This is an archive of past discussions about User:Acroterion. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.
Technical news
After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
No, I've used IRC about twice in ten years and I've generally found it irritating to watch go by. That and I don't remember how to log in. Email is fine for me if you have something that you'd like to convey. Acroterion(talk)00:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC).
Infobox template
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, Because of the reasons described on Talk:Latur#Infobox, I had to convert the text based inbox into a template. I was wondering, what is the technical dofference between these two formats, and which one is preferred on wikipedia? Would you please let me know? Thanks. —usernamekiran[talk]00:35, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
In general templates are used for information that needs to be transcluded on multiple pages, where manually changing the content on each page would be cumbersome. Otherwise there's no technical reason to prefer one over the other that I'm aware of, but I claim no special technical knowledge concerning templates. Acroterion(talk)00:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
It probably does no harm. It makes it a little harder to casually change things, which appears to have been your goal, and while we generally want it to be easy to edit, I think it's a reasonable approach. Acroterion(talk)00:58, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
ANI
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hey, I've no idea why I did this, which I just happened to catch sight of in your page history. Must have been a misclick, sorry. Timothyjosephwood, the IP actually did alert Acroterion to the ANI. It was my fault it didn't show up. Bishonen | talk19:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC).
Yeah. I noticed it after I posted the warning when I was looking at their recent contributions. But at that point it was half of one six dozen of another, so I just let it be. TimothyJosephWood19:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Requesting an unbiased vote
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This person is important in their feild of work. I just need sleep but will edit it in the morning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JONDoe123 (talk • contribs)
Not from what was written. Can you provide two or three detailed articles in major independent publications that substantiate the statements int he article? Acroterion(talk)02:55, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Jadrograd
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I would like to know why you removed my Jadrograd wiki page, and how was it being disruptive? Jadrograd is a fictional nation that I am constructing on a gaming site called ROBLOX. I don't see how Jadrograd is inappropriate and a "Hoax" in anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeninFromYakutsk (talk • contribs) 03:03, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Was wondering if I could get your thoughts on an odd situation here. I believe it is a clever attempt at vandalism, but would appreciate your more experienced review. I enjoy sandwiches (talk) 05:18, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
I was not aware admins to file a report as well. That is height of bureaucracy lol —usernamekiran[talk]03:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
No, it's actually a check on the use of administrative tools. Administrators are not supposed to use the tools in situation where they are involved in content. While this particular user was being disruptive, it was best that I avoid taking administrative action myself and to report it at AN3, acting as a regular editor for that purpose. Otherwise it becomes too easy to use administrative tools to settle a dispute by a supervote. See WP:INVOLVED. Acroterion(talk)03:18, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
yup, thats what I meant, height bureaucracy. But it is good though. It brings a hold on abuse of of power. And most of the times, the edit wars are ignited cuz one of the parties involved think they are right, and one of them is mostly not. A third person's opinion is necessary. —usernamekiran[talk]03:46, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Yesterday I came across a violation of Involved involving the closure[1] of an AFD by a non-administrator. The editor who had taken part in the AFD closed it as a delete. I undid the closure, then went to a non-involved administrator and asked him[2] to close the discussion.
In another case last year, an administrator closed an AFD (as a delete) that I started but not before he or she doing other edits that caused them to become involved (In addition the AFD closure had taken place before the 7 days were up for running these. WP:SNOW didn't apply since votes were running only 5 to 2 in favor of deletion.) and then violate INVOLVED by using their tools. That was the clear consensus of an ANI thread[3] that I started. The administrator was told not to do this again. As for the AFD, it was restarted and when it ended[4] as a no consensus! Maybe I protest too much but the truth is I want these discussions closed correctly and will speak up if I think something was done wrong whatever my sentiments are. Administrators shouldn't take actions if they are Involved and that goes for editors too when certain cases arise where they too have become involved....William, is the complaint department really on the roof?12:58, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Maybe you can help me
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
How do you edit something like this- Musgpdisestcat|201|0|2009|2010
Note I removed the from both ends to avoid putting things on your talk page.
On musical group disestablishment page for 2010 its putting both 2010 disestablishments and Organizations disestablished in 2010. That's overcategorization because the latter is a subcategory of the former and its doing it on all the yearly pages. How can we get the yearly disestablishments out of these category pages?
I discovered this when removing 'Arts organizations disestablishment categories' from the Musical group pages. Which is a whole other disestablishments categorizing issue I been coming across of late. Like restaurants in retail categories, Art galleries in retail companies and more....William, is the complaint department really on the roof?12:29, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Can you show me a page on which this occurs? In general I'm hopelessly incompetent in things on WP that are encased in curly brackets - I'm the last person you should look to for advice on template editing. The only subject in which I received a C in graduate school was introductory coding - it just wasn't my thing. Acroterion(talk)02:46, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXXII, April 2017
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi,
I read the message that you left regarding my addition of a society to those at Yale University; it is my society, and I am adding it so that future members may find it as a reference.
I understand that there is not a direct reference in books as with older societies such as Skull and Bones, as this is a relatively new society. However, many of the other societies on this page do not have references. Could I retain the addition of this society?
In general a prerequisite for adding an organization to a list on Wikipedia is that it should already have an article, which in turn means that sources have been provided to substantiate its existence and its notability. All subjects must show notability, meaning that they have received significant notice in independent media or scholarship to show that the world at large has taken notice. The reason things on lists don't always have references is that they've already passed the bar by having articles with references (that doesn't mean that referenced lists aren't welcome). So, you will need to register an account, assemble sources substantiating the content and the subject's notability, and write an article on the organization first, then add it to the list. Acroterion(talk)02:41, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Re: secret societies
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi,
I am sorry - I actually DO have a reference, via Yale Rumpus Magazine's society issue (in fact I have two):
You will see that Aquinas is listed on the Rumpus account and that society members were cited in the article. Would it be possible for me to create an account, gain access to edit the page for this very specific purpose, and then cite these?
No disrespect to Rumpus, but it falls short of the bar for recognized independent media with a reputation for fact-checking. You'll need something out in the wider world - most student publications don't qualify. As I said, first notability, then article, then list. Just because some things don't measure up doesn't make it OK for more to be added. Acroterion(talk)02:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
The Daily News is better, but to show notability for a global encyclopedia you should have sources that are distinct from Yale..Acroterion(talk)03:16, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Societies
I understand - thank you for your help!
Please clarify
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
An IP seems to keep using lousy sourcing to add mostly useless weather related information to the Yellowstone, Glacier and Grand Teton NP articles...and/or is drawing conclusions from the data in the websites they keep posting that is derived from guesstimates from graphs. I'm sure you've already noticed this but thought I would mention it anyway. Hope you're doing well these days!--MONGO02:18, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I saw that, I may start protecting them. Every now and then we get a spate of weather edits on a given class of articles, it seems to be a common fixation. All is well here, awfully busy with work. Acroterion(talk)02:31, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Small Warning Issue
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hey, I feel kinda awkward saying this because you're an administrator and have over 10 years of experience of constructively editing Wikipedia - which I deeply respect and admire you for but I'd just like to point out that this user: Little Frog8887 (Talk) had been warned for an inappropriate edit just one minute before his next problematic edit and had less than one minute to read my warning before you issued yours. A quote from the: user warnings project page: "The user must be given a chance to see, and react to, each warning given." Thank you. -=Troop=- (talk) 16:49, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
You're welcome. Edits of that ilk go back to November from that IP, so I anonblocked it for a year - they'll have to issue threats from a less-anonymous IP. Acroterion(talk)23:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I was surprised to see that it was a public library IP. Odd that it could be used by the same user over an extended period without similar garbage showing up from other nearby IPS. Meters (talk) 23:41, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Article Editing
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Thanks for your help. Would you like to work on my article with me? Thanks I would appreciate some help working on the actual article about the Missouri Med School accreditation history. Vitamindaughter (talk) 20:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I've already answered you several times on your talkpage. If you want to edit Wikipedia you have to respect community norms and actually listen to other editors and respond constructively. Acroterion(talk)21:15, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
May want to look at this
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello. I would like to ask you something. I was thinking of requesting page mover permission because I participate actively in closing RMs and generally moving pages, but there are many cases that a round-robin move is needed, and some others(generally not through RM) that redirects should be suppressed, but without having this permission, I cannot do either of them. But wonder whether this might be regarded by some as hat collecting since it will be my 3rd request for permission(the other 2 were done) in 16 days. What do you think? --Kostas20142 (talk) 15:50, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi,
I am very well aware that Parbhani is very far away from being a WP:GA, but what needs to be added/removed to make it a good article? Thanks for the help. —usernamekiran[talk]19:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Well written It has a fair amount of peacock phrasing and intensifying adjectives, and much of it appears to have been written by en-2 or 3 level writers. There is a lot of odd grammar and capitalization.
Verifiable Lots of statements are referenced, lots are not.
Broad in coverage Seems reasonably broad
Neutral See peacock phrasing and intensifiers.
Stable Seems reasonably stable
Illustrated Not very good, three pictures of a monument, two night shots and some palm trees don't give us much idea of what the place is like.
It's a start - it needs heavy copyedits, either removal of unsourced material or addition of references, and better pictures. Hope that helps. Acroterion(talk)01:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I would Like to report you
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Please do not use Wikipedia to promote a product - it doesn't matter whether it's your product or a customer, promotion isn't acceptable in an encyclopedia. See WP:SPAM. If you want to complain about my enforcement of this policy you can go to the administrator noticeboards, but you should know that your own conduct will be examined there. Acroterion(talk)14:55, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I WILL TRY TO REPORT YOU HOW DARE YOU MAKE ACCUSATIONS
(talk page stalker) Firstly, sign your "contributions". Secondly, stop shouting by using caps. Thirdly, listen carefully to what you have been told by an experienced administrator regarding Wikipedia rules on spam entries. You will get nowhere on here unless you abide by established practices on the encyclopedia. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
(another talk page stalker) Azeem, having reviewed the deleted page, I also agree with the deletion. When your company becomes notable, one of the ways you will know is that other people will write about it so you don't have to. I suggest you also read our conflict of interest guideline. You should never write about yourself or your company, primarily because it is impossible to have the neutral point of view essential to an encyclopedia. Antandrus(talk)18:10, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Confused
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An RfC has clarified that user categories should be emptied upon deletion, but redlinked user categories should not be removed if re-added by the user.
Discussions are ongoing regarding proposed changes to the COI policy. Changes so far have included clarification that adding a link on a Wikipedia forum to a job posting is not a violation of the harassment policy.
There is a new tool for adding archives to dead links. Administrators are able to restrict other user's ability to use the tool, and have additional permissions when changing URL and domain data.
Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
My template got deleted by, it said it was you. It got deleted for being unused (unused is what it said) and it was used in a article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCYoutube2 (talk • contribs)
I deleted the article first, then I deleted the template while cleaning up. Please do not use Wikipedia to promote your YouTube channel. Acroterion(talk)01:37, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Since it's expired and and there's been no significant trouble I just removed the note concerned ECP from the arbitration notice - the arbitration regime remains. Acroterion(talk)00:53, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Action box
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
You mean those little notifications at the top of the page? Just click the notification bugs and click "mark all as read." Have you been editing the national parks list while logged out? If so, you're edit-warring. Acroterion(talk)01:21, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Per your question
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
No, I have not been editing that article. I was using a public computer at the local library, so somebody else must used that computer after me.
Hardcoreromancatholic (talk) 01:32, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
Hi, Acroterion. If not too much trouble, could you take a look at this edit? It appears to me that User:Sundayclose rightly closed a thread in Talk:Lee Harvey Oswald that was not discussing improvements to the article, however, the close was reverted by an editor who felt the comments were "interesting". Cheers! -Location (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do once I've read through it all. It's been a long week and reading JFK stuff will just put me to sleep. Acroterion(talk)01:25, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
I removed an editor's comments not related to article improvement with this edit. When you have a moment, would you mind reviewing that to see if I was out-of-bounds for doing so? Thanks! -Location (talk) 04:38, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
You were not out of bounds, that kind of comment has no place in talkpage comments. I'll review the editor's contributions. Acroterion(talk)11:44, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I wasn't sure if I was to cite WP:RTP or what. Normally I might let off-topic comments go and ask someone to close the discussion if has become derailed, but this one seemed to ignore that it was closed. Thanks again! -Location (talk) 15:30, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXXIII, May 2017
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Does the three revert rule apply to me reverting three or more of my own edits within a 24 hour period? Also, can you give me the link to the page on that rule? Please reply on my talk page.
Hardcoreromancatholic (talk) 00:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
You can revert anything of yours as much as you like, provided there aren't any intervening edits by others that may have interacted with your edits. If some other edits have elapsed it becomes a matter of judgment. See WP:3RR for more. Acroterion(talk)01:44, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Vandalism
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
A talk page discussion is not "closed" by hiding it; it is simply closed by not replying any more. Don't feed the trolls, it's that simple. Hiding a discussion between a number of editors as you did, is for me rude and unacceptable behaviour, worse than trolling. Harald88 (talk) 20:26, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
You're entitled to disagree, but you aren't entitled to claim that those who try to manage talkpage disruption are vandals or trolls. Putting the discussion in a box (which really isn't hidden) is one way of gently encouraging others to not prolong an obviously unproductive discussion, as experience shows that it can otherwise be revived at any time by new editors who stumble across the discussion and start it up all over again. The one-click archiver was developed to head off that kind of issue, but that really does move it off the page.. Acroterion(talk)16:10, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Lincoln/Titanic/Kennedy IP
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Gratuitous and aggressive judgement on what W's purpose is.
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have Wikipedia and the Guardian in my will.
Be assured that I am removing W, immediately.
Goodbye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanismws (talk • contribs)
Since you possess such a very clear understanding of Wikipedia's purpose, you probably understand by now that Wikipedia doesn't exist to promote companies that re-purpose iPads and cellphones as digital picture frames. Acroterion(talk)16:11, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
In the future, please provide a properly formatted source the first time. You've been around long enough to know better, and you've been around long enough to know better than to reinstate unsourced material after you were, in fact, asked to source it. Something better than a bare URL to a high school webpage would be even better. Acroterion(talk)21:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Hi. I own the copyright to http://kenclarkbfa.crevado.com/about content and was attempting use, alter and expand the information for Wikipedia article.
I had just noticed I had left the 'l' out of Clark and was trying to figure out how to alter that when the page disappeared. I did try to reply to the flag that popped up about copyright violation but it seems my attempts didn't succeed. Could the article please be re-instated or is there the possibility of getting the text so I can edit it off-line in Word? I'm looking forward to your reply.- Ken (Obie Willis)
It says plainly at the bottom of the Crevado page that it's copyrighted. You may not use the content on Wikipedia unless it's been released in a manner consistent with a Creative Commons license or if its been verifiably released to Wikipedia via the methods outlined through the links on your talkpage. In any case it's promotional (as is reasonable, professional profiles are meant to be promotional) and must be heavily edited before it's placed on Wikipedia, so that it's suitable for an encyclopedia. I would suggest that you compose entirely new text offline and post it, remembering to follow the best practices listed at WP:COI - since the text is already on the Crevado page it's not lost, but since it was written for a different purpose the literal content is not usable here. Remember that you will need to substantiate notability be reference to multiple references in major independent media for the article to pass Wikipedia's notability bar. See WP:YFA and WP:BIO for more. I'l be happy to help out, but I'm in a very different time zone and can't usually respond in real time. Acroterion(talk)11:44, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I own the copyright of the content of the page. http://kenclarkbfa.crevado.com/about. When the wiki article page was removed I was adjusting, adding content relevant to an encyclopaedic style and adding references and attributions that were not related to selling artwork. That material is not on the crevado page and that is what I am after and hoping to retrieve so I can work offline on the article. I didn't realise an article would be judges before it was completed. My wish is that the article to be briefly re-instated so I can quickly retrieve that information. Cheers,- Ken Clark (Obie Willis)Obie Willis (talk) 12:37, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
As Yunshui has already advised, no administrator will restore a copyright violation even for a short time. As long as an incompatible copyright is shown on the source it can't be used here, unless you give permission via OTRS. In any case, the content is promotional and must be re-written in its entirety to be suitable for the encyclopedia. And as Boris notes, Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies. Acroterion(talk)17:16, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Thomas Andrews
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Why are you giving me a hard time over correcting the mistake on Thomas Andrew's page? He was an Irish man, not British. It even says it in the article. All I did was fix the information box. Adhamh777 (talk) 01:26, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
You've been changing nationalities in several places with the explanation "mistake." That's not a valid explanation, and the matter of nationality for pre-Republic people from Northern Ireland has been extensively debated. Don't make contentious changes without discussion. Acroterion(talk)02:24, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Reverts
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Because you're making significant additions and removals without discussion and inserting poorly-sourced opinion. Please discuss proposed edits on talkpages. In particular, you're editing through the lens of anarchic principles, which seems to me to be undue weight. Acroterion(talk)13:49, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Blocking of Joey2017
Latest comment: 7 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hi there! I was assisting this user in IRC, and although their topic is SNOW, I didn't see anything too egregious to substantiate a block. But, I'm sure there's a good reason, that maybe us plebs don't have insight to. Anywho, was just curious. Thanks in advance, and again, hi! Drewmutt(^ᴥ^)talk02:58, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Drewmutt, I can see that Joey was socking with Fuzzy2019 and most contribs are deleted. He also recreated a few different versions of the article in about a day:
As BH notes they were socking and creating multiple articles to avoid salting, and they even went as far as creating a fake newspaper/website domain to attempt to attempt to substantiate notability. A promotion-only account, definitely NOTHERE. Acroterion(talk)09:54, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Heh, yeah, I suspected as much, when I asked head on "Did you create this site?" the next line was "User joey2017 disconnected". Anywho, thanks for the insight fellas! Drewmutt(^ᴥ^)talk20:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I just wanted to say...
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Good to hear from you KoS. I'm still here, but real life is fairly demanding these days and I do relatively little here - 12 and 16 hour days on the clock,sometimes with jobsite visits out of town. Between work and house projects my work on content is fragmentary at best. I do more photography than anything else if I have downtime while traveling. Acroterion(talk)01:14, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2017
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
Latest comment: 7 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, Acroterion. Hope you are well. A new user has been posting on my user page rather than my talk page. Is it possible to (speedy) delete that page? If not, is it possible to have the history of that page stricken? Thanks! -Location (talk) 22:38, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Either one is possible. I can delete as a userspace request, or I can delete the troublesome portion. Whatever suits you. Acroterion(talk)00:18, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
It would be great if you could delete the user page (but not the talk page!) when you have time. I'll probably put the dot back on it! No rush. Sorry to bug you! Thanks again! -Location (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Acroterion,
I'm a relatively new Wikipedia editor, and I noticed your comment that a Wikipedia article may not cite Wikipedia. My studies focus on conspiracy theory, and I wanted to point out an instance of a conspiracy theorist who had attempted during the past several years to sneakily edit Wikipedia. If citing Wikipedia on Wikipedia is not allowed, how would I cite this instance of vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creynold2 (talk • contribs)
Unless it's been discussed in reasonable detail by independent media, you can't. You would need to cite an outside discussion in a reliable source. Your analysis of Wikipedia edits would be |original research, which would not be permitted. Acroterion(talk)22:15, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
No, it's not, but I have concerns about self-appointed wiki-cops who template people with more than a decade of experience. Acroterion(talk)01:59, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Sockpuppets of Billy Hathorn
Latest comment: 7 years ago9 comments4 people in discussion
Although the name is familiar I'm not really au courant with his modus operandi - Louisiana politicians and personalities, no? Acroterion(talk)01:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, this is him. Right MO and the addition of the Portalbar template as he did here is just like the edit here (he wasn't detected on this IP until now). There is at least one dynamic IP that has been assigned to him for more than six months like a static line which is here and Drmies has blocked it previously for Billy's block evasion. Given this admission after the block expired, I would say that this IP is due for at least a one year hardblock but will defer to Drmies' opinion on the matter and let him issue the block.
I've hardblocked the IP that William has posted above for two weeks. We need to locate his current IPv6 address block. Much of last year, he was using this block and then he changed to this block until May 1 (last edit). Finding and blocking his new IPv6 addressing would help deter him. — Berean Hunter(talk)12:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
@Berean Hunter:. Here is another 64.134.28.158 of Billy's IPs. Would you like for me in the future to post to your talk page if I come across any of BH's socks? FYI I'm one of User Ryan kirkpatrick's duck hunters[8] mostly because I do a great deal of aviation related edits....William, is the complaint department really on the roof?12:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
No, posting here is fine. I find more socks from reading Acroterion's talk page. Actually, the best place, when we have enough evidence to make it worthwhile, is the SPI case. If you happen upon the IPv6 range that he is likely using then you can post to my talk or here so that I can examine it. I've blocked the above IP and deleted his article. Good job finding him. — Berean Hunter(talk)13:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Posting here is fine with me. Enough people watch this page to ensure that somebody knowledgeable will be able to help. Hathorn's not one I would have recognized or been able to check easily. I have a couple dozen long-term socks that I try to keep track of, he wasn't one of them. My work and home schedule this summer makes my presence on WP intermittent, but I try to check in once or twice a day. Acroterion(talk)16:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I decided to create a Wikipedia page on my own YouTube channel because no one else has done it yet. Since I am not as popular as People like Pewdiepie I'm worried that there will never be a page on my YouTube channel. But it isn't an autobiography. After all I'm using my channel name not my real name. Thank you. 😇
Doesn't matter. Don't write about yourself or your projects. If and when you rival PewDiePie someone else will notice and write about you. Acroterion(talk)03:23, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Help admin
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, thank u for blocking realitytvshow. This is actually their second account they have blocked for pulling the same childish stunts. Is there a way they can be permanently banned for sockpuppetry? He keeps logging out and reverting edits on many pages. I am new so I don't know how to ban all his ips. Can you please protect Real World: Ex-Plosion, The Challenge XXX: Dirty 30, and The Challenge: Battle of the Exes II and Ink Master (season 9) from this menance? Also given its their second account block can it be an IP block and a permanent block? Given his history though he will make new accounts. Sdfakjdfjklklasdf (talk) 05:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Another user problem
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
You're right, I'm looking into a simple rangeblock that should deal with the situation. Keep an eye out for others and let me know - lots of people wath this page and somebody'll take action. Acroterion(talk)00:31, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't see a simple rangeblock as possible - the IPs are clearly related but they're too dynamic to expect that blocking will accomplish much. There have been some recent technical improvements to the blocking mechanism that can help to make a block stick even against logged-out users, and since nothing appears to have happened in the past couple of days it seems to be working. At some point we'll see them again and will have to act accordingly. Acroterion(talk)00:53, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Michael Shuey
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
You deleted an article about Michael Shuey. Please restore to my sandbox so I can see if it is related to a new article I might create.Trackinfo (talk) 20:18, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
The 2010 deleted article was about a 10th grader born in 1994. There is no usable content, if it's the same person you are better off starting from scratch. Acroterion(talk)20:36, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
In 2010 it was an unsourced stub about a very tall kid written by a 15-year-old. Probably the same person, but nothing usable. Best to start from clean since it had no sourcing and wasn't a good start. Acroterion(talk)
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I nominated this article for speedy deletion and I was hoping you can take a look at it. The reasons for the CSD request can be found here[9] on the article's talk page. The article is at AFD and other than the subject himself no one is arguing keep plus the AFD has run the full seven days. An AFD closure could be possible too. Thanks....William, is the complaint department really on the roof?14:10, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I looked it over and generally agree. That said, I'll see about it this evening once I've had a chance to review in greater detail. Acroterion(talk)18:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Smit Trivedi
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Because the subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for individuals. Please see WP:BIO, and please remember that autobiographies are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. Acroterion(talk)18:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Deletion of Halon Entertainment
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I am confused as to why the Halon Entertainment page was deleted by you. It was written in a factual way, had links to appropriate references, and documented a company that is notable in the film making business. It was written in a similar tone as those of other companies listed in the same categories. I am open to modifications but an outright deletion seems extreme. Please contact me on my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vfxnerd (talk • contribs)
The one I deleted (as did RickinBaltimore) is a 10th grade high school hockey player in Michigan, and one deleted in 2013 by Elcokid is a swimmer. What sport does your Brian Brown compete in? Acroterion(talk)11:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Administrator changes
TheDJ
Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is editor call my editing "personal anaylysis" while i present sources and the dont. TimothyJosephWood 14:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
—usernamekiran[talk] 03:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Miscellaneous
Actually, the best place, when we have enough evidence to make it worthwhile, is the SPI case. If you happen upon the IPv6 range that he is likely using then you can post to my talk or here so that I can examine it. I've blocked the above IP 
Done I've also located this IP which he has used recently.
