Open main menu

User talk:Longhair

Active discussions

Hi, I read the fax article. Thank you. One thing, why do you question whether faxes are more secure than internet-based modes of communication? As a physician in the US, I assure you that I and most doctors believe it to be so. As we both know, hackers abound on the internet and important private information is often being accessed by people who should not access it. This does not occur very often with real landline fax transmission, most likely because a hacker would need to access the telephone lines somewhere. Please either correct me or correct the article. Thanks This is my first attempt at editing a Wikipedia article so please forgive me if I am doing this wrong. I can be reached via e-mail at

Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:04, 11 October 2019 (UTC)


Immediate AttentionEdit

Hi Admin,

I would like you to have your immediate attention on this page. Thank you.

Venomous Sniper (talk) 08:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@Venomous Sniper: Thanks. Can you please warn vandals with more than one warning before reporting, unless they're on a rampage at high speed. It makes it easier to issue a block once they've been sufficiently warned. Aside from that, thanks, you had a few waiting and most were easily taken care of. -- Longhair\talk 09:21, 25 November 2018 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for blocking the above user. The user has also uploaded the file Identity appropriation.gif to Wikimedia Commons which I have nominated for deletion. Regards, JACKINTHEBOXTALK 08:46, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@JackintheBox: Thanks. I'm not an admin over there but somebody will complete that eventually. Quite a backlog at the moment. I'll knock out what I can here. -- Longhair\talk 08:48, 25 November 2018 (UTC)


Please hide the revisions made by the compromised account of user:Divinity76 today. CLCStudent (talk) 19:36, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: Another administrator already has. -- Longhair\talk 19:38, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

source lootingEdit

i'm unsure what you mean, the source is the NY Times article itself that was already there. I'll re-edit it. TerminatorXtotheEdgeofPanic (talk) 20:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@TerminatorXtotheEdgeofPanic: And this edit? [1] -- Longhair\talk 20:15, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
the LA 1992 looting weren't predominately in black areas of south central LA? also why remove both of my edits, dont understandTerminatorXtotheEdgeofPanic (talk) 20:20, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
@TerminatorXtotheEdgeofPanic: You explained your first edit which you've since re-added. If you can find a reliable source for the second then you're welcome to reinstate that also. -- Longhair\talk 20:39, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Yannick MireurEdit

Hi Longhair, thank you for your welcome message. Will read the references and revert.

AndreAdrian says thanksEdit

Hello Longhair. I am an old contributer to the german Wikipedia. I will read the links. Thanks for your welcome! AndreAdrian (talk) 22:04, 26 November 2018 (UTC)


Hello Longhair and thanks for welcoming me, and thanks for your interest. In real fact i have browsed a lot of pages in Wikipedia guidelines sure it's a place that i decide to stay and edit. Thanks again for welcoming me. (talk) 23:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)–Kollam_ExpressEdit


Thanks for the information, I've shared an external link of government website. It was the information verified by Indian government. Don't know if that's considered as low quality link then what should be the quality link?

I am new here, trying to learn as much as I can.

Regards, --Paradiseholidays (talk) 18:04, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Paradiseholidays: I would have thought a government would use a .gov-like domain, but I've since visited the website and I won't revert should you add that link again. -- Longhair\talk 22:25, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Shakira111 IPEdit

Hi Longhair, my hunch is certainly true that Shakira111 is still evading the block by using IPs for the following reasons. The IP user (talk · contribs · WHOIS) used the Twitter links from fans and record labels to add certifications like 1, 2, 3. The same urls were added to some of the same articles by Shakira111 like for instance here, see using the same Twitter fan account. It seems beyond coincidence and the IP came and reverted my exact removal on the article "Chantaje", the exact reversions which Shakira111 was also doing while returning from his/her block. —IB [ Poke ] 22:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@IndianBio: I see what you're saying. I didn't follow the Twitter link but if it's a fan site and they're using the same reference, they pass the duck test here. If they're evading blocks again, they'll just continue to do so. Topic bans and similar won't stop them either. What was the outcome of the post to AIV? I see nothing this end that came of that, or did admins refer you to me, having dealt with this editor several times previously? -- Longhair\talk 22:22, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
The AIV resulted in the IP being blocked for two weeks. As for the main user, Shakira111, I had pinged you myself since you were the one who had originally blocked him/her, and would know better what to do in this situation. I'm just surprised that someone would pay absolutely no attention to blocks unless, as you say, this will continue alas. —IB [ Poke ] 22:27, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@IndianBio: OK I see that now. They've only been blocked in the past 10 minutes or so... their edits came at 3am in the morning here. I'd just logged off for the evening so wasn't around. Their account block expires in a day or so. I'm going to sit idle and do nothing with the main account for now, and if they evade their block again before their block expires, ping me again please. It's part vandalism and part personal I'm assuming. Disruptive along with a tad of aiming for your edits from what I can tell. -- Longhair\talk 22:38, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. A bit of digging in resulted in a lot of these fan Twitter links being added (presumably by the same user) across all the singer Shakira related articles. I will keep you posted regarding what happens and how the main account behaves. —IB [ Poke ] 22:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@IndianBio: Can I have the exact Twitter account URL please? Not the tweet URL, but the account. -- Longhair\talk 22:47, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Sure. One of them is PakyShak and the other is Shakira_Brasil. —IB [ Poke ] 22:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@IndianBio: I just did an external links search... only got 1 hit at Deja Vu (Prince Royce and Shakira song) aside from the Twitter account mention being at my talk page here. I'm not doubting what you're saying, but if you can isolate the exact Twitter accounts they're referencing then perhaps technical means can be employed to stop them adding them to begin with, which will pretty much stop their disruption because the wiki software will step in before anyone else can and block them from being added altogether. -- Longhair\talk 22:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Oh I just went around deleting most of the links from the Shakira articles. Just the one you linked above was left. That's why you didn't find them much. Check my most recent contributions :) —IB [ Poke ] 23:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@IndianBio: You missed one. Thanks. I'll be around for a few hours, if not online, then nearby. -- Longhair\talk 23:06, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Upsilon Sigma Phi leaks scandalEdit

I removed a considerable amount of content which I think is a clear overemphasis according to BLP policy from this article. I subsequently noticed from the history that you had previously blocked an other editor for deleting potions of this material. I did not intend this as a revert of your block, and i apologize if it looks that way. If you disagree with me, I suggest a discussion on either the article talk page or the BLP noticeboard. If you do, let me know where; I shall then state my position, and if I think necessary ask for an RfC for broader input, but I do not intend to get extensively involved should the consensus be opposed to my deletion. DGG ( talk ) 00:55, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@DGG: Your edits are fine. I did intend to revisit this article, lest that incident occurred late-ish at night here and upon waking one becomes distracted by other issues here that get in the way. That blocked editor was not engaging in discussion other than brief edit summaries and I saw their deletions as being cited by reliable sources. I blocked them for continual removal of information without discussing the exact nature of their problem. I also left information at their talk page on how to have the article deleted without the edit warring that took place. It's all good my end. Articles of those types always make me want to look away. I appreciate the work you've done to give it the cleanup it deserved. Thanks. -- Longhair\talk 01:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for your help tonight! It's been the first time I've encountered anyone needing blocking and you were there! Philipnelson99 (talk) 04:48, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Philipnelson99: It happens. Thanks for your help also. -- Longhair\talk 04:52, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Philipnelson99: I see you've found another one already... :) I'll be logging off shortly. Be sure to take any active vandalism to the relevant noticeboard. -- Longhair\talk 05:16, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Longhair: Ah, thank you for pointing me to the notice board! I'm just now really learning how to fight vandalism! Thanks! Philipnelson99 (talk) 05:20, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Philipnelson99: I saw you mention earlier one had attacked you. That'll happen too when you catch the wrong one off-guard mid-vandalism spree. Just revert and brush it off. Wikipedia:Deny recognition is a good essay on that topic worth the glance. Good luck. -- Longhair\talk 05:22, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Longhair: I'll be sure to read it!! Thanks! Philipnelson99 (talk) 05:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Always good to have you around - trust your week is going well JarrahTree 00:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Page protectionEdit

Hi Longhair, can you protect the Kate Siegel page? It's been the target of unsourced defamatory attacks from multiple IPs. -KH-1 (talk) 05:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@KH-1: Done. Quite an active mess eh? -- Longhair\talk 05:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Yeah, but should be alright now. -KH-1 (talk) 05:25, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


Dear Mr. Longhair,

we created as a study with no commercial intend. Our focus is to show people who don't have the capability to travel much, how tall famous structures around the world are, and to inable them to compare them in size to other structures the might know or have heard of. We try to be as accurate as possible with the information we provide by scaling them into their right prorpotions. We believe this information could be a good learning tool.

Could you please let us know why you do not estimate this learning tool to be fit to be included into your encyclopedia. This might also help us to improve what we are doing. We don't wish to offend anybody and we are not involved with political or commercial content and therefore your input would be highly appreciated.

Thank you

your Size-explorer Team — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buildingsize (talkcontribs) 14:44, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Buildingsize - You absolutely cannot add links to references, sources, or websites that you own, author, or maintain. It's an absolute conflict of interest violation to do such a thing, and it degrades these articles from being worded and referenced in order to reflect a neutral point of view. It also violates Wikipedia's policy that disallows the inclusion of original research within articles. I mean, think about it for a moment... if I add content and information to an article and I reference my own stuff, that puts the article's neutrality into question and people would be correct in asking questions about that... It's like having a scientist hired by a tobacco company introducing a study stating that smoking doesn't cause cancer... would you accept such a study, or would you be crossing your arms and saying, "noooo... wait a second here...."? Of course you'd be crossing your arms and rejecting the study! :-) ...because the scientist's conflict of interest is clear and the study's neutrality is compromised because of this. This is why we cannot accept your links or URLs as sources and why you cannot add them to Wikipedia. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:52, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Buildingsize: {editconflict, thanks Osh... I'll let you speak because you've said it far better than I...} But I will add, you (Buildingsize) have signed off using the word "team"... please note Wikipedia accounts are for the sole use of one person only. I'm going to ask you to change username as it must represent a single person rather than a team or organisation. You are not required to use your real name. You are currently in violation of the username policy. Your username can be changed at Wikipedia:Changing username. Again, all accounts must represent a single editor or person, not a "team". -- Longhair\talk 15:00, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Shakira111 returnsEdit

As expected and this happened. SMH. —IB [ Poke ] 15:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@IndianBio: I was just about to ask...brb. -- Longhair\talk 15:07, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@IndianBio: Handed a month off. They're not getting it. -- Longhair\talk 15:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
And don't think they will ever get it. We both know where this is heading sigh... Thanks Longhair. —IB [ Poke ] 15:11, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@IndianBio: Keep me informed. I expect we'll revisit this topic again soon-ish. -- Longhair\talk 15:15, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit warEdit

Hello, I do not know how to open a debate on Critical Reviews in Toxicology, Taylor & Francis, and Predatory publishing talk pages. Could you do it please ?


@Scientificrigor12:. No. It's not my debate to enter. But the talk page you require is at Talk:Critical Reviews in Toxicology. You're better off heading there rather than continue to edit war. -- Longhair\talk 18:16, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scientificrigor12 (talkcontribs) 18:22, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


I think there was a mistake - via Avi edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alina c26 (talkcontribs) 00:36, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Ya I do agree with the fact that , the edit I made wasn't appropriate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nandini Devaskar (talkcontribs) 02:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC) 

Clarification on Word of Faith EditEdit

My apologies on the inappropriate edit. I'm new at this. Could you explain to me how Joe McIntyre and Justin Peters are considered experts but I'm not? I have published a book on this subject on Amazon and have had a blog dealing with these issues for years, as well as a YouTube channel addressing the misinformation in Justin Peters' commentary. How does one go from being a guy with an opinion to an expert who can be cited on Wikipedia? Because I can assure you Justin Peters is not an expert. He's a guy with an ax to grind against Benny Hinn and faith healers, and has spread a ton of misinformation on the subject. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodney saunders (talkcontribs) 12:50, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

@Rodney saunders: Your first edit was unsourced, and your second linked to a blog website. I made no comment on anyone else being an expert on this topic, but information added to articles must be by published by reliable third party sources. You appear to be adding primary sources related to your own work in this area. -- Longhair\talk 21:41, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I was referring to the article calling Justin Peters an expert, not you. So I guess I need to establish myself as an expert and wait for somebody else to use me as a source. Does being a published author qualify? JP isn't a published author. He's just a guy who does seminars and videos. I at least have a self-published book. Confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodney saunders (talkcontribs) 04:38, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
@Rodney saunders: It sounds like the article has quite a few issues. If content in the article isn't sourced by reliable independent publications, you may remove such content. The link I've provided in my comment here will assist you to determine the reliability of sources. If another editor chooses to undo your edits, then article talk pages are where you can both reach a consensus on the article content. Self-published books aren't a reliable source... they're considered a primary source, and nor videos and seminars unless they've received significant coverage in secondary sources. I hope that helps. I realise it can be confusing, so if you have any further questions, feel free to ask. -- Longhair\talk 07:45, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

UAS Laboratories pageEdit

Hi there,

Thank you very much for your attentiveness to pages. However, I am a bit confused of why my content was rejected. Everything listed is public information and can be confirmed by a number of news sources. Do I need a greater variaton of sources? I just found it easy to use their website since all the information was in their news and announcements like a historical record. Every historical event, location, Recognition and Current Activity can be confirmed by a news source. I apologize that you found my content advertorial in nature. This is my first post I've edited and I suppose I write a bit too much like a story teller. Will I have another opportunity? If you notice, this page has not been updated in some time and the history, current activities, and locations all need to be updated. The proliferation of knowledge of probiotics and the probiotic industry is highly important to me.

Thanks, Kyle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyle.b.obrien (talkcontribs) 19:40, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kyle.b.obrien: See WP:COI. You appear to be employed by this company and your editing is a conflict of interest. Per the Wikipedia Terms of Use you will be required to declare any paid editing on your user page. You will not be permitted to edit the article directly, but rather request edits at the article talk page. -- Longhair\talk 21:36, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Issue with ContentEdit

"While most Welsh immigrants came to the US before the 20th century, "immigration has by no means stopped." Current expatriates (a recent notable example being Anthony Hopkins) have formed societies all across the country, including the Chicago Tafia (a play on "Mafia" and "Taffy"), AmeriCymru and New York Welsh/ Cymry Efrog Newydd."

Issue with the above entry. Published material should make it clear that Welsh Immigration from Wales to to USA is very low. The publisher above is referencing a few high profile individuals and a couple of social groups. Recommended corrections: Welsh immigration to the United States is low, but Welsh immigrants do still arrive (Or any other similar clarification). "Immigration has by no means stopped" is a poor representation of the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

@ Your edits were unsourced. Feel free to re-add them by citing reliable sources. -- Longhair\talk 01:12, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

If it can not allow me to create a bot user account,please delete my account!Edit

Last week,I had been created an account"Yesterdaybot",I'm a bot's host,if there was a rule,can't create any bot,just help me to delete my account,please.(I had contact to wikipedia community email,but nobody answer,I doubt you are a offical system admin)Haojie A liang 08:41, 1 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yesterday Once More (talkcontribs)

@Yesterday Once More: Bots must be approved by the Bot Approvals Group at WP:BAG. Accounts are not deleted at Wikipedia. If you wish to no longer edit just stop using your account. -- Longhair\talk 21:53, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for all the hard work, you truly deserve this @Boothsift 00:28, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Following up on last messageEdit

Hello, I didn't remove content, I moved it to another section. India had its own section separately from "Asia", so I decided to move the information under "Asia". Is it fine if it's moved back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newshesha23 (talkcontribs) 03:06, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


re User talk: Can you explain why you're reverting the IP's removal of comments? Per WP:BLANKING, the IP is allowed to do it. It might not be wise, but reverting it certainly doesn't help anything and adds more heat than light. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:40, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

@L235: True. But when they're accusing another editor of good standing of wrongs, others are asking for evidence. Blanking just means they're likely accusing while also unwilling to backup their disruptive claims. More than one editor is requesting evidence. -- Longhair\talk 05:48, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I understand and am very sympathetic. I personally disagree that reverting three times and then revoking TPA was the best thing to do, but I respect that reasonable editors may disagree. Have a good night, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:57, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
@L235: This editor has been ip hopping for some time and editing per WP:TE. When editors accuse others of good standing then withdraw requests or blank requests for further info, that's kinda disruptive imho. Perhaps I lost my cool. I appreciate your input here. All the best. -- Longhair\talk 06:06, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Longhair has a habit of doing this, he obviously doesn't care about following Wikipedia policies. He is nothing but a hypocrite. (talk) 14:18, 13 December 2018 (UTC)


Hello, I am one of Chinese Wikipedia administrators. You may feel weird for edit of Poeplelikeyou.

He is one of User:Jessechi's Sock puppetries. He is a long-term Wikipedia vandal in Chinese Wikipedia[2].—Outlookxp (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

  Administrator changes

  Al Ameer sonRandykittySpartaz
  BosonDaniel J. LeivickEfeEsanchez7587Fred BauderGarzoMartijn HoekstraOrangemike

  Interface administrator changes

 Deryck Chan

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
  • A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
  • A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

  Technical news



  • In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
  • Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


Hi Longhair. Since this user appears to understand and be willing to abide by the COI restrictions, I've unblocked them. AS ever, if you have any issues, feel free to drop by my talkpage; you're always welcome! Yunshui  09:20, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Yunshui: All good. -- Longhair\talk 09:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Grand, thanks! Yunshui  09:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Alternate page titleEdit

Hey, I saw that you deleted my alternate user page title. Is having that against the rules? I was just following the instructions here – if this is an illegal practice, that page should probably be changed, I'd say.

Ker Blam, PaulodiCapistrano 23:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@PauloDiCapistrano: Your edits at your userpage made your userpage appear as if it was in the article namespace which may confuse some editors. Userpage guidelines state that userpages must not appear to look like articles. I'm not sure that your changes to userpage appearance would be visible to those using different skins to the default anyhow. I realise the link I've provided doesn't expressly mention the page title and refers more to the hosting of articles in userpage, but it's still likely to confuse some editors in my opinion. -- Longhair\talk 23:20, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
@Longhair: Got it. Makes sense. Thanks!
Ker Blam, PaulodiCapistrano 23:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

History MergeEdit

Hi Longhair, User:Nizil Shah left a message on my talk page, asking for a history merge between Polo forest and Polo Forest. The latter was somehow created when I moved the page, but the former is the current page being edited. Also, I am credited as the creator, which I am not. I agree with Nizil that a merge should be performed, but I was not sure how to do it and I don't know a lot of admins(GAB was helpful, Swarm is currently too busy to reply and let's just say Beeblebrox was not a big fan of me asking him for help...but my wording was pretty awful). So, I have come to you for assistance, but I also understand that admins are normal people and they have other things to do. So, I wouldn't mind at all if you are too busy(not being sarcastic or harsh).

Thanks, --@Boothsift 06:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Boothsift: Polo Forest is the preferred title? I've performed the merge... but just checking the intended article name. -- Longhair\talk 06:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
@Longhair: Hi, I believe that Nizil prefers Polo forest, however since it is a place, I think Polo Forest would be better. --@Boothsift 06:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
@Boothsift: Places are usually capitalised. I'll leave you two to sort that and if you need any further assistance I'll be around in between real life throughout the evening. I've deleted the duplicate. -- Longhair\talk 06:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for history merge. I have capitalised the title as per your advice. -Nizil (talk) 07:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Edit conflict on blockEdit

Hi Longhair! I think we edit conflicted here. I had revised the block to reflect the LTA socking. The username is irrelevant at this point.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:11, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ponyo: I suspected LTA. No probs, we both had the same intention. -- Longhair\talk 23:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

You just deleted thisEdit

Portal:Philately/Header. The portal page this was used on had been drastically edited without any notice to me, the maintainer, and they have now reverted it but you deleted this page. Please restore or userify, so I can see exactly how it constructed as I would like to recreate it for the portal revision. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 23:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: Restored. -- Longhair\talk 23:45, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll look at this and see how its elements can be retained, even if it get deleted again. ww2censor (talk) 23:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
@Ww2censor: Grab what you need and if it requires deletion again just tag accordingly. Thanks. -- Longhair\talk 23:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

about the editEdit

I was about to ask you to reset it to before how this whole thing dispute started. I see that you have reverted it correctly, already Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pirabarlen (talkcontribs)

@Pirabarlen: While there's always two sides to every story, I have communicated with another editor who you both chatted with at irc and looked into the mess of edits left behind. It's clearly an off-wiki dispute that became active here at Wikipedia. I think I have the correct version of said article in place and will add the article to my personal watchlist in case the dispute resumes in future. In short, something just didn't make sense when I took a closer look, and when things don't make sense, somebody isn't being honest. I think it'll all blow over now and everyone can move on peacefully, at least here anyway? -- Longhair\talk 13:48, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
@Pirabarlen: @Wedgeantilles0: This dispute is now taking place on 4 different pages here, as well as IRC. I suggest taking any wiki related issues to the talk page so the entire issue can be followed without anyone getting lost along the way. -- Longhair\talk 14:04, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I have added a text regarding departing members on the talk page. Wedgeantilles0 (talk) 15:29, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

New page deletion: Asia-Pacific Quiz ChampionshipsEdit

G'day Longhair

Just wanted to discuss deletion of this new page. I would have thought an international event of seven years standing is wiki-worthy. I had a look at the various guidelines but they refer more to sporting events so were not much help. The page is still in development so I plan to re-submit it when it is more substantial. Happy to discuss further in the meantime if you wish.

cheers, Jockosaurus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jockosaurus (talkcontribs)

@Jockosaurus: The article was completely unsourced. I am happily to restore the article and move it into your draft workspace. -- Longhair\talk 22:04, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Re the deletionEdit

Wasn't trying to step on feet there. From link watching, I had already blanked the page previously, and with the reanimation, I deleted, and went to be more specific to the user, and found you had already stood and tapped your foot. <shrug> Sometimes they don't want to listen, though just know better. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:20, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I don't mind. I'd already warned the editor. You just completed the job :) -- Longhair\talk 04:21, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Back at it again via Vlkwatchman (talk · contribs) -- Longhair\talk 04:45, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Having COIBot monitor and there will be a matching set of reports locally — billinghurst sDrewth 04:58, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: "Chris" isn't enjoying this... I think they've copped an autoblock via the sock I blocked. I'll let them cool down and read up before I change anything. Sigh. -- Longhair\talk 05:10, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
What do you mean RTFM? What? It isn't WikiWriteWhatIWant? Damn you and all your rules. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: If I had $1 for every coi editor that shapeshifted into another identity... :p -- Longhair\talk 05:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Nice to know to where the CoIers move, which is why I find COIBot so valuable for monitoring. I'd prefer a $1 for every spam edit; hey just my xwiki deletions/reversions. Heck, sometimes just getting a dollar would be okay. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I wasn't even aware of COIBot but I am now. I'll look into it... -- Longhair\talk 05:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Not aware? Oh no, and it is so best of mates with XLinkBot. Beetstra is the maestro, though I have good access. To drive it best, it is IRC controlled, though can do bits through webpages, at least to poke a page. Prod me if you want or need more access. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:45, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Yeah, I'm interested. I do a lot of coi related work here sometimes and it'd come in handy. Any quick start tips you can give would be much appreciated also. Thanks. -- Longhair\talk 20:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

re: user page deletion and delete templateEdit

First off, thanks for the quick response to the delete request - however, the fact that the delete is using "speedy deletion" in the template's contents doesn't make a great deal of sense to me. In most cases that I've come across, a regular delete template doesn't necessarily have that sort of language on it that implies that immediate action is requested. DSquirrelGM (talk) 02:46, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@DSquirrelGM: Speedy deletion can be a complex topic with many criteria for deletion. I could tell what your intentions were so deleted the content you requested to be removed. This page describes all the criteria for content that is able to be speedy deleted along with the shorthand codes used to abbreviate the criteria. If in doubt just tag the article with {{csd}} and another more experienced editor or administrator will usually be able to tell what you're intending. -- Longhair\talk 02:52, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
@DSquirrelGM: The alternative is Articles for Deletion which is a discussion based deletion process and intended for content where speedy deletion criteria does not apply. -- Longhair\talk 02:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the user user:CixqoEdit

This user keeps recreating an autobiographical page, that keeps getting repeatedly deleted. also keeps creating pages about his songs. He doesnt seem to meet WP:MUSICBIO. What should the next step of action for this user be? Daiyusha (talk) 08:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@Daiyusha: I'll take a look, thanks. -- Longhair\talk 08:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
@Daiyusha: I've blocked them due to the bulk of their edits being self promotional content. That appears to be their primary purpose here at Wikipedia. Any other contributions were very few and far between. -- Longhair\talk 08:53, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Penn State School of MusicEdit

I got raked over the coals recently for placing such obvious username blocks. Don't run for ArbCom unless you want to be called to the dramah boards, haha. Drmies (talk) 22:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@Drmies: People will complain about anything... I wondered why the obvious tended to be left alone of late. I voted for you anyway :D -- Longhair\talk 22:43, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


My report of user:2600:100D:B004:3DEB:4CC1:B144:8F7E:55A6 has been sitting there for a little more than an hour. Could you please block them? Just look at the prior contributions today such as [[3]]. They are vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 00:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: They appear to be fixing vandalism, at least on the Happy Pills article anyway. Their edits prior to that however... if I'm wrong feel free to clue me up a notch. -- Longhair\talk 00:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
look at [[4]] and the edits before. CLCStudent (talk) 00:59, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
@CLCStudent: Yes, I saw that. They've stopped editing but I'll keep an eye on them in case they resurface. I don't know enough about the Candlebox topic without checking but they're also editing dates which may be a case of fixing one issue while breaking another... -- Longhair\talk 01:00, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
@CLCStudent: Somebody else just blocked them. -- Longhair\talk 01:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Grissom High SchoolEdit

on the wikipedia page for Grissom High School, i added a legal issues section regarding a lawsuit that is currently ongoing with a former student being discriminated because she was transgender, there are multiple articles regarding this

1. 2. 3.

i also updated the address section to include the schools former address which is 7901 Bailey Cove Rd, the former location was closed in 2017 and the new location on 1001 Haysland Rd SW was opened in August of that year, the former location is currently being demolished — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

@ You need to include the references for your edits in the article itself. The onus is on you to provide references for your edits, not others to verify the information. Thanks for this, but you'll need to add them to the relevant article, not my talk page. -- Longhair\talk 07:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

My PageEdit

How is writing a bio about a person advertisment. He already has plenty of advertisment — Preceding unsigned comment added by DjAbscence (talkcontribs) 02:15, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@DjAbscence: Would "that person" be yourself? Your username matches the person you were writing about. Please read over the information at WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. It is not recommended to contribute articles about yourself due to conflict of interest issues. -- Longhair\talk 02:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
No i am not him i assumed that I would use the user name as it would be linked to the page, this man is a renouned musician, so I do not see the issue... — Preceding unsigned comment added by DjAbscence (talkcontribs) 02:20, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Musicians need to meet the notability guidelines detailed at Wikipedia:Notability (music), which mentions that artists must have received significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. If an article fails to meet those guidelines it'll usually be deleted. Your username is also a violation of the username policy if you're using the name of another well known living person. I suggest changing your username if you wish to claim you're not the topic of the article you're writing about. -- Longhair\talk 02:26, 12 December 2018 (UTC)


is there a way to get all the info I wrote back and just remove the website??? I didnt save it anywhere else and need the info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D4cmusic (talkcontribs) 02:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@D4cmusic: I've restored the text to User:D4cmusic/sandbox. -- Longhair\talk 02:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
@D4cmusic: Note that simply removing the website link won't solve the issues of promotional editing. -- Longhair\talk 03:00, 12 December 2018 (UTC)



I would like the correct information to be put on ARA FC wikipedia page and for the same I would request you to do not put any incorrect information


Kapil Dinesh General Manager ARA FC — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)



You deleted my submission because of a conflict of interest. However, I do not have any relationships with the publishers or the articles that were listed. These were third parties.

Please advise what article(s) specifically flagged this error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebrebelmusic (talkcontribs) 19:53, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Hundredcrackedfist (talk) 21:47, 19 December 2018 (UTC) Yo Longhair, I can't work out how to delete an unnecessary reference. Any tips?

have a good oneEdit

christmas and new year and all that JarrahTree 00:52, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!Edit

Merry Christmas!Edit

  Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Longhair, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,

Abelmoschus Esculentus talk / contribs 08:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Happy New YearEdit

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

  Guideline and policy news

  1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
  2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
  3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

  Technical news

  • Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
  1. At least 8 characters in length
  2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
  3. Different from their username
User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on
  • Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
  • {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.



  • Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
  • Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

User talk:NortheasternmigraineEdit

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 08:48, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

7 January 2019Edit


I want to ask If I have a statement from the School to explain the Controversies, can I edit the paragraph?

There's a wikipedia: Neutral Point of View that's written: All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.

So, I'm questioning about the reliability of the controversies content. Could you give me any explaination?

PRP-SPHLV (talk) 04:23, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

you are missedEdit

come back, wherever you are! JarrahTree 09:53, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Editor of the WeekEdit

  Editor of the Week
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

Longhair, a prolific editor with over 160000 edit since his first in 2004, is an editor whose work is mainly hidden from the everyday world of Wikipedia editing. From 2005 to 2008 he created over 600 new articles mainly about his homeland, Australia. His recent return to active editing has seen a vandal fighter (and mentor of vandal fighters) 'par-excellence'. He displays a willingness to investigate into a specific vandals activity (or should I say miss-activity)...looking in depth at the behavior and history of the vandal. He gives basic good advice and guidance to those editors who report vandalism, sending them to WP:AIV and other pages. On top of all that, Longhair takes the time to Welcome many many new editors to WP. Bali Nine, Peter Dupas and Crime in Australia are articles Longhair has pruned and prodded and watched over the years.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:


Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7  14:15, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

That is so weird - he stopped without notice in first week of December and hasnt edited since - to add the above is blind to edit history JarrahTree 14:36, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't agree. The nomination was back in November of last year. If your implication is he has "passed" then this is a eulogy praising his efforts over the years. If so, I did not mean to insult his memory. I meant to praise it. ―Buster7  14:49, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
No big deal - he has had breaks before of some significant ranges of time JarrahTree 00:12, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).

  Administrator changes

  Harro5Jenks24GraftR. Baley

  Interface administrator changes


  Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
  • Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

  Technical news

  • A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.


  • Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:15, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Admin Noticeboard(vandalism)Edit

The IP is making constant disruptive edits. Hyperius1255 (talk) 00:40, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Hyperius1255: - Longhair has been regrettably MIA for a couple of months. You might try another administrator or the WP:AIV noticeboard. Tarl N. (discuss) 01:00, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


youre still alive - good to see you back - theres been a discussion at the rfa about dissapearing people on wp en :) - trust youre ready for that hard stuff again... JarrahTree 10:56, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Concerned about potential conflict of interestEdit


I am (relatively) new to having an account on Wikipedia, so I'm not exactly sure where to raise this issue. You are the admin who initially sent me a "welcome message" when I first made this account several months ago, so I thought I would try messaging you about this. Sorry if this is the wrong place to bring this up.

I have ran across an editor who I strongly suspect is involved in undisclosed paid editing or some other form of conflict of interest. All their edits appear to have been made, either directly or indirectly, to very subtly improve to image of drugs marketed by a drug company called Vanda Pharmaceuticals, or to harm the image of competitors. I first noticed some odd edits on the article Non-24-hour sleep–wake disorder, and I looked at the person's other edits, and found a rather clear pattern. They have made edits to improve the image of the Vanda Pharmaceuticals drug Tasimelteon, and to delete information about Melatonin, which is used to treat the same disorder. I then saw that this user had made edits to similarly improve the image of the anti-psychotic drug Iloperidone. I was curious if this drug was also made by Vanda Pharmaceuticals, so I looked it up, and in fact it is. They have also made edits to subtly harm the image of Rozerum, which is another drug that competes with Tasimelteon. This person has not made any edits at all which are not related to either a drug made by Vanda Pharmaceuticals or to a disorder which one of their drugs are used to treat. I found this highly suspicious, and can't really think of a reason someone would have this pattern of editing unless there is a conflict of interest or paid editing.

I did my best to manually revert the most offensive of this person's edits, while trying to make them more reflective of the facts that are stated in the given references so as to give accurate and unbiased information about all the drugs. I also just now left a message on the user's talk page about this. The editor I am talking about is user:Courtney828. They apparently haven't made a user page, but their edits can be found here: and their talk page where I left a message here:

Have I followed proper procedure for something like this? Is there more (or less) that I should do/should have done? Thanks. Vontheri (talk) 05:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.


  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Choo Choo BarEdit


The article Choo Choo Bar has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:57, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

WP:REFUND requestEdit

Hello LH: please restore all the Portal subpages you deleted via WP:CSD G6. Since there are now assessments in process as to whether the single-page or multi-page versions are better for the encyclopedia, the only way these assessments can proceed is if the subpages are restored. Thanks in advance, UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:42, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

you lazy b------ Edit

you are missed, come back some time JarrahTree 00:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

You know how it is. That "real life" thing often gets in the way. I'll try. -- Longhair\talk 01:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Choo Choo Bar for deletionEdit


A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Choo Choo Bar is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Choo Choo Bar until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:25, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

  Technical news



  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

I am a bit late on this, Thanks for the warm welcome back in November 2017 on my past account Crazyblocks2004 Crazyblocks 21:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Page CreationEdit

I want to create a brand page of LearningCaff. How can I create this brand page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Askst (talkcontribs) 13:26, 25 April 2019 (UTC)


Hi just wanted to say thanks for explaining stuff to me back in June '18 (apologies for the tardiness here) and for the warm welcome! Cheers! (Hinckleycoldstorage (talk) 07:41, 26 April 2019 (UTC)).

ArbCom 2019 special circularEdit

Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:22, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)Edit

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.


  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

[Non-urgent] SHA-256 Identity Commitment QuestionEdit

Good day Longhair,

I had seen that you left a welcome message on my talk page, thanks for that!

Upon visiting yours, I noticed that you generated a SHA-256 identity commitment and included it in your page footer.

I am interested in generating one for myself – are there any resources on the matter you can provide to me so that I may do so?

Thanks in advance!

Very Respectfully,

»λopaquandricatαlk 13:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

  Administrator changes

  AndonicConsumed CrustaceanEnigmamanEuryalusEWS23HereToHelpNv8200paPeripitusStringTheory11Vejvančický

  CheckUser changes


  Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
  • An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
  • An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

  Technical news

  • The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
  • Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

  Administrator changes

  28bytesAd OrientemAnsh666BeeblebroxBoing! said ZebedeeBU Rob13Dennis BrownDeorDoRDFloquenbeam1Flyguy649Fram2GadfiumGB fanJonathunderKusmaLectonarMoinkMSGJNickOd MishehuRamaSpartazSyrthissTheDJWJBscribe
1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

  Guideline and policy news

  • In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

  Technical news

  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

  Guideline and policy news



  • Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
  • The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

    Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

  Administrator changes

  DESiegelJake WartenbergRjanagTopbanana

  CheckUser changes


  Oversight changes

  CallaneccFoxHJ MitchellLFaraoneThere'sNoTime

  Technical news

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.



Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

  Technical news

  • As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.



  • The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

what a reliefEdit

to see you back.... funny that I should be in a situation where there was discussion among my handlers (sic) as to whether we were going for a trip to Geelong for the heck of it earlier today JarrahTree 07:29, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

  Guideline and policy news

  • A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

McBride plc pageEdit

I am a content editor for McBride and I have no financial interest in the company and I do not gain financially from editing the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mchapmaninstinctif (talkcontribs) 10:39, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Removal of Editing in Wikipedia PageEdit


I have just make some changes in wikipedia page but you you removed it. I have been in B2B industry for more than 10 years, and all the listed websites are top global business platforms. I give external links of some B2B platforms because they don't have wikipedia page. You can verify yourself about the authority of such B2B websites.


Nasir Khan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nasirk81 (talkcontribs) 11:16, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Nasirk81: Wikipedia requires reliable sources so that others can verify your contributions. Top companies is a matter of opinion. You added links to the sites themselves, not references to back up any claim to being a "top global business platforms". -- Longhair\talk 11:20, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2019Edit

Hello Longhair, this is to inform you that I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. I will not edit further as you suggested in your message. Many thanks for your kind collaboration, have a nice day, Elisabetta de Grimani (talk) 11:36, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Fat Dan RafaelEdit

Do a google search on the subject AndrzejPoczobut (talk) 03:37, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@AndrzejPoczobut:The onus is on you, the contributor of the information, to provide a reliable source. Twitter is not a reliable source and your other source isn't in English. -- Longhair\talk 03:42, 8 November 2019 (UTC)


On this page: , I made a very minor edit that didn't need to have a citation to back it, as the information supporting it was in the rest of the article. I'm going to go back and fix it, if that's alright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PerfectlyUnique (talkcontribs) 04:54, 8 November 2019 (UTC)


Thanks for the advice, I am new to this so I am learning on the fly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webdevsp (talkcontribs) 14:38, 8 November 2019 (UTC)


Could you please reconsider your speedy deletion of Dangerous!. Releasing an album through Epitaph is a credible assertion of importance. Thanks. 23:54, 8 November 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duffbeerforme (talkcontribs)

@Duffbeerforme: This article has been htrough AfD twice, being nominated for deletion by yourself on the second occasion actually. I hear what you're saying about notability, but the article as it stands was filled with references that backed up nothing claimed in the article, and furthermore, was primarily edited by somebody with a very close association with the band. They're currently blocked and awaiting an unblock request so they're unable to communicate on this topic for now but I suspect they may be back once those issues are resolved. I did think about not deleting however when the references don't check out, and the article has been deleted via AfD, with nothing changing since that time, I decided to delete... I wasn't the first administrator to delete speedy this article either. Now I may be wrong and perhaps this band is notable and references do exist, but when editors with a conflict of interest go hard with puffing up the article subject to something it isn't, it's usually a sign of something not notable trying to reach the bar. May I ask what changed your mind, having once nominated the subject for deletion yet now requesting it be brought back to life? -- Longhair\talk 05:17, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
My afd nomination was in 2010. At that time they were not there yet. The album I mentioned above was released in 2011, after that deletion. Coverage exists of that release eg. duffbeerforme (talk) 06:37, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
@Duffbeerforme: Thanks for the clarification. I didn't look into all the finer details but I did check the references. I'll restore the article but I'll mention again it is heavily edited by an editor with a clear conflict of interest that is hell bent on claiming all sorts of amazing things they've achieved which simply aren't backed up by any reliable references that were included in the article. If the article was to be cleaned up you'd find it'd be a very bare stub with little content... substantial coverage of this band just isn't out there where we can find easily. The editor with a clear conflict of interest was also asked to back up some of the claims made in their edits and they simply refused to answer. I'll restore now... and keep an eye on it for any future outlandish edits. -- Longhair\talk 06:46, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Please block this userEdit

Hi, the person you just blocked created a new account. Can you please block this sock? Thanks. Aoi (青い) (talk) 06:19, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

@Aoi: Thanks. Done. They're on a little crusade and reappearing. If they resurface please let me know and I'll deal with it if I can. -- Longhair\talk 06:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the quick action, and yes, will do. I appreciate your help. Aoi (青い) (talk) 06:24, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!Edit


Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

  Administrator changes

  AkhilleusAthaenaraJohn VandenbergMelchoirMichaelQSchmidtNeilNYoungamerican😂

  CheckUser changes


  Interface administrator changes


  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news



Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Longhair".