Sergecross73

Vandalism part 34

Serge's 34th iteration of his own personal WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. Feel free to report anything you feel may need admin intervention. Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, based on the editing patterns, I'm wondering if @125.160.112.170 might actually be blocked editor @JustYourImaginaryGuy. Not sure how to report this; I noticed you dealt with the latter editor before. RegalZ8790 (talk) 05:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree. I've blocked. Feel free to report incidents like this to me, and if I agree, I'll issue blocks or page protection as needed. Thank you! Sergecross73 msg me 13:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I figured this was okay, just wanted confirmation. Anyway, he's at it again, now with @125.160.115.29... RegalZ8790 (talk) 01:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 16:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Sergecross73 Back for another round as @125.160.113.185. What can be done with an individual who has no intentions of respecting Wikipedia and its community? RegalZ8790 (talk) 06:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Looks like someone else hit him with a WP:RANGEBLOCK. Hopefully that helps. Sergecross73 msg me 17:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, This user keeps reverting my changes saying they are vandalism. This IP traces back to the subject of the edits who has been using wikipedia to promote his own name, articles, and videos. He doesn't cite his work, he simply pastes it into other articles.

He has done this on the USNVGT page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_vs_Snakeand several others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/35.135.179.48

Surely this is against the terms. Thank you for looking into this. datagod (talk) 🍁 22:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Adding/restoring info without a source is definitely against policy. I don't know enough about these subjects to know who is correct in some of the disputes, nor am I following the accusations of self-promotion, but I'll warn them about the sourcing issues. Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

12 hours

12 hours 12 hours 12 hours 12 hours 12 hours 12 hours 12 hours

LOL. Okay I'm done, have a nice day. 24.117.18.138 (talk) 01:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Your weird comments about Wikipedia editors wasting their time/having no life always rang hollow...but this is taking it to a new level. Sergecross73 msg me 01:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes

Nyttend

• JohnOwens
• Killiondude
• MelanieN
• Nihonjoe

Bureaucrat changes

Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

Joe Roe

Oversight changes

GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.

Technical news

• Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Martin O'Donnell § Infobox discussion. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Track listing

Hi again, Serge. Since you edit in the same area, I wanted to ask: is using the template {{Track listing}} necessary for albums? (the template says to use either the template or a bulleted list), then can a simple table be used instead too? A while ago, I added track listing to this article Link Click#Music, but there already exists a table for the soundtrack which was not added by me but I believe it is much more legible than the template I used? or would it be better to post this on the article's talk page instead to gain consensus?

Secondly, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters says, "Reduce track titles on albums where all or most tracks are listed in all capitals." So, would it be appropriate to use ALL CAPS when titles use it sparingly, where almost all the tracks use normal capitalisation and a few use ALL CAPS? There's also this stylisation in track titles, say, for example, this title "XƎTЯOVerthink" on the article Link Click. Is it needed to write it per Wikipedia's capitalisation? The title is only mentioned once, and most of the other titles follow the general manual of style. I believe adding notes at the bottom just to specify the stylisations is not very practical and the stylisations can be used in the title since they are only ever mentioned once? Lunar-akaunto／talk 10:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello. WP:TRACKLISTING gives good guidance on how to handle things. I personally always use the template in articles I create, but was surprised earlier in the year to find other editors don't, and that actual guidance is more dependent on how complicated the information you're trying to portray is. I personally don't find much value in how its portrayed though - I simply pick one, and if anyone doesn't like it and wishes to change the track list to a different format, I let them do so. As long as the track list is present and correct, I'd rather work on other, more important things that readers are likely to actually notice.

In the same vein, I'm a pretty strict follower of WP:ALLCAPS. I don't use capitalizations unless its clear that there's some sort of meaning behind it. Otherwise, its lowercaps. Sergecross73 msg me 16:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. So, potentially, using a table for track listing is correct as long as there's no edit warring over it? and worry not, like earlier times, I am no longer hell-bent on track listings alone anymore, (this time I am actually adding stuff that matters or readers read rather than just needlessly tinkering with track listings), this was just something I thought when the entire listing was missing, like say, if someone had already added this before and used a bulleted list or maybe did not use stylisation for titles I would not fiddle with it and have no problem with either of the two used by the original editor as they saw fit.

What do you think about stylisations in track listing titles, not ALL CAPS or all small where there's little to no actual meaning behind the change but actual stylisation like "XƎTЯOVerthink" or "Xetrov Overthink" in the music section? Using the latter and adding notes just for the stylisation would be futile, especially when the song itself is never mentioned in the article again? Lunar-akaunto／talk 03:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Glad to hear there wont be any further troubles. As far as your questions goes, it might be a good one to ask at WT:ALBUMS. I'm not 100% sure how I'd handle examples like that. I mostly edit American/European/Australian rock music articles, and they don't tend to use stylizations like that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay I'll do that. thank you for your help Lunar-akaunto／talk 01:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)