User talk:Moneytrees/Archive 28

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 32

Copyright

Hello @Moneytrees I hope you're doing well. Can you do the revdel Baalveer 3. Thanks for your consideration C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 16:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@C1K98V I've now revision deleted this, in the future you should use a revdel template instead of a Copyright Problem one. User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel fills out revdel templates quickly. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah sure, will do the needful the next time. Thanks for the quick response C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 16:51, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Barrister Babu you missed the episode 31 summary. See voot, you can check the Earwig tool for copyvio percentage, also do a revdel again. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 17:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Done. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 17:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppetry

Hello, Moneytrees. It is possible that Madame Necker (talk · contribs) (a WP:NOTHERE troll that you indef blocked some months ago) is back, this time as Cssdixieland (talk · contribs), judging by this comment, which Cssdixieland posted as a brand new account, praising an earlier post of Madame Necker. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 21:38, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Mister Sundostund, Your dilligence in trying to unmask old Wikipedia editors who may be posing as new ones is laudable, but it fails in one important detail: the supposed 'brand new account' is not really new. CSS Dixieland is an old account, nothing less that from the year 2012, starting in Wikitravel. When Wikivoyage forked from Wikitravel, all content existing in Wikitravel was copied to Wikivoyage (the licence permits that copy), including content written by CSS Dixieland. Then Wikivoyage was made one of the official projects of the Wikimedia Foundation. CSS Dixieland is still the name registered in Wikitravel, until today.

In Wikivoyage and Wikipedia, however, the name has recently needed to be changed to the simpler one of cssdixieland (rendered as 'Cssdixieland' by the Mediawiki software), because the old name CSS Dixieland contains four capital (upper case) letters and one space, presenting problems when using command-line tools. In Linux, for example, it needs to be surrounded by double speech marks. Thus the change from the name CSS Dixieland to the name cssdixieland (or 'Cssdixieland') has had to be requested. The change has been granted by one Administrator of Wikipedia and another of Wikivoyage. Similar change has not been requested in Wikitravel yet, there the name still is the old one, CSS Dixieland.

Thanks for Your efforts in policing Wikipedia, Sir, we certainly need some level of control, or our wiki might become the target of various kinds of undesirable persons. Like any other wiki, but especially Wikipedia, being as it is the biggest wiki currently existing in Internet. I do not know who is Madame Necker (in History, Monsieur Necker was an important Minister of Finances of the French Government, immediately before the French Revolution of 1789), but I found her comment in favour of the Confederate States of America relevant to the subject being discussed, and I copied part of her words verbatim.

You inform that Madame Necker was blocked months ago. I do not know the reason, or how justified the blocking was, but blocked or not, if I consider a contribution to be valuable then I praise it, or also I quote it.

Receive, Sir, a Strong Confederate Salute. Cssdixieland (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

@Sundostund Hmm, I don't actually think Cssdixieland is a sock of Mme Necker (I would've pegged Beaneater00 instead) but I've blocked them because I don't see them having a productive future here. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 17:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I would say that your pick of Beaneater00 as a sockmaster is more probable than my first thought about Mme Necker. Anyway, your decision to block this WP:NOTHERE troll is more than correct and justified. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 23:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

And, I almost forgot – do you think that Cssdixieland's user page should stay as it is now (as they created it, before being blocked), or should it be deleted (or tagged somehow, with its content removed)? — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 19:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

@Sundostund I'm not sure what deletion criteria it would fall under; I think it's best just ignored. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 01:29, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Block of AndewNguyen

Not sure if you were having a bad day/moment, but it seems to me that the said block is pretty egregiously inappropriate. I am willing to admit I'm wrong if I missed something, but AndewNguyen is about the furthest thing from an SPA. On top of that, his last edits prior to this week were in September of 2022! I realize you two are on different sides of the same debate, but AndewNguyen certainly contributes positively to wikipedia, and rarely even makes edits to article mainspace - he always discusses his edits on TALK first. So I just don't see the reason for the block. I wanted to approach you first before taking this elsewhere. Thank you. 2600:1700:1250:6D80:947A:51E4:EB45:1FB4 (talk) 23:05, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

• I am reverting this, as it appears to be a blatant case of admin overreach against an ideological opponent. I will take no further action in this, and I implore you to seek input from other admins before taking further action. See user's talkpage for my rationale. --dab (𒁳) 10:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

  Wow. I’m absolutely stunned. Your first use of the block/unblock button in 12 years was to do an undiscussed unblock of a very well reasoned and justified NOTHERE block. Courcelles (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Block review - AndewNguyen. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritchie333 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

re inquiry on AN

Regarding your question here, GHBH (to discredit opponents) was suspected, but compromise (the account was inactive for several months), and the possibility of shared network use were also discussed. See User talk:Hersfold/Archive 33 (September 2009)#Cognition socks for a flavor. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 20:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Weird, thank you very much... Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 17:47, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

User:DGG

I wonder if you could shift the "(revised Nov. 14, 2021)" note further down, perhaps just inside the "Who I am" section. Otherwise it reads like the deceased notice was revised then, which is an odd thing to revise at all, and the date might suggest this was when, which it isn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colin (talk • contribs)

@Colin I've now done this. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 00:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Possible new CCI case

I was looking at active RD1 requests when I saw a large amount of text removed from New Hampshire State Police. I did some further investigating on the user in question and saw more text copyright violations removed at Maui County Police Department, and Gastonia Police Department. The user in question is SGT141. I am not sure what to do here. Scorpions13256 (talk) 23:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@Scorpions13256 I also revision deleted content they added to the history section of Suffolk County Sheriff's Office. I would recommend filing a CCI request. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 00:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I'll get that done as soon as possible. Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Mail

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

Netherzone (talk) 18:25, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

@Netherzone I've responded to this now, sorry it took a bit... Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 10:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Procedural notification

Hi, I and others have proposed additional options at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC_on_a_procedural_community_desysop. You may wish to review your position in that RfC. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Youtubek

UTRS appeal #72579 is a thing. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra Oh yeah, I archived a few LTA pages several years ago-- I don't really remember the specifics. Feel free to revert me and re add the pages if you think it's worth keeping. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 02:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Nah. I just was amused by the UTRS ticket claiming to be this person. Could be impersonation. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:13, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Moneytrees. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 11:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

—*Fehufangą (✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 11:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Ondenwald Monkey and Philotrio

... are socks of Ehr1Ros2. You don't need to do anything, just thought you might be interested. --Yamla (talk) 10:12, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Well that makes sense, thank you @Yamla. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:46, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Any objection to unblocking Jengtingchen

User talk:Jengtingchen made what I thought was a pretty good appeal. Any ojbection to unblocking?

I must say I disagree with a comment Yamla left on that talk page, about copy-pasting bullet points from which to expand and rewrite. I've done that myself. But I didn't make the mistake of inadvertantly saving the copyvio bullet points. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist I'm ambivalent towards unblocking, as I don't think the appeal is bad but I'm not too sure if the editor has actually learned not to copy, which mostly comes from my past experiences with these blocks/unblocks. I won't mind if you unblock however. I agree with Yamla in the sense that Jengtingchen specifically should try and avoid that practice in the future. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 04:40, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Eddie Mannix ledger and a loaded question

I saw you cleaning up Billy Hathorn copyright issues yesterday. I stumbled across something from User:Dutchy85 this morning, something I often see mistakenly associated with Hathorn: the introduction of the offline and primary/connected source The Eddie Mannix ledger as a citation about film costs and income. While I don't normally fuss about offline sources, I'm wondering about how much we can trust this unverifiable source when introduced by multiple known bad actors. How do you feel about trusting blocked editors to correctly utilize an offline source like Mannix? BusterD (talk) 12:25, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@BusterD It's a case by case basis; there's some CCI subjects that are more accurate with their sources than others. Could I see the specific article/citation on your mind? Dutchy85 was inconsistent with citations; for example, their 2nd block for copyvio came from this edit, an unsourced edit that copied from an external link Dutchy85 had added to the article sever years prior.... Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 04:31, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

There appear to be 925 instances where the exact phrase "the eddie mannix ledger" appears in the pedia, 890 in page space. Based on a clickthrough of the first 20 search occurrences 18 of them were inserted or pagecreated by Dutchy85 in January 2014. The other two (formatted identically) were inserted by ips (likely Dutchy85 editing while logged out). Here's the first example. I dug a bit further; prior to January 7 2014, Dutchy85 was using varying sources to cite box office figures, mostly pointing towards Variety lists. On 1/7/2014 they edited a page using this format for the first time. The rest of January, they created or edited about 1300 times, in many cases making an identical type of edit, utilizing numbers reported to derive from this offline and primary source. So we have AGF'd this material and it's never been verified. This is my concern. Each of these edits looks fine and appears to come from a reputable (if primary and non-published) source. But it could just as well been invented. There are a few published excerpts but I haven't checked any numbers yet. BusterD (talk) 13:18, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

When asked in 2018, according to Dutchy85 they personally visited the library to access this resource. The sample numbers I checked did seem to agree with those quoted by a film scholar available via JSTOR. Perhaps it's not a concern at all. Might be a drag when such articles get to FA-class review, but I don't see a history of it in the w-search. Sorry for my mis-remembering Hathorn was involved but when I saw you had blocked Dutchy85 I decided to ask. BusterD (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

@BusterD Yeah, I'd have to be more familiar with Dutchy85's adherence to sources to be able to say if there's cause for alarm here. Unfortunately, I haven't really touched the daunting CCI. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 19:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Just so long as it doesn't resemble block-able behavior you recognize. I'll put this in front of a forum for suggestions. Thanks for what you do. BusterD (talk) 21:17, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Dog

I hope your dog feels better soon. Jehochman ^Talk 17:01, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Jehochman. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:40, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Hope that the surgery goes well and your dog can get back to better health. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 04:54, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

It turns out whatever was in her wasn't a tumor, seems like it was a severe infection. It was successfully removed and she's now resting at home. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 20:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

That's great! I would hate to see someone's dog die. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

On the surname "Necker"

What exactly were you implying here?

Also consider the username, "Necker"... but don't say it really quick! If this user wants to appeal this block, they should change their username

Be explicit with your answer. 2001:569:7F63:5900:DC06:3686:C6B1:2EA3 (talk) 06:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the cleanup

Had something come up shortly after the block so I didn't have an opportunity. Much appreciated. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Yep, last thing a discussion like this needs is a distraction like that... Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 13:17, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Scottywong case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 21, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks?

I just gotta ask... you "thanked" me for an edit in 2007, a speedy delete tag (manual, and for an invalid reason). Why? Dennis Brown - 2¢ 22:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Dennis Brown At the time you tagged the article, it was a blatant copyright violation, and I was looking through the history as part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Sittaconde. I'll thank edits that are helpful to me, no matter how old they are 👍 Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 01:32, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I get it. I've kind of done similar once or twice. Thanks for the explanation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:11, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

ConvoWizard talk page study

Hi Moneytrees, I am approaching you as you were the one who promoted this study at the ANI and even having successfully signed up in the third try I am just not getting the updates as described here in the description of the project. Nor have I received a link to the ConvoWizard.

I have received an e-mail by someone appearing to be someone involved in the project, but I must admit I doubt it. First I clicked on the option that I want communication on the study over the wikipedia talk page... yet they approach me over email. And the answers are also not really bringing the expected solution.

Why can't they just install the ConvoWizard or at least give a link to where I can do it by myself. I expect that after having signed up for a week and the signup discussion is archived, they either notice I have not installed the tool correctly or I get raltime talk page updates.

I have told the contact person per Email I'll open a discussion at your talk page.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 04:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Paradise Chronicle,

This is Jonathan from the ConvoWizard team. Do you know who the person who contacted you over email was? I spoke with the other team members here and nobody involved with the project (other than Moneytrees themselves) have reached out to you by email.

Regarding your question about not getting a link to install ConvoWizard: did you complete the survey all the way to the end? At the very end of the survey (assuming you are eligible and marked Yes for the consent form) there is a final page that includes a link to the installation instructions page. Can you confirm that you ever got that link? If not, it's possible that you quit the survey too early, in which case I'd invite you to fill it out again until you get to the final page with the link.

I hope this helps clear things up, but please don't hesitate to reach out (either here or on my own talk page) if anything is still unclear.

-- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 19:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jonathan, great, if you write me an email I'll resend you the whole conversation, but for the moment I do not feel comfortable with sharing it onwiki. But they claimed to be part of your project, so I believe its ok to share the contact with your team in private.

And dear Jonathan, I do not complain easily, I've completed the survey now twice and was accepted also twice. I have downloaded convowizard twice as well. And yet, my "reply tool" doesn't give me any updates.

I'll give you now a little rant so the tool could warn me, but I believe it won't warn me, just a test.

Do you earn money by deceiving wikipedia editors in taking part in a study and at the same time collecting data what browser they use?

Why do you withhold the fact that only firefox and goolge browsers are welcome from the application form?

Why do ask for communication per email when wikipedia talk pages are the target of the study?

Didn't warn me.

My aim in taking part in the study is to learn how to win an argument where one argues obviously wrong like here. Absolutely nothing from the 1st to the 11th of July? There is info about the events between the 1st and the 11th July. Actually the whole discussion is interesting. I guess that editor would like to learn from you as well. Both of us would like to learn. Get the it done Jonathan and let us learn. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

My honest and serious advice would be to hire an Wikipedia programmer to write a script for the convowizard for its use on wikipedia. We have several programmers who have a lot experience in writing very useful scripts for wikipedia and of which I have installed several. Some are also just for testing like the one I recently installed. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Got it, I think I found the issue. It looks like although you've installed ConvoWizard and claimed a token, you haven't yet logged in to the tool (on our end, the token still shows as not activated). As a security measure, ConvoWizard is completely nonfunctional until you are logged in with a valid token. The installation page includes instructions for using the token to log in, but just to repeat it here: clicking on the ConvoWizard icon in the extensions menu should show a popup login form, where you need to enter your username and token. After clicking "submit" you should then see the message "Token successfully processed". If this still doesn't work, feel free to let us know.

I'll also follow up with an email to discuss the issue with the contact. Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 00:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jonathan,

well thanks. I was about to renounce and quit the aim of wanting to help as it was just too complicated and time consuming. Well, then I thought I'd assume good faith and tried it out, and yeah the issue with the token was not finished. But now I have read the mesage token successfully processed and no updates are incoming yetː) Is there anything else I need to do?

Have a good day, Paradise Chronicle

P.Sː I guess it is better we move the discussion to your talk page as Moneytrees gets a notification everytime we leave a comment on his talk page.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

fair use in quoting from source within reference templates?

Hey, Moneytrees! The creator of No Mafia is arguing that because sources are behind a paywall, they need to be quoted heavily in the references, and is quoting longish paragraphs multiple times from some of the sources. I'd gone through and removed the quoted text to allow for combining of the references, as I didn't really think the quotes were needed, and some of them constitute multiple long copy-pastes from the same article, long enough that they may actually represent most of the text of that source. Do you have a feeling for what would be considered fair use for this? Valereee (talk) 10:51, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:COPYQUOTE. Quotations in citations are to be used to help find the text that supports the statement, and should be short and to the point. Multiple paragraphs is not appropriate, and if it's the whole article, then that constitutes a copyright violation. Izno (talk) 15:55, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Izno! Valereee (talk) 18:47, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Advice on a possible copyvio

Hi Moneytrees. I made a listing on the Copyright Problems board a few days ago, about a possible, but not verified copyvio (but it could be verified by someone with access to the right resource). I have yet to receive any answer. Could you please read my listing and give me some guidance?

Also, in Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210410, I know what the Y and the N mean, but what is the white boldface N that appears directly after the bullet on many of the list entries? SmileySnail (talk) 17:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@SmileySnail (talk page stalker), Copyright Problems is chronically backlogged and new listings are not always promptly responded to; the more complex cases or ones with very difficult to access sources often take longer, with multiple people individually attempting until someone makes headway on the case. This is no fault of your own, but rather on the low bus factor at the board. I promise that either me or my fellow clerks and admin patrollers will have a look at it soon. As for your other question, the boldface N is to signify that it was a new article creation. Sennecaster (Chat) 22:14, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sennecaster, I will be patient with the backlog (although I will probably create more listings for other articles in the meantime). Also, is there some template that the clerks use to create CCI subpages? If so, that should be edited so the CCI subpages will say what the boldface N means, just like they explain Y and N. Thank you for your reply and for all the good work you do here at Wikipedia. SmileySnail (talk) 02:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)