless necessary! Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits! 
13:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([17][18]). — MusikBot talk 19:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Could you please comment on this edit and subsequent warning from @Oblivy. Why did you make this edit and do you believe it was appropriate for Oblivy to warn you? -Fastily 05:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- I was a beginner at the time and I did not think that I would have to read the diffs for an edit that causes the word "its" to change to "it's." I really think that it was important for Oblivy to warn me, as it teaches me to never just blatantly use find and replace. Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits! 01:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- For what it’s worth the rapid fire use of find and replace gave me some concerns. I did look through their edits and this seemed to be a one-off, and the immediate acceptance of responsibility and efforts to resolve are praiseworthy. OTOH automated tools in the wrong hands can cause a lot of havoc in a hurry… Oblivy (talk) 09:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I did not mean to cause any harm back then and I now decided that reading diffs is important and you cant just do a repetitive shortcut to find and replace on articles. Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits! 17:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I did not mean to cause any harm back then and I now decided that reading diffs is important and you cant just do a repetitive shortcut to find and replace on articles. Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits!
- For what it’s worth the rapid fire use of find and replace gave me some concerns. I did look through their edits and this seemed to be a one-off, and the immediate acceptance of responsibility and efforts to resolve are praiseworthy. OTOH automated tools in the wrong hands can cause a lot of havoc in a hurry… Oblivy (talk) 09:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hey! This is Cooldudeseven7 again, and i'm just asking if there is any progress on this Rollback case? Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits! 11:15, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've randomly sampled your recent edits and I'm seeing an unacceptably high number of serious mistakes. In addition to the error above, I found:
- Here, you offered poor advice and almost inappropriately moved the page to userspace. Pages like this are not acceptable on Wikipedia, even in the userspace.
- Editors may remove warnings from their talk pages at any time, meaning this revert followed by these warnings (1, 2) and subsequent AIV report are extremely inappropriate
- I'm not sure why you felt the need to insert a
{{Static IP}}template here. Not a helpful edit. Also worth noting that this doesn't belong in a section header, which breaks the page formatting.
- I think you need to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works (i.e. quit RC Patrol for now and go make article contributions instead) before applying for advanced permissions. To be clear, RC patrol isn't a race to see who can revert the most edits, so please don't treat it as such. Closing as Not done. -Fastily 23:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, but am I not allowed to ever submit again because of these or are you just saying wait a bit? Cooldudeseven7 tea talk 00:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- You can resubmit at a later time. I would recommend waiting a good amount of time, addressing comments left above, and making sure you are ready and qualified. You may also want to consider WP:CVSCHOOL, after addressing the feedback above. (Non-administrator comment) Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 13:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Cooldudeseven7 tea talk 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- You can resubmit at a later time. I would recommend waiting a good amount of time, addressing comments left above, and making sure you are ready and qualified. You may also want to consider WP:CVSCHOOL, after addressing the feedback above. (Non-administrator comment) Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 13:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, but am I not allowed to ever submit again because of these or are you just saying wait a bit? Cooldudeseven7 tea talk 00:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've randomly sampled your recent edits and I'm seeing an unacceptably high number of serious mistakes. In addition to the error above, I found:
- I was a beginner at the time and I did not think that I would have to read the diffs for an edit that causes the word "its" to change to "it's." I really think that it was important for Oblivy to warn me, as it teaches me to never just blatantly use find and replace. Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits!
- Could you please comment on this edit and subsequent warning from @Oblivy. Why did you make this edit and do you believe it was appropriate for Oblivy to warn you? -Fastily 05:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- TheWikiToby (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
(Trying this again because one of my scripts broke the template)
I have been reverting vandalism and patrolling recent changes for over a month now. The last time my request was declined, I simply hadn't been patrolling for a month at that point, and @Fastily had no other objections. I have consistently warned all vandals I reverted and reported many to AIV. I believe I'm ready to have rollback now. Also note that I am a pending changes reviewer. TheWikiToby (talk) 17:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([19]). — MusikBot talk 17:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make (especially when reverting good faith edits). Are you aware of tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet which make this extremely easy? -Fastily 23:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Fastily Diff by diff:1. Completely forgot that there is a warning template for NOTFORUM. The last time I used that warning was all the way on Sept 13 [20] which is more than a month ago. Completely skipped my mind.
2. I have no explanation on this one; I probably just forgot.
3. No explanation either.The earlier failures seem to be one off mistakes I made that happen to be close together, but the revert that happened just today is definitely very unfortunate for me not to warn. The sea of reverts I've made mostly have warnings other than the above, so I don't exactly know how I managed to forget to warn at all. I'll make sure this doesn't happen again. TheWikiToby (talk) 01:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)- Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of not biting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -Fastily 21:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. I promise a warning/explanation for every revert I perform from now on. TheWikiToby (talk) 21:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of not biting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -Fastily 21:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Fastily Diff by diff:1. Completely forgot that there is a warning template for NOTFORUM. The last time I used that warning was all the way on Sept 13 [20] which is more than a month ago. Completely skipped my mind.
- I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make (especially when reverting good faith edits). Are you aware of tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet which make this extremely easy? -Fastily 23:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bigeditingideas (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Reason for requesting rollback rights: I have experienced myself with editing on Wikipedia and undoing vandalism on Wikipedia, and I think I am ready to undo vandalism the easy way. If anyone could reach out to me so we can get this settled and I can have my rights, then that would be great. Thanks! - Bigeditingideas (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not done I reviewed your contributions and found little to no recent anti-vandalism work. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 23:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Jlwoodwa (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I've been patrolling Special:RecentChanges for vandalism, and I sometimes encounter editors who rapidly vandalize many dozens of pages before being blocked. In these cases, I don't need to check each diff before reverting it, so I'm requesting rollback to more efficiently handle them. I am also interested in the tools that require rollback, such as Huggle. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done -Fastily 23:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Footer
[edit]Policies and links