User talk:El C/generic sub-page21

DS 2021 Review Update

Dear El C,

Thank you for participating in the recent discretionary sanctions community consultation. We are truly appreciative of the range of feedback we received and the high quality discussion which occurred during the process. We have now posted a summary of the feedback we've received and also a preview of some of what we expect to happen next. We hope that the second phase, a presentation of draft recommendations, will proceed on time in June or early July. You will be notified when this phase begins, unless you choose to to opt-out of future mailings by removing your name here.
--Barkeep49 & KevinL (aka L235) 21:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey

Hi El C - noticed you hadn't been around for a while. Hope all's well and you're just taking a break - God knows you deserve it. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 17:58, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey, GS. Thanks for checking in. Everything's okay-ish, just got a lot on my plate right now. Hope to be back soon-ish. Best, El_C 13:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

El C, I know that feeling. Glad you're OK (or at least okayish!), stay safe. GirthSummit _(blether) 16:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi. I was tagged here, I wondered if responding to these accusations that weren't made in any good faith whatsoever would be a violation of the topic ban. I think it would, but I wanted to make sure. In this case, should I not respond at all? I took into account that you were the enforcer on topic ban, and I thought it would be best to ask this to you. --► Sincerely: Solavirum 07:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

500/30?

For Stolperstein and History of the Jews in Dęblin and Irena during World War II, both have seen recent activity from likely socks. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Heads up to El C - I've applied it to Stolperstein. The other article seems already to have been protected by Ymblanter, so no action needed here. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 16:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is at WP:AN#Review_of_30/500_protection Thanks Girth Summit _(blether) 12:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Alea iacta est

Given your previous involvement in imposing some discretionary sanctions in this area, I felt only natural that I should also inform you of an open ArbCom case request. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Update

Hope to be back (in some capacity, at least) sometime next week. Thanks, everyone, for your collective patience. In the meantime, Songspam, per usual. El_C 00:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

If all goes well, will start dealing with the backlog on this talk page tomorrow. Should have picked Mercy... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 21:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Remove voluntary sanction

Hi, I've just seen I've been mentionned multiple times in discussions and I think I'm detached enough now so that I'll be fine to answer by myself on the subject. I must admit I wrote once last week or so because I wanted to make a point to another editor I used to engage with back in february. I forgot about the voluntary stuff tbh. But if you'd accept to remove my voluntary sanction i'd appreciate it. Thank you very much for your help back in february, you didn't "mishandle" anything. You helped me make it end when I was in my (let's say more intense) phase and wasn't really liking how I was being treated as a conspiracy theorist. Feynstein (talk) 14:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Feynstein. Glad you're doing better and happy I was able to help. Per your request, I've lifted the sanction and have updated Wikipedia:Editing restrictions/Voluntary to reflect that. Best, El_C 14:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Advice on dealing with difficult user

Dear @El C:, could you please have a look at the tone of user Alalch Emis in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zangezur_corridor AfD and advise whether that behaviour is within the Wikipedia standards for editors' interaction? The person appears to have zero knowledge in the topic yet hard convictions based on cold-searching Google, and got agitated because I pointed out that he should not WP:OR in already highly controversial subject and suggested to self-revert then discuss his additions. If he kept it limited to tendentious editing and commented only on my actions I would somehow tolerate that, but after I pointed out that targeting the editor's personality like "you're boring" and repeatedly using inflammatory language like "you're wasting your time" and "you can keep spinning it whichever way you like" is not acceptable, he showed no insight. From his talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alalch_Emis I can see he had similar problems with another article which you closed the case of. What's the right course of action, please? TIA! --Armatura (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Armatura. Honestly (and just at a glance), as the editor who nominated the page for deletion, for you to comment below virtually every keep !vote feels like WP:BLUDGEON behaviour. I see you've also tagged new and/or dormant accounts, which is fine. But I also see, for example, Davidgasparyan2001 (talk), whose delete !vote is their second edit, and which reads (in full): Delete. Dear colleagues, I strongly remind that Wikipedia is not a place for political influence. Zangezur corridor doesn't exist, so this provocative article should be deleted (diff). Why has their !vote gone unchallenged, but the ones by the SPAs !voting keep have? So, I really dislike this type of imbalance, which I find erodes the project's credibility. Anyway, while it's expected for a contentious deletion discussion to ebb and flow, I'm seeing a lot of ebbing, but not much flow. Maybe take a step back from the discussion so as to calm the waters a bit...? HTH! El_C 21:20, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks for your neutral reply, EI_C, helpful as always. I will take your advice; you are right, I, after all, may be getting too emotional about this AfD. As for scrutinising those two discussants, one of them was already edit warring with me on Zangezur disambig page and the other one known for consulting a blocked editor suddenly 'retired', triggering the suspicion. I did not check the rest of the participants, perhaps subconsciously relying on the vigilance of the Azeri editors who are active commenting under the delete votes and would have normally highlighted suspicious pro-Armenian activity immediately. Had to check Ebb and flow article to see what you mean by that phrase :-) I believe I did not directly call names to any editor in that AfD and would like others not to call me names, that was the sole reason for asking you to have a look, not the AfD itself. Regards, --Armatura (talk) 21:52, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

semi-protect Talk:Investigations into the origin of COVID-19?

As you were the admin that applied the semi-protect to Talk:COVID-19 misinformation, what would be your thoughts on applying the same to Talk:Investigations into the origin of COVID-19? The talk page has, particularly recently, gotten significantly more IP-based cruft. Particularly with low quality accusations, sometimes indicating the article was not read by the user. An additional sampling from the last week:

• Content replacement vandalism [1]
• Unhelpful theorizing [2]
• An aggressive presumption of bad faith/shilling [3]
• Anonymous IP with "all my PhD friends" WP:OR [4]

Naturally, all of this is disruptive, and a drain on editor time to address. Would you consider protection of this talk page as falling under WP:GS/COVID19 for the same reason as the misinformation talk page protection, or is there a noticeboard you'd suggest taking this to? Thank you. Bakkster Man (talk) 13:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, my protection action at Talk:COVID-19 misinformation followed ToBeFree's request that I close an AN thread, a thread in which they requested WP:ECP, though I ended opting to go with semi (my closing summary). So, I would be wary of semi-protecting this COVID-19 article talk page single-handedly. My suggestion would be to raise the matter at WP:AN and make your case there. Regards, El_C 13:53, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

FYI

The local description page of the POTD image is cascade protected, so there is no need to protect it. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh. Weird, because the cascade protection option wasn't actually enabled in the protection window: example link (are you able to view it?). El_C 17:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism of trans BLPs

Hello - after you handled the vandalism of trans BLPs I reported yesterday (thank you for this), two other IPs in the same subnet (147.161) that vandalized those pages vandalized the pages of two other trans women, Tifanny Abreu and Alexandra Grey. I don't know how to file a request for a rangeblock or whatever it's called, but am hoping you or another admin can help. Funcrunch (talk) 02:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Logged AE action. El_C 07:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, but this edit summary explains why I asked about a rangeblock... Funcrunch (talk) 00:14, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed that part. In answer to your question: if you research (and link to) the parameters of the range, I'll consider implementing it. Otherwise, I'm not really confident in setting up range blocks (aside from IPv6 ones) on my own, so WP:ANI might be a better fit. El_C 00:25, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hiya

Hi EI C,

This IP you blocked is back with vengeance :( OyMosby (talk) 15:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. El_C 16:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Talk:List of Jeopardy! contestants

Thanks for protecting List of Jeopardy! contestants. However, the talk page is still being spammed. Could you also protect Talk:List of Jeopardy! contestants? Thanks. AldezD (talk) 20:14, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one month. Range blocked. El_C 00:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

WP:GS/UYGHUR

Hey El C, did you find what you needed? I'm new to the GS area too and am desperately hoping I haven't botched this all too much :-) All best, Go Phightins! 16:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Go Phightins! — looks good! Regards, El_C 16:35, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Re your edit summary asking why I linked Radio Free Asia Article and GS/UYGHUR, this is because the current bout of activity on Radio Free Asia began following news about the arrest of RFA journalists reporting in Xinjiang. (The disruption was first brought up at AN/I here.) GS/UYGHUR has been set up as "broadly construed", and given the situation the Radio Free Asia article falls under that broad framework. More specifically, the article also has a "Arrests of Uyghur journalists' relatives" section, which is directly within the topic area. CMD (talk) 16:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

It's a bit borderline, because the contested edits don't really touch on the Uyghur genocide. Still, taking this impetus into account, I've downgraded to WP:ECP, extended to one year. Will log. El_C 17:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I can see how it may look borderline, but I also feel if this point was brought up by an involved editor I'd consider it wikilawyering. It's a content dispute about the credibility of a news org that reports on the topic. Not that there's a need to look into it right now, but most of those involved in the current discussion (on both 'sides' too so to speak) have also recently edited the Uyghur genocide article and/or talk page. (Not a commentary on your admin actions, just further context.) CMD (talk) 17:36, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

The point is that it neither falls under the scope of a "primary article" nor do the contested edits constitute "related content." That is what makes this hazy. El_C 17:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

If I may interject, I wouldn't even claim it is borderline; to put this into contrast with Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a media building containing offices of AP news who report on the conflict has been bombed, a far more "direct relationship" to the conflict and thus the sanctions, with the article even dedicating a subsection to it. And yet, there are no sactions, no restrictions. Now compare this with an article about RFA, which also has a subsection regarding China's forced disappearance of an editor's relatives. I think it would be best to do a thing similar to ARBPIA4 (If there is confusion about which content is considered related, the content in question may be marked in the wiki source with an invisible comment.) and comment the subsection. Of course, I will say that as I am involved, I am biased, so I will not go around attempting to challenge your decision.

@Chipmunkdavis: Involved like yourself? And no, it is not about the "credibility of a news org that reports on the topic", WP:RSN exists for this purpose. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 18:27, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

If the impetus for the +US propaganda bit were to stem from a broader dispute which involves the Uyghur genocide, then I do deem it as "related content" ("related context"?). Again, it's a bit hazy. As for the example of the Gaza media building bombing over at the AP article: ARBPIA "related content" could be invoked for it if there was a dispute concerning that bombing incident (and anything related), but the prevailing practice is not to impose these sort of sanctions preemptively. El_C 18:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I would not say the +US propaganda bit stemmed from a "broader dispute", it was only mentioned once during the discussion of the addition in April, but I guess I understand why that is a concern.

As for the example of the Gaza media building bombing over at the AP article: ARBPIA "related content" could be invoked for it if there was a dispute concerning that bombing incident (and anything related), but the prevailing practice is not to impose these sort of sanctions preemptively. This makes sense, thanks for explaining. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 19:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

CPCEnjoyer, maybe my language wasn't precise enough. What I meant to say was that I'm willing to bend the GS with "related context," as it were, if this renewed interest in Radio Free Asia was a spillover from Uyghur genocide -related disputes. This, because the sensitivity of the subject matter is off the charts. El_C 00:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Except, this "renewed interest" wasn't a spillover, it was hounding first from My very best wishes due to my edit at Talk:Azov Battalion and then Volunteer Marek because of an SPI request.

This, because the sensitivity of the subject matter is off the charts. Agreed, though I am not sure how 30/500 will fix it, other than allow two editors, who were previously punished for off-wiki coordination, remove sourced content from the article and stonewall it by not discussing on the talk page. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 11:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

As I have been pinged, I have not been involved with the current dispute, and am unsure what the Editor Interaction Analyser is meant to show. CMD (talk) 00:59, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

CPCEnjoyer, a couple of things. First, no accusing other editors of hounding or off-wiki coordination without evidence in the form of diffs, please. Not on my talk page, not anywhere. That counts as an WP:ASPERSION. At any event, if that is something you wish to pursue further, you should take it to the relevant noticeboard/project page. But as someone whose 2nd edit was to revert the Radio Free Asia page (April 10 diff), my sense is that you may be risking a WP:BOOMERANG there. Up to you, though. Regardless, I'd stress that this isn't something I wish to engage, here, on my talk page. Also, toolforge'ing CMD (which I just noticed) in a manner that comes across as too terse to be useful — that is also increasingly giving me WP:DISRUPTSIGNS vibe. Overall, I'm not sure there's further utility to continuing this conversation thread on my talk page at this time. El_C 14:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

First of all, I never accused them off off-wiki coordination, I said they were punished for it, it's a statement of fact (see WP:EEML and the list membership). As for the hounding "allegations", here you go:[5][6]. But "exposing" them was not my point, my point is that the notion that the "renewed interest" relates to Uyghur Genocide is not very concrete and I gave you the examples & the actual reasoning behind the "renewed interest". You yourself have said that the general sanctions (and the ECP by extension) are "borderline" and "hazy", and I thought this might help clear things up. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 15:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

CPCEnjoyer, oh, okay, EMML. Gotcha. As for hounding: I rarely if ever accept toolforge data as (the main) evidence about that. Such evidence ought to be the form of diffs. At any event, this isn't something I'm inclined to investigate further at this time, largely due to time/stamina constraints. Same with this GS action. To that: I acknowledge your position/clarification. If you change your mind and do choose to seek wider review regarding that logged one-year ECP, I'll note that I'm waiving any GS obstacles to amending/revoking this action on my part. Any uninvolved admin should feel free to make any alterations they see fit. I need not be consulted or even notified. El_C 15:43, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your replies & information, and sorry this dragged on for a while. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 16:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism by user

I fondly remember fondly our previous interactions and am glad to cross paths with you again, even if under somewhat unfortunate circumstances. I just reverted an edit I judged to be vandalism by User:213.175.190.165. It looks like they have a history of vandalism and that you've previously warned you. What should I do in this type of circumstance? Should I alert the involved admin, like I'm doing now, or should I try to handle the situation myself in some way? Be well and stay safe, Benevolent human (talk) 18:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Benevolent human. That warning block was a year ago, so it may not even be the same individual. In any case: Blocked – for a period of one week. In answer to your question, report vandalism at WP:AIV or to an admin of your choosing, either works. Glad I made a positive impression.☺ Best, El_C 19:06, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

2021 whatchamacallit at the United States Capitol

Hi El_C, since you've been a peacemaker in January / February, I thought I'd bother you again. 2021 storming of the United States Capitol has recently been moved to 2021 United States Capitol attack, but a lot of people (myself included) believe there was no consensus. The move review is still open, but now someone started a new RfC... It looks like we're moving into the same mess we had four or five months ago. As far as I can tell, some of the involved editors are relatively new to Wikipedia, and many of those participating now were not involved in the RMs back then. I think it would be good if an experienced admin could keep an eye on it. If you don't have the time or energy, that's OK. In that case, you could point me to someone/somewhere else I could post a note like this? (I hope this doesn't look like I want to stifle or control the process. I don't. I just wouldn't like to see it devolve into a non-process again.) — Chrisahn (talk) 19:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Chrisahn. Sorry, I don't really have the time/stamina atm to revisit the naming disputes over the US Capitol Insurrection article/s. In answer to your question: I'm afraid no one specific comes to mind, whereas the move review is the proper place to contest any moves. If there is also an RfC that is somehow mirroring it (or similar), maybe bring that up at AN/ANI/AE, if you feel it should be, say, suspended in the interim. Good luck! El_C 20:19, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

OK, no problem, I understand. I'll have a look at the noticeboards. Thanks! — Chrisahn (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject mergers

Could you please close and determine consensus for the discussion at WPTC? There are some additional related comments here. Noah^Talk 22:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Noah, sorry, but as noted directly above (large text), I'm not accepting ordinary requests at this time. Maybe list it at WP:ANRFC...? El_C 23:19, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Dark Emu and Bruce Pascoe

See [7], [8] and [9]. I guess these articles might get mnre attention now. Doug Weller talk 18:42, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Interesting. Strong sources. Looks like Farmers Or Hunter-Gatherers? (a red link at the time of my writing this) needs to be created — brief mention of the book at Peter Sutton (anthropologist), whereas a glance at the scholar.google.com.au entry for Keryn Walshe shows that she is also deserving of a page. Anyway, robust debate is always welcome at related talk pages to ensure the respective articles reflect current academic thinking. El_C 05:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

sorry to stickybeak (now you really know I'm from Aus) but I have Sutton and Walshe's book (very impressive so far). Do you recommend creating a standalone page for it El_C Doug Weller? Noteduck (talk) 05:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes! But, hey, if you wanna be a Duck Influencer (WARNING! XXX-RATED!), you might have to do some unmentionable things... El_C 06:42, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

hahaha nice. Actually, the admittedly silly moniker Noteduck comes from back in the days of Runescape (showing my age). This much more experienced player said to me "names here are getting dumber all the time, I swear people just lump two random words together. You see players with names like note-duck or whatever the hell else." And it turns out, years and years later, the name Noteduck was pretty hard to forget! Noteduck (talk) 09:40, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Question

Dear @El C, hope you're doing well. I wanted to hear an additional opinion and thought about asking it here if you don't mind. I had a long discussion in the Zangezur corridor talk page whether these addition are appropriate or ought to included after every Aliev land claim over Armenia [1] [2] [3]. All the arguments are presented in the discussion, if you can, please take a look. I want another third opinion, and I thought since you were involved with AA topics and that you have alot of experience, asking you was my first choice. I just don't understand why after every Aliev land claim over Armenia, which he has done many times over the years [4] [5] [6] [7] [8], hinting at irredentism (I was told that presumably I can't call those claims "irredentist" if there are no sources saying that it is), there needs to be synthesized and included what seems like an apologia quote from a press conference talk. These additions after every land claim just give the false impression to the reader that Aliev *actually* has no land claims or "territorial claims" over Armenia.

I just find this inclusions of the same apologia quote so bizarre and it troubles me how my fellow editors don't see it that way, and persistently argue to keep it. We're here arguing whether a dictator's territorial claims were "clarified" by him or not from a random press conference, or why it even needs to be synthesized and included in the first place, meanwhile just recently, Azerbaijan already infiltrated parts of Armenia Lake Sev#2021 Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis.

How are these additions to every Aliev land claim display to the reader how the situation actually is and what Azerbaijan is currently doing.

A) Aliev clearly has history of territorial claims over Armenia, directly a quote from Az president's website from 2014:

"Our development will be continued even more rapidly. Therefore, the issue of restoration of our territorial integrity will be resolved without a doubt. Let no-one have any doubts about that. At the same time, I have repeatedly talked about this and want to say again that the Azerbaijanis must return to all our historical lands in the future. And our historical lands are not limited to Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding regions. If we look at the recent history and the statistics of the 19th century, we can see that the area populated by the Azerbaijanis was very large. The present-day Armenia is actually located on historical lands of Azerbaijan. Therefore, we will return to all our historical lands in the future. This should be known to young people and children. We must live, we live and we will continue to live with this idea."[7]

B) Not only he has claims over Armenian territory (this isn't about Karabakh btw, I'm talking about Armenia proper), but as I showed above, Aliev's already doing it, in Lake Sev most recent and prominent one.

Could you please give your thoughts about this and whether supposed "clarification" ought to be included after every Aliev land claim, when clearly, the reality is a lot more in line with what Aliev actually claims and does. And I feel like this addition by Grandmaster: "We will remember our history, but we have no territorial claims to any country, including Armenia" [1] [2] [3], is just an attempt to false balance and again, doesn't portray what the reality is to the reader.

Many thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 14:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

For the record, I was told that other third opinions can be asked, quote from Grandmaster: "I have requested a third opinion from a person who was previously involved with AA topics. Feel free to ask for more third opinions."

Hello, ZaniGiovanni. I'm sorry, but I'm not accepting requests of that nature at this time (nor is the overall topic area one with which I'm particularly familiar). Yes, Grandmaster seeking a third opinion is fine, though hopefully, the editor being solicited doesn't display partisanship for either side. The WP:3O mechanism can help with that. Regards, El_C 15:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

No worries. Best wishes, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 16:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Still remember Peacetowikied?

I had to think of you when this editor came across my wikipedia experience. You blocked him in August 2020. There is an editor who seems to like the same image as Peacetowikied. The recently blocked had a rather disruptive behavior to term it super-diplomatically. Peacetowikied at least had peace in his username. Anyway, both editors are blocked indef. for now.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Maybe you could change the visibility of this edit.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Paradise Chronicle, vaguely. Sorry, but I don't think there's a need to revdel that (double-middle finger ASCII) edit from 2013. El_C 19:41, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Ah, ok. It also doesn't bother me. And I didn't grasp that the edit is from 2013. Best wishes and happy editing.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, same to you. El_C 20:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

COVID-19 accepted and resolved by motion

The ‎Origins of COVID-19 case request you are a party to has been accepted under the name COVID-19 and resolved by motion with one remedy which supersedes the community authorized general sanctions with discretionary sanctions. Sanctions made under the previous community general sanctions are now discretionary sanctions and alerts made under the community GS are now DS alerts. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Disruptive edits

Someone from the UK has been obsessively disrupting pages about religions (Islam in Turkey, Islam in Tunusia, Yazdanism, Alevism, Islam...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/213.107.66.4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/80.2.21.124

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.234.73.94

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/217.137.42.32

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/213.107.1.41

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/217.137.41.183

They used at least 5 different ips to revert user:KurdeEzidi on a page yesterday. I am reading & contributing on those pages recently (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/46.221.85.78) and have been noticing those disruptive ips on many pages about religions.

I suspect that they are probably this blocked ip:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.40.183.184

46.221.74.215 (talk) 08:03, 17 June 2021

IP, since Bradv is the one who CU-blocked the IP whom you suspect of being the master, maybe ask them to investigate...? El_C 10:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Appeal

I am appealing at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Astral_Leap_appealing --Astral Leap (talk) 09:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Sunshine

		Sunshine!
		Hello El C! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 14:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy first day of summer, El C!! Interstellarity (talk) 14:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Interstellarity, and same to you. El_C 14:30, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

June thanks

Thank you for protecting articles in June, with some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Cool, will check it out. Thanks for sharing! El_C 21:51, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Really nice. Also, the presentation (visuals) is putting Songspam to shame... El_C 05:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

thank you ;) - added: missing SlimVirgin, and RMF festival opening - violin concerto and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Incredible. It doesn't get better than this! El_C 21:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

That in memoriam made me shed a tear... El_C 21:06, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

understand, both, going to work on Psalm 86, in memory, and another will be Psalm 30, talking about dust and death and morning light - someone else supplied the Hebrew for that one some time ago --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:10, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Conservative Party (UK)

Requesting reduction in protection to "Permanent semi-protected" so we can open up the page to another section of Wikipedia editors. (Added bonus is we are treating it the same as the Labour Party so it wont seem like playing favoritism!) Of course if the sockpuppetry continues, I will have no problem increasing protection permanently again! B. M. L. Peters (talk) 03:14, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Sure, B. M. L. Peters, I'll test the waters, though political equivalencies isn't a determining factor when it comes to protection levels. And on that note, if the protection needs to be upgraded again, I'm unlikely to leave it at just six months (more like a minimum of a year plus). El_C 05:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protection at Ilhan Omar

Hi El C, you indicated in an edit summary that you wanted a reminder to restore indef semi-protection to Ilhan Omar after the one-week protection ended. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Firefangledfeathers. Done. Thanks for the reminder, I appreciate it. Regards, El_C 18:49, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree with you...

....about Omar. I hinted as much when I put on the year's protection. If any further proof was needed: less than half an hour after the full protection expired - in other words while the article was very briefly unprotected - there was another BLP violation by another IP. I even wonder if that article is going to have to go to ECP, but for now I completely agree with indef semi. -- MelanieN (talk) 23:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Cool, thanks, Melanie. I'm relieved you feel this way — I can be a bit toe-steppy at times (working on it). Right, I caught the tail end of that conspiracy theory BLP vio earlier today. Yeah, ECP may well be in the cards for that page. As an aside, I'm often a bit puzzled as to why certain contentious high profile pages work well enough with semi, while others need ECP. Like, United States being fine at semi, but India needing ECP. A bit of a mystery, tbh. El_C 00:59, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

IP 81.214.82.158

81.214.82.158 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hi El C, got another one here;

Because I reverted his edits at Xiongnu [10], which attempted to push a Turkic origin, completely ignoring the other theories, he proceeded to spam my talk page

The reasons you give are not a reason to delete my resources, please do not vandalize, do not delete resources that do not work for you at any time,you didn't even read the sources.and please give neutral comments.thanks have a good day

[11] same comment here

The reasons you give are not a reason to delete my resources, please do not vandalize, do not delete resources that do not work for you at any time,you didn't even read the sources.and please give neutral comments.thanks have a good day. Ethnolinguistic means language origin,You cannot determine the race of that nation by language.

[12] edit summary; 'no.Because of pan-Iranians like you, Wikipedia's accuracy has declined.'

[13]

can i talk u in discord or instagram? can you give it to me if you have an account

--HistoryofIran (talk) 20:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 2 months with everything disabled. El_C 21:34, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Cleaning up after vandals (Gerda bump)

Hi

You recently blocked Lenchmobbin (talk · contribs) for deceptive editing and poor communication, after my nomination. My quick question now is how do I most efficiently undo the damage they did? It would be a lot of work to go through all the articles and figure out what remains of their changes and what needs to be reverted, and since there are intervening edits I would have to do it all manually. Is there a quicker way with some tool or something, or do I just have to suck it up and do it the hard way? Thanks in advance for any help! Knuthove (talk) 17:02, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Nope, nothing that I, at least, know about can work as a timesaver for all of that painstaking work. No rest for the weary. El_C 05:55, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Another watering down of the wisdom of the tetragrammaton, damn it. History is all downhill. At least if we can trust Isaiah, the Big Chief's view was that there was 'no rest for the wicked'. As a rogue editor and traditionalist that's my take on working here (without offending Weary Dunlop 's memory).:)Nishidani (talk) 12:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Did I do a wicked thing or is it a Wicked problem. Or... El_C 12:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

That in itself is a wicked problem question, since how you take it depends on whether the stress accent goes on the first or the second syllable of wicked. Philip Roth's novels, and a million others (John Updike) often deal with male protagonists who have a wick(ed) problem, if the stress makes that word monosyllabic. Ah, I suppose, bending my mental elbow with fond memories of student weekends, I should accommodate the matter to the wisdom of my dialect: (no rest-rooms for the shickered). Cheers, pal.Nishidani (talk) 12:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Unrelated-related, here are the books I've read most recently (in chronological order): Dayworld (Hebrew), The Simulacra (Hebrew), Nineteen Eighty-Four (Hebrew), Real Ultimate Power, The Official Ninja Book (English), The Lovers (Hebrew) ISBN 0-345-28691-X, now reading Darkness at Noon (English). If there is a method to my madness, I submit to you that it is Totally Sweet. And Smooth. El_C 12:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

The only connection there is with The Simulacra, which, being written by Philip Dick . . .Seriously, after Darkness at Noon, it's worth glancing at his neglected novel, Arrival and Departure. I read it too long ago to remember much but 'Statistics don't bleed' somewhere there stuck. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 13:50, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Right, I've heard of it, but never gotten around to locating/reading it. Anyway, maybe we should start an Anti-Orwellian/Pro-Ninja book club? Just throwing it out there. El_C 13:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Dunno. The (Orwellian) future (apart from one's mortality at the moment of writing this:)) is already here in my twisted way of viewing this otherwise splendid world, so I tend to, with fiction, only read stuff composed prior to 2000 (BCE, would be ideal, but I never learnt Sumerian). Nishidani (talk) 16:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Nishidani, if you hear that chipping sound as you sit in your ivory tower, that'd be my army of chipmunks. So, brace yourself...? El_C 18:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I only brace myself to avoid my trousers falling down to my ankles. You've stumbled on one of my early nicknames -Chip - the chosen monicker the brightest kid in our class (+162 IQ, but he wasn't good at football or cricket, poor bugger) devised for me. As long as your little chaps don't mind the toponi di campagna, snakes and hedgehogs that thrive on my property or come to share an evening meal with my cat, rest assured they'll get the royal carpet treatment, Devonshire tea if they bowl in too early to enjoy the abundant horse chestnuts here. I've long taken a leaf out of Archibald Belaney's book. Since I'm an ex-Mick and it's St.Pat's Day, for the record, his ophidophobic ostracism is something I put down as a black mark against the saintly blighter. As an act of ethnohistorical reparation, I have become the local snake rescuer, by the way, phoned to pick them up and remove them to safe bushland when they curl up near neighbours' doors. CheersNishidani (talk) 19:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Nishidani, being as cultured as an aristocat isn't gonna save you from the justice of the mob masses. So, when I say brace yourself, I'm chiefly talking about the chipmunks' tiny guillotines — i.e. takes a while before the choppy-choppy (Chinese racism connotations unintended!) is done! El_C 20:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Death by a thousand comic cuts? But as an orientalist with a background in the martial arts, you should warn your chipmunks that I am a dab hand at 筷子剣道 with a swordsmanship only equaled by puss in boots, the real aristocat. I'm just a hardscrabble aristocrapNishidani (talk)

Nishidani, this isn't a Kung Fu fantasy movie, with the magic and the flying. One (three) word: tiny armour columns! El_C 11:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Story: back in the old country, my cat took on a Palestine Viper on two separate occasions and triumphed both times. She was the best! El_C 20:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

God's grief. Even your cat can't shrug off the lessons of Genesis? Nishidani (talk) 21:11, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Now I'm thinking about Yoninah (Genesis, not cat-related), again. Where is she, indeed, Gerda? El_C 11:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

I broke you the sad news yesterday, next to the synagogue pic. Will write a different psalm article in her memory. On her talk or on Google, look for "Touching the World of Angels" (and "Yonina"). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:01, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't pick up on it (obviously). No words. El_C 12:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

... so I had to write for the Signpost - today: Bach's cantata composed for today, - perhaps listen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm listening to it how? (No direct link.) El_C 15:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Ask MarnetteD who was listening when typing ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Psalm 125 please, only 5 verses! - Did you find music? DYK that it became FA yesterday? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

No, I didn't know how to find it. It's nice, I like it. Thanks! As for Pslams, did you not see that I did 124-150 as requested (on March 23)? 125 is good to go! No, I did not know. Congrats on like, what, the millionth FA? El_C 12:04, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK how I found it: ask google for "BWV 1", as difficult as that ;) - I wonder if you'd like the faster version that appears first better. - WOW for having done all those Hebrew psalms, - no, I missed it, and didn't you see that for many, we have them already, thanks to Yoninah? I'll do one by one. - What I saw and admired - with great sadness - was the beauty of this. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh! I guess I misunderstood your request. Still, it was time well spent, so I have no redundancy regrets. What do you mean Google? There's lots of https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=BWV+1+cantana — a couple of which I've already listened to... Indeed, sad. Hopefully, he'll come back, if not soon, one day. El_C 12:29, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Why should he? You mentioned time well spent. Next time arbitration calls me I'll also not participate. Time not well spent. To my limited observation, always, sadly. - On that brighter side: I didn't count FAs, but none last year, and this one was hard. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you were Giano'ing it up. Was probably confusing DYK/RD with FA, though.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 12:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Giano will get flowers for dreams. 12 FAs - I looked. Dreaming of Innisfree Garden, just to show the image, - I tried on DYK, twice. Yoninah would have accepted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

to get serious: ... and the first performance was on a Palm Sunday which is today, and Yoninah's obituary today with the beginning of Passover - putting some little ego-battles in perspective --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

... and today is the day I want to be praised for having been able to suppress the urge to thank for the TFA ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda, two things before I go back into the Void to resume my slumber. First, please don't mention SchroCat on my talk page (even as a hint in whimsy) — it makes me feel uncomfortable. Secondly, I've no stamina for uphill battles right now, despite my strong feelings about certain recent and/or developing events of note. And that's that. I gotta do what's best for me, and by extension, the project — they're one and the same. El_C 15:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I didn't refer to any user, was just proud of remembering. How about a line from a psalm for praise? Psalm 69? The next to be expanded. The term "little ego-battles" (if you mean that) was coined by Antandrus in a very general way, and used in February: "You know what I like most about Wikipedia, ultimately? It gives stuff away for free. All our little ego-battles blow away in the wind. They're nothing. The articles remain." Amen. Also very generally: I was in no battle on our dear project, - any claim ty the contrary would need a reliable source (... and don't tell me that arbs are such a thing). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for what you said on Yoninah's talk, seen only now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Of course [Yoninah]. Erm, sorry, but that "pride" is Off Pudding for me [SchroCat subterfuge]. As to What Is This (show more for lyrics} — an institutional shift? An establishment-dissident re/alignment ? Strange times. Strange dreams [The Thing]. El_C 18:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

("pride"??? as if it was bad to be proud of no battles? My attempts were Motezuma (where I was called disruptive first time ever), Sparrow Mass (where I was called a warrior first time ever, for installing the consensus version weeks after an edit war of others) and Siegfried (opera). SC had nothing to do with any of it, nor was he even a party to the arbcase. Completely different cinema.) Today is the first day after beginning expansion of Psalm 69 without Hebrew text. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda's April corner

wild garlic

You may be interested in the TFA on Easter Sunday that played a role in my life! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Cool. Those who have fallen live on in us, in our memories and love. Blessed Easter to you, Gerda. El_C 17:10, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, happened! - Psalm 115 in Hebrew, please? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see ;) - I read my watchlist backwards. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK that we had a beautiful Main page on 10 April? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

On this day in 1742, He was despised was performed for the first time, and when I wrote it in 2012, I didn't only think of Jesus. Andreas Scholl sang that for us, - you are invited to a Baroque stroll. - Next: Psalm 116, please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Quality_Article_Improvement/Psalms#116. El_C 13:51, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Excellent! Will start today then! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Today: an article about music significant in my life, Bach's motet Jesu, mein Freude, with a long way from the start in 2006 to the Main page today ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

DYKongrats! El_C 09:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, really? I failed a GA nom, twice, and it took the better editor to make GA possible. (Just look at that longest talk page for any Bach composition in memory.) It's my piece of defiance not only against death and fear but also arbcom, DYK? - I opened a peer review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, I'm lost (obviously). El_C 10:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

What do you find if you click on "DYK"? - And what do you find if you visit the article's talk page? - The original defiance happened here. It's short for the lyrics that begin "Defiance to the old dragon, defiance to death, and to fear on top. World, rage and leap. I stand here and sing, in safe tranquility." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

More like lost the thread due to inattention.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ World, rage and leap — I like that! El_C 13:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I knew that! listen! The raging is when you only hear the basses grumbling, and last word is "brummen", the sound that bears and bumble bees make, imitated by all. Great fun to do! If only we could. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Will do. Also: bears and bumble bees — intrigued. El_C 14:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Could you give Hebrew to Psalm 104, please. In the news. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:04, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Quality_Article_Improvement/Psalms#104. El_C 21:18, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Great! Almost 13k views for the Psalm yesterday, imagine. Too bad I was out all day, and only few will have seen it in more splendour, with Hebrew. Did you read there that someone found it worth studying Hebrew for 10 years to read it in the original? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

You may have seen it already on my talk: Psalm 118 is the one for today. (Psalm 86 tomorrow) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

No, I haven't seen it, but will get right on it. El_C 11:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Gerda: 118, 86 — now  Done. El_C 11:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Fruit of you labour: memories on the Main page today, Psalm 115 thinking of Yoninah, Christa Ludwig and Milva, - voices that made the Earth a better place. Sad that the psalm hook didn't appear on Earth Day as planned, but better pictured and late than going unnoticed ;) - Will work on Psalm 68 when done with the mezzo. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Gerda's May corner

Enjoy two ladies today, one played in an iconic film, the other sang in the premiere of a famous opera, with her husband-to-be ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Nice share. I'll have me some of that Franz Liszt clout! Also, I do seem to recall discussing and possibly also watching Under the Pavement Lies the Strand, but I don't remember if it was in a German history or history of feminism course (hazy memory)... El_C 09:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

It's great sharing with you, actually looking - the soprano made it to the stats, imagine! even Liszt got 3k+ hits - my talk got interesting with people meeting while I was working, did you see? I switched back to the April pic, because the wild garlic is in full bloom as I saw yesterday, and chamomile didn't even begin. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:01, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I look (mostly)! For sure, Chipmunk Season being upon us sure is nice. Anyway, you know what they (I) say: It Don't Mean a Thing (If It Ain't Got That Swing)! [Set up] → Doo-Wap [Punch line]. El_C 10:37, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Fine! Look ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:26, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Not looking! El_C 11:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I didn't say listen, but look ;) - Look at the talk: it has the whole sad story of the infobox wars in a nutshell (including that a friend's RfA failed because of her comments on said page), and I think - after all the trouble we've seen - we just reached the happy ending. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:35, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh, it was infobox-relatd? Boo! And Grr... El_C 10:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

What in the word "happy ending" did you not understand? There seems no need to ever mention that topic again now. - I came to ask for Hebrew for Psalm 95. - Miss SlimVirgin. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Today: Kammermusik (Hindemith), - don't miss caricature, "badboy" and the review! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Today: Thomas Fritsch, the German voice of Diego in Ice Age. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Today: pictured white and blue - birthday of a friend whose name was in the credits for Ice Age, if you waited a while --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Today: the lead DYK, "useless but meaningful", or a dream-com-true pictured --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Joke Singh

Just FYI - Immediately after your one week protection of Joke Singh expired, newly registered editors were back to vandalising it. I posted the page at WP:RPP. Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 08:28, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Malinaccier. El_C 23:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

User:YashPratap1912

Hello. I have an old one for you. You blocked this user back in August 2020. They were advised of the standard offer the next day by another admin. See User talk:YashPratap1912#Standard offer

They have been asking for an unblock and getting ignored for some time now. They seem to have expressed an understanding as to why they were blocked and made a clear promise not to engage in the same behavior. They have also described areas that they intend to edit in. They have also gone well over 6 months without visible problematic behavior.

I have had a checkuser confirm that there is no technical evidence of evasion in the last 6 months.

Before doing anything I wanted to consult with you. My understanding is that they were blocked for misusing multiple accounts, possibly in a deletion discussion, though I am having trouble finding the discussion in question. Perhaps you remember the details?

I want to make sure there was nothing egregious like death threats or extended block evasion or anything else that would preclude the standard offer. I also want to know how you personally feel about the matter.

If they are unblocked I will be monitoring their talk page for troubles and have already informed them that they can be reblocked if there is any trouble. Thank you for your time. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 22:52, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey. No, sorry, I am unable to recollect the details there. Maybe Prax remembers, as she's the one who filed the report in question... Regards, El_C 23:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

That is okay, I can piece it together from there. Have a great day. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 23:19, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, sounds good. Am a bit in transit atm, so writing in haste — I was only able to glance at the thing. El_C 23:38, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Jalen Green protection

Hi El C, thanks for protecting Jalen Green. I noted that you only protected it until July 3. Given that it has already been protected once this year and was the target of vandalism by multiple IPs in the last few days, none of which will be over until he is actually drafted, I ask that you extend protection until after the NBA draft.--User:Namiba 13:34, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Sigh, obviously, I can't tell time. And I think now I've gone too far (Sept. 6). Well, gah, I'm done touching it. Obviously, I lack the competence in which to do so! El_C 13:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! You may want to keep an eye on Evan Mobley as well. I found someone snuck-in draft speculation as well.--User:Namiba 14:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Heh, sure, I guess. Recommended length? El_C 14:37, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

I recommend August 1, which is two days after the upcoming NBA draft.--User:Namiba 14:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Shit, I fucked it up again. El_C 14:41, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Billy Goober introduced a deliberate factual error into Cade Cunningham after you added the protection. Looking at their talk page, it seems that this is their MO. Could you block them?--User:Namiba 15:47, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely. El_C 18:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

User Лобачев Владимир malicious activity at article Pahonia and Moldavia

@El C: Hi, once again... This disruptive user Лобачев Владимир simply refuses to give up and wants to start a new edit warring at article Pahonia by reinserting already removed information (HIS EDIT). You gave a warning to stop such malicious activity at this article, but he clearly doesn't care. Can he be finally blocked for his malicious activity? Otherwise, he will obviously perform it again and again, and again because he doesn't care about warnings. He has also recently performed edit warring at article Moldavia (here is warning to him for 3RR rule violation). He was also warned for disruptive editing already in 2018 (warning from his talk page). Please finally stop this disruptive user who constantly provokes edit warring and violates various rules of Wikipedia. -- Pofka (talk) 14:05, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but I'd rather not follow up on this single-handedly at this time. Recommend filing a report at a noticeboard of your choosing — feel free to link it for me here (I may or may not comment there, we'll see). El_C 14:11, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

@El C: I created a report about him here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Лобачев_Владимир_reported_by_User:Pofka_(Result:_). Since you encountered his disruptive activity as well, your opinion would be very welcome. -- Pofka (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

That report would be beyond too long for WP:AN/WP:ANI (and, if it was at WP:AE's, it'd be several times its 500-word limit), not to mention WP:AN3, where reports are generally a quarter of the size (if that). Recommend you trim and condense to a very significant extent. Finally, you've left several of the report's mandatory parameters blank (maybe they're answered in the lengthy body, I dunno). In short, this is a highly problematic report. El_C 20:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

@El C: Well, I wished to show how systematic his edit warring is. He only edits Russia-related topics and attacks other countries. Truly disruptive user when he attempts to edit non-Russian topics. I shortened my initial report and your opinion is certainly welcome there: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Лобачев_Владимир_reported_by_User:Pofka_(Result:_). -- Pofka (talk) 22:16, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Block this user

User talk:Amaan4210 he is removing sourced content continuously without explaining, you can check Pakistan article, I request you to please stop his disruptive edit and block him... Sumit (talk) 05:07, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Sumit, looking into it. El_C 12:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Sumit (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Fidesz

Hey, I'd like to you look at Fidesz, it seems like the page is under attack by a sockpuppet named SmalforaGiant, a lot of information was added without previous consensus on the talk page. I did revert their edits but some unknown user has reverted them back. I've RPPed the page just in case but again I need someone to take a look. There was also a sockpuppet investigation launched 3 days ago by Martopa here since three different IPs with same edits have been doing this on a couple of different pages. Cheers, --Vacant0 (talk) 13:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but I'm not accepting requests of that nature at this time. Regards, El_C 13:41, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

That's alright, is there somebody else I can contact regarding this issue? --Vacant0 (talk) 13:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, no one specific comes to mind — I'm afraid it's likely to be the usual venues. El_C 13:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Got it, no problem. --Vacant0 (talk) 13:56, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I am probably gonna get to your RfPP request very soon, though. El_C 13:58, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it! --Vacant0 (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Ma al-'Aynayn

Hi El C. could you please have a word with Marmandie? Basically, they kept adding nonsensical material to the Ma al-'Aynayn article and edit warring over it. My attempts at trying to explain to them that what they are doing is nonsensical made no difference and now they are adding irrelevant/nationalist content to the article. Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 14:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I mean, at a glance, while it is rather poorly-written and poorly-integrated into the existing prose, I'm not sure it goes beyond a content dispute that should be resolved on the article talk page. Feel free to get a 2nd opinion, though. Regards, El_C 14:15, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

It's WP:SYNTH (the whole thing is unsourced and unattributable). That being said, I'll think about it. Regards, M.Bitton (talk) 14:30, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't necessarily disagree, but speaking for myself (only), I think it'd probably be better to get all that on the article talk page-record, rather than have an admin force it away by fiat. Best, El_C 14:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

That's a good idea. I will copy and paste that discussion on the article's talk page. Regards, M.Bitton (talk) 15:02, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

You look like a man who realizes Canada's residential schools are defunct

Wanna help with a persistent main page error? Just seven bytes to you, but "former" is a powerful word for us. And nice to hear for native Minnesotans, too, probably. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I dunno, maybe I'm ESL'ing up the flow of it, but my read is that "site of" could be seen to imply that, without the former. In any case, I wouldn't feel confident enough to amend it single-handedly, so it's probably best to gauge the views of other WP:ITNC participants and go from there... El_C 21:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

There are no participants to gauge at Errors, just me waiting. A site is where something is, and a former site is where it was, trust me. Regardless of whether you accept this mission, it's solid English (for physical things, anyway, event sites are forever). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:12, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Not sure I understand. I count six other participants in the WP:ERRORS thread and many more in the ITNC one... Sorry, feeling a bit missioned-out today. El_C 22:25, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Three were talking about a topically related but different error, and three about a Florida condo. But no worries. Someone else will either do it or it simply won't be done. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, that got a tad bit trubulent —glad I stayed away, then— but it looks like your formula persevered. And as for me, I learned nothing! El_C 18:39, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Damn. I'd have guessed the roles reversed, Stephen for "former school" and Brad for "former site". But at least I didn't have to resort to correcting either of them! You made the right choice, for sure. Thanks for nothing, not even sarcastically! InedibleHulk (talk) 18:57, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I live to give! El_C 20:03, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

And I'd rather die than use this browser's YouTube! But yeah, seems impressive from this side. I'll remember that video ID, and thank or criticize you for it later, whatever is appropriate. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:12, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Dear Finland...

So sorry! El_C 00:19, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

(←) It was fun while it lasted... now you're just randomly apologizing to Finland for reasons unknown! DanCherek (talk) 02:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

And that's when I realized that I would have to use my dancing technique to win this match... El_C 03:55, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Helsinki-is-hot-this-season!.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Helsinki-is-hot-this-season!.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Michaelm

Did you not ban User:Michaelm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxy (talk • contribs)

Hmm. I guess I didn't click the sitewide button, now Done. El_C 13:32, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

British royal family

"I've semi'd British royal family for 2 weeks due to a serious influx (the reasons for which I'm unsure about)."

I assume you don't follow the British red tops? They're in one of their periodical feeding frenzies, for reasons I have no interest at all in trying to understand. As usual, it's basically uninformed he said/she said speculation. The Forgers' Gazette has even been running a series on new explanations for the Death of Diana, traditionally the preserve of the Daily Excrement. Narky Blert (talk) 21:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Heh, I'm more of an Independent man myself, truth be told. The funny thing about the Daily Express is that Google News indexes its nonsense to me like it's crack! Doesn't matter which English-language version (US/UK/CAN/OZ/NZ) — I never, ever visit it, yet it still doesn't leave me be. Only on the Hebrew version do I get some reprieve. One's interest in certain publications can ebb and flow. For example, when I was a kid, Davar would bore me to tears, but now I can't do without it. Some publications, though, the trees weep. El_C 21:58, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

J. Wellington Wimpy

Could ye take a look at the history please. Cheers! ——Serial 12:25, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one month. Cue the usual I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today — what, it's Wed.! El_C 12:31, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I literally have to go out and buy burgers now. ——Serial 12:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I had one yesterday for dinner (for real). El_C 12:35, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

A quick video clip for any talk page watchers unfamiliar with the phrase :-) El C that just means you have 6 days to save up your pennies. Gads I am so old I remember when a couple burger franchises would have "10 burgers for 25 cents" deals on a Tuesday :-P MarnetteD|Talk 12:37, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

As I've grown older, I've become more of a burger snob, I'll confess that much... I still remember when Burgeranch was first introduced to me back in the homeland. Paradigm shift. El_C 12:41, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Rojava Protection (?)

Hello, what is the exact reason of Rojava page protection update? I don't demand decrease. BerkBerk68 (talk) 21:28, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey. In answer to your query: there was, like, a dozen reverts in the span of a day or two. As I noted at RfPP (diff), I am open to downgrading in the not too distant future. Regards, El_C 09:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay thanks BerkBerk68 (talk) 10:34, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Check this article

Hello, I want that you see this article once and if I or someone else has made a mistake in editing it, then correct it.(Article- Hajipur ) I want to make this article better, its an request... Thank you... ItsSkV08 (talk) 03:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but this isn't a subject matter with which I am familiar. Perhaps participants at WP:IN would be willing to lend a hand...? Regards, El_C 09:38, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Cr1TiKaL

Hey i see you semi protected Cr1TiKaL and i just wanted to thank you for it. My question is can you make the protection permanent like other youtubers because it seems the protection expires in September. Thank you. MrMclovin (talk) 04:12, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, MrMclovin (great username, btw!). For sure, you're welcome, glad I could help. However, that page isn't a candidate for indef semi at this time. With there only having been 2-3 protection actions, there would have to be some rather exceptional circumstances and/or egregious misconduct to justify such a measure. If anything, with Charlie's YouTube channel approaching 10 mil, he's more of a public figure than some lesser known living persons, whom, due to their notability being more borderline, are more likely to be indef semi'd upon request (again, barring the exceptional stuff). I'll also note that being a YouTuber (or any internet content creator) isn't really a metric in this regard. Finally, for context, I've indef semi'd more than one page that, literally, had tens of previous protections (not that I'm suggesting that here, or in general). Welcome to the project! Regards, El_C 09:51, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining. MrMclovin (talk) 02:14, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Evyatar page protection request

Hi El C, I saw that you declined the page protection request for Evyatar as pre-emptive. I completely agree that is pre-emptive, but respectfully disagree with that as a reason not to protect the page. My understanding of the Arbitration Committee rulings on the Israel-Palestine conflict is that articles related to the conflict are supposed to be given pre-emptive 500/30 protection. Evyatar is an Israeli outpost in the West Bank, which makes it a prime candidate for this protection. If I have misunderstood the rulings then please accept my apologies. RoanokeVirginia (talk) 13:41, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

RoanokeVirginia, years back, I preemptively protected tens of ARBPIA pages (well over a hundred), mostly in one fell swoop. This preemptive protection of ARBPIA pages was the prevailing practice at the time. But, a couple of years after that, a consensus emerged among several of us admins who were most active at RfPP to not do that anymore, which has been the prevailing practice ever since. Perhaps it's worth asking the Committee to clarify whether that's okay...? If it isn't, I'll likely just be ignoring these requests rather than declining them outright. Regards, El_C 13:49, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt and informative response. I think asking the Committee would be a good idea as the rulings summary page could be more explicit on this, but I am not sure how to go about this, any guidance or help would be greatly appreciated. RoanokeVirginia (talk) 14:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

No problem. Happy to do that myself. If I've yet to do so by, say, Monday — remind me. Regards, El_C 16:33, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

RoanokeVirginia, just noting that the settlement was vacated without incident today (diff), and, not to jinx it, also without incident here on Wikipedia. El_C 16:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Protecting versus blocking

This is regarding Manticore (talk · contribs), and why I didn't full-protect the article instead of partially blocking the two editors reverting each other.

Before partial blocks existed, I would have protected. Nobody likes to be blocked. Even though I know that blocks are only ever placed to prevent disruption and are never punishment and never personal, they still brass people off, because they stay as a permanent record on your user log for ever and ever, with all context for them stripped away.

However, not all administrators agree with this approach. For example, in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Robert McClenon 2, Iridescent wrote "This [protecting instead of blocking] is directly contrary to both established Wikipedia policy and to custom and practice, in which the only occasions full protection should be considered as a response to a content dispute are multi-party disputes in which so many people are involved that blocking is not a realistic option—remember, every time you protect a page you're preventing everyone from editing it, not just the people involved in the dispute." Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:05, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Ritchie333, no, that's not right for this case. If I see someone making three reverts like that (i.e. in relative isolation), I fully-protect the page to prevent them from reverting a 4th time and running foul of WP:3RR. Because, in this case, who cares if the bio of some Slovakian sprinter is protected for a day along with some innocuous protection log entry (which does not single any one individual by name). But a block log is for life. El_C 16:00, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Request

I need some help to really leave for my own health, which is not compatible with the en.wp environment. My request: please delete all my empty user-space pages, permanently block me, including throughout my own user space and protect my user space against edits by non-admins. Otherwise, please point me to where I might find an admin who might be prepared to do so. —Quondum 11:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Very sorry to see you go, Quondum, but of course your health comes first. Please ping me if and/or when you're ready to come back. And thank you. Thank you for all that you've done to keep science honest on the project. Best wishes and kind regards, El_C 13:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Glad to see you are still around!

Don't know why, but I seem to recall a while back seeing a "semi-retired" banner on your page. Great to see that it is not so. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind sentiment, Gabriel, I appreciate that. But, no, I've never used a retired/semi-retired banner before. Best, El_C 14:28, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Update

I know you're "not taking requests" at the moment, but since you're more involved in the issue of Volunteer Marek's behavior than anyone else,[14][15][16] I'm keeping you appraised:

• 18:47, 27 April 2021 Falsely accuses an editor of canvassing
• 18:20, 18 June 2021 False aspersions,[17] which he then repeats throughout the discussion[18]
• 18:25, 18 June 2021 Insult and false aspersions (and he's wrong about the count)
• 19:40, 18 June 2021 Insult (also wrong [19])
• 01:04, 19 June 2021 Asked to avoid making accusations in edit summaries
• 14:17, 19 June 2021 Asked to AGF
• 18:20, 19 June 2021 False accusation[20]
• 19:37, 19 June 2021, 19:39, 19 June 2021, 19:52, 19 June 2021 PAs, Aspersions and insults
• 01:35, 21 June 2021 False accusations[21]
• 08:08, 28 June 2021 False accusation[22]
• 08:00, 7 July 2021 Again with Icewhiz

That's five editors, two ANIs[23][24] and a lot of time wasted, when his actual contribution to these articles is close to nil.[25][26][27]

Cheers. François Robere (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

François Robere, I guess I should emphasize that I'm definitely not taking requests right now that are gonna depress me! Regards, El_C 12:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Hey, El C. Hope you're well. The museum article which the new account added doesn't discuss at all Androutsos's origin - not one word - and they removed a source which discussed their origin. The other new account which is doing the same thing is Mercurius1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). They're adding random sources to articles and claiming Greek origin for Byzantine emperors, but the sources don't propose Greek origin; in fact they discuss non-Greek backgrounds[28][29][30][31][32][33] It should have been mentioned in the summary that their activity is part of a broader behavioral pattern across many articles by specific new accounts and there is no "correct version" to protect, but I still feel that such behavior by new accounts shouldn't get any presence on live versions. These accounts know that their edits will get verified and will get removed sooner or later. The validation they're seeking is to keep their "work" online as much as possible.--Maleschreiber (talk) 12:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Maleschreiber. Doing alright, thanks for asking. The thing is that the museum piece in question does mention his father as such, so, I'm confused why it's disputed (the source, the info, etc.). As for the now-expanded rest, it's getting a bit too complicated for my liking, tbh... Regards, El_C 12:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not disputed that it mentions the names of his father and mother - a source about them was already in the stable version. The new account was trying to use it as a source which suggests that his father is Arvanite, but his mother isn't. This particular source doesn't mention his parents' origins, but the one he removed calls Androutsos an Arvanite. It's the reason why they wanted to remove & replace it[34].

Side comment: To be able to reliably remove these sources, I searched through 2,000+ pages. When you have to repeat the same unpleasant activity over and over again and you realize that the result is going to be the same every time, it becomes difficult to maintain procedural standards (use of talkpage, informative edit summaries). --Maleschreiber (talk) 12:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

This is not an area with which I'm familiar with (never heard of Arvanites), and it is difficult to follow, not least in a venue such as RfPP. So, unless, you find an admin familiar with the subject matter enough to apply WP:ACDS directly, a more comprehensive report in a noticeboard may be needed. Or run an RfC, I dunno. It's difficult to review, in any case. Regards, El_C 12:58, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Side comment #2: The museum article was copied from Greek wikipedia ("Wikipedia" on the bottom of the page). I understand that you may not be able to review the issue. I'll move the discussion to the talkpage and when the protection expires, I'll do all necessary cleanup. And I'll file a report at SPI.--Maleschreiber (talk) 13:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh — that's not a side note! That makes it a simple WP:CIRCULAR matter. Sure, sounds good. Regards, El_C 13:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Side comment #3: As my second year as a contributor/editor/user comes to a close, I'm still surprised at how supposedly curated websites of academic and cultural institutions routinely copy their content from wikipedia, but wikipedia is considered to be less "prestigious" than them. It seems that social capital does reflect real capital after all.--Maleschreiber (talk) 13:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Maleschreiber, I think that conundrum stems from those (institutions, etc.) doing the refactoring not understanding that Wikipedia pages are constantly being maintained. Being, on average, at any point in time, roughly accurate is not good enough for factual precision. The likely error rate is too high for that usage. By our RS rules, they could use a non-open tertiary source like Britannica, because its editors are professionally vetted. Of course, that does not mean the corresponding Greek Wikipedia page is wrong (if it says that). Its content, including sources, may be refactored here (with attribution). Hope that makes sense. Regards, El_C 13:35, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Continuing sockpuppetry at Melinda French Gates

Hi El C, another IP has repeated the name change on Melinda French Gates that led you to protect the page a few days ago, shortly after the protection expired today. Can you renew the protection? ― Tartan357 ^Talk 00:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey. Got it. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, El_C 00:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

BTW, Tartan357, as of a few months ago, MusikBot II will add/remove the pp- tags (if you give it 5-10 min) — though it isn't sophisticated enough to add custom ones like pp-blp, pp-sock, etc. Regards, El_C 00:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

El C, I'm aware—I just like to do it, especially when a custom one can be used. Thanks, though. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 00:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Go on then, Gooby's blessings upon you. El_C 01:11, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

RI Driving School

LOL what exactly do they think they'll get out of a spam edit summary. SMDH. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:17, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Responsible spammers will always provide a descriptive edit summary! El_C 14:25, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Myanmar protection request

Hi El C, could you semi-protect List of presidents of Myanmar? Thanks. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 02:11, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Done. El_C 02:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Kosovo

The Battle of Kosovo article was semi-protected indefinitely a few days ago due to disruption by IPs. Since then, there have been new rounds of reverting cycles. Today, new user Istinar breached WP:3RR by making 4 reverts. Can you keep an eye on the article or put a short full-protection, or maybe place a short message on that editor's tp? To be clear, I am not involved in the current dispute, just have the article on my watchlist. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:09, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I've p-blocked for the 3RR breach. El_C 13:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your intervention. Partial blocks are very helpful and effective in such cases. I wonder why they did not exist years ago, when only "full blocks" were possible. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I wonder why haven't you reported other users who deleted sources, made major changes to controversial topic without any prior discussion or are inserting trivial data to promote their countrymen while diminishing significance of others? No need to answer, I think I know why. Istinar (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Istinar

I just noticed that you blocked Istinar (talk · contribs) from a page in the WP:ARBMAC space. They have also recently added a fair bit of toxicity at Talk:Denial of the genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia, so you might want to examine applying more sanctions to enforce the rules of decorum. I am involved, because I tried to reason with them; silly me. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Joy, having glanced at that talk page, I feel that I'm probably not versed enough in the subject matter to be able act with any confidence at this time. Maybe if you were to break it down to a cogent WP:AE report...? Intuitively, it sure looks like they're on a TBAN course (also factoring their response on my talk page earlier today), but I've been wrong before (to put it mildly). Regards, El_C 21:01, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

The irony is that "Istinar" means "truth-teller", while on Battle of Kosovo they tried to push a POV similar to the infamous nationalistic narrative of the Milosevic era that all "important" participants in the anti-Ottoman side were Serbs, or at least no "important" Albanian was there. Given that, two blocks in 5 months after less than 100 edits on Wiki is no coincidence. I hope they reflect, or a topic ban will not be far away. It is a pity Balkan topics continue to lose editors for frivolous reasons. Idk if @Peacemaker67: has sth to say. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not really about the content dispute, I'm more concerned about this edit where they clearly cast aspersions, accuse me of taking sides because it's somehow "my" government etc (describing a period of about 30-40 years), of lying because I truthfully translated their glaringly contentious username, and of anti-Serb bias without any evidence whatsoever because I told them their contributions already show that they're not here to build an encyclopedia. This goes way beyond what is normal to say in a content dispute. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Joy, thanks for the explanation. Indeed, I agree that this is likely sanctionable conduct, so I'll start with a logged warning. Will get right on it. Regards, El_C 11:42, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Obviously NOTHERE: instead of listening to advice, made a sock account to evade the block [35]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:04, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll let a CU confirm, but regardless, Istinitost Blocked indefinitely. El_C 13:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, that maybe should be deleted from public view. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:20, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it's all wrapped up. El_C 13:23, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again. I did not notice you had already deleted those diffs from public view. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:26, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Zakir Naik

I was going to do a full protection on this as many of the accounts involved are 500+ but it's a nightmare and I didn't want to protect the wrong version!! There's been canvassing on and off en-wiki (one sided, from what I see currently) on this article as is seen here. I also placed a canvass banner on the talk page discussion which has more drive by participation on both sides. I blocked a couple of accounts (one incorrectly as sock, it was an off-wiki canvassed meatpuppet) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Emdad Tafsir/Archive. There's another really old sock farm on the other side too, with a couple of recently blocked socks. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rajputbhatti/Archive. —SpacemanSpiff 13:16, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

SpacemanSpiff, by all means, please feel free to adjust the protection as you see fit. Happy to leave it with you. El_C 13:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Heh, I was hoping to leave it with you! —SpacemanSpiff 14:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Hot potato! Whose hungy? El_C 14:18, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the version needs to be corrected too. On talk page, only Xpert3 has defended the current version, while other two canvassed editors,[36][37] have done nothing other than attacks on the article and me. While 4 editors have validly raised concern against this whitewashing campaign. NavjotSR (talk) 05:20, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

NavjotSR, by all means, correct away. I mean, it's not like you're prohibited from doing so, especially seeing as SpacemanSpiff blocked Xpërt3 for disruption that included repeated WP:CANVASSING (after warning). El_C 12:07, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey navjyot ? I did nothing ? This is not a white washing campaign . It's not someone's personal blog , this is Wikipedia we have to maintain the neutrality which your article was unable to . Please don't do this Maaz143 (talk) 21:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not spam

Next round's on me! Drink responsively. El_C 21:07, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

It's postmodern multimedia deconstructive commentary. EEng 20:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that's what William Hogarth said back in the 1700s... El_C 21:07, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

2022 Punjab Legislative Assembly election

Hi El C. You WP:GOLD protected 2022 Punjab Legislative Assembly election for a week at the end of June, but the same editors have returned to reverting each other now that the protection has worn out. One of the editors involved did post something on the article talk page, but that never got a response and only led to more reverts. Would you mind taking a look at this again? Perhaps a "last warning" from an administrator to those involved might finally encourage them to start discussing their differences instead of just reverting each other. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Marchjuly. Tentatively trying to figure out what's what, but I dunno... maybe I'm just not thinking that sharp today (almost certainly). But seeing as Ed is also on the scene, I'm optimistic. Regards, El_C 11:09, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look. I don't really know anything about the subject matter; so, I can't really say who's in the "right" so to speak. I still had the article on my watchlist from the last time, and only noticed the back-and-forth reverting had started up again. Perhaps now that others are involved in trying to sort things out (the most recent revert was made by someone else who left an edit summary encouraging discussion), things will settle down a bit and be resolved on the talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

I think I was able to sort it out, Marchjuly. I've now issued an indef p-block, which I think resolves the matter. Regards, El_C 02:35, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Their response to the p-block seems to indicate that it was the right thing to do. Maybe that was just posted in the heat of the moment, but time will tell if that's really the case. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Hell is other people... El_C 04:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Economy of Pakistan

Hi can you please review and fix Economy of Pakistan article since this edit [38] by @Mohammad Adnon Khan article is not showing properly on mobile version. Ytpks896 (talk) 11:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Ytpks896, I don't use mobile for Wikipedia, so I wouldn't know what to fix. Regards, El_C 13:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

IP-only editor making same disruptive edit using different IP addresses

Hello. I need guidance with someone who is trying to get around the revert rule by using different addresses.
An IP editor returns periodically to List of accolades received by Carol (film) to make the same disruptive edit using a different IP address each time. It's been done 6 times as of today. I first issued a warning on 3 July 2021‎, and today a second one, 12 July 2021. This time I added the following to the template: "Whether it is as IP 2601:1c0:c700:3030:7844:6361:113b:7708 ; 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f81d:132d:b3a6:324 ; 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f88d:3db7:5498:7ce1 ; 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:892:2fde:7119:bdd2 ; 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:702f:48e0:c204:763 ; or now 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:6988:a42a:30ef:9b64 — this is the same IP editor making the same disruptive edits." Never explains what row is being changed, and never explains the reason for the change. How is a one-track-mind editor like this stopped? Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 10:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Pyxis Solitary, I don't really understand what I'm looking at, but here is the /64, so that's a legitimate way in which this ISP assigns their IPs to them. As well, I'm not sure what revert rule you're referring to, but it isn't the 3 revert rule, which is 4 reverts within a 24 hour span. How to communicate? A note on the article talk page, then link to it directly in your next edit summary. Try that maybe. But if this is a wider issue of disruption (i.e. with their edits to other film -related pages), maybe take it to WP:ANI...? Also also *whispers* not taking requests. Regards, El_C 10:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

I didn't want to take up too much page space, but this is what to look at:
26 May 2021 as 2601:1c0:c700:3030:7844:6361:113b:7708
30 May 2021 as 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f81d:132d:b3a6:324
12 June 2021 as 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f88d:3db7:5498:7ce1
3 July 2021 as 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:892:2fde:7119:bdd2
3 July 2021 as 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:702f:48e0:c204:763
12 July 2021 as 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:6988:a42a:30ef:9b64.
No explanation about what row was changed. No explanation about why it was changed. But I do know this about the awards table: the nominations for each award are listed in accordance with how they are listed in the sources. It's obvious that this IP editor has some kind of OCD problem, but I don't believe that the integrity of an article should fall prey to personal whims or mental disorders. I don't ever approach ANI unless it's a last resort, but I guess the only way to stop the whack-a-mole leaves no other solution. Thanks for responding to my question. Best to you. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 08:39, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Appreciation

Thank you for how you handled the Adamant1 ani case, you could have chosen a harsher verdict but you decided to be kind about it . On their behalf I want to thank you for that. Celestina007 (talk) 14:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

But you used a naughty word. EEng 14:52, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

The fuck I did! Thanks, Celestina007, I appreciate the appreciation. El_C 15:04, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the fact that you appreciate the appreciation. ☺️ Celestina007 (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

The cascade starts with a spark! ☻ El_C 21:13, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject

I understand the ban of the wikiproject. Can you delete all the pages related to our wikiproject? Thanks (Participants and Template link etc, I can send links if its necessary.). BerkBerk68 (talk) 20:35, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Sure, list-away. El_C 20:49, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] I guess thats all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BerkBerk68 (talk • contribs)

Cool, thanks, BerkBerk68. I appreciate the assist. El_C 21:08, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Gambling References

Please take notice and go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Blackjack to read “Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor and Others Not Identified.” This Notice of Informal Motion is also placed as a courtesy at the user talk pages of those who have shown interest in the subject, namely, TransporterMan, Orangemike, QFIT, El C, and Rray.

Extended content. El_C 22:24, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

The Informal Motion is placed, as per request by Rray, on the talk page of Blackjack and in addition on those of Card counting, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track. Because El C is the user who convicted me and sentenced me (Editing from 2600:1700:5651:2780:0:0:0:0/64 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪El C‬‬), I respectfully take the liberty of providing additional information here. Disclosures. Apparently using an IP address to contribute is a violation, so I have adopted the screen name of Aabcxyz. All my statements are supported by evidence, which I present at the said talk pages. In the comments that follow I provide additional evidence in parentheses. For the benefit of El C as well as for that of all who read this, a user has volunteered to review my comments before I post them to ensure that no further violation of wikipedia rules inadvertently occurs. Issue #1. On June 19, El C put a stop of my editing resulting from allegations posted by Objective3000 using an ID other than Objective3000. The allegations were 1) vandalism, 2) use of multiple IP accounts, 3) a third allegation using Wikipedia jargon to which I am not familiar. This was a star chamber proceeding, not allowing a defense and not providing the identity of the plaintiff, here the accuser. Because I had removed citations to the self-published webpages of Objective3000, it was a direct conclusion that he had filed the complaint, verified by looking at his user log, in which Objective3000 used a different user ID. (Evidence: 19 June 2021 IP vandalism • Card counting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) • Blackjack (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Temp semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. 16 or so repeated deletions in the last week by multiple related IPs. Refusal to go to TP. O3000, Ret. (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2021 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg User(s) blocked. El_C 16:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC) ) Concerning allegation 1, I removed multiple references put in place by Objective3000 (the evidence for this allegation appears at Blackjack and Card counter talk pages) as self-published web pages with commercial content. Only one other edit, to improve the quality of Blackjack was made. I considered the removal of citations one of cleansing rather than vandalism; no actual informative page content was removed. Concerning allegation 2 by Objective3000, the evidence (log of my edits at the two pages) not only does not support the allegation but DIRECTLY REFUTES IT. I can respectfully suggest that these weak and verifiably false allegations should not have passed muster for conviction. I take note that Objection3000 uses at least two other ID’s, O3000 (Talk of Card counting, section 24, O3000 (talk) 20:34, 17 November 2017) and O3000, Ret. (User talk:Objective3000 ; O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)) If an allegation of use of “multiple IP accounts” is grounds for being banned, then certainly use of three is grounds, unless there is something I don’t understand (highly likely) or the rules of Wikipedia are to be construed arbitrarily and capriciously. I also take note that Rray had not worked on Wikipedia since May 30, 2021, when he quizzically, of the millions of articles on Wikipedia, decided to visit Blackjack and Card counting on June 14, 2021, to reverse my deletions of citations placed by Objective3000 to his self-published webpages, with the comment to “assume good faith.” He also commented on Card counting, “These references have been here for years.” If there is a statute of limitations relevant to violations of WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS (see Issue #4 below), it might be put forth as an affirmative defense, but I have found nothing in Wikipedia rules to that effect. Issue #2: One of my actions was to delete at Blackjack under Blackjack Literature a link placed by Objective3000 to his webpage “book.” That was reversed. On consideration, Rray validated my concern and removed the link based on “This doesn't really fit in with the rest of the books on this list for obvious reasons.” (22:15 15 June 2021). That justification was articulated by me on my act of removal: Blackjack literature: self-promotion of commercial website; not a peer-reviewed book like all the others cited; shameful abuse of WP for self-advertising (1:29 12 June 2021). In light of Rray’s deletion, which stands, that act does not constitute vandalism in the eyes of other users. Issue #3. The evidence shows that before 8/31/2007, no citations to Objective3000’s self-published commercial webpages existed on Blackjack, Card counting, Hole carding, and Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track. After that date, the evidence shows that Objective3000 inserted citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content, namely, qfit and blackjackincolor, more than once a month in the next six months. At the talk pages of Blackjack and Card counting the evidence that ten such insertions were made by Objective3000 is presented. Under the doctrine of argumentum ad ignorantiam, I cannot say whether others subsequently inserted such citations in these or other webpages, but the evidence is irrefutable that a) Objective3000 inserted such citations to the five articles in the six months after he became active, b) NO OTHER user had inserted citations in the five articles to either of these self-published webpages BEFORE he became active, and c) NO OTHER user inserted such citations to any of these articles during the six month period examined. Issue #4. It was interesting to find that currently Hole carding lacks the two citations to Objective3000’s self-published websites that he had placed on 12/24/2007 (see Blackjack for evidence). A search through the log shows that from 23 December 2010 through 27 December 2010 two users tried to remove references that Objective3000 had placed to his websites. (See Issue #5 and Hole carding talk page for Evidence.) On 27 December 2010 user TransporterMan began a discussion with Objection3000 based on the merits of citations inserted by Objection3000 to qfit and blackjackincolor being in violation of both WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS.. TransporterMan noted the following on the talk page of Hole carding: “Let me note in passing, however, that the links being removed appear to me to be very iffy as reliable sources to support the assertions in the article. TransporterMan (TALK) 14:43, 27 December 2010.” The rest of the discussion appears on the talk page of Hole carding, including his opinion that WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS are being violated and that a referral to Reliable Sources Noticeboard about these sources would substantiate his opinion, stating “I'm fairly certain of my analysis and the probable outcome.” To summarize, TransporterMan finds fault lies in Objective3000 not being an expert according to the Wikipedia definition “Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. None of Objective3000’s “work,” using his actual name as provided on his commercial webpages, has either been published as a peer-reviewed journal contribution, been accepted for presentation as a paper at a scholarly meeting (Evidence: google scholar, https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/authors.html), or has not been published in book form by reliable third-party publications (Evidence: amazon.com search). One may conjecture, sine testimonio, that Objective3000’s not pursuing the matter with TransporterMan was a case of discretion over valor: The Hole carding article has about 50 daily visits, whereas Blackjack and Card counting together have about 2300 daily visits, 50 times more traffic. A determination that the citations to qfit and Blackjackincolor violated the doctrines of WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS would be global rather than local, meaning that such citations would necessitate removal from ALL wikipedia articles. Apparently, an appeal to the Reliable Sources Noticeboard committee suggested by TransporterMan was pursued by neither Meisner nor Objective3000. Such a determination for removal, the probable outcome according to TransporterMan, would have been dispositive. Issue #5. The evidence shows that others have disputed the appropriateness of Objective3000’s citations to this self-published webpages. I was not the first. The evidence in the TransporterMan discussion indicates one such user. In Fred Bauder’s personal page, User_talk:Fred_Bauder#Conflict_of_Interest.2FAdvertising.2FContentiousness, there is evidence of two others, Mr. Bauder himself and a user referred to by Objective3000 (Objective3000 (talk) 14:22, 6 September 2011), wherein Objective3000 refers to the banning of the user. In Hole carding, two users removed the references placed by Objective3000. One got banned for life. (Evidence presented at Hole carding.) In four instances, including mine, the modus operandi of Objective3000 is to begin the process of getting those objectors banned from editing for vandalism or other causes. Under the doctrine of argumentum ad ignorantiam, I cannot say whether other users have found citations to qfit and blackjackincolor inappropriate and whether Objective3000 files claims of vandalism or other causes against them to get them banned, but the implication survives on its own merits. In such cases, judging from the editing histories of these four users, the objectors are new users on Wikipedia and fell prey to violation of its guidelines as alleged by Objection3000 to protect his citations. That was certainly the situation in my regard. Issue #6. On June 19, 2021, Objective3000 posted a message asking that Blackjack and Card counting be given protected status. This action is taken to cease inappropriate editing on controversial articles, articles about celebrities and political figures, and the such, not to ensure that Objective3000’s citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content be preserved. Both Blackjack and Card counting have the lowest ranking of completed article, C-class, the editing needs of which are described as “Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.” Yet, Objective3000 wanted both protected.

In consideration of the above, I will respectfully continue to seek the following relief by any and all means appropriate and legal under Wikipedia guidelines: a) Removal of citations to Objective3000’s self-published webpages with commercial content globally and prohibition of additional citations being made by any user to the self-published webpages with commercial content, or, in the interests of a settlement, b) retention of the citations but under the condition that all commercial advertising be therein removed by Objective3000 or his agent, including but not restricted to banner ads and links to software sale sites complete with pricing, such a settlement requiring a published waiver of their policy from the Reliable Sources Noticeboard committee concerning establishment of expert standing and other relevant criteria for posting of references to self-published material.Aabcxyz (talk) 22:07, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz

This just seems like a brief summary; could you please go into substantially more detail? --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Floq, that was beautifully crafted. EEng 22:26, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam: Anyway, looks like it's (linking...) Special:Contributions/2600:1700:5651:2780:0:0:0:0/64, an IP which is no longer blocked. Don't really remember the context there. Aabcxyz, this is a volunteer project, so you should very significantly trim and condense your messages if you wish for them to be reviewed by anyone. El_C 22:24, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Floquenbeam, the title of my post was originally "Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor." The Informal Motion appears at Blackjack. Since you requested more detail, I will copy what I originally posted here at your user_talk. Thanks for your interest in keeping articles free of commercial content.Aabcxyz (talk) 22:51, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz

I'll notify the Foundation to order more storage capacity. EEng 23:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Yay! We are the WP:BITE'est biters. Meow! El_C 23:09, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

It may be my imagination -- but I don't think this person likes me. O3000, Ret. (talk) 16:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Give him the stick — DON'T give him the stick! El_C 13:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Can’t believe I missed this. The IP range that you temp blocked is in Oak Park, Ill. This is the home of an editor with a dozen socks [44]. This is one of the AfDs over articles about himself written by these socks. [45] He also attempted to add material about himself to the blackjack page back then. I took part in that AfD ten years ago and he spent months hounding me, by phone, email, and other sites. I removed personal info about myself from my user page as a result. That was ten years ago and he quoted that diff two days ago on the blackjack TP. I’m uncomfortable filing an SPI as the target of his attacks. I suppose I could go to Beeblebrox, who participated in the AfD, the SPI, and is a CU. O3000, Ret. (talk) 12:10, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

WT:Article wizard protection

Hi El C! Regarding your decision to only temporarily protect WT:Article wizard, I can't help but see this as just unnecessarily kicking the can down the road. There's no reason to think that newcomers will somehow stop making test edits two years from now, and every reason to think they'll resume just the same as they resumed as soon as the previous protection expired, creating more work for vandalism patrollers and for whoever sets up the next round of protection. It's unfortunate that the gigantic {{Talkpage of help}} notice isn't enough to stop the junk, but that's the situation. Newcomers will still have the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/feedback page (linked from a banner on the wizard talk page) to give feedback. Other talk pages in similar positions such as Help talk:Introduction have been indefinitely semi'd, and as I said in my request, I really think that's the clear best course of action here. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:13, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, you're probably right. I doubt much will change in 2 years. Okay: Done. El_C 00:25, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Saragarhi

Hi El_C, hope you're doing well. Would you like to reinstate semi-protection at the Battle of Saragarhi article now that the full protection has expired? DanCherek (talk) 13:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Dan. Doing good, thanks. And thanks for the reminder. Nice to see you. Don't be a stranger! El_C 14:28, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm enjoying the songs. DJ El_C FTW. DanCherek (talk) 14:39, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

♫Yay!♫ The future's so shade, I gotta wear bright! El_C 14:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing in the Baidya

Hello El C.I am sorry to bother You.An user named Advaita222 is involved in edit war in the Baidya page.In spite of my invitation to talk page,He is continuously reverting the consensus version.The version was approved by one of our Senior editors Ekdalian ckeck it here.I have warned him.Can You please help me to handle this.Thanks.Regards.Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Abhishek Sengupta 24. Sorry, but as is noted above (in large text), I'm not really accepting out-the-blue requests at this time. Maybe post about it at WP:AN3...? Good luck! El_C 14:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply.It's really helpful. Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

ARCA archiving

Hello. A while back you were asking for a archive of WP:ARCA requests. Although it is not complete and will still take a few weeks for me to finish, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Clarification and Amendment requests is an index of all clarification and amendment requests excluding requests moved elsewhere (such as to AE) or requests removed without consideration by the arbitrators. It contains the a link to case or decision affected, a permalink to the request, the date the request was opened, the date the request was closed, and finally relevant links which is currently only permalinks to any enacted motion in the request. Hopefully this is useful. As it's currently being worked on it's not yet linked to from other places, but I plan to un-orphan the page once all entries are backfilled. After the index is complete there may be other improvements made to the archiving process for ARCA requests. Hope this index is useful. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 22:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Great work, Dreamy Jazz! Looking good. Mucho apreciado. El_C 03:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Protection request

Hi El C, can you indef ECP Isaac Herzog? He's the president of Israel, WP:A/I/PIA really should be applied. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 05:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I was hoping Yehoram Gaon would win, but he withdrew, if recall correctly as soon as Bougie entered the race. Anyway, rarely if ever do I preemptively protect pages, DS/GS or otherwise —I think the last one was Jewish space lasers (Pew-Pew!)— and I don't really see anything that gives me serious pause for Herzog's page right now (possibly I missed it). Regards, El_C 08:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

15:09

The sig says 15:08 but the edit history says 15:09 so.... Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

El_C 15:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you - ANI

I'd completely forgotten about the paid editor making a complaint. There are plenty of other reviewers who will handle their future submissions. I don't check who the creating editor is when I make a review, though. I just look at quality of the draft. I imagine they would like their payment. That tends to mean they must do their work well enough for articles to be accepted.

On the rare occasions I get dragged to ANI I tend to let my edits speak for themselves. There is little point in mounting a defence because the defence is already present in the history concerned, and folk will make whatever judgements they choose, as is their right. It is also the right fo any editor who feels the need to take any other editor there. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 06:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Letting your edits speak for themselves... Ah, an optimist, I see. I respect that. El_C 12:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Generally anything one says makes it better in a negative manner. Rather like the Streisand effect I also note the words of Queen Gertrude which can work against any party im these discussions 👀😈🤪 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 12:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Ricky Schroder

I would like to ask that you restore the original version of the article without the added category. User:Jaydoggmarco added the Category:Anti-vaccination activists to the article on June 16th as shown on this revision. [[46]] It was reverted several times by other editors and IPs before I stepped in and gave my two cents. It was fine for over a month before Jaydoggmarco (who has been wikihounding me for basically his entire edit history since early June [[47]]) decides to revert it again. Of course since contentious changes such as that must be discussed first on the talk page as opposed to just adding them and reverting, I opened up a discussion. It went unanswered until yesterday, despite my constantly explaining I wanted to discuss. Calton stated "nobody works for you" and reverted without adding anything to the discussion section. [[48]] I feel that it is appropriate to have the original version of the article prior to the change be the version that is protected, at least until a consensus can be reached. Thank you for taking the time to read this.TJD2 (talk) 06:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

While in the case of Ricky Schroder, this seems like more of a m:Wrong version matter than an outright WP:BLP vio, it may be worthwhile to bring the broader dispute to wider review at WP:ANI or WP:BLPN — sorry, but I'm not available to attend to it single-handedly at this time. Good luck! El_C 12:24, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Help

Something is going on L. Murugan page, seems to be a heavy vandalism, maybe protection for the page is needed for few days, please look into this matter Nahtrav (talk) 12:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Please post protection requests at WP:RFPP. Sorry, but I'm not really taking out-the-blue requests at this time. Good luck! El_C 12:32, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Covid-19 and Covid-19 Pandemic.

I believe On both Covid 19 and Covid 19 Pandemic articles that extended confirmed protection is not necessary. Natadmim (talk) 14:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Whereas I feel it is necessary, so... anything you wish to add? El_C 14:39, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Lavash

Dear @El C, would you mind giving your input as a third party on Talk:Lavash#Recent revert page? We have a dispute with regard to which wording is more appropriate. The editor I'm having a dispute with, @Wikaviani, also pinged two other editors for third opinion. There's also a need to clarify whether pinging an editor who gave you a barnstar would breach WP:CANVASSING and WP:THIRD. The second editor they pinged tries to convince me it doesn't, but I'm not sure. Thanks in advance. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 08:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, funny that you've come to me, seeing that Wikaviani has given me a barnstar — Pepperidge Farm remembers (++topical!). Anyway, probably not CANVASSING (though using the WP:3O mechanism would have been better), still, full disclosure: I did indefinitely block Visioncurve a year ago for legal threats (lifted, withdrawn), and I do think Kansas Bear is awesome. Anyway, at this stage, probably best to just launch a full WP:RFC about this, during which the longstanding version should display, with reversions of the contending version back strongly discouraged throughout that time. I'll WP:AA2-tag the page, but otherwise hopefully, this will suffice. Regards, El_C 12:26, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

That's actually funny. I asked you for a third opinion cause of your previous/current involvement with the wikiscopes, and I thought it would be an objective/neutral choice for everyone since you've also blocked me previously, and I have interacted with you only 2 times I think. I really don't know the other editors involved and didn't comment on them, just the decision of Wikaviani to selectively ping editors they have been known/involved with previously.

Thanks a lot for your input. Best wishes, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, no problem, but what do you mean by "wikiscopes"? I'm unable to recall what (who?) that is. Anyway, I'll emphasize that the point about CANVASS is whether the user/s in question can be seen to already be leaning toward one position over another as it pertains to the given dispute. Regards, El_C 13:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I meant the WikiProjects that the article falls under. Probably cause of my limited experience that I used the wrong term. Cheers, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:38, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

In fairness (to me!), ZaniGiovanni, when it comes to the topic areas listed at T:DSA, I'm kinda everywhere. El_C 13:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

That's actually really nice. To be honest, after you blocked me, I tried to broaden my editing areas and I learned quite a lot actually. So in a sense, I look at it as a learning/improving part on my wikipedia journey. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Cool. That's always the hope, ZaniGiovanni, so I'm pleased to hear that. El_C 15:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment El C, not sure what I have done to deserve it. I guess Wikaviani's ping did not work, seeing how I did not receive a notice. As for Lavash, meh, I see reliable sources stating both origins, no need to give undue weight to one or the other.
PS:Has ZaniGiovanni been notified of AA2 sanctions on their talk page? I see that after coming off a one week block their first edit was to make a revert on an AA2 article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Kansas Bear, watch it, modesty is grounds for sanctions! In answer to your question, it looks like, yes, on March 12. El_C 17:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

LOL. That is ok. I have already self-sanctioned myself from most domestic and American politics articles! --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:05, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Kansas Bear. To my defense, at the time I just created my account if I remember correctly, and shortly after that, it was blocked (I probably missed the message, and to be frank, I wouldn't have even understood the significance of it at that time if I noticed). I would say it was a very novice mistake on my part 4 months ago (if I did anything wrong). Feel free to ping my account if you need any clarifications.

Ps: I still might not fully understand the sanctions part of AA articles, could you or @El C please elaborate further so I won't repeat any mistakes (was I not allowed to revert after the block cause of the sanctions)? Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:20, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you're asking me exactly. I no longer have a firm recollection of your block, if it's about that. El_C 21:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

No worries @El C. Reading it now, I don't quite understand what I wanted to ask either (: Cheers, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 22:18, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I have been editing Wikipedia since 2007 and this discussion closure may have been the most inspiring and beautiful thing I have ever seen. BOTTO (T•C) 23:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Wow, Botto, what a nice thing to say. Thank you for your kindness — again (above), the cascade begins with a spark! El_C 01:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Protection of That Vegan Teacher

Hi, it seems since your protection of That Vegan Teacher expired a few days ago, the number of vandalism incidents has increased again. Could you have another look whether protection is needed per WP:BLP? Thanks --hroest 14:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. El_C 15:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

"beefing up protection"

I do, in fact, see what you did there. ;) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 17:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Chef Tony, can I have a bite? Oh. El_C 18:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey?

Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.

For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.

I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.

Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.

Thanks so much,

Sarah Sanbar

Sarabnas ^{I'm researching Wikipedia} _Questions? 20:19, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Malhun Hatun at WP:RfPP

Ok, maybe I was exaggerating with many, I had just become weary of all the disruption. Thanks for the protection anyways. IronManCap (talk) 21:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

No worries, all good. El_C 02:37, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

s1mple

This made me laugh--thanks for the help. Alyo (chat·edits) 23:09, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Nice, I'm like GuardiaN with a TMP... (Remember the TMP? Pepperidge Farm remembers.) El_C 02:37, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I need an opinion

Hi El C, how have you been? I need you to give an opinion, if/when time permits. I asked on June 14 @Joy: on their talk page to give me an opinion about or help to deal with a disruptive editor. Joy did not respond. Yesterday you blocked that disruptive editor indefinitely. Since Joy did not react at all to my post on their talk page, I removed it [49]. I wrote in the edit summary "Indefinitely blocked by an admin. When someone asks for sth, the most humane and civilized way is to respond, even with a simple "I cant help". Joy insists that I insulted him, though I told him that I was not saying that Joy is not humane or civilized, and that I did not want to insult him. What I meant with the edit summary is that when someone asks your for sth, the most humane and and civilized thing to do is to not ignore, but to give a response (even a "I can't help you"). I also told him I know he is not obliged to help me. However, Joy insists that I should learn English and that I insulted him. I ask you as an experienced admin who has given help to both Joy and myself: should my edit summary be seen as an insult to Joy? If so, can the edit summary be deleted? Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

No, Ktrimi991, Joy is free to ignore (or overlook, whatever) anything they see fit. You have no right to question that (inaction) in any way whatsoever. El_C 18:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, as I said, I know that Joy is free to ignore anything. Wiki is volunteer work. Was my edit summary an insult, and if so, can it be deleted? Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:33, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, I'd be insulted if I were they. No, it does not need to be deleted. El_C 18:43, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

OK, my bad then. Joy should not feel insulted though, because my not-so-thought-out edit summary was not intented to insult. What would I gain if I insulted? My reaction was due to being entirely ignored, sth that although entirely allowed on Wiki, might create irritation to those being ignored. In any case, it was the first interaction between us, and apparently the last - out topics of interest seem to not be the same. Btw, El C thanks for dealing with the disruptive editor [50]. Your job is always very much appreciated :) Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

A final note on Joy's claim that I need to learn English before I try to edit Wiki. Firstly, I have been on enwiki for some 5 years. Secondly, although my English is far from perfect, it has been good enough to allow me to talk as equal with important people, including at meetings and events organized by the EU, UN and NATO - including some Croats whose Wiki articles Joy edits. How do I manage to interact with other people in such cases? English is important, and even more important are human values such as responsiveness, mutual respect, will to help and collaboration. They are values that never go out of fashion. El C, thanks again for your input here on my dispute with Joy, and for dealing with disruptive Balkan editors. You are one of the very few willing and able to help to make Balkan topics a better thing. Cheers to both, Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

• El C, I will be away from Wiki until August 5 (or maybe later). Is there anything I can do to prevent bots from posting on my talk page? Ktrimi991 (talk) 06:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't know. El_C 17:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

ANI complaint

Hi. I have a question for you. I don't think the ANI complaint by Fram is justified or should to me being indefed. Since it's clearly retaliation because I wouldn't answer him how and when he wanted me to. Nothing I have done that led to this or the last complaint has been anywhere on par of the behavior that caused the original block either. I've made a lot of progress since then. It's obvious people just want to get me blocked though and I was planning on appealing if I get indefed.

That said, I do feel like I could use a break from this for my own mental health. The general level of toxicity I've been dealing with lately and things going on IRL have been causing me some hardcore anxiety that I just can't be 100% solid due to right now. And I realize I'm going to keep having issues if I'm not able to be 100% solid about things. So I wanted to propose a six month block to cool down, reflect on what led to this, and work on my IRL issues. Realistically, even if the ANI complaint doesn't lead to an indef I still want to step away for a while and cool down. So is there a way to propose a six month block or have it happen without it seeming like I'm trying to weasel out of a permanent block or bludging the process? --Adamant1 (talk) 08:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Adamant1, I'm not familiar with that thread or any related one/s, so I'm unable to comment on it right now, one way or the other. Regards, El_C 09:25, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

OK. Adamant1 (talk) 09:28, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hyatt Regency walkway collapse

Not trying to be mean, but did you really need to fully protect Hyatt Regency walkway collapse? Why were you so quick to press the 'fully protect' button when extended confirmed lock or auto-confirmed lock would've been much better to use? I know it's an edit war.. but it's literally just mainly IPs.. and it's not a BLP article or a very pressing issue. I fail to see why a full protect is needed here. wizzito | say hello! 22:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Wizzito, I don't favour extended-confirmed users over IPs in an edit war, and I think it isn't to your credit that you do. El_C 22:48, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

El_C Sorry, I didn't know too much about the situation at the time; I'm still amazed about the length of the lock in general, though (really, a week?). Preventing 99% of active users from editing one page over a few edit warring users just seems ridiculous in my personal opinion, though. wizzito | say hello! 22:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Anything else? El_C 22:56, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Nope; have a nice day (not saying that to be mean) wizzito | say hello! 22:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

A pleasure, I'm sure. El_C 22:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

We edit conflicted before your ping. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Twice twice, that's a fractal! //Chugs beer. (What, it's beer-o'clock somewhere/everywhere...) El_C 14:17, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Heh! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:22, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Of course, another one now. The admin-spamming on that page is unrelenting! El_C 14:25, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Cleveland Indians

Talk:Cleveland Guardians got separated from Cleveland Indians. Cards84664 14:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

On it. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

😂 I'm out for today! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you. We're here all week! El_C 14:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 6, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 18:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

WaPo op-eds

I noticed that their op-eds are really not on par with their news, but there likely are other sources, —PaleoNeonate – 07:59, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

On the same token, since this makes both the US and China look bad, maybe it'll get buried...? I guess we'll see. Excerpt, because paywall'ing-it-up, apparently super-important for Bezo$:

The institute was carrying out experiments using chimeric viruses with modified spike proteins, tested on mice with respiratory cells genetically altered to resemble those of humans. The goal was to see which were more infective. These experiments were written into grant applications, including for U.S. funds; the research began in 2014-2015 and was underway at the institute through 2019. The work was not done in the highest biosecurity level laboratory. (from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/23/china-is-stepping-up-its-deception-denial-investigations-covid-19/)

El_C 08:05, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

No idea, I have various hypotheses but would only be speculating. These are experiments plausible in level-4 labs over the world for medicine research. But also, better sources should be found, that's an op-ed and I've seen various suboptimal ones at WaPo (see "opinions" in the URL and "Opinion by the Editorial Board"). It's marked as such because it's not official WaPo news, —PaleoNeonate – 08:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Certainly not gonna be an easy feat with China purposefully obstructing to the utmost, including by spreading disinformation that it came from a U.S. military laboratory. I doubt the Washington Post editorial board is that easy to fool, but maybe...? They certainly do not seem to be as science-silly as certain other editorial boards of major newspapers that also start with the letter W. As for the US funding angle, I suppose we'll see whether the Biden admin's appetite for investigating COVID's origins will extend to when Biden, himself, was VP... El_C 10:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

If the insinuation of that piece is that gain of function research involving chimeric viruses at WIV possibly created SARS-CoV-2, then I believe that is incorrect. SARS-CoV-2 is a mosaic virus, it cannot be created with chimeric virus techniques. Too bad the topic is so complicated. It makes the spreading of misinformation easier. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:31, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

That isn't an area with which I'm familiar enough to comment further on. Nor, for that matter, am I able verify your own assertion or to what extent it aligns or misaligns with that piece. But what I do know about is China's resistance toward investigating the origin of the virus, coupled with their own disinformation efforts. That, at least, is rather firmly in the public record. And it is highly suspect, I challenge. El_C 13:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I came across this article recently. While it seems fishy, I actually rather accept the idea that China just finds it an insult. For example, with the Hong Kong handover, a big issue for China wasn't the area's economic role or something, but that having a foreign power hold it was a "national humiliation".[51] China does a lot of things just out of principle and pride. If indeed this is a baseless theory, I can imagine why China would be frustrated, and find this line of inquiry an insult in itself and refuse to co-operate with it. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 08:56, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

ProcrastinatingReader, China's bluster can suck it. El_C 11:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

I suspect this might be more directly relevant to COVID-19 misinformation by China than to COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis. Particularly as the rationale I most commonly see for the COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis article is that it is a valid scientific theory, which I have generally interpreted to imply we should prefer (if not outright require) sources that meet the higher threshold for WP:SCHOLARSHIP. If not, I worry we're just opening a backdoor to borderline WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE/WP:RGW if we say "it's science, but there's a conspiracy to keep it out of scientific journals". This was where I was going with the question on AR/E, this is the kind of edge case which relates closely to the content dispute about sourcing (which led to the later editing dispute). So I was curious if you had some insight or recommendations on the souring question, or just found it to be a curiosity for future speculation. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Bakkster Man, you may refer to my statement in the arbitration case which, in part, pointed to my aversion against using MEDRS as a blunt instrument for suppressing the social and political history of the pandemic. El_C 14:46, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

When a pathogen is leaking from a lab (there were many such incidents), this has nothing to do with science. This can not be established from the sequence analysis, etc. This is a simple fact to be established by investigators (who are acting more like detectives). This whole thing so far is political to such degree that China imposed economic sanctions on Australia merely for suggesting that it needs to be investigated [52]. What they hide must be huge. My very best wishes (talk) 15:18, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

That's right. These Chinese intimidation tactics are very much to their discredit. My sense is that it's more a matter of national esteem (and probably more at home than abroad), than the potential hit of worldwide reparations, which they can probably afford without their economy being crippled. I don't think the US, even with all of its renewed stance toward not losing global economic supremacy, would want that — which is to say, neither the former Trump nor current Biden admins would. (Obvious aside point is that if Biden does end up FDR'ing-it-up, the American economy would stand a fighting chance.)

Again, if this is a revelation of note, there's still no way to tell about the US funding, its import, purpose, etc. It's all speculative at this point. But it would be pretty ironic if the US were to deem any investigation into that (or at least its broad strokes) as classified. But getting well ahead of myself. I hope the record reflects that engaging in the counter-factual is an indulgence I rarely allow myself. El_C 15:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

And it is classified [53], which is a disgrace. From what I read, they suppose to have a lot of highly damaging materials on Putin, his friends and other strongmen, but all of that is classified (including White House records of talks by D. Trump). By keeping such things secret US enables all these dictators. My very best wishes (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh shit! El_C 16:02, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@El C: You're the second person I've seen suggest that I'm looking to apply MEDRS scrutiny. I'm uncertain where this impression came from, some help would be appreciated if you can point me to where this misunderstanding may have started. I've cited the very lightest-touch of our science-related sourcing requirements: WP:PREPRINTS. As I'm sure you can imagine, this ends up feeling like I need to defend against a strawman (unintentional or otherwise).

I don't expect AR/E to be the right venue to solve this question, perhaps you can recommend a better venue that could help to provide a path towards a consensus on sourcing when we run into this issue (which has happened multiple times), where we have a scientific claim made with generally-unreliable sourcing repeated in generally-reliable press with minimal critical review of the claim itself. Since we can't rely on WP:MEDPOP for these topics, it would be nice to have at least some wider agreement on how we handle these types of claims. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:44, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Bakkster Man, I think the best venue would be WP:RSN (by way of WP:CENT). El_C 15:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Appreciate the recommendation. Would you suggest waiting for the AR/E case to close first, or begin discussion there and link in AR/E and related articles when ready? Bakkster Man (talk) 16:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Controversial disputed claims in the WaPo editorial, thoughts from a virologist

Many of the arguments re: how genetic engineering is relevant to the pandemic or its origins are missing the point. As I described in some more detail over at the GoFR talk page, it doesn't even necessarily matter whether the WIV was trying to make GoFR viruses (and it is heavily disputed). If the relevant experts who understand how to analyze virus genomes have said SARS-COV-2 was extremely likely not engineered, based on their analysis of the genome, its spread, the biochemistry, etc. then we should trust what they say in peer-reviewed secondary literature reviews published in scientific journals, over what the Washington Post editorial board says.

This editorial also made some key statements, that proclaim certain experiments involving viruses collected from bats were "gain of function." What they leave out, is that there is significant debate among the relevant experts about whether or not those experiments, in fact, qualify... What follows is more detail about that.

There are experts who have come down on both sides of whether or not there was "Gain-of-function research"

Richard Ebright (emeritus professor at Rutgers who is a bacteriologist and biosafety researcher) told The Washington Post that he thinks they qualify: The research was — unequivocally — gain-of-function research,” Richard H. Ebright of Rutgers University, a longtime critic of such research, told The [Washington Post] Fact Checker. “The research met the definition for gain-of-function research of concern under the 2014 Pause.” The EcoHealth Alliance's position (The US-based Nonprofit who subcontracted the sampling of bat viruses in the grant proposal to the WIV), as described by their spokesperson, believes it does not count: “As described in the paper, all but two of the viruses cultured in the lab failed to even replicate,” he said. “None of them had been manipulated in order to increase their ability to spread, all the researchers did was insert S [spike] proteins in order to gauge their ability to infect human cells...gain of function research is the specific process of altering human viruses in order to increase their ability (the titular gain of function) either to spread amongst populations, to infect people, or to cause more severe illness.” MIT molecular biologist Alina Chan (also pro-lab leak, interestingly) has argued that these experiments would not have been affected by the 2014 moratorium: Alina Chan, a molecular biologist and postdoctoral researcher at the Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard, said in a lengthy Twitter thread that the Wuhan subgrant wouldn’t fall under the gain-of-function moratorium because the definition didn’t include testing on naturally occurring viruses “unless the tests are reasonably anticipated to increase transmissibility and/or pathogenicity.” She said the moratorium had “no teeth.” But the EcoHealth/Wuhan grant “was testing naturally occurring SARS viruses, without a reasonable expectation that the tests would increase transmissibility or pathogenicity. Therefore, it is reasonable that they would have been excluded from the moratorium.” Many scientists have thoughts on both sides, but the entire scientific community was in uproar when this grant was rescinded due to political pressure. Scientists really hate when you overtly mix politics with their science. The grant was later reinstated due to this uproar. Scientists of different persuasions of whether it "counted" were also upset about the lack of transparency in the review process, about whether or not research "counts." They want those reviewing panels to be more open. Notable examples include Angela Rasmussen and David Relman.

And what about the controversial Menachery et al paper in 2015, about SHC014?

There's also been questions raised about a 2015 paper that was a collaboration between the Baric lab and Zhengli's lab at the WIV, which could be what the editorial board is referring to here. Importantly, this paper involved pseudoviruses (which cannot replicate and are more similar to vaccines than bioweapons). Any expert on viruses could tell you that this was not gain-of-function, because pseudoviruses cannot function as viruses. All they do is get into a cell, they cannot make more of themselves or, most importantly, get out of the cell. Ralph Baric, who was lead author on that paper, does not believe that work qualified: We never introduced mutations into the SHC014 [horseshoe bat coronavirus] spike to enhance growth in human cells...These recombinant clones and viruses were never sent to China. Importantly, independent studies carried out by Italian scientists and others from around the world have confirmed that none of the bat SARS-like viruses studied at UNC were related to SARS-CoV-2, the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic. There aren't really a lot of reliable sources describing experts who believe it did qualify. At least none I could find published in RSes. Baric's lab did also infect transgenic mice with the virus, but only in ways that fundamentally did not increase the ability of the virus to replicate or infect human cells. Mostly because the natural virus could already do it! "Gain-of-function" refers to when a virus is enabled to replicate more inside human hosts. Not when it is simply already able to infect them, and scientists show this. The NIH ultimately determined this did not fall under the 2014 research moratorium.

And were they working with viruses at dangerously "unprotected" biosafety conditions?

The MIT Technology Review article I cited in the preceding collapse suggests there is something wrong with the fact that Baric's lab conducted experiments with this virus at BSL3, whereas Zhengli's lab at the WIV handled them at BSL2: Unnoticed by most, however, was a key difference that significantly shifted the risk calculation. The Chinese work was carried out at biosafety level 2 (BSL-2), a much lower tier than Baric’s BSL-3+.. This is an extremely common criticism that is placed right alongside the "GoFR" accusations. I see it bundled constantly, such as: Well, it doesn't matter if they weren't doing your extremely narrow definition of dangerous experiment, because they were handling it at the wrong biosafety level! This argument is leaving out an extremely important aspect, though: This is exactly what the CDC's Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories manual recommends that we do! The Technology Review omission makes sense, because they do not have PhDs in virology or biosafety etc. SHC014 has never shown any propensity for causing disease in humans. Biosafety reviews by IBC committees (at the WIV and UNC) have likely determined that it is safe to handle them in vitro (outside animals) at BL2 and in vivo (in animals) at BSL3+ (although we are not privy to these institutional panel discussions, only independent scientists and community members around the institution are in attendance). What I can tell you for sure, though, is that this sort of stepping down in intensity of biosafety controls is an extremely common practice. It's what we do for all sorts of families of viruses, as standard operating procedure in virology, all around the world. By the way, we also handle those bat-like coronaviruses at BSL-2 in vitro here in the United States. We do this stepping down in intensity for many different viruses. Tamiami virus (a close relative of Lassa virus), Ross River virus (a close relative of Semliki Forest virus), or non-neurovirulent strains (e.g. Kunjin) of West Nile all come to mind. All of these are examples of viruses closely related to BSL-3 and 4 viruses that are themselves handled at BSL-2 (and BSL-2+) because they lack a concerning virulence in humans.

Here's a more personal example from me to you, to help explain the proper biosafety conditions for these pathogens

To help illustrate this point, we do the same sort of stepping down in biosafety with hantaviruses, and it was exactly how I handled hantaviruses during my PhD. If the virus has never been shown to infect humans or, specifically, cause disease in humans, but we have evidence that people have generated antibodies against it... (as they also have for these coronaviruses) then we're pretty darn sure it doesn't infect healthy immunocompetent humans. And so in grad school, I handled those non-human pathogenic hantaviruses at BSL-2 or BSL-2+ in petri dishes (e.g. Thottapalayam, Tula, and Prospect Hill viruses), just like how many other researchers at other institutions in the United States do it. Even though the closely related Andes virus and Sin Nombre virus kill 30% of the patients they infect, and are aerosol-transmitted! Scary, right??? Well that's probably why, when I worked with these viruses, I did so at BSL3 and BSL3+. Wearing masks and double gloves and a gown and goggles and a tyvek suit, in a negative air-pressure room, which directed all air in the entire room into HEPA filters in the ceiling. Inside a laminar flow hood that directed all air immediately into HEPA. Whenever we transported samples, we did so inside two air-tight containers, in case anything were ever dropped, so there would be no question of accidental release. When transported by mail, there had to be a third outside air-tight container. When we infected animals with these viruses, we did so at a BSL4 in Montana. Wearing space suits. With a chemical shower at every exit. We were periodically inspected by the CDC at both facilities. I had to write up a biological risk assessment citing every aspect of the disease, and the risk it posed, and the mitigation strategies we had in place, with in-line citations, that was reviewed by both the CDC and our in-house biosafety committee. I had to answer questions about my mental status, any medications I take, etc. And keep at home a kit with a mask, gloves, suit, and goggles. If I ever got sick, I was supposed to put these things on, so that I wouldn't transmit the infection to the paramedics in the ambulance that would come get me, or the physicians and nurses that would take care of me in the E.R. and transport me into an isolation room.

Okay, smart guy, what about the WIV?

Before you say "that's an awful lot of "I"s in that preceding collapse, you should know these are all international standards in high level biosafety with dangerous pathogens. And, we even know that French experts helped set up the WIV's BSL3 and 4 facilities, and inspected them, along with the ISO, who also certify American BSL4 labs. Biosecurity researchers here in the US helped train the researchers there.

So why do we do that, handle the closely related non-human pathogenic viruses at a lower biosafety level?

We do it because biosafety work is difficult, slow, and expensive. And we actually know that too many biosafety controls is also dangerous. Studies have shown that over-gowning physicians and nurses can lead to more infections, because they become fatigued more easily and disrobe and put on the equipment more carelessly. These are the single most important moments in biosafety. How you put on and take off the gear. There are reams and reams of books published about the best way to do this. It's a founding principle of biosafety, that we should not overburden with too many controls. Otherwise, there will be a slow creep towards putting the most expansive and restrictive protections on every experiment. Instead, we put the apropriate amount of biosafety for each experiment. This allows experiments to be conducted more easily (plaque assays, antibody inhibition assays, flow cytometry of cells, etc. which are all quite frustrating to conduct at BSL-3 and 4) which enables faster generation of treatments and vaccines. Of course, eventually, the findings are later replicated on the real-deal human pathogenic viruses, but at the appropriately higher biosafety level. Doing the experiments first on closely related viruses that are more easily (and still safely) handled at BSL-2 (and BSL-2+) means less time is wasted at BSL3 or 4, and that BSL3 and 4 work is conducted more safely.

TL;DR

I don't want you to think I don't have any concerns about the WIV and whether these viruses escaped from a lab. I do have those concerns. I want it to be investigated more deeply, I want China to open up, etc. But what I want to make abundantly clear to you is that there is a lot of misinformation flowing around about these laboratories, their experiments, etc. Often from sources who do not have the necessary expertise to evaluate the claims they make. Can you imagine how frustrating this is? Imagine you were a plumber, and you visit some guy's house, to clear a clogged pipe. And the guy sidles up to you, and elbows you and says "Hello fellow plumbologist. I see you got your snake there, for clearin' clogs...have you ever considered that the lil scratches you make on the sides of the pipe there could actually be serving as nucleation sites for future clogs to form? What if you're actually the one who's causing this clog? Maybe you should pay for it, too, huh?" I don't provide this analogy to say the lab leak is "impossible" like this B.S. plumbing analogy. I provide it to say: this is what it feels like to be constantly in conversations with people who have never set foot in a biosecurity lab, but feel as though they know enough about it to ascertain it is "extremely likely" or in some cases "99% likely" that this virus leaked from a lab. I think it's "unlikely, but requires more investigation" like most virologists. I do not think this op-ed adds anything to that conversation that has not already been hashed out in extreme detail elsewhere, by topic experts. I do not think it adds anything to how we should cover these topics on Wikipedia. I do think we could probably cover more of what I have detailed above in articlespace, but only where it is not WP:OR or WP:UNDUE. The SHC014 controversy, for example, could probably get a paragraph in Gain of function research. But only when included in an NPOV way, that depicts the mainstream scientific view. Like we do with all topics, but especially fringe topics.

Sources
References

I'm sorry, I know this is long. but there really is a lot of detail here. The length of detail should be instructive, because it shows a great example of why the WP:OR and WP:SOURCETYPES policies are so important. For some of these debates, a PhD really really helps one understand the intricate details. And we need multiple scientists peer-reviewing each other in how to assess these intricate details. That's why I think discussions of scientific theories like whether or not an experiment qualifies as "gain-of-function" or not, is something we should only source to peer-reviewed literature review articles published in reliable topic-relevant journals!--Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 18:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)(edited 18:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC))

Shibbolethink, yes, it's long, but I still read it with great interest. Can't say I understood all of it... I've taken one natural science elective in university and that's it. (It was Chemistry, which curiously was super-easy, I got a 95, which is more than the 94 I got in Hebrew, though my attendance there was less than 50 percent due to boring.) Thank you for sharing from your breadth of knowledge. You've certainly have given me (and I suspect other readers here) much to think about. Glad to have an editor as qualified as yourself editing these extremely important pages! El_C 18:23, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Of course, always happy to help :). Feel free to tag me in to extremely topic-dense discussions about this stuff and I'll provide as much of a neutral opinion about it as I can. Re: school, if it makes you feel any better, I got a D in Organic Chemistry 2 and they still gave me a PhD and let me into medical school, hahahaha. It probably didn't help that I had mono and strep throat at the same time that semester!--Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 18:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, if it wasn't clear, this was the university's version of Chemistry-for-dummies, just to temper my boast a bit. El_C 18:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

That was very nice as a view by US virologist. But unfortunately, we have no idea what is happening in China [54] or in Russia on that matter. Let's just say that one man I knew closely and who worked in Zagorsk facility was found dead (allegedly a suicide). I will say no more. My very best wishes (talk) 19:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Editing rights revoked?

Can you please tell me why my editing rights are invoked for the article List of converts to Islam from Hinduism? You can read about my edits here. --Bringtar (talk) 12:54, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I neither revoked nor invoked your editing rights, Bringtar. El_C 13:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. You actually protected the page so I am no longer able to edit it. --Bringtar (talk) 13:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

July corner

July

Last year's flowers match the image on the user page nicely, see? - DYK that her last reply to me was in a thread Green for hope? - The DYK set for Yoninah will appear tomorrow, including Psalm 85, with the kiss of justice and peace. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda. It means a lot. El_C 13:20, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Can you help us to the Hebrew for Psalm 123? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:44, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Got it: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Quality_Article_Improvement/Psalms#123. El_C 20:04, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I must have saved an old version - and didn't notice. Restored, I hope. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy again! El_C 20:10, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Relief! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

sad to wake up to see that brave Uses x gone --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Same. I fucked up the count and now it's... shit. El_C 14:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Shit happens. Music happens. On the Main page now: "my" school. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Big applause! 👏 El_C 15:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn't perform, just listened, applauded and took a few applause pics, the cutest not published because she whirled too much. - Can you please perform your magic for Psalm 7? I have no idea what the article says, about literature use and arrows. Do you understand that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Got it. No, I don't understand it, nor do I get why a sermon would be called "literature." Pretty weird. Nice, glad the music soared. El_C 01:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for looking, - much of it will go then, but I'm behind with many things because the music soared for too long ;) - Do you know it? A duet says "O namenlose Freude" - O joy beyond words, and a quartet "Mir ist - so wun- - derbar" - no idea how to translate, and the four have VERY different outlooks, with the same melody. (A girl falling in love with a woman disguised as a man, girl's father and young man who hoped to marry her until this happened.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

No, I don't know it, but sounds interesting. About 7, I'm gonna change the weird "literature" subheading, at the very least. Will do so mmentarily. El_C 11:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Fine! - More music: 2 songs, the morning song - about rising from being down, in more than one sense - is a GA, - there should be more given my initials, but I also want to care for articles of those who recently died (now Esther Béjarano). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Right, I remember reading about Esther Béjarano's passing in the Israeli press. *** Nice! But what is this? A songspam competition? Because I'd be winning (well, spam-wise, at least!). El_C 16:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Could you add from Hebrew obits? - Go win, I just found it funny that - after a long pause - 2 songs were on DYK the same day. With Yoninah at her desk, that would not have happened ;) - Translation competition perhaps. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, there's nothing too noteworthy that I've seen in Israeli media (just quickly checked now), be it in Hebrew or English, that significantly adds to what's was already written about her in the existing cited sources... El_C 17:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for looking. Did you know that Vivaldi composed cello sonatas? I didn't until I took the pic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

No, didn't know, either, and I consider myself a fan. Again, I just love the look and feel of St. Martin, Idstein... El_C 21:37, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Choir to be resumed there, in three groups of equal voices, after vacation. - moar music, a new song about a feast - a dear family member remembered today when she would have been 122 - the next psalm on our program is Psalm 68 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know how I missed that. Annoying. Bumping the Corner. Anyway, now done. El_C 15:17, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Seneffe

• Battle of Seneffe (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This article is being completely revised(result, figures, etc, etc.)[55][56] by an IP hopping editor. Anyway you could protect it? --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Semiprotected by me, after seeing the log. EdJohnston (talk) 16:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Ed! --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:31, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

The List of Albanians in Greece article

I am not involved in that content dispute, but from a quick look I see it is not going well. While the article is under full protection, the talk page is having highly inflammatory and insulting comments. I am leaving this note, as you might want to leave a civility reminder or a DS template on that tp. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Your query

My pinging of you didn't send. I've responded on my talk page. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Retracted

I have retracted the smear accusation from Talk:Prosperity theology. tgeorgescu (talk) 04:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Tgeorgescu, I appreciate that. El_C 04:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Alalch Emis. Thank you. VQuakr (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

On being Jimbo'd

I suppose it's possible the user is aware that I was JIMBO'd in 2009, since, after all, I link prominently to my block log on my userpage. What they may not be aware of is WP:BLOCKABDICATE. Bishonen | tålk 11:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC).

Un-becoming, eh? What a stain. BTW, Bish, maybe consider taking up martial arts, 'cause wikijail be rough. Here's my sensei, who comes highly recommended (well, by me). El_C 11:27, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Your disruptive behavior at ANI...

Has been keeping me amused every time I have to wade into that cesspit. Please keep it up. That place needs more levity, and editors like you, EEng and Martinevans are doing God's work.

(And yes, I know what the notification of this looked like, given the title, heh heh). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:20, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, MPants, I appreciate that. But let's be honest: on my part at least, it's mostly attention-seeking. Also, I think I beat your notice title with User_talk:HighInBC#Your_policy_violation! El_C 14:27, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, I've stepped up my game, here. I mean, a lot of those threads could really benefit from a little disruption. This paper might be an interesting read. FWIW, there's a lot of research out there on the subject, and it all comes to pretty much the same conclusion. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:45, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For your interventions in the COVID-19 'lab leak' topic area, and the COVID-19 topic area more generally, last year and early this year. Doesn't go unnoticed! ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Haha, why do I get the sense like I'm being set up as a party for the next ARBCOVID (2)? Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes! Thanks, Pro, I like retroactive awards. I like awards. Yours truly, El_C 12:39, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

BTW, PR, if like me, you love Scienk that is pier reviewed (i.e. reviewed by some drunk guy on a pier), check out some of my updates to Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in Israel, which also serve as interesting case study for a semi-isolated population that got vaccinated early on. (Latest update: PM to decide later today whether to go ahead with a health panel's recommendation that a 3rd shot be administered to folks 60 and up.) El_C 13:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hah (re Scienk)! And speaking of Israel, when I was there a couple years ago after the second election, some folks joked they should just skip the third election and go straight to the fourth. Same idea may well apply to ARBCOVID 2 and ARBCOVID 3 ;)

Honestly, mostly I saw this comment from Johnuniq and figured it's a good idea to show appreciation when the dirty work is done. (also might help enlist participation for the next time the laundry comes around ;) -- whenever and whatever that'll be) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:11, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Revdel this edit summary

Could you revdel [this] edit summary? I pasted by I meant to copy. 92.5.2.97 (talk) 15:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Got it. El_C 18:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Editor claims that the blocking admin is "incompetent"

El C, if time permits, can you take a look? @InNeed95: was blocked by @EdJohnston: two days ago, after I warned them for the misuse of the word "vandalism" when referring to good faith edits made by other editors. After the block expired, InNeed95 insisted on my tp that they were right [57]. On their own tp, they called the block "incorrect charge", defended the misuse of the term "vandalism" and called the blocking admin "incompetent". They did not reflect even after another editor told them that the block was a right action and that the "incompetent admin" comment was a personal attack [58]. What do you think? This editor claims that the situation needs a review. Is this editor suitable for editing controversial Balkan topics? Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

For my defence:

I am sorry for calling him such. Its quiet insulting I know. I exaggerated a bit.

You just have to understand, that after the Admin threw in "Reasons" on the dispute that I had with the User Pipsally, which were incorrect, and I even told him, that it was not about the Reason which the Admin claimed, the Admin did not care about my comments.

I felt offended and got mad, as such, it resulted in the use of the word "incompetent". This is normal Human-Psychology.

As I said, I am sorry and next time, I will hold my thoughts for myself.

I hope that the situation is understandable.

--InNeed95 (talk) 20:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

InNeed95, do you understand that the other editor involved in the content dispute was not a vandal? Read WP:RfC on how to solve your content dispute. That will be helpful. More importantly, do you accept that your block was because of your wrong actions instead of the admin being "incompetent"? Ktrimi991 (talk)

Forgot to answer the rest of Ktrimi991 comment:

For the rest, I did not "Defend" the use of the word "Vandalism"! I explained why I called it "Vandalism", and in my discussion with another User on my Talk Page, I even said, "maybe I "exeggerated" a bit".

For the Topic "controversial Balkan Topics":

I am trying to be as neutral as possible. If I would be pushing a POV for example, I would have let the 4% in the the Article Kosovo Serbs in its place, and wouldnt have reverted the edit done by a IP-User, who edited the at first 7% to the now in the Article shown 4%. Why would I as a "POV-Pusher", insist in showing a higher number of serbs in Kosovo, than the 4%? Many Albanian Nationalists claim even lower numbers, so how am I POV Pushing?

Also, I am not even that active in general.

I also just want to link the comment I wrote to User:Ktrimi991, where I explained, how this whole problem started in general.([59])

--InNeed95 (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Ktrimi991, at a glance, this seems like a bit of a nothing-burger atm. I'm sure if Ed (who is more competent than myself) needs my input about any of this, he can ask for it himself.

InNeed95, Wikipedia's learning curve is rather steep. As a new user, you'll likely find it perilous (if you haven't already) to jump head first into a contentious topic area such as the WP:BALKANS one. Maybe start with uncontroversial areas until you learn the basics...? (Basics like utlizing WP:INDENT in a conversation, for example, which I've done for you here.) To aid in that, I'd recommend for you to take an hour or so to go through some of the pointers presented in Help:Introduction as well as reviewing the Five pillars of Wikipedia and the project's policies and guidelines. Good luck! El_C 21:44, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Idk, I am not sure whether repeatedly calling good faith edits "vandalism" (after getting blocked for doing that) and an experienced admin "incompetent" is nothing-burger. EdJohnston certainly can ask you for help if he needs it, but since InNeed95 came to my tp to imply that EdJohnston was wrong, I thought that a second admin could make things clearer for InNeed95. Anyways, since you are the fifth editor (and the second admin) who is advising the editor, hopefully they will reflect. Your links together with the RfC one I posted are a good way for InNeed95 to learn more about the editing process on Wikipedia, and on how to solve content disputes. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I just don't have time to go through walls of text right now, so it's a glance or nothing. Obviously, it isn't the smartest for someone new to WP:NOTVANDALISM -mess up on Wikipedia, with its steep learning curve, and then tell someone like Ed who has been intimately involved with it for years that they are "incompetent" (i.e. it smacks of Dunning–Kruger silliness). At the same time, no one has welcomed this new user to the project, nor have they been given a DS alert and so on. Oh well (all 'round, likely). El_C 22:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

The editor has made more than 250 edits since December, and the first message on their talk page was in May. So they should have been welcomed long ago. But they certainly have been made aware of Balkan-related DS. Anyways, it is a waste of time to discuss further since you do not have time. If indeed InNeed95 learns through the links posted by you and me here, it will be the best outcome possible from the situation. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Ah, okay, I see that they removed the DS alert. Anyway, as the notice above (in large text) states, I'm not really taking out-the-blue requests right now, in general. El_C 22:33, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

No worries, I know that. Hence I started the discussion with "El C, if time permits, can you take a look?" Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:39, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

This is the thing, Ktrimi991: that preface notwithstanding, once you've posted the request here, the user who is the subject of the complaint responded to it, then you respond to their response, then they respond to that, and so on. You've sort of put me on the spot where I feel obliged to at the very least glance it and say something, if only to prevent that conversation from just going and going, here, on my talk page. El_C 23:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

No, certainly you should not feel obliged to say sth just for the sake of it. If you do not have time, or just not interested in the issue, certaily you should not read walls of text or check diff after diff. As you probably have noticed, I never respond to the reported editor more than once, unless an admin joins the discussion. Every discussion has its natural end, especially when the one on whose tp the discussion started is not involved in the issue and is not interested at the same time. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Be that as it may, when an inexperienced user is speaking to me here, I do sort of feel obliged to not be a dick and respond. Also, what's a sth? Typo? El_C 23:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I fully understand that. When someone, especially a new editor, posts on your tp, you feel it is more polite to respond, even with a short response. On "sth", someone asked me for that a few days ago on my tp. "Sth" is "something". Since we are on Wiki and WP:RS are always needed, here is one. It looks like my usage of "sth" is becoming famous around :P Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:44, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Huh. A shorthand. I learned something new! El_C 23:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Nice, now let me learn sth new: what kind of animals are those in the beautiful pics on the top of your tp? Squirrels or sth similar? Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Those are Chipmunks! El_C 00:06, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh, like the ones at Alvin and the Chipmunks. Very beautiful animals. Well, I need to go to feed my cats, as they are (desperately) meowing. Regards, Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:14, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@El C:

Greetings User:El C,

I appreciate your will to help. As you said yourself, you dont really have time to review the problem. That is of course understandable. I just want to point out that User:Ktrimi991 claims the whole time that I am defending the use of the word "vandalism" and "incompetent". I stated already above, that the use of those words came thru me feeling offended and at the same time angry/mad towards the other users for not beeing cooperative. As such, I accepted that the use of the words was wrong and next time I will hold my thoughts for myself.

I explained the actual problem on the Talk-Page of User:Ktrimi991. If you have time to read it, I would appriciate a opinion from your side. ([60])

I wish you a great day and till next time.^^

--InNeed95 (talk) 11:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

AE question

Hey El_C, it looks to me like some clerking by an uninvolved admin at AE would be useful right now at the CutePeach thread, but I don't know the norms particularly well. I see that the rules are "500 words and 20 diffs", but given the back-and-forths going on, that seems a little restrictive and asking for permission to extend the comments is excessively bureaucratic at this point. Any suggestions on how to tackle this? GeneralNotability (talk) 13:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

GN, obviously you haven't seen this, which makes it clear I won't be touching that particular acrimony-fest again. El_C 13:28, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Understood, though I might have been a bit unclear - I was asking for advice so that I could try to deal with it, not asking you to try to deal with it :). Any chance you'd be willing to give general advice on how to clerk walls of text at AE? Non-specific to this particular mess. GeneralNotability (talk) 13:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

GN, I'm afraid I don't really have a blanket advise. My approach would largely follow a review of the particulars, of which I am unfamiliar with in this case. Sorry for the nothing-answer. El_C 13:35, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Re: right of passage for admins

[61] Really? What about unblocking EEng as a way of earning your admin spurs? The most cromulent admins have done that at least three times. [Checks]. OK, I guess that's only one person, then. Bishonen | tålk 07:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC).

Unblocking? What are you, a communist? But the latest one about the Neopets, that did look like it was exciting! El_C 11:37, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

178.150.150.214 copyvio-refspam

I undid the revdel on Dipyridamole...unlike their edits on other pages, this was just insertion of their ref. Still spam obviously, just not copyvio content. DMacks (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Oops, thanks. I appreciate your diligence. El_C 15:22, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome! Happy (or whatever feeling when cleaning up messes) editing. DMacks (talk) 17:02, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Those Canadian socks...

The IP that misspelled your name was previously blocked here [62] and likely the same editor as here [63]. I think it might be HughD but honestly I'm not sure other than it's clear I did something to their Cheerios. Springee (talk) 01:54, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 3 months. High-fructose corn syrup, so delicious. El_C 02:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

When I had only glanced at this section for a moment, I thought it was a joke about how El_C had misspelled their own name in that string of typos, and Springee was making a pun where HughD was a comment on El_C's endowment. I now see that is not necessarily the case. Although to be fair, the jury's still out on that SPI. I want to believe. don't mind me just --Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 02:03, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Let's just say that Capt. Pronin would be proud and leave it at that... Oh hi/bye, Mark! That's right, another random Capt. Pronin spam! El_C 02:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

B[r[a[c[k]e]t]s]!?

What the syntax on one vs two brackets? I've found sometimes I have to use doubles or the link doesn't work. [wp:test] vs wp:test for example. Springee (talk) 13:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Nobody calls my bluff! Erm, linking internally = two brackets. Linking with http = one bracket. The More You Know... El_C 13:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

beating a dead ass

I really think you're right, that Mjolnirpants/Springee ANI would have been better at AE with its structured discussion. Also I'm sure beating dead asses has to count for exercise, so win-win! —valereee (talk) 17:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I know it as flogging a dead horse but I guess mules will work just as well:)Selfstudier (talk) 17:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hm, was I supposed to insert that above the musical interlude? :D —valereee (talk) 17:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Probably, haha. Selfstudier (talk) 17:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

It was more like lecturing an angry ass while the coyote slips away, but I actually agree that I should have started an AE filing instead of responding at article talk. That would have made a much cleaner end of things.

El C, for everything else I said, I do appreciate you immediately adding back the CR restriction at that page. It won't stop POV pushing, but it will make it harder to engage in. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone. Grateful for the friendly banter. Enjoy your Taxpayer-funded Mule. El_C 23:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Premature Autoarchiving

Hi El_C

Sorry to bother you here, but I think it's probably the best place to ask. This was autoarchived while two elements, a question and evidence of probably not-stale violations were still outstanding. I was hoping to ask how to restore it or otherwise keep it alive until handled? BilledMammal (talk) 07:08, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

BilledMammal, I'm not sure what resolution you're hoping for, but I doubt you'll find it at ANI. If you feel confident that you have a case, and you're feeling daring, I suggest you make use of WP:AE for any and all your WP:ARBPIA needs (though I should probably also caution you to beware the WP:BOOMERANG). HTH! El_C 11:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I was uncomfortable enough going to ANI; though I am not worried about WP:BOOMERANG (though I do enjoy the name), I'll probably leave it as is, and keep this editing in mind to bring up as context should the user cause issues in the future. Thank you for your assistance and your patience. BilledMammal (talk) 07:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Kingdom of Commagene

Dear @El C hope you're doing well. Would you mind giving your input as a third opinion in Talk:Kingdom of Commagene#Recent revert? I'm having a minor disagreement over the lede wording with @HistoryofIran. Arguments are presented in the talk, if you have time, please take a look. Kind regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 08:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

ECP?

Hi El_C. I'm asking since you've always adminned in a balanced way in this topic area while staying uninvolved in the actual disputes. Would you consider putting transgender people in sports (history) under extended confirmed protection per the gender DS? Or at least semiprotection. This is an extremely contentious and politicized topic in the media right now, and we've just had this editor show up. I had to revert that due to its WP:BLP violations against a scientist working in this area (calling her "bad faith", and citing a blog and engaging in OR to push a narrative about her) as well as numerous violations of WP:MEDRS. This absolutely won't be the last time disruption is a problem at this article. This is no different than climate change or GMOs where scientific articles say one thing while politicized media sources and soundbites can be used to say something else. Crossroads ^-talk- 14:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Crossroads: Checking to see if protection is necessary.. El_C 14:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protected indefinitely. Logged AE action. El_C 14:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

An earned-the-hard-way barnstar

	The "Grace Under Fire" barnstar
	After following as much as I could stand of this discussion at AN, I am amazed at the good humor with which you keep tolerating the sneers and smears. I am awarding you the "Grace Under Fire" award. Also remembering the not-so-old saying, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall catch hell from both sides". MelanieN (talk) 17:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Melanie, for your exceptional kindness and uplifting spirit. It is most appreciated. El_C 23:14, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Myanmar protection request

Can you semi Prime Minister of Myanmar? ― Tartan357 ^Talk 06:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Another one bites the dust. El_C 08:08, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

Hey, EL C. Hope you're well. I have filed a semi-protection request at [64]. There are other articles which are targetted by these IPs with the same narrative. [65][66]. If you have some spare time, could you semi-protect these articles? --Maleschreiber (talk) 12:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator EdJohnston. El_C 16:55, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

IRANPOL

Hello, El C. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Vanamonde (Talk) 16:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Good to go. El_C 16:55, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in my recent RFA

Thanks for your support and trust in my recent run for admin. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see making an error, or if you just need help. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 17:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

A helpful tip (well, two)

You can bypass pawaylling in a number of newspaper websites by either 1) clicking the browser's stop button before the page loads with some annoying "subscribe" overlay or 2) even better, read the article in the Internet Archive. Since many newspapers paywall stuff only a few days after the initial writeup, you can get the day 1 version in IA quite often. Neither is foolproof, but they are good to keep in mind. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm aware. That might work for some publications, such as The Washington Bezo$, but not for Haaretz, unfortunately. WMF, if you read this, get me a payed subscription to Haaretz and I will pay you back in hugs and kisses. El_C 02:55, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

How about a hacktivist solution here https://github.com/yuvadm/free-haaretz ? And will I get hugs and kisses too? :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:57, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

I dunno, do you have McNuggets? Sorry, unless it's been posted on scnsrc or max-rls — do not trust. El_C 13:07, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok this really made me laugh..

[67] Hahahahha! :) --Hammersoft (talk) 20:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

The joke is that said jobs committee compels those who don't want while rejecting willing volunteers! That's right, I'm Gerda 'ing it up. Folks will have to work for the lore from this point on... El_C 20:28, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Just like Gerda. Bringing joy everywhere. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:30, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

I came to say I don't understand any of the jokes, and WP:Great Dismal Swamp has no room for jokes, normally. But, Cullen, what you said comes as a crystal-clear surprise. - Joy? I have two (!) articles under recent deaths on the Main page, made Ursula Kraus at least decent (from a tagged stub), and now Karl Heinz Bohrer is waiting for improvements. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, you know Gerda was around during beta 4, when they nerfed the TMP, comforting everybody, telling us: 'don't worry, one day a new Steyr will rise, and it will be awesome. But then they'll nerf it, too. And there will be much woe among the COD gunners...' True stogy! El_C 21:06, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

I'd add that, for years, as a COD gunner, I'd get no love (even as I'd be carrying everybody). Then, the CS gods reduced the price on the COD guns and all the pros in the leagues started using them (because, obviously they would), and suddenly it was cool to use the COD guns. Then they raised the price back up a few months later, and... woe. El_C 21:34, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Moreover, I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't let it get to me, but the constant complaining about how it takes no skill to use the COD guns (right, that's why I'm dominating the server) is such bs. Sure, I get a sight advantage (that's the point), but neither the AUG nor the Krieg are easy guns to master. I actually think that wrt correctly applying fast semi-auto, or getting controlled bursts to land, or spray control on full auto — those are actually some of the most difficult guns in the game to do that with. And one might think: 'well, you're playing against kids,' but that atually has not been my experience. The average age seems more like 20s and older, when I'd play, at least (which is to say purposefully late). Anyway, I'm sure this is of great interest to everyone.</rant> El_C 22:15, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Pivotally, note that both the AUG and the Krieg are given distinct recoil parameters for normal view and for zooming in with the scope (and props to the devs for that extra challenge for these superior arms). You're basically operating two-guns-in-one, which you must do seamlessly and with immediacy in order to survive. No skill. Pfft. El_C 02:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

"I'm El_C. The C stands for Clutch God." DanCherek (talk) 23:57, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Heh. //Bows. If I'd permitted some further boastings, I really think that in another life, I could have been a pro. I've had tons of experience playing the game, and I've been a pianist from a young age, so good hand coordination, in general. Also, good performance in an actual gun range using a variety of arms. And forget about the Krieg/AUG — if I'm feeling mischievous and decide to use the G3 or SCAR-20, watch out! Here, I took a screenshot of this one casual match where, as a CT, I picked up a G3 from a T and... spammed my way to victory, from 0-7 depression to an 8-7 turnaround. Assists? What assists? I'll take the kills, thank you very much. P.S. No offense, redrose, even though you were 4th on our team, you kinda sucked at that match. P.P.S. Some redactions in the image. Not sure if Tarantino at the WPO still intends on doxxing me, but just in case, let's make it a bit more difficult for him... El_C 01:47, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

BTW, GW, I realize the bot archiving is fast. But if you still wish to respond, this be the space. I naturally assume that this matter is important to you, as well... El_C 17:09, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

I know so little about guns that I can only assume that's a very funny joke that sadly went way over my head... GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 17:25, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Nah, the only joke here is my own spectacular lameness, GW. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 17:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

GW, as a consolation, enjoy bomb robot — hero! El_C 17:58, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:G3 domination.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:G3 domination.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 02:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

♫ Ta Ta Taa! ♫ El_C 02:42, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Seriously, you know better than to edit war to keep a nonfree file on your user talk page. Whpq (talk) 02:56, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm duly chastised. Undoubtedly, Valve would have sued over having this image displayed here for a day. But if you're feeling alright, you're feeling alright. That's the most important thing. El_C 02:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

There are innumerable sites that will host that image that you simply could have linked to with a url. Whpq (talk) 03:01, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, Whpq, you do your thing. If you feel that strongly about it, that's fine. Take it easy. El_C 03:07, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:G3 domination.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:G3 domination.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Giving the bot a treat! El_C 17:23, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Took care of it.

I hope, you know what I’m talking about. (off Wikipedia pointless comment of mine) Sorry. - GizzyCatBella🍁 05:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate that. El_C 11:04, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Wi Spa controversy

Contacting you as you were the admin who semi'd Wi Spa controversy under GENSEX D/s. Just requesting you add to that protection some move protection, as it was just moved w/o discussion in a very NPOV manner and think it would be best that it only be moved by admins. What do you think? ~Gwennie🐈｟💬 📋｠ 03:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Done. El_C 03:19, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Pages

Hey, El C. Hope you're well. A new account Seemitfe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is moving the titles of articles about medieval Albanian figures to Italian renderings which have typing errors. I can't move them back because of the technical limitation of reverting back a page to its original name The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. These pages are: Gjon Muzaka moved to Giovanni Musachi (the correct Italian rendering is Musacchi), Lekë Dushmani moved to Lek Dushman (I accidentally moved it to Lekë Dushman I tried to revert it), Gjergj Arianiti moved to George Aryaniti. They also moved the Gjergj Kastrioti Skënderbeu National Museum (official name) to Museum of Skanderbeg. They've tried the same changes before [68][69]. I have none of these articles in my watchlist and I wasn't aware of the changes at the time. Is it possible to restore them to the original titles before the changes?--Maleschreiber (talk) 10:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Maleschreiber, these sort of requests may be submitted to WP:RMT. Might be worthwhile to also try speaking to this user, whose talk page, besides a welcome message, is currently blank. El_C 12:02, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Patriotic Komitas Union of Montenegro

Hi El C. I see you are protecting the site from IP editing by 2023, however there is a problem in both sources do not say that Miroslav Škoro sings anti-Serbian songs. It was invented and added. I hope someone fixes it, and those who invented and added it should be ashamed to lie. Thanks and Bye.93.136.0.168 (talk) 16:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP. Sorry, I don't really have knowledge of that matter, but feel free to make use of the edit request feature to make any proposals. Good luck! El_C 16:56, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't know how to use Wikipedia and edit request ,hopefully someone will remove this inaccuracy of what the editors write User:Слободар [[70]]and User:Vacant0 [[71]]. Good luck in further editing, Goodbye.93.136.0.168 (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Oops, I see you've contributed to the conversation about it at Talk:Patriotic Komitas Union of Montenegro today, IP. My mistake, sorry about that. You've actually did exactly what is expected. So, let's see how that discussion evolves and go from there. P.S. If you feel like it, check out Help:Introduction to start familiarizing yourself with some of the basics. While, granted, the learning curve on Wikipedia gets steep, the basics basics are ultimately intuitive enough, I think. P.P.S. Vacant0, please feel free to elaborate on the article talk page, too. El_C 17:41, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for Help:Introduction.93.136.0.168 (talk) 17:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome. If you have any further questions, please feel free to drop me a line. Have a good one. El_C 18:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Alien Corn

The Book of Ruth is surprisingly litle mentioned in song; though I did find this, notable for its use of ska accordion. Narky Blert (talk) 12:14, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

I'll take your Sixth and Seventh Books of Moses and raise you a Slavery Days→I And I Survive (Slavery Days) [works biblically and beyond]. El_C 13:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

stepping into the arena of RfPP

Would you look at my protection edits just now? Did I miss something? BusterD (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Looking at #increase, I see Khel Ratna requested. To me this looks like a content dispute and should be directed to RM. Agreed? How best to do that? Start the RM myself? Put the onus on the page mover? BusterD (talk) 17:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Looking good! 👍 El_C 17:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

About Khel Ratna, that RM is unlikely to pass, so I wouldn't bother doing anything. I've granted the indef move protection request myself. El_C 17:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Re: Khel Ratna, I just didn't want to choose sides in the dispute, even though I disagree with the move. Am I being too thoughtful here? BusterD (talk) 17:48, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes. El_C 18:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Page protection: Pahonia

@El C: Hi, thanks for applying page protection to article Pahonia, however I have strong doubts if its level is high enough. All three users (Czalex, Kazimier Lachnovič, Hugo.arg) who aggressively attempted to deny Wikipedia:Consensus were extendedconfirmed users, therefore all of them will still be able to revert and cause edit warring. Probably there will be even more similar users in the future. So could you apply Full protection because it suits its requirements "Articles with persistent disruption from extended confirmed accounts"? This mess took place for way too long and should be solved permanently following WP:CON. -- Pofka (talk) 17:31, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Pofka, ah, I see. Well, let's do this: if any ec rights user continues reverting, let me know, because that would be a cause for sanctions, including but not limited to revoking said user right. El_C 17:35, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

👍

Oh, I didn't realize this symbol is allowed in wiki text... and it's not even a template. Nice :) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

💩 Firefangledfeathers (talk) 05:21, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Spaghetti punch! El_C 05:24, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

RFPP

Sorry to waste your time there. I really did not know the appropriate venue, since it seems like the GS/DS were saying protection can be done by any admin with lots of deference to where they feel it is appropriate, but there doesn't really seem to be a venue to request it other than {{admin help}} or RFPP. I suppose it could have gone to ArbE? But weird since that isn't usually what that board is used for. And it's even more confusing that the other templates I referenced don't have formal "consensus required" restrictions on them like they probably should, but instead just editnotices. All in all, very confusing. But I respect your need to have a uniform requirement for RFPP, and I didn't want to waste your time more than necessary to get the answer. So thank you, and carry on with the good mopping, Cow Man. And carry on with the good humor. I will probably just request an informal editnotice that doesn't carry any binding sanctions with it, like Template:Current consensus editnotice.--Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 16:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Shibbolethink, if I can try sharpening again, I think the crux of the matter is about the imposition of a preemptive protection (or a CR DS, sure) exception, which isn't really done unless clearly imminent, in an immediate sense. That's a value, I have found, that seems to be increasingly universally shared among the admin crops. I don't even remember the last page I protected preemptively besides the Jill Biden bio after the election (from none to indef semi), and likewise (and far, far less importantly), the Jewish space lasers redirect (*Pew! Pew!). Thus, the general imperative is to deal with problems as they arise, without straying too much outside the margins of immediacy. That means that preemptive exceptions will tend to be quite extraordinary in nature (often with a BLP component). Hope that makes sense. Best regards, El_C 16:19, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

No problem, I've added {{Ds/talk notice|topic=covid}} to the talk page. El_C 16:23, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

El C, Thank you, and yes that absolutely does make sense. I don't want to make the admin/editor burden more onerous than is absolutely necessary, and if it's already working, why fix it? I've seen enough overengineered reinvented wheels after 3x 10-person meetings to know the consequences :P --Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 16:26, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Speaking of fixing, I don't know that there is a way to add the {{Ds/editnotice|topic=covid}} (alternative?) without it containing binding sanctions. I seem to recall a couple of admins complaining specifically about that recently, but unfortunately, I'm unable to remember the when and the where. El_C 16:30, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

El C, ohhh that's a good point. It basically necessitates a restriction of some kind, whereas maybe you just want to caution editors... When I get a chance I could add that to the sandboxed version of the template I'm currently proposing, if you think that would help?? Like a "restriction=none" option that removes the hardline language and makes it a warning without a specified restriction.--Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 17:13, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, now I'm remembering where I'd seen that complaint. As I recall, RexxS was telling ProcrastinatingReader that his changes to the DS template were removing that feature. I remember at the time (I was a 3rd wheel in that intense pre-debacle), I was telling RexxS that though, personally, I've never used that feature, it'd actually be a good idea to start doing so. Great follow up on my part, obviously. Eep. Anyway, that's RexxS for you, he was all about accessibility. Gone (from the project) but not forgotten. El_C 21:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Coordinated attack against article Coat of arms of Lithuania

@El C: Hello, disruptive users began attacking article Coat of arms of Lithuania. Please apply extendedusers protection to it as well. This coordinated attack is related with a recent RF decision at Pahonia. One disruptive user wrote a message to me (HERE) and began attacking the vital Lithuanian article. Please take actions. Also, please delete all edits made after my yesterday's stable version (this one). -- Pofka (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Pofka. I've indeffed that user and indef semi'd the page (Logged AE action). Not sure, though, that WP:ECP is needed at this time, but feel free to clarify if you deem it to be otherwise. Regards, El_C 16:49, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, and about your WP:REVDEL request, feel free to link pertinent diffs, so that way, I don't have to do anything! El_C 16:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

@El C: This is a vital Lithuanian article and random IP users should not be allowed to distort this quality article. Sadly, I believe this is just the beginning. Let's see if Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access will be enough. Thanks. In the past I already wrote to you that there are various angry nationalists in Belarus who want to deny that Lithuania is Lithuania. RFC of Pahonia proved that their hatred against Lithuania and Lithuanians is baseless. These two disruptive users (VikiVeki, Nickitki, 37.212.21.194 and 178.174.161.19) made a lot of edits today and it would be really exhausting to check what destruction they have made. Could you please rollback article to this version (THIS) before all vandalism took place? Or is it identical already (don't know if you are able to check that)? You can delete all edits of VikiVeki, Nickitki, 37.212.21.194 and 178.174.161.19 from this article because these were a pure vandalism by aggressive Belarusians (e.g. see this: 1, 2, 3). Lithuanian user Cukrakalnis attempted to combat their vandalism alone, but probably some destruction is still left. -- Pofka (talk) 17:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Pofka, next time, please link rather than bold (I fixed that in your message). I've also indeffed Nickitki (who joins VikiVeki). Sorry, but none of these edits are good candidates for revdel. El_C 17:21, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, El C. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! The Captain's still in fine form, per usual. El_C 21:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Dura lex, sed lex

I just notice that Solavirum has recently edited in Abbas Qoli-Khans article in violation of his topic ban from the AA2 area (i think this is the third or fourth time). A historic ruler of an Azerbaijani province obviously falls under the ban area. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 07:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't feel like dealing with him right now. Probably best to make your case at WP:AE then. El_C 11:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

"Preemptive get off my lawn"

It isn't a a "get off my lawn", but a "please behave yourself when you are on my lawn" :P --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 18:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Guerillero, remember when I didn't know what OK boomer meant? Like, at all. Well, look at me now! YouTube Premium, please take more of my money. Together, we will bring those bearrorists to justice. El_C 18:33, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

On title

There appears to be some who question Haaretz's reliability as a source on Haredi Judaism in general. This user has not said Haaretz in general is unreliable. But reserves the right to do so in the future.155.246.151.38 (talk) 22:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Don't alter mine or any other editor's words to give them your preferred meaning, IP. That is a cause for sanctions. I'm formally warning you. Don't do it again, please. El_C 22:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

The title of a subsection are considered your personal words as opposed to general stuff which can be edited? It makes sense your personal words which you sign for are off-limits, but the wording of a subtitle? Okay.155.246.151.38 (talk) 22:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

IP, that you'd presume to so radically alter the wording/meaning of my own purposeful writings is kind of unbelievable to me. But okay okay. El_C 23:03, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Are you allowed to change a title or subtitle of a thread?155.246.151.38 (talk) 23:12, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

You are allowed to use common sense. El_C 23:18, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has policies. A policy question is being asked. Are you allowed to change a title or subtitle of a thread?155.246.151.38 (talk) 23:21, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

IP, I'm trying to be nice. You really need me to spell it out? The subsection themes my OP there: RS status not in question, and yet... touches on my point about Haaretz being overvalued on the English Wikipedia in that it's listed as Israel's sole Paper of record. Then, you come along and change it into RS status not in question yet... — that is not what I wrote (!). I take a dim view to all this ruleslawyering. El_C 23:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism at article Coat of arms of Lithuania continues

@El C: Hello, please apply extendedconfirmed protection to article Coat of arms of Lithuania because Belarusian nationalists keep attacking it. Now another nationalist began deleting content, so he should be blocked as well (e.g. 1, in this he modified Encyclopedia Britannica statements: 2 because he doesn't like them). The trend of this nationalist is the same as the previous ones: Lithuania is Belarus, Lithuanian coat of arms is a Belarusian symbol, etc. These nationalists should be stopped. RFC of Pahonia clearly stated that prior to 1918 there was no Belarusian symbols/state, but these nationalists keep reinserting various controversial statements. -- Pofka (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Pofka, maybe file a case at WP:AE...? I'm not really interested in following up on this right now. El_C 14:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@El C: Could you please at least apply permanent extendedconfirmed protection to this article because recently this article faces a systematic disruptive editing nearly on a daily basis? I restored to a version prior to vandalism myself, but these random users with low number of edits will certainly come back. It would be much, much easier to monitor extendedconfirmed users vandalism. Afterwards, I will certainly create WP:AE cases about extendedconfirmed users disruptive editing in this article because their quantity will be much lower. As seen at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Hugo.arg_and_Kazimier_Lachnovič, help does not come urgently from WP:AE and it will take time for other administrators to understand this highly problematic topic. Please apply protection to this vital article from the nationalists flood. -- Pofka (talk) 14:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

That I can do. El_C 14:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@El C: Thanks. By the way, I have a question about WP:AE. If extendedconfirmed user will perform vandalism now, I can immediately create a case at WP:AE or I should insert warning to their talk page first? I saw mentions at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Hugo.arg_and_Kazimier_Lachnovič that Hugo.arg will probably escape sanctions because he did not received discretionary sanctions warning. Could I insert "Discretionary sanctions alert" (like this one) myself or it should be inserted by an administrator?

Also, maybe a {{Ds/talk notice|topic=e-e}} template would simplify this task of informing disruptive users (it is already present at article Pahonia talk page)? If so, can you insert it to article Coat of arms of Lithuania talk page as well (as I believe it should be performed by an administrator)? -- Pofka (talk) 14:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Huh. I thought I added the Ds/talk, but I guess not. In answer to your question: you are misusing the term "vandalism" (see what vandalism is not). Vandalism is reported at WP:AIV. WP:AE is for more nuanced disruption. Further in answer to your question, yes, the user talk page DS alert is a requirement for any arbitration enforcement action that would involve sanctioning said user directly (as opposed to a 'normal admin action'). You can find a list of these alerts at T:DSA. HTH! El_C 15:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Belarusian nationalists...

Hello, I'm sorry to interrupt you again, but they simply do not stop. You recently blocked two newly created accounts, however now yet another newly created account was created (Mkurski) and attempts to recreate Pahonia article (see: Draft:Pahonia coat of arms of Belarus). Can you take urgent actions against this? It is really obvious. These two users you blocked are also related: VikiVeki, Nickitki (false accusations about xenophobia in the edit summaries shows that). I believe user Kazimier Lachnovič is using sock puppetry. Can you check IPs? Though, he is probably hiding with a VPN. -- Pofka (talk) 11:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, got it. El_C 12:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

@El C: Thanks. I created a case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kazimier Lachnovič. Since you was involved in stopping these sock puppets, your statement would be very welcome as it would likely simplify the process for administrators who will make a decision about Lachnovič. -- Pofka (talk) 14:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Belarusian view

@El C: The deletion of the Pahonia article has created an anomalous situation: hundreds of years of an important aspect of the Belarusian history has been wiped out there. It was the result of a group of activist editors promoting an actualised and reductionist reading of history. In Wikipedia articles, the the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is now increasingly reduced to a modern ethnicity. The leading contemporary specialists in Belarusian and Slavonic studies - Snyder, Wilson, Plochy, McMillin - would strongly object to such views. This reductionist approach impoverishes both Lithuanians and Belarusians. Please let and encourage the Belarusian perspective to be developed on Wikipedia. Please do not assume that Belarusian editors have malicious intent. We may make mistakes, but we'd like to play fair. Please support it. Nieszczarda2 (talk) 08:35, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Lithuanian nationalistic vandalism

Hi, sorry to point this out but we are witnessing a wave of Lithuanian nationalistic POV vandalism of Belarus-related articles by an organised group including User:Pofka and User:Cukrakalnis. This included the forced removal, following a fake consensus reached as a result an non-representative vote, of the article Pahonia which a Belarusian historical coat of arms and former state symbol (just as it is a Lithuanian symbol). Moreover, I am the creator of that article but for some mysterious reason I was never notified of any deletion discussion going on - until the article was removed! We see fake accusations of things like sockpuppetry, manipulation like replacing the neutral term “national liberation movement” with emotionally-charged “nationalism” in the article National emblem of Belarus, etc. People are simply being unfair and chauvinistic, doing nothing but asserting themselves at the cost of others, and this is very sad --Czalex 12:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Reiterating my response to the above

I'll reiterate my position as stated above. I do not wish to be to go-to admin for Belarussian-Lithuanian disputes. I don't know enough about it and my talk page isn't a noticeboard to raise these concerns (unless especially urgent or egregious). Thanks for understanding, everyone. El_C 13:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Response to Czalex

First of all, pardon this El_C, I wrote this without seeing your edit.

It is very unwikipedian to claim that two people of the same ethnicity with an active interest in something are necessarily organized. I will admit, I check Pofka's contributions quite regularly, but that in no way means I collaborate with him. I check other user's contributions as well, e.g. J-Man11 (I won't pin him here, because he is not a part of this discussion; he mostly edits military history), and edit some of his articles.

To claim that the vote in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pahonia#RFC:_Pahonia was fake consensus and non-representative vote is WP:ICANTHEARYOU. Both sides discussed and a WP:CONSENSUS was reached. Many people, which heretofore discussed voiced their view here were tagged, as much as 8 by Kazimier Lachnovič and 4 by Pofka. The more recent RfC is more valid, as it included 17 votes, while the other had less and it was very disorganized, to say the least. It is unfortunate that Czalex was not notified, but I am sure he wouldn't have missed the discussions if he had put the Pahonia page in his watchlist and glanced at its talk page once in a while.

We see fake accusations of things like sockpuppetry, - there is an investigation which has only started and conclusions should not be jumped to. That is why Pofka went through the process which is established by Wikipedia. Plus, the individual concerned, i.e. Kazimier Lachnovič, made a bizarre statement: "Why did you protect the obviously vandalized article Pahonia and where do you see any consensus in the corresponding RfC?" source Why would an individual be angry at an article being protected unless he had an agenda to pursue, perhaps with the aid of sock-puppets? Such cases are not unheard of and an investigation would be welcome. Moreover, it is not reassuring that the one who made the edit would revert it a minute later.

manipulation like replacing the neutral term “national liberation movement” with emotionally-charged “nationalism” in the article National emblem of Belarus - if one reads the source mentioned, it does not mention a national liberation movement, but it does repetitively stress the word "national", which is what prompted me to summarize it as nationalist. I specifically said No mention of "national liberation movement" in the source, at least in the English sections. If they are mentioned in the Cyrillic sections, that should be made explicit in the quote section when citing. If Czalex had given a quote, I would have been ALL for putting in the “national liberation movement”. Instead, Czalex did not provide it.

Moreover, to call my edits in National emblem of Belarus as manipulation is absolutely incorrect. All I did was look at the sources provided and check whether they say what the sentence says. When I find discrepancies, I adjust them, like I did today in the article. That is what Wiki editors are supposed to do, and if anything, me finding all mentions of Russia/Russians/Russian culture in the sources changed to East Slav is manipulation. This is clearly visible in this diff.

With WP:GOODFAITH in heart.

(Excuse this El_C, I wrote this as a response to Czalex, I couldn't let his claims go unaddressed, I had to rectify his unjust claims) --Cukrakalnis (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Chips

I agree that semi-protecting the article was necessary, but I wouldn't have done it for two months as you just did. A duration of one day or even just a few hours would've been sufficient enough. The vandals will soon see that it's protected and simply move on... That's how it usually works. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:51, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah, while I'm not familiar with that sock/master, I'm actually comfortable with 2 months seeing as it's a WP:DAB page. El_C 02:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Also, they started doing this on Aug 5, so a "few hours" — really? I think you're underestimating this sock's dedication. El_C 02:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Also also, I don't want to make this into a thing, Oshwah, because I like you and I think you like me, but I gotta tell you, that That's how it usually works is kinda rubbing me the wrong way. We've both protected a lot of pages, me +8,200, you +820 (flex!), so I dunno, maybe assume that I already know how it usually works... El_C 03:39, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

El C - I like you a lot, El C! I apologize if that statement came across the wrong way. It wasn't my intention at all. Don't take it the wrong way... I wasn't aware that the vandalism goes as far back as the 5th. I apologize for the mix-up there. What I simply meant to say was that users who vandalize (even heavily like that) on a page for less than a day - I protect the page for a few hours, and in most cases (at least in my experience), the vandalism usually stops after it expires. Again, I obviously wasn't aware of the full situation here, so please accept my apologies for the bad assumption. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:56, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries, we're good, bro. El_C 03:59, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Good. :-) The last thing I want to do is offend and piss off a fellow editor and admin - especially one that I've grown to respect. Thanks again for responding, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Keep in touch! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah: When I first came to you, I was but the learner. Now I am a fucking dinosaur in Star Wars. Darth Tyrannus. El_C 04:29, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

User Review Request

Greetings User:El C,

I would like to ask you, if you could Review the latest edits by this User.

Especially his continues edits on the Article Template:Foreign relations of Yugoslavia.

I have notified him twice with a warning on his TP about his mistakes, but he is ignoring them by blanking his TP immediatly.

If you have time, a Review would be appriciated.

--InNeed95 (talk) 08:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, InNeed95, I indef semi'd it (logged). But next time, please take this to a noticeboard. I'm not really accepting out-the-blue requests at this time. El_C 13:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Ditto for Foreign relations of Serbia. Also, IP blocked for 3 years. We got Flushing_Girl and before that Subway_NYC64, but I gather Koov is the master...? Bah, who cares. El_C 14:25, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Good day User:El C,

Thanks a lot for your time and additionally, thanks for your help.

Currently I am on vaccation and I am using my phone. Its quiet annoying to copy/paste, linking,.... etc.

Thats why I requested help thru your talkpage instead of the noticeboard (because it was easier to do thru the phone).

As I said, thanks a lot.

Have a great day.

--InNeed95 (talk) 14:35, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Sure, but please keep in mind that I generally prefer for my talk page to not to function as a spillover for noticeboards. Enjoy your vacation. El_C 14:41, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

mistakes

Anyone who can admit them is A-ok in my book. —valereee (talk) 20:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Val. Still, I done fucked up. Doesn't feel great. El_C 20:15, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Been there, recently. And it was actually something important to me, and I fucked up handling it. Sucks, eh? —valereee (talk) 21:23, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

And of course, Cody Ko releases a video today titled sad cringe. That's me today, sad cringe pity party. Didn't even get much schadenfreude mileage out of the thing, until the end, at least. Hard thinking is called for, and by thinking, I mean Whisky.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 23:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

TRM

Saw your ArbCom reply. I agree. TRM has been absolutely mellow during this Cold Feast. I think he was just a victim of the piece. I'll be happy with the outcome if BHG can grow beyond her present limitations. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I dunno, DFO, as the crux of my statement emphasized, there does not seem to be shortage of violations to go around. And BHG, Piotrus and Llywrch (perhaps a singular slip there, though) seem pretty covered on that front. But, yes, the claim that TRM has also slipped, I've seen no convincing evidence of that. El_C 23:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Ikh Hob Dikh Tsu Fil Lib

Speaking of songs and non-stressful things, this is a new article that could use some citations that just popped up in my routine patrol of User:AlexNewArtBot/PolandSearchResult. Maybe you'd enjoy copyediting it? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Why did you block the Coronavirus variant article indefinitely?

Good morning El C. I am wondering why you have blocked Variants of SARS-CoV-2 indefinitely. I have clicked on your WP link for an explanation but it refers to editing disputes, which is not the case here. I would be grateful for your explanation. 2A00:23C6:5497:8B01:12E:D663:414B:A1FC (talk) 08:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, IP. In answer to your question: that particular semiprotection was an Arbitration enforcement action, a protection action which was largely enacted so as to ensure that the standards set in Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) are upheld (example). See also the FAQ for that guideline. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/COVID-19 for the full case. Actions to enforce the decisions of that case are logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration_enforcement_log#COVID-19, with protections, specifically, logged here. Let me know if you have any further questions. El_C 09:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for answering. I agree that in the long run we should endeavour to cite medical textbooks etc. But at the beginning of a new disease, or new variants as in this case, such textbooks do not yet exist. I think you are setting the bar too high at this early stage.

Specifically with regard to your example, the "D614G" sentence is not only correct but also important. This mutation happened in the B1 type and is therefore found in all currently globally expanding variants. This is mentioned only indirectly in the article but not made clear. Hope you can fix it. Otherwise please unblock and let others do it. By the way, I did not write that sentence nor do I think it is adequately sourced. But if you leave it in place, future editors can improve on it, but only if the article is unblocked. No need to reply, I must get back to work now.2A00:23C6:5497:8B01:7DBF:7A99:66AC:D5A0 (talk) 14:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

IP, I'm not going to do that. What I've done is the prevailing practice atm. If you wish to address any outstanding issues, you're welcome to do so on the article talk page (Talk:Variants of SARS-CoV-2). That's largely what it's for. If you wish to edit the article directly, you may do so by registering an account and gaining the WP:CONFIRM tenure, which isn't too high a threshold (10 edits / 4 days). I can't really comment on that example, specifically, as I lack the knowledge to do so, but the strict sourcing requirements of WP:MEDRS as currently applied to the pandemic is what it is. It isn't something which, I, myself, had set by fiat. In fact, like yourself, I'm on the record that in certain respects, the bar indeed should be lowered, but right now this does not seem to be the general sentiment. But I do hope that changes sooner rather than later. Wishing you a good workday, El_C 14:44, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Commagene

Dear El_C, I left a message earlier asking you for a third opinion in Talk:Kingdom of Commagene#Recent revert. I also used WP:THIRD, with no replies back. Please consider looking at that talk section and if you'd be kind enough, give your opinion as a third party. I can't resolve that dispute, I'm starting to think that the editor has a certain POV and uses their much higher experience as bullying tactics. They reverted my edit again without even replying in talk diff. I feel like I'm starting to repeat myself, and I can't come to a conclusion with the user. Hoping that you could help to resolve this issue. Thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 16:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, ZaniGiovanni, that isn't something I want to take on right now. Maybe there's a noticeboard that can provide you with some assistance...? Good luck! El_C 16:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

I understand you El_C. I really wouldn't have asked if I had any success in establishing some sort of an agreement with the user. But I also understand that such discussions aren't enjoyable or interesting at all. If I was you, I probably wouldn't want to engage in those either. With best, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 17:22, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Them are figntin' words!

(idle observation) After my daughter moved away, she called one night urgently needing to know "what is the name of the song with the screamers?" That's what we call it. We prefer this version though. Schazjmd (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

With the screamers — LOL! Sorry, Schazjmd, 3rd favourite. Sam Brown's growl cannot be matched. That said: Ranch is good. El_C 20:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for sticking up for Flyer here [72] (single brackets). Disagreeing with her is fine. Doing something that would rub noses in her loss is not. Springee (talk) 04:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

George Harrison Thank you

Thank you so much for protecting George Harrison's page, I am very happy! 9Revolution.

Glad I could help, 9Revolution. Today's songspam is for you! El_C 14:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

$0.02

You asked suggestions for what evidence to look at. I think the arbitration report is starting to focus alot on Mhhossein, but this is understandable because he has made 30% of all edits at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran, edited Iranian topics (a difficult area) for 7 years, and dealt with difficult users. I don't think Mhhossein is a perfect editor and I can see his mistakes, though I think his contribution on this topic as been, on the whole, positive.

So my two cents would be to look the evidences on Mhhossein (eg those in Vanamonde's section) and see if any patterns emerge. I tried giving evidence on him but I don't think its adequate. Sorry if my thoughts are all over the place! VR _talk 18:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

VR, yeah, they are a bit. This isn't too focused, I'm afraid. But, RE: Stefka and Mhhossein have filed WP:SPIs against each other — I knew that SB launched an SPI on MH (because I commented on it at the time), but I was not aware that it was also vice versa. That submission to your evidence section says that this is so, but you've provided no, well, evidence. Can you please clarify, then, with evidence? Because WP:SPI/Stefka_Bulgaria does not exist, so I'm confused. To that: not to be a dick, but it's kinda silly of you not to link to these SPIs, but instead just link to the main WP:SPI page, for some reason (like, for what?). El_C 21:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

That's a total idiot move on my part. Ok, I've fixed the issue and given links for both.VR _talk 21:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries. Damn, that's a long SPI. Hopefully, I can finish reading it by Christmas! El_C 22:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh it wasn't my intent to get you to focus on SPI. I think you and Vanamonde possess a lot of wisdom on what's going on and I really hope you will give your impressions either in the evidence stage or the workshop stage, ideally, both.VR _talk 22:35, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Right, I get that. I just didn't know that MH filed an SPI on SB, so it caught my attention. Anyway, seeing as the evidence phase ends on Aug 17 and that I find the Workshop model incredibly convoluted and counterintuitive, I wouldn't hold too much hope about me doing either of those things. But, again, if someone has something targeted they want me to review, I can probably do that. El_C 22:43, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Mhhossein in case he has something more targeted to review.VR _talk 22:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)Struck and ping removed after El_C's comment below. Sorry it was not my intention to make this a biased discussion.VR _talk 23:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

VR, I don't like you singularly pinging someone, like MH, who is on your side of the MEK dispute, onto here. El_C 23:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

You're right, sorry.VR _talk 23:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

• I saw your comment. I think the RfC you were looking for was is this. FWIW, I disagree with your comment "the anti-MEK camp also largely reflects the view of the theo-fascist Islamic regime that rules Iran". Yes, I've been critical of MEK, but does't mean I agree with the Iranian government or its lack of freedoms etc. In fact, you'll find that much of the criticism of MEK actually comes from Western liberal sources.VR _talk 22:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

• I meant largely reflecting their (Islamic regime's) view of the MEK. Sorry for my imprecise language. El_C 22:10, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks for the clarification.VR _talk 22:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Help

I want a clarification on this issue in 2019 Loksabha elections article page ,where results table are for only 542 seats and one seat held later. ECI recently updated the files and includes all seats for calculation vote share ,voters, registered electors and so on. It even published a article and atlas about 2019 loksabha election, I tried to edit as per Election commission of India's sources and files but one user reverted both my edits and references and said that delayed election should not be included.Whether it is a general or delayed election or not, primary source for election related articles in Wikipedia are the election commission of their respective countries. Even Election commission of India saying total electors for GE 2019 are 911,950,784 they reverted to 910,512,091, I even continuously arguing but that user not satisfied for Government's souce and files. Please express your views in itNahtrav (talk) 10:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Nahtrav, if you ask for someone's help, the courteous thing would be to link to the page in question. If it's about the 2019 Indian general election, then I'd say that you should follow your own request: express your views in it, with it being the article talk page. Because other disputants are making use of it. So please do so and stop edit warring. El_C 11:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for this mistake, I just forgot that in the middle of that argument, so I should post it in Article talk page, shouldn't I?Nahtrav (talk) 11:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes. And in general, observing the maxim of Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle during editing disputes would be good. El_C 11:10, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Can you see the discussion now Talk: 2019 Indian general election , till now no objection for my edits except the reverted editor, who also created that table .Nahtrav (talk) 15:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I edited based ona strong and updated reference from both govt , private and news article but the another user reverts just because it's "editors choice" and "need not necessary" and not citing any reference or Wikipedia rule but still revert make no sense to me apart from article page discussion, another discussion was also made on the reverted user talk page Nahtrav (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not really available to assist you further with this right now. El_C 16:13, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to prolong this, but do you think you could remind Nahtrav about our canvassing rules? This is not particularly neutral. Given that he's done this on-wiki, I also strongly suspect that another user was canvassed off-wiki to comment given how quickly they appeared on the RfC after Nahtrav and basically just said that they agreed with him... Cheers, Number 57 15:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57: #Note_to_participants added. El_C 17:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Your closing at WP:ANI

There are still issue of WP:1RR that was broken about week ago. Do you think it could be brought to WP:AE? --Shrike (talk) 15:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

As someone who has probably done more AE stuff than any other admin on the project, here's a question: is it common practice to sanction someone for a one week old (at the time of the filing of such a complaint) 1RR violation? I honestly can't remember. Because in a normal 3RR scenario, such a complaint would be deemed Stale. Also, a not unimportant question would be whether a self-reversion request was attempted first. El_C 15:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Or even requested. Or if somebody really should be patrolling others contributions on articles they have never involved themselves in in order to seek out opportunities to run and write a report. Or claiming a 1rr violation when they tagged the article as being covered two weeks later. That strikes me as WP:TE of the WP:NOTHERE sort tbh. nableezy - 22:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

RE: Or even requested — I know, I write like shit, no need to gloat. El_C 22:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

ARBPIA close

	Digital Fruit Basket
	For your recent close of an ARBPIA-related ANI thread, the WMF awards you this digital fruit basket. As you know, you have a ways to go before you get one IRL, but we hope these e-grapes tide you over until then. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 15:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Heh. True story: a little while ago the bank typo'd my birth date, which became a whole run-around with the gov't for some reason, multiple promised call-backs from the bank not returned, etc. In short, super annoying and time consuming. Finally, had to go into the branch in-person. Once everything was sorted there, I dictated a note to the rep helping me to be sent to the person handling my accounts. I ended the complaint with: tell branch manager that a fruit basket would be aiight (emphasizing that spelling). She laughed. El_C 15:36, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

To up the lulz-quotient, may I add in some e-bananas.     ←   ZScarpia   16:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm gonna go over there. Enjoy yourself. El_C 16:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

AN/I

Thanks for closing the discussion. I won't make any comment about the discussion itself. But if I am parsing your closing note correctly, there was an objection to the template I used? I transcluded it from one of a dozen ANI threads that use it to produce a full list of user-associated links. I wasn't suggesting that editor was a vandal; simply using a format used in any number of similar threads. And not once did I suggest the editor was a vandal. St★lwart¹¹¹ 02:01, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I figured as much, but it still looks unseemly in the edit window, was my point. Next time, just use {{userlinks}} or whatever instead, for disputes of that nature. You'll basically get the same output without having a {{vandal|Your Opponent}} being displayed for anyone editing the complaint. In closing: optics shmotcics. El_C 02:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Space pedant

I see that User:Space pedant remains unregistered. I am sorely tempted (even if Interstellar Smartarse might be closer the mark). Girth Summit _(blether) 15:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Careful, that's where the Jewish space lasers come from! For extra lulz, note my protection summary: El C (talk | contribs | block) m (Protected "Jewish space lasers": Arbitration enforcement: preemptive — will not log! ([Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (indefinite) [Move=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (indefinite))). El_C 16:09, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Wow - that's a whole new realm of crazy I was previously unaware of. Frickin' laser beams... Girth Summit _(blether) 16:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

El_C 16:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Destructive Twitter Post related to Great Highway Wikipedia page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=1039461072#Possible_solution? . The case has been closed but I added part (minutes before closure). Adding something have do with this one twitter post and Great Highway Wikipedia. Especially when someone said "they go few rounds" on the page and ""They don't know what they're up against" "... https://twitter.com/graue/status/1427461634482597890 Centralist2021 (talk) 22:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I don't have a Twatter account and for some reason it's not letting me click on things right now. I can't explain it. Still, I think I get the gist of it. Duly noted. Now, as for you, maybe fourth time the charm (?): can you please tell me how many individuals have access to the User:Centralist2021 account? And can you please tell me if any further coordinated action should expected, from either camp? Thanks in advance. El_C 22:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I can be at phone or connected Coffee shops WIFI using Wikipedia unless there a rule against traveling around or something. I wont able tell if "coordinated action" will resume after article page gets unlocked. I cant do anything else anyways. I will see what happen when it gets unlocked.. The activity started on same day the road reopened. I do not know if you can check pageviews on it. Centralist2021 (talk) 22:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Fifth time, then: so it's just you operating the User:Centralist2021 account? I sorta need you to expressly answer with a yes or a no. BTW, I didn't even know the Great Highway existed, period, up until a few hours ago. And I've actually spent some time in California. Anyway. El_C 22:37, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Ya. Great Highway Wikipedia may get into "no compromise" article resolution just like what was done in the protesters and survey to close roadway. It not acceptable they bring that here even if its on talk page is created. I thought in ANI stated "Wikipedia don`t pick sides". Centralist2021 (talk) 02:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay. El_C 03:02, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia allow sanctions or something related. Making it focus on the current status of the roadway. Dont need see nickname of a roadway or stating reopening details or concerns. Only need to know is the date and if "Great Highway is open to traffic" or "Closed to traffic"Centralist2021 (talk) 03:27, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Centralist2021, I don't know. This isn't an area of the project with which I am familiar. El_C 03:30, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I think it might be needed permanently until a solid decision for Great Highway is made. Who specialized in sanctions in Wikipedia? You got a page link? It def trim both sides to lowest point. Centralist2021 (talk) 03:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Centralist2021, I specialize in sanctions, just not in disputes that involve roads. The admin who protected the page also specializes in sanctions. I haven't seen anything to suggest sanctions are needed at this time, but you're free to seek a second opinion. However, I'm wary of burdening any individual admin with that by sending you their way (I feel it'd be an imposition). Good luck. El_C 03:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

No problem. I am up to have the article with even compromise were both sides of content would be trimmed to the lowest until a solid development for article has been made. Centralist2021 (talk) 03:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

What’s up with you lot who despise mobile diffs?

Bbb23 also stated they hated that shit, irdk. Boy do you make our work extremely tedious but I have found away around it though. Celestina007 (talk) 00:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007, because they suck! Don't just take my word for it, a learned Scott agrees (probably). El_C 00:42, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007, Wikipedia's mobile version sucks. Although when I browse it on my mobile devices it looks okay'ish, it transfers poorly on the pc (where I'm actually logged in). Just having to look at a different type of display is disorienting enough, in of itself. And I've been here since 2004 (no mobile devices then), so I'm set in my ways. El_C 04:30, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Reference

Hello I got a interesting topic to create an article. Is The Times Bulletin a genuine news source for the reference? Boti2481 (talk) 00:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Boti2481, no idea, I don't know a lick about it. The reliable sources noticeboard is the venue to pose these queries. El_C 00:40, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok thank you Boti2481 (talk) 00:45, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Can you please help me out as I am new in editing so i am facing lots of problem Boti2481 (talk) 01:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Boti2481, check out Wikipedia:Teahouse. New editors can seek assistance there. Good luck. El_C 01:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft moving to mainspace

Hi I have fixed all issues by talking to an administrator of the Draft:Rishton Ka Manjha I need someone to move the article can you do this? Boti2481 (talk) 04:35, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Boti2481, you asked this question of several editors/admins now. They have told you that you need to submit your draft to Articles for Creation for review. This is the next step you should take. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:00, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

And now he's blocked as a sockpuppet. It seems like this is often the case with editors who are one day old and have lots and lots of questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:06, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Liz. Appreciate it. El_C 08:16, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

User attacks other users

User:Mavi Gözlü Kel who has many warnings attack other users here could you look on this, WP:NOTHERE? [73] he was blocked several times. Shadow4dark (talk) 07:57, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Got it. BTW, Shadow4dark, FYI: if you put a bare url in square brackets, it will wrap it thereby minimizing its length. El_C 08:16, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

August thanks

August songs

The second thanks in August go to you, for help with Hebrew, and your spirits! My 12th today, DYK? I decorated, also for a birthday. Songs invite to more music, places, food and flowers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Nice! ♫ You're the Birthday, you're the Birthday, you're the Birthday, Boy or Girl! ♫ Also, RIP Señor Beaverotti, master conducter. El_C 14:08, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, love the music! - RIP two more Polish musicians, planned to be expanded (one created) tomorrow and after (see user page) - I do only one per day, making an exception today ;) - Haven't met FH in a long time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:13, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

B.B. said: that's okay. Yay for random insurance guy who is a patron of the arts! El_C 14:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Define random ;) - I like coincidences such as: he has a daughter Ildikó, which isn't the most common name, and she was invited to enter the Austrian army because people thought the "o" indicated a man (and she considered going to that meeting for the fun of it). One of four soloists in yesterday's concert: Ildikó - pictured in "songs". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Don't quantum superposition me! I wish she'd have gone for it. Would have been some major lulz. Ah, a celloist, my woman! El_C 14:39, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the link! - I watch the TFA today (but will take it off tomorrow). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Today: 2 interesting DYK (I think), sadly 2 who died (on top of 2 from Poland yesterday), and a concert in which Daniel Barenboim just played piano, with this wonderful orchestra of players from Israel and Palestine, conductor from Israel, - and afterwards he and the orchestra received last year's prize (pictured). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Today: 3 DYK, including that the author dedicated a summer story to a license plate number ;) - Five rows of images added, sunflowers and butterflies continued, four rows of 15 August alone, - a rich Monteverdi day, - enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Man, that is one happy bee! . And yay for Psalm 86 — I helped (probably). Big smile. El_C 22:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Today Giedrė Šlekytė - flying to the top ;) - Can you help me with Psalm 34 , please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Noo, not Lithuanian! Hmm, I can't find the Psalms page anymore... El_C 00:09, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, found it in the archives. But the extra clicking has made me so angry! El_C 00:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done, but done angrily! El_C 00:20, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

rubbing eyes ... how about looking for the word psalm (or better Yoninah) on my user page? ... or talk? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:41, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

What, three clicks?! You've gone mad with power. El_C 06:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

When I posted I was dead tired after a long rich day, - sorry for that. Psalm 34 contributed to the richness. WT:QAI/Psalms. Thank you for adding to it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

It's okay. Possibly, I took the hardship of clicking one time on the archive page a bit too far.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Hope you have a good Sunday! El_C 14:26, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Today: Teresa Żylis-Gara, the second soprano to impress me on stage, died, - long live the memory of her beautiful singing, remembered with thanks. 28 August 2013 was a special concert day: look. After Hillbillyholiday gave me a tree. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Outed!

You are Lobby Lud and I claim my £5! Narky Blert (talk) 19:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Narky Blert, yet all the complaining Cow (Man) wants to do is rescue some hostages and own a bunch of campers.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ P.S. Sometimes the cows fight back (even against technicals!). El_C 20:12, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I shot an arrow in the air,
It fell to enough, I knew not where;
But, strangely, at my journey's end,
I found it again in the neck of a friend.

(Falsely attrib. Longfellow.) Narky Blert (talk) 23:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Give me my goat you damn scientist! El_C 00:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

"I shot an arrow into the air.
It hit the ground, I know not where.
You know. I loose a lot of arrows that way".
GoodDay (talk) 02:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Get the knife! El_C 03:04, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Behavior of Vaze50 after a very final warning

Hi there, I know you warned Vaze50 on their talk page a few days ago about WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:ASPERSIONS but Vaze has continued such behavior mostly towards DeCausa on their talk page. It seems Vaze has been give enough WP:ROPE, but has not dropped the WP:STICK and cotinues to beat a WP:DEADHORSE. [74][75][76] saying "Your motivation is absolutely bizarre to me", "There are only a couple of plausible reasons. 1) You think the UK is not a country (objectivity false), 2) You have a political objective to advance by removing the UK, 3) Some other reason that isn’t immediately apparent.", and probably more damnin saying "Have you noticed GoodDay that DeCause suddenly went quiet when they accidentally revealed their bias on the topic and their belief that the UK is not a country? How can anybody seriously say that this website is acting in an impartial way when a tiny number of blatantly politically motivated individuals are allowed to bully their way through? What can we do about this?". Please let me know if I am being to cautious. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 21:10, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Handled (hopefully). El_C 21:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Not making light of any of this. But, when he comes back. Will it be alright for him to complain on my talkpage? It helps, to have a place to let out one's frustrations. I've 'cooled off' over the years & no longer overly loose my temper around British topics. Maybe my hard-earned calmness, will rub off on him. GoodDay (talk) 02:30, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Frankly, GoodDay, I don't think your comments helped at that debate, & I'm not sure they will again. Johnbod (talk) 02:38, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

That debate was DOA :( GoodDay (talk) 02:41, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

GoodDay, sure, if you think it'll help curb their perennial aggression, sounds like a plan. Hey, nothing wrong with some complainin' (see thread above). It just can't cross the same line that they were warned about multiple, multiple times. BTW, I've been to England a couple of times to visit family — had a wonderful time. And the food didn't suck! El_C 02:44, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, I understand his frustration. Reckon, it'll be up to him :) GoodDay (talk) 02:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

El_C I am only slightly concerned at an inconsistency in treatment. It certainly seemed to me that Johnbod was equally provocative, seeking to police what other people were able to say, but he faced no caution whatsoever. I reject wholeheartedly the idea I suffer from "perennial" aggression - any look at the edits I have made over many years will demonstrate that I have made numerous effective and beneficial contributions to articles on all sorts of issues, usually without issue or incident. However, drawing attention to an inconsistency has led to some really remarkable behaviour from editors. You are right that I questioned that behaviour, because it seemed so unbelievable. I follow that up with a question to you, El_C - how you would feel seeing your country wiped off as many pages on this website as possible? You don't have to put up with that, so you don't have to endure it, but I would ask you to just briefly consider how it would make you feel. Then ask yourself again if I am guilty of "perennial aggression". The wider point about historical inconsistency is a failure on the part of this website and it would be improved if it could be resolved. I will not apologise for attempting to resolve it, but evidently there is absolutely zero appetite from people to do so. Vaze50 (talk) 14:30, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

So close to archive city, Vaze50 (no ping). Anyway, I don't think being passive-aggressive is really an improvement over being aggressive-aggressive, but whatever. I ain't the civility/pc/tone police, so as long as you don't do or say anything too egregious, further involvement from moi is unlikely. P.S. England is my city? El_C 21:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

LTA IP account

Hi El, could you look at Special:Contributions/2601:601:9800:76::/64? The IP resumed their disruptive edits about a day after the block was lifted. User:Alex Bakharev has blocked it twice, but the admin has only edited once in the past month. IIRC, you once asked me about this LTA user, so I figured you might still be familiar with them. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 06:36, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one year. El_C 13:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! BilCat (talk) 15:43, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

SPI case of Chatterjee95

Hello, El C. There is an open SPI case of a user Chatterjee95 whom you've blocked from mainspace following an ANI report. Kindly have a look into it. Thanks -- Ab207 (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, I don't really remember this Incident. You may wish to alert Fram (←Fram, alert!) who filed the original report. Good luck. El_C 13:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Couldn't resist

Hello El C. I hope you are well. I'm guessing this is what a pirate does when their talk page gets too long :-) Enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 17:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

MarnetteD, if your ship gets boarded by pirates, sip your tea with confidence and grace. You'll instantly gain their respect and there may even be some booty in it for ya. You're welcome! El_C 18:34, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

That video is a treat :-) I haven't seen the booty before but I'll be on the lookout (from a crows nest) for it now. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 18:45, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Australian Strategic Policy Institute

Hi El C, I'd like you to know that your initial perception of the sources was not taken as a reflection on me, so I don't regard your apology as necessary at all. Nonetheless, I am happy to accept the apology. Onetwothreeip (talk) 02:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I intended it as an apology to members of the publication itself, rather than to yourself, since I questioned its veracity in the protection summary, which may have been inappropriate. El_C 02:45, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

But I definitely did not take it as a reflection of you, to be clear. El_C 02:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, that is clear. Are you interested in making edits to the article during its full protection period on behalf of other editors? Onetwothreeip (talk) 02:54, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

I am not, I don't think that would be appropriate. El_C 03:13, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi

The kickboxing result for Amansio Paraschiv vs. Lofogo Sarour was overturned. The judges first decided 29-28, 29-29 and 29-29, meaning majority draw. After it was overturned to a UD (unanimous decision) for Paraschiv. And I do have two sources saying this: 1. KickboxingZ 2. Official Facebook of the promotion. The IP is ignoring them. So thanks! What I need is some weeks of protection. .karellian-24 (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

.karellian-24, actually, I don't think there's any harm in taking a wait and see approach to this, for now. El_C 17:04, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Yay for songspam stuff!

Hi El. Forgive me for intruding in this superbly curated section of your talk page, but although I commented earlier this year with a suggestion, I have felt that this section is too personal to you to add stuff to it. It is most enjoyable, and I return here frequently to dip in and haven't found anything not to my taste. Following a lost four hours on one occasion, I have limited myself to two links per day since then. Basically, I wanted to thank you for this and if I may be so bold, to suggest something for you to sample. (For the record, the second sax from the left of your latest link has played as a guest artist with my suggestion), which is, The San Andreu Jazz band. link to leaders Youtube page from a school for performing arts in Barcelona. There is approximatly 15 years worth of video posted by the Professor of the school, Bass and Sax and Conductor Joan Chamorro. I could go on and on and on, but I'll request you to take a look, and find out for yourself, if you have not come across them. Let me know what you think. Best wishes -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 11:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Cool, Roxy the dog, really glad you're enjoying the songspam series! Wow, small world, definitely will check out. All the best, El_C 12:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Nice 'Round Midnight, a song which I love dearly (already Amy Winehouse'd above). El_C 12:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Oromia

Hi, thank you for your block the page Oromia. That good place for dispute resolution, Assuming good faith, I want to request edit in order to add Sheger at the infobox and lead section from [77][78][79]. Thanks! The Supermind (talk) 13:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

The Supermind, the page isn't locked to you (you're at the EC user right level, the page is only semiprotected), so you can just edit it normally. HTH! El_C 13:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Where? Still the page is showing locked sign. The Supermind (talk) 15:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, my mistake, I was thinking of something else. It's actually fully protected, so you can use the edit request feature, I suppose. Good luck. El_C 15:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Removal of edit summaries on page

Hello! I see you removed an edit summary on the page Lacewood Productions however I think a few more edit summaries will need to be removed for the same reason as the first. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:20, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. El_C 20:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Bigg Boss (Hindi Season 15)

Hi El C. The disruption at this redirect (Bigg Boss (Hindi Season 15)) has not stopped even after it being protected. I guess GenuineEditsOnly 2005 should be blocked because they've been warned enough and they continue doing disruption. I'd leave the decision to you because you protected the redirect.....─ The Aafī ^(talk) 11:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. El_C 11:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi El C; They are back at Bigg Boss (Hindi season 15). Please protect this redirect. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 18:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Done. El_C 18:34, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Dear @El C: Thank you for protecting the page of Agra-Lucknow Expressway. Kindly help do the same for Purvanchal Expressway also. I am too working since long to make Wikipedia a nice, informative platform. Regards. Aakash Singh India (talk) 12:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I guess. But if there's further edit warring on other road pages, continuing to protect will no longer be feasible. El_C 13:09, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Pahonia requires urgent actions again...

@El C: Hi, sorry to disturb you again, but they simply don't stop and yet again wants to deny Wikipedia:Consensus. Please take urgent actions against Pahonia (disambiguation). The trend is the same as they claim that one of the historical names of the Lithuanian coat of arms is an exclusively Belarusian symbol (this disambiguation page is nothing else than a shortened version of Pahonia). It was already denied at Wikipedia:Consensus. -- Pofka (talk) 14:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

@El C: They implement suggestion B (make disambiguation page) of RFC (link to RFC once again), despite the fact that the decision was suggestion A (make redirect page). Please delete Pahonia (disambiguation). -- Pofka (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Not the biggest fan of the ol' barnstar, but the El_C brand of crazy keeps AN/I from being a complete cluster. I guess keep it up? ~TNT (she/they • talk) 14:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Heh, thanks TNT. Will do, at least until the inevitable point in which the barrel(s) of laughs roll over me! El_C 14:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Disruptive edits by newly created account

Hello El_C, a relative new account, TSKEnjoyer12 (1 month old creation), have been reverting and errasing information from RS from military equiptement related articles. Multiple times The user reverts content using false arguments in the edit sumary section. Always pushing for a BIASED POV. He have been warned many times, but he errases the warnings, but keep pushing his POV. Mr.User200 (talk) 18:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorted. El_C 20:20, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

He has older sock account TSKEnjoyer. Shadow4dark (talk) 23:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Seems abandoned. Report if that changes. BTW, why do either of you not link internally? It's super-easy and often makes parsing a message much easier (refactored both of your messages to show). El_C 01:33, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

ARBHORN editing restriction still active?

Hello El C! I'm a bit confused: reading WP:ARBHORN, this should have ended around on 9 March, yet I see that you added a new editing restriction on an editor on 4 March (here) which is still there now. EdJohnston also warned the editor for violating the editing restriction on 23 March [80], which is well after the DS should have ended. Is this a mistake? Because if the editing restriction still stands, the user has been violating it massively. This can be seen at a glance by looking at their recent contribs [81] [82] [83] [84] [85] (full disclosure: one of these reverts undid a number of edits by me); they recently even got into a edit war and 3RR violation on a ARBHORN-related article. Of course, none of this matters if the editing restriction should actually have been retracted. Note recent warnings on their talk page though [86] [87] [88] [89] [90]. Should I take this to WP:AE? Thanks for your attention! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 21:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

I looked a bit further and found a confirmation on the talk page that ARBHORN is still in effect (wouldn't hurt to put that at the project page!). So I guess I should take it to AE? ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 21:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Patience, Apaugasma, I'm going as fast as I can. Also, sometime less is more. Anyway, sorted for now. In answer to your question: I did not set an expiry date on that prohibition (which was intended as a boon, in fact), so it is still in effect. El_C 21:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah, the 3-month probationary period for the WP:HORN DS confused you, I see. Sorry, but your message was not easy for me to parse. El_C 21:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, if I had looked a bit further the first time around I wouldn't even have had to post here (or bother EdJohnston for that matter). Also didn't know you could do an AE block on your own (still somewhat new around here ). I think that actually a topic ban may be in order, but I'll leave it be for now (the diffs are here on your talk now should they be needed). Many thanks for your expedient action, you're doing great! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 22:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. No worries, glad I could help. Regards, El_C 01:35, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

2021

One editor is pushing his old "We don't know who Australia's head of state" BS, again. Another is trying to overturn an RFC result, concerning political offices in infoboxes of bios. A group of editors are trying to control what we can & can't have on our user pages. Is 2021 the year that Wikipedia goes nuts? or is it just me. GoodDay (talk) 03:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Shit, he's missile proof! El_C 03:23, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Sus espionagicus?

I notice that you were recently outed by an unimpeachable source as a CIA pig. That being the case, you might enjoy this rabbit hole (do you get that one?) of information and entertainment. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 17:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Heh, JoJo, the fellows at the Mossad are gonna be pissed! Anyway, I presume this was the trial run to what is now my unstoppable army of chipmunks... El_C 17:55, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

AGF clowncar!

AGF clowncar!

I keep feeling like a huge curmudgeon who always assumes the worst of other editors (especially new accounts editing articles on YouTubers), so the "AGF clowncar" comment made me chuckle. In a sinister creepy-clown way, naturally. Ahahaha. Fact is, this morning I almost posted a diatribe to the Teahouse against a completely innocuous comment that wasn't even directed at me, and that's why I thought I'd check if there was anything in the templated message that just rubbed the editor the wrong way. bonadea contributions talk 19:31, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Haha, nice ride! I was, like, 50:50 it's either trolling or a genuine Point of privilege. Hard to tell these days. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 19:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Advocates

Hi El C, the recent kerfluffle with Special:Contributions/Johnpacklambert illustrates a major hole within Wikipedia's ANI system: The lack of advocates. Often, otherwise competent editors find themselves in situations where they become so overwhelmed that they cannot react objectively. This is especially true for editors on the autism spectrum, but certainly not limited to them. I've been in such situations on Wikipedia myself, and felt extremely overwhelmed. I'm not sure what the solution is, or if there even is one. However, I've never seen this issue addressed, and, given the WMF's sensitivity to people with disorders, this may need to be addressed in some way. BilCat (talk) 20:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey, BilCat. Bad memory over here, but also long institutional memory. I don't know if you remember the WP:AMA (Association of Members' Advocates). My recollection is that it was clunky more often than not, but still was able to produce some good outcomes. Of course, the project then isn't what it is now, which may likely be decisive there. But maybe not? Who knows. To that: sorry, I don't really remember what brought down the AMA (possibly, I wasn't around at the time). And in general, I'm not sure I'm able to figure out a solution to the added strain one undergoes whenever they are faced against the many (rightly or otherwise), obviously a highly unenviable position for one to find themselves in. El_C 01:08, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Hmmm, I have vague recollection of it, once I looked at the page, but it was mostly before my time also. BilCat (talk) 02:46, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Reviewing block of Johnpacklambert

Hello. I have decided to take on this less than trivial unblock request.

I want to start by saying that I believe the block was correct. While indefinite you have given them a path back by pointing out the need for assurances that they recognize the issue and will not repeat it.

Their rather lengthy unblock request seems to admit fault and make such assurances. That being said I believe any unblock should be conditional. I want to discuss with you how you feel about a conditional unblock and what sort of conditions may be appropriate.

I have read through the ANI thread and I see a few suggestions ranging from topic bans, 1RR restrictions, and little tolerance for future similar issues. What do you think would be a good set of conditions to warrant unblocking?

I am also not assuming you take their current statement as sufficient, if there are any deficiencies that need to be addressed please let me know. Ultimately I would like to see a way to let this editor back in a way that will not harm the community. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 01:15, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

HighInBC, I'm about to turn in, but breifly'ish: the obvious and non-negotiable condition would be for JPL not to falsely accuse others of "hate speech" or of discrimination against neurodiverse persons again. The TBANs and all that, that I leave to the community. Related to that, I'll note that I'm not at all familiar with JPL's body of work on the project. To the best of my recollection, we've never spoken until today. But I'll reiterate (and refactor) that when I fully and move protected the Mormonism article 2 days ago, I didn't really understand what was happening. But once I sort of did at ANI, I realized it was worse than I thought. Then it escalated further still, then I acted. Hope that makes sense. El_C 01:27, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 01:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Well that did not go well. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 00:30, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I've noticed! El_C 00:37, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Heat

Hoping this doesn't cause you too much drama - I do regret being very clear with the whole "if anyone objects I'll revert" thing, but then I didn't really expect anyone to object to a bit of human decency... Ho hum ~TNT (she/they • talk) 03:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries, TNT. Recently, I've reached the final stage of zero fucks given — it's like Nirvana, except instead of meeting Buddha, you get run over by Cow Man.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 04:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Question

Dear El C, firstly, wanted to say thank you for your recent mediation in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement.

I had a question if you don't mind: Currently, there is a content dispute in Armenian–Tatar massacres of 1905–1907. The user WimpyDood refuses to revert themself and restore stable edit until consensus is reached on talk, see history of edits. I explained them multiple times about wikipedia guidelines and asked to revert to the stable edit per WP:ONUS, WP:CONSENSUS, but, A) they refuse and throw baseless accusations at me, B) they don't reply to my latest messages pinging them and asking the same, see Talk:#Latest addition.

I'm having a lot of difficulties interacting with the user. I'll immensely appreciate if you could intervene. Many thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 16:36, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

LouisAragon, can you take point? El_C 17:33, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Just left my 0.02$ right here[91] I might add that user "Qızılbaş", who made the initial edit, has a rather long history of making (intermittent) WP:OR POV-like edits on WP:AA2 articles. I left him a warning some time ago,[92] but, unfortunately, it seems to have been to no avail. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, LouisAragon, appreciate the assist. Indeed, the final station may well end up being WP:AE. El_C 01:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

El C, LouisAragon, thank you for your input and help. I'll restore the stable version of the article until consensus is achieved on talk over the disputed content, as the user WimpyDood still hasn't responded to my pings to self revert themselves and restore the stable edit.

Dear El C, I had one more question just to clarify things and to confirm my understanding of relevant guidelines: If a user added new content to an article, and it got reverted later on, is it correct for subsequent editors to restore said disputed content [1], [2] without achieving consensus on talk?

My understanding is that it's not correct, and I tried my best to explain this (with relevant guidelines including) to WimpyDood [3], who kept reverting and restoring disputed content. I would very much appreciate your thoughts regarding this, so if I'm in the wrong as WimpyDood claims in their next message to me (this isn't the first time from them) [4], I'll know better and act accordingly in the future. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:02, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Generally, the spirit of WP:ONUS should be observed, but it isn't an automatically-enforceable rule or anything, like Consensus required is, for example. El_C 13:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your time El C. With best, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

El_C, ZaniGiovanni Similar case here, brand new edit.[93] Based on a cursory look I can already say that this edit also packed with violations of WP:OR and WP:SOAPBOX amongst others. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Seems like a repetitive behavior from the user at this point, considering their previous edits in AA articles. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

AE request withdrawal

Hi. After taking some time to cool off, I'd like to withdraw my AE request concerning GoodDay. After a deluge of WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT comments in the original RfC, I felt like the goal was to replicate that at AN, but with a clearer head, I see that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 20:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

All this fighting is giving me serious WP:WIKISTRESS. I'm gonna go work on some unloved articles for a while. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 20:59, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries, done. Latest two tracks above are relaxing, and seaworthy. El_C 21:12, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Relaxing, indeed. Thanks for the recommendations :) ― Tartan357 ^Talk 03:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

House of the Rising Sun

An expert on the now-closed Yahoo! Answers once said that someone - possibly Dave Van Ronk - had seen an old photo of a women's prison in New Orleans which had a carving of a rising sun above the grim stone doorway. That makes a lot of sense to me. Link. Narky Blert (talk) 22:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Wow, nice gem! Yeah, the lore there goes deep and dark, and whose origins are shrouded in mist. Speaking of Deep haus, the first Hippiehaus track I heard was Lake Erie (in some various artists collection) and I was, like, holy shit, it's 50 percent intro! But later I found out that there's actually a FULL and was, like, holy shit, it's actually 90 percent intro! I respect that. El_C 00:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

The Animals' version is in an ancient musical form, the passacaglia; as was once pointed out on BBC Radio 3 by the notoriously spiky composer, and contrarian, Robert Simpson.

It's been suggested that Hilton Valentine is perhaps the classic name for a Geordie guitarist. Or perhaps not.

Chas Chandler wasn't just a moon-faced bassist. He went on to have a very successful talent-spotting and managerial career.

Your selections are a bit laidback for me. On the rockier side, try a song which is basically 50% outro. Narky Blert (talk) 01:19, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Right, I remember watching (hearing?) a history of docu about it a few years back, though I don't think it was a BBC one. Yeah, it's a laid back day, so don't be a prep! That said, can't really go wrong with CCR, so you may be upgraded to a mere poseur. El_C 01:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Protection request

Hi El C,

Would you consider EC protecting Causes of transsexuality under the gender DS? This is an extremely politically contentious topic and is a disruption magnet. (history) Aside from IPs and low-level stuff, an editor who is autoconfirmed but not extended confirmed recently appeared and, even after I reverted them the first time saying in an edit summary to use only WP:MEDRS review articles, they added a bunch of primary sources as well as three major BLP violations, here (the book contains no such relationships whatsoever) and here and here claiming that Ray Blanchard wrote an essay written by someone else.

Thanks for considering. Crossroads ^-talk- 23:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Crossroads, I'm a bit out of my depth there. But more generally, though I'm personally inclined to do so, I'm a bit wary of treating WP:GENSEX the same way we do WP:ARBPIA or WP:APL wrt the frequency and ease of straight-to-ECP protections. This case looks somewhat borderline to me to immediately sign off on (which isn't to say it isn't warranted, it may well be). El_C 00:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Strike that, I can't read! Done. El_C 00:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Valor Christian High School

Pinging you next--I've already dropped notes at several noticeboards, and with Ohnoitsjamie. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Looks like I was late to the party, IP. El_C 03:16, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Eh, parties are highly overrated. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Are you or have you ever been...? El_C 05:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Those types of parties, too. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh comeon, we got buttons! El_C 23:18, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) El C, looks like the full protection was overkill by whoever protected the page. I'm also unsure whether the current content is WP:NOTNEWS/WP:RECENTISM, but there's a bigger WP:BLPNAME issue I'd like to fix (or if you'd rather not mess with something set to expire in about 2 hours, I figure you know what needs to be done). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:22, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Ugh, RC, your professionalism is killing my buzz. Sorry, didn't really look at the thing once I saw another admin was handling it. El_C 23:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Ugh, I was basing myself on what the Twinkle tool tip was saying to me. Apparently, it's until tomorrow 1:30 UTC, which is still 24 more hours... @Discospinster: Mind adjusting the protection? Or at least fixing the blatant issue, if you'd mind. El, sorry for killing your buzz: I guess it's my aversion to reporting stuff which is likely to fail the WP:10YEARTEST? Anyway, I probably should get back to having an argument about the layout guidelines for external links on Bach cantatas (just listening to them would have been a better option, but now I've noticed something annoying, so, alas, down the rabbit hole...). Anyway, it's still the weekend so plenty of opportunities to find something else to cheer up? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Given you rationale, RandomCanadian, I would not offer any objection to the changes you suggest. Good luck, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, what change that is being asked for? Like, exactly? Looked at the article talk page — nothing. Tried to otherwise parse it — mystery shrouded in mist. El_C 13:50, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:BLPNAME - i.e. short of entirely removing the recentism/notnews, if we're going to keep it, we don't need to name the non-notable persons that where fired. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:02, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Heh, I'm slow. That's funny. Anyway, I did the thing. El_C 14:21, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

2021 Canadian federal election

Hello,

I was trying to update the article 2021 Canadian federal election regarding the NDP's platform policies on various topics, but the article is locked. Can you enable permission to update? - Matticus333 (talk) 03:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi. No problem. You're good to go, Matticus333. El_C 03:16, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Weird, you're not new. You should have been autoconfirmed ages ago. I can't explain it. Anyway, now confirmed, I guess. How odd. El_C 03:19, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

So I added all of the NDP platform positions to the article, then all that work was deleted by someone else. Then I got some alert saying I violated copyright despite citing the NDP platform as a reference for each policy listed? Very strange, and deeply frustrating given that I'd spent hours making those edits. - Matticus333 (talk) 08:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Matticus333, Diannaa is a very nice person (suck up!), so maybe just ask her about it directly...? Legend has it she once even spared a camper, though that remains unconfirmed. Anyway, I'm afraid it's unlikely I'd be able to find the spare time to look further into this in the immediate future (busy, sorry). Good luck! El_C 21:46, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 22:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

A question

Hello, El C. Does 2022 New York gubernatorial election, fall under the 1RR rule? GoodDay (talk) 05:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey. It is not. Regards, El_C 05:23, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I thought it was under (post-1992 United States politics) 1RR restrictions. Haven't kept touch for awhile. GoodDay (talk) 05:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

For 1RR to be in effect, an admin has to place {{Ds/editnotice}} and {{American politics AE}} to the page first. El_C 05:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

After 3 Edit-conflicts ;) I'll withdraw my WP:ER report on @BlueboyLINY:, who appears to have 'some' communication problems. Possibly slight WP:CIR issues. GoodDay (talk) 05:50, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, no edit requests for you! El_C 05:52, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Would you help the fellow? He appears a tad mixed up. Doesn't even know how to properly contact an editor. GoodDay (talk) 06:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Ronaldo

Just wanted to say your comment “I’m seeing double over here four Cristiano ronaldos” made me laugh. Thanks RossButsy (talk) 11:10, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Success! El_C 11:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Requests for article protection

Hey El C, I warmly greet you and hope you're good. I've been noticing repeated vandalism on Sin Boy [94][95][96][97][98] and I therefore believe semi-protecting the article could be necessary. Thank you in advance.--Lorik17 (talk) 11:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lorik17. A pleasure. But actually, it does look like your preferred changes might be in violation of MOS:ETHNICITY. This MOS stuff isn't an area I'm too familiar with though, tbh. Regards, El_C 11:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Yet another sock puppet of the same user

@El C: Hi, yet another sock puppet of the same user is performing disruptive editing: Gedzimin. Draft:Pahonia(emblem) is the same as Draft:Pahonia coat of arms of Belarus you recently deleted. This is obviously the same disruptive person. Please take urgent actions against him. -- Pofka (talk) 19:54, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 19:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Page protection needed

Hey El_C, any possibility of a page protection here [99]. I have a feeling it could get really bad. Thanks, Khirurg (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

By some totally crazy coincidence (MUST be a coincidence), Ktrimi came out of nowhere to rv within a minute of me posting here [100]. This is what we have to deal with in these articles. Khirurg (talk) 20:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Lab Leak essay close

Thank you for this. Even if I may dislike with the outcome, I believe you have fairly assessed the lack of consensus. However, I do have one favor to ask: Is there any way you could restore the essay's talk page, since the user essay will be kept? I think it adds important context to the community's thoughts on the essay. Let me know if I should file a formal WP:REFUND instead. Thank you.— Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 14:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Shibbolethink, I appreciate your support. No problem:  Done. El_C 14:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/109.79.160.61

I just commented at AN/I, but I only now just noticed you blocked 109.79. I think this was a misunderstanding because from what I can tell since 109.79 is actually an experienced user (not a sockpuppet) who had a pretty legitimate reason for doing what they did (certainly weren't ever warned against it at least). I really don't think blocking them was the right call here. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I didn't say they were a sock. But if they are an experienced user, how do you justify their logged out editing that hounds another user? El_C 17:27, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

MJL, please feel free to refactor this exchange onto the ANI thread. Probably better we discuss it in that wider forum than split the discussion over here. El_C 17:35, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

(1) All of their experience is logged out editing. They've been editing Star Trek articles for at least more than a month (it's all on their range)

(2) editorinteract.py showed me two diffs: [101] and [102]. Besides the explicit mention of Talk:WUKY, those were the only examples I could find of following.

(3) All three show the same exact pattern of 109.79 simply trying to restore removed text, and I can't see in that as anything nefarious. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:41, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

FWIW, my intuition on these matters, are rarely wrong. GoodDay (talk) 17:50, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, GoodDay, unless it involves smoking out campers, my intuition is kinda for shit. El_C 17:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I sincerely hope, ya'll are correct on this. GoodDay (talk) 17:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Who knows. But I'd rather err on the side of good faith. El_C 17:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

A poseur writes:

The Boomtown Rats were a punk band of the second rank, who'd written a couple of good tunes but had a rep for TTH. Then one day in 1985, with Sir Bob Geldof (as he then wasn't) running on fumes and adrenaline, they did this - and jammed the entire BT phone network for over two hours.

Few popular musicians understand the power of silence. Keith Moon was another.

(I'd bet my life savings Geldof got his K on the recommendation of Brenda or someone in her household - Thatcher couldn't stand him, he called her out.) Narky Blert (talk) 17:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm more of a funk than I am a punk man, truth be told, Narky Blert (though, of course, I admire the latter's origins and spirit). But I'll check it out. Thanks for the recommend! El_C 17:43, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Narky Blert, I tried giving it a chance, I really did. But it just isn't my cup of Earl Grey. Damn, I think I might be a prep! Oh noo! El_C 17:22, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For taking on difficult tasks that need to be done I award you the Admin Barnstar. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:07, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, man! I did a thing, I got a thing. El_C 23:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I endorse all barnstars given to El_C (not that my endorsement is meaningful but just putting it out there). S0091 (talk) 23:55, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar

For being “that sort of admin” there are a bunch of you though, but you popped in my head first. I have always been intrigued by men and women of power who aren’t stiff but jovial and act as though they aren’t powerful but command great authority and power it’s hard to explain but I hope you get what I’m trying to say. Furthermore for being an admin who is unafraid or unfazed in the face of tough decisions. Celestina007 (talk) 23:51, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Coincidentally I see TNT already gave you a Barnstar of Good humour and as God is my witness I saw it after I had given you the Barnstar. Still sad about the JPL block though 😔. Celestina007 (talk) 23:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Wow, I don't think I ever edit-conflicted by an award just as I was responding to a different award! Anyway, I followed some of that, Celestina007, the rest I will definitely let go to my head! Thanks for colours! Hope your knee is healing good and not too hurty. El_C 23:59, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I’m recovering, thanks once again. Thank you for your services towards the growth of the collaborative project E, it is appreciated. Celestina007 (talk) 00:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Page Protection

Kolkata Downgrade the protection to semi because of page stablity.. Thanks.– ItsSkV08 (talk) 08:40, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Done. BTW, ItsSkV08, the magic word is... plight, probably...? El_C 10:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Impersonation?

Is this you?--Ymblanter (talk) 15:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Announcement: I've quit en and moved to Commons, Ymblanter (for the lulz!). El_C 15:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:01, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

You spelled kthxbai wrong! El_C 16:06, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

El C is El keeper of the sacred lulz nowadays; so that's a dead giveaway. SAD to catch the champion of the proletariat moonlight for the capitalist suids though. Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Kill prepz, get money. El_C 18:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

IP harassment

Hi El C. Some IP hopper (from Turkish Cyprus) has appeared out of nowhere and is disrupting the latest articles I have edited. [103] [104] --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:57, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

In tandem, even. El_C 20:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Think I got a fan [105] [106] --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:51, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

In tandem in tandem — that's a fractal! El_C 21:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Hattrick [107] --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

♫ Ta-da! ♫ El_C 12:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Johnpacklambert

I saw that you were the administrator that protected User:Johnpacklambert's talk page; would you be willing to look at the user page as well? Brownugget (talk · contribs) is an account created today that seems to be created with the sole purpose of messing with JPL and made this edit to his user page. - Aoidh (talk) 22:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

And... gone. Beyond reprehensible, truly. El_C 22:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that so quickly. I'm at a loss as to what goes through some people's heads. - Aoidh (talk) 23:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Of course, Aoidh. Thank you for reporting it. Indeed, depressing to witness someone having lost any semblance of humanity and compassion. El_C 23:07, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

I was not aware of the edit notice, in hindsight that makes a lot of sense. First time doing a page restriction under DS. Thank you. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 23:01, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries. Hey, we all gotta start somewhere. And if you get a Cow Man to guide you, all the worse! BTW, handy link to remember: T:DSA (specifically, Template:Ds/topics/single notice is transcluded at the bottom). El_C 23:11, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:SPA account casting repeated aspersions

The user Aydin mirza keeps casting aspersions in Talk:Kapan#Edition and sources. Their latest reply is a good example [108]. They seem to be a WP:SPA account [109], and have a history of disruptive and POV style edits in AA area. They also re-revert every time their disruptive edits are reverted [110], [111], despite all the notices in their talk page. Maybe you could take a look, dear El C. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Having glanced at it, their behaviour obviously isn't ideal, but I confess that the content changes themselves go over my head. I'll drop them a warning to tone it down. If you see fit, maybe take it to WP:AE for a more comprehensive review...? El_C 13:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the help El C, appreciate it. I'll wait and see if the user continues their behavior or not, as maybe they'll improve in the future. Pleasure talking to you, cheers. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:50, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries, glad I was able to help (hopefully). El_C 17:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, El C. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 00:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 00:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Quick announcement

Friend in hospital needs help. Possibly serious, but not life threatening. Might be resolved quickly enough, but if I vanish for a few days, that'd be the reason.

Sorry in advance if I miss your comment here, there's been like 50 edits to my talk page in the last 2 days alone, which is really par for the course. Please note that, in general, there's no harm in placing a note at the bottom here just to check if maybe I overlooked your comment. That said, there are a few (very few) threads/comments I purposefully do not reply to for whatever reason, so, I dunno, use your discretion there I suppose (ask yourself: what would Darth Tyrannus do?).

Thanks everyone and best wishes, El_C 17:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Update: Just grabbing some things from home, probably gonna be about a week. El_C 18:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Ouch! My best wishes for them. Narky Blert (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

That's terrible! Hope your friend gets better soon :( — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 19:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

May the force be with you both. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 19:54, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I echo the above as well. Crossroads ^-talk- 04:40, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, friends! Just quickly watering plants. Should be a few more days. In any case, excellent prospects for a full recovery, but still gotta get over the barrel of not/laughs. In the meantime, while away, I've drafted some nonsense no one cares about: An open letter to Irma Records and What Lulz got to do with it, got to do with it? Enjoy! P.S. Forgot to mention last time: it only took me 17 years, but finally gave my Commons userpage a facelift: →ElC← (old timey pics circa 2004-2008). Talk soon. El_C 21:40, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Great news about your friend! And lots of excellent pics. --bonadea contributions talk 09:40, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Best to all! —valereee (talk) 17:34, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Back early, but gotta re-charge. Currently re-reading a Hebrew translation of Giles Milton's Nathaniel's Nutmeg, Val. It is excelente. El_C 03:25, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Move prot

You changed edit prot here but that also set the temporary move prot to indef. Can you remove the move prot or lower it to autoconfirmed to match edit? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:18, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I actually think it's best to leave the move protection for the Panjshir conflict at admin level (i.e. RMs only), due to the nature of the subject matter. El_C 03:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

JPL unblock thread

• The ANI thread is here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Johnpacklambert unblock conditions. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:53, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

And it's a shoe in! El_C 03:57, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand very many of your clever comments lately. I'm sure it's my fault. But could you do me a favor and, when talking to me, either do it in plain English, or just don't do it at all? I have no idea if this is a compliment, an appreciation, a disagreement, an insult, a play on words, a reference to some song. It's exhausting to have to ask. --Floquenbeam (talk) 04:00, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Uh huh. El_C 20:44, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Not going to lie, El_C. I have found it... curious.. the amount of references and silly jokes you have been making as of late. Any particular reason behind the uptick? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:45, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

No. El_C 02:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit-war and WP:OR addition

Dear El_C, hope you're doing well. As the title says, user Verman1 edit wars and later adds complete WP:OR with POV modifications in Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: Revision history. As seen from the history, I notified them numerous times about their unsourced additions, now they're adding the same with a source that doesn't support their claims (and which after checking, I told them [112]). They re-reverted me yet again without an explanation (also breaking 1RR if it applies) [113]. Clear breach of WP:OR, WP:EW and WP:DE. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey. Sorry, not really in the mood to look into that right now. Regards, El_C 13:55, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

No worries. With best, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 14:01, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

98.113.137.35

98.113.137.35 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hi El C

An IP has recently emerged, adding personal commentary and removing sourced information [114] [115] [116]

A interesting thing is that the edit he did here [117], which is basically a restoration of a previous banned users edit [118], both of whom have the same rather rude behaviour [119] [120] [121]. This guy deffo seems to know me (or well, he think he does). --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:16, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Blah! El_C 19:27, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) why did I laugh at this so much haha, good one. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 20:42, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Looks like a range block might be needed [122] --HistoryofIran (talk) 05:31, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

If you have a recommended range, feel free to link it here. I'm happy to have a look. El_C 14:26, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, I may have misunderstood how range block works then. I just saw that both IPs had the same 98.113.137 number and thought that would be enough. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:32, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the club! That's why when someone asks for a range block, I let them link to the proposed range so I can get a sense of any collateral (that, at least, I can do). El_C 15:38, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @HistoryofIran: maybe I can help. An IP range is like a net you throw over a bunch of IPs that are given out to users connecting to the same network, which is often determined by being geographically close to each other. The larger the net you throw, the more chance there is that you will 'catch' more than one user receiving IPs within that range.

So if we block an IP range, we want to make sure that the net is not too big: we want to block the disruptive user, but we might not want to block their brilliant neighbour who happens to sit in the same IP range. The way to do this is to look for the IP range that does include all the disruptive IPs, but not any (or too many) others.

For example, the smallest IP range in this case is 98.113.137.35/32 (you can reach this by going to an IP's contribs and manually adding "/32" to the URL), which doesn't include 98.113.137.113. The largest possible IP range, 98.113.137.35/16 (the smaller the number after the /, the larger the range), does include it, but is of course much too large. The fastest way to find the smallest range that includes it is to first check the one in the middle between 16 and 32, 98.113.137.35/24, which still includes it, then again the middle between 24 and 32, 98.113.137.35/28, which doesn't include it anymore because it is too small, and so work your way to 98.113.137.35/25, which is the smallest IP range that contains both disruptive IPs.

The next thing to do is to check whether any of the other IP's caught up in the range can be safely assumed to belong to the same disruptive user. If not, blocking that range will also block the non-disruptive and potentially brilliant users behind the other IPs. Whether that 'collateral damage' is worth it, is something El C doubtlessly will be able to judge. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 00:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Facepalm I've just found a tool linked to by WP's block log ('calculate a rangeblock') that will automatically do this for you (just fill in the disruptive IP addresses; it will also work for these longer IPv6 addresses if you choose that option). ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 00:32, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Just gonna put this here instead of making another section lol, got another fan; Special:Contributions/5.122.30.175 --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:17, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

BORT! Serious uptick lately, that's weird. El_C 20:30, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Booker T. Washington Senior High School (Miami, Florida)

Hi El C, extra eyes on this will be appreciated--I don't want to spend the late night reverting and repeating, then going to a noticeboard. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

How can I say no to you, IP? El_C 03:01, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

I know, my charm has no limits. And my intuition is decent--probably I went straight to an administrator because I had a sense this would be a next chess move [123]. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Back In Black spam! El_C 04:08, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Wondering

• [124]
• [125]
• [126]

To start off, if this is too recent for you to wish to discuss, I can understand that and will happily go crawl back under my rock.

But in light of recent events, it's interesting to me to consider my recent proposal in light of recent events. Now it's a different situation to be sure, but I wonder, setting aside the 24 hour arbitrary time limit a second, I wonder if discussions (between blocker/unblocker/potential blocker/various editors/community/etc.) might have been more fruitful somehow. This was a mess, but such situations often are.

I'm wondering what we (as editors, as admins, as part of a community) could do better here.

And in thinking about it, I guess I was wondering what your thoughts were, not so much necessarily on this specific situation, but situations in general. - jc37 06:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

jc37, indeed, right now I'm not at the point of engaging in detached generalizations that extend from this case. You'd think that after +8000 blocks and +200 unblocks I'd get the benefit of the doubt, at least when it comes to lifting my own block. But whatever. Doesn't matter. I'm just... Doesn't matter. El_C 11:31, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

I understand. and I understand. I know cliches and platitudes are unlikely to help at the moment, but regardless, you have my empathy. I wish you well. - jc37 11:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Actually it does help, so thank you for that. Kind regards, El_C 11:45, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Balkans topic ban coverage

I really do not care much about what that particular editor does, but out of curiosity. Is an editor who is topic banned from the Balkans allowed to edit articles that mention Romania, Serbia and Croatia [127]? Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Ktrimi991, it's a bit borderline, but the edits themselves do not seem to violate the TBAN's parameters (its spirit, if you will), so as it stands, I'd leave it be. El_C 18:09, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

I see what you mean, and I agree. Of course, that editor should be thankful for your good will. I have seen several cases of topic banned editors being blocked for a week or a month for edits that were good ones, but were made on articles that concerned (uncontroversial) Balkan stuff. Well, that was rather harsh probably. Best. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:38, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

It seems that the editor was not aware of the rule [128]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:29, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Strange Wall of text at my Talk

Hello, El_C, User:Karak1lc1k left me a message at my talk page, dont know what to say, could something be made. For example to protect my talk page or indicating him that talk pages are not Forums. I'm not Iraqi or Belgian but dont believe that type of opinions should be allowed, because of WP:FORUM and WP:CIV. By the way that user was blocked in the past for disruptive edits and turning talk pages in forums 1, 2, 3.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I just reverted it as per WP:SOAPBOX. Especially for clear WP:SOAPBOXing like this, I think deletion or collapsing is always the best answer — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 18:45, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

And of all the admins to deal with such anti-communist soapboxing, you've chosen the Red'est of the bunch — smart move! El_C 19:55, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Karak1lc1k has a problem with civility.[129] So I am not surprised by their attack on Mr.User200's talk page. Editors like that are a time sink and are not here to build an encyclopedia. --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:41, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Any advice ?

Hey El_C, hope you are doing well (and your friend who was in a hospital too). Just to let you know, this RfC i opened more than a month ago has not gained any contribution, however, so far two other editors have already said that the current version is not legit, Visioncurve and Kansas Bear. Thoughts ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:19, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey. Thanks. Wow, that has to be the saddest RfC I've ever seen (participation-wise). My recommendation: relist and advertise it (neutrally, of course) on a number of wikiprojects related to the subject matter. I'm presuming that the two choices presented are the principal contending versions when I say this, though. HTH! El_C 20:26, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, same goes for me, that's really the saddest RfC i've seen since i'm on Wiki LOL, and it's mine ... I'm not well aware of how Wikiprojects work, since i've never been a member of one of them, but i'll give it a try. What do you mean by "relist" ? you mean i should post the RfC again ? Thanks very much.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:47, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

I mean re-tag it again with an updated timestamp and a note that mentions you having done so. See WP:RFC#Restarting_an_RfC. El_C 21:05, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

@Wikaviani: your username is so hard to link, so much code! El_C 21:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thank you very much ! Sorry for my username, didn't know it was so hard to link (i think it's because there is a missing bracket at the beginning of the ping) ! Cheers !---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:16, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, because I have to reconstruct it from <b><span style="color:orange">---Wikaviani </span></b>^{<small><b>[[User_talk:Wikaviani|<span style="color:blue">(talk)</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Wikaviani|<span style="color:black">(contribs)</span>]]</b></small>} No biggie, you're hardly the only one. El_C 21:19, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Table mess

cheers El C, wondered if you can help here- an editor has added this (Procurement) table which mostly speculative content, and a mess to read - further the content is already covered Royal Malaysian Air Force page. I've removed & noted here to no avail (twice wanna avoid an edit war)- any help would be appreciated - Thanks FOX 52 ^talk! 05:14, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

FOX 52, I've blocked 42.188.81.254 and warned PTS_188. But, as for your edit summary to Klueng that read in full: that's not the proper use of a table WP:WHENTABLE -further already covered in the "Present development": (RMAF page) (diff) — that's actually not the best approach for dealing with someone who has only been here for a couple of months. It would have been better to explain in simple terms on the article talk page what all that means, then add a link to it at the end of the original edit summary. Otherwise, it sort of comes across as wiki alphabet soup bombardment of a new'ish editor. And, in general, communicating through edit summaries is rarely enough for content disputes. HTH! El_C 10:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

For Your Information, Sorry to say this but It Wasn't my idea to revent it. Klueng has Made this for days and im not against Fox but he need to understand That Aircraft Iventory dosen't need to put on Equipment of RMAF But he Insists to remove. One Iventory is Enough. Im just doing my job to help klueng. Sorry to make Edit war. Peace.PTS 188 (talk) 14:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Again, im sorry for mess up.PTS 188 (talk) 14:32, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks El C much appreciate you help as always (will take the rest to the talk page) - Cheers FOX 52 ^talk! 15:24, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Myanmar protection request

Can you please renew the protection on 2021 Burmese protests? ― Tartan357 ^Talk 08:34, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I restored the original title and move protected, but let's wait and see if additional protection action is needed. El_C 10:22, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

On a related note: I'm in agreement with @Tartan357: that the current prime minister of Myanmar, is the 12th prime minister. I'm quite familiar with the editor (Mewulwe), who has a habit of 'deleting' numberings from random office holder infoboxes, with a tendency to edit-war over it. Kelvin Goertzen, is the latest example. GoodDay (talk) 17:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

If you are bored....

Breakfast sandwich!

Garden City?

Gardner?

You might take a look at Topal Osman, there has been an edit war on-going since 10:39, 17 July 2021, when ‎user:Alexander Leone started removing referenced.[130] --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:28, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 20:36, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Not sure there were ever any bears in Kansas, though I have seen mountain lions on two separate occasions whilst driving a bread truck. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Once on the way to a Dead show, I stopped for a breakfast sandwich at Garden City, or was it Gardner? I can't remember now. I can't even remember the concert, but I do remember the breakfast sandwich! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ It was super-yummy! El_C 21:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Template ECP

I definitely used to ECP templates before it was "approved", since the option was there in the software and it made sense to me, but then someone (don't remember who) decided to make a big deal about all the templates that were ECP protected out of process and insisted that I reverse a bunch of them. Then a couple years go by and we turn around and approve it "formally" or whatever, and now folks want to take admins to task for using template protection "when ECP would suffice", even for things that happened years ago. I do love a bureaucracy. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 01:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If people are going to complain about that, the best thing to do would be to tell them "if it ain't broken, ..." and suggest they find something a wee bit less bureaucratic to spend their free time on. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:27, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Beyond that, I suppose my underlying point was that technical and content templates are not the same, yet somehow there's the expectation to treat them as such. It's very strange to me. El_C 11:10, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Egyptian Islamic Jihad

Hello El C, this article claims that Iran and Sudan and Ba'athist Iraq are allied with Egyptian Islamic Jihad and I noticed that so many people are angry about it and keep removing it from the lead. I added it again after somebody removed it, but I'm not sure if I shall keep it or remove it. So I decided to ask an administrator to tell me what to do. رايكر (talk) 08:44, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

رايكر, start with an explanation on the article talk page (Talk:Egyptian Islamic Jihad), a page that was last edited by a human in 2009. Good luck. El_C 11:12, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Regarding a user

Hi El_C, the user whome you have blocked User:Sushameendra Simha.Vaddigiri has created another account User:Sushameendra Simha.V and started doing the same thing again. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 11:34, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Got it. El_C 11:36, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

How to approach this?

The user seems to be a sockpuppet/meatpuppet [131] judging by their knowledge (for a 100 edit account) and mostly POV focused edits in AA area and in Turkish articles. They have been reported in an SPI previously [132]. They seem to be quite knowledgeable about guidelines, examples: Neutrality, consensus. [133] (note below 20 edits at that time), and others [134], [135]. What do you think, El C? I have very limited experience with sockpuppets/meatpuppets, so wanted to ask for advice. Many thanks in advance. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I mean, if that SPI failed to prove socking, and if you don't have any additional evidence (including meat-socking), then you're sort of left to operate under the assumption that their account status is nominally legit. In that sense, their edits should be viewed in contradistinction to the status of their account. That doesn't mean it isn't suspect or that they aren't an WP:SPA in a DS topic area, but that an analysis should focus on the merits (or lack thereof) of their edits. Not much else to do right now, otherwise. All based on the most cursory of a glance, mind you. HTH. El_C 01:15, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, I just noticed that they left this rant on my talk page, making baseless report threats and calling my good faith reverts “unruly revisions”. Since they didn't provide any examples, here's what an “unruly revert” looks like (according to them) [136], [137]. The first one, I kindly notified them of BRD and asked to open a discussion because of this. They edit-warred and re-reverted again. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 04:04, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

TBAN imposed . El_C 05:22, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I just saw the back and forth, and wanted to clarify something (maybe I shouldn't, but for the sake of reality). The discussion should've been initiated by them per BRD, and I told them in my edit to discuss [138]. I actually restored the stable edit since there was some edit-war and they re-reverted another user as well [139]. The second diff they provide (which I also showed here), I didn't even touch the page after it [140] since I assumed good faith and thought they know what they're talking about. Maybe I need to look closer. Regardless, I have much respect and appreciation for Wikipedia guidelines and hence wanted to clarify a couple of things. Sorry if this was long (or unneeded). Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:13, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Another new user left these [141] [142] on my talk page. The article in question Zakarid Armenia (that I'm not even the creator of) was carelessly nominated for deletion by them, and was undone by multiple editors [143]. I actually asked @Liz (one of the reverters) for some help [144]. I'm not sure if this AfD by them was filed correctly [145], and they undid actual AfD in another article [146]. Their disturbing message on my talk worries me [147] and they clearly have WP:CIR issues. Maybe you could take a look. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I got a bad feeling about this one... El_C 13:31, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

The user has left this on my talk page, baselessly accusing of “vandalism” and that “no valid reason and asking for reaching unnecessary consensus”. Pretty sure they also broke 3RR [148], [149], [150], [151], and no discussion was opened on Talk:Gugark. They were notified of edit-warring previously [152]. I also explained to them that their edit was contested and asked that they should stop re-reverting without discussing first [153], but to no avail. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 09:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

They're edit-warring again and tendentious editing in other pages as well [154], [155]. I asked them [156] to see talk for the first diff Talk:Chechil#POV_pushing, as there was already a discussion, and they failed to address the issues adequately. They also restored the dubious edit in second diff with the main source for historical info being an “Art Sales Catalogues Online” and a painting apparently [157]. I already lost count on how many times they edit-warred and breached BRD, and most of their edits are poorly sourced POV edits, which they were also asked to adequately address multiple times including in talk pages of articles [158]. The personal attacks on my talk page are just an example of their battleground behavior [159], [160]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Jason J. Hogg

Hey El! I came across this draft tagged with WP:G4 which I declined because the discussion it linked was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason J. Hogg (2nd nomination) which was a speedy by you. But then there is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason J. Hogg which had Keeps. So, the speedy would seem to be an error if the first AFD was also about the same topic. In that case, the proper course would seem to be to restore the article as it was "no consensused" in the first discussion and start another AFD? Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, the subject keeps contracting WP:PAID editors to write this piece about himself. I don't think this was declared by Saidfont back in 2016 or was known by the 4 participants in the 2017 AfD. BTW, the opening sentence of the 2021 deleted page reads: Jason Jude Hogg is the Executive Vice President of Preferred Dynamix, a business that is part of Rent-A-Center.

So, basically, we have a wealthy individual who just keeps throwing money at PAID editors to create his bio (seemingly since 2016). First, presumably with User:Saidfont, then with User:DanDavidCook (see my note about that at User_talk:DanDavidCook#Editing_against_the_spirit_of_WP:PAID), and now by User:Onemoretimeagain, who has a total of 3 edits, all of which entered yesterday, and whose very first edit reads: N User:Onemoretimeagain ‎ ←Created page with {{UserboxCOI|1=Draft:Jason Hogg}}.

Anyway, feel free to take it to WP:COIN for a wider review, but honestly, to me it looks like more of the same pay-for-WP:PROMO by this minor businessman who has plenty of money to burn. El_C 13:01, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree with you that we should not have that article. If we had an AFD right now, I would argue for deletion. I just wanted to make sure you hadn't missed the "(2nd nomination)" part when you closed that AFD. Having done so, I am moving on from the draft. Kudos, by the way, on successfully resisting the urge to use the p-word. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:07, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Zakarid Armenia

I am here regarding the topic of deletion of "Zakarid Armenia" due to many reverts, I've lost the huge wall of texts and arguments that I had which you accidentally reverted. So, if I may ask, could you please do it yourself or, at least copy the text I've written and paste it here so I re-do it? SonofJacob (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

SonofJacob, I didn't "accidentally" revert it, but I don't understand your request. Your version is still available here. El_C 16:13, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Notification

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Nicoljaus, indef topic ban and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks,--Nicoljaus (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Proposed decision posted at the open Iranian politics case

In the open Iranian politics arbitration case, the proposed decision has now been posted. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. You were notified as you made comments in the case request. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 01:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

MEK suit on! El_C 02:00, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Sectioned

Arbcom can never take our love![161] Izno (talk) 03:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

They combine into a Megazord, Izno! Darth Tyrannus trembles. El_C 03:10, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

A Maybe Stupid Comment About a Close

Maybe I shouldn't try to read WP:ANI from a phone, but I was scanning through it and saw Concerns About Softlavender by Butterslipper, and saw your close stating that a CBAN had been imposed, and I thought that it couldn't possibly mean what it appeared to mean. I knew that it had to mean that the Original Poster had been banned. But the subsequent subthread to that effect wasn't in view. I figured that it really meant that Butterslipper had thrown the boomerang at a kangaroo that wasn't there. So, in this case, the close wasn't self-explanatory unless one scanned way down. Just adding that it was the OP would have helped. Oh well. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Sorry for the confusion. That did not occur to me (obviously). El_C 19:30, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, I think I figured out the simplest way out of this. I'll just siteban Softlavender — problem solved! El_C 19:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Isn't that what ButterSlipper was trying to do? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:13, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

That's right, except they are no BunnyyHop. Joseph Stalin checking in. El_C 07:03, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

No, no, no, no, do not do that! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:43, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, too late: in the name of the Lawl — banham. Your's sincere, General Ham Alvis 19:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I just woke up and do not have a snappy comeback for this. Maybe I should go back to sleep. Softlavender (talk) 22:14, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Wait, didn't I siteban you? Oh well, just goes to show (probably), when you're the esteemed General Ham Alvis, everything looks like ham (see breakfast sandwich story below). El_C 22:24, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry C, this is too meta for me at this hour of the day in my world. I can barely make out Martinevans123's meta humor, and he even links to the things. I think I had best stay off of usertalk pages for a while. Or maybe you should just stick to the subject of chipmunks with me for a while; that level I can understand. Softlavender (talk) 22:32, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

And then General Ham Alvis went AWOL. That's okay, he sucked anyway. Now Capt. Pronin, there's a hero of the Motherland! Erm, wait, sorry, must-exercise-restraint-over-the-stupid. El_C 22:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Shucks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:41, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Unrelated-related tidings of-the-now: just got a scam phone call from India (and you know I answer all of em!) about how I'm gonna get super-awwested. The "officer" asked for my name, so naturally I said it was "Ham Alvis." Him: okay, Mr. Ham. Me: No, Ham is my first name, my last name is Alvis. Him: okay, Mr. Alvis, let me transfer you to one of our agents. But sadly, I didn't reach the 2nd tier. They might have just google'd the name. So, no joy. Or, partial joy only. El_C 17:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Germiyanids article

Hello, since the Kurdish-related content on the Germiyanids page has been subject to persistent disruption for a period of two weeks by Turkish nationalist editors wanting to remove or minimize anything Kurdish-related from the article, and some suspected sockpuppets (still waiting investigation) who persistently keep removing a specific and sourced piece of the content about the religious Yezidi background of the dynasty's Kurdish component, I've come to request an extended confirmed protection for the page. KurdeEzidi (talk) 14:59, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@KurdeEzidi: Done. But in future, I'd prefer if you were to list protection requests at WP:RFPP/I. Thanks. El_C 15:05, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, have a good day. KurdeEzidi (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Advise on Rex Wilson (director)

I came across some allegations on the Rex Wilson article, and removed them as they were unsourced and of a serious nature. This isn't a BLP issue, as he's been dead for nearly 100 years. Looking into the details the allegations were added back in 2017, but went unnoticed until a different IP editor removed them in February of this year. That was reversed [in April, which I reverted in August. Once again come September the details were added back, and again I reverted.
I feel it likely the person adding and re-adding the details is the same person, they don't appear inclined to discuss the matter, and each time it's added by a different IP months apart.
So here's where I need advise. I can't report the IP as they an never the same, but asking for page protection seems pointless given the delays between each edit. However I'm basically in a extremely slow edit war, and every option seems unhelpful. Given the nature of the allegation it doesn't seem ideal to just let the matter go. If this was a BLP issue I would have asked for the revision to be revdel'd.
I've tried finding any evidence of the allegation or details of George Edward Wilson's (he's real name) later life, but without any success. Apart from the BFI link the only offer source I've found online is a death notice in a local newspaper archive that is likely related, but gives no more details. Rex certainly appears notable have directed multiple films, but due to the amount of time that has past it's very difficult to find anything. Any advise on how I should proceed? 92.5.2.97 (talk) 22:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
I know it's the wrong reference, but I always see Heston pretending to be dead on horseback when I see you name.

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Also noted WP:EXTRAORDINARY in the protection summary. HTH. El_C 00:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Gina Carano

Hello there comrade. I cannot help but notice this remark you made in an edit summary for Gina Carano: this thing again? Which is to say: fire-and-forget graffiti by supporters and detractors alike continues unabated. This is an inaccurate assessment, and borders on bothsidesism. There is no ongoing back and forth between two sides, one being Gina Carano's supporters, and the other being her detractors. There are only supporters, who are members of a known far-right hate group that calls itself "The Fandom Menace", trying to vandalize the article and remove important information related to the social media controversy that led to her ousting from lucasfilm, in an attempt to whitewash her. There is no "other side" of "detractors", just regular contributors trying to fix the damage. Just thought you might want to know. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 09:45, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

IP, I meant edits hostile to her such as this revdel-worthy one. Hope that makes sense. El_C 12:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

That's not "detractors". That's a lone vandal that periodically keeps adding the same dumb jokes every few weeks. It is Gina Carano's defenders who persistently vandalize the page. And they are dedicated enough to create accounts to get around a low level protection. There is no such behavior on the part of her "detractors", partly because there are no such detractors - aside from the usual critics that are inevitable in the case of all celebrities that peddle typical q-anon bullshit. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 07:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Look, IP, I'm not sure what you're expecting from me at this point. When I attend to like, say, 20 RfPP listings in a row, I can't really expend an hour on each, or nothing would get done. So, rather than examine tens or even hundreds of diffs, I sample a few, thus making it is by nature a bit of a statistical approximation. Prior to the latest, I haven't looked at this page since my original Feb protection. In any case, my sampling showed disruptive editing for and against (though, granted, I didn't attempt to proportion these), hence, my summary to which you object. In short, I'm not sure an argument about a potential WP:FALSEBALANCE in my protection summary is that useful, especially if the protection action itself is good. El_C 08:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Perfectly understandable. I simply thought it would be wise to caution you about carelessly using the "both sides" claim. The past six years have proven how dangerous that can be, both on the internet and in real life. Take care, and have a great day. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 08:27, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, IP. I'm not sure how avoidable such errors are, seeing as there's only about 300 of us active admins for the entire website — so with backlogs abound, expediency often takes precedence over what otherwise would be a much more careful review. In any case, thank you for sharing your perspective. Regards, El_C 08:40, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

El_C, I would note that this IP editor was taken to ANI for their talk page comments which focused on bludgeoning, picking fights etc. Based on my interactions with them I'm not at all surprised. Their view that only "the other side" is the problem is perhaps rather optimistic on their part. Similar claims were part of the basis for the ANI. Consider this claim to justify removal of content they don't like, "Hungarian academia is in fact highly partisan and has been under the thumb of the far right Orban administration for a decade".[162] Looking at the editor's behavior and the Carano topic I'm not surprised they are heavily invested in that topic. As it appears the concern is putting the article under EC keeps them from editing. Perhaps making a named account would address their edit restriction concerns. Springee (talk) 11:41, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

but both sides blame the other side! GeneralNotability (talk) 12:54, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

GN, I thought Haywire was a fun movie. Recommended. El_C 12:58, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I think you'll find that I'm actually perfectly moderate and in the middle, and it's both sides that cause the problem because they don't agree with my (objectively true and correct) view. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:23, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@GeneralNotability:The edit history of the Gina Carano article doesn't support this claim. The overwhelming majority of disruptive edits that led to the article being protected again, all tried to remove the same information. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 13:05, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

IP editor, my comment was a joke. GeneralNotability (talk) 13:46, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

@Springee: and I would add that the ANI you speak of derailed into bringing up old behavior from over a year ago, after it became apparent that my more recent behavior was not as bad as people made it out to be. My last edit to the Gina Carano article was a minor correction that better reflects the cited sources (and other users AGREED with me), and my comment on the Elizabeth Bathory talk page on hungarian academia is backed by reliable sources - which the user I was talking to was in agreement with. Neither of these instances involve me picking fights with anyone. The claim that I have a problem with an article getting protected is anso incorrect. If you're already keeping tabs on my edit history, you can verify for yourself that I'm usually the one asking for articles to be protected - If I want an edit made, I always take it to the talk page. And in the case of the Gina Carano article specifically, the changes I asked for were eventually done. Also, if you think my curent behavior is an issue, wouldn't it make more sense to take it up with me personally? 46.97.170.112 (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

InNeed95 did learn nothing

InNeed95 doesnt learn nothing, he still vandalizing, edit warring and POV pushing, per this Special:Contributions/InNeed95 your comment was indeed useless to InNeed95, he persists violating wiki rules and stalking other users... Aquinasthomes1 (talk) 11:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

What proof of "vandalism" do you have, Aquinasthomes1? Do you know what a WP:DIFF is? El_C 12:12, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@El C: He was blocked by the admin @EdJohnston: for racist insults against Serb minority and againts other users. He has since his founding violating 3RV rule, he constant provokes edit wars, vandalizing and POV Pushing. He is absurd disruptive and visibly reverses everything Serb(ian) and even Greek, and tries to Kosovarize articles that have nothing to do with it.

• • • Just look at this:
    • He removed an important church in kosovo (in UNESCO) in cristianity of kosovo just because its serbian orthodox. [163]. This is a absurd vandalism
    • [164] This user falsified the source, novak djokvic, a serbian tennis play, does not recognise kosovo, only the Kosovo and Metohia (An Serbian province under UN), and he removes without any explanation the Republika Srpska, a Serb Majority Federation in Bosnia, falsificating the source. This is high POV ,violate the source Vandalism and violation of BLP policy
    • [165] He revert me without any explanation, and he got reverted by another user.
    • [166] He revert me with a spam summary, and if he had read what he was reverting, he wouldn't revert me.
    • This user is hides the occupation of nazist albania renaming the name, in an article about a serb(ian) orthodox church[167], this is unnaceptable
    • [168] Another example of vandalism that resulted a block
    • [169] another POV
    • [170] Holy See doesnt recoginises the republic of kosovo(Holy See–Serbia relations), and the user put POV and unsourced claim, literaly denyng Holy See Position, Basis of the article.
    • [171] this user blanks his talk page just to be unnoticed by the administrators.
    • [172] Here his block by admin.
    • [173] about serbia, he started inserting pov [174]

• • he said that he was wrong in [175], but repeat again [176]

• • he tries to albanize greeks inserting pov [177][178]

• • clearly not here to contribute to wikipedia, just gaming and edit warring. He should be blocked indef.

Aquinasthomes1 (talk) 13:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Aquinasthomes1, one diff that shows "vandalism," please. Sometime, less is more. El_C 13:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to shoot you a quick thanks. I see you doing admin work all over the place, and generally trying to keep spirits high and cut down on unnecessary drama when you can. Obviously, not everyone appreciates your sense of humor, but at least you're trying to add some levity. Anyway, know that people you don't really interact with see and appreciate what you do. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks, ScottishFinnishRadish! I'll take your show of support as a stern commitment to future claymore deactivation on my behalf. Congrats, you have been con-scripted! El_C 20:44, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Any time. I've always been a bit of a Leroy Jenkins. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Nice. Together, we shall keep that pool closed! El_C 20:56, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Keep on climbin'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St3kjsmOQQE Narky Blert (talk) 22:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Dude, I swear to God, for a second I thought that maybe you've just VERY IMPORTANT ABOVE! LISA'd me, but them are lottery odds. Still, Ted Hawkins is also good! What a voice. Velvet and rust. El_C 23:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Good, wasn't he? Narky Blert (talk) 23:12, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Great, even. El_C 23:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hi El C, sorry to bother you. Can you have a look at this report regarding disruptive IPs. Thanks a lot. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Paper9oll, I've seen it, but I'm not that adept at range blocking, so didn't really have that much to contribute. Regards, El_C 13:02, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@El C If range blocking is not possible, it is possible to request you to help to just block the 4 mentioned IPs? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:08, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Paper9oll, what I'm trying to say is that this should be determined by someone who knows more about range blocking (of which there are two here) than me. El_C 13:11, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@El C Ok understood, will wait for next admin to come by. Thanks you for the help. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:15, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Minar-e-Pakistan

Greetings,

Since August ending are in communication (your comment @ my talk page) about #En masse public molestation and sexual violence against women.

In spite of reasonable effort from my side that includes communicating with content deleting IP's talk pages as well as related project talk pages, and couple of user talk pages from article history there is no response from content deletionist side.

One response which I received on my talk page supports encyclopedic notability of the incidence, but had some other query which has been answered by me.

Since it is almost 3 weeks there is no communication from deletion side I suppose Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle supported by semi protection might lead to the discussion, please do suggest.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 12:40, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bookku: that's plenty of time for them to respond, so they could effectively be seen to have forfeited their position on the matter, while you retain standing. HTH. El_C 12:44, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Austria-Hungary

Thanks for protecting the page. There’s been a slow edit war on that for about a year. Something more than a 4 day lock is probably needed…but I don’t know what. DeCausa (talk) 13:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

No problem. Yeah, I didn't know that it was that longstanding. I'm not sure what to advise right now as I'm operating with very little background info. El_C 13:35, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, if you want some background (?) … there’s basically 2 camps. One believes that the flag in the infobox should be what’s called the “civil ensign” (which is an amalgam of Austrian and Hungarian symbolism) and the other believes that’s not a “real” flag, that there was no Austria-Hungary flag and only the two separate flags of Austria and Hungary should be shown. I’m not sure why the two camps get so upset about it. It may be connected with some sort of local modern POV that I’ve never been able to fathom or it may be just the normal WP pedantry-syndrome. Historically, the civil ensign was the flag shown in the infobox for many years.

Then it kicked off about 3 years ago - there was an RfC in 2019 to include the Austrian and Hungarian flags as well as the ensign - that was “no consensus”. I think for a while all 3 did appear. And then for about the last year it’s flicked back and forth in a slow edit war between only the 2 flags and only the civil ensign. There’s about 5 or 6 editors regularly involved but SPAs regularly show up too. Then a month or so ago another Rfc was opened on it and just closed as again “no consensus”. There was quite a lot of socking, new account SPA participation etc. (For disclosure: I opted for the civil ensign but I don’t care that much.)

The problem now is it’s completely unclear what the status quo ante the RfC is for the article to “go back to” - there’s been so much edit-warring over the last year. RandomCanadian proposed on the talk page that to fix that there be no flag at all until a consensus emerges and I supported that - and the latest reverts were the civil ensign camp putting it back in disagreement with that approach. That’s it in a nutshell - a total mess! DeCausa (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for explaining. Yeah, for sure, if it's even unclear which (flag) version is the longstanding and which one is the contending one, then indeed, that is quite a mess. Also, RE: I’m not sure why the two camps get so upset about it. It may be connected with some sort of local modern POV that I’ve never been able to fathom or it may be just the normal WP pedantry-syndrome — it can be two things! Regards, El_C 14:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Yep, total mess; which is why I suggested that no consensus = no flags; exactly to prevent this kind of utterly silly edit-warring; and as I was saying on the talk page over there, because the last thing we need is an RfC to determine what was the consensus before... As for pedantry, seems like the less obscure a topic is, the more of this kind of nonsense happens (hence why you don't see this on stuff like wonderful Baroque music). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:21, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

But the timeline for the contested changes exists, so... ultimately, it should be explicable, no? El_C 15:34, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, this would probably require going a fair bit back in time. See [179] for a compilation of diffs from September last year. I have my doubts that this has been a perpetual edit-war, based on the following evidence:

• A flag was first added to the article back in 2003 ([180] - the corresponding file is long deleted (apparently for reasons of "OR"; so I have no clue what it was - you might be able to help); this was then removed at some point in 2004; skipping through a bit you get to this 2006 version; which includes all of them (war ensign, civil ensign, flags of austria and of hungary, and two coats of arms); then you get to this "new infobox" (only civil ensign); promptly removed less than a month later; added back in here...
• Seems to have been some further edit warring in early 2007 [181]. The civil-ensign then stayed in until March 2008; at which point it was removed by bot ([182]) for being a duplicate file but shortly re-added ([183]); until being changed again by an IP in July of the same year and then removed entirely ([184]); changed again in August. Further edit-warring (with of course the good old claim of "vandalism") in September.
• This seems to then have stayed as is for a while; with the next change being simply this change to an svg version of the same flag (civil ensign). The next significant change was to the war ensign (also "Naval ensign"); January 2011; but reverted back less than two weeks later ([185]).
• There's no significant change over the next five years. Unrelated to that; there's an interesting section on "Flags" (Special:Permalink/710231654#Flags which could potentially be added back in (this was suggested by some in the RfC).
• The first significant change in 8 years came when a discussion was closed, and this resulted in the addition of an additional flag (still keeping the civil ensign); although this was promptly reverted because the closure of the discussion was "no consensus". This is how the page remained for a bit; including when you appear to have first edited it, [186]. Thereafter, there was an edit war in early August 2020, which led to the inclusion, in order, of A)the civil ensign ([187]); B) both civil ensign and Habsburg/Austrian flag ([188]); C) stonewalling back to the civil ensign [189]); D) the "national flags" variant ([190]).
• This edit war seems to have ended after a discussion which resulted in the removal of the civil ensign (Talk:Austria-Hungary/Archive_5#Request_for_comments_on_correction_of_the_flag); although the arguments seem rather weak and I don't see too much besides personal opinion (note that there was no independent close of that discussion, either, and it was not an RfC, so it's worth not too much). This didn't last long; as it was changed (back to civil ensign) and back in October; in November ([191]); then there was this (in February of this year); with the civil ensign back (but not at the same place), in addition to the other two; but this was then removed here.
• From there on you can it is rather clear from the edit history that there was further disruption in regards to this point. This ultimately led to this; which led to the RfC; which led to this; which led to this.

In short, there's a fair case to say that there was a previous consensus for the civil ensign; but that this was disputed recently; and the new consensus is "no consensus"; whatever that means as far as "which flag goes in the infobox" being unclear. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I see (again). Thanks for explaining. Yeah, for sure, seeing as the RfC question wasn't phrased as should X be changed into Y (with X being the longstanding version), the water sure stayed muddied in this latest iteration. Regards, El_C 17:12, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I would've protected the article for 6-months, with no flag or symbol in the infobox. After six-months, a perma-semi-protection. Oh well, you've more patience then I :) GoodDay (talk) 17:29, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

It wasn't patience. Again, I just didn't realize it was such a perennial problem when I protected. El_C 18:07, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I was also going to suggest at least permanent SP (as nearly always present for modern countries, and quite often for recent [one century is still rather recent] historical entities), based on this but also other disruption. Feel free to do what you want with the article and the temporary full protection; though if you're going to keep the flag as is then you could as least properly identify it as the 'Civil ensign'. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:35, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Apropos of nothing

Homeopathic A&E. Narky Blert (talk) 20:52, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Whoa, that's strong stuff! El_C 01:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi El C. Firstly, hope you aren't too bothered by this from yesterday. I was so confused when I read that, only thing that came to my mind was this (especially when I later took a look at their page and previous conversation with you).

Anyhow, my good friend SonofJacob was back. They started to edit-war (again) in Zakarid Armenia with an uninvolved user over their AfD result, who (rightfully) closed the AfD as speedy keep. Here are the diffs, it's quite funny actually (maybe sad who knows): [192], [193], [194].

Here comes the best part tho: When they finally reached the 3rd revert, they created another account to cirumvent yet another 3RR breach, see user Mukvani16 (talk · contribs) and their glorious two edits: [195], [196].

It was such an obvious WP:DUCK that the AfD closer themself opened an SPI investigation/SonofJacob. Finally, my question is, why was the SPI closed exactly? It had so many red flags and was a very obvious WP:DUCK case, and as you can see from the AfD, it isn't only my opinion. I asked Callanecc to kindly explain and maybe consider reopening, and showed them the previous issues with SonofJacob. I haven't got a reply to my latest message (understandably, it's weekends), so I hoped you could shed some light. Thanks in advance and best regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 23:15, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey ZaniGiovanni. I'm good, thanks for asking. In answer to your question: the reason I've never applied for CU or OS permissions and am unlikely to do so in the future is because I don't really care for having the extra rulesets. Accordingly, I can't really comment on the considerations made by an admin who is operating with those rulesets in mind. But at any rate, looks like Callanecc has now responded to your query. El_C 01:35, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi El C. I noticed that you reverted Sjalel per WP:ARBPIA4 on Jul 13, 2020 regarding the Mandaeans article. The user appears to be making the same type of edits now for Mandaeism and also citing articles, but changing their meaning as they did in Mandaeism on Sep 16, 2021. I tried to change one such edit. Are these types of edits allowed? Thanks Mcvti (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mcvti. My Jul 2020 revert concerned their addition which mentioned the "Palestinian origin theory," but at a glance, I'm not seeing how these latest edits are likewise ARBPIA in nature (possibly I missed it). El_C 01:38, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, if you take a look at 06:41, 16 September 2021 in Mandaeism, Sjalel again rejects Palestinian origin theory as they did in their edit on Jul 13, 2020 regarding the Mandaeans without providing a reliable source. Also adding a similar edit at 07:26, 16 September 2021 in Mandaeism without a source. Thank you Mcvti (talk) 02:11, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Mcvti, I can't find that edit. Please just cite the pertinent WP:DIFFs. El_C 02:15, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Not sure if I am posting the page correctly, here is the link as edited by Sjalel [[197]], the source cited does not provide the info that was posted. Again, in this page [[198]], the user adds "In addition to Edmondo Lupieri, Edwin Yamauchi and Christa Müller-Kessler both argue that the Mandaeans originate from Babylonia as a non-Jewish sect." without providing a source. Mcvti (talk) 02:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Mcvti, I don't really understand those additions as this isn't a subject with which I am too familiar. Still not seeing the ARBPIA connection there, either. El_C 02:35, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

OK, thanks anyway Mcvti (talk) 02:37, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Corrin, etc

As info I've applied a couple of wide range blocks that may help with this LTA. Edit: At least for a bit. I looked further back on Corrin now and see how bad this one has been. -- ferret (talk) 13:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh, there's just one? Sorry, I didn't pick up on that. El_C 13:14, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Possibly some others mixed in but from what I can tell this one guy has been hitting a set of 4-5 articles all year long in bursts. -- ferret (talk) 13:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

I see. Not to be Western-centric, but a bit too anime'y for my liking. I like my RPGs with long-bearded wizards and shit (FF excepted). El_C 13:22, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Request protection

Can you protect the National Democratic Party of Germany page? Repeated disruption (maybe even considered vandalism) by an IP user [199]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 15:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, this IP 185.30.88.216 (talk · contribs) keeps adding unsourced POV and removing sourced info in AA articles. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, ZaniGiovanni, I'd rather pick and choose which requests to attend to. I don't really wish for my talk page to be a spillover for AIV/RFPP/ANI/AE. Thanks in advance. Regards, El_C 17:02, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

IP editing a protected page, impressive

Probably happened at the same time you protected it, so he just sneaked through. I'm sure it ends now, thanks. Ifnord (talk) 21:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Right, that's what I figured, too. But still funny. El_C 21:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks and Help, please?

Thanks for intervening on Godzilla vs Kong. However, the person that was edit warring left this (1) and this (2) on my talk page. He could get temporarily banned for these, right? Armegon (talk) 21:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Warned. El_C 22:05, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks re Dhar Mann

Just wanted to say thanks for dealing with the Dhar Mann salt issue. Have a great day! snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 23:15, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

You're most welcome, snood1205. FYI: there's a new Dhar Mann challenger, which cranks the insanity to 11! Plus, there's an Engrish bonus. El_C 00:44, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Assistance

If user:Idris Munaf Shaikh2 agrees, would you consider moving the List of Indian battles to their sandbox for them? It is in dire need of references, proper linking(to battles instead of people, places, or things), and overall verification.

Once it is moved can the current version be deleted or will that require a more complicated resolution? --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:49, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Wouldn't the WP:DRAFT space be better? But, certainly, if they consent to that, that'd be the path of least resistance. Fowler&fowler, sourcing aside (aside!), how does the veracity of that list article looks to you (even if only at a glance)? El_C 15:58, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Dealers choice. As long as the editor in question knows how to get to it(new user, I'm assuming).--Kansas Bear (talk) 16:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

:) Riddled with grade inflation it is (though not all the fault of the author; WP has done that already), every belligerent is an "Empire." It would be better if they named the person commanding each side, rather than the abstract empire they were fighting for. The early ones are legendary wars, described in mythological accounts. Some of the later ones, especially involving India and Pakistan, make India come out on top. I wonder how they would characterize 2019 Balakot airstrike. Has too many battles to be useful in an encyclopedia. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:20, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Fowler&fowler, thanks for the prompt assistance. For sure, it's of an inordinate length. But, of course, that could be remedied by splitting (some way, somehow) and refining, no? Though, it sounds like it'd be a lot of work, so maybe worth posting about it at WP:IN to see if there's interest in developing that. Kansas Bear, sorry, didn't look at that user talk page until now because... stuff? Otherwise, moving to draft space and will drop the author a note about it. El_C 16:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:List of Indian battles. El_C 16:34, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks El_C! --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:36, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I was thinking about splitting it as well. Could be conveniently split into Ancient, Medieval, and Modern or somesuch. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:52, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, dropping a note at WT:INDIA would be good. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Sounds promising. I noted the possible criteria for splitting on the author's talk page, albeit vaguely: User_talk:Idris_Munaf_Shaikh2#List_of_Indian_battles_now_a_draft. El_C 16:58, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Noted WP:IN, as well! El_C 16:58, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

My sincerest thanks to both of you! --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Amendment request: Nicoljaus, indef topic ban declined

The amendment request Amendment request: Nicoljaus, indef topic ban, has been declined by the Committee. You can review the closed amendement request here. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 12:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Nasser

Really don't think that article should be E/C'd, yes he was a major figure in the A/I conflict, but he was so much more than that and the article covers wayyyyyy more than Israel related things. Think that should fall under the partially related part of things. nableezy - 15:24, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Of course. That's not what the protection implies. My rational followed so many of the disputes I sampled having been ARBPIA in nature. With the "related content" expansion of ARBPIA4, expect to see more ARBPIA protections of this nature. A random example I noticed in passing is Yair Lapid (who is usually seen as even less ARBPIA'y than Nasser), which CambridgeBayWeather opted to ARBPIA. In fact, there's ARBPIA "related content" protections that are far stranger (which is to say, strange outright). El_C 15:39, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

BTW, Nableezy, when I ARBPIA ECP pages that are not "primary articles," I nearly always add a "related content" note to the protection summary. I think the reason I failed to do that with Nasser may have been because it was in the midst of a ~40 protection requests marathon at RfPP (might have overexerted myself somewhat). El_C 16:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Well Jesus that clarification escalated things dramatically. Hadnt seen it but your protection makes sense in that case. nableezy - 22:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Good talk. El_C 22:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wash Phillips

Lift Him Up. Bonus marks if you know what instrument he played without looking it up. Narky Blert (talk) 21:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Alex, I'll take Washboard (musical instrument) for 500. El_C 22:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Dolceola, WTF? El_C 22:07, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

One of two broken ones, which kindly white folks had given him. Narky Blert (talk) 22:48, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Heh, for a second, I misread "kindly white folks" as kind whitey folks. Hurrah! RIP Whitey the bunny. El_C 22:54, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Just a heads up, if you need a new rabbit I can take care of that for you. I got 14 fresh ones, barely a week old. I'll give you one if you make ScottishFinnishRadish's Wholesome Rabbitry a blue link. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:34, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Cool, that's a few. Breeding like... Is there a racist one? Asking for a friend whose into re-education (not stews). El_C 23:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm sure I can indoctrinate one for you. A steady diet of am talk radio and a subscription to the Gribble report should do. I could probably wrangle up a homophobic quail too. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:48, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I was reminded by someone with a better memory than my own that my white pet rabbit's name was actually Mister Whitey, because... respectable. El_C 16:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

About an article you protected

Thanks for protecting Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, (I requested it after noticing significant amounts of disruptive edits relating to massive fan cruft, and not the kind TV Tropes would like) but it seems that didn't do jack. Our disruptive editor seems to go right through the autoconfirmed wall. I just noticed that someone credited DHX Media (turns out they didn't get the memo it's actually called WildBrain now) for the series. Also, producers Sarah Wall and Kirsten Newlands have been added onto Dee Bradley Baker (Boo Boo Chicken and Coco the Monkey) and Nika Futterman's (the singing lock from season 4, episode 20, "Mickey's Monster Musical") credits respectively. I really don't wanna start an edit war. That would ruin my good standing.

Namethatisnotinuse Namethatisnotinuse (talk) 22:20, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Namethatisnotinuse: WTF? Boo-Boo isn't a chicken, he's a bear! El_C 22:29, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

No, in Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, he's a chicken. Link to picture of character Namethatisnotinuse Namethatisnotinuse (talk) 23:32, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Sacrilege! El_C 23:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

You

You're not dumb, you're a genius. Thank you for your edits. Also, Hey. Lostfan333 (talk) 22:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Dumb guy genius now? Hurrah! El_C 22:49, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Nice Lostfan333 (talk) 00:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Pramod Bhagat

Hi, I saw you fully protected this page a week ago because of disruption caused by changing birth place. But unfortunately the unconfirmed or IP accounts continue to vandalize the article by adding wrong information. Can you please see this problem. Thankyou. 🌌Zoglophie🌌 14:20, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 16:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Gerda's September corner

September songs

Omas gegen Rechts - enjoy strong women! I thought of Yoninah on the first day of Rosh Hashanah. I hope you could help your friend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

These unstoppable grannies are da best! A ray of light in my day. Thanks, yeah, helped for a while, but now someone else has picked up the slack. One way or another, we'll figure it out. El_C 00:49, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Good news, thank you! Could you please help us to Psalm 16 text? (Psalm 15 next). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

I am WT:QAI/Psalms -on it. El_C 21:53, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Good to glow. El_C 21:59, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Taken with thanks! - Rich Main page today: first TFA by promising author, pictured DYK by my friend LouisAlain who is discouraged by an AN discussion, and one of the Recent deaths. Enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:45, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh cool. Was always fascinated by him. I learned a lot from that article, in its various iterations, and looks like its time to read it once more! El_C 18:04, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Argh, should have said for long — lulz oversight. El_C 14:55, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

no problem, understood ;) - I like the author. - On 9/11, two meaningful DYK, you'll find them (or see my talk) - I gave today#s Precious to the one who built that set and many many more, in Yoninah's foot steps. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Nice. Ah, the Flight 93 article, that brings me back. But an EEng thing that's absent an image macro? I think he might be losing his touch. Or maybe images being superseded by video spam technology? To that: EEng, in advance, I don't remember asking you a God damn thing! Standard EEng angrily emoji follows → El_C 15:59, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I have not the foggiest idea what you're talking about. EEng 14:15, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Sadness turns to extra-sadness. El_C 14:26, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Anger turns to sadness. El_C 16:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

?? - today: the day of bold red and black, for Dante who died 700 years ago, and Peter Fleischmann who died recently, leaving us films full of vision. Dante: just heard Inferno, imagined by a woman, the main character both speaking and singing with an inner 4-part voice! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Cool. Coincidentally, I re-read a Hebrew translation of Dan Brown's Inferno last month, which, fuck the haters, I like. BTW, the Israeli Association for Nature Photographers did their annual members' pick of pic of the year. Check it out, I think you'll like (all images are within Israel proper, or proper'ish, at least): https://www.ynet.co.il/environment-science/article/s14krn11gf El_C 00:49, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Amazing pics. So many creatures looking at me I have no idea what they are! For the beauty of the earth - The lady-bug on poppy matches the Dante talk colours best. I'll go now and switch to today's classic black&white. I experienced the conductor - listening - with the student orchestra. Keep my talk watched, more to come, and while this one is even pictured on the Main page, I'll take care of more red&black, and green, on my talk for those without image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Will do. That is sleeping on a flower! El_C 06:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

as you probably saw already, today moar music, Beethoven, and my brother was in the orchestra, 10 July! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:20, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Double cool! Sorry, I forgot to look. You may now refer to me as Broken Promise Man. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 12:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I promise more finds for the days to come, and I refer to you as El C ;) - This particular hook took weeks to pass, and some others the same, and then they all appear in a row it seems. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:05, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

promised: the next chapter, about chance --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:10, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Nice! Dumb guy over here. For some (not-enough-coffee, probably) reason, I misread "chance" as dance, and for minutes I just couldn't figure out what was happening! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 11:06, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Today: a woman in red (back to the beginning of the thread), two who died under "in memoriam" and LouisAlain missed - my first editnotice read: "Every editor is a human being" which is quoted from a comment by Geometry guy in a 2012 discussion on WP:AN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Like. El_C 17:43, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I miss a bit of indignation. We can't help that people die, but can we help that they are driven away and missed, perhaps? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:48, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh, LouisAlain indeffed, I see. I admit to have not been able to make sense of that AN mega-thread. Block summary = lies about machine translations. Huh, that's a new one for me. Weird. El_C 17:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

How is this: biased me - I miss a friend of a decade - doesn't tell you one more word, and you remain uninvolved and ask the blocking admin? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Uninvolved like a fox! ←sorry, all I can find on short notice was a horse. Though, I did not know you were friends for a decade. El_C 20:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I was involved in writing about a horse ;) - Now I promised no more words, but need to correct you: decade, not decades. His first entry on my talk was in 2012, afaik, and he was in the process of translating all Bach cantatas to French, which makes me tremendously biased. I did one per week then, at the composer's speed, and around 200 survived. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Different topic, RD, perhaps you could help with this "ready" - I'm not involved, just saw it on my watchlist. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:11, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Already  Posted! You're correcting my correction? That's so mean! El_C 01:55, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Can I be forgiven that my reply was to what I had read, not reading again (by then changed) in edit mode? Did you seek clarification for the block? (I'm just beginning, pings first, then check Main page (DYK for someone who recently suddenly died, a collaboration), then adjust my talk, my user, thank for TFA, remind of Precious, go over watchlist.) - Scrolling, I saw that we had a similar topic in February. I miss Flyer, Yoninah and SlimVirgin due to death, but Mathsci, RexxS and LouisAlain due to our lack of kindness and good faith, and its the latter which makes indignation burn. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

No! Always attribute to malice. I mean, not beyond my original query. Honestly, I struggled with the explanations. Unlike all these other gone but not forgotten contributors you mention (whose bodies of work I at least had a passing familiarity with), I didn't even know LouisAlain existed until your mention, so I remain rather in the dark, as it were. El_C 12:51, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I thought you are familiar with my talk, no? Remember Leo Kestenberg? Thinking of Yoninah, to connect to the beginning. Translated by LouisAlain, and without him, I wouldn't even know that great reformer of early music education existed, whose reforms were stopped by the Nazis. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Vaguely. But with my memory that's not saying much. I mean, I knew who he was and I think I did read the brief Hebrew wiki page about him at some point, because the prose there seems familiar. I likely also read the English one, but I can't really recall having done so (which, again, isn't really indicative of much). El_C 13:56, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Please let's not talk about memory, - mine is so bad for the useful things. The DYK about him wasn't bad, for a brief summary. I have archives to fight bad memory. Look at my user page 2021: how many times is LouisAlain mentioned? ... and mostly for having started an article? ... and most of those went to DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

When you see the cremation pic on my talk, and the song of defiance, I'm burning with indignation. Martin asked questions I also had, and he was silenced. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I changed the fire to friendship, with a gentle-looking woman remembered + those blocked for no good reason. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Americana

Pearly Brown, possibly the last of the blind singing preachers. Docu.

Britiana isn't a thing, but I'm minded to give you a couple of examples. Narky Blert (talk) 18:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Nice. Looks like it's a blues sort of day. I actually started watching season 2 of Britannia (sp.) a few days ago, so good timing, as always. El_C 18:43, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

That voice! (and I'm a sucker for bottleneck). Narky Blert (talk) 19:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

IP you blocked

You issued this IP their second block not that long ago.[200] They are still at it, it seems.[201]-[202] - LouisAragon (talk) 12:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

LouisAragon, April 9 is long ago for me. I'm having a hard time remembering anything from that incident, or following the material currently contested, with which I'm not too familiar with to begin with. El_C 12:24, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

You're right. I'll elaborate. They insist, though edit-warring, that the area of western Georgia (i.e. historic Colchis) was not part of the Achaemenid Empire, despite the modern-day academic point of view. They try to remove all Achaemenid maps from the article that show the area of western Georgia/Coclhis as part of the empire. They use 19th-century maps (by George Rawlinson) in order to interpret that the maps, based on modern-day WP:RS and/or consensus are somehow illegitimate. Bear in mind, they enforce this narrative not through discussion or whatsoever, but through their edit summaries while removing and reverting. The most recent, comprehensive works on the Achaemenid period debunk their narrative in any case:

• "The situation is reminiscent of Colchis and Caucasian Iberia. Once, it was inconceivable that they had been under Achaemenid rule; now, ever more evidence is emerging to show that they were, forming a lesser part of the Armenian satrapy -- Gocha R. Tsetskhladze, The Northern Black Sea (2021). in A companion to the Achaemenid Persian Empire, Bruno Jacobs, Robert Rollinger (eds). Wiley Blackwell. p. 665
• "From this we may infer similar political conditions in modern south‐western Azerbaijan as those prevalent during the Achaemenid period in eastern Georgia, Colchis, and Armenia. " -- same source, p. 676
• "It is increasingly recognized that Colchis was also part of the Achaemenid Empire, forming with Caucasian Iberia a lesser part of the Armenian satrapy" -- (2014). A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean. Jeremy McInerney, ed. John Wiley and Sons. p. 332

Their entire editorial pattern (which got them blocked in the first place), is loaded with a tunnel vision-like pro-Georgian narrative, which enforces them to violate WP:TENDENTIOUS. And no, I don't think supposed concerns about WP:RECENCY has got anything to do with their concerns at the Achaemenid Empire page (feel free to take a look at the edits they have made at other pages). - LouisAragon (talk) 12:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Amidst their ongoing campaign at Achaemenid Empire: "Until you show me the source where it says that Colchis was in Satrapy and part of the Achaemenid Empire, until then I will always deleted these fake maps."[203] - LouisAragon (talk) 12:58, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 3 months. El_C 13:08, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Idle thought

Ever look around Wikipedia, see the depth of so much nonsense and wonder if your are wasting your time trying to push back on the sea? - jc37 17:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Never. When it comes to the ocean, I have a good spoon! El_C 17:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

(looks at my eye dropper) - They gave you a spoon?! - jc37 17:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I've thought this myself from time to time. It's why I have no problem just removing an article from my watchlist and ignoring it when dealing with a problem editor that's not so much of a problem as to actually get sanctioned. There's so much nonsense going on all the time that there's really no reason to set up a fort to defend my hill of shit on a giant plain of shit. There will always be more shit to work on, so why deal with shit that's stressful or wastes your time. That's why I wrote Shit flow diagram, to explain how to go along with shit, instead of eating it when it hits the fan. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

(rofl) - I, I, I cannot believe that that article exists... - jc37 17:35, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I determined about a month into serious editing that it was going to be the first article I wrote. Luckily researching for this AfD led me to the land of milk and honey that is Shit flow diagrams, and I knew it was made for me. I had the highest viewed non lead DYK in August, too! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Lol - jc37 17:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

You blocked User:Pritam kumar roni das for lack of communication and copyright infringement is back and engaged in sockpuppetry. The new accounts are

• Pritam das 01022000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Pritam Das 2000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Thanks. 42.105.4.65 (talk) 17:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

• (talk page watcher) The duck couldn't be quacking louder. I've tagged one of the pages at RfPP, the other one probably warrants it too. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Got it. El_C 17:53, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

AFAICS the pages aren't protected yet; and job half done is as good as none :). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:25, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Explain the physics behind that dress. I predict that solving this equation will lead to a new paradigm: the Theory of a couple of things. El_C 19:13, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I prefer musical theory - however, like everything else, that was broken down and made into something far too complex (like physics theories) in the 20th-century. re. fruit basket: actually, how inconvenient timing of yours, there's a lone apple tree in my backyard, but I'm afraid that there's not much left of the delicious harvest... Now, what I can offer: have any musical work you're fond of that is missing a suitable recording here on Wiki (piano, harpsichord or organ)? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 21:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Who Has Seen The Wind? El_C 21:57, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I'd gladly help, but it's likely still under copyright and that brings other issues (Performing rights), even if I could actually find the version in question. Also the only article here I can find is about the version by Yoko Ono. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:11, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

El_C 22:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Page move help

Hi El, can you please move North American A-36 Apache to North American A-36? The move discussion has been closed as "Move", but the article is still move-protected. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 20:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 20:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Margaret, Maid of Norway

Bored nationalist or monarchist has pov’d this. Given Margaret was a seven year old, can you semi or indef? Thanks awfully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.39.166 (talk • contribs)

Hey IP. Sorry, why are you telling me about this? Have we met before? Though my memory is for shit, I don't think I was even aware that she existed until now. I'm really more of a 20th Century history guy than anything, even though I did watch Count Dankula's (And... I've been cancelled) docu on the Glencoe Massacre a couple of days ago (YouTube link), which is a definite recommend. What? What's 400 years between Highlands fweinds. What was I talking about? Oh, right, I don't understand the meaning of Maid. Did Margaret, Maid of Norway also had Maids (of Norway)? Because that would be trippy.

Anyway, wrt taking any kind of admin action, I don't know if there's anything to really do right now, as all the edits save one are from July 2021 or earlier, thus being quite Stale (likely too stale even for pc at this time). Or, do you just mean today's edit by Reefyj (diff)? If so, then indeed, that edit looks like it may not be entirely legit (I certainly dislike it being edit summary-less, at the very least). After briefly sampling their talk page, it looks like Reefyj, themselves, may not be editing in an entirely legit way (hard for me to tell one way or the other at a glance).

Finally, out of the wikiprojects listed on that page (Norway, Medieval Scotland, Women's History, and Scottish Islands for some reason), only Royalty and Nobility and Middle Ages seem active'ish right now (edits this month), so you can ask for help there, I suppose. Biography is also listed, but it may be too broad for our immediate purposes. But, the 1st place to post about this would be on the article talk page (Talk:Margaret, Maid of Norway), whose last discussion ended on May 2020 (so not terribly active, either). HTH. El_C 12:04, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

2021 AFL Grand Final Semi-protection

I think that 10 days was probably a bit excessive; 1-3 days probably would have been enough since the page now isn't as heavily edited. Also, didn't see your comment until now! Jeuno (talk) 23:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Done. Cool, thanks for getting back to me. El_C 23:06, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

DriedGrape topic ban violation at Turkish War of Independence on Armenian genocide

You are banned indefinitely from editing or discussing anything to do with the WP:AA2 topic area, including anything to do with the Armenian genocide, broadly construed

Turkish War of Independence is related to the Armenian Genocide. Although DriedGrape's sanction was broadly construed, they engaged in a discussion in this topic area. I think this is a violation of their topic ban. Best regards.--V. E. (talk) 16:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

V. E., if you want me to look at this, please explain how you contend this to be so, by using summaries and WP:DIFF evidence. Thanks. El_C 16:40, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Here are their edits diffs[204][205].--V. E. (talk) 16:45, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Half way there: now the summaries. El_C 16:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Their diffs are related to the content on the section historiography of Turkish War of Independence. This section discusses official Turkish historical narrative which has genocide-denialist characteristics. Also the article falls under AA and related conflicts: The Arbitration Committee has authorized uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on users who edit pages related to Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, including this article. (taken from the talk page of the article)--V. E. (talk) 16:49, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but that doesn't summarize how what was said in those diffs constitutes such a violation, specifically. Maybe it'd be better for you to find an admin willing to do all that leg work for you...? El_C 16:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Their edit on the talk page says I just checked the source and doesn't having a big chunk of the first section after the lead, that being Historiography here, constist of a single source, that one being a recent interview with a single historian on an obscure news site, make it undue and even fringe? Especially when in the exact same source, the interviewee admits their field of expertise is not the ethnic cleansings that took place during the era? Even the interviewer doesn't seem reliable as the entire interview has loaded questions, claiming TWoİ had an İslamist purpose. Doesn't ethnic cleansing during and historiography of the Turkish War of Independence fall under their topic ban?--V. E. (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

V. E., already read that. I honestly don't know. That's why I asked for summaries that would give some context into the what, where and when. El_C 17:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

He criticised a section regarding the fourth paragraph of the historiography section in two ways 1) they think it is CV (but that's irrelevant to their topic ban), 2) they assess and criticize reliability of the source and expertise of the interviewee regarding the historiography of conflict which I think constitutes the violation.--V. E. (talk) 17:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

V. E., what's the copyright infringement that's being claimed, specifically? El_C 17:12, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

4th paragraph in hist. section but I can't see how it's relevant to this discussion, I had already re-paraphrased it 2 days ago.--V. E. (talk) 17:15, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

V. E., it's relevant if I am to revdel it as such. El_C 17:28, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, you can compare the 4th paragraph to the Google translation of the original text it is paraphrased twice.--V. E. (talk) 17:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) the article falls directly under WikiProject Armenia, and has extensive mention of the Armenian genocide as well. From the lead: Simultaneously, the Turkish nationalist movement carried out massacres and deportations in order to eliminate native Christian populations—a continuation of the Armenian genocide and other ethnic cleansing operations during World War I. Both fall under their broadly tban. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 17:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Zani. This is what I've been telling, or at least, trying to tell.--V. E. (talk) 17:21, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I trust El C's judgment and what he'll decide to do at the end, even tho I agree with you. The tban was also less than 2 weeks ago, and they don't really have other edits afterwards [206]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 17:28, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

My talk page contributions were not even remotely related to the topics I have been sanctioned from. DriedGrape (talk) 17:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Until it is demonstrated that the comments in question touch on AA2 in a direct way, this may just be skirting the limits of the ban, which while isn't recommended, isn't expressly prohibited, either. El_C 17:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

I am aware of that, which is why my talk discussions were specifically solely focused on editorial merits and the possible copyright violations of the other contributor. DriedGrape (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

El C, so, you are saying that discussion of a material of an article that falls under the topic ban does not directly violate the ban, am I right?--V. E. (talk) 17:39, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that's possible. It really depends on the page/discussion in question. For example, Jerusalem is covered by ARBPIA, but there's components to the topic (say, archeology, etc.) that may not not invoke its ARBPIA dimensions. El_C 17:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

I think I understand what you mean El C, but I still have a question: If the tban is broadly construed (which it is in this case), doesn't that mean they shouldn't participate in articles that fall under AA? Even if their participation isn't directly about the genocide or anything specific, it's still a participation is it not? And if the article falls under WikiProject Armenia and also has extensive mention of the Armenian genocide, I thought this was a violation of the broadly tban. I'm asking because I still not fully understand the tbans and whatnot. Thanks in advance. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 17:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

El C, You've commented on their claim of copyright violation but didn't comment on their assessment and critique of the source and interviewee of the source related to the same section. The source in question mentions the term Armenian genocide (Ermeni soykırımı) 3 times and the last sentence of the paraphrased section from the same source states that TWoI was a campaign waged against Armenians and Greeks minorities. They also stated that they found the material 'fringe'.[207] Do you not consider these to be a discussion of the material?--V. E. (talk) 17:57, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) ZaniGiovanni, again, in my view, not by default. But other admins' mileage may vary, so WP:AE would be the venue to get a better sense of that vis-à-vis this particular case. I, personally, am not familiar enough with the subject matter to draw any inferences that'd sway me one way or the other in this case. That's why I asked for "summaries" that establish the AA2 connection that's being specifically invoked wrt to the cited comments in question. El_C 18:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

V. E., looking. El_C 18:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Except the portion of the contributions which I criticized had nothing to do with AA2. The source mentioning those topics and me criticizing the way you utilize a completely different portion of the source is irrelevant. I rhetorically asked if relying on a singular niche source would arguably be fringe.DriedGrape (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Look, V. E., maybe I just lack the concentration today, but I'm still having a hard time either following or verifying what you say. You're not making it easy for me, it feels. Maybe take it to WP:AE, because obviously right now I remain unsure about what's going on here. El_C 18:06, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Americana of the Day

Cleoma Breaux Falcon - "Hand Me Down My Walking Cane". Narky Blert (talk) 18:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

You're really bringing back them old timey tunes, Narky Blert! El_C 23:22, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

This version of "The Moonshiner" sounds almost primeval - Roscoe Holcomb, "Moonshiner". Narky Blert (talk) 16:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Stealed up all my corn — ++ relatable. El_C 17:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

SPI

Hey, El C. Hope you're well. I have filed a new SPI about an account. Can you please take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haldir Marchwarden?--Maleschreiber (talk) 22:41, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Not for all the chipmunks in the world. Well, that an exaggeration. I'd probably do it for even one chipmunk in peril. Luckily, safe in burrows, I think we're good. El_C 23:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Is there a barnstar for punning?

if so, then could you link it and I'll fill in the details and throw one your way for the magnificent pun in

Anyway, anyone, like yours truly, not intimately familiar with the UK Labour party's anti-semitic -related (expressly so) expulsions and background, is going to be left (-) scratching their heads here, I suspect. Nishidani (talk) 09:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Pun unintended. Fuck. El_C 10:01, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Note...

Hi, I just thought I'd mention that your intended indefinite block is pretty definite. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 10:40, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Yay for competence! El_C 10:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hehe. BTW, I wanted to thank you for recently linking to the "bobs and vegana" video. It was very funny. I especially like the headache part. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Mandarax, they are basically best friends! El_C 20:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Plus, Taylor Swift dated Lucas Till, who was in X-Men: First Class with Kevin Bacon, who was in The Magic 7 with Ted Danson, whom I met at an art museum. So I'm litterally his best friend too! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:35, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Happens to us all. Good block. SQL^{Query Me!} 10:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Homendy article

Please consider making editing to Jennifer Homendy available to verified accounts as the vandalism and accusations are coming from non-account editors who appear to be incited by Elon Musk. Thank you. QRep2020 (talk) 14:13, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Why? What's the rush? If those accounts don't engage the talk, then they'll have forfeited their position and that would be that. El_C 15:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Myanmar protection request

Hi. Can you please renew the protection on Vice-President of Myanmar? ― Tartan357 ^Talk 00:24, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I blocked that IP, Tartan357, but I'd rather hold off on reinstating the protection, for now. El_C 01:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm also happy with that. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 02:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion

LingThukhaShwe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has logged in to repeat their disruptive edits: [208], [209], [210], [211], [212]. Note in the first diff that they cited the same bogus BBC source as the IP did. The source does not at all support their claim that the deposed VP is still in power, only that he is under house arrest rather than being in prison. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 04:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Unpleasant distraction. El_C 12:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Just the president , State Counsellor and other ministers were detained.If you read the articles and constitution , you can clearly say that they're neither under house arrest nor in the prison. How can others know the politics in Myanmar more than Burmese people . Anyway ,if that articles changes or not their posts and situations in Myanmar won't change. Thanks :) LingThukhaShwe (talk) 04:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC) Tarzan is doing what he wants to do without trying to discuss with Burmese editors. LoL Myint Swe is come from the military and former general. Why could he go to house arrest?. 117.18.230.188 (talk) 04:30, 30 September 2021 (UTC) I never said Myint Swe is under house arrest. But I've provided a plethora of sources that show he exited the scene after handing power over to MAH, who has himself referred to Myint Swe as the "then Acting President". Henry Van Thio is the one under house arrest. You are absolutely free to provide sources that say otherwise. But neither of you have done that. ― Tartan357 Talk 04:36, 30 September 2021 (UTC) I think Henry Van Thio is not vice-President because he is currently in house arrest. Do Note Tarzan, you can change everything you want on Burmese articles at this time. The junta banned all Wikipedia and a few ppl access to edit Eng Wikipedia with the Mytel internet, owned by the Junta. So I dont care what you change since now. 117.18.230.188 (talk) 04:39, 30 September 2021 (UTC) I agree, and the editor in question is trying to say that Henry Van Thio, a member of the National League for Democracy, is still VP. Regardless, this section is about LingThukhaShwe's block evasion, it is not about a content dispute. Please keep that to the article talk page. ― Tartan357 Talk 04:46, 30 September 2021 (UTC) uhh sorry. LingThukhaShwe is correct on the case of Henry Van Tho's term, according per 2008 constitution of the of Myanmar. Already explained in your talk page. If you want to know about the info and sources he provided are correct or not correct, you can freely ask to respected Burmese editors like User:Hintha or User:Hybernator. Dont decide one-sided. 117.18.230.188 (talk) 05:15, 30 September 2021 (UTC) This section is about their block evasion. I will not address further off-topic comments. ― Tartan357 Talk 05:20, 30 September 2021 (UTC) Well, Do you always avoid discussions with Myanmar editors? But the truth is not changed whenever you changed everything. LingThukhaShwe is a law expert how can you know the laws in Myanmar more than him or other? Have you achieved the enlightenment? 117.18.230.188 (talk) 05:29, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tartan357:, if you want a more definitive answer about those accounts, WP:SPI is the venue for that. I'm not confident enough with the info here to act on that basis alone. El_C 12:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your actions over on the article talk page. As I've tried to explain to these people calmly, I am happy to be proven wrong and only want to see sources. But they insist on going straight into troll mode whenever I make an edit they think is wrong. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 19:56, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Could you take a look?

Hey El C, hope you're doing well. Could you please take a look at this] discussion? This is the first time in my Wikipedia editing that I felt like I'm being bullied by more experienced editors. And I noticed you're familiar with one of the editors, so if it isn't hard for you, please have a look at that discussion. With best, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 00:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, I'm not seeing "bullying" or any other kind of harassment. And I'm sorry to say, but without evidence (quote+diff), it's an WP:ASPERSION of you to make that claim by only linking to a lengthy talk page exchange. That falls short of the evidence required for alleging misconduct of that nature.

In any case, neither side should be edit warring. It doesn't even help anything. It's very short term. If the impasse proves intractable, then an RFC will decide the long term. So, in that sense, who cares about the short term. Nothing but strife from that approach. Also, your final comment —over 10,000 bytes of text!— is so lengthy, it is effectively a form of filibustering. How is anyone expected to respond to that? Anyway, I have an idea for a compromise, so let's see if it gains traction. El_C 01:15, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry El C, I was in a rush. But here are the diffs...

Their feeling and assumption about me:

...When I interact with you, I get the feeling that this is someone who has edited Wikipedia before[213]

My response:

Oh really, you get that feeling. Are you suggesting I'm a sockpuppet or something? Well, here's my suggestion: Since you have no problem in expressing your baseless feelings about me, I'll voluntarily choose to undergo an SPI investigation (since no Clerk would even endorse it if you felt to try). Pick any editor(s) you want, I really don't give a damn. One caveat, tho: when the SPI fails (and it will), you have to apologize to me publicly on my talk page for your baseless feeling and assumption.[214]

The reply I got after I voluntarily suggested undergoing an SPI if they have such feelings:

HA! You are the one that wanted to make this personal, not me. And SPIs can not connect to anyone beyond 3 months. Nice try though. Time will tell.[215]

I always ask controversial questions in your talk page because I've seen that you're fair yet bold at the same time. Even tho I noticed that you're familiar with the editor and probably are friendly with him (apologies in advance if I'm wrong), I still choose to ask here because of your qualities as a good admin. Now please, could you say that this looks good faith and a civil conversation? How many times does the user have to throw baseless feelings towards me? What was that "Time will tell" passive-aggressive comment at the end?

I'm literally willing to undergo any investigation just to show how baseless that assumption was, and for them to apologize to me. If this isn't bullying from an experienced user, what else is this? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 01:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, they're responding to your even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling — seriously, how do expect barbs like that to go? The way it looks to me, you're the one starting with the less-than professional conduct: Whoa there big fella and lol is too chat room -like and is especially inappropriate in the midst of a heated dispute. So, I'm sorry, but it feels cherry picked and it ignores the impetus for the personalizing (you). Not saying the response is necessarily the best, either, but I'd wish you'd be more self-critical here. BTW, being friendly with someone, or friendship outright even, isn't something that would sway me. I've chided Gerda plenty. Gently, but still. El_C 01:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Whoa there big fella and lol is too chat room: I replied to someone who wrongly said that I "don't have consensus to change the stable version", when in fact, I restored the stable version (see this which enjoyed consensus for 3yrs, and the one just before KansasBear's edits. And now compare it to the current article). Moreover, they were already pre-planning a "meeting in the noticeboard" lol [216] without even hearing my reply or even knowing the actual context. He just gave me the big fella energy (you're not that guy pal). Don't you think that's the least harmless reply I could've gone with, considering their wonderful comment?

even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling, I inherently respect any experienced editors like yourself just for the amount of work put on this website[217] This is the full sentence. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 02:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, a cascade starts where it starts, is my point. Yes, I realize that's the full sentence, but it's a backhanded compliment, which isn't helpful. I don't really wanna get into the content weeds of the thing. But I submit that not escalating, even slightly, when tensions are high, is the better approach. I think all of you should have tried de-escalating, but honestly, I don't really feel like tone policing. In this instance and in general. So maybe another admin would be a better fit. El_C 02:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I understand El C. You know what I noticed with far more experienced editors? If someone was in my place and to the reply of even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling, I inherently respect any experienced editors like yourself just for the amount of work put on this website, they received feelings and assumptions of sockpuppetry with no proof, this could've ended somewhere in WP:AE or WP:ANI. Especially since I'm more than willing to voluntarily undergo an investigation (if there is any way, I really don't care), and I receive a reply of "Time will Tell".

But Wikipedia already gives me enough headache, I'm also not dumb enough to understand that taking this to ANI against an established editor I don't really have chances (since I also noticed that maybe some or a lot of editors have their preferences, regardless of the situation).

Maybe one day when I'll be as stronk as you or KansasBear, justice will prevail...(humour) Take care El C and I appreciate your time. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 02:36, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Followup I guess. May I ask for you input in Orontids, El C? I think I addressed concerns raised in talk and added sources for Armenian origin, while keeping the lead neutral [218] [219] and I told the same in talk [220]. But all of my edits got reverted again, with insufficient responsee of: Also, your sources did not state Armenian origin, taken in context their usage simply means the same as "dynasty that ruled over Armenia". Please look at the edit history of the article. I even tried to restore this which wasn't even discussed and was removed becasue of "WP:V". I added the exact page and the quote with it, yet it still got reverted.

Also, editor casts the same sockpuppetry aspersions again:Ah, how sweet still pulling all those rules. Odd how someone that has only edited for 6 months knows SO much about Wikipedia.[221]. Btw, that was in response to my comment in the talk. Also how come like-minded editors discuss on talk and achieve conesnsues, unanimously agreeing with each other, while I'm the only one with a different perspective? That's why I'm asking your input. Can you please objectively look at my edits and comment, and give us your thoughts? If the "origin" part was the issue in my edits, then surely Armenian dynasty should be added back in the lead because all of my added WP:RS sources mention it as Armenian dynasty. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 00:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a bit burned out from AA2/KURDS lately due to a sharp spike in requests, so I'm unlikely to attend to this matter in the immediate future if at all. Regards, El_C 00:30, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Ok El C, then I'm just helpless at this point. Can you suggest what should I do about the repeated baseless sock allegations? I left a funny bonus context below this regarding the accusations and my "guideline knowledge". I really can't stand their passive-aggressive assumptions anymore. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 00:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the repeated sock allegation, KansasBear seems to have a problem with my "knowledge of guidelines". But this one is just too funny, I have to mention. I actually learned about the silence of the lambs from... you (while I was browing ANI monthts back). I even saved the link lol. [222]. Quote: Debresser's version already enjoyed consensus, at the very least loosely, via WP:SILENCE. You can't tell him that his version has no consensus when yours has even less! El_C 05:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC).

Btw, what would an experienced editor do in my shoes at this point? They would've already reported KansasBear for repeated and absolutely baseless sock accusations, right? I wonder if KansasBear would interact same way with a more established editor? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 00:36, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, I don't understand what you're asking of me. I don't understand why you keep pinging me to that page. SILENCE is not an entitlement. Three editors disagree with you, all of whom veterans of the topic area, if you contend their views aren't representative of the interested editorial pool, you're free to run an WP:RFC that would determine whether this is or isn't so. There's noticeboards for conduct matters with which you are already familiar. I don't really know what else to say. El_C 01:39, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I would prefer that ZaniGiovanni instead of trying to wiki-lawyer this issue, to start reading what they are putting into the article. The Cambridge source calls the Commagene king(an Orontid descendant) as "...the king’s paternal ancestors, traced back to the Achaemenian monarch Darius...". But ZaniGiovanni calls it Armenian origin.

As for the Izady source, he incorrectly attributes the wrong time for Eruand to the 2nd century AD, the Orontids that ruled Armenia died out around 200BC(per the article). Which means we should probably avoid using Izady. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:06, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Soylent Green

Why have they not made a re-make of this movie!?!? --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Bad concession stand sales! El_C 01:51, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

LMAO. --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Probably because we already know the punchline. How do you top that? "It's cows!"? BilCat (talk) 01:46, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Akhtar Raza Khan protection

Akhtar Raza Khan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Due to this edit (by an editor who hasn't edited in a month, rather conveniently) straight after the protection and image being restored, would it be possible for the protection to be increased to ECP please? FDW777 (talk) 13:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Done. El_C 13:59, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

2021 Atlantic hurricane season

Hi, El_C, and I hope you're doing well. Could you please unprotect or decrease the level of protection on 2021 Atlantic hurricane season to PC? The edit-warring between autoconfirmed editors has stopped. Thanks, Destroyer (Alternate account) 20:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't follow. Stopped in what sense? El_C 21:31, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for lowering the level of protection. I'm sorry if I was unclear - I meant that the edit warring on the page as well as the unsourced changes stopped after a discussion on the talk page. Thanks again, Destroyer (Alternate account) 00:34, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

No worries. Indeed, I've already dealt with this by way of WP:RFPP/D. Yeah, your wording was confusing, because in your OP you said: The edit-warring between autoconfirmed editors has stopped. But the WP:ECP technically restricted them from making any edits to the page (edit warring and otherwise). So I was, like, stopped? How could it re/start? Cheers, El_C 12:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Britiana (sp.?)

The King of Rome - Dave Sudbury 1, HMHB 2, June Tabor 3 The Unthanks 4.

Not to be confused with the song of the same name by Pet Shop Boys.

Narky Blert (talk) 21:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Narky Blert. Will listen soon. El_C 12:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

If you're in need of a not-here block...

See Special:Contributions/CreatorofGod19. :) BilCat (talk) 22:25, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

BilCat, never in need, but yeah, for the username. Creator of (uppercase) God — what? That's dumb. And 19? Super dumb. El_C 22:50, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I just laughed at the "Creator of God" part - even as an Evangelical Christian, I've seen much worse than that. However, the "19" part went over my head, so I haven't a clue. BilCat (talk) 23:00, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Looks like they are using Special:Contributions/2603:7080:4E43:1B00:18D4:2783:52C2:43F6 to evade their block, and are still causing trouble. See also Special:Contributions/2603:7080:4E43:1B00::/64 BilCat (talk) 21:17, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Got it. El_C 21:20, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again! BilCat (talk) 21:25, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Dremo

Hello Sir El C, greetings from this side. The Draft Dremo is ready, please take a look at it. Thank you. --Idoghor Melody (talk) 23:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Good to glow. Dremo is now live. I'm a knight now! El_C 23:27, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@El C: Yeah, you're a knight now😅 awarded from me(king of england) to you. I want to ask, since it was moved by you(admin), is it automatically reviewed? Or will that be done by a reviewer?--Idoghor Melody (talk) 23:31, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Idoghor Melody: I reviewed it, so all good. Best, El_C 23:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@El C: Thank you very much, I appreciate, Idoghor Melody (talk) 23:58, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Reporting - Wikicommons

Greetings @El C: I was curious about, if I report somebody thru the Noticeboard for Example... is this connected with Wiki-Commons or does it have to be another way? Because the Sock of JohnGotten (User:Aquinasthomes1), is now doing his stuff on Wikicommons 1. --InNeed95 (talk) 14:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

When involving a user on another project, this is either dealt with through the m:Global locks procedure or, locally, on that project. El_C 14:51, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Americana of the Day #2

Meddlin' with the Blues. By no means the greatest blues number ever recorded (though that's some decentish harp playing). The point of interest is that Leonard and Mays performed in 1925 as The Two of Spades - which antedates the first written mention of the ethnic slur "spade" by 3 years. Narky Blert (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again, Narky Blert, will listen soon. I'm on a bit of a D&B bender atm. El_C 21:37, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I have a taste for YT vids with <1,000 views. Narky Blert (talk) 21:45, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, the next songspam is at 1,091 views right now — so close! El_C 21:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Request for Rollbackers Right

@El C: Hi , I 've Requested For Rollbackers Right on WP:PERM But Any Admin not Attention on My Request. Best Regards Maniik ^{🇮🇳Any Help🇮🇳? Contact Me.} 14:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Lazy Maniik: it's only been a couple of days and there is a bit of a backlog. I'm sure it'll be reviewed soon'ish. El_C 14:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@El C:, Ok I'm Wating for Approval of My Request and Thanks for Answering Me. Maniik ^{🇮🇳Any Help🇮🇳? Contact Me.} 14:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Having a Issue with a Certain ip

Hello EL C,

I am having some Serious issues with these ip's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:7500:B1C1:3B4:BE3D:7CD2 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:7500:BCFD:E67:2830:3056. The person that created Tevin21 account was blocked indefinitely, the same person that created that account also used this ip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:E900:58BF:FE40:E178:BED9 to add incorrect information to WWE Hell in a Cell please see these two edits by this ip- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WWE_Hell_in_a_Cell&oldid=1047818909 and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WWE_Hell_in_a_Cell&oldid=1047819090, This ip said that in his edit that The 2021 event was the final Hell in a Cell PPV held, as the event was discontinued and replaced by Bash at the Beach in 2022, to me that is a lie and WWE will never hold a bash at the beach ever again. Ever since protection ended for WWE Hell in a Cell these two ip's (2600:8800:4021:7500:B1C1:3B4:BE3D:7CD2 and 2600:8800:4021:7500:BCFD:E67:2830:3056) has resumed adding false information to WWE Hell in a Cell Chip3004 (talk) 21:34, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Got it. El_C 22:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Somethingiana

If you've got some time to waste, search YouTube for "animals house of the rising sun reaction". It's like another British Invasion - but this time with Black guys being reintroduced to their heritage, rather than White guys being shown what they'd ignored.

My OR is that in the late 40s to early 60s there was a handful of British merchant seamen who'd buy singles in the States, play them to death on the voyage home, and sell them when they got back. The Smokey Robinson/Motown fan was from Liverpool (hence The Beatles), the Chicago blues fan from London (hence The Stones), and the JLH fan from Newcastle (hence The Animals).

Lonnie Donegan was a minor musician - but his covers of Lead Belly and Woody Guthrie got into the UK charts in the 1950s, when the best that musicians like that could hope for back home was to get arrested. Narky Blert (talk) 21:43, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Nice. An uneasy feeling watching black persons reacting to https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=lynyrd+skynyrd+free+bird+live+reaction (Confederate Battle Flag ++). ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

BTW, just started re-re-re-reeee reading a Hebrew translation of Frederik Pohl and C. M. Kornbluth's The Space Merchants (1952). Have you read? I have a 1978 print, which ordinarily isn't the worse, but it's in terrible shape (physically). Super love it, though (literaturely). El_C 22:06, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

On your link - well, yes... Top tune, but you have to balance "Curtis Loew" with "Sweet Home Alabama". Not easy.

I don't remember The Space Merchants, but I read a lot of Pohl & Kornbluth in my teens. For the One True Account of what the military is like, I recommend Bill the Galactic Hero.

(I'm so decrepit that I can't remember which of Dylan's and The Animal's version of "Rising Sun" I heard first; probably Dylan's.) Narky Blert (talk) 22:38, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

What's next?

I thought the AE report on me over a month ago, was strange. But the current AN report, outdoes it. GoodDay (talk) 16:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, GoodDay, unlike at that AE complaint (link), as I pointed out in this latest AN thread, I can't help but think that none of this might have come to pass had you simply explained yourself better from the outset (not that this excuses the OP's reaction). But I also can't help but think that, sooner or later, the OP was headed toward this sort of outcome, irrespectively of this latest dispute and/or your involvement therein. El_C 16:38, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, I need to elaborate my edit-summaries, better. GoodDay (talk) 16:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Mon Phagun

You recently SPed that page to prevent disruption due to obvious socking. Needless to say; the socking has continued. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 01:18, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Possible vandal

Hi El C, could you look at Special:Contributions/2A02:2F0E:6011:D00:78B8:36BF:F207:9CB9. Their continued edits on Bell 429 GlobalRanger are breaking the infobox along with edit warring, and the edit here looks like vandalism. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 01:35, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 01:39, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

They're back - see Special:Contributions/Borota80. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 04:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Special K. El_C 15:33, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

The fun-ness has returned

Topal Osman. No sooner than the page protection expired, an IP removed referenced information. *sigh* In happier news, Chicago somehow beat Detroit. AND, my grandson Luke was born this morning! WOO HOO! --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

OMG, super congrats! El_C 02:05, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. He was 3 weeks early, but everything is fine. This is number 6 for me. Three granddaughters and three grandsons! --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

That's great. Da Bear has many cubs and cublings! El_C 02:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

BTW, six has always been my lucky number! El_C 02:24, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Nice! Well, my youngest son has not started out on that part of life's journey, so I imagine this will not be my last grandchild. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:29, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi El C. Wanted to ask if repeatedly pinging an editor who shares same POV constitutes as canvassing? Aydin mirza (talk · contribs) has pinged Grandmaster multiple times, asking for opinions with a non-neutral tone [223], [224]. Despite me reverting their edit, they didn't ping me or any Armenian editors in talk. I tried to explain this to them, and notified them of canvassing, but they still pinged their favorite editor with non-neutral tone. Also, how can one apply for “third party” when multiple editors are already involved? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 19:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, this is a noticeboard spillover on my talk page again. Give, like, at least a month, let's say. And even after that, sparingly please. El_C 15:39, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Is it a spillover? I think you're confusing the Grandmaster report with this account, Aydin mirza. I don't recall Aydin being reported in ANI, apologies if I'm incorrect El C. And the user insists only pinging their favorite editor(s) who quote “understand them”, just because I asked them to show basic english grammar on english wikipedia. You know in my whole editing time, I only pinged an editor in talk pages once, and I was asking for them to ping an admin (as I didn't know any at the time). I got all kinds of canvassing warnings and comments for that. After that, I'm very careful with pinging, especially with editor(s) who might agree with me. And I'm very careful in general about guidelines/etc, probably why I'm one of, if not the least reported editor from the toxic AA area. But why SPA accounts like Aydin mirza should be exempt from this? Why they can continue to ping whomever they want even after warning, especially in contentious discussions? And why their nonchalant response should be tolerated? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 17:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, you're treating my talk page like it's a noticeboard, still. I'm trying to curb the number of requests here that are of this nature. I'm not sure how to express that any more clearly. El_C 17:57, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry El C, didn't understand you at first. I thought you were saying the user was being reported and this was just a spillover, my bad. You're probably doing the right thing, it's just too much of everything recently especially in AA. Take care, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:17, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Americana of the Day [#3]

Bukka White - "Aberdeen, Mississippi Blues" and "Poor Boy" - link.

Bonus live tracks - Hound Dog Taylor (link) and Django Reinhardt (link). Look at their left hands. Narky Blert (talk) 20:46, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Love me some steel guitar! Love me some Gypsy Jazz! El_C 15:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Have you counted their fingers? See also Tony Iommi#Accident - appalling H&S, but an admirable gesture by a really decent man (who probably couldn't stand the noise The Sabs made). Narky Blert (talk) 15:56, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Review discussion

Hey, El C. Hope you're well. In a discussion about a block, several policy issues have emerged User talk:BleronZ#Block Appeal Discussion. I feel that a review by an admin who knows the Balkan topic area and is experienced in policy matters will be able to clarify them.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Maleschreiber, not what I'm looking for right now, sorry. El_C 15:41, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Question about machine translating, probable socks and mass rollback

User:Gerry Scott is almost delicately a cross wiki sock, and gamed extended confirmed in part by adding machine translations of movie plots. Should that be reverted, and it's there a way to roll them back en mass? Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Already blocked. ScottishFinnishRadish, that account has a scant few edits at en, so colour me confused. El_C 09:42, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I was actually confused myself because I saw they had over 500 edits, but the vast majority of those were another form of gaming extended confirmed, so the cleanup was easier than I expected. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:07, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, most of those ~500 edits are deleted contributions to a subpage in French (about Beillevaire, whatever that is). El_C 11:40, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Account.

Hello, El_C, a evasive user account keep posting the same type of comments at my talk page. Same type of comment a Anon IP posted months ago. Seems the same person.Mr.User200 (talk) 22:37, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Blocked indef, but I was unable to discern any socking. The harassing IP may have simply registered an account through which to continue their disruption. El_C 09:40, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, seem the same person was using a range of IPs for that.Mr.User200 (talk) 15:50, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

No worries, happy to help. Anyway, using an IP and then later registering an account is a legit thing to do form the standpoint of socking. But, of course, this is rather moot since they used both the IP and the registered account to WP:HARASS you (just a technical aside is all). El_C 15:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Copyright concerns at Ilford Animal Cemetery

Hello El C, Sorry to bother you. I removed a section at Ilford Animal Cemetery, because it was a near word for word copy of part of the article it was referenced to. Not knowing enough about the subject matter, I didn't feel able to replace it.
This has now been done by a different IP user, but it simply reinstates what I removed with some very minor differences. I'm unsure whether this is enough, to no later nger be an issue. I was going to bring this up on the articles talk page, but I noticed that you have blocked the original poster (User:Iyo-farm)). One of the few additions to what I removed was "Its later use for the Nazi Holocaust, was only applied from 1942", which highly similar to additions by Iyo-farm. So I thought I would seek you advice. Thanks 89.241.33.89 (talk) 17:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP. I removed and WP:REVDEL'd the WP:COPYVIO in question, with a warning against its reinstatement. Please let me know if these issues still persist. Regards, El_C 18:09, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Africaniana of the Day

Solomon Linda - "Mbube".

A lot of the subsequent recording history of "Mbube" is pretty seedy, but something like justice was eventually done. Narky Blert (talk) 21:44, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I've been searching for this duo I really liked, but I can't remember what they're called, or whether they're from Mozambique or Angola. It's been driving me kinda nuts over the last week or so. El_C 14:05, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Duo Ouro Negro? The only duo I could find in the relevant Portuguese categories. If not, give me a clue as to genre. Narky Blert (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

National resistance. El_C 14:43, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I can scarcely be arsed to maintain my own TP, let alone refactor anyone else's as suggested in your ES.

Missa Luba - Sanctus. Narky Blert (talk) 21:16, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Right, I realized you undid my edits by accident, I said angrily. Nice music, though! El_C 21:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

ANI discussion thread

Hi. Given your previous involvement in a discussion regarding this user, I'm hoping it's not a problem for me to ask you to take a look at this new thread. Thanks in advance. Magitroopa (talk) 17:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

New account nothere

Hey El C, hope you're well. I didn't want to open an ANI for this, as it seemed the case here is obvious. Sorry if I'm wrong, but if you could, please take a look. This new account, Fullstackdev, keeps edit-warring and adding content back without any consensus, and which is being discussed in talk and AfD. They leave ethnically charged deranged comments in talk [225]. Some lovely quotes:

I think the Armenians who lost the war in Karabakh think that they will win with wikipedia special forces. Armenians are chasing a dream again. On many pages on Wikipedia, I see only articles created with Armenian sources.

All your propaganda efforts will be in vain. It is a war indemnity given by Armenia for losing the Zangezur Corridor at the end of the 44-day war. You should get used to it by now.

Their vote text is just something else on its own. Hope I'm not disturbing, but this case seemed obvious to me. They also added propaganda sources in different articles, such as calling the Armenian genocide "the Armenian problem" (common denialistic talking point), and shifts the blame to Armenian political party of that time, Hunchakian. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Not related to this, but Che was killed this day in 1967. His last words: "I know you are here to kill me. Shoot, coward, you are only going to kill a man." ZaniGiovanni (talk) 01:37, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Famously. Didn't realize it was today. I recommend Jon Lee Anderson's Che: A Revolutionary Life (1997, 800p) as the preeminent biography about him. El_C 01:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Will add it to my list, thanks. I still have lot of theory to read that my brother keeps sending me and that I don't find time for.

Wanted to add Che's death in the "on this day" section of main wiki page. Never have done so before, not sure if it's a good idea or not. What would you suggest El C? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 01:57, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't feel comfortable participating or even advising on that. Currently reading Mike Duncan's The Storm Before the Storm: The Beginning of the End of the Roman Republic (2017, 300p), it's really excellent. El_C 02:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Bigfella back at it

I've just reverted another 18 unsourced/undiscussed mass genre changes by Bigfella77 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), their first edits since your block on the 2nd. They've still never discussed any of their edits. Time for an indef? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 21:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Yup. El_C 21:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, big fella. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 23:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Whoa big fella. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 21:11, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• Now getting similar edits from 174.215.160.5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). I'd say 50/50 it's the same person vs. someone with the same fixation, but might be worth some admin attention either way. For now I've warned and have rolled back about 20. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 19:32, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Julian Assange

I think you should check for possible WP:STONEWALLING first, wouldn't it be better to try and deal with that? I think this is just going to lead to endless RfCs and drive editors away which is exactly what a stonewaller would want. NadVolum (talk) 00:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Easier said than done, so no. El_C 01:06, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:General_sanctions/India–Pakistan_conflict - permalink update?

Hi El_C, in the process of closing the recent ARBIP amendment request I noticed that the obsolescence notice at WP:GS/IPAK still contained a placeholder permalink. Should this be updated just for maximum clarity? Thanks! firefly ( t · c ) 11:31, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

I've been waiting for the ARCA to close before updating further, not just wrt the obsolescence notice, but the form and structure of the final dissolution process itself. El_C 11:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Apologies, missed this yesterday - the ARCA has now been closed. firefly ( t · c ) 08:45, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Firefly. El_C 12:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Franceiana

You probably know the famous English-French cover version - but this is the original, written and recorded by a Russian émigrée.

One of my better efforts was the enwiki biography of a résistant who got 12,000 views in WP:DYK; and another 3,250 last month, when - unprompted by me - he appeared in WP:OTD on the 78th anniversary of his death. (The median daily number is 3-4, more than for most of my articles.) Narky Blert (talk) 22:25, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Like. Thanks for sharing songs of resistance! El_C 03:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Unpleasantness at an AfD

Please take a look here and revdel the offending revisions? This was in response to this thread at ANI. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

RandomCanadian, though I was unaware of that ANI complaint (and have not looked into its context further at the time of my writing this), that doesn't look like a good candidate for revdel. In fact, I think an inline redaction would have been better than doing so outright. El_C 14:35, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

"Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material" (revdel reason no. 2) seems to be quite the match for this; but ok. I did use {{redacted}}. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

RandomCanadian, in line redaction → {{redacted|text}}. Anyway, I'll just quote this passage in full:

I recommend that the user Djm-leighpark not interfere with the second nomination process, as one of the similar articlespaces of the user has already been deleted with the same references (Aerospace Research Systems, Inc.). I will look more into the user's activity in the near future to see if it warrants requesting to have the user blocked from possibly further vandalizing the encyclopedia.

Looking at that, I'm not sure it even needed to be removed to begin with. Granted, the tone comes across as, if not menacing outright, certainly unpleasant. And the "vandalizing" is a personal attack. But I think it'd be enough to just point that out. To me, it feels like a heavy-handed approach for dealing with, well, "unpleasantness." Though, again, I'm operating with pretty much zero context, so maybe there's something here I'm not getting. El_C 15:14, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

It is a personal attack against a specific editor (there's a clear link here to be made with WP:NOTVAND); it is entirely germane to the nomination (conduct disputes, real or imagined, should not be conducted at AfDs, unless it materially impacts the article); it has led to people objecting to the nomination both on the AfD and at ANI; and it clearly has "no relevance or merit to the project". Agree to disagree on whether revdel is heavy-handed, but since it clearly is objectionable, I think the removal should stand. Of course, since this was me enforcing what I thought was common-sense requirements, and apparently there's room for disagreement, you're free to improve on my action. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know anything about this beyond this comment thread and a very cursory glance at the deletion page. So I wouldn't feel confident in doing anything (nor do I really care that much, tbh). But I see these kinds of you're vandalizing NPAs in talk pages and in edit summaries all the time, but I rarely revdel or remove these for that reason alone. Usually, I just warn the user in question about NPA. In my experience (and certainly my operation), mild NPAs are rarely revdel'd or even simply removed. To me, the common sense thing to do would have been to post below the offending comment, pointing out its offensive and inappropriate nature. Anyway. El_C 15:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

FWIW, in that case, we have different thresholds (my initial reaction was also only after glancing at the ANI and taking a very brief look at the AfD). Not important in the end. In other news, it's near lunch time here, so see ya! RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:40, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Nice, enjoy your lunch. El_C 15:45, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

To be clear RandomCanadian's intervention at the AfD will result in me being blocked. I have requested at the ANI this is done to prevent me making a personal attack, but if it only happens by unpleasantness that has now aggravated inside my head spilling to WP that is how it will likely happen. I am reasonably sure I recall an incident on Railways/UK Railways, which may have been caused by myself not reading something properly, and I recall at AfD/PROD was also involved. If any events there may be more behind this intervention. I am again requesting a to be blocked before I do something worse. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I specifically recommended no action (since none is warranted). If you're having trouble dealing with the current situation and/or the editor who attacked you, you should consider taking a wikibreak (which doesn't require you getting blocked). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:21, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Djm-leighpark, I pinged you by accident in the quote. You should follow up any issues at the ANI thread with someone who has some familiarity with this dispute, because I know next to nothing about it. Good luck, hope it all works out in the end. El_C 20:03, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Return of the Waun Mawn vandal

Hi El C,

The protection that you put on Waun Mawn a few weeks ago has now lapsed, and with its lapse the "bearded ape" vandal has unfortunately returned. While they have only edited once as of this post, I see no reason why they won't resume their previous pattern; would it be possible for you to reinstate the protection, perhaps for longer this time?

BilledMammal (talk) 10:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I can't wait to eat that monkey... El_C 11:30, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Britainiana of the Day

Fascinating Aïda - Cheap Flights. Narky Blert (talk) 17:50, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Feckity feckity! El_C 11:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

I love the bodhrán player. Did you spot which of them is MtF? Narky Blert (talk) 11:33, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, Magnetized target fusion isn't something I'd be looking for... El_C 11:42, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

IDK how that happened, but it's usually safe to blame WMF. My guess is that I started to edit the current revision, which turned out to be an old version when I saved it (no warning). Narky Blert (talk) 11:53, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

You're making me so hangry. Get your own monkey dessert! El_C 12:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Template protection

Hello El_C. You page protected COVID-19 pandemic in Iran back in March 2020 under WP:GS/COVID19. However this page relies on two templates that remian unprotected, Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Iran medical cases & Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Iran medical cases chart. The first of which was vandalised today. I've reverted the vandalism, but was wondering if they should be protected as per the main article? Thanks 89.241.33.89 (talk) 19:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Done. Hey IP. Perhaps not as a universal rule for countries' COVID pages, but due to the exceptionally high spread of COVID in Iran, I'd say that, yes, it's due. Thanks for your help. Regards, El_C 11:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Americana anglicised

Michael Tippett - "Steal Away" - link. It sounds like a difficult sing, there's a lot going on.

Off-topic, just to show I'm an old softy - Battle of Saragarhi.

[NB crosses his fingers that he's for once managed to post on this page without refactoring it.] Narky Blert (talk) 21:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Did I mention that prior to moving on to the jazz band, high school yours truly was in the choir (and awesome)? Anyway, you know what subgenre I realized the Songspam series hasn't covered yet? White supremacist rap! (And you know how much racists love rap.) Presenting Playmatetessi's ARYAN QUEEN. But before clicking, WARNING: this constitutes audible terrorism, which may induce one to swim out to sea (the Specific Ocean, specifically) to escape the scourge of Man, or in this case, Woman. Enjoy! El_C 12:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Do you still have the choirboy's skills - sing in tune, sing in parts, sing anything at sight? I was voice-tested at school by our music teacher and choirmaster, who gently suggested that perhaps I wasn't quite ready yet. That was nearly 60 years ago, and I'm still waiting.

In 1963, we spent a family holiday in Gairloch Poolewe. The later stages of the journey involved lots of single-track roads with passing places, and we admired the balance of prudence and aggression displayed by the car we were following. We stopped at a ferry, and the driver got out. "Good Lord - That's Freddie Wayne!" After exchanging a few words, he walked up to the grocer's van we were waiting behind, tapped on the window, and said "Excuse me, do you have any peaches?" That was somehow typical of the man.

If you want to add fascist punk to your playlist, I don't recommend Skrewdriver either. Narky Blert (talk) 22:00, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Screw Skrewdriver, but Playmatetessi is something special. She has the voice of angel (of death), such magestic dissonance.

Yeah, I've been fluent in both piano (started at a very young age) and vocals since my early teens. I can play just about anything (jazz standards, etc.), with either, or both at the same time (which is good at parties).

Cool. But the only peaches I eat are from Peach County, Georgia. Also, sure, Freddie Wayne, I totally know who that is! Anyway, after subjecting you to Playmatetessi, here's some well needed ear correction. El_C 22:50, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

The crops are all in, and the peaches are rott'ning. Narky Blert (talk) 04:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:VANDALISM at article Coat of arms of Lithuania

@El C: Hello, after some break another user (Marcelus) is causing chaos in article Coat of arms of Lithuania, thus this vital article requires urgent actions. Marcelus previously had also participated in Talk:Pahonia#RFC: Pahonia and opposed the solution which currently is a WP:CONS, so he belongs to the same anti-Lithuanian nationalistic gang which received sanctions previously. Today he single-handedly removed two well-referenced paragraphs from this extended-protected article (1). Could you please apply sanctions to him which includes removal of his extended rights? I believe such vandal does not belong to the reliable extended-level users group. -- Pofka (talk) 16:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) (also noticed the ANI thread, where I commented, and memory from the rejected premature ArbCom case due to simultaneous timing with the COVID one) @Pofka: See WP:NOTVAND. Ordinary disruption is not vandalism. @El C: Now, at the ANI, I suggested for topic bans for some people at least, though I don't know who is the more at fault, and obviously those involved are going to claim its the others... However, since this is at ANI, the above looks like obvious enough forum-shopping, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 21:57, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

  Nevermind, see this is already dealt with. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:08, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Would you be willing to take a look at some personal attacks?

I'm hoping to avoid the whole rigamarole of ANI over someone making personal attacks. Would you be willing to take a quick look and maybe give a warning? Other users already have warned them, but they respond to earnings with more personal attacks against me. I'm hoping a word from an admin might make a difference. I've left details out for now so you won't be bothered if you're not interested. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:41, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 60 hours. Oh, I'm not personally attacking you, it's just been my experience that you act as a vandal and that you regularly troll Wikipedia to increase your stats. Eep. El_C 08:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I liked "Admitting you wrongfully reported me for vandalism and apologizing for it mighty close to being a vandal." Apologies are for vandals. Real editors persist! Thanks. It's been going on for a couple weeks, and I've been mostly ignoring it, but I figured after continuing this long I should try and do something. I definitely prefer not having to go to ANI for it though. I'm almost willing to put down money that they're going to assume you also have ulterior motives. Which makes sense, editing for 17 years for the chance to block a person just trying to get the truth out on a small regional bank is really what we're all here for. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Can you also take a look at this behavior after a block. Made threats at three talk pages, then began changing dates again, contrary to sources. It's past the one day for an AIV report, or I would have just put it there. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 13:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. I'll dedicate my next concertina song to you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Notice

Check your email. Cheers - wolf 15:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I've seen it, but didn't really have much to say in response, off-wiki. If there's anything you wish for me to address on-wiki, I'm happy to oblige, though. El_C 15:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, ok... as I said, basically I don't think the history there justified a lock and I don't think a page should be locked because of a simple content dispute, especially when the lock is requested by one party in the dispute and the result is to lock out at least five (possibly more) parties in the same dispute. I just never seen RPP weaponzied like that before. I thought that perhaps it was worth a second look, to possibly reconsider. So... that's about it. Thanks - wolf 16:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

How was it weaponized? Please explain, because as it stands, that's an un-evidenced WP:ASPERSION. El_C 17:01, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

The evidence is in the page history, the current dispute taking place on the page and the account status of those involved in the dispute;

• User A has a registered account.
• Users B, C, D, E & F have ip accounts.
• User A is in a content dispute with users B to F.
• User A files RPP, with the stated intention of locking their opponents in the dispute out of the page.
• The history of the page is relatively stable, the only ip edits for the previous couple weeks are from the 5 ip users, B to F, roughly one every three days or so. No other ip edits, and certainly no persistent disruption or vandalism from any ip users. If anything, this is just a slow edit-war, between User A and a half-dozen (or more) other users, going back for months. There just didn't appear to be a need for the page to be semi-protected.
• But it was, and now only User A, on one side of the dispute, is able to edit, while users B to F, on the other side, are locked out.
• Basically, RPP has been used as weapon, (or a "tool" if your prefer (no aspersion was intended, I'll strike "weapon/ized" if you like), in this dispute, and I don't believe that's what RPP was intended for.

You yourself acknowledged these ip users in your log remarks: "To the individual or individuals behind the latest IPs: if you do not engage other disputants on the article talk page ... you will effectively be forfeiting your position.", basically making the protection a part of the dispute. If they're not disrupting the page anymore than user A is, they shouldn't be locked out while User A isn't. If you felt the content dispute was so disruptive that protection was warranted to quell the disruption and force the parties to talk, then perhaps full-protection with admin-only access, would've been the way to go. But beyond that, you were notified at the RPP that User A had also just filed at DRN (I don't know if that construes forum shopping or not?), why not let that process play out?

Anyway, I'm not trying to get up in your grill, I honestly belive you're one of the few, very good admins we have. I also know there has been a strong push of late to treat ip users equally with registered users, and to be friendly and accommodating to new users and those not familiar with all the processes and rules here. This lock could be seen as favoring a regular, registered user, giving them ammo for their fight, while causing disenchantment among the other users. I'm just trying to keep things balanced, that's why I requested you take a second, closer look. Thank you - wolf 20:45, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Referring me to the page's revision history is not evidence. It may be where the evidence is, but that isn't the same thing. I had already announced that if the IP disputants will not engage the talk in a few days, I will be converting the full protection into semiprotection (something which I specifically pinged you to). Otherwise, the page would have remained fully-protected on the IPs' version for the entire week.

So, they didn't, and I forgot. Then, you arrived here today to take issue with the full protection for some reason (though it displayed the version belonging to the IPs!), a complaint I did not and still do not entirely understand. That message, in turn, reminded me to semiprotect the page as promised. Which you now also take issue with. But I submit that I was clear from the outset with the IPs. My full protection summary reads:

To the individual or individuals behind the latest IPs: if you do not engage other disputants on the article talk page (Talk:United States Army Special Forces) you will effectively be forfeiting your position. Thanks.

While my downgraded semiprotection summary reads:

Downgrade, lengthen protection. IPs: you may still engage the article talk page (Talk:United States Army Special Forces) at any time, but since you've failed to do so thus far, now it's this

I'm honestly lost as to what I should have done instead. If you, yourself, favour the IPs' version, get a 3rd opinion or maybe even run an WP:RFC on the contested content. But I'm not sure how productive this exchange is, because I'm not really understanding what you want me to do. El_C 21:21, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. Minor point but I was (obviously) under the impression it was semi. But, even then I stated that semi should be reconsidered, and it should either be full or nothing. And you've since changed it from full to semi, and from 1 week to 2 months...? (I'm now honestly lost).

Another point, the only reason I mentioned the page history is because I believed admins checked the history before acting on an RPP. And as I said, I don't believe the history alone warrants protection, and I didn't think pages were protected due solely to content disputes.

Along with that, the protection locks out one side of the dispute, and not the other (who as it turns out requested the protection, specifically stating they wanted to lock out their opponents!) But now I'm just repeating the same unaddressed concerns.

Your last words were that I should take this to 3PO or RfC, but there is already a DRN filed on this (that I mentioned above and at the RPP).

I think the protection is mistake, but if you think it's the right call, I'll respect your decision and leave it at that. I didn't have a position in this dispute (as my edits there will show), I just wanted this year-long edit-war between this single editor and a group of ip users to end. I was trying to work towards that, but everyone is entrenched, this editor has already filed at RPP and DRN and has even threatened going to ArbCom. I'll just watch for now, see how this plays out, and hopefully the dispute will end, either with content supported by sourcing and consensus, or no content at all (this is not a new position for me either).

Sorry for the hassle, consider the RPP matter dropped. - wolf 22:31, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

RE: WP:DRN — that DRN filing was unnecessary. As I already mentioned there, there needs to be an impasse on the article talk page first before filing such a WP:DRR. It wasn't forum shopping, it just needlessly split the discussion. Because the IPs didn't engage the article talk page, just like they didn't engage that DRN request. El_C 21:40, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, just noticed this after I posted my comment above. Wanted you to know I not ignoring this comment, just standing by the decision above to leave this all be for now. I think any more of a directed response will just further this into more of a circular debate, and I'd like to avoid that, as I'm you would. You're still on my Christmas card list! - wolf 22:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Thewolfchild, it just feels like you're not being responsive to my salient points. For example, above, I linked to where I pinged you to say: But, if the IP/s fail to engage the talk in, say, a couple of days, let me know and I'll convert to a longer semiprotection, yet this lengthened semiprotection still surprises you. How so? You also say that it was "obvious" that you mistook the full protection with a semi'd one, but it wasn't obvious to me. Yes, I looked at the history, but not in the way that necessarily aligns with the evidence that you say exist, and yet to produce (the burden is on you, since you made the "weaponizing" claim).

Further, you seem to want protection inaction somehow for a year-long edit war. Why? Why a "mistake"? You seem to want the IPs to get a fair shake (me too), but if they don't WP:COMMUNICATE on the article talk page (or at that superfluous DRN), what do you expect to happen? I'm sorry, but it's frustrating when you present yourself as an even-handed mediator, but you don't seem to be acting like one. It's okay to challenge my actions, but stuff has to connect and it just... isn't here. I dunno, I'm happy to let this go, but these seemingly fire-and-forget complaints that I (still) can't make sense of, well, they make me a bit uneasy, to be perfectly honest. El_C 00:10, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps were talking past each other (I dunno, but this medium really does suck sometimes). As for your adding the protection, it's your call, you're good with it, I disgreed, but said I dropped it. I'll stick to that. On a side note, you mentioned "weaponizeding" again (which I offerred to strike) and you say your "uneasy". If it's about that, please let me make clear that I was referring to User A, not you. I felt (and still feel) they... used RPP in a manner that I disagree with. While only one IP user has posted on the tp about this so far, they have spoken with edits, with multiple, lengthy edit summaries, and even added sources when requested. Multiple users all saying they believe a specific edit belongs, and because they don't use WP on the daily like others here, that somehow invalidates all those edits? Or the consensus that comes with them? But because they haven't shown up again (yet) on the talk page, this single editor, User A who has engaged in the protracted edit war with all these people, with nothing more than IDLI and OSE as a reason, is now somehow able to bar them from editing... for months? That makes me uneasy, to be honest.

And now I'm gonna stop here. (I'm debating deleting this entire post actually). We disagree on this. When I said I'd drop this, it wasn't because I changed my mind, I just don't think anything is going to come of debating this further. I own the semi/full mix-up at the beginning and any confusion that may have initially come from that. I also should've made clear that I felt it was the requesting editor that I belive misused RPP, not you, and probably should've used a different word (eg; like tool, I probably should've gone with that). Other than that, none of this is "fire-and-forget". It's "put my disagreement with your decision on the table with my reasons why, you're standing by you're decision, and I'm not gonna debate it further". I've been told in the past here to let things go, and I'm trying to do just that. Not everyone is going agree with every decision an admin makes. That's all that happened here, afaic. I hope you're ok with that. Cheers - wolf 02:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Thewolfchild, if you think there was a misuse of some sort, by anyone, take it to a noticeboard. But I think you'll find that insistence on actual evidence isn't an imperative that's limited to myself. If you want to actually drop it, maybe don't keep prefacing that with lengthy posts, because that diminishes from that intent (call it fire-and-forget or whatever). El_C 08:42, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

"Lengthy"? I kept them as short as I could just to address points in your subsequent replies. (And like said, this medium sucks) If I wanted to bring this to a noticeboard, I would've, but I haven't. I asked you about it, and then decided to drop it. That is still my decision. Now, hopefully this is short enough. Have a nice day. - wolf 15:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Continuous disruptive editing by IP

Hi, I want to let you know about an on-going disruptive editing by an IP at 2021 Facebook outage page. Thanks, WikiLinuz (talk) 17:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

EDIT: Looks like they're also here, reverting your talk pages. WikiLinuz (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

And I didn't even read your msg before they changed Buck Flower into Fuck Flower! Which as far as vandalism goes, is pretty funny. As was their preemptive strike.

But why did you contact me to begin with? That article wasn't on my watchlist. Did I otherwise do something related to the subject matter? Because if so, I do not recall it. El_C 17:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, I usually contact the administrators directly to skip the drama. I see you listed under currently active admins and you happen to be my favorite pick this evening :) WikiLinuz (talk) 17:52, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh, neat link. El_C 17:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

-ana of the Day

In 1939, the Daughters of the American Revolution refused Marian Anderson permission to sing in Constitution Hall because of because. An outdoor gig was arranged instead. This seems to be the only surviving footage.

My Oath, but she was good. "Deep River", "Erbarme dich". (If you don't know the latter, it's a meditation on St Peter's remorse after his betrayal.) Narky Blert (talk) 18:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Narky Blert, My Oath, but she was good — I totally understood that (probably)! BTW, Gerda, Bach sighted! El_C 09:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Note

I'm not feeling motivated to assist with this matter. Presumptuousness and hostility will tend to have that effect. El_C 16:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I thought I'd remind you of your actions here [226], [227], and invite you to check out this set of edits [228], [229],[230],[231]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.19.189 (talk) 21:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC) You're gonna have to be more specific, IP. I don't recall that 2019 incident (I've protected thousands of pages since), nor am I able to infer how it connects to these additional links you've provided. El_C 21:46, 15 October 2021 (UTC) You're a smart guy, I'm sure you'll figure it out, if you want to. It's not the page protection, but the blocking of a user over what you described as harassment. 12.30.19.189 (talk) 01:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC) I guess I don't want to, then. Not like this. El_C 01:19, 16 October 2021 (UTC) Color me shocked. Things sure look different when it is one of your buddies doing the harassments, eh? 12.30.19.189 (talk) 01:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC) Eh. El_C 02:10, 16 October 2021 (UTC) Shalom El C. I will be more direct than the IP. If you Google: Yoav Sarig Nableezy, the only result is a post in a Wikipedia related site. The conflict of interest in nominating this scientist for deletion is obvious, and given the obvious notability of the scientist it appears very bad faith. Free1Soul (talk) 16:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC) Maybe look at how a user's entire editing spree yesterday followed me around to 18 odd pages he or she had never been to edit in opposition to me. I thought that article did not demonstrate notability and nominated it for deletion. I have no personal or financial connection with the subject in any way shape or form. nableezy - 16:15, 16 October 2021 (UTC) Here, that should make the problem fairly clear. nableezy - 16:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC) I voted in AFD and undid 17 map changes, objected by other user too, you made in rapid succession. Your mass change of maps was challenged and you also broke 1RR. The map you placed is misleading vs a more complex situation. In one instance you made a hoax as Hippos was never held by Syria, also not before 1967, yet you placed it in Syria, which I reverted. Your feud/coi with Sarig is clear. Free1Soul (talk) 16:26, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand what any of this has to do with me. There are noticeboards to lodge complaints at. If you look at WP:AEL, you'd see that I've sanctioned many users. It's presumptuous to expect me to follow up on each of them. And it's discreditable to make baseless accusations if I don't stand at attention. I'm not an employee of any of you. I am not an employee of Wikipedia. El_C 16:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

1RR

Ok, I have a problem; an editor makes two edits to Katamon a few hours apart:

• 15:49, 12 October 2021
• 20:15, 12 October 2021

I believe the editor broke 1RR (and Katamon is under 1RR), the editor in question apparently does not believe so (see the talk page). If I am wrong, then please WP:TROUT me; if not: please help me explain to the editor in question that he is wrong. (And, btw; I am not looking to sanction the editor over this in any way; my "goal" is just to make him (or me??) understand 1RR; cheers, Huldra (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Huldra: Looks like a 1RR vio, but they have self-reverted their last revert[232].VR _talk 01:26, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

User:Vice regent: I know; as I said: I wasn't out to sanction anyone; I really just wanted to clear up if it (originally) was a violation, or not; Huldra (talk) 22:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Huldra, I don't want my talk page to become a spillover for noticeboards (see large text directly above this header), please spread the word. El_C 14:57, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Ok, sigh, noted, Huldra (talk) 22:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

For what it's worth, El C, I didn't understand the large text until now. Given the close proximity to all the music, I though it was a statement on your DJ policy. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 03:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh, that did not occur to me. Amended. El_C 12:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah!! I thought it was about the music too. Good to clarify! DeCausa (talk) 13:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, I am taking music requests, but you do need to know what genre of music I feel like listening to at any given time. El_C 13:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Thruppence for your thoughts

Clip.

Jenny presumably ended up the DDR after WWII, changed her name, gave up her former career, and succeeded in a new one.

An Austrian baroness has preserved her memory. Narky Blert (talk) 18:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

My thoughts: I don't understand what's happening. Personally, I like Virginia a lot. Many good times there. And if I also happen to know the governor, maybe they'd be a cushy job for moi. Like, I dunno, Squirrel Inspector (an annual salary of $25 million would be aight), which I envision would mostly involve affirming to concerned citizens: yes, that is a squirrel. And so on and so forth (deep thoughts). El_C 20:03, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

2.5 is an interesting number. Mene mene tekel upharsin translates as "one, one, shekel, half" - or in modern money, twopence ha'penny or 2½¢. Daniel was saying that the writing for Belshazzar was, quite literally, on the wall.

Being a Brit, you cannot expect me soon to forget or forgive the genocidal behaviour of your invading beasts against Squirrel Nutkin. Narky Blert (talk) 20:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Dude, I can barely tell the difference between Duncton Wood and Watership Down — so, to wrap up this job interview, this is what will make me such an excellent Squirrel Inspector. Also, as I was telling Val yesterday, those 2.5 hours just flew by. Now watching Dunkey play Family Man / Peter Guy [Amend: sorry, it's 3.5 hours not 2.5, I miscounted. Extra amend: oh, part 2 is 2.5 hours long, maybe that confused me], so you see (SO YOU SEE...), it all adds up to a beautiful rainbow of stupid. 🌈 El_C 21:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

While on the topic of interminable novel sequences, have you ever played the Thomas Covenant Challenge? Each player takes one of the books, opens it at random, and starts reading. The winner of each round is the one who first spots the word "clench". Narky Blert (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm embarrassed to say that I was unaware of the franchise/author. I remember I got a couple of those pre-RPG books where you roll a dice and shit to the page number/outcome. Fuck, I hate these so much (which is surprising, because I like RPGs). El_C 11:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Steve Jackson? I remember those. Narky Blert (talk) 11:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed protection

Hello El C,

on 25 September 2021 you protected the page Diesel engine for ten days – apparently, this was not long enough… [233] Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 13:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

K. El_C 13:39, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

short desc

Hi there El C, how are you doing? Would you mind changing the short desc in Turkish War of Independence, as the page is still fully protected? Seems like nobody objects to my proposal in talk. Sincerely, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 07:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey. If there was positive support for it, maybe, but a lack of opposition isn't enough for me when the protection expires in 2 days anyway. El_C 11:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

BLPTALK violation?

Hi. I think you closed the recent Arbcom issue about BLPTALK violations at Talk:Israel lobby in the United Kingdom, brought by a user now blocked as a sock, who had redacted material on the talk page. This has now been un-redacted under the justification "rv sock". Do you know what the status of the material is? Should it be redacted or not? (Context: the redacted links include to SPSs purporting to doxx WP editors.) Thanks! BobFromBrockley (talk) 19:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I re-redacted and revdel'd the edits with those problematic external links, BobFromBrockley. El_C 20:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Word of the Day

Poronkusema. Narky Blert (talk) 02:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Fin! El_C 07:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, FIM! El_C 14:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Another Nordic method of avoiding payment on a civil engineering contract. Narky Blert (talk) 18:11, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Rashmi Rocket film article

Please request to protect article some users spreading vandalism. Sush150 (talk) 05:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Sush150, protection requests are submitted to WP:RFPP/I. I've already attended to that request there, btw. El_C 07:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Sush150 (talk) 08:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for your admin work! Always appreciate your wikignoming and reading your insights in discussions. Thought I'd share a kitten for an underappreciated editor. Cheers!

A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 08:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the kitten, A._C._Santacruz! I appreciate your kind words very much. El_C 08:37, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Results from Icewhiz-led AE proceedings

Hi El C, I was wondering whether you think it worth me contesting my TBAN on the basis that the AE was written up by 11Fox11, a now condemned sockpuppet of Icewhiz,] and Geshem_Bracha supported by Geshem Bracha, another Icewhiz sockpuppet]? Clearly Icewhiz had no right to raise the AE itself, and, in hindsight, I was being pursued by a highly POV and experienced banned user gaming the system. I've tried to ask Callanecc, but I've just noticed they haven't been active since 14 October, and you have been more involved in AE cases since then. As you have noted, 11Fox11 subsequently withdrew their case against Selfstudier, though Icewhiz continued their efforts in the case raised by Hippeus in their case against ZScarpia. I think the fact that 11Fox11 raised an AE against me while another was still ongoing and without asking me to revert are definitely aspects of the case that now can be seen in a different light after the SPI. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Iskandar323, I was not involved in reviewing that AE case so I simply have no knowledge as to what it was about. El_C 12:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Pokémonfanxyz is a sockpuppet of Pritam kumar roni das. Their editing interest is nearly same and see this. This sock will ultimately get extended access very soon and will again resume the disruptions especially to the page Mon Phagun and other TV shows. Other confirmed socks were Pritam das 01022000 and Pritam Das 2000. Please block them. Thank you 2402:3A80:6F7:FE71:DCD8:69CE:4DCB:3B58 (talk) 16:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done. El_C 20:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic

Hi can you please increase security level of Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, it's sovereignty is disputed with Morocoo and article is always under attack with vandalism and propaganda edits, This article should be indefinite semi-protected like Somaliland, Artsakh and other. Ytpks896 (talk) 21:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Ytpks896, I don't think it's as bad as Somaliland was (see also the later WP:HORN). Surprisingly, a lot of the fairly intensive SADR-related disruption of a few months ago (I blocked multiple disruptive accounts and protected multiple related pages then) actually skipped the main SADR article itself. Which I found quite puzzling at the time. Anyway, I'm inclined to do nothing atm.

While wrt activity it's a good candidate for WP:PC, it looks like enough editors watch that page to make it unnecessary. Feel free to drop me a line if things get worse (I notice the disruption on that page ebbs and flows) and I'll consider semiprotecting, but it probably won't be indefinitely. Before I finally indef semi'd Somaliland, there were 25 previous protections. Before another admin indef semi'd Republic of Artsakh (see also WP:AA2), it had 13 previous protections. Whereas the SADR page has had only 4 previous protections. Hope that makes sense. Regards, El_C 21:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

xxwiki

Sheesh, first a cywiki and now a viwiki 'crat indeffed from enwiki? What is it with these people, and some of the smaller Wikipedias? I suppose all we can do is encourage editors fluent in other languages to beef up their own Wikipedias, in the hope of building critical masses there (all puns intended). (I tried and failed with KIENGIR, but so it goes.) Hoping that WMF will do anything is like farting down a well and listening for the splash. </rant> Narky Blert (talk) 22:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Last year, I indeffed a Japanese wiki 'crat for FRINGE-driven hate speech, but I can't quite remember the who or the when. El_C 23:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Americana of the Day

WWII, about Lyudmila Pavlichenko (the Soviets favoured female snipers, as being more lethal than men) - Miss Pavlichenko.

Typical Woody song - catchy tune, socially aware (if atypically bloodthirsty) lyrics. Serious props to the guy on the fansite who spotted that obscure tune's reuse by a British post-punk band. Narky Blert (talk) 21:37, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

• HMHB regularly re-use obscure tunes, Nigel Blackwell is well-known for his knowledge of musical history. He'll quite often happily re-use lyrics as well, although usually in a satirical way (i.e "Chesil Beach, is far away in time", referring to the fact that the image on the cover of "Echo Beach" was actually a map of that English beach.) Black Kite (talk) 21:59, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Nice, Narky Blert! You know the key to my blood Red heart! Love Woody; prey to goddess Lyudmila Pavlichenko like a deity, or at least an angel of righteous vengeance.

Also: It sounds like a class rant but it's really because I am the landlord of the pub that gets the cemetery — fuckin' brilliant!

Black Kite, now if only there was more funk and less punk, but damn, damn talented plagiarism (just at a glance, I didn't know HMHB existed until now). El_C 11:41, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Not just song lyrics either. The fansite was set up to work out where on earth NB10 was getting his quotes from. If you can think of another band who've referenced Euripides (not exactly mainstream for someone who left school at 16 with no qualifications) in a song ("We Built This Village on a Trad. Arr. Tune"), I'd be interested to know.

HMHB are the only band I know of who've recorded a song about necrophilia - Excavating Rita. Don't miss the Hank Williams/Dylan pun (or the obvious BWJ quote).

This is a seriously eclectic playlist for any radio show. Revisiting it after some years, I see that in the meantime I've written the article on one of those songs ("She Was Poor but She Was Honest"). Narky Blert (talk) 20:06, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

I have a 40-odd song HMHB playlist on my car MP3 player and it's my immediate go-to when I've had a grim day at work. It is frankly impossible to listen to "National Shite Day", "The Light at the End of the Tunnel" and "Joy Division Oven Gloves" and the world not be a better place afterwards. Black Kite (talk) 20:33, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

What sandwiches have you got? Narky Blert (talk) 21:34, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

The only one? That's good, Narky Blert. Stay innocent! I'm not gonna be the one to introduce you to horrorcore (probably). And speaking of being more lethal than men, and in keeping to that promise, Smallz One is one Narcissistic Bitch (WARNING - DISTURBING CONTENT) you do not want to encounter in some proverbial alley... El_C 22:05, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Necrophilia is dead boring (whereas incest is only relatively boring). Narky Blert (talk) 22:22, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Zing!☻ El_C 00:01, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring over RM closure

If time permits, can you take a look there? One editor closed a RM, one of the participants reverted the closure. The closer reverted suggesting a move review request, the other editor reverted again. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:45, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Doo-wop of the Day

Licensing problems, perhaps? This track never seems to have made its way onto any Greatest Hits by the Clovers compilation. Narky Blert (talk) 18:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Straight from the underground! El_C 22:57, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

El Clásico

I’m afraid the editor whose request to fully protect the page you accepted is acting in bad faith. Please, check the revision he was continually reverting. He is also biased and obsessed with adding Cristiano Ronaldo’s 2017 celebration to the history section, despite the lack of reliable sources confirming it had a lasting impact on the rivalry. Even so, despite my objections I kept his additions with slight modifications and that too was reverted before he complained to admins citing non-existent “vandalism”. Trackfan20 (talk) 06:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Trackfan20, this isn't a subject with which I am familiar. My suggestion would be for both of you to refrain from accusing one another of bad faith conduct and address the matter on the article talk page (which neither of you have done). If somehow you reach an impasse there, there are dispute resolution requests you may avail yourself of, like Third opinion or a Request for comment. Good luck. El_C 09:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I will proceed accordingly. Trackfan20 (talk) 09:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Gerda's October corner (resurrected)

A Cow Man approved sunset

October songs

Small request: on WP:ITNN, I moved a ready mark from the prose to the headers, but still nothing, - the whole thing (not only that article) hasn't moved in 4 days. The person (28 Sep) died the same day as the one who has been top for these days, and there were no major changes needed for him as well, - it looks unfair. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:41, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

I may have spoken too soon, - one more was moved in. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

... and now Amakuru moved him in as well - one of these days I want to turn to Psalm 15, - I hope they'll stop dying --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Going for a swim! El_C 15:34, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Good for you! - I uploaded new pics (click on songs), including "our" concert (after exactly two years without) and a cow sunset --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:39, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Story: Once, kid me and a friend almost drowned in the Sea of Galilee. We swam stupidly and then the currents did not want to be our friend. After so many hours, we basically just stopped trying to fight it and focused on conserving the energy needed just to stay afloat. These kinds of currents are the main cause of drownings (usually due to exhaustion), with a few happening a year, and a few tens needing rescue. But anyway, then the current took us home (to shore), where much relief/freakout was had by all (military got scrambled for the search, it was intense). *** Nice pics! When Cow Man approves of a sunset, you know it's a sunset. El_C 14:35, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

(blushing, thank you) - Today: #1700, and I uploaded more images, mostly blue and green, for hope. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:34, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps you can help? Mordechai Geldman has a ref for his death in Hebrew, and I just added it without knowing what it says. Does it have a day, and perhaps place? Anything else? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:20, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

OMG, I cannot believe how much Haaretz sucks, everytime anew. Their former art critic and they still paywall'd it. Just... beyond the pale. Anyway, Ynet says died in his home, which מרדכי גלדמן says was Tel Aviv. El_C 22:27, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Two things you could do for me today if you have time: improve Geldman (source works and such), and go ahead for Psalm 15. Going out --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Two things? That's more than one thing! Erm, WT:WikiProject_Quality_Article_Improvement/Psalms#15  Done. El_C 14:24, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, for both! Geldman is on the Main page! Working on the next 2 there. Evelyn Richter looks ready, but perhaps the six "on" stayed less than 24 hours. Updated pic counter, and after the next bio, I'll upload a few more, on a rainy day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Today: see yourself, read about a hymn praying to not be on earth in vain, about a comics artist whose characters have character (another collaboration of the "perennial gang", broken by one of us banned), and in memory of the last prima donna assoluta, Edita Gruberová. I had to go to two grave sites last week, one who died now, one who died 10 years ago, so standing upright and in black seems appropriate. More colours - but subdued - can be had on hikes, - updated. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Mis-archive, noo! El_C 10:07, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I never minded and just kept adding. DYK that three of the recent deaths mentioned on the Main page were improved by me, and today needs work on the fourth? Cheer me up. Sometimes we celebrate in the middle of the day a feast of a resurrection ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Just don't call me The Necromancer. Here's a hymn (?) to brighten your day, bruh! We Bid You Goodnight (in the morning somehow!). El_C 11:50, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn't because I didn't even know the word ;) - today: memories in friendship --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:42, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Significant day in many respects --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

I presume this was about the deer dinner...? (It does look tasty!) Please con-firm! El_C 09:51, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

One of the many aspects, musings on my talk mentioning pumpkins and peanuts. This is the third day I wanted to pass a November corner, but there was real life, and one job still waiting before I can get to it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Britaniana of the Day

Billy Bragg - "The World Turned Upside Down", about the Diggers. Narky Blert (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Like — True Levellers true hit! El_C 15:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

And here was me thinking that Billy Bragg might be too ragged for your taste . Narky Blert (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I can be ragged. I've been to Elk Mountains (in the Raggeds Wilderness) and lived to the tell the tale. El_C 12:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

"Moose Rag" may have been the only tune Ted Johnson ever wrote; I can find nothing about him, even on Stefan Wirz' excellent site. Narky Blert (talk) 13:13, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Whoa, old timey ghost can jam... I'ma hit you with the classics! El_C 13:22, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah, The Levellers, now there's a band. Levelling the Land is a ridiculously good album, even if their following output has been patchy (the latest one is a good 'un though). Black Kite (talk) 13:37, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Listening to the first track of Levelling the Land now — colour me impwessed! El_C 13:43, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Notice

You have mail. - wolf 04:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello El C

I see you protected the pages we had edit war on. I wonder if this will check what is written in the edit war. I hope it won’t remain the last thing he wrote, because I didn’t want to give back anymore. I hope he will write correctly, that there will not be something left that is not true and vandalism. Please someone check out these 3 articles and decide what exactly is there. Thank you 89.172.36.162 (talk) 05:16, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Someone? Anyway, aimlessly reverting back and forth so many times in all those pages isn't helping anybody, regardless of what's what. All it does is destabilize those pages and flood their respective revision histories. As you know, the matter is currently being discussed at ANI, so that is where you should make your case. Thanks. El_C 05:20, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that it is stupid to protect a page, about leaving vandalism something that is not true and now that vandal is laughing, the administrator protected the page, and mine writes. That's what I wanted to say, someone should check the page later and correct it if it says incorrectly. 89.172.36.162 (talk) 05:26, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Tell someone at that ANI discussion, IP. This isn't the venue. Both of you claim the other is a vandal, so I dunno, I'm stupid, I guess. El_C 05:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I said there I hope someone will check those three articles. Thank you 89.172.36.162 (talk) 05:44, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Apologies for removing

Hello there! Apologies for removing on this User talk:103.144.225.75 page that my sig color is blue. I didn't know that it was a joke when you said that but yes.. I'd also laugh when I saw your reasoning why you edited back so yeah. Cornerstone2.0 (talk) 06:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

No worries, Cornerstone2.0, all good. El_C 15:12, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Brittaniania

While we're on the subject of Agitpop, the album which this song is from (released a year-and-a-half before Thatcher took office!) achieved a heady #144 on Billboard, so you may not know it. If you feel inclined, you can mouth "and me" during the pause. (I've still got the original album, and the stencil that came with it.) Narky Blert (talk) 16:54, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I did not. Let's fucking go! El_C 17:59, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

TRB's commercially most successful song was "2-4-6-8 Motorway", which is perfectly enjoyable pop but nothing special. Their best song may be this, in a live performance on regional TV before it was released; 44 years later, and the fury still crackles through the screen. It got to #14, even though no-one on BBC Radio would play it except the late great John Peel.

I plan to introduce a topic related to my most recent article in a subsequent instalment. Narky Blert (talk) 20:07, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

It's good, but liked Power in the Darkness a lot more, tbh. BTW, John Peel sounds like he would have been super-fun to get wasted and listen to tunes with. El_C 21:58, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Peel was one of the great radio DJs, and is much missed. I didn't always listen to him, but it was reassuring to know he was there. He had a very dry sense of humour, would listen to anything people sent him, and play a lot of it. He basically discovered reggae, punk and hip-hop for UK radio audiences. I could never get to grips with his love of hip-hop, but two out of three ain't bad. Einstürzende Neubauten anyone? See List of Peel sessions.

John Walters was also highly influential and a corrective. There's a story that after Peel had signed off one of his early Radio 1 broadcasts, during the psychedelic era, saying that he was off to commune with the flowers in the park, Walters was discovered on the floor of the broadcast booth laughing uncontrollably.

Peel's two favourite bands? Half Man Half Biscuit and The Fall. Narky Blert (talk) 22:35, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Closely followed by The Wedding Present, I suspect. I am one of those that listened to Peel on my shitty radio in my bedroom as a child, and he certainly got me into the bands that make up the more unlistenable parts of my record collection. Black Kite (talk) 22:51, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Where I lived as a kid, there was this guy who collected hundreds of records. After he was killed in the war, his parents turned his collection into a lending library for the neighborhood (with index cards and everything). I really owe a lot of my early music education (not playing music, I had a teacher) to his collection, borrowing a record a week for years (many of which he had ordered from overseas because they weren't available in the country at the time). El_C 23:01, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

User script protection

Hi. I didn't understand your message "Technically unable to do so (only delete button displays for this page)." I'm thinking something to do with an admin tool? Is there any workaround? (page: User:DaxServer/BooksToSfn.js) — DaxServer (talk) 18:49, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a workaround, DaxServer. I've never encountered anything of the sort before. El_C 21:59, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) User scripts (among certain other pages, see WP:PPINDEF) are automatically protected by the MediaWiki software so that only the user and interface admins can edit them, which is why you weren't able to change protection. Regular administrators can delete those pages, but that's about it. clpo13_(talk) 22:14, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

That's interesting. Thanks for the info! — DaxServer (talk) 08:53, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Since you are active

Do you think this qualifies for revdel? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:39, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

bbbbbbb El_C 17:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Wise and eloquent as ever. Thank you very much, El C! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:52, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Forgive me my nonsense as I also forgive the nonsense of those who think they talk sense. --Robert Frost. El_C 18:17, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Boo!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello El C:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 22:28, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Usernamekiran, I'm already super-scared. I've peered into the eyes of a Guga! El_C 23:17, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

lol yes. Sometimes, it feels like eyes from some paintings are watching you, right? I mean, usually photographs don't have that effect. It's like the subject's soul enters the painting or something like that. —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 06:14, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Heh, Vlad the Impaler's got nothing on Guga! El_C 11:44, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

BTW, Usernamekiran, forgot to mention. If you really wanna get scared, my man Nexpo has got the goods. I recently watched LOCAL58: The Broadcast Station that Manipulates You and What are The Walten Files?, and holy shit! Hollywood can learn a thing or two from Nexpo and the film makers (whose genres I often can't even define) he curates so masterfully. Not for the faint of heart. El_C 09:59, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Watched them the other night, can confirm, very spooky and yes not for the faint of heart. ...Walten Files is captivating, and I loved the style of LOCAL58. — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:26, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@Wugapodes: I really Like the artistry and aesthetic for both of them, though I did like the story for LOCAL58 more than I did the one for the Walten Files. Something about the moon (obligatory How High The Moon songspam) just creeps me out. I dunno, maybe I'm part werewolf...? Anyway, it's really great to have Nexpo keep an eye for the works of both these artists and others like them. Hopefully, we'll keep getting more (and more often, even) such excellent curations of these by him. El_C 12:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, El C. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Bobherry Talk Edits 00:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

MoonlightVector

I came across this editor's userpage earlier today and redacted sensitive information. I just wanted to stop by here and say that the information I saw lead me to believe that this editor will be not as disruptive two years from now. I would have been the same way just a couple years ago. I gave them some advice. Feel free to respond if you don't think it was good. I am not sure if you were aware (you probably were). Scorpions13256 (talk) 04:40, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Scorpions13256. Good advice. Best, El_C 09:11, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Just because I like it

Gary U.S. Bonds - Love's on the Line".

Good album. Useful backing band (I miss the horn player). Narky Blert (talk) 06:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Interesting, I was unaware of Gary U.S. Bonds. But he isn't really my cup of T. And generally Bruce, too, to the point of it becoming a running gag amongst our group of friends. In fact, concurrently upon adding O Mary Don't You Weep to the songspam, I sent a mass spam email that read: Holy shit, I finally found a Bruce Springsteen thing I like! (Cheers and jeers followed.) El_C 09:22, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Minor musician, but The Boss often used to close out his shows with "Quarter to Three", and gave him enough songs for two albums plus his and the band's time as payback. {He's credited on the album cover as Rusty Springboard.) Typical of a generous man who's never forgotten his roots.

Love that video of "O Mary". If you don't know Nebraska, try it; Springsteen solo, mainly in reflective rather than rocker mood. Narky Blert (talk) 10:01, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

No, I wasn't familiar with it. Listened to Nebraska (song). Don't get me wrong, it's nice, but Harvest Moon it ain't. It just doesn't really do it for me. Yeah, I heard Bruce is a decent guy. El_C 10:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

If you can find it (it appears to be out of print and it isn't on Spotify), Badlands: A Tribute to Bruce Springsteen's Nebraska is one of the better tribute albums. The Ani DiFranco, Chrissie Hynde and Son Volt tracks are particuarly strong (IMO). Black Kite (talk) 11:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Found it, Black Kite. Wow, impressive lineup. El_C 11:49, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Woot! I don't know that album. Narky Blert (talk) 20:50, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

El Clásico protection

Hi El_C, I hope you're doing well! Thanks for the ongoing song recs Just wanted to let you know that your protection at El Clásico recently expired. Thanks, DanCherek (talk) 11:52, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Doing good, Dan. Glad you're liking the tunes! Thanks for umpdate, I guess... El_Clásico 11:59, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Ha, I noticed the coincidence... involved? Anyway, to put this random message in context, I edited the page and then noticed that you'd asked for a reminder, in case you wanted to restore the semi-protection. DanCherek (talk) 12:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Done. Too slow, recent-past-me! Damn, need more coffee. El_C 12:20, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Additional Korean War pages requiring protection

Thank you for protecting Battle of Chosin Reservoir, Hungnam evacuation. I also request similar protection of Second Phase Offensive and UN retreat from North Korea which have been experiencing similar issues. Mztourist (talk) 15:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm not seeing why it's needed at UN retreat from North Korea exactly. And on Talk:Second Phase Offensive#Obviously the miles should be added in, I don't really understand your objections. Do you consider https://www.royal-irish.com/ to be a reliable source for this? If so, it can be cited for that (maybe with attribution); if other sources' figures vary, they can be cited, too, for an approximate range. But the IP isn't oblige to provide multiple sources. Reliable is reliable. El_C 15:43, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

If you look at Talk:UN retreat from North Korea you'll see an IP trying to right great wrongs but more focussed on berating me than adding a reliable source into the body to support the assertions. On Second Phase Offensive the wording the IP added here: [234] to make it read "Over the next two months, the Second Phase Offensive forced all UN forces to go on the defensive and retreat some 200 miles, losing not only Pyongyang but Seoul to the enemy troops for the second time in the war. China had recaptured nearly all of North Korea by the end of the Offensive on 24 December 1950." making it a direct copy from the https://www.royal-irish.com/ which states "Over the next two months, UN forces would retreat some 200 miles, losing not only Pyongyang but Seoul to the enemy for the second time in the war and the Chinese recaptured nearly all of North Korea by the end of the Offensive on 24 December 1950". Yes I do have a problem with www.royal-irish.com because it starts with "Over the next two months, UN forces would retreat some 200 miles" when the offensive began on 25 November and ended on 24 December 1950, that's one month. Also Seoul wasn't lost in the Second Phase Offensive, the Third Battle of Seoul was 31 December 1950 to 7 January 1951. So www.royal-irish.com confuses these close, but separate offensives. As I said on the Talk Page if 200 miles is correct then there should be no problem finding other sources. Mztourist (talk) 15:59, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

I removed and WP:REVDEL'd that WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE WP:COPYVIO (diff), which should have been the first thing to mention. About berating: I need diffs+quotes — it isn't really reasonable to expect me to read a lengthy talk page. I'm sorry, I just don't have the time. Anyway, if you've reached an impasse on the article talk page, maybe get a Third opinion...? Unfortunately, this isn't an area with which I am especially familiar. El_C 16:29, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I only noticed the CCI just now when reading the two side by side. Hopefully ;) the IP will complain about you now! Mztourist (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, they would need to write their own prose, regardless. But as for what www.royal-irish.com confuses and whether it is even a reliable source — not sure on both counts. El_C 16:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

utrs 50241

Hey! UTRS appeal #50241. I be praising the Lord and asking him to deliver this poor soul form their, well you done seen it. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

RE: "macro-evolution" — I just have a difficult time knowing how to respond to such epistemological reductionism, DFO. Clearly, we have the inanimate (an electron, a hat), with the continuum complexying toward the animated (a virus, a cat), and all the way to sentience (a gorilla, a person). Some futurists also posit an eventual conscious universe, with 'thinking matter' spreading in the way that, say, strange matter is thought to and so on (by cosmic touch, if you will). Beyond that, the 'totality of all' vis-à-vis God is more a discussion that's within the realm of theology than anything which could, even in theory, be made explicable.

Ultimately, then, such a stance is more a feeling than a pursuit that demands rigorous study. With which comes a growing risk of devolution (back to Dark Ages, away from Renaissance). At least philosophically, because obviously Iran has scientists, so in the day-to-day, they just double-speak the philosophy when pressed due to state coercion. Oh, and does current Afghanistan even have a national anthem, because that would be music, right? El_C 16:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Someone probably said it before, but I got it from Glen Cook, that no religion makes sense, even to its adherents. So, we must take it on faith that <insert creed here>. And yes, the religious authorities (Sanhedrin) hated Jesus in his day, cause he discredited their authority, and today they (we know who they are) wish to discredit Science for the same reason. Rare is that individual (or maybe not so rare) that can believe <insert creed here> in their heart while having and understanding and accepting head knowledge that the religious <Holy book of choice> thumpers feel threatened by. They very much wish to reset the world to that simpler time when you daren't disagree with them. And this is why I rebuked that UTRS guy much as Paul rebuked Cephas . And of course, it all boils down that one's personal faith is not the rock upon which Wikipedia is built. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:52, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

And sometime a statue just gets lucky!

The Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius in Rome owes its preservation on the Campidoglio to the popular mis-identification of Marcus Aurelius, the philosopher-emperor, with Constantine the Great, the Christian emperor.

Free day — elevated debate. El_C 17:47, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

The doctor said give him jug band music

Foldin' bed

I just hope those jugs didn't hold jake. Narky Blert (talk) 20:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

There's only one Jug, Narky Blert. El_C 15:58, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Socks are back

El C, editor Pritam kumar roni das has again started editing from new account Serialbongo evident from their editing pattern and interests (They both have uploaded TV serial posters without licenses, editing List of Pokémon anime characters, and adding unverified information to Star Jalsha and Zee Bangla TV shows. For reference, User_talk:El_C#Sockpuppetry. Thanks. 42.106.236.200 (talk) 15:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

The sock has been confirmed by CU but not blocked. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pritam kumar roni das2402:3A80:6D2:6ACA:FEE3:2536:10A:7FE9 (talk) 03:18, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Delays? Why does your talk page stalker (me...) need to report everything to RfPP? At least protecting might be a simpler solution than playing whack-a-mole. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:12, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Delays! BTW, RandomCanadian, Pups Alone starring Dolph Lundgren, Jennifer Love Hewitt and Rob Schneider is now out. You're welcome. El_C 14:59, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Expect Snuh this week

El_C 14:07, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

• Bottleneck at Capel Curig.

The Lyrics Project has never worked out whether one line is "Neil Morrissey's a knobhead" or "Neil, Morrissey's a knobhead". Narky Blert (talk) 21:22, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The latter. You are welcome. -Roxy the sceptical dog. wooF 08:07, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Hey Roxy, I owe you quite a few *woofs* from lately, so here, I'm paying my tab and even depositing an additional small number for a positive balance. El_C 16:51, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Hey Narky, sorry but I'm Powderfinger'ing this joint! El_C 16:51, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

One of Neil's very best. Narky Blert (talk) 16:57, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Npa

Hi El C, hope you're doing well. Not to disturb you, but I honestly didn't think I should be even bringing obvious troll and ethnically charged cases to ANI. A while back, an edit-warring IP from Van cat started personally and racially attacking me in their talk page. I tried to inform the admin who previously protected the page, but I got no response. Today I wake up to see the IP follow me and rant under my post in the admin's page, again with the same weird ethnic and racially charged attacks/assumptions. The IPs "contributions to the project are mainly edit-wars in Van cat using different with different ranges [235], [236], [237]. I would very much appreciate if you could take a look. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 07:11, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

ZaniGiovanni, best to find an admin who is good at setting range blocks. If you want to link to a range, I'm willing to consider it (wrt collateral, at least, though no guarantees about effectiveness). El_C 09:49, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your time El C. Although I understand that maybe taking this to appropriate venues would've been the more formal way, I just thought their comments were pretty self-explanatory. If by ranges you mean exact numbers, here:

88.230.173.190 (talk · contribs)

88.230.176.200 (talk · contribs)

88.230.169.26 (talk · contribs)

Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 09:57, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

No, I mean a single WP:RANGE that encompasses all of them. Sorry, if you don't know what that is, I'm probably not to best admin to assist you with this. El_C 10:18, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

yeah, I didn't know about the WP:RANGE. I'll open an AN case, thanks for the help. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

User continue the same motive after ban

Hey El C, just wanted to let you know that the user ‎Çerçok continues with the same behavioral motive after his ban - WP:IDHT, tried to add WP:COATRACK material and accusing about omitting intentionally certain people etc.[238]. I know that WP:BALKANS policies are very strict with disruptive users so could you have a look? Thanks Othon I (talk) 21:58, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Othon I, maybe you both can agree to get a Third opinion and to step away for a bit from the page until that's ready...? Might as well deal with the underlining content that's contested once and for all. El_C 10:11, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Englandiana

Regrettably, there seems to be no early recording of this piece of caustic social commentary: "They're Moving Father's Grave to Build a Sewer"; clearly English music hall, if I'm any judge.

I've known the tune they segue into at the end, "My Old Man (Said Follow the Van)" since I was a child. (A song about a moonlight/midnight flit; we have no article; a house move out of office hours, performed the day before the rent collector brought the bailiffs in.) It was most famously sung by the great Marie Lloyd, for whom see Marie Lloyd#Risqué reputation and transatlantic tours 1st para. Narky Blert (talk) 23:30, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

I can't say the musical style is really up my alley, but thanks, this is nonetheless good stuff! El_C 10:25, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

A Nigerian editor

I was recently emailed through WP by a Nigerian editor. I did my own checks - and it seems that he really is someone who liked one of my articles and wants help in improving his editing skills, rather than being a prince who just needs some ready cash to unlock his family's fortune. So, I gave him what advice I could, rather than forwarding the email to ARBCOM with a satirical covering note.

Anyway, the experience reminded me of this classic from 2002. I don't have the patience to run that sort of exchange, but admire anyone who does. Enjoy! Narky Blert (talk) 19:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

This calls for a General Ham Alvis celebration! at the ready. El_C 19:36, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

In the 2000s, I was phoned by someone from the M$ help centre who informed me that my PC was infected with something serious. Concerned, I followed his instructions until he asked me to set up a direct link. After a few minutes of confusion, I explained that I couldn't do what he was asking for because I didn't have an Internet connection (which was true).

Some years later, after being pestered by yet more calls from M$, I asked the guy who runs my offie to translate an English sentence for me into Hindi, and he obliged. The next time I got a call, I used it. The caller was so keen to do business with me that he tried to ring me back 5 times within the next 15 minutes. Honestly, some people! All I'd said was, "I'm sorry you have such a small penis". Narky Blert (talk) 20:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I've been using Ham Alvis as my name to phone spammers for a while now. But I kinda suck at scambaiting. I never seem to act excited/alarmed enough, so rarely do I even make it to the 2nd tier. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 20:47, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Tom Mabe. Narky Blert (talk) 21:25, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Haha! El_C 21:42, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Need Assistance

User Aj Indiana was blocked for 2 weeks by you on 15:03, 15 October 2021 for being disruptive and edit warring [239]. After 2 weeks, user didn't change his attitude and has been constantly involved in edit warring where multiple users have warned him on his talk page. He was again blocked on 16:11, 30 October 2021 for a period of 36 hrs [240]. But again the user has continued edit warring on multiple pages including Ranjit Singh where he inserts disputed information with unreliable sources and extremely poor grammar. He has been referred to take discussion to talk page where the topic is in place but he ignores it and continues to revert changes as he seems appropriate. Here is the latest warning he received [241] but still user isn't showing any improvement. He needs to be blocked indefinitely. Three times is a strike. MehmoodS (talk) 20:04, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

MehmoodS, what is your actual objection to the addition/its sources? Please answer that on the article talk page (not here). You are edit warring, too, and Wikipedia isn't baseball but in any case there needs to be four reverts to exceed WP:3RR. El_C 20:43, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

User:El_C Objection is that there was edit warring by Aj Indiana and other user Ar1a1yan where Aj Indiana wants to claim Ranjit Singh's background as Jat while the other user have used sources that state that Ranjit Singh's background as Sansi [242]. Their is dispute about this information among many historians and one author actually mentions about this dispute here [243]. So to avoid edit warring, the background information was removed as proven disputed by this source. I have also mentioned this on the article's talk page section "Family was Sansi Sikh or Jatt Sikh or Neither is disputed". But the user Aj Indiana doesn't address this dispute discussion on talk page. He has reverted the changes to way he likes which to claim Ranjit Singh's background as Jat and that is why I thought to take your assistance.MehmoodS (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I blocked indef, MehmoodS. El_C 01:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. But looks like the user created another account Mohmood20 [244] and he is using it to impersonate me. Even going as far as redirecting his account to mine [245]. This is clear that his intention is to jeopardize my account. I have reported him on sockpuppet investigation. [246]. But any quick assistance in blocking account of Mohmood20 indefinitely would be the right solution. Fact that he redirected the page to mine is clear violation. MehmoodS (talk) 09:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Got it. But please no more mobile diffs, I can't take it anymore! El_C 12:02, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Sorry, I wasn't close to PC so sent message via phone. But I will make note of it. Thanks again. MehmoodS (talk) 12:12, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Opinion request

Hi El C, would you mind giving your input as a third opinion in this discussion? Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 09:36, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, ZaniGiovanni, that isn't really something I do. El_C 10:14, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

No worries, I took it to WP:THIRD. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit protection

Thanks for edit protecting the article I requested, I thought indefinitely would be better but it was my first protection request so I just went for what’s happened to the page previously. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia DirkJandeGeer (talk) 16:00, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome, DirkJandeGeer. Glad I could help. El_C 16:01, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Just because I like it

The original, for reference purposes.

Balding old man sticks his foot on the monitor and the kids in his backing band melt into puddles of sweat. Narky Blert (talk) 18:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Narky, I've watched that Dick Dale video multiple times through the years! 360p? Hit me with it! El_C 22:10, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

All of The A-Z of John Peel is worth a watch, even if you disagree with him. Narky Blert (talk) 23:11, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Heh, I recognize like three artists on that list.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Wow, Santa is pissed. El_C 23:16, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Follow up on a user you blocked

in relation this to your block of user 49.180.171.190 and that user’s request for unblock, [247], [248], would you mind taking a closer look and seeing if the ip user is the same person as User:Nvtuil and User:Sinwiki12? Like the ip user, nvtuil has been editing exclusively from a mobile device and on his user homepage also says he is from australia. When it comes to Sinwiki12 the ip user seems to suggest that he is the same person as the registered user in this edit [249] and draws on a spelling convention that is specific to Australian English - note the use of the word s instead of z [250]. All three users share the same geopolitical points of view, have edited on the same pages (this is what tipped me off that they might be the same person) and consistently fail to write content in a neutral way by not attributing the things they are writing to the authors and works that they are using. I don’t know if impersonating accounts or this sort of thing is allowed and what the penalties are but i have to think there has to be something that can be done about it given the tremendous amount of disruption that this type of activity can cause to the encyclopedia Estnot (talk) 06:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Estnot, I'm not a CU, so that'd be a matter for WP:SPI. Otherwise, the IP's unblock request and post-block comments are so lengthy as to effectively be rendered unreadable to me, so I'm not gonna bother with any of that. HTH. El_C 14:51, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

A personal anthem

Elvis Costello & The Attractions - (What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding.

A cover, but IMAO greatly superior to the original by Brinsley Schwarz - a tighter band, and Elvis' producer avoided the *lightbulb* ideas of adding BVs at the words "sweet harmony" and the maudlin spoken bit for the benefit of anyone who hasn't been paying attention.

There's an entertaining video of The Boss playing it live, during which assorted people (perhaps attracted in from the street outside by the racket?) wander onto the stage to sing a line or two each. (The relentless drummer ruins it for me, though.) Narky Blert (talk) 21:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I could never get into Elvis Costello (no Springsteen-like discovery yet); indeed, the Brinsley Schwarz version is better. Like The Boss with John Fogerty, Dixie Chicks, Jackson Browne, Eddie Vedder, Dave Matthews, and Bonnie Raitt. El_C 00:04, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

EC has got a bit fat'n'old, but is his younger days he could get pretty angry. "Less Than Zero" is about that POS Oswald Mosley, and "Oliver's Army" is about The Troubles (Oliver is Oliver Cromwell).

Do you know "Shipbuilding"? It's about the 1982 Falklands War. "Take me to task" refers to the Falklands Task Force; for "someone got filled in", the Wiktionary definition quotes this song. Elvis' version; though if you prefer the version by Robert Wyatt or the one by Tasmin Archer that's OK by me. Narky Blert (talk) 16:58, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I was unaware he was on the side of good (markedly). Still, the music itself just doesn't do it for me. Lacks, I dunno... melodic potency or whatever. El_C 17:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

My deaf spot is postwar jazz. Some years ago, BBC Radio 3 broadcast two of Duke Ellington's Sacred Concerts. I had to switch off after 20 minutes, it was genuinely getting physically uncomfortable, even though I can listen to a lot of the most dissonant stuff imaginable. (I once played through the whole of Metal Machine Music on YouTube; only the once, because I didn't think it worth a second listen.) I know, my loss. Narky Blert (talk) 20:11, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Totally agree. If it doesn't have a decent melodic bent, it probably isn't for me. It's one thing to listen to something maybe once just to appreciate its aesthetic, it's a whole other thing to really ride the flow (i.e. unlike when the Flo Rida's you). El_C 20:22, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

All the mods on the site where I used to be one agreed that spammers and trolls should be compelled to use serialised email addys and/or usernames. We never could persuade management, though. Narky Blert (talk) 22:20, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Narky, I was unable to follow your train of thought there. El_C 13:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking of the SPI you linked. Behavioural evidence if best, but if you can back it up with standardised usernames of the form Spammer001, etc. it makes life a whole lot easier (especially when searching). Narky Blert (talk) 13:25, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, l_C. Florida Man doesn't need confessions, though, He operates by sheer instinct! El_C 13:31, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Jai Bhim

Thanks for letting me know, I did actually miss that link at the very bottom. However I don't think we should restore the text since the first half is a copyvio of the linked source, and the rest (everything after "In reality...") appears to be original research. I didn't warn the user for unsourced content but I think I should maybe put a notice about copyright. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 00:43, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for letting me know. I'll do the things. El_C 00:49, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Okay, hopefully that did the trick. BTW, RE: The movie is based on real life incidents which happened in the 1990s in Cuddalore district of Tamil Nadu and the accused police man in the real incident did not belong to Vanniyar community — news18 needs to hire better writers! El_C 00:56, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Suspicious new user

I saw your block of ArtaXerxes58 and their socks,[251] and I noticed a new user, Al Ameer27.6. Said new user's edits oddly mirror ArtaXerxes58 and their socks.

• Pahlavi dynasty
• Rawadid dynasty
• Durrani Empire

Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Block, protect as I encounter em. El_C 18:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Blunt incivility straight off the bat

This is what user:D.Lazard posted, straight off the bat (under a feigned "third opinion" comment[252]), in reponse to user:HistoryofIran at the Talk:Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi page.

"HistoryofIran disputes this edit. In this disputes, HistoryofIran uses only procedural arguments, whithout discussing whether King's opinion is notable enough for being mentioned in Wikipedia. Moreover the name "HistoryofIran" suggest that he is not neutral on this subject, and that he is here for pushing Iran's official point of view (possible WP:COI)."

I find this to be a pretty gross violation of WP:NPA, WP:BATTLE and WP:AGF. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:08, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

LouisAragon, looks like they've been already Warned. But generally, unless of an especial urgency, I'd prefer for you to submit reports of this nature to noticeboards rather than over here. El_C 13:14, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Album title of the day

Stop sniggering at the back! Narky Blert (talk) 20:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Songspammed! El_C 12:04, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I wonder if he'd been listening to Debussy, e.g. Poissons d'or? Narky Blert (talk) 12:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Indeed. BTW, I've recently songspammed Debussy as well. My edit summary read: +Gymnopédies → Arabesque No. 1 — Claude Debussy + Erik Satie = 1888 BFFs. Ah, 1888, that brings me back. El_C 12:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

A non-hit wonder

The Only Ones - "Another Girl, Another Planet" - video - Peel session (not a carbon copy). It turned up in Peel's Festive Fifty (listener-voted) 1978-1982 and 2000, but commercially sank without trace.

The band reformed in the 2000s, but the singer's voice was totally shot. Narky Blert (talk) 21:03, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Nice, that's a surprisingly decent guitar solo for a punk song. They usually have no guitar solos at all, and their vocals seem almost purposely aimed at an un-melodic discord (which this track otherwise does too). Kind of like Eastern music, but less complex and layered musically. Which I suppose fits the rebellious streak, which of course I'm all for. But generally the music — Oy. El_C 00:33, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Page protection

Hello, can you please protect this page Islamic State – Khorasan Province because if you look at the page history you will see anonymous users keep removing huge content from the page and this has caused an edit War. 197.52.28.131 (talk) 10:40, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Drmies. El_C 00:34, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Oddly moving

Gavin Bryars - Jesus' Blood Never Failed Me Yet - link.

Bonus #1 - link. I'd love to know who scripted that, and whose idea it was - I suspect they asked TW on, and he improvised most of it.

Bonus #2 - Tom Waits - "Downtown Train" - link. Narky Blert (talk) 21:58, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

🎼 Fantastic! 🎼 El_C 13:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

IP with disruptive editing

Greetings El C due to continuous disruptive editing recently the Vuk Karadžić page was protected but it did not stopped with vandalism. This "new" IP Special:Contributions/93.138.19.195 started their edit warring on that page with the same behaviour on Mate Parlov page. Can something be done. Thank you. User:Theonewithreason (talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Theonewithreason, I'm not really available to enforce MOS:ETHNICITY disputes at this time. Also, the contested edits in question do not seem to be vandalism (see what vandalism is not). Perhaps it's disruptive editing of which vandalism is one subset of. Not sure right now. In any case, maybe take it to WP:ANI...? If you do, please ensure that the subject of the complaint is properly notified. Good luck. El_C 13:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. User:Theonewithreason (talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)

I just wrote the truth, that someone doesn’t like it, it’s his thing. 93.138.19.195 (talk) 13:41, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

I am being followed (wp:following) again this time by User:49.228.19.151

Hi User:El_C in relation your block on User:49.180.171.190 (background information: [253] and [254]) can you take a look at user 49.228.19.151’s edits (Special:Contributions/49.228.19.151) and see if they might be related? Both ip users have

1) made their first series of edits on the encyclopedia by tracking my previous edits across multiple articles (49.180.171.190 followed by edits on Wilson Sporting Goods, Concerns over Chinese involvement in 5G wireless networks, Meng Wanzhou, Extradition case of Meng Wanzhou [255]; 49.228.19.151 followed my edits on Chen Shih-chung and the United States [256])

2) made baseless allegations against me (49.180.171.190 has accused me vandalism [257] & [258]; 49.228.19.151 has accused me of canvassing [259]

3) showed intricate knowledge of editing policies of the encyclopedia despite being “new” editors (49.180.171.190’s third edit on the encyclopedia makes reference to wp:blp [260]; 49.228.19.151 second edit makes reference to wp:canvassing [261])

4) addresses which geolocate to the same region (both start with 49) which suggests the same person is editing on both accounts using a proxy server.

I also do recall encountering an editor who used the exact term “gish galloping” on another China related article but cannot at this moment recall which one specifically at this moment.

I’m sorry to bother you again but (once again) your help here would be most welcome Estnot (talk) 12:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

49.228.19.151 Blocked – for a period of 3 months. Estnot, I won't be around as much in the next little while, so if you see these IPs again, just report em to WP:AIV or WP:ANI, referencing this discussion. Drmies, looks like blocking the /16 didn't work. Would it be feasible to expand the range? I don't think protection can help that much, since it looks like they're just going to whichever pages Estnot happens to be frequenting at any given time. Also, who is the master? Is there an SPI? Thanks as always. El_C 14:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks El C--I don't know but I'll look into it later. Estnot, I'm sorry for the abuse--it's sad. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

thank you all for the help Estnot (talk) 15:35, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

OK El C--this is going to get complicated soon. Checks were done in relation to a number of SPIs, but I'm going to stay on the safe side and ask Maxim and NinjaRobotPirate if there is anything they see or that they can do. Increasing the range block is not possible. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:58, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

It looks like someone on a VPN. That's becoming more common now, but there are bots that automatically detect and block VPNs, proxies, etc. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:18, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedrun! El_C 02:14, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Just because I like it

Richard Thompson - "Turning of the Tide". Narky Blert (talk) 18:11, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that was nice. El_C 02:20, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Block this IP address

Please I request you to block this 182.56.210.144 ip address. Doing unsourced edits. Sush150 (talk) 07:19, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

The ip address is doing repeated unsource edits in Badhaai Do, Atrangi Re, Bachchan Pandey, Raksha Bandhan, Jug Jugg Jeeyo, Thank God, Radhe Shyam and Rocky Aur Rani Ki Prem Kahani film articles. Sush150 (talk) 07:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Sush150, such block requests are submitted to WP:AIV or WP:ANI. El_C 11:00, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Sush150 (talk) 11:13, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Sweet Home

You've got one of this great man's best-known songs in your spamlist; here's a little-known one, from the end of his career. (The second-last verse was prophetic.)

For balance, here's one by his great rival. (The sleeve credits Johnny Winter for "miscellaneous screaming".) Narky Blert (talk) 12:39, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Nice. Was listening to Second Winter the other day. So crisp. Full album. El_C 09:12, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Fun album, I didn't know it. UK and US styles were diverging again in the 70s, and I don't think JW really crossed The Pond. (We decided a couple of years ago that he's the answer to the trivia question, Name a blind White bluesman - legally blind, from his albinism.)

I'm a sucker for Dylan covers; but instead I'll post Mississippi Fred McDowell - "61 Highway".

In the late 80s/early 90s, a colleague (vocals, rhythm guitar, harp) fronted a local blues-based fourpiece. He'd been dropping hints all week about a new number they'd been working on, and I'd been failing miserably to guess it. At their next gig, the SOB dedicated it to me ("When I was a young boy / At the age of five / I met the gypsy woman / And I spat in her eye / Now I'm a frog / All slimy and green", then launching into one of the maddest fast harp-driven breaks I've ever had the pleasure of hearing). Of course Martin was pointing and laughing, while I was shaking my fist and hurling imprecations at him.

Lead guitar was Roddy Radiation, which is part of how I can claim the unusual double of having drunk wine with a Nobel Laureate and beer with someone who'd had a #1 single. Narky Blert (talk) 21:26, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Martin, I totally know who that is. I like how this is entering some Gerda-level find-the-ciphertext music-mystery. Awareness is overrated. El_C 09:51, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hey there, it’s been a second, I hope you are fine and In good health, quick one here, In hindsight you always called diffs in mobile format your weakness, needless to say you sure as hell don’t like mobile format diffs & you have (positively?) corrupted me and I try to de-mobilize every diff I make. Recently I used a diff in mobile format see here & @Ritchie333 converted it to desktop format, and user the word “conventional” which I thought was quite funny & made me laugh, I might have asked you before(I’m not so sure) but my question is what is the fundamental difference between the both? R333 please I’d be happy to hear from you as well. Celestina007 (talk) 12:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007, I think the fundamental difference is that Wikipedia on mobile is very, very poorly optimized compared to desktop. Sorry, I don't really know that much about the lore for why it is like this (still). Best, El_C 12:53, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Ah, that much is true, I can only imaging that(arbitrary speaking) less than 10% of editors here use mobile devices. Celestina007 (talk) 13:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Contributions/202.142.177.7

Greetings,

I got curious with long list of warning messages to the IP over the years Special:Contributions/202.142.177.7. It is relatively minor spam cases once in a while but consistently over the years. Seem to be a static IP.

Usually I don't feel like recomonding blocking IPs and Users, so I did not report directly @ notice board. May be you can look into it with your experience better .

Thanks

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 17:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Bookku, even if static, probably too slow moving to bother doing anything about beyond reverting their once or thrice a year nonsense. El_C 20:16, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that what I thought.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 00:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

re Supermann block

Wow, that was really not excellent. In indefinitely blocking a 15-year editor, you cited WP:BLUDGEON, which is not only an essay, but a largely stupid essay which says, among other things, "Typically, the [bad, bludgeoning] person replies to almost every '!vote' or comment, arguing against that particular person's point of view. The person attempts to pick apart each argument with the goal of getting each person to change their '!vote'". This is presented as bad behavior (!), and I guess it's bad enough to get kicked off the project (!!). What the heck is AfD supposed to be for if it's not to present facts and arguments to persuade.

But wait. The blocked editor's (supposedly horrible, blockable) efforts were at a Deletion Review advocating for the overturn of a deletion, where the deletion was indeed overturned and supporting an article at an AfD where the article is going to be kept. (It looks like, tho maybe not cos you've, I don't know, kicked out a key editor addressing objections to the article, altho you could have waited.) So it's not like he was wrong. That matters.

I haven't looked at your WP:NPA allegation in detail, but its for sure that Supermann was goaded quite a bit (including by a sock at one point). I do think he rose to the bait and got more testy (and arch) at times then you'd like to see. Other editors were worse, I think... and goading is not a good look. Sorting all this out fairly and correctly would take scores of man-hours which is why I recommended leaving it alone since there was a fair amount of bad acting all around, tempers got a little bit inflamed as happens, but no serious violations of any rules were made (essays aren't rules), and nothing that couldn't be handled locally and it's not going to be a running sore cos the AfD is going to be closed soon.

But you think different I guess, and your call. Wrong call, but I understand; I know the admin corps is super overworked and all, and of course you're going to make rash, poorly considered actions when you're tired and stressed. But I mean if you didn't have the time to do it right, you didn't have to do anything. So I mean if you want to reflect on that, that'd be great IMO, but up to you. Herostratus (talk) 19:42, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Herostratus, I'm sorry, but your complaint feels unfocused and fragmented, and riddled with assumptions and misrepresentations. There's nothing preventing me from linking to an essay, though the block notice read (in part): You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Specifically, WP:BATTLEGROUND conduct (at times testing the boundaries of WP:NPA, if not exceeding it outright) and WP:BLUDGEON to excess. In any case, I've reopened that ANI thread, so you're welcome to bring your concerns for wider review. El_C 20:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Aright, great. Sorry if my argument was poorly presented, thanks for considering it anyway. Yes you did cite mainly mention battleground and personal attacks, and that would be sufficient, but also bludgeoning, which caught my eye, and it was in the indictment. I had not even heard of this before, and now I'm seeing it swung around a lot, almost like some kind of... some kind of truncheon, or something... which is providing more heat than light. So that. Herostratus (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I sort of see it as a somewhat mechanical and repetitive form of WP:TE (added: and WP:IDHT). But not all behavioural conventions are written as policy. Conventions that aren't expressed as formally could still be invoked, providing their application to a given case still aligns with fundamental policy. For example, WP:BEANS is often cited in serious matters, even though it's a humor piece (though recently, I tried to highlight its more serious counterpart, an essay). Also, it is not an indictment and the block need not be permanent. The avenues to getting it lifted are not insurmountable and are not merely for show. El_C 20:43, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

potential sockpuppet

Hi User:El_C in relation to your block of User:Supermann and also User:Lolitart [262], it appears that they are sockpuppet accounts. Both accounts:

a) consistently use the 2017 wikitext editor function

b) format many of their tags in the same idiosyncratic way:

example #1 Tags: 2017 wikitext editor Disambiguation links added — Supermann [263] and Lolitart [264]

example #2 Tags: Reply Source — Supermann [265] and Lolitart [266]

example #3 Tags: Source New topic — Supermann [267] and Lolitart [268]

c) regularly leave the same edit summaries (example Reply)

d) share interests in certain topics or topic areas (example Shanghai related articles)

e) share the same pro PRC bias

f) demonstrate a lack of competency in many of the same areas (wp:competence)

Can you look into this issue in a bit more detail? Estnot (talk) 04:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) FYI, Estnot, the tags are automatically applied. "Reply" is a very common edit summary, and it's the default for everyone using the new-ish Reply Tool, now enabled by default for all editors. No comment on the rest of your evidence. Firefangledfeathers 06:11, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't make that connection, Estnot, I just username soft-blocked Lolitart for the Loli, per WP:CHILDPROTECT. Anyway, not sure there's much to do about it now, but if someone else that appears to be them appears on the scene, you can add them to the WP:SPI, where perhaps a CU could shed light. El_C 11:08, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

can you expand a little bit further what you meant when you said there’s not much you could do about the situation now?To a non administrator such as myself this explanation strikes me as a bit confusing and not making a lot of sense because the way I see it you can simply change the reason for your block of User:Lolitart for sockpuopetry based on the evidence I have provided. That would seem to be a much simpler way to resolve what appears to be a case of sockpuppetry. Or does confirmation of every case of sockpuopetry have to go through the SPI process? Estnot (talk) 06:24, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

What I mean is that your evidence isn't good enough as confirmation to alter the block. In fact, at a glance, it seems rather circumstantial. But there's nothing to do right now because both are indeffed anyway. About SPI: A CU there might be able to help in determining whose's who, but, again, as both both are indeffed, there's no one of concern to SPI right now. El_C 11:32, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

The reason I keep bringing up my sockpuppet suspicions is because supermann has made a number of edits which I think require removal. (Wp:sockstrike) Not all but some. But without confirmation of sockpuopetry this does not appear to be possible because wp:3rrno appears to apply only to “ banned users in violation of a ban, and sockpuppets or meatpuppets of banned or blocked users” and not those who have been indefinitely blocked. What am I supposed to do in this situation? Am I allowed to remove those edits by Supermann without confirmation of sockpuppetry? Estnot (talk) 20:16, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Old

I'm feeling old. My PC is acting old (mofoboard problem I suspect). While I'm trying to sort that issue out, Monteverdi's "Toccata" (1607) just doesn't get old. Narky Blert (talk) 22:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

But what about Martin? Heh, my GPU cost more than the rest of my entire computer combined, which I guess is the new normal. Thanks for fucking it up for the rest of us (and fucking up the planet), Dink Doink. El_C 13:28, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm not surprised, the GPU cost a lot.

Some stories ought to be true.

Using this m/c is like reading a newspaper through a letterbox by candlelight in a strong draught. I'm relying on my shoppers to buy me something that works. (The empirical GSMASS rule, All new computers cost £1200, worked for almost 25 years starting in the late 70s, but is now hopelessly obsolete.) Narky Blert (talk) 18:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

In Soviet Russia, GPU Dink Doinks you (you, specifically, Narky Blert!). El_C 10:31, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Section headings on AN/ pages

Hi El C could you advise why you asked that I not alter a title? My understanding from WP:SECTIONHEADINGOWN is that “It is generally acceptable to change headings when a better heading is appropriate, e.g., one more accurately describing the content of the discussion or the issue discussed”

The only reason the title was not set this way originally was my human error. My thread open starts with This is a behavioral issue from two editors so it seemed appropriate to correct my error to make it clear to whom it refers. Is there a reason we shouldn’t adjust headings on AN/ noticeboards generally? Thanks Cambial — foliar❧ 19:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Cambial Yellowing, you waited too long to amend the header (Nov 16), so doing so now comes across as misleading at best and deceptive at worst, making it appear as if it was like that this entire time. But it wasn't. El_C 22:32, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. I will try to remember to check my title editing earlier (preferably before posting) in future. Cambial — foliar❧ 22:37, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II

Hi El C, you protected McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II back in October from an IP user that refused to discuss their changes. The user has returned to make the same edits as before. See Special:Contributions/210.185.97.52, which locates to the same city as Special:Contributions/203.221.79.237 and the others. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BilCat (talk • contribs)

Sure thing, BillCat. Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. El_C 09:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Gerda's November corner

November songs

In November, I can offer some reading, - three feast days in a row, reformation followed by All Saints' and All Souls. On All Saints, we sang in choir in a mass - a 2021 first - and rehearsed (with the other group) for the next such thing next Sunday. All Souls is the birthday of the subject of my first article who will play a major concert on 14 November. Today we "celebrate" the first DYK for which LouisAlain laid the base in a German sandbox, - needlessly complicated but working. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Nice. Super Gothic (image attached). El_C 10:07, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. The 19th century probably thought they were superior to the real Gothic ;) - Did you know that the first attempt to build that church collapsed? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:14, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

The duck ponds have had their revenge! I'm currently reading (slowly) Matthew Kneale's Rome: A History in Seven Sackings (2017), so let's just say that the Goths (Visi and Ostro), well, they make an appearance... El_C 10:20, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, "duck ponds" tells me nothing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:26, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Saturday Night at the Duckpond. Narky Blert (talk) 18:47, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

The collapse was due to the foundation being laid where there were once ponds... El_C 10:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I see ;) - I read "duck" here so often not meaning ducks that I was mislead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

update --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Library hijinks:

Go Santa!

Me: I have a book that's due tomorrow, can I get an extension? I'm at chapter 7 of 7.

Librarian: Sure, one sec.

Me: Nazis!

Librarian: ???

Me: Before that, French!

Librarian: ???

Me: Before that, Spaniards!

Librarian: *Looks at book, realizes it's Rome: A History in Seven Sackings. Laughs.*

//And... scene. How am I not finished this book yet? I gotta stop being Busi-ness Man and start being Reading Man again. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 00:41, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Good idea. Reading suggestions, on a friend's concert day, 3 DYK, Brahms depicted + sadly Aga Mikolaj (listen!). May the roads that we travel make us meet again! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:12, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

🎼 Ear magic! Also, Santa's really into the piano (me-relatable). El_C 15:21, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

thank you, and he's really into the piano, hands crossed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Your food is so exotic. Rump steak, ooh la la! El_C 09:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

BTW, finally finished Rome: A History in Seven Sackings last week. New book: Matt Taibbi's Hate Inc. (2019). El_C 13:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

good news - I managed to begin the translation of Zeitmaße into the composer's native tongue, stress on "begin", with a nod to its author Jerome Kohl - hope for a psalm next week --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Cool, good luck with the translation! I'm at the Psalms ready. El_C 14:06, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Protecting 2001–2002 India–Pakistan standoff

Hey, I noticed you applied full protection to the article. I requested indefinite pending changes protection because the article (like other India-Pakistan topics) is prone to vandalism like this. The content dispute in question has died down and consensus has been reached (and one of the parties has been taken to ARE), so a whole week of full protection seems a bit too extreme. Cipher21 (talk) 13:12, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Cipher21, the latest edits feature edit warring among registered users, of which you are one (diff), hence the full protection. Semiprotection would have no effect, since you're all confirmed users or higher. I briefly considered protecting higher at WP:ECP, but opted against doing that since it would have unfairly locked you out but not your opponent (who unlike you, currently enjoys the extended confirmed user right). Applying pending changes to the page wouldn't be worthwhile regardless of any of that, because it is simply too active atm to be of benefit. HTH. El_C 13:22, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

True, but both of us had decided to stop editing a few days ago and the area of the infobox in dispute has been removed entirely (by a third editor). After an extensive discussion on the talk page, it seems that consensus has been reached on a certain revision (but I indicated I wouldn't restore it until I received confirmation). I just wanted indef PC protection so that IPs wouldn't vandalise the casualties by adding or removing a few 0s. Cipher21 (talk) 13:52, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, if the latest editing disputes are done (at least reverts-wise), then I'll lift the protection. But how sure are you that they are (done)? Also, your request to have the page protected against IPs isn't really connecting for me. Most of the activity I'm seeing is coming from registered users. I see an IP making an edit 4 days ago, and the IP edit before that was over a month ago. So not a lot. Also, IPs are able to edit a page when it's under pending changes (WP:PC). Are you sure you understand what it does? El_C 14:01, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm sure the dispute in question is over - I just received said confirmation as well. As for protection, that's precisely why I wanted PC. There isn't enough IP/new account vandalism to warrant semi protection, but PC prevents a situation where one guy quietly slips in a few 0s, and no one notices for a while, during which hundreds to thousands of people could be mislead. With PC this sort of vandalism will be reverted before it is visible to (unregistered) readers. Cipher21 (talk) 15:14, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

That's only one person, though. About pc: again, the page is too active atm for it to be of benefit, in two ways: first, no edits seem to fall under the radar, as everything looks like it gets noticed pretty much the same day. And secondly, the page is active enough that chasing a cascade of revisions could hinder editorial flow. It isn't what pc is meant for. El_C 15:22, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Alright, your call if you believe PC isn't needed. I don't propose chasing a cascade of revisions, just copy pasting the "casualties" section from the said revision back into the current page to avoid messing anything else up. I don't want to bore you with the details of the dispute but those are official figures from India, and the opposing argument consisted of misrepresenting sources (and refusing to listen when said misrepresentation was pointed out), so doesn't WP:SNOW apply? Cipher21 (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Apply to what? I'm not seeing a WP:DRR discussion that requires a WP:CLOSE, SNOW or otherwise. El_C 16:35, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

In the sense that it's WP:RS versus WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, so it's common sense that the former should be accepted instead of prolonging the already unnecessarily long talk page discussion. Cipher21 (talk) 17:01, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

That's not how SNOW is used, which is to expedite closures of structured discussions, like for an WP:RFC or WP:RM or WP:AFD (etc.). All there is on the talk page right now is a normal (unstructured) discussion, which at a glance, doesn't look that easy to follow. El_C 17:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Well yeah, that's the reason I condensed it into a single sentence. The whole thing really should've been resolved with a single edit summary but was bloated into this mess because one editor outright refused to listen to others and kept POV pushing. You can go through the ARE page if you want a rough idea of how it went. Cipher21 (talk) 17:34, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by ARE page. Anyway, maybe get some outside input into the content dispute, like a WP:3O or WP:RSN. I'm sorry, but I'm not really available to help with that myself at this time. El_C 17:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

ARE page. A third opinion was requested but turned down because more than two editors were already involved. I understand that you're not available to help with the content dispute, but could you reduce the protection, perhaps by a few days or completely? The dispute has been resolved, the opposing party has been topic banned and the discussion has been closed. Cipher21 (talk) 04:52, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Then start an WP:RFC, I dunno. But a content opponent of yours in this dispute, Suthasianhistorian8, has not been banned at WP:AE. I'm not going to modify the protection right now. Why are you expending so much energy on that? It hasn't even been a day. El_C 05:35, 21 November 2021

That's another dispute on a different topic altogether. Suthasianhistorian8 is also convinced that I requested full protection to stop them from editing. Anyway, since you want to keep the protection, I'll make an edit request to restore the content from the agreed upon revision if you're not available to do so. Cipher21 (talk) 06:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, I'm unable to follow much of it regardless right now. If you want to request unprotection at WP:RFPP/D, you may note in that request that as the protecting admin I can already be considered notified and that any admin should feel free to adjust the protection in any way they see fit (including by lifting it outright). El_C 06:32, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Islam in Albania

Someone, firstly as an IP editor and then with an account created for the purpose of continuing reverts, is changing sourced content. Three editors, including me, have asked them to not change sourced content and provide reliable sources for their own claim. However, they have persisted, and maybe a short semi protection is needed. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:02, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

How did you manage that whitespace, Ktrimi991? El_C 13:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

With whitespace, do you mean the horizontal space rows between this section and the one above [269]? I use the Enter key of the keyboard for that. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:21, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Next question: why? El_C 13:23, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

It might partly be instinctive, actually. With no real logical reason. Also, because I am writing on the phone, having more space between sections is of help. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:44, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

It's not allowed! El_C 14:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Opps! Is this a rule for all Wikipedia talk pages, or is a thing you want to not be done on your talk page? If it is the former I will not use the phone to edit Wikipedia again; if it is the latter I will not use the phone to edit your talk page again - or to create new sections . Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:52, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

NEVER USE THE PHONE AGAIN! El_C 15:01, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

The poor phone, it is the time for retirement only after a few "tasks" on Wiki here or there. Unemployment for a phone is such a sad thing. Haha :P Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:06, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

I hate computers

Welcome to your new computer! Please confirm that you own your primary email acct by entering the security code we have sent to your secondary email acct. Welcome to your new computer! Please confirm that you own your secondary email acct by entering the security code we have sent to your primary email acct. I think that's one for tomorrow. Meanwhile, I'm setting up everything I like under a pseudonym, whose DoB may or may not be correct but which allows me to access adult content. J'ai changé cent fois de nom. All I need now is a spurious cellphone number to confirm my identity.

Meanwhile, I've been listening to:

• The Termites - "Tell Me", a rather sloppy cover of the best song on The Stones' first album.
• The Waterboys - "Old England Is Dying".
• Big Country - "Fields of Fire".
• Arab Strap - "The First Big Weekend. Narky Blert (talk) 21:38, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Old England (Remastered version) has an interesting time signature and good lyrics (sax seems out of place, though). Couldn't understand what the guy in the kilt is saying in Arab Strap (I presume it's profound), but I like it. El_C 13:48, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, The Termites were eaten by The Aardvarks or something, and vanished without trace. The only unusual feature of that track is that I must have heard it once 66 years ago and remembered it.

The Waterboys also did a lot of quiet reflective stuff, which you might want to look out for.

I rather thought that Arab Strap might be most to your taste. I don't need subtitles, but reading the lyrics helps get into the mood. Basically, nothing happens. It's one of those numbers which music-loving radio DJs dig out occasionally. Narky Blert (talk) 20:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Narky, it was to my taste. Sorry, one week -belated. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 13:55, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Don't know how to de-escalate PAs

Hi! As you're probably aware you banned me earlier in the month from ANI for CIR (justifiably so). I have recently been the target of personal attacks at an AfD I started here, by Roxy the dog. I wish to de-escalate the situation but I don't reallly know how. I don't have any bad will against them and recently buried the hatchet with them. I asked a few times to see if the other user would apologize and stay on-topic to the discussion but they have not, and don't know what else to do without escalation (especially since this might be affecting other users as well). Santacruz ⁂ Please tag me! 16:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I'd start by no longer replying to them. Either of the people in the AfD. You're not going to change either of their minds, and other people looking at the AfD won't read all that shit. Just disengage. You could even go so far as removing the AfD and article from your watchlist and let the process sort itself out. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

But the personal attacks were unprovoken, and happen to other editors as well. They've personally attacked me multiple times this month and have 7 bans for edit warring and personal attacks. There is no guarantee that if I disengage and then make any discussion in skeptic topics that I won't get insulted by them again, and while I don't want to escalate it I don't know what else to do. Last time I thought that burying the hatched would be enough but it didn't seem so. My issue is not with the AfD itself (Alexbrn has made some great points there and I'm looking forward to how that discussion is added upon by other editors) but with Roxy's pattern of attacks. Santacruz ⁂ Please tag me! 17:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

You asked how to deescalate. If you're seeking action that would be an escalation. If you disengage and ignore then the situation is deescalated. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I meant like, long-term. Santacruz ⁂ Please tag me! 17:44, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for jumping in, but harassment on WP is something that I'm always concerned about. I think what you have been doing - pointing out that you view comments as a personal attack - is the right thing to do. Currently, I don't think that the comments have reached a point where they are actionable, as the community provides a fair bit of leeway. However, ongoing harassment will reach a point where it will be acted on. So one of two things will happen - they'll get the point and pull back, or it will be clear to the community that they won't, and the community will act.

I'm very uncomfortable with ignoring harassment completely. Often when a long-term editor is indef blocked it is clear from their history that they had an ongoing problem, and that every time people would ignore or defend their comments, until finally they could ignore or defend them no more. - Bilby (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

I came here because of who made the last edit and the topic title. The ping didn't work for some reason. I cannot believe the OP read my talk page and then typed the above. -Roxy the dog. wooF 00:39, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

The ping didn't work because it wasn't intended to work — {{no ping|Roxy the dog}}. El_C 12:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi everyone. Sorry, but some stuff came up, so I'm a bit pressed for time for the next little while — it's quite possible I overlooked something important. Still, a couple of notes, FWIW. A._C._Santacruz, I'm not seeing personal attacks in that AfD (Nov 23), and certainly not harassment, Bilby (again, maybe I missed it). Granted, Roxy the dog's criticism of your [A. C. Santacruz], uh, content focus (?) isn't particularly gentle. But is gentle always better? When you asked Roxy for an WP:APOLOGY (Nov 6), that read awkwardly to me. I'm sorry to say, but it comes across as misdirected at best and a provocation at worst (which I'm sure wasn't your intent). In general, I'm of the view that forced/requested apologies are rarefy if ever a good idea. I'd probably respond in the negative to such a request had it been directed to me, tbh.

Still, admittedly, I am not entirely unbiased here as I've always been firmly on the camp of the pro-science editors (regulars at WP:FTN, etc.). Like, with the section you've linked to (User_talk:Roxy_the_dog#Questions) that seems to be about Roxy resisting attempts to remove the pseudoscience descriptor from the Astrology page, even though the WP:ARBPS talk page notice {{Ds/talk notice|topic=ps}} is at the top of its talk page. Anyway, I think ScottishFinnishRadish advise about de-escalation was pretty good, at least for now.

Sorry, that's all the time I can really expend to this right now. Other admins' mileage may vary. @Wugapodes: maybe help out with this one, too...? If you do, I'm willing to illegally campaign for your ArbCom candidacy. I already have a good slogan: Opabinia regalis has failed the cat community — a vote for Wugapodes is a vote for kittens! El_C 12:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

A list of disrespectful/ridiculing/sometimes PA edits by Roxy in both the ANI thread and the AfD: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. And the diffs for the Apaugasma interaction I referenced above: 1, 2. Calling people silly, apes, asking them to "take a long walk off a short pier" (urban dictionary), how is this not harassing me and other users from editing within pseudoscience/skepticism articles? I don't see the point in mentioning that they're pro-science as if that makes their words ok. Having the 'right POV' is not an excuse for insults and belittling others. As an atheist mathematics nerd that grew up in a homeopathic, astrologic, auspicious, highly catholic household I am as anti-pseudoscience as Roxy. But the way they're interacting is just not constructive. Santacruz ⁂ Please tag me! 13:41, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

A._C._Santacruz, nothing in those diffs stands out to me as being particularly egregious. Sorry, I'm generally not interested in tone policing, so I'm the wrong admin to ask to act no that. I'll act on WP:HARASS and WP:NPA, but I rarely do WP:CIVILITY enforcement, because I don't like doing that. And he didn't call you an ape — he said went ape at ANI over it. That's just normal slang to 'going overboard', excess, etc. In fact, I'm reading Hate Inc. right now and Taibbi uses that exact phrase in a way that, to me, comes across as relatively inoffensive (I'll see if I can find the quote, since it was just a few pages ago). Anyway, I'm not sure what you want me to do.

More broadly, there are several veteran editors (I'm talking years) who are, to put it bluntly, chronically uncivil, which is something the community has generally been unable to remedy in a decisive way (i.e. beyond occasional blocks). I'd rank Roxy somewhere at the average of that continuum between annoying (definitely me) and seriously insulting. Again, mileage, vary, etc. El_C 14:06, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Being pinged here I just want to say this: in real life I'm an atheist, a skeptic, and heavily pro-science, and the worst part of being targeted by anti-pseudoscience editors around here is really being branded as pro-fringe just for disagreeing with them. I find that extremely insulting, especially because other WP editors pick this up and also start to regard me that way. Otherwise, yes: disengage, unblockables, varying mileage, etc. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 14:27, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Point taken, Apaugasma. I freely admit that there are probably nuances here which I'm not fully cognizant of. El_C 14:33, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Just an example of being targeted by anti-pseudoscience editors around here is really being branded as pro-fringe just for disagreeing with them here, I just noticed that ScottishFinnishRadish is not only at war with GSoW, but is actively supporting Fringe. They removed pertinent criticism info from the BLP of "medium" Thomas John Flanagan, including the summary of his felony conviction from the lead. That was because I removed clear BLPvio here and here. I don't know if that is harassment, but it's certainly WP:BATTLEGROUND and uncivil. Also, that article could probably do with some revdel. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

I mean, it's an WP:ASPERSION (and probably BATTLEGROUND, too), but I wouldn't call it harassment. El_C 15:08, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

And I didn't, and wouldn't, seek any sanctions or the like. I didn't even report anything when they restored the BLP violation to the lead. It's mostly just an example of the behavior around the topic. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:12, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Sure, some venting is allowed here. And, yeah, I sort of gathered, as much as I understood what was happening in that ANI thread (read: not a lot). But at least I was able to (not?) learn that Valereee likes websites, so silver lining. El_C 15:19, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

By the way, just because we're having a civil conversation doesn't mean I forgot. I'll never forget! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:29, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

That list needs expansion... El_C 15:39, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

@A. C. Santacruz: I read through the thread and some of the diffs, and I agree with El C that nothing I've seen looks like it needs admin tools to resolve just yet, but I will say that the battleground developing does concern me. At this point the best advice I have for you is to simply disengage. Conflict tends towards a cycle of escalating back and forth, so to de-escalate, break the cycle instead of feeding it. It's hard and takes a lot of personal strength, but if de-escalation were easy we'd have a lot less conflict on here. For my part, I'll try talking to Roxy and see if we can all take a step back before walking off a cliff. — Wug·a·po·des​ 19:41, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

EL , I think it is really hard for someone to determine if a statement is offensive or not. The way I generally tackle it is if someone clearly states that they are offended, and the other editor continues to make the same coments, then it doesn't matter if I would be offended or not, as repeating the comment after they express how they feel becomes harassment. Sometimes it is simpler - physical threats, repeatedly saying that someone is incompetent by accusing them of WP:CIR, blatant insults - but I can't always recognise what someone finds offensive, yet this doesn't mean that it isn't, so I encourage people to be clear about when they are offended. Most editors will respect that, editors who deliberatly want to cause offense won't. That doesn't mean that all potentially offensive statemnts should be actionable, but I think repeated deliberate offense becomes such. - Bilby (talk) 22:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this, Wugapodes. Appreciated. BTW, I think I might have found a good Nexpo-esque creepypasta (still reviewing — it's like 2 hours long).

Bilby, absolutely. And it is partly this excess of grey area for subjective interpretation that discourages me from enforcing WP:CIVIL, at least as decisively as I would WP:HARASS and WP:NPA. And, again, in general, I'm just not a fan of tone policing. But, indeed, if someone is being unrelentingly unpleasant to folks (which I don't think Roxy is, though he's no angel, either), then I'd be more inclined to support action or even act myself. El_C 11:46, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Film clip of the day

Paul Robeson - "Ol' Man River" - link.

It is a cause for enduring regret that Robeson only recorded one of Dvořák's ten Biblical Songs - "By the Waters of Babylon" (in the original Czech, yet).

Am I right in thinking this may be to your taste, or is that pie in the sky?

{added) a historical document by Harry K. McClintock. Narky Blert (talk) 22:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Like. Wow, great post, Narky! On this talk page, you get bonus credits just for linking to Paul Robeson. And you get extra-Gerda hymn credits for linking to The Preacher and the Slave. BTW, I like In the Sweet By-and-By (and I like J.P. Webster), a lot, I find it really beautiful. El_C 11:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

yes, rich post, like all of it (writing in Berlin) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:01, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Randomly: well, if you have schnitzel — take pics! El_C 14:44, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

The Berlin specialties are liver, Eisbein and Currywurst. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, okay, when next in Vienna, then. Now I feel like liver and onions. El_C 15:16, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

which I had --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:04, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Pics or it didn't happen. El_C 16:24, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

pics taken but no time to upload yet, - and off for a chamber music concert in the Pierre Boulez Hall where I took a pic earlier (years ago) but never uploaded --Gerda Arendt (|talk) 16:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Did Stefan George write nouns with lowercase initial letters, or are the transcriptions in String Quartets (Schoenberg)#Text faulty?

George wrote lower case. You are a fast reader, - did you get it from my talk or looked up the program? - I didn't upload my pics of the hall because taking pictures is verboten, but they are better than what we have here ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:57, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! I googled Pierre-Boulez-Saal for the programme and looked at our Schoenberg article to refresh my memory of the poems (and played the Haydn). Narky Blert (talk) 11:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanksgiving music - click on November songs for the food delivery. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

That Showboat clip is remarkable for 1936. Even years later (to at least Hellzapoppin', 1941), Hollywood films would include a toe-curling musical interlude in which a group of darkies would discover a piano on the set and hold an impromptu dance party.

Neither the hymn nor the parody is well-known in UK; but "pie in the sky" is long-established idiom (from at least the 1950s to my knowledge). I'd make a small wager that "The P and the S" had been brought over by a labo(u)r activist, and that those Scottish miners knew both the song and who Joe Hill was.

The most unexpected articles can get serious numbers of views. When I wrote C. Austin Miles, I never expected 20 views/day; nor anywhere near 17 for the Dvořák cycle. Narky Blert (talk) 20:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Gerda, apples? No! I wouldn't touch a Waldorf Salad even if it would be served by Basil himself. Yuck. El_C 11:25, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Narky, Sorry, is that a lot of page views? I don't really have a metric. I just checked and it looks like my talk page gets about 100 a day, so C. Austin Miles — C Deez Nuts! [So disrespectful ] Needless to say, I like Richard Griffiths (RIP). Thanks as always for the education on the history of British workers and their struggle. El_C 11:25, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Be in the news, even in a minor way, and you can get a thousand plus; be obscure, and 1 (background noise) is typical. If you're a prolific editor, you can get 400-700 for your Home Page. Narky Blert (talk) 12:08, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

"juxtaposition of the sublime and the trivial" didn't interest many but me ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

View count or it didn't happen! (See what I did there, Narky?) El_C 14:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Filippo was a youngbloodyfool. Charging an armoured car with hand grenades? ptui! (Isn't that a super photo? I was very pleased to find it.) The Gold Medal was often posthumous, and IMO as an award is right up there with the VC and MoH.

There's an undocumented story we can only guess at. Italy was in something of disarray between 1943 and 1945, with 20-odd years of fascism to dismantle; but someone saw fit to collect the details of that incident and send them upwards towards the Quirinale; where clearly someone took notice. I like to imagine that one day a shiny limousine glided into a Neapolitan slum to the admiration of all, a man wearing a tricolor sash heaved himself out, knocked on a door, and proceeded to read that document aloud. Narky Blert (talk) 00:54, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

I got a decent sense of that overall context in the last chapter of the last book I read (chapter 7 of 7, "Nazis," in Rome: A History in Seven Sackings — see here). It's an unbelievable bio of a brief life, to be sure, from what little that is known. El_C 13:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Obtaining consensus is a blockable offense?

I've been told obtaining consensus is a blockable offence, and in the same discussion asked by the same person and another editor they tagged to do the opposite. Now I'm confused. Cipher21 (talk) 18:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not following that blocked/banned for disruption, either (by TrangaBellam). I presume it's due to... reasons. And I wouldn't worry about that Filing an edit request to reinstate deleted content is cheeky. If it gets reported to admins they will take a dim view of it (by Kautilya3). I just presume you didn't know that this isn't what edit requests are for. Also, I set the protection to WP:FULL, not to WP:ECP, so you made a mistake there as only admins can edit the page currently (protection expires in 2 days though, anyway).—oops, wrong page

Anyway, as Kautilya3 mentions, run an WP:RfC and/or consult WP:RSN about the strength of those sources in making these claims (about allies). Maybe they'll be deemed good enough; maybe they'll need to be qualified (like in parenthesis, claimed by x); or maybe they're no good. The editorial process will determine which is which. So you're free to explore that avenue.

That said, wrt my own recollection of my interaction with you, I observed that: 1. you're still pretty low on the wiki learning curve, but are not that cognizant that you are (i.e. of those limitations, a bit of a Dunning–Kruger thing, tbh). And 2. You tend to WP:BLUDGEON discussions in that confused state. Take that as you will. Good luck. El_C 20:37, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I hadn't read TrangaBellam's comment carefully. Consensus-seeking is not problematic. But, Cipher21, you need to discuss it with the people that objected to the content. You can't randomly issue an edit request for it to be reinstated. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

From the perspective of someone who answers hundreds of edit requests, a request for someone to revert someone else's edits is pretty much an automatic "seek consensus" template reply. Of the article is protected there's generally a reason, and asking someone to edit war on your behalf through protection is generally not good. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Just because I like it

Godley & Creme - "Under Your Thumb". One of the very few ghost stories in popular song. Narky Blert (talk) 00:36, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Nice, Narky. I was unaware, so definitely an Under My Thumb misdirect for me! Interesting you mention g-g-g-ghosts and ghostings, because I've been watching a lot of scary content lately (Nexpo, etc.), which as I was recently telling Wugapodes (also a fan) I find a bit difficult to define as a creepypasta'ish genre, though I've heard Pyrocynical call it "Transmedia storytelling," which is a pretty good albeit partial term for it. (See #Boo! for more spooky details and #HSGS [etc.] for even more of the lore.) El_C 13:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

It hadn't occurred to me before - but I wonder if G&C were consciously or unconsciously writing a reply song to "UMT", which is exceptionally misogynistic even by early Stones standards. Narky Blert (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit war

Hi El C! I'd like to ask for your help with an edit war at Talk:Ali#problematic_edits. Thanks! Albertatiran (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Albertatiran, I'm sorry but I'm not available to assist you with this at this time. Enforcement for edit warring can be sought at WP:AN3. Good luck. El_C 14:00, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for letting me know. Albertatiran (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Omicron

• Omicron (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: persistent IP vandalism due to emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant after expiry of protection has resumed. Already asked at WP:RfPP yesterday, but seems fo lks are busy. Thanks 2402:3A80:6C1:96A:9464:D5D3:4371:B576 (talk) 04:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Johnuniq. El_C 13:46, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Just because I like it

The surprising return of the Breakfast sandwich

A biscuit for you - mind your teeth!

Steve Winwood - "Arc of a Diver" - link

He was so disgustingly talented that he had a UK #1 at age 15 with "Keep on Running" - link. (I prefer the cover to the original, but only just.)

(Another Steve scored a US #1 at age 13 - link.)

Bonus track, because I'm feeling generous today. (This is the song being parodied.) Narky Blert (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Like. I'll have me some Steve Winwood (and friends) any day! And now I want biscuit, but not the weird English kind — the good kind. El_C 02:04, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

That's not a biscuit! that's a bun or a bread roll (or in my bit of England, a batch, and in other parts, a bap or a butty; you can starve to death trying to get a food order right; for some reason, all the synonyms seem to begin with 'b').

I've never been a big SW fan, I find his harp sound grating, but the man has class. Once asked if his blindness was a handicap to his career, he replied, "It could have been worse, I might have been born Black".

Skiffle was a sort of English proto-punk - all you needed was enthusiasm, a washboard, a tea-chest bass, a crappy guitar, a beat-up drumkit, and some imported 78s. Lonnie Donegan isn't on anyone's list of superstars, but look at his list of singles - getting Lead Belly and Woody numbers into the UK charts in the 1950s says something about his ears. The bands of the British Invasion grew up listening to him. Narky Blert (talk) 21:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Buttermilk biscuit! I'm not sailing anywhere. Anyway, I like his music well enough, though not as much as some of my friends. Personally, I've never owned a retail album of his in the pre-streaming era, but it was around well enough. Yeah, I don't know who any of these other people are. El_C 14:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Notification

I will be appealing my topic ban at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard SecretName101 (talk) 00:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Disappointing of you

I want to express to you, not out of anger, but disappointment, that it hurts you so quickly reached a “no” decision.

I am far less disappointed that you want to retain that topic ban than I am at why and how you are reaching and justifying said judgement.

I had already, long before, acknowledged to you the I now recognized the article was “overwhelmingly negative” in those exact words, yet you penalize me for not repeating myself on it? I said I would submit ANY negative-leaning article on marginal figures for review first, that EXCEEDS your concern. Yet you flag that as unsatisfactory.

You judged me solely on outlying mistakes, and utterly ignored longstanding and continued positive contribution to the project.

You had urged me to make edits to show I am valuable to the project. I make over 1,000 edits on a variety of subjects, and you do not even acknowledge them.

These topic bans are to prevent threats of disprution to the project. Not to punish. You have not based your arguments on what threat of disruption I would actively pose.

And we had been over that I didn’t, at the time, see politicians having a different format than other BLP on crimes. Yet you played ignorant to our previous discussion on that.

You also have reignited a micro aggression towards me, and are seeking to penalize me for having not sat silent when that initial micro aggression occurred. Characterizing people who fail to recognize the exact same patterns as others as incompetent IS a clear micro aggression towards neurodiverse individuals. SecretName101 (talk) 02:52, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

SecretName101, I'm unable to parse the meaning of that it hurts you so quickly reached a “no” decision, but in any case, I'd rather the discussion not be split (yet again: [270][271]), so please incorporate any arguments you see fit toward your appeal, rather than doing so here. Thank you. El_C 03:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Question concerning mass shootings

Back in 2019, you put an editnotice in place regarding the listing of victim names. I assume this wasn't the 1st time or the last. What criteria goes into making that decision? Just curious since another one is being debated again. Thanks --GoneIn60 (talk) 09:31, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

An agreement as to a criteria never came to fruition, probably because the views of many participants are so entrenched. My own sense is that the smaller the number of victims is, the more suitable it is to list them by name. On the flip side, the greater the number, the more listing individual victims by name violates the spirit of WP:NOTAMEMORIAL. As for my 2019 notice, it emphasizes WP:ONUS, which I think should apply to any mass shooting page (on a per page basis), at least until this elusive criteria is formed (if and/or when). HTH. El_C 10:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Appreciate the explanation. Yeah, it's a difficult discussion every time, and I think an all-or-none approach (at least in regard to random victims) is the only way some kind of consensus will form. Otherwise, you'll have editors arguing over what the threshold is before names should be excluded. Oh well, onto another age-old debate I go! --GoneIn60 (talk) 10:21, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

An uncomfortable song

Jacques Brel - "Au suivant".

No subs on that, but there's a version in English by Scott Walker, a very good interpreter of Brel - "Next". Narky Blert (talk) 20:08, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Wow, intense. Next! El_C 11:23, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Special restriction

Hi El C. I'm wondering whether the special editing restrictions from March this year on Dabaqabad are still in effect atm. I looked into this concurrently after they appeared to snub the consensus translation of four Italian-speaking editors on a Caroselli book, subsequently edited by user Lambian : (link), an action they repeated here, in both cases without a talk page comment. Then I saw this article's history; they made reverts in November without a talk page comment, and again on the 5th of December without a talk page comment; this appears to me to be a snub of their ARBHORN restrictions. In their talk page comments they also smeared Jama Omar Issa as prejudiced, thus unreliable, for a typo he made in 1976 when the Somali script was 4 years old (link), even though he has been peer reviewed 113 times per google scholar. Before this thread, I was wondering if its allowed to unarchive the currently archived case. Heesxiisolehh (talk) 06:47, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Heesxiisolehh, I recall there was emerging consensus in that AE case to convert that custom sanction I imposed on Dabaqabad into a standard TBAN, but looks like participation in the case fizzled out for some reason, then it got archived un-closed (for my part, I think I got busy and just forgot). I'd say it would be okay to file another AE request, one which emphasizes that its new evidence should be considered alongside that un-closed, now-archived AE request. More directly in answer to your question: yes, since nothing new was logged at WP:AEL, nothing has changed wrt that custom sanction still being in effect. That Dec 3 incident does appear to be a violation, though the Dec 5 one doesn't. HTH. El_C 11:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello!

Thanks for the ping @El C:, I'd just like to clear things out and give the context;

1. The only consensus was the translation: that is the Dhulbahante handed over forts. You used that source to then claim that all Dervish forts from Jidali ([272]), Taleh ([273], where you can even see the WP:Synth and misuse of the sources) to Eyl ([274]) were Dhulbahante garesas or forts which is not supported by that source nor by any other sources you cited at all. There is also this issue with you misusing sources and engaging in original research and synth in regards to Diiriye Guure, I have had to remove several mentions of him since none of the cited sources actually supported the notion that you promote that Diiriye is the overarching sultan of the Dervishes, even more powerful than Sayid Mohammed Abdullah Hassan. More on that here.

2. This part was not a typo, but rather valid criticism as well as a consistent pattern that I noticed with the removal and decreasing of the Isaaq members of the Dervishes in clear violation of the sources that it quotes. Doubting a source is not "smearing". More on that link here.

3. To be honest, I feel like this is an attempt by you to "avenge" yourself after I removed a lot of your content which were original research not to mention reeked of WP:Synth. Instead of discussing this serious matter so we could reach a consensus and improve Somali articles together (you even stopped replying to my messages) you went straight to the admins in an attempt to "get rid of" me.

It is also very disingenuous of you to claim that I left no message at the talk pages when I opened not one nor two but 3 discussions with you (Regarding Deria Gure, regarding your Jama source, regarding addition of original research) in addition to further elaborating on my stance on this Diiriye Guure guy here as well as elaborating on unreliable sources. Any removals of content is in the context of these discussions since the content I have removed are almost identical to the content removals I have been discussing with him over.

And to be honest with you, I have a feeling that the Diiriye Guure page might be nothing but a hoax. I'll research this further and I'd like @El C: to also take a look at it if he has the time. Dabaqabad (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Dabaqabad, I don't have the time atm. El_C 13:37, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey

Hi El C long time no talk, hope you're doing well. I had concerns regarding a user you have tbanned from AA. Following the tban of DriedGrape and their subsequent tban violation block, they have edited AA content again: [275], [276]. First diff they added an Azerbaijani name, and in second diff they removed a bunch of sourced info regarding Armenia. Hoping that you could take a look. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:08, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey. Doing alright, thanks for asking. Just really busy lately. Anyway, blocked (again), but for longer. El_C 13:27, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Busy time of the year) Btw El C, just noticed that in second diff they didn't remove but rather restructured/move down info related to Armenia, wanted to correct myself. With best, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 13:43, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

SPI

Hey, El C. Hope you're well. Can you close a report I filed at SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Solomon155? The sockmaster account and the sock are revert-warring together and they're adding information which is not discussed by the bibliography. If all articles targeted by them were permanently semi-protected or required autoconfirmed status it'd be even better.--Maleschreiber (talk) 00:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey. Doing alright, thanks for asking. Sorry, but I'm not a CU (and have no interest in becoming one), so pretty much the only time I attend to an SPI is when I have some sort of first hand knowledge about it. El_C 13:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Request

Can you please review and close the discussion at Talk:Oxford High School shooting#Names_of_victims? My initial request was going to be at the seven day mark, but another editor suggested "7-10 days", so I leave it to you to decide the best time, but I believe given our prior interactions nobody would ever suggest you were biased in any way towards my position in these discussions. If not you, could you recommend an admin with a history of closing contentious discussions? Thank you! —Locke Cole • t • c 06:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) These kinds of contentious debates typically run for several weeks if not a month. In past RfC's, responses were still coming in 3 weeks later. Surprising this one wasn't closed in favor of having a broader RfC (or moved to a new RfC section, copying the existing discussion over). --GoneIn60 (talk) 12:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

My suggestion remains: work on building consensus to update WP:NOTAMEMORIAL, or to get a new policy/guideline about this outright. Currently, we still have Wikipedia:Victim lists and Wikipedia:Casualty lists as competing essays. Which is dumb. I'm not interested in involving myself with further repetition in this perennial matter, at least for the foreseeable future. Nor am I prepared to basically create such a criteria by fiat via WP:ARBBLP. At the event, I'm too busy atm to assist with too much, in general, but if that wasn't the case, the aforementioned is what I'd say. Sorry, I'd rather not recommend someone else because I feel that would be an imposition. El_C 13:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Good advice. I just recently discovered those essays existed. Will see what I can contribute in that regard once we get past the current debate. Locke, we should go ahead and follow the normal process on this one. --GoneIn60 (talk) 13:49, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

WWGB had suggested we run it for ten days total, initially my thought was a week as discussion appeared to be slowing down, but as you've solicited feedback in some additional venues, I would be fine with letting it run for 14 days total (unless there's clearly some discussion continuing to merit going longer). We should request an uninvolved admin at WP:AN to close it, either now (with the aforementioned 14-day closing date in mind) or nearer to the actual end time (I'm leaning towards now because there's a lot to read through/sort through, so if someone wants to take time to consider the arguments/merits they would have a headstart). —Locke Cole • t • c 06:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Now sounds good for the reasons you mention, thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Done. —Locke Cole • t • c 15:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

You're fine, thank you for the pointers and advice regardless, El C. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Something more cheerful

Boccherini - Guitar Quintet No. 4 - "Fandango".

I myself will attempt the invocation - "Gerda, Gerda! Wache, erwache!"

(I don't think I could get Silvia Duran through WP:NBIO, but she's mentioned at Dance in Israel#Flamenco.) Narky Blert (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I'll go to sleep, after a great night at the Nationaltheater München, too tired to upload a pic, and one on the commons is rather similar. Tenor world-famous, but Russiam soprano and Israeli conductor have no article yet which will change. See my images, and that Fandango is mentioned, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (Conductor at least in German. If LouisAlain was still with us he'd translate that tomorrow. Now I have to do it myself, and it will not be tomorrow.) talk) 23:39, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I've got a special treat for those long winter nights. Coming soon. (No Winter Is Coming jokes, please!) El_C 15:38, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Anwar Shah Orakzai salting

A couple of weeks ago you salted Anwar Shah Orakzai. While NPP reviewing, I found that it was re-created today as Anwar Shah Orakzai (Journalist). Would it be beneficial to salt that one too, as well as the lowercase Anwar Shah Orakzai (journalist). Curbon7 (talk) 07:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, looks like I never actually salted. In any case, I indeffed the user and moved the page to draft rather than re-delete. Maybe that move plus the block will be enough. If not, let me know. El_C 11:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Protection

Please protect Breast tax.CoachEzhupunna (talk) 08:10, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Logged at WP:CASTE. El_C 11:56, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Totally unfair quiz question

What connects the following?

1. Louis Armstrong - Melancholy Blues
2. Chuck Berry - Johnny B Goode
3. Blind Willie Johnson - Dark Was the Night (Cold Was the Ground)
4. Ludwig van Beethoven - Cavatina from Op.130 (that recording specifically)

Hints available on request. Narky Blert (talk) 21:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Anyone who's been the specific kind of stoner I used to be will get this right away. Firefangledfeathers 21:55, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

What is Contents of the Voyager Golden Record — final answer. El_C 13:03, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Bravo! The blind musician and the deaf, together in eternity. Narky Blert (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

My favorite is Chakrulo, a Georgian choral piece. Firefangledfeathers 22:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Question

I have created an article called "Council of Troyes (1129)". However, there is a page Synods held at Troyes that redirects any Council of Troyes to that particular article. Is there anyway to remove the redirect for "Council of Troyes (1129)"? Or some other solution? --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:52, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Is there a reason you can’t just over-write the current redirect page, Council of Troyes (1129) with your new article text? It stops redirecting to the Synods page when #REDIRECT [[Synods held at Troyes]] {{R with possibilities}} is deleted. The reason I ask is that’s what I would have done so if there’s somethng wrong wth doing that it would be good to know. DeCausa (talk) 08:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Right, Kansas Bear, here, click this link → https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Council_of_Troyes_(1129)&action=edit ← and just add your content to it directly (I saved you a click!). El_C 12:58, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

DeCausa, I was not sure that was an option. Thanks, El C. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:10, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

BLP violations

You protected the page earlier and you did it again but I just want you to know that you will see such disruptions only on List of converts to Islam from Hinduism and and not vice-versa. Kindly see Category:Lists_of_religious_converts_-_possibly_widespread_BLPvios where you can clearly check admin Black Kite's comments about it. I have also experienced that a handful of editors (some of whom are blocked already[277] follow this pattern to edit war, sometimes with false edit summaries,[278] without checking the sources[279] and they do it just to get the page protected from editing.

In the ANI discussion, if you spare 5 mintues and read this incident, you will see my edits to the page were all adequetly sourced and comply with BLPCAT whereas the other editor's edit summaries were not true and several other editors have commented on that.

This has been happening agian and again and it is quite exhaustive to contribute further when you have to explain these things to such editors who clearly have a vandetta and keep removing the edits. As an admin, can you please honestly suggest me a way to fix the problem permanently to keep Wikipedia unbiased and so that I can contribute in other areas? Thanks. --Bringtar (talk) 17:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Bringtar, I don't have time to follow up. Again, report any outstanding issues to WP:BLPN (or any other relevant noticeboard). Good luck. El_C 17:19, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. --Bringtar (talk) 17:34, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Module:Portal/doc

Why was this protected? It's only used on two pages, so is not high-risk. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Ditto for Template:Portal/doc. The doc pages themselves aren't high-risk, only the templates they are documenting. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:12, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

jjjjjjjjjjjj El_C 17:21, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Would you mind unprotecting the pages, then? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:22, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

To what end? El_C 17:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Because they were protected based on a misunderstanding and the protection serves to impede (admittedly fairly rare) edits to the documentation of Template:Portal and Module:Portal for no legitimate purpose. The original RFPP request would likely have been declined if you had understood what doc pages were used for, so why are you arguing for a permanent change in protection status resulting from your own temporary confusion? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:29, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Sure, doesn't matter. El_C 17:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I thought they were transcluded-protected at that level. I can't read, or pay attention, it seems. Again, sorry about that. Jeez. El_C 17:36, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Pppery, [280] should fix this for good I think? (as by their own admission El C is bound to forget all about it again) — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:56, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

List of converts to Islam from Hinduism

I obviously haven't looked at the whole list, but the entries I *have* looked at that were removed look well sourced. I think you may have have unwittingly backed up a religious warrior there. Black Kite (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

I haven't backed anybody, unwittingly or otherwise. That 30K addition was added and removed multiple times since its original insertion back in April. If you think there's good reasons to over-ride m:Wrong version in this instance, feel free to do so. I have no objection as I know next to nothing about the contested content in question, nor will I have time to investigate this further any time soon, I'm afraid. El_C 19:20, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

No, I wasn't suggesting you had; however, it does appear that much of the removed material is sourced, and is being removed for ideological reasons. I have moved the original list (minus some obviously poor entries) to my userspace and invited the editors concerned to edit it until it is stable. Black Kite (talk) 09:18, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good. But to recap: I was pinged to a talk page that discussed the dispute over this page (because I protected the page in the past, but not about this dispute I don't think). I saw a 30K addition being edit warred since April by multiple users, so I fully protected the page, randomly, at the latest version.

I explained to the disputants about the general mechanics of ONUS (especially, in an RfC when exclusion/inclusion face one another), because I was misquoted on that. I finished with a reminder that BLP takes priority. And that's it. That's all the time I have to spare to this right now. Any admin should feel free to do whatever. Beyond stopping the edit war, I don't really know what's happening (the arguments, their validity), so this is just a stop-gap measure. Nothing deeper in it than that (for me). El_C 14:00, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Just as an update, with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of religious converts now live (which I added to WP:CENT as it involves over 25 pages), the argument about bio cruft seems broader than just this one page. And calling the OP a religious warrior may have missed the mark. Because it's valid to argue against bio cruft just as it is to argue that these lists have value to readers. Hopefully, the deletion discussion can clarify on which side of consensus (or lack thereof) these arguments fall. Anyway, what I'm getting at is that this seems to be a legit position for the OP to advance. (Personally, I don't know enough about these lists to favour any one side.) El_C 14:36, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Lithuania–Taiwan relations — Comments re the IP user involved

The IP user involved in the dispute at the article Lithuania–Taiwan relations, which you've recently temporarily protected, is actually in trouble for numerous offences, not just relating to that article. In fact, they probably should have already been blocked days ago for other reasons, but they've been able to get away with even further wrongdoings due to a lack of attention from other administrators (the only administrator who has been commenting on my case for a while has been David Gerard). David Gerard has already temporarily protected the article China–Lithuania relations from the same IP user (it's a different IP address but the user has been IP-hopping; Wikipedia:Sock). A case at ANI has already been opened up by me in order to address a personal attack that this IP user has thrown out at me prior to the bulk of their disruptive editing. The user is guilty of:

1. throwing out undeserved personal attacks
2. on the same thread; unilaterally escalating disputes from content-based into conduct-based
3. restoring personal attacks that have been removed
4. knowingly citing a deprecated source
5. removing sourced content on multiple occasions
6. vandalising articles intentionally
7. vandalising talk pages whether intentionally or unintentionally
8. bludgeoning and spamming talk pages and articles
9. adding biased, non-neutral, original research, and undue-weight content to articles
10. operating multiple accounts with the intention to deceive
11. behaving generally disruptively and derailing several talk pages
12. behaving generally in bad faith
13. immediately assuming the bad faith of other users and refusing to negotiate with them
14. citing past dirt against other users in order to attack them in the present (including against both me and David Gerard)
15. throwing out racist attacks and other insults to groups of people
16. using edit summaries to gossip rather than to detail their actual edit changes
17. using talk pages as a forum to gossip rather than to discuss improvements to the articles
18. edit-warring (I forgot this one)
19. pushing conspiracy theories (I also forgot this one)
20. citing sources that don't actually back up their claims (this is another minor one that I forgot)
21. adding unsourced information to articles and edit-warring in reaction to it being removed (this occurred before they started citing sources, albeit inappropriate sources)
22. citing opinions as facts (this is a minor one... and this is the last wrongdoing that I'll amend to the list at this point in time)
23. etc.

— Jargo Nautilus (talk) 06:32, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Wow, Jargo Nautilus, 23 episodes, a full season! Anyway, sorry, I don't really have time to look into this more closely atm. Feel free to drop me a line if it becomes urgent. But if you do, please make your report brief and with links to diffs in question (not too many). Good luck. El_C 14:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Talk:History of the race and intelligence controversy

Hey El C! I noticed you put a month of semiprotection on this talk page back on October 2, per an RFPP request. I personally don't mind semiprotection of talk pages if there is a good reason, which there is in this case. Especially since WP:ARBR&I applies. So consider this my vote for a renewal of the semiprotection, in case you were considering it. Maybe even 3 to 6 months. I'm writing to you instead of just doing protection myself in case you are aware of other discussions on this idea, either in favor or against it. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Ed. No, I was unaware of that discussion or that IP excesses continued on that talk page after the protection expired, though it does seems like it's par for the course at this point. Anyway, latest IP blocked for 2 weeks (/64). I'll give it another 3 months, sure. Best, El_C 10:17, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

AEDS

Hi, El_C. I have noticed that you are less active in DS than you were, but could you take an unbiased look at [[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Maneesh|this]]]? I'm not special pleading for you to "take my side" - which I know isn't how you roll - but that specific situation seems to be generally spiralling and could use some "new" eyes, I think. Just if you get a chance. Newimpartial (talk) 13:21, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Newimpartial. Well, of the last 10 edits to WP:AEL, 5 are mine. But, true, I've drastically cut back on cases at WP:AE (which I was often taking on single-handedly), so most of my latest DS actions are via RfPP and to a lesser extent AN/ANI. Unfortunately, I'm pretty busy at this time for any kind of a deep dive, but yeah, maybe. El_C 13:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, I suppose you may be continuing to act but with less yammering. :) Anyway, I just feel that the AE discussion is starting to wallow - I am not calling for you to actually read through the obscure Talk page discussions that gave rise to this one; you could even ignore my filing and start with the comments made by the editor in question at AE, and wade in only as deeply as you feel called. Newimpartial (talk) 13:48, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Stealth yammering! Okay, you piqued my curiosity. El_C 13:53, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have to say, after seeing the AE thread, and seeing this request here, it makes me deeply uncomfortable. There are already three uninvolved admins looking at that thread, so reaching out to another, even if you say I'm not special pleading for you to "take my side", you're still reaching out to a specific admin to look at a thread with three other admins commenting because you'd think it could use some "new" eyes. It's really not a good look that you're seeking specific admin attention at WP:AE, especially because you don't seem satisfied with the three sets of admin eyes already looking into it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:56, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, as it stands, sanctions seem likely, so I'm not sure it's correct to say that Newimpartial isn't satisfied with those three admins. El_C 14:09, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, if you wouldn't describe the interaction so far as wallowing, well then, our perceptions differ. And I don't see how my reaching out to a specific admin whom I know only because they subjected me to an IBAN years ago is in any way against policy. There certainly isn't any reason to think El_C would be biased in my favor. I would just like to see more eyes on the filing, so it doesn't get bogged down in proceduralism, etc. Newimpartial (talk) 14:15, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

76.30.143.210

76.30.143.210 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Heads up, this user that you blocked appears to be misusing their talkpage access. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:95E8:4DB9:3862:F374 (talk) 20:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this while I was away by disabling TPA, C.Fred. Appreciated. El_C 13:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Glad to help! The IP had made my watchlist for some past misdeed of theirs, so I saw the edits and shut that down pretty quickly. —C.Fred (talk) 15:14, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Reply regarding AE

Hey, I just saw that you seemingly pinged me (and others) at someone else's talk page, and advised us not to make further comments exceeding the word limit. I didn't get that ping and didn't see that until just now after I added more comments. I actually had forgotten that AE had word limits for commentors. It's hard for me with AE and other heavy disputes because I feel like I need to address and refute various claims, but at the same time I don't want to turn the thread into a TL;DR and scare off the fresh eyes that are most needed. So, sorry about that. Crossroads ^-talk- 07:45, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Seemingly! No worries, Crossroads, shit happens. Ordinarily, I'd say that this is likely to prove complicated, because with so many responses in that AE report already, how would you word-limit-exceeding folks decide on what to remove if plural-you wanted to add something else you deem important? But, at the event, it does look like the complaint is just about ready to be wrapped up, so that bullet was probably dodged. Needless to say, important to be mindful of this for next time, as it (word limit) is one of three vital components that set AE apart from AN/ANI, the other two being: sectioned discussion and cases being decided on by a quorum of uninvolved admins (usually) in a dedicated Result section. El_C 13:26, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

i suggest in the future, for the plural you, you use the highly formal yous all, or perhaps y'all. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:32, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, as I'm sure you're aware, we have a new Slap Mountain champ. Also, the use of lower-case i is strictly prohibited on this talk page, on pain of slapping (y'all). El_C 13:41, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Something about that AE is suddenly not passing the smell test

I saw this and went to the "that" — which led me to make the following discovery:

Why do the following 19:23, 7 November 2021 + 23:41, 7 November 2021 comments not appear in the WP:RS/N history:

• "I didn't think it would be long until the culture warriors targeted PinkNews, and I don't think it should be too long until they are politely told that it won't be happening, either. Black Kite (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)"
• "Thank you for your concern, but I don't believe that labelling editors who come to Wikipedia to edit with a certain POV on a subset of articles (whether that be cultural, political, religious or anything else) to be derogatory, merely factual. Black Kite (talk) 23:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)"

Who hid the comments by Black Kite from the Revision history — and why?

What's going on here, because this smells to high heaven. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 14:44, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Those comments are both still in the history. Firefangledfeathers 14:50, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

You saw that I linked the history page, right? Where are 19:23, 7 November 2021 + 23:41, 7 November 2021? Show me. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 14:53, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Pyxis Solitary: See here. 23:41, 7 November 2021‎ and 19:24, 7 November 2021‎. Anarchyte (talk) 14:54, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

19:23, 7 November 2021 + 23:41, 7 November 2021 are not appearing in your "here" link. Don't link to the discussion page — I already linked the page itself. Where are the diffs? We use diffs to point out an editor's comment. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 14:58, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

They're right here. I took that screenshot logged out in a private browser. Anarchyte (talk) 15:03, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

When I click on "here" above, I see them as 19:24 and 23:41. Screenshots available on request. :) Newimpartial (talk) 15:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Pyxis Solitary, maybe you didn't account for your timezone's offset from UTC? Firefangledfeathers 14:54, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Find the diffs. Link to the diffs. Do not link to the discussion page. The diffs are gone. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 15:00, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Comment 1 and Comment 2. Firefangledfeathers 15:04, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the screenshot and links to the comments. I do not understand why I am able to see all the other diffs, except those specific two.
I can see that, you, Anarchyte are an Administrator. I don't know your status, Firefangledfeathers. But why would the two of you be able to access the diffs, but not me? Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 15:18, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I am not an admin. Can you see them if you log out? If you search for Black Kite diffs on 7 November, do you see them but with a different timestamp? Firefangledfeathers 15:19, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I have never been and never will be an administrator, but I don't have any trouble seeing both diffs. Screenshots available on request. :) Newimpartial (talk) 15:23, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd consider supporting your RfA. Have you ever been involved in any disputes on Wikipedia? Firefangledfeathers 15:25, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

This quite literally made me laugh out loud. Thanks for that. :) Newimpartial (talk) 15:29, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I took the screenshot logged out to avoid any possible admin interference. Is it possible that you have changed your timezone and so that's why they're not showing? If you ensure that your timezone is set to the wiki default UTC in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering and then reopen the link I posted above, does it appear? Otherwise, I reckon WP:VPT is the next stop. Anarchyte (talk) 15:27, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I just did a "Find edits by user" search for 100 edits and got the following return:

• 23:41, 07 November 2021 (diff | hist) . . (+320) . . Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard (/* PinkNews needs to be reevaluated */ thank you)
• 19:24, 07 November 2021 (diff | hist) . . (+261) . . Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard (/* PinkNews needs to be reevaluated */ no.)

Don't know why I had to jump through that hoop. But thanks to both of you for the input because it made me keep pushing at it. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 15:30, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

"Is it possible that you have changed your timezone" – just checked my prefs. It's set on wiki default. Argh! Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 15:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Holy word limits Batman!

If you thought we were being bad in the Maneesh case, the Barecode case is fast approaching the length of a respectable article in its own right! Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Io, Saturnalia!

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Quanda S. Francis

Jinx.

Feel free to change it back to your version if preferred. -- Euryalus (talk) 05:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Meh, me lazy. El_C 05:55, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

A sighting...

I haven't really edited since I threw in the towel. All I've done here this last year is remove some crap from my talk page, restore an image that was butchered by the non-free reduction bot, and correct a couple of glaring errors in articles that I happened to read which annoyed me so much I couldn't leave them. I only really stay logged in because I prefer viewing the site with the personal JS and CSS on my account.

Somebody elsewhere told me I only needed 10 edits to vote in the Arbcom election, which surprised me, so I voted anyway, just for the lulz.

Having been pointed to ANI by a discussion in another place I noticed the oblique reference to me, so I commented. That makes me 90% eligible to waste a vote in the next pointless election already, I guess...

What I'm really saying, I suppose, is don't expect a return any time at all, but don't think we evil monitors of wiki-nonsense aren't always lurking, ready to pounce with our ineffectual drivel.

Stay safe. Nice to hear from you. Begoon 14:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, man. Always good to see you. I've always placed a lot of stock into what you have to say, and I honestly could care less if it's on-wiki or off. As far as I'm concerned, you're still contributing to the good of the project (such as it is, warts and all). Don't let anybody tell you otherwise! Kind regards, El_C 15:24, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Flattery will get you everywhere. You do pretty good yourself (remember I'm watching...)

One day I might decide to do good from within again - today is not that day. That doesn't mean I don't care. Begoon 16:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey, when it comes to suck ups, I fuckin' commit! Don't be a stranger. El_C 16:21, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I know that. And I won't. Begoon 16:32, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Songs of the season

		Holiday cheer
		Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 El C. MarnetteD|Talk 02:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Александр Мотин

Hello. I am working on UTRS appeal #52253. This user wishes to have their community ban reviewed by the community. It has been about a year and they claim to have not attempted to circumvent the ban in that time.

I have my doubts that their attitude is one that will convince the community to reverse the ban, they still seem to be blaming the admin who proposed the ban.

Regardless I would like to let them make an appeal on-wiki to see what the community feels. Since you removed talk page access I would like to get your opinion first.

I would of course give them advice prior to doing so. Looking forward to your response. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 03:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

HighInBC, though my sense is that it's a futile exercise, no objection to going through the motions so long as they leave me be, for real this time (pings, emails, etc.). So feel free to go ahead. El_C 09:46, 19 December 2021 (UTC)