→Administrators' newsletter – June 2024: new section
Tags: Reverted MassMessage delivery
|
→So I was chatting with Barkeep49...: new section
|
||
(26 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
Line 18:
:I haven't done a deletion review before, I hope I'm doing this properly :) [[User:Kapitan110295|Kapitan110295]] ([[User talk:Kapitan110295|talk]]) 04:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
::{{u|Kapitan110295}}, as the people who have responded to the discussion have already pointed out, DRV is appropriate if there was an issue with the prior deletion discussion/closure itself. In this case, the situation is that you are asserting that there is now a notable topic by this name, unrelated to the discussion at RfD 3 years ago, so you would have been better off skipping DRV and just drafting a new article since there’s nothing for DRV to evaluate. You can still do that by withdrawing the current discussion (if you’re not sure how to do that, just leave a comment saying that you want to withdraw and someone will do the rest) and then proceeding to start working on the article. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 13:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
== Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment ==
Line 284 ⟶ 208:
:Hi {{u|Tumbuka Arch}}, [[WP:RSP]] is not a list of reliable sources per se, it is a list of sources that have been repeatedly, exhaustively discussed. Most sources used on Wikipedia are not listed there. If you are uncertain about a source’s reliability and want the community’s input, you can start a discussion at [[WP:RSN]]. Alternatively, if there’s been disagreement in whether or not it’s reliable enough to be used in the contexts you have been relying on it, you can open an [[WP:RFC]] at RSN to hopefully get a clearer consensus. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 14:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
==
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | [[File:NPPbarnstar_SE.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" |
'''Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray; width:100%;" | This award is given in recognition to Rosguill for accumulating at least 200 points during the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! [[User:Hey man im josh|Hey man im josh]] ([[User talk:Hey man im josh|talk]]) 19:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
|}
== May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Streak award ==
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #e7dddf;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | [[File:Rack and pinion animation.gif|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" |
'''Rack and pinion Award'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray; width:100%;" | This award is given in recognition to Rosguill for accumulating at least 15 points during each week of the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! [[User:Hey man im josh|Hey man im josh]] ([[User talk:Hey man im josh|talk]]) 19:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
|}
==Socking IP (belonging to {{noping|Bensebgli}})==
Hi, you mentioned in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pors&diff=prev&oldid=1227398360 this edit] that [[Special:Contributions/2404:3100:18a9:69ea:1:0:fe6c:aa0b|this IP]] has behavioural similarities to a [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bensebgli|sockfarm]] , they still seem to be socking using the [[Special:Contributions/2404:3100:1800::/40|same range]] , and have personally attacked me multiple times. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rajput_Mughal_marriage_alliances_(2nd_nomination)&diff=prev&oldid=1226273371] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rajput_Mughal_marriage_alliances_(2nd_nomination)&diff=prev&oldid=1227667773] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Liz&diff=prev&oldid=1227669844][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rajpur&diff=prev&oldid=1227665190] <span style="font-family:'forte'">[[User:Ratnahastin|<span style="color:#A52A2A;">Ratnahastin</span>]] <b>([[User talk:Ratnahastin|talk]])</b></span> 15:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{u|Ratnahastin}} Given how much the IP jumps around, I'm not seeing a range that we could block. I would offer to remove or strike messages with personal attacks, but it seems like that's essentially been taken care of already. You can request page protection if they make disruptive edits. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 19:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
::Just to let you know, their range ([[Special: Contributions/2404:3100:1800::/40|2404:3100:1800::/40]]) has been blocked by {{noping|Spicy}} as a checkuser block. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3A2404%3A3100%3A1800%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%2F40&type=block] <span style="font-family:'forte'">[[User:Ratnahastin|<span style="color:#A52A2A;">Ratnahastin</span>]] <b>([[User talk:Ratnahastin|talk]])</b></span> 12:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
== Suspicious IP address accounts ==
Hello i was just wondering what could be done about suspicious accounts such as this one @[[User:77.87.98.59|77.87.98.59]] which does nothing but revert articles in order to remove mentions of Chechens? Can it be blocked or could the articles they spam be locked so only people with a certain amount of edits can access them? because this account does nothing but remove mention of Chechens like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orstkhoy&diff=prev&oldid=1228478832 here] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Durdzuks&diff=prev&oldid=1227817460 here], my rollbacks to original versions (which me, Wikieditor and others agreed upon) are still being removed and i don't want to edit war. [[User:Goddard2000|Goddard2000]] ([[User talk:Goddard2000|talk]]) 21:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
:Looks like they took a break from editing shortly before you left this message. While their pattern of edits is concerning, I'd like to see more concrete evidence that their edits are clearly tendentious--there's one or two where they give a completely misleading edit summary, but the majority indicate justifiable reasons for changes (e.g. removing unsourced material or material not verifiable with the cited source). If you can demonstrate to me that these justifications were false a block would be in order, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort at this moment given the chance that the IP goes dormant. If disruption continues at these pages it's a basis for protection. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 22:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
::The two examples i provided are not enough evidence? the IP is literally just removing any mention of Chechens in the intro from articles such as Orstkhoy (a major Chechen tribe) and Durdzuks (an ancient exonym for Chechens). I am sure you remember how me and Wikieditor/Muqale debated about various sections in these articles but nowhere did any of us disagree that both Orstkhoy and Durzuk are related to Chechens, the talk pages are testament to that if we disagreed on something it was rather who the tribe/exonym was related to most. The removal of unsourced material is fine but again it seems to have been done due to it having mentions of Chechens but the main issue with his edits (the most recent ones) is the removal of the sentence about the Chechen ethnicity of Argun district and the villages transferred to it. This part: '''"due to them belonging to the same nation as the locals (Chechen) and geographically closer to the central governance of the Okrug."''' He removes it despite it existing in the source on page 3 in the bottom, again it was already accepted by other editors who usually disagree with me. Only the IP addresses seem to be disagreeing, in my opinion it is enough to ban. [[User:Goddard2000|Goddard2000]] ([[User talk:Goddard2000|talk]]) 01:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
:::I see your perspective, and I hadn't realized on the first glance how much sourced text concerning Chechen ancestry was included in the rest of the [[Orstkhoy]] article and had just been paying attention to the sections they changed, which were unreferenced. I also hadn't realized that the "return to stable version" (which it in no way was) was their second edit, out of the blue, which to me signals that they both a) clearly have edited Wikipedia before and b) fully understand how disruptive and misleading their editing is. I'm going to go ahead and block for a month or so, given that the IP has about a week of stable history. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 02:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
== User:Benicaverra ==
In February, you gave [[Special:Contributions/Benicaverra|Benicaverra]] a UPE warning, which they ignored. On 6 June, they reappeared, removed your warning from their talk page, and made several drive-by "votes" at AfD, all deletes except two keeps at [[WP:Articles for deletion/Matt Hunt (journalist)]] and [[WP:Articles for deletion/MacGregor (filmmaker)]], both SPA-created articles. This smells like a UPE network, but I'm not sure how best to proceed except raising it at [[WP:COIN]], which probably won't achieve much. I already emailed the CU mailing list with the concerns, given that it wasn't obvious enough to build SPI case on, but no action seems to have been taken. Do you have any suggestions? --[[User:Paul_012|Paul_012]] ([[User talk:Paul_012|talk]]) 03:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
:The ignored warning followed by AfD disruption seems like enough for me to justify a block. You may want to also file an [[WP:SPI]] between this account and the two accounts that created those AfDs, as they're both SPAs with less than 50 edits, and a CU check may turn up more accounts as well. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 03:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks. I've filed an SPI at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Benicaverra]]. --[[User:Paul_012|Paul_012]] ([[User talk:Paul_012|talk]]) 04:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
== So I was chatting with Barkeep49... ==
...and we were talking about the need to develop better information on Afro-centric reliable sources. Barkeep49 pointed me to [[Wikipedia:New_page_patrol_source_guide#Africa|this page]] and, on looking at its history, it seems you started it and have been constantly improving it. Thank you for your work here! It is a hidden gem that just highlights how knowledgeable editors like yourself do so much to help improve the project quietly, consistently, and professionally. [[User:Risker|Risker]] ([[User talk:Risker|talk]]) 02:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
|
![]() | This user is a polyglot and likes languages a bit too much for their own good. They're happy to try to speak to you here in Spanish, German, French, Portuguese, Italian, Hebrew, Yiddish, or Russian, although they may need to switch back to English depending on the subject matter. For a full list of proficiencies, see their User page. |
![]() | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
An editor has asked for a deletion reviewofMoroccanoil. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Kapitan110295 (talk) 04:12, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Barkley Marathons on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm coming back into Wikpiedia after a long break to cool down from life in general and Wikipedia to a degree. As I was on my way out of the door I gained an indefinite ban at ITN, enforced by you per the logs. So as a reminder to me, what is required for me to appeal against this, is it simply a thread at ANI or some other request? Thanks in advance. The Rambling Man (Been a while, I know......) 22:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Wikimedian,
You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.
This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.
Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.
On behalf of the UCoC project team,
RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rosguill, hope you're doing well. I was thinking about make a section about this topic [1]. Where do you think it will be most appropriate, WP:ANorWP:ANI? I feel like the latter doesn't pay much attention to these kind of issues, but I'm not sure. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A redirect 2024–25 SA20 that User:Thesagar75 had created twice, and whom you had blocked in Jan, has been recreated by User:Sagar Singh 9, account created in March. Jay 💬 20:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rosguill. Shravan Tiwari has been moved back to the mainspace. I noticed in the page history that you draftified it in January citing UPE/block evasion concerns; so, I'm just letting you know as a couresy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Really hoping you have the time right now. Only the private evidence is private. So, we can talk about the rest of it on wiki. Have you considered becoming a CU? If anyone needs it, that's you. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, per WP:BLOCKEVIDENCE, related to Special:Diff/1206604402 and Special:Diff/1223193298, please make sure you are reporting UPE and other private evidence blocks so that they can actually be reviewed. Primefac (talk) 16:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The community has rejected the idea of individual administrators acting on evidence that cannot be peer-reviewed.
Is there anyway we can protect this article per WP:GS/AA enforcement action? An IP has been removing referenced information since 3 May. --Kansas Bear (talk) 12:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Following that user's block from the specified 2 articles, could I ask you to glean through his other ones in the related subject? He has a history of warnings. From what I've seen, his style is inflammatory, and his contributions are large chunks of barely-relevant, poorly sourced and badly written text. AddMore-III (talk) 23:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
![]() |
thanks for your contributions! :) xRozuRozu (t • c) 04:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply] |
You don't know about the whole Perakans! As a Malaysian, I still know everything about Peranakan ,you don't know how many ethnicities Peranakan are out there, do you know the difference between Peranakan Chinese Baba Nyonya , Baba Yaya , Kiau Seng ? 2405:3800:84B:1E32:91A6:951B:7279:2F04 (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article is about Peranakans with Chinese ancestry. For Peranakans with Indian ancestry, see Chitty. For Peranakans with Eurasian ancestry, see Kristang. For Peranakan Muslims of Indian, Malay and Arab descent, see Jawi Peranakan.signed, Rosguill talk 17:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hey, did you had a chance to read the discussion before looking it?
I would appreciate if I could get an answer to my questions regarding the request for enforcement in that topic, specifically regarding the policy I have quoted regarding re-instating of content in dispute.
I hope you cold see I am coming with good fait and instead of fighting we could have a fruitful conversation...
"Many users believe that unregistered users' sole contributions to Wikipedia are to cause disruption to articles and that they have fewer rights as editors compared with registered users. Studies in 2004 and 2007 found that although most vandalism (80%) is generated by IP editors, over 80% of edits by unregistered users were not vandalism."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Welcome_unregistered_editing
Hope that you will address my concern regarding the policy instead of choosing the easy route of calling me disruptive and dismiss my request for rules to be enforced equally :) 109.64.78.25 (talk) 18:04, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Rosguill, I just noticed that you redirected the page about String Quartet No. 4, Op. 35. I realize that I probably didn't address the notability concerns properly and later forgot about it. Now, the page is deleted, and I believe this work by this Canadian composer is important and notable for Wikipedia readers, as it has been performed on multiple occasions in several countries, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. I would like to ask if you could restore the deleted page and give me a chance to improve it and prove its notability with reliable sources. Thank you, Patrick0506 (talk) 13:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rosguill, see the unblock request at User talk:Make Way For The King. I have already sent an OS request for their edit summaries at Kolkata Knight Riders. Pinging @K6ka who blocked them for their awareness. S0091 (talk) 19:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. Where is the evidence there was "extensive copyvio of the original English episode summaries" in Love, Chunibyo & Other Delusions: Heart Throb? Now that the history has been deleted, I can't check them for myself to verify your claims. You've also inadvertently left List of Love, Chunibyo & Other Delusions episodes with half of its content now gone without any episode list whatsoever for the 2014 series, which is not exactly helpful.--十八 20:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Currently Progressive Zionism forwards to Reform Zionism, where it is claimed that "Reform Zionism (is) also known as Progressive Zionism" but there is no source supporting this claim. This is a misleading claim in the US and in much of the rest of the world. I suggest that this sentence be changed to "Reform Zionism (is) sometimes known outside the US as Progressive Zionism." In the United States, and in the global Zionist movement, Progressive Zionism often refers to a non-religious successor to non-religious Labor Zionism. It is misleading to say that Reform Zionism is also known as Progressive Zionism.
The only part of the Reform Zionism opening paragraph that alludes to this claim is the last sentence, which reads "In Israel, Reform Zionism is associated with the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism." But Progressive Judaism is not ordinarily another term for Progressive Zionism, Progressive Judaism is another term for Reform Judaism. If you go to the website for the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism and do a search for "Zionism" - https://reform.org.il/en/?s=zionism - you will get no responses. It does not use the term "Progressive Zionism" to describe itself. I looked at all of the available sources cited in this article and almost none of them refer to the term "Progressive Zionism."
It seems that only outside of the US, Progressive Zionism sometimes used to mean Reform Zionism. Arza (Association of Reform Zionists of America) Canada almost exclusively uses the term Reform Zionism, and occasionally uses "Progressive Zionism" on their website. As one moves further from the US, the term Progressive Zionism is more commonly used to mean Reform Zionism. Arza Australia https://arza.org.au/about-us/ uses "Progressive Zionism" and Reform Zionism and the World Union for Progressive Judaism uses the term "Progressive Zionism" to mean what in the US is Reform Zionism.
But in the US and in some English media in Israel, Progressive Zionism has a different meaning. It means Progressive in the political sense, not the religious sense. Progressive Zionism in the US has nothing to do with Reform religious Judaism. For example, the 1st hit in a Google search is https://ameinu.net/about-ameinu/progressive-zionism/ . Ameinu is a non-religious organization with a historical connection to Labor Zionism. The 2nd hit is a Hadassah interview with Nomi Colton-Max, the VP of Ameinu. After the Wikipedia article about Reform Judaism, the 4th hit is a Jewish Currents article called "Progressive Zionists Choose a Side." This is not an article about Reform Jews, the Progressive Zionists in the article are『the Peace Bloc—Americans for Peace Now (APN), T’ruah, J Street, the New York Jewish Agenda, the National Council for Jewish Women, Ameinu, Reconstructing Judaism, and Habonim Dror, many of which operate as a loose coalition called the Progressive Israel Network (PIN)』 The 5th hit is https://www.habonimdror.org/progressive-labor-zionism/ , which is part of the Progressive Israel Network and affiliated with Ameinu. Even in American Reform Synagogues, Progressive Zionism is not equated with Reform Zionism. The guest speaker at a Stephen Wise (one of the largest Reform temples in Los Angeles" program about Progressive Zionism is Ken Bob, the president of Ameinu. https://swfs.org/calendar/progressive-zionism-in-light-of-october-7-%F0%9F%99%8B/ This demonstrates that in the US, even Reform Zionists don't think that Reform Zionism is also known as Progressive Zionism.
Internationally, when the official American Zionist Movement presents itself to Israel and the rest of the Zionist world, Progressive Zionism is distinct from Reform Zionism. See https://azm.org/elections/ . The "Reform Zionist" slate is Vote Reform: ARZA Representing the Reform Movement and Reconstructing Judaism. In its description, it calls itself "the largest constituent of ARZENU, the umbrella organization of Reform and Progressive Religious Zionists." Note - "Progressive Religious Zionists," NOT "Progressive Zionists." The Progressive Zionist slate is Hatikvah: Progressive Israel Slate. Its description is "proudly supported by Aleph, Ameinu, Americans for Peace Now, Habonim Dror, Hashomer Hatzair, J Street, Jewish Labor Committee, New Israel Fund, National Council of Jewish Women, Partners for Progressive Israel and T'ruah ..." - these are the same Progressive Israel Network organizations that are what Americans generally mean when they say Progressive Zionism. The only religious group in the bunch is T'ruah, which is non-denominational - it is not affiliated with Reform Judaism.
In English-speaking Israel as well, Progressive Zionism generally means left-wing political Zionism, not Reform Judaism Zionism. If you look at the articles in The Times of Israel tagged "Progressive Zionism - https://www.timesofisrael.com/topic/progressive-zionism/ - most of the articles are about what in the US is considered Progressive Zionism, for example this article about the merger between Ameinu and Americans for Peace Now.
Please make that correction in the Reform Zionism article, and restore the article I started writing about Progressive Zionism as it is commonly known in the US, in the modern-day global Zionist movement, and in the English-language Israeli press. Of course the "Progressive Zionism" could include the fact that outside the US, some English-speaking countries use the term "Progressive Zionism" to mean what in the US is known as Reform Zionism. Tysonsahib (talk) 16:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
Is this "allowed" to be rev-del'd? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oi!&diff=next&oldid=1226101870 Thanks! Myrealnamm's Alternate Account (talk) 15:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rosguill, I saw you reverted someone here adding a site on perenial sources page with a reason "rv addition, 3 discussions all of them small, one of them not at RSN, none of them formally closed, and discussion looks like more of a "no consensus" balance than "generally reliable" to me."
While I am not related to the case, I just would like to know the steps I should take so that the site The Nation (weblink: https://www.mwnation.com/) could be added there or on the list of reliable sources.
I tried posting this here but don't know if the outcome will be the same.
Another thing is that I frequently create articles using this source, so I really need the community's input on it.
Thanks.
--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 10:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
![]() |
Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar | |
This award is given in recognition to Rosguill for accumulating at least 200 points during the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 19:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply] |
![]() |
Rack and pinion Award | |
This award is given in recognition to Rosguill for accumulating at least 15 points during each week of the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 19:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply] |
Hi, you mentioned in this edit that this IP has behavioural similarities to a sockfarm , they still seem to be socking using the same range , and have personally attacked me multiple times. [3] [4] [5][6] Ratnahastin (talk) 15:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello i was just wondering what could be done about suspicious accounts such as this one @77.87.98.59 which does nothing but revert articles in order to remove mentions of Chechens? Can it be blocked or could the articles they spam be locked so only people with a certain amount of edits can access them? because this account does nothing but remove mention of Chechens like here and here, my rollbacks to original versions (which me, Wikieditor and others agreed upon) are still being removed and i don't want to edit war. Goddard2000 (talk) 21:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In February, you gave Benicaverra a UPE warning, which they ignored. On 6 June, they reappeared, removed your warning from their talk page, and made several drive-by "votes" at AfD, all deletes except two keeps at WP:Articles for deletion/Matt Hunt (journalist) and WP:Articles for deletion/MacGregor (filmmaker), both SPA-created articles. This smells like a UPE network, but I'm not sure how best to proceed except raising it at WP:COIN, which probably won't achieve much. I already emailed the CU mailing list with the concerns, given that it wasn't obvious enough to build SPI case on, but no action seems to have been taken. Do you have any suggestions? --Paul_012 (talk) 03:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...and we were talking about the need to develop better information on Afro-centric reliable sources. Barkeep49 pointed me to this page and, on looking at its history, it seems you started it and have been constantly improving it. Thank you for your work here! It is a hidden gem that just highlights how knowledgeable editors like yourself do so much to help improve the project quietly, consistently, and professionally. Risker (talk) 02:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]