Contents

User talk:Rosguill

This user is a polyglot and likes languages a bit too much for their own good. They're happy to try to speak to you here in Spanish, German, French, Portuguese, Italian, Hebrew, Yiddish, or Russian, although they may need to switch back to English depending on the subject matter. For a full list of proficiencies, see their User page.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Good evening, Rosguill as the administrator who imposed the restrictions — indefinitely topic-banned from articles related to ethnic minority groups in the former Soviet Union, broadly construed. In my first appeal to AK, 4 admins suggested I contribute on other topics, as I was asked so I 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 Товболатов (talk) 14:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi, 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.--Товболатов (talk) 08:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.--Товболатов (talk) 06:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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:CANVASSing violations of your ban. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi, 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 --Товболатов (talk) 14:48, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My prior comment stands, 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:00, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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--Товболатов (talk) 16:35, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Товболатов You continue to have recourse to AE if you want to appeal your sanction. Please do not email me about this further. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi Rosgull, just a courtesy note that I have mentioned you in my comment at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 October 24. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 02:29, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I actually got the ping directly from your linking my name in the comment. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks. Wasn't sure if you had pings activated and didn't want to run the risk. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 02:33, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I am virtually inactive on Wikipedia due to a lack of time, so I thought I could bring this to your attention here rather than at the AE noticeboard or ANI/I which take more time as procedures. I took a look at the tp of the Balsic family article where there is an ongoing content dispute, and among comments I noticed that Khirurg accused a long-term editor of "using an obscure source to push ethno-nationalist POV" [1]. A few months ago you gave an AE-logged warning to Khirurg about "making accusations of tendentious nationalist editing without evidence of serious misbehavior" [2]. At the relevant ANI/I thread you said "I am going to log warnings for both Khirurg and AlexBachmann against accusing other editors of tendentious nationalistic editing without providing diffs of serious misconduct" [3]. Since this is an obvious breach of an AE-logged warning, maybe you might be interested in taking a look at it and probably at the general discussion on the tp. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:52, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can see, while this was a risky comment from Khirurg and it would have been better to elide (and still would be best to strike) to push ethno-nationalist POV, their objections to Muhadri seem valid (or at least as-yet not effectively challenged), and on that basis I don't see this as being a claim made without evidence. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have an opinion on Muhadri and they might be right or wrong about him, but can you point out where is the evidence that user Bato is pushing an ethnonationalist POV? One thing is to use an unreliable source (one can do that without a bad intention, just due to not being aware of its unreliability) and another thing is to use an unreliable source to push an ethnonationalist POV. That together with apparently inflammatory or mocking edit summaries or comments like "rv attempt to hide "undesirable" info" [4], "Stop trying to use excuses to remove inconvenient information" [5],"Now, why don't you tell us the real reason you are so absoultely insistent" [6] do not look to me like good faith against other editors. Anyways, you are the admin and your judgement decides, not mine. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A plethora of such examples of terseness could be enough to convince admins at AE, but I am only going to act on reports to my talk page if they meet a very high, unambiguous level of disruption, which these incidents don't rise to individually. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Taking this to AE is up to one of those editors who are the target of such comments. My time is limited and I prefer to use it for better things than preparing a large number of diffs and giving response after response as Balkan-related AE cases often demand. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:28, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) Thank you, Rosguill, for your measured approach. I do have a question though. If I think that someone is pushing ethno-nationalist POV (a far from uncommon situation in the Balkans), what am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to not call it out? Should I pretend it's not happening? As you saw, I did not call anyone names, I did not label anyone a POV-pusher. I was describing a behavior. Regarding the content dispute, what we have here is an obscure medieval noble family whose origins have been described as uncertain or unknown by multiple notable western authors such as Tim Judah and Elizabeth Roberts, yet we have sources like The Truth on Kosova (published in 1993 during the height of the Yugoslav Wars), being used repeatedly and uncritically to claim that this family was "Albanian throughout all the generations". On top of that I am being taunted in the talkpage that I haven't even read the bibliography. I am neither Serbian nor Albanian, I have no dog in this fight. What I'm seeing here though is damage to the encyclopedia. Could you keep an eye on the article while the situation is evolving? It would greatly help things and keep everything on an even keel if the various participants were aware that an admin was watching things. Khirurg (talk) 03:33, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Khirurg--you should call out the systematic use of weak/improper sources, your mistake here is the where and when of it. Bluntly accusing an editor in a 3 editor discussion of POV-pushing is not productive: it muddies the water by shifting the focus of the discussion from article content to more general behavior, and does not present a consensus view that what's happening is actually POV-pushing, it's just your word against theirs. What you should be doing is taking these concerns to AE and presenting a concise set of diffs demonstrating persistent or willful misuse of the sources, ideally having first secured a clear consensus among other editors that the sources are in fact inappropriate. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:34, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill: On the same discussion I noted that the behavior of the editor who added Muhadri bordered on tendentious, so while it is less equivocal than my own, Khirurg's conclusion here isn't necessarily unique based on that editor's behavior in the article and TP. As for Muhadri, his name cropped up in a recent US State Department report as an example of the local media contributing to a hostile climate against ethnic minorities in Kosovo. [7] and the Serbian Orthodox diocese said his writings spread "ethnic and religious hatred" [8]. The "Ali Hadri" organization he is a senior member of has made it its mission to kick the Serbian Orthodox Church out of its medieval monasteries in Kosovo and pushes the fringe notion that they were built by medieval Albanians, going as far as sparring with the Kosovo Supreme Court and the US ambassador to Kosovo, who refuse to go along with their agenda. [9] [10] Although not addressing his writings directly, claims of the sort he makes about Serb history and cultural heritage have been debunked by this scholar, among others. [11] So while Khirurg may have worded their rebuke differently, they were right to call the user out. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 11:53, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Star Citizen Ships page that was deleted back in 2021

Just curious to know whether this page was deleted for being empty, or abandoned or some other reason. I think there's a lot of information out there about the various vehicles in this game and Wikipedia wouldn't be a bad place to have that represented for standardization, posterity, etc.

Pages with info on this which could be used as source material include, but are not limited to:

• Cloud Imperium Games own Star Citizen web presence at Roberts Space Industries
  • Star Citizen Ship Matrix website
  • Links to pledge pages for ships; Hurricane
  • Links to their in-universe encyclopedia, Galactapedia
    • Galactapedia article for the Hurricane
• 3rd party references like:
  • Erkul Games
  • Star Citizen Tools: Hurricane

Thoughts? Alundil (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page was a redirect, deleted due to the lack of any relevant information at the target article, Star Citizen. The links you provide here don't appear to be the kind reliable sources that could be used to establish notability for a standalone list. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:28, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt reply. I've read the "Reliable Sources" link you posted and on the 3rd party references list I can understand that. But the first set of bulleted items are 1st party sources (i.e. produced and maintained by Cloud Imperium Games, the developer and publisher of Star Citizen). Those are not reliable sources? Alundil (talk) 21:25, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To establish the notability of a standalone topic, we need independent secondary sources, not primary sources. Primary sources are used very sparingly on Wikipedia (see WP:PRIMARY), essentially only to provide further detail that has already been identified as significant by secondary sources. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:37, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I think I'm understanding the aim now and this may not be a good topic, overall, for WP as I don't know that there will be other secondary sources that would a) discuss/list each ship and b) reach the standard for reliability that WP is looking for given the nature of the subject matter.

Thank you. Alundil (talk) 21:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion reviewofSSSniperWolf. 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. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 11:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I see that this article, which I had created, has been removed via redirection and I was not aware of an AfD discussion with regard to this article and the history page tells me that it was yourself who did this. I thought that these decisions were only taken after an AfD discussion. Therefore I think it is fair to respectfully ask why you seem to have taken the unilateral decision to effectively delete my article. Rillington (talk) 07:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rillington, per WP:BLAR, a discussion is not needed but you are allowed to revert the edit as if it were a bold edit. That having been said, I would encourage you to review the general notability guideline, as the article for Radio 3 Breakfast did not have the citations needed to meet that standard and I was unable to find any additional usable coverage in an internet search. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I will admit that I prefer not to get bogged down with things like you mention. I just prefer to spend my time writing articles on subjects which I think are notable enough for an article and locate some references as per basic Wikipedia rules and hope that people see that my efforts are always in good faith and are part of all of our wishes to make Wikipedia better. I will look at a few places to add to the independent references and then revert the edit. Rillington (talk) 15:15, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rosguill:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by ageorother categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

		Geneva mechanism Award
		This award is given to Rosguill for collecting more than 25 points per week in the October 2023 NPP backlog drive. Thank you so much for your continuous contributions to the drive! Hey man im josh (talk) 01:36, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		This award is given to Rosguill for collecting more than 200 points during the October 2023 NPP backlog drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to the drive! Hey man im josh (talk) 01:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. There is an RfC 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. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. Mannytool (talk) 21:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. Mannytool (talk) 21:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After doing some looking, I've found that evidently this is not a new issue per 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. Mannytool (talk) 04:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. Fred Zepelin (talk) 22:28, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:48, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. Fred Zepelin (talk) 20:30, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, You AFD'ed a page in 2020 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 Wprep (talk) 17:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BurtonReingold (talk · contribs), see this edit [12]?Knitsey (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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? Kaspo (talk) 23:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article still has a lot of phrases that read like PR filler, e.g. 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... 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:50, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Could you please check this request of mine at WP:AN? Thank you! Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 05:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @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? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 14:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 09:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: "Time to make new accoubt" which is concerning. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 10:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rosguill,

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:01, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rosguill, there's a user who is removing cited content on this article [13] even after I had warned them. [14] Magherbin (talk) 15:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Then it should be very easy for you to make your case to uninvolved editors via WP:3OorWP:RFC. Alternatively, if you have obvious evidence that another editor is misrepresenting sources, you can open a thread at WP:ANI. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

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:

1. 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,
2. 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?

Cheers!

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for getting back on this and for providing a comprehensive answer. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 [15]. They've since been undoing my edits on other articles [16] [17]. I notified the user about the policy of hounding a couple months ago [18]. The user had also been blocked for similar violations of ‎Matan ibn Uthman which was not following BRD and simply resuming edit warring [19]. The second edit since their block has been lifted is entering a content dispute im involved in. [20] Magherbin (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
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? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

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

Could you please delete pg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gojira_vvv, created by mistake. Tks Caiaffa (talk) 21:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Rosguill! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]