Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Deletion review for Moroccanoil  
3 comments  




2 Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment  
1 comment  




3 Enforcement of community ANI-based ban at ITN  
3 comments  




4 Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C  
1 comment  




5 Question  
2 comments  




6 TheSagar  
2 comments  




7 Shravan Tiwari  
3 comments  




8 Sent you a mail again  
4 comments  




9 Private evidence blocks  
10 comments  




10 Çankaya Mansion  
3 comments  




11 Got Milked  
2 comments  




12 A cup of tea for you!  
1 comment  




13 Peranakans  
3 comments  




14 Request to receive response for my claims in the discussion although I am not "qualified"  
2 comments  




15 redirect of the page: String Quartet No. 4 (Ichmouratov)  
7 comments  




16 TPA removal and rev/del request  
3 comments  




17 Re: Love, Chunibyo & Other Delusions: Heart Throb  
5 comments  




18 Progressive Zionism  
3 comments  




19 Rev Del Request  
3 comments  




20 HELP  
2 comments  




21 May 2024 NPP backlog drive  Points award  
1 comment  




22 May 2024 NPP backlog drive  Streak award  
1 comment  




23 Socking IP (belonging to Bensebgli)  
3 comments  




24 Suspicious IP address accounts  
4 comments  




25 User:Benicaverra  
3 comments  




26 So I was chatting with Barkeep49...  
2 comments  













User talk:Rosguill: Difference between revisions




Page contents not supported in other languages.  









User page
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
User contributions
User logs
View user groups
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 




Print/export  



















Appearance
   

 





Help
 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Browse history interactively
 Previous editNext edit 
Content deleted Content added
→‎Happy New Year!: new section
(419 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 7: Line 7:

| algo=old(60d)

| algo=old(60d)

| archive=User talk:Rosguill/Archive %(counter)d

| archive=User talk:Rosguill/Archive %(counter)d

| counter=39

| counter=42

| maxarchivesize=75K

| maxarchivesize=75K

| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}

| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}

Line 13: Line 13:

| minthreadstoarchive=2

| minthreadstoarchive=2

}}

}}

== Deletion review for [[:Moroccanoil]] ==

== Sanction ==

An editor has asked for [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#Moroccanoil|'''a deletion review''']] of [[:Moroccanoil]]. 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.<!-- Template:DRV notice --> [[User:Kapitan110295|Kapitan110295]] ([[User talk:Kapitan110295|talk]]) 04:12, 11 May 2024 (UTC)



: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)

Good evening, [[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] as the administrator who imposed the restrictions — [[User talk:Товболатов/Archive#Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction|indefinitely topic-banned from articles related to ethnic minority groups in the former Soviet Union, broadly construed]].

::{{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)

In my first [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive320#Result of the appeal request by Товболатов|appeal to AK]], 4 admins suggested I contribute on other topics, as I was asked so I [[xtools:pages/en.wikipedia.org/Товболатов|contributed]]. You also told me to work on other topics before the appeal. Please reconsider your decision of 17 February 2023 to restrict the topic. Sincerely [[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 14:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)



== Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment ==

:{{u|Товболатов}}, acknowledged. The contributions list looks promising at a glance, but I would ask that you take this appeal to AE as I don't have time to do it due diligence in a timely manner. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 14:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)



[[File:Internet-group-chat.svg|48px|left|alt=|link=]]Your feedback is requested &#32;at [[Talk:Barkley Marathons#rfc_67E48AB|'''Talk:Barkley Marathons'''&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment]]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of [[WP:FRS|Feedback Request Service]] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by [[WP:FRS|removing your name]].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by [[User:Yapperbot|Yapperbot]] :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact [[User talk:Naypta|my bot operator]]. &#124; Sent at 17:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] All right, I'll try again.--[[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 14:36, 19 September 2023 (UTC)



== Enforcement of community ANI-based ban at ITN ==

::Hi, {{u|Rosguill}} refused me in Arbitration, yes there is strict judgement, it is always so, I have seen many times how people are judged in the Russian section. Please don't send me to Arbitration anymore.)) After some time I will appeal to you again, if you have free time, you will decide for yourself. Just don't judge me harshly, you can see that I admitted my mistakes and apologised, and after that I had no violations. Anyone can make mistakes, no one is immune to it.--[[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 08:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)



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. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] <small>([[User talk:The Rambling Man|Been a while, I know......]])</small> 22:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

:::{{u|Rosguill}} Good morning, can you please reconsider my appeal on the restriction. I haven't broken any rules in 8 months. I have created articles in other areas.--[[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 06:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

::::{{u|Товболатов}} Sorry, after your last and rather catastrophic appeal at AE, I'm not going to touch this sanction unilaterally. I also note that you've made relatively few edits since then, and that your only talk page engagement on en.wiki has arguably been [[WP:CANVASS]]ing violations of your ban. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 14:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

::::{{u|Rosguill}} Judging people is a big responsibility. Maybe it's for the best. Thank you, kind man.--[[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 15:54, 25 October 2023 (UTC)



:{{u|The Rambling Man}}, community bans should be appealed at [[WP:AN]] by opening a thread. I'd maybe recommend taking a few months of on-wiki editing before rushing to appeal though, I would expect that to greatly increase chances of succeeding. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 03:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

:::::Hi, [[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] once again I would like to contact you regarding my case. Yes I did the newsletter at the beginning of the year, it was my mistake, I admit it and I have apologised. It's been a long time about a year. Could you reconsider the topical ban, remove the blocking, I did not violate. I created 114 articles in the English section. I want to make useful contributions to the English section on Caucasus. Regards --[[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 14:48, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::My prior comment stands, {{tq|I'm not going to touch this sanction unilaterally}}. I would further expect that AE would interpret most of the edits you've made since your last request would be dismissed as busybody work. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 16:00, 27 November 2023 (UTC)



::Yes of course. Thanks for your response. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] <small>([[User talk:The Rambling Man|Been a while, I know......]])</small> 11:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I have no big offences, for spamming violation yes one day or week blocking understand. Other offenders with full blocking you will remove the blocking. I don't understand why I'm being treated like this. I was editing for two years before the violation, no one told me that I am a violator. At the beginning of this case was the administrator Callanecc he warned everyone that it is not inappropriate to violate, I did not violate anything kept away from disputes. It was the other editors who were arguing. Then when you took over the case you took their side, they realised that they could violate the warning of the Callanecc administrator. They immediately started correcting everything in the articles. That's where the big argument came from. Yeah, I got carried away with the argument, I agree, but I didn't do that big of an offence. When Reiner Gavriel disappeared, I was blamed for everything. For my contribution after the offence, I was thanked by many members. You have to understand me too, it's not my fault. Sincerely--[[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 16:35, 27 November 2023 (UTC)



== Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C ==

:{{u|Товболатов}} You continue to have recourse to AE if you want to appeal your sanction. Please do not email me about this further. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 22:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::I also think that you may have a fundamental misunderstanding of how sanctions work on en.wiki and the expectations surrounding sanctions appeals. I would recommend reading through [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks]] and related pages carefully. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 22:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

:::Ok. Хорошо [[User:Товболатов|Товболатов]] ([[User talk:Товболатов|talk]]) 07:14, 28 November 2023 (UTC)



<section begin="announcement-content" />

== Misleading RfC wording ==

:''[[m:Special:MyLanguage/Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024/Announcement – vote reminder|You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.]] [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate&group=page-{{urlencode:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024/Announcement – vote reminder}}&language=&action=page&filter= {{int:please-translate}}]''



Dear Wikimedian,

Hey. There is an RfC [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_of_Kosovo#RfC_Should_Jonima_and_Muzaka_be_considered_Commander/leaders_of_this_battle? there]. Its wording has 2 issues. One is that is not a neutrally-worded brief question/statement, and the second is that it is misleading because the "second view" does not reject the "first view". Can you take a look if time permits, and if necessary advise the editor who made the RfC on how to solve the issues I raised? I think that a single sentence like "Should Muzaka and Jonima be part of the infobox?" is what is needed. [[User:Ktrimi991|Ktrimi991]] ([[User talk:Ktrimi991|talk]]) 22:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)



You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

:It has been reopened even though I don't see any ground to discuss this obvious matter. [[User:AlexBachmann|AlexBachmann]] ([[User talk:AlexBachmann|talk]]) 16:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC)



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 [[m:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024|voting page on Meta-wiki]] to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

== The Wikipedia Library ==



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 [[m:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Charter|review the U4C Charter]].

Hello again my friend. I'm coming to you with this issue because in the past you informed me of the existence of [[The Wikipedia Library]], which since then has been a very valuable resource for me when editing pages and finding sources. However, I have run into an issue. The site that I use the most is Newspapers.com. I was recently trying to find sourcing to help improve the [[Jeff Hartings]] article but ran into a paywall when I tried to click on one of the links to the newspaper article, saying that I need to "choose a subscription to view the page". In the past I've had no issues with the database. I was under the impression that the database was free to access. Is there some content that really isn't viewable without paying? If you know how to resolve this I appreciate the help. [[User:Mannytool|Mannytool]] ([[User talk:Mannytool|talk]]) 21:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)



Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

:{{u|Mannytool}} you should still be able to access Newspapers.com’s paywalled content with the Wikipedia Library; IIRC, a few months back they changed how our access is managed, however. It’s been a while since I’ve set it up, but I believe you should be able to get it by finding the Newspapers.com entry in the WL’s list of databases, and then creating a free account on Newspapers.com. At that point I think you should have access. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 21:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

::Strangely, it's not allowing me to create an account. I had an account that I used before, but I believe I made it outside of the Wikipedia database so it was not necessarily connected to Wikipedia. I'm currently trying to make one through the link but it's giving me an error message, saying "unable to create new account." I may just have to revert back to my other account because it does allow me access to some newspaper articles, but not all of them. [[User:Mannytool|Mannytool]] ([[User talk:Mannytool|talk]]) 21:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

:::Hm, I’m pretty sure there’s some Wikimedia staff that is responsible for making sure WL resources are accessible, I’d look through the related WP-space pages and see if you can find someone to contact for help. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 22:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

::::After doing some looking, I've found that evidently this is not a new issue per [[Phab:T322916|T322916]]. In fact, this specific issue that I ran into has existed at least since early 2023. Why I'm only just now running into it, I'm not too sure. Hopefully it can be resolved here soon. [[User:Mannytool|Mannytool]] ([[User talk:Mannytool|talk]]) 04:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)



On behalf of the UCoC project team,<section end="announcement-content" />

== Elisa Jordana ==



[[m:User:RamzyM (WMF)|RamzyM (WMF)]] 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill. Researching Wiki articles created by the subjects of the article as a form of self-promotion were something of a hobby of mine for a little while, and I ran across [[Elisa Jordana]], which seemed like an obvious example of the genre. I trimmed it down quite a bit and was going to nominate it for deletion, then found you already did that a while back (result was no consensus). I was wondering, now that almost 4 years have passed and there has been zero notability of this person in the interim, if you wanted to nominate it again. [[User:Fred Zepelin|Fred Zepelin]] ([[User talk:Fred Zepelin|talk]]) 22:28, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

<!-- Message sent by User:RamzyM (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Election/2024/Previous_voters_list_2&oldid=26721207 -->



== Question ==

:You're welcome to take a crack at it, but the given that the last AfD was the ''4th'' such nomination, it may be a lost cause. You could try wikilawyering that because the first AfD resulted in redirect, and all subsequent AfDs resulted in no consensus, the page should stand as a redirect and not as an article. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 01:48, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

:: I look at it from the other side of the coin - the nominations were spammed by IP addresses and new accounts, and now that some time has passed, we may see only actually real editors weighing in, which will probably get a definitive result either way. Anyway, I nominated it. Let the community decide, hopefully without the actual subject of the article weighing in. [[User:Fred Zepelin|Fred Zepelin]] ([[User talk:Fred Zepelin|talk]]) 20:30, 14 November 2023 (UTC)



Hi Rosguill, hope you're doing well. I was thinking about make a section about this topic [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_205#User%3AAtakhanli%2C_a_sysops_from_Az.Wikipedia]. Where do you think it will be most appropriate, [[WP:AN]] or [[WP:ANI]]? I feel like the latter doesn't pay much attention to these kind of issues, but I'm not sure. [[User:HistoryofIran|HistoryofIran]] ([[User talk:HistoryofIran|talk]]) 18:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

== Page recreated ==



:{{u|HistoryofIran}} Presuming that your intent is to investigate the other suspected sockpuppets/collaborators, I think ANI is most appropriate. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 19:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi, You AFD'ed a page in 2020 [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raybak Abdesselem|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raybak Abdesselem - Wikipedia]] it was created twice and deleted as well, 4 times deleted, and a sock-puppet made it to [[Raybak Melk Abdesselem]] all the references are same except 2, here's the request to delete [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raybak Melk Abdesselem]] [[User:Wprep|Wprep]] ([[User talk:Wprep|talk]]) 17:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

==TheSagar==

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.<span style="font-family:Segoe Script">[[User:Jay| Jay]]</span><span style="font-size:115%">[[User talk:Jay| 💬]]</span> 20:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)



:Blocked as obvious sock, noting that they'd already been pinged for various disruptive edits as well. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 15:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

== Compromised account? ==



== Shravan Tiwari ==

{{user|BurtonReingold}}, see this edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grey_triggerfish&diff=prev&oldid=1185905788]? [[User:Knitsey|Knitsey]] ([[User talk:Knitsey|talk]]) 19:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)



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. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|talk]]) 06:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

:Not sure it's necessarily compromised given how few edits the account has made overall, but their editing since October is clearly NOTHERE material. Blocked indefinitely. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 19:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

::OK, thanks for checking. [[User:Knitsey|Knitsey]] ([[User talk:Knitsey|talk]]) 19:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC)



:{{u|Marchjuly}}, this ended up being quite the rabbit hole, see [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maheshworld]]. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 15:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

== Nomination ==

::Thank you for looking into this. I didn't realize things were that messy. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|talk]]) 21:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)



== Sent you a mail again ==

Why do you say it's promotional? [[Draft:Nomination_(brand)]] The information is all taken from third-party sources and not direct ones. National newspapers like Repubblica and Il Sole 24 Ore are two important dailies in Italy. I've added new information from other sources and the international trend on TikTok and I delete some sentences. What do you think now? [[User:Kaspo|Kaspo]] ([[User talk:Kaspo|talk]]) 23:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC)



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,<span id="Usedtobecool:1715346935105:User_talkFTTCLNRosguill" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;'''[[User:Usedtobecool|Usedtobecool]]'''&nbsp;[[User talk:Usedtobecool|☎️]] 13:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)</span>

:The article still has a lot of phrases that read like PR filler, e.g. {{tq|nearby Florence, a city with a centuries-old tradition of goldsmiths and jewelers. Working as an ice cream maker in youth, he realizes how jewels are a status symbol and decides to create a customizable bracelet just like the flavors of an ice cream that everyone can choose from to create something unique}}... {{tq|In the 1990s, after the first big success in Italy, the brand got famous in the North European countries and straight after the United States.}} Cosi uno scrive annunci nelle riviste, ma non nei articoli di Wikipedia. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 01:50, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

:Get well soon, Rosguill. Sorry to have put you in the position. I default to you cos of the NPP connection. Best,<span id="Usedtobecool:1715365339417:User_talkFTTCLNRosguill" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;'''[[User:Usedtobecool|Usedtobecool]]'''&nbsp;[[User talk:Usedtobecool|☎️]] 18:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)</span>

::All good {{u|Usedtobecool}}, it was an honest mistake on both our parts and I don't think anyone's planning on throwing the book at us yet (just y'know, opening the book and pointing to a page). <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 18:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

:::@[[User:Usedtobecool|Usedtobecool]] {{+1}} I was thinking the same for a while now that Rosguill would become a good CU. Since SPI has a backlog now and needs a few helping hands, I think this will be the right time to apply if they feel it is interesting. Regards! [[User:Maliner|Maliner]] ([[User talk:Maliner|talk]]) 17:50, 14 May 2024 (UTC)



== Question ==

== Private evidence blocks ==



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. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 16:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Could you please check [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Swalors|this request of mine at WP:AN]]? Thank you! Best regards, [[User:WikiEditor1234567123|WikiEditor1234567123]] ([[User talk:WikiEditor1234567123|talk]]) 05:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

:In fact, administrators who are not Checkusers or Oversighters should not make private evidence blocks at all, per [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Confidential evidence]], which states {{tqq|The community has rejected the idea of individual administrators acting on evidence that cannot be peer-reviewed.}}

:Please send cases like this to either a CU, OS, or to ArbCom. I for one am more than happy to take 'private evidence' referrals from admins in my functionary capacity. [[User:Firefly|<span style="color:#850808;">firefly</span>]] <small>( [[User talk:Firefly|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Firefly|c]] )</small> 17:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

:{{u|Primefac}}, {{u|firefly}}, noted! I hadn't been aware of that clause. I will collect the relevant emails and send them along. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 17:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

::Might be a good idea to include a reminder in the next Admin Newsletter. [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 17:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

:::It's been in [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/2022/10|there before]]. Any sort of reminder might make more sense when the new [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard/Archive_14#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict_of_interest_management_closed|paid editing queue]] launches (something I hope Rosguill gives serious thought about applying for). [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 18:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

::::I'll look into it when it's time, although my first impulse regarding this (and the encouragement to pursue CU status in the section above) is that for as long as actual new page patrolling makes up a significant portion of my editing, taking on these additional roles might make me more judge-jury-and-executioner than is really appropriate (at least from the vantage point of anyone on the receiving end). <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 18:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

::I believe that the only relevant materials I have actually acted on are related to the QuadriSayedSahab case; I have not reviewed anything related to the second diff concerning Annuarif although I believe I did receive an email this morning (I have been sick recently and have thus been applying less than my usual diligence in responding to requests). {{u|Usedtobecool}}, please forward relevant further correspondence to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org and/or firefly per their volunteering here. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 18:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

:::It's done. Thanks firefly. I did often wonder if it's functionaries I should be contacting but that wasn't the practice that I learned when I was learning, and missed that RFC as well.<span id="Usedtobecool:1715365232666:User_talkFTTCLNRosguill" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;'''[[User:Usedtobecool|Usedtobecool]]'''&nbsp;[[User talk:Usedtobecool|☎️]] 18:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)</span>

:::For the record, I don't believe any of my previous emails included private evidence. They numbered two or three and were sent for a more frank/comfortable communication and/or for communicating sock tells that I had shared more cryptically onwiki.<span id="Usedtobecool:1715365630110:User_talkFTTCLNRosguill" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;'''[[User:Usedtobecool|Usedtobecool]]'''&nbsp;[[User talk:Usedtobecool|☎️]] 18:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)</span>

::::The QuadriSayedSahab case involved private evidence sent to me by a different editor. Your description of our past off-wiki communication is accurate to my recollection: it's mostly been about calling out patterns of editing between accounts that would amount to spilling the beans if repeated on-wiki but which did not include anything actually private in nature. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 18:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)



== [[Çankaya Mansion]] ==

:Hello @[[User:Rosguill|Rosguill]]! It seems that a bot archived the request. What should I do, if the request didn't get any attention despite clear evidence of edit warring and got archived? [[User:WikiEditor1234567123|WikiEditor1234567123]] ([[User talk:WikiEditor1234567123|talk]]) 14:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

::{{u|WikiEditor1234567123}} If it didn't get any attention before archiving it's fine to unarchive. But, in this case, you also posted it in the less-than-optimal forum--AN is more for backlog notices and other admin chatter, [[WP:ANI]] is the official board for reporting problematic behavior (and as this involves Chechen topics, [[WP:AE]] is also an option as that falls under [[WP:ARBEE]], broadly construed). So at this point I would just make a post at AE or ANI, noting that it had previously been posted at AN. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 16:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

:::Oops, I completely forgot that WP:ANI is the one where I should make that type of reports... Thanks for noting that! [[User:WikiEditor1234567123|WikiEditor1234567123]] ([[User talk:WikiEditor1234567123|talk]]) 16:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

::::Okay, the same request at WP:ANI received no attention and was archived despite clear evidence. What should I do now? Best regards, [[User:WikiEditor1234567123|WikiEditor1234567123]] ([[User talk:WikiEditor1234567123|talk]]) 22:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::If no one replied to the report, you're justified in just unarchiving it and asking for admin attention. Alternatively, AE may provide a quicker response. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 22:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::Hello! The report has been archived for the 4th time and no admin has replied so I was wondering if you could take a look. Best regards, [[User:WikiEditor1234567123|WikiEditor1234567123]] ([[User talk:WikiEditor1234567123|talk]]) 09:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::{{Done}}. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 15:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::::Thanks! [[User:WikiEditor1234567123|WikiEditor1234567123]] ([[User talk:WikiEditor1234567123|talk]]) 16:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::::I'm honestly a bit surprised that this last round didn't receive admin attention before me, given that uninvolved editors were very clearcut about what needed to be done. I suppose some people just see that Russian topics are involved and immediately skip past to the next problem. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 16:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::::::Yeah, people don't want to be involved with a dispute related to the topic they're not familiar with. Furthermore, Swalors indicated his intent to do sockpuppetry: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1189263824 "Time to make new accoubt"] which is concerning. [[User:WikiEditor1234567123|WikiEditor1234567123]] ([[User talk:WikiEditor1234567123|talk]]) 10:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)



Is there anyway we can protect this article per WP:GS/AA enforcement action? An IP has been removing referenced information since 3 May. --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 12:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

==Empty categories==

Hello, Rosguill,



:{{u|Kansas Bear}}, yes, Armenian Genocide-related material is plainly within scope of those restrictions. {{Done}} and logged at [[WP:AELOG]]. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 14:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

After categories are tagged for being empty, CSD C1, they sit for 7 days in [[:Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion]] in case the category is only temporarily empty or has been emptied out of process. Then incorrect edits can be reverted. They shouldn't show up in a regular CSD category so I'm not sure how you came across them. Of course, if the category creator wants to have the category deleted, they can always tag them CSD G7 and they can be deleted immediately. Otherwise, we wait a week before deletion. Thank you. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 02:01, 30 November 2023 (UTC)



::Thank you. Stay safe, Rosguill. --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 15:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

:Ah, I came across them at the bottom of [[WP:CfD]] and had assumed that it collected both CSDs to-be-done and categories that had been cleaned up following a CfD closure. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 02:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)



== Battle of Shimbra Kure ==

== Got Milked ==



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. [[User:AddMore-III|AddMore-III]] ([[User talk:AddMore-III|talk]]) 23:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill, there's a user who is removing cited content on this article [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Shimbra_Kure&diff=1189305013&oldid=1189304919] even after I had warned them. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMatan_ibn_Uthman&diff=1186631920&oldid=1186626992] [[User:Magherbin|Magherbin]] ([[User talk:Magherbin|talk]]) 15:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)



:There appears to be a consistent pattern of COATRACK editing, yes, although now that the active disruption has been dealt with, nothing that rises to the level that would make it appropriate for me to deliver a sanction as a bolt out of the blue. If you think that the quality of their edits is of such a consistently poor quality that it has become disruptive in general, you can bring a case to [[WP:AE]], but I doubt such a request will be successful unless/until there are examples of 6+ articles where this has happened or new examples of disruptive editing since the p-block. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 01:54, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

:He’s peddling false information [[User:Matan ibn Uthman|Matan ibn Uthman]] ([[User talk:Matan ibn Uthman|talk]]) 17:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

::Then it should be very easy for you to make your case to uninvolved editors via [[WP:3O]] or [[WP:RFC]]. Alternatively, if you have obvious evidence that another editor is misrepresenting sources, you can open a thread at [[WP:ANI]]. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 17:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)



== A cup of tea for you! ==

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Parish]] ==



{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"

Hi!

|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg|120px]]

|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | thanks for your contributions! :) [[User:XRozuRozu|xRozuRozu]] ([[User talk:XRozuRozu|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/XRozuRozu|c]]) 04:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

|}



== Peranakans ==

I noticed that you had closed this discussion as "no consensus" and left the page live. [[WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE]] notes that, in AfDs on entries about relatively unknown non-public figures, the closing admin ''may'' be closed as delete if the article subject would prefer the article be deleted. I understand that this language leaves it open to admin discretion, and requires so I'm left to inquire:



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 ? [[Special:Contributions/2405:3800:84B:1E32:91A6:951B:7279:2F04|2405:3800:84B:1E32:91A6:951B:7279:2F04]] ([[User talk:2405:3800:84B:1E32:91A6:951B:7279:2F04|talk]]) 17:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

#Was it your reading of the situation that this individual is not a relatively unknown, non-public figure? If so, my questions would end there, since BLPREQUESTDELETE would not plausibly apply. However, if not,

#Would you be willing to expand upon your thought process around how you exercised discretion in keeping this in the no consensus outcome rather than deleting this?



:As a Wikipedian, you need to provide reliable sources to back your claims. Also, on English Wikipedia, you need to write in comprehensible English, which your article-space contributions have thus-far fallen short of. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 17:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Cheers!

:Also, I'd draw your attention to the hatnote already at [[Peranakan Chinese]]: {{tq|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]].}} <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 17:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)



== Request to receive response for my claims in the discussion although I am not "qualified" ==

— [[User:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">Red-tailed&nbsp;hawk</span>]]&nbsp;<sub>[[User talk:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">(nest)</span>]]</sub> 05:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)



hey, did you had a chance to read the discussion before looking it?

:{{u|Red-tailed hawk}}, to be honest my initial reading was that there is no consensus on the very question of whether Parish is sufficiently non-public. While I still think this is an accurate description of the extent to which participants disagreed, on reviewing [[Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual]] I'm now inclined to believe that editors arguing that Parish is low-profile are on shaky evidentiary ground, and would consider discounting their opinions somewhat in reevaluating consensus. Now, [[Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual]] is a supplementary essay so I don't think it's appropriate to a priori discount !votes that are contrary to it, but I think its advice is sound (in particular {{tq|high-profile:... Need not be a "household name", simply self-promotional.}}) and suggests that Parish is not low profile due to his self-publication in relation to his legal notoriety.

:I'm further disinclined to cite BLPREQUESTDELETE and delete because of the way in which the AfD came to discussion. This came to AfD because of a legal threat raised at a noticeboard, which led to editors investigating and questioning its notability. While it's valid to question the notability, the underlying request from the subject is a demand for censorship backed with a legal threat. And yes, [[WP:DOLT]], but this was hardly overlooked: there was an entire AfD about it, in addition to the noticeboard discussion. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 20:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

::Thank you for getting back on this and for providing a comprehensive answer. — [[User:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">Red-tailed&nbsp;hawk</span>]]&nbsp;<sub>[[User talk:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">(nest)</span>]]</sub> 00:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)



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.

== User Aurelius5150 ==



I hope you cold see I am coming with good fait and instead of fighting we could have a fruitful conversation...

Hello Rosguill, there's a user showing up in other articles I edit after a dispute I had with them on one article namely [[Imamate of Aussa]] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Imamate_of_Aussa&diff=1178518362&oldid=1178394454]. They've since been undoing my edits on other articles [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aw_%28father%29&diff=1178396144&oldid=1178013674] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Garad&diff=1178397088&oldid=1178136271]. I notified the user about the policy of hounding a couple months ago [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAurelius5150&diff=1178518087&oldid=1178517959]. The user had also been blocked for similar violations of ‎Matan ibn Uthman which was not following BRD and simply resuming edit warring [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Imamate_of_Aussa&diff=1183588196&oldid=1183588063]. The second edit since their block has been lifted is entering a content dispute im involved in. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABattle_of_Shimbra_Kure&diff=1190648176&oldid=1189219888] [[User:Magherbin|Magherbin]] ([[User talk:Magherbin|talk]]) 18:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)



"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."

:I think that their edits in October do look like hounding, but their recent activity doesn't quite follow the same pattern, and they were blocked for an edit war at [[Imamate of Aussa]] in November, so I'm not sure there's any further action that would be appropriate at the moment. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 21:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Welcome_unregistered_editing

== New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive ==



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 :) [[Special:Contributions/109.64.78.25|109.64.78.25]] ([[User talk:109.64.78.25|talk]]) 18:04, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

{| style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; background-color: #FFF; padding:10px 15px 0"

|style="padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; font-size:130%" |'''[[Wikipedia:New Page Patrol|New Page Patrol]] |''' <span style="font-size:85%">January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive</span>

|rowspan=3|[[File:NPP Barnstar.png|right|75px]]

|-

|

* On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.

* Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.

* Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.

* Each review will earn 1 point.

* Interested in taking part? '''[[Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/January 2024/Participants|Sign up here]]'''.

|-

|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself [[Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter list|here.]]

|}

[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter_list&oldid=1190722499 -->



:IPs are not allowed to edit these topics per [[WP:ARBCOM]]'s rulings, which are endorsed by the community. This is a necessary measure to address sockpuppetry and persistent bad faith editing in the topic area. End of discussion. Persistent attempts to challenge this as an IP is itself a violation of the ruling, and will result in a loss of editing privileges if continued. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 18:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

== Page created by mistake ==



== redirect of the page: String Quartet No. 4 (Ichmouratov) ==

Could you please delete pg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gojira_vvv, created by mistake.

Tks [[User:Caiaffa|Caiaffa]] ([[User talk:Caiaffa|talk]]) 21:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

==Happy Adminship Anniversary!==

<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->

{{ombox

| name = Happy Adminship

| image = [[File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg{{!}}alt=Wikipedia globe and sysop mop|50px]]

| imageright = [[File:Twemoji2 1f389.svg{{!}}alt=Party popper emoji|50px]]

| style = border: 2px solid SlateBlue; background: linear-gradient(300deg, AliceBlue, Honeydew 30%, Honeydew 70%, AliceBlue);

| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;

| plainlinks = yes

| text = <big>'''Happy adminship anniversary!'''</big><br />Hi Rosguill! On behalf of the [[WP:Birthday Committee|Birthday Committee]], I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=rights&page=User%3ARosguill successful request for adminship]. Enjoy this special day! [[User:The Herald|The Herald (Benison)]] ([[User talk:The Herald|talk]]) 02:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

}}



Dear Rosguill,

== Seasons Greetings ==

I just noticed that you redirected the page about [[String Quartet No. 4 (Ichmouratov)|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, [[User:Patrick0506|Patrick0506]] ([[User talk:Patrick0506|talk]]) 13:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)



:{{u|Patrick0506}} Nothing has been deleted, you should be able to access everything in the page's history, here's a link for convenience to the last revision before redirection [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=String_Quartet_No._4_(Ichmouratov)&oldid=1220044286]. I would have merged information to the article about Ichmouratov himself, except that said article was comprehensive enough that it wasn't clear if it would be appropriate. My concerns regarding the No. 4 article is that the cited sources appeared to praise the album that the No.4 appears on, but dedicate virtually no attention to the No.4 piece itself. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 14:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 6px solid #FF4646; background-color:#46CB18;"

::I understand. Thank you for your input, it's appreciated. I will work on making this page more informative about the composition itself. [[User:Patrick0506|Patrick0506]] ([[User talk:Patrick0506|talk]]) 18:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

|align="left"|[[File:Xmastreenewyork06.jpg|225px]]

::I have one more question. I want to ensure I'm following Wikipedia's rules correctly. After adding more information, if I understood correctly, I cannot remove the "Notability" tag myself since, as the creator of the page, I have a conflict of interest. Should I approach you for this task? Sorry for asking so many questions, this is my first time dealing with this issue, and I want to do everything according to the rules. Thank you in advance for your advice.[[User:Patrick0506|Patrick0506]] ([[User talk:Patrick0506|talk]]) 18:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

|align="center"|<b style="color:red"><i style="font-size:large">Merry Christmas, {{BASEPAGENAME}}!</i><br /> Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. [[User:onel5969|'''<span style="color:#536895;">Onel</span><span style="color:#ffb300;">5969</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:Onel5969|<i style="color:blue">TT me</i>]]</sup> 02:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)</b>

:::Eh, it's a gray area to be honest as long as you don't have an actual [[WP:COI]] with the subject itself (i.e. while it's natural for you to be somewhat biased towards the state of the article given that you started it, unless you have an actual external relationship with Ichmouratov or this work it's not a full-blown COI). In this case, since we've already discussed it here and I'm confident you're approaching this in the right spirit, I wouldn't object to you removing it yourself (and if I still think there are serious notability issues even then, I would just progress to opening an [[WP:AfD]] so that the community can weigh in and come to a consensus. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 19:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

|align="right"|[[File:Spirit of Christmas.jpg|225px]]

::::That makes sense. Thank you for the quick response. I will do my best to get it right. All the best. [[User:Patrick0506|Patrick0506]] ([[User talk:Patrick0506|talk]]) 19:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

|} [[User:onel5969|'''<span style="color:#536895;">Onel</span><span style="color:#ffb300;">5969</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:Onel5969|<i style="color:blue">TT me</i>]]</sup> 02:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

::::Dear Rosguill, I just wanted to keep you updated in case you would like to check. I have worked on the page over the last few days, adding more information about this composition, including music samples, external audio, and image files. Thank you again for your advice and contributions. it's much appreciated. I feel that I learn something, and I am grateful.

::::Best regards, [[User:Patrick0506|Patrick0506]] ([[User talk:Patrick0506|talk]]) 15:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)



== TPA removal and rev/del request ==

== Happy Christmas ==



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 @[[User:K6ka|K6ka]] who blocked them for their awareness. [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 19:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

{{User:Joseywales1961/Holidays 2023}}



:Looks like K6ka already (correctly) removed TPA. I've gone ahead and performed the revdel. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 20:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

== "hyperbolic demand" ==

::Thanks Rosguill. [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 20:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)



== Re: [[Love, Chunibyo & Other Delusions: Heart Throb]] ==

Really? As you know, it's standard to propose remedies on AN. Not a demand. That wording is hurtful. '''[[User:Andrevan|Andre]]'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">[[User_talk:Andrevan|🚐]]</span> 22:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)



I'm confused. Where is the evidence there was "[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Love,_Chunibyo_%26_Other_Delusions:_Heart_Throb&action=history 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.--<span style="background:white;color:">[[User:Juhachi|<b style="color: black;">十</b>]][[User talk:Juhachi|<b style="color: red;">八</b>]]</span> 20:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

:Demanding a warning in response to {{tq|Any reasonable third party would consider your reverts as irresponsible and borderline harassment of a new editor.}} halfway down a rabbit hole thread in an AN report is silly. The quoted text doesn't particularly help DMH43's case, but it is Kafkaesque to demand a sanction in response to it. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 23:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

::It was not a demand but a proposal for a warning. Really, you think that's ok to call it a demand? I thought better of you. This whole event has been extremely eye-opening. '''[[User:Andrevan|Andre]]'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">[[User_talk:Andrevan|🚐]]</span> 23:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Demand, proposal, I don't think that makes a major difference in this context. You're hounding a new editor, that's the issue. Mild hounding, before you take issue to that wording as well. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 23:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

::::It makes a huge difference, I'm very offended and upset by your comment, coming from a long-time admin, and it's quite beyond the pale to double down on it. I object strenuously that I am hounding that editor. All I did was propose that he be warned for incivility and for gaming the system. That is within a reasonable range of what can be said on an AN thread, which I remind you, that editor himself started as an appeal. I find your comments extremely troubling. '''[[User:Andrevan|Andre]]'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">[[User_talk:Andrevan|🚐]]</span> 23:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::The intent was not to hurt you, but it should serve as an attitude readjustment. In the absence of actual diffs that demonstrate NOTHERE behavior, a new editor's sanction appeal is not the appropriate time to nitpick their tone (barring you know, actual slurs and over the top ad hominem). <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 23:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::[[WP:NOTHERE]] is already shown in the diffs and SFR's original action, which talks extensively about gaming the system, battleground behaviors and so on. '''[[User:Andrevan|Andre]]'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">[[User_talk:Andrevan|🚐]]</span> 23:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::A little AGF would go a long way here. Keep in mind, they're a new editor who has stepped feet first into historical Byzantium which is currently at war with dozens of sockpuppeteers. Without the context of why this is being treated as such a big deal I'm sure it looks much different. [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 23:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::I am AGF; did I accuse the user of being a sockpuppet or a POVwarrior? I asked the user to read gaming the system and RGW. Instead they are doubling and tripling down on their problematic behavior and showing lack of clue or understanding why it's an issue. They also accused Dovidroth of harassment - which is incivil, inappropriate, and unsupported here. Other users are piling on saying that Dovidroth should be sanctioned which is absolutely ridiculous and problematic. I stand by my comments, and I continue to be extremely troubled by Rosguill putting their finger on the scale in a way that is deeply hurtful and inappropriate, and which they have shown no self-reflection towards. It is not appropriate whatsoever to characterize my comments as a hyperbolic demand or to attempt to turn this around to sanction me or Dovidroth. Quite inappropriate indeed. As I said, this whole event, the Byzantium as SFR says, has really opened my eyes on a lot of things and not in a good way at all. '''[[User:Andrevan|Andre]]'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">[[User_talk:Andrevan|🚐]]</span> 23:32, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

==Topic ban removal==



:The text came up in a copyvios.toolforge.org report that matched the text to www.themoviedb. org/tv/45501/episodes?credit_id=55525564c3a3683d3b001960&person_id=4c85cb465e73d66b5b00006e&language=es-es (n.b. that website is on Wikipedia's blacklist, hence the non-functional link). My guess is that the summaries were likely the original first-party summaries provided by the publisher of the anime, but that is still under copyright and not material we can include on Wikipedia. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 20:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I had appealed the topic ban which you had imposed more than two years ago.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ratnahastin&diff=prev&oldid=1029733961] The appeal is yet to be formally closed.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Closure_requests#Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive357#Topic_ban_appeal_2] I hope you will help me out here. Thanks! <span style="font-family:'Forte';">[[User:Ratnahastin|<span style="color:#d93634;">Ratnahastin</span>]] ([[User talk:Ratnahastin|talk]])</span> 04:58, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

::Is it possible for me to see which summaries were potential copyvios? Was it all of them, or just some of them? Seems kind of pointless to discard all of them if only some of them were in violation.--<span style="background:white;color:">[[User:Juhachi|<b style="color: black;">十</b>]][[User talk:Juhachi|<b style="color: red;">八</b>]]</span> 21:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

:::About 80% of them were matches, and in my experience when that's the case it's usually all of them and the non-matched ones just match to a different page on the site and thus don't get identified in the report. What I can do for you though, is restore the page and bring back the template and all of the other metadata other than the summaries. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 22:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

::::I appreciate that, thank you.--<span style="background:white;color:">[[User:Juhachi|<b style="color: black;">十</b>]][[User talk:Juhachi|<b style="color: red;">八</b>]]</span> 22:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)



== Progressive Zionism ==

:I don't have time to action the request at the moment, but I've gone ahead and de-archived the discussion and tagged it so that it will not be re-archived before a formal closure. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 15:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)



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.

== Season's greetings ==

{{clear}}

<div class="center" style="background:darkgreen;border:no;padding:0.2em 0em;{{round corners}}"><br />[[File:Zeppelin Christmas postcard 1909.jpg|600px|center|alt=Christmas postcard featuring Santa Claus using a zeppelin to deliver gifts, by Ellen Clapsaddle, 1909]] <span style="color:white;">~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~</span>{{pb}}



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."

''<span style="color:lightyellow;">'''Hello Rosguill:''' Enjoy the '''[[Christmas and holiday season| <span style="color:yellow;">holiday season</span>]]'''&#32;and '''[[winter solstice|<span style="color:yellow;">winter solstice</span>]]''' if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, [[User:CAPTAIN RAJU|<span style="font-family: Bradley Hand ITC;">'''CAPTAIN RAJU'''</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:CAPTAIN RAJU|(T)]]</sup> 20:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)</span>''

</div>



It seems that only outside of the US, Progressive Zionism sometimes used to mean Reform Zionism.

== Happy New Year! ==

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.

{| style="background-color:#FFFBC4; border:5px solid #009600;"


|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle; padding:4px;" | [[File:Happy New Year .jpg|500px]]

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.

|style="font-size:x-large; padding:3px 3px 0 3px; height:1.5em; text-align:center;" | '''[[New Year|Happy New Year]]!'''


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 [https://azm.org/wp-content/uploads/2020-ARZA-Platform-and-Slate.pdf 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 [https://azm.org/wp-content/uploads/2020-Hatikvah-Platform-and-Slate.pdf 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 [https://www.timesofisrael.com/left-wing-zionist-groups-americans-for-peace-now-and-ameinu-to-merge/ 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. [[User:Tysonsahib|Tysonsahib]] ([[User talk:Tysonsahib|talk]]) 16:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


:{{u|Tysonsahib}}, please make a formal [[WP:ER|edit request]] at [[Talk:Reform Zionism]] for consideration. I'd also recommend trying to make briefer arguments. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 16:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

::Sorry for the long argument. I was trying to document the validity of my claims. I was bummed the article I started writing was deleted. I made an edit request as you suggested. Thank you. [[User:Tysonsahib|Tysonsahib]] ([[User talk:Tysonsahib|talk]]) 16:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


== Rev Del Request ==


Hi there,


Is this "allowed" to be rev-del'd? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oi!&diff=next&oldid=1226101870 Thanks! [[User:Myrealnamm-alt|Myrealnamm&#39;s Alternate Account]] ([[User talk:Myrealnamm-alt|talk]]) 15:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)


:Eh, it's obvious vandalism but I think revdel is unnecessary here. It's juvenile, but it's not really ''offensive'' per-se and the article in question isn't a BLP and I don't see this being a serious defamation concern. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 15:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

::Ok, thanks! [[User:Myrealnamm-alt|Myrealnamm&#39;s Alternate Account]] ([[User talk:Myrealnamm-alt|talk]]) 15:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)


== HELP ==


Hi'' [[User:Rosguill|Rosguill]]'', I saw you reverted someone [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources&diff=prev&oldid=1226449392 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."''

<br>

<br>

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 (Malawi)|The Nation]] (weblink: https://www.mwnation.com/) could be added there or on the list of reliable sources.

<br>

<br>

I tried posting this [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: The Nation (Site)|here]] but don't know if the outcome will be the same.

<br>

Another thing is that I frequently create articles using this source, so I really need the community's input on it.

Thanks.

--[[User:Tumbuka Arch|Tumbuka Arch]] ([[User talk:Tumbuka Arch|talk]]) 10:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


: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)


== May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award ==


{| 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)

|style="vertical-align:middle; padding:2px;" |<div class="center">{{fontcolor|green|'''''Hello Rosguill:'''''}}</div><br /><br />'''Did you know ...''' that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with [[axe]]s, [[hammer]]s and [[chisel]]s?<br />

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary [[blister]]s.<br><br>[[User:CAPTAIN RAJU|<span style="font-family: Bradley Hand ITC;">'''CAPTAIN RAJU'''</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:CAPTAIN RAJU|(T)]]</sup> 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

|}

|}


{{paragraph break}}

== May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Streak award ==

:<div style="float:left">''{{resize|88%|Spread the WikiLove; use {{tls|Happy New Year elves}} to send this message}}''</div>{{clear}} [[User:CAPTAIN RAJU|<span style="font-family: Bradley Hand ITC;">'''CAPTAIN RAJU'''</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:CAPTAIN RAJU|(T)]]</sup> 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)


{| 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)


:{{u|Risker}}, ironically, when I saw the RSN thread bemoaning a lack of assessments of African sources last week my first thought was "oh I've tried and failed to fix that". A few years ago I made an effort to try to launch RfCs assessing the media landscapes of countries obscure to English Wikipedia, but it ended up being a bit of a bust for the same reasons that we lack these assessments in the first place: our editors by and large are not familiar with them. The problem is resistant to proactive solutions within the sphere of English Wikipedia, but at least by documenting the discussions we do have (despite whatever shortcomings and biases they may have) we can incrementally assemble what we think we know in a format that is conducive to further correction, critique and expansion. <sub>signed, </sub>[[User:Rosguill|'''''Rosguill''''']] <sup>[[User talk:Rosguill|''talk'']]</sup> 15:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)


Revision as of 15:01, 22 June 2024

Deletion review for Moroccanoil

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]

I haven't done a deletion review before, I hope I'm doing this properly :) Kapitan110295 (talk) 04:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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. signed, Rosguill talk 13:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

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]

Enforcement of community ANI-based ban at ITN

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]

The Rambling Man, community bans should be appealed at WP:AN by opening a thread. I'd maybe recommend taking a few months of on-wiki editing before rushing to appeal though, I would expect that to greatly increase chances of succeeding. signed, Rosguill talk 03:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes of course. Thanks for your response. The Rambling Man (Been a while, I know......) 11:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

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]

Question

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]

HistoryofIran Presuming that your intent is to investigate the other suspected sockpuppets/collaborators, I think ANI is most appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 19:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TheSagar

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]

Blocked as obvious sock, noting that they'd already been pinged for various disruptive edits as well. signed, Rosguill talk 15:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shravan Tiwari

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]

Marchjuly, this ended up being quite the rabbit hole, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maheshworld. signed, Rosguill talk 15:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking into this. I didn't realize things were that messy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent you a mail again

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]

Get well soon, Rosguill. Sorry to have put you in the position. I default to you cos of the NPP connection. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All good Usedtobecool, it was an honest mistake on both our parts and I don't think anyone's planning on throwing the book at us yet (just y'know, opening the book and pointing to a page). signed, Rosguill talk 18:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Usedtobecool +1 I was thinking the same for a while now that Rosguill would become a good CU. Since SPI has a backlog now and needs a few helping hands, I think this will be the right time to apply if they feel it is interesting. Regards! Maliner (talk) 17:50, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Private evidence blocks

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]

In fact, administrators who are not Checkusers or Oversighters should not make private evidence blocks at all, per Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Confidential evidence, which states The community has rejected the idea of individual administrators acting on evidence that cannot be peer-reviewed.
Please send cases like this to either a CU, OS, or to ArbCom. I for one am more than happy to take 'private evidence' referrals from admins in my functionary capacity. firefly ( t · c ) 17:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Primefac, firefly, noted! I hadn't been aware of that clause. I will collect the relevant emails and send them along. signed, Rosguill talk 17:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Might be a good idea to include a reminder in the next Admin Newsletter. S0091 (talk) 17:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's been in there before. Any sort of reminder might make more sense when the new paid editing queue launches (something I hope Rosguill gives serious thought about applying for). Barkeep49 (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look into it when it's time, although my first impulse regarding this (and the encouragement to pursue CU status in the section above) is that for as long as actual new page patrolling makes up a significant portion of my editing, taking on these additional roles might make me more judge-jury-and-executioner than is really appropriate (at least from the vantage point of anyone on the receiving end). signed, Rosguill talk 18:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the only relevant materials I have actually acted on are related to the QuadriSayedSahab case; I have not reviewed anything related to the second diff concerning Annuarif although I believe I did receive an email this morning (I have been sick recently and have thus been applying less than my usual diligence in responding to requests). Usedtobecool, please forward relevant further correspondence to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org and/or firefly per their volunteering here. signed, Rosguill talk 18:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's done. Thanks firefly. I did often wonder if it's functionaries I should be contacting but that wasn't the practice that I learned when I was learning, and missed that RFC as well. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I don't believe any of my previous emails included private evidence. They numbered two or three and were sent for a more frank/comfortable communication and/or for communicating sock tells that I had shared more cryptically onwiki. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The QuadriSayedSahab case involved private evidence sent to me by a different editor. Your description of our past off-wiki communication is accurate to my recollection: it's mostly been about calling out patterns of editing between accounts that would amount to spilling the beans if repeated on-wiki but which did not include anything actually private in nature. signed, Rosguill talk 18:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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]

Kansas Bear, yes, Armenian Genocide-related material is plainly within scope of those restrictions.  Done and logged at WP:AELOG. signed, Rosguill talk 14:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Stay safe, Rosguill. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got Milked

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]

There appears to be a consistent pattern of COATRACK editing, yes, although now that the active disruption has been dealt with, nothing that rises to the level that would make it appropriate for me to deliver a sanction as a bolt out of the blue. If you think that the quality of their edits is of such a consistently poor quality that it has become disruptive in general, you can bring a case to WP:AE, but I doubt such a request will be successful unless/until there are examples of 6+ articles where this has happened or new examples of disruptive editing since the p-block. signed, Rosguill talk 01:54, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

thanks for your contributions! :) xRozuRozu (tc) 04:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peranakans

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]

As a Wikipedian, you need to provide reliable sources to back your claims. Also, on English Wikipedia, you need to write in comprehensible English, which your article-space contributions have thus-far fallen short of. signed, Rosguill talk 17:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I'd draw your attention to the hatnote already at Peranakan Chinese: 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]

Request to receive response for my claims in the discussion although I am not "qualified"

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]

IPs are not allowed to edit these topics per WP:ARBCOM's rulings, which are endorsed by the community. This is a necessary measure to address sockpuppetry and persistent bad faith editing in the topic area. End of discussion. Persistent attempts to challenge this as an IP is itself a violation of the ruling, and will result in a loss of editing privileges if continued. signed, Rosguill talk 18:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

redirect of the page: String Quartet No. 4 (Ichmouratov)

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]

Patrick0506 Nothing has been deleted, you should be able to access everything in the page's history, here's a link for convenience to the last revision before redirection [2]. I would have merged information to the article about Ichmouratov himself, except that said article was comprehensive enough that it wasn't clear if it would be appropriate. My concerns regarding the No. 4 article is that the cited sources appeared to praise the album that the No.4 appears on, but dedicate virtually no attention to the No.4 piece itself. signed, Rosguill talk 14:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Thank you for your input, it's appreciated. I will work on making this page more informative about the composition itself. Patrick0506 (talk) 18:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have one more question. I want to ensure I'm following Wikipedia's rules correctly. After adding more information, if I understood correctly, I cannot remove the "Notability" tag myself since, as the creator of the page, I have a conflict of interest. Should I approach you for this task? Sorry for asking so many questions, this is my first time dealing with this issue, and I want to do everything according to the rules. Thank you in advance for your advice.Patrick0506 (talk) 18:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, it's a gray area to be honest as long as you don't have an actual WP:COI with the subject itself (i.e. while it's natural for you to be somewhat biased towards the state of the article given that you started it, unless you have an actual external relationship with Ichmouratov or this work it's not a full-blown COI). In this case, since we've already discussed it here and I'm confident you're approaching this in the right spirit, I wouldn't object to you removing it yourself (and if I still think there are serious notability issues even then, I would just progress to opening an WP:AfD so that the community can weigh in and come to a consensus. signed, Rosguill talk 19:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. Thank you for the quick response. I will do my best to get it right. All the best. Patrick0506 (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Rosguill, I just wanted to keep you updated in case you would like to check. I have worked on the page over the last few days, adding more information about this composition, including music samples, external audio, and image files. Thank you again for your advice and contributions. it's much appreciated. I feel that I learn something, and I am grateful.
Best regards, Patrick0506 (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TPA removal and rev/del request

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]

Looks like K6ka already (correctly) removed TPA. I've gone ahead and performed the revdel. signed, Rosguill talk 20:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Rosguill. S0091 (talk) 20:08, 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.-- 20:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The text came up in a copyvios.toolforge.org report that matched the text to www.themoviedb. org/tv/45501/episodes?credit_id=55525564c3a3683d3b001960&person_id=4c85cb465e73d66b5b00006e&language=es-es (n.b. that website is on Wikipedia's blacklist, hence the non-functional link). My guess is that the summaries were likely the original first-party summaries provided by the publisher of the anime, but that is still under copyright and not material we can include on Wikipedia. signed, Rosguill talk 20:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible for me to see which summaries were potential copyvios? Was it all of them, or just some of them? Seems kind of pointless to discard all of them if only some of them were in violation.-- 21:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
About 80% of them were matches, and in my experience when that's the case it's usually all of them and the non-matched ones just match to a different page on the site and thus don't get identified in the report. What I can do for you though, is restore the page and bring back the template and all of the other metadata other than the summaries. signed, Rosguill talk 22:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that, thank you.-- 22:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Progressive Zionism

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]

Tysonsahib, please make a formal edit requestatTalk:Reform Zionism for consideration. I'd also recommend trying to make briefer arguments. signed, Rosguill talk 16:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the long argument. I was trying to document the validity of my claims. I was bummed the article I started writing was deleted. I made an edit request as you suggested. Thank you. Tysonsahib (talk) 16:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rev Del Request

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]

Eh, it's obvious vandalism but I think revdel is unnecessary here. It's juvenile, but it's not really offensive per-se and the article in question isn't a BLP and I don't see this being a serious defamation concern. signed, Rosguill talk 15:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks! Myrealnamm's Alternate Account (talk) 15:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HELP

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]

HiTumbuka 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. signed, Rosguill talk 14:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

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]

May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Streak award

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]

Socking IP (belonging to Bensebgli)

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]

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. signed, Rosguill talk 19:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know, their range (2404:3100:1800::/40) has been blocked by Spicy as a checkuser block. [7] Ratnahastin (talk) 12:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious IP address accounts

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]

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. signed, Rosguill talk 22:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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. Goddard2000 (talk) 01:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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. signed, Rosguill talk 02:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Benicaverra

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]

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. signed, Rosguill talk 03:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've filed an SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Benicaverra. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 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]

Risker, ironically, when I saw the RSN thread bemoaning a lack of assessments of African sources last week my first thought was "oh I've tried and failed to fix that". A few years ago I made an effort to try to launch RfCs assessing the media landscapes of countries obscure to English Wikipedia, but it ended up being a bit of a bust for the same reasons that we lack these assessments in the first place: our editors by and large are not familiar with them. The problem is resistant to proactive solutions within the sphere of English Wikipedia, but at least by documenting the discussions we do have (despite whatever shortcomings and biases they may have) we can incrementally assemble what we think we know in a format that is conducive to further correction, critique and expansion. signed, Rosguill talk 15:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rosguill&oldid=1230408524"





This page was last edited on 22 June 2024, at 15:01 (UTC).

This version of the page has been revised. Besides normal editing, the reason for revision may have been that this version contains factual inaccuracies, vandalism, or material not compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.



Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Code of Conduct

Developers

Statistics

Cookie statement

Mobile view



Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki