Talk page

Contacting meEdit

I prefer to communicate via talk pages. Please only email me if there is a good reason not to conduct a conversation on a talk page. I do not respond to emails regarding link deletions and other issues that should be discussed on your userpage or the article talk page.

Why did you remove my external links?Edit

If you've come here because you want to know why I removed some external links you've added, please read Wikipedia's policies on spam, Wikipedia external link guidelines and conflict-of-interest first. Because of Wikipedia's popularity, it has become a target for folks looking to promote their sites, which is against Wikipedia policies. Wikipedia is not a free advertising platform.

Talk archives

Talk archivesEdit

PLEASE LEAVE NEW COMMENTS AT THE *BOTTOM* OF THIS PAGE.

Notability referencesEdit


Narendra Modi Stadium articleEdit

Have posted repeated and multiple sources on the stadium capacity. They are being repeatedly reverted.

How to request semi protection. sunny.......... 20:53, 2 March 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnyji 2k (talkcontribs)

While you're aroundEdit

can you take a look at User talk:2600:1700:3BD2:8C0E:8DB2:D4A9:CF5D:E23 and the history. I think it probably needs revdel and the ip blocked. Something squirrely is going on. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a ton. Have a great day. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:50, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Always happy to help, cheers! OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit warriorEdit

Sir, this is regarding that edit warrior (K.D Manikya Tripuri) you blocked two days back [1]. They are back doing the same thing today. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:17, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Request to restore DraftEdit

Hey there User:Ohnoitsjamie, I hope you are doing well. Recently, I've noticed that you've deleted two of my drafts under speedy deletion criteria for promotion, namely Draft:Chirag Pardesi and Draft:Youth Against Rape; also, I saw your warning on my talk page. I'm here to explicate that my work is not promotional, and will never be. However, I understand notability is the issue with my draft topics specially with Draft:Chirag Pardesi, but I believe Draft:Youth Against Rape might be moved to mainspace in near future. So, there was no need to remove it. I would request you to restore the Draft page and also check Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 January 4 too. Thank you and happy editing for your future. -- Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) 03:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

I checked that DR review; deletion was endorsed. I'm not restoring any of your drafts, as you've wasted enough of our time. OhNoitsJamie Talk 05:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
User:Ohnoitsjamie, I've wasted lot of your time? I know deletion was endorsed, also I didn't get your point, you deleted my drafts because they're promotional? Simply I'm asking you to check one time which word or line or paragraph was promotional in those draft. Notability is not issue in drafts until they've a scope of being published in main space. And for misbehaving with me, I forgive you and believe you'll correct this small error of yours soon :) Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) 13:43, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm not restoring your drafts. Please do not bother me about this again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Blocked ipEdit

Hi Ohnoitsjamie,
You range blocked 2601:199:4181:E00:9DAB:2601:ED22:3B9C (talk · contribs) on Feb. 21.

  • Perhaps you need to look at 73.123.30.85 (talk · contribs) too per this edit, where in their edit summary they claim to be the same editor, per a talk page comment by the first IP. Both IPs seem to geolocate to same US city.

Regards, 220 of ßorg 14:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Good catch; blocked, range extended. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:11, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
My 'evil deed' for the day, accomplished! Face-devil-grin.svg Bwah, ha, ha hah ...! 220 of ßorg 04:11, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion (73.123.30.85, 2601:199:4181:E00:0:0:0:0/64)Edit

User_talk:73.123.30.85 has been blocked three months for evading this rangeblock, but I wouldn't be surprised if they attempted to evade both of those blocks. user:220 of Borg, User:Binksternet, User:Mvcg66b3r, User:Magnolia677 - you've all warned this editor before, please be on the lookout for more socks; the IP will likely geolocate to the Boston metro area. They tend to edit articles about TV and radio stations and music, and have also edit-warred on Stunting (broadcasting), Broadcast signal intrusion, and Gender reveal party. Feel free to ping me if you see any suspicious edits. Thanks! OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:07, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks like they occasionally use 174.255.64.0/18, per this continuation of the Blender edit war. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Article reviewEdit

Hi Ohnoitsjamie,
Is there by any chance any option to get an article reviewed by anyone; pref an admin before it gets published, so that it does fall in the eligibility criterias? I dont see any such button. PLs help

Thanks in advance, good day  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insightisinside (talkcontribs) 06:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC) 
@Insightisinside: I'd suggest using the Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation process. The page covers the process pretty well; you create a draft, and experienced editors will review it, provide feedback, and reject/approve it for publishing to mainspace. Keep in mind that an approved draft may still be challenged via the WP:AFD process, as no single editor has the final word on that. If you're intending to create an article about your business, please don't. It's not going to happen; it doesn't remotely approach our WP:CORP notability guidelines, not to mention the obvious conflict of interest. You've also been warned about promotional edits and blocked; further such edits will result in an indefinite block. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Troublesome IPEdit

Sir, this IP is back vandalsing the quote in the article [2]. I've reported them to WP:AIV, but thought it would be better to notify you as well. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Partial-blocked for a year, pending changes on page. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Smear campaign onMohamed Abdullahi Mohamed Farmaajo's Page.Edit

The Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed Farmaajo Wikipedia page is subject to a recent smear campaign in the form of massive disinformation. As you can see by looking at the recent edits in the last month or so by 1 particular user AmirahBreen. In the same breath, the same user AmirahBreen has edited former president Hassan Sheikh Mohamud during the same periods but instead posted positive and neutral edits. This is a clear indication of a biased and one-sided targeted attack using misleading information, this will lead to constant issues in regards to the validity of the page. Please look into this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlottecracker (talkcontribs) 17:19, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

If you look at that talk page history, you'll see that I've already commented on it. I'm tired of arguing with the editor in question; I'd suggest taking the matter to an WP:RFC. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:41, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Same IP behavior I reported before, from the same rangeEdit

User talk:2600:1700:3BD2:8C0E:A541:ADFD:3055:4DFF looks like they're posting logs of bounced email traffic from a school district. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again. Is there a noticeboard I can report this stuff to so I don't bother you directly? It doesn't seem like it fits the normal vandalism board. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
That probably fits WP:AIV better than a lot of the other reports there, but feel free to ping me directly if it looks like I'm active. (Oh, and I expanded a rangeblock on that one. Can't tell if it's a bot or just a weirdo). OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Neutrality vs WhitewashingEdit

So you removed my edit to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_St_Michael_and_St_George page noting that the badge of the order is unfortunately racist. Your rationale was that, apparently, noting the existence of the racism is not viewpoint neutral, which seems hard to justify unless one can demonstrate alternate imagery in which St Michael is portrayed as black and Satan as white! Regrettably, the net effect of your reversion is to create a whitewashed, defiantly not "viewpoint neutral" page where the unfortunate fact that the order's imagery relies on the undeniably racist imagery of a white figure vanquishing an evil black one. Now, I am absolutely open to suggestions as to how best phrase the edits, but I do not believe we can be complacent when one's notice is drawn to the problem. Of course, I'm aware of the dog-piling related to racism and the royal family, but I see a huge difference between noting that the imagery is problematic and linking that to other issues. Ultimately, the choice is quite binary: either we note and ideally regret the consequences of historical choices and decisions (racism, colonialism, misogyny, etc), or we pretend they don't exist (hence "whitewashing"). So I am hoping this discussion evolves to a "how" rather than "whether", because the latter is not acceptable in 2021!MalcWeir (talk) 22:06, 11 March 2021 (UTC) User:MalcWeir

Please read WP:NOR. We don't allow editors to insert their personal opinions in Wikipedia. If one or more reliable sources wrote about the badge image being problematic, then it may be appropriate to mention it with sources. In the absence of that, it's your personal opinion. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:38, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

I find it a rather sad indictment of your personal ethics that you are able to consider such blatant racism as just a personal opinion: it's objectively racist, not an opinion. However, I've revised the paragraph to include citations to clear statements from two people who are entitled to wear the thing, one of whom is the Governor General of an independent country that banned the wearing of the racist insignia on the grounds that it is racist. Mind you, had you actually READ the citation to CNN at the end of the paragraph that offended you, you would have already known that the issue of the racism is not a personal opinion, but it appears that you didn't bother to investigate much. MalcWeir (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 08:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Section tag on Mohamed Abdullahi MohamedEdit

About your tag on this page, your edit summary says that 95% of the criticism in the section is by one editor. It would also be true to say that 95% of the section was written by one editor. I would be as happy as you for other editors to contribute valid cited edits to the page which show a fair reflection of reliable media sources. I am watching closely what is coming up in the news and sincerely hoping that there will be some positive developments which can be added. Amirah talk 23:34, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Any attempts I've made to prune material (or anyone else), you've reverted. I'm not interested in discussing it anymore, as it's clear that you intend to continue to monopolize the page, and as such, it should probably go to WP:ANI at this point. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:40, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for drawing my attention to Ownership of content, I have read the page carefully and will continue to follow all Wikipedia guidelines I am aware of with the intention of both improving Wikipedia and my own editing skills. Although you have said you do not wish to have any further discussion with me on the subject, I am still available for discussion if you decide you wish to discuss it with me. Amirah talk 01:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Block EvasionEdit

Sir, looks like User:K.D Manikya Tripuri is trying to evade the block. [3], [4]. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:45, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

The range may need a bigger blockEdit

The narrow focus was good, but an impressive percentage of the busy edit history consists of disruption and reversions [5]. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Yikes, that's a really big range to apply a full block on. I've done it to ranges where 90% of the edits were garbage, but at least for the last 50 edits, at least half appears to be good faith. Were there any particular patterns of vandalism or articles you were looking at? I'm wondering if there might be some smaller sub ranges to target. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:13, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I see what you're saying. I haven't established a clear pattern, and wouldn't know how to distinguish sub ranges. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:20, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
If we see a few different IPs doing the same kind of vandalism, I can run them through this tool to try to identify a smaller range. OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:35, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Revisiting this. A look at the last 24 hours suggests at least 75% of the edits are vandalism. I don't know if it's possible to connect them to a smaller range.... 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:43, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

You've got mailEdit

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.CptViraj (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Indef or long block?Edit

Hi Jamie. Based on your comment here, I thought I'd bring this edit and this edit to your attention. Clearly another WP:DOB/WP:BLP violation by this serial offender. Four days off their previous block for the same issue, I think it's obvious this editor is WP:NOTGETTINGIT. Could you take a look? Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 14:57, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Indef'd. We'll see if they can convince anyone in an unblock request that they understand how WP:BLP and WP:V work. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Do you think the 7th edit by this new editor quacks loudly enough? Toddst1 (talk) 15:34, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Yup; blocked. (Even aside from that edit, other idiosyncrasies and patterns are a giveaway). Stay tuned for the inevitable outraged appeal. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

regarding changes made on a wiki page of Farnaz ShettyEdit

hello, I made the changes on the page of Farnaz Shetty which were true. I know I have no source to mention as of now but I gave inputs after checking with the facts from the concerned person herself. Infact she herself asked me to make the changes. If possible if you can help with the changes then it would be kind of you. Her original date of birth is 16th September 1996. and she is born and brought up in Mumbai. Please help me look into the matter please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YashviBarbie (talkcontribs) 19:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

If you have no reliable source, you can't add it, period. Your claim that the subject asked you to add it doesn't satisfy WP:BLP requirements. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
"original date of birth"? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

User talk:95.12.122.112Edit

Hi, User talk:95.12.122.112 from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1059#Disruptive_edits_to_"last_updated"_dates_by_IP_user seems to be vandalising a number of pages again after the last block expired. Could you block it again? Thanks, --WikiHannibal (talk) 15:11, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

95.12.122.112 hasn't edited since February? OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
I meant User talk:95.12.118.65 which is also listed in that ANI subsection, sorry. WikiHannibal (talk) 16:39, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
[6] Same. All of the recent edits from that range have been football related updates; I don't see any obvious issues. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

174.255.64.228Edit

You blocked this IP for "Disruptive editing: and block evasion" specifically edits to Exxon_Valdez. I have been looking at that page and I think that 174.255.64.228 was correct, the volume was hundreds of thousands not millions (ref later numbers in the article and references for them). I might be wrong so do the sums yourself but mid range numbers are 100000 m^3 and a barrel of oil is 159 litres 100000 m^3 x 1000 = 100e9 ltr / 159 = 0.629e6 million barrels which is in the hundreds of thousands and not millions. Mtpaley (talk) 00:57, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Please look closer at the block; I blocked a range on March 26th (nearly a month after the Exxon Valdez edit) that was being used disruptively by a previously blocked individual; it's unfortunate innocent IP editors get caught in range blocks, but that's unavoidable sometimes. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:12, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Danny MannEdit

I heard that Danny Mann just got deleted from Wikipedia, and I wanna bring him back onto this wiki were he absolutely deserves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexkrzywicki1 (talkcontribs) 20:33, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

That's great. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:01, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

On the side of cautionEdit

Hi Jamie. To be on the safe side, I just rev-del'ed this contribution from a fan of yours. Not sure if the information therein met the criteria, but you can of course revert the delete if it doesn't. Favonian (talk) 15:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, revdel was fine, and thanks for giving that IP and extended vacation. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:51, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Disruption continuing after return from your blockEdit

Hi Onij, 71.114.156.203 (talk · contribs) is just WP:NOTHERE. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:18, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Jeesh, gave them another vacation. Thanks! OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:16, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 13:41, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

OOPS!Edit

Hi Ohnoitsjamie! I accidentally overwrote your indefinite block of WWE and NFL superfan right as you saved it. I restored your indefinite block - sorry for the mix-up! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

No problem; any objections to the indef? Given that they'd already been already been blocked for abuse recently, I didn't see the point in giving them more rope. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Mohamed Abdullahi MohamedEdit

Is there anything that can be done for this article? The slant has only gotten worse and the misreading or misrepresenting of sources to slant the article has gotten worse as well. Has it been brought up on the NPOV or BLP noticeboard that you're aware of? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, a long thread: [[7]]. It may merit an ANI ticket at this point. I'm a little exhausted with it personally, but if it was brought up at ANI, I'd support a topic ban. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:02, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Now I know why I thought there was a BLPN post, I actually posted in it. Maybe I'll try to get something together, but I've never done an ANI posting. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Holy shit, I read it, most of it--that editor thinks it's all about them, don't they. Drmies (talk) 23:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
User:ScottishFinnishRadish - I appreciate your time invested in the article; it's a topic area I'm not well-versed in, and honestly most of my time is spent on short-duration admin tasks. Keep pushing back on the POV-slant as you're doing; if it goes to ANI, we'll want diffs to show that we've made attempts to address the issue. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
The only familiarity I have with this is that I once ran a tabletop Shadowrun game set in Somalia. It's just so obvious that there's a problem. How much more than this do you think I'll need to get together? A lot of diffs are tough because Dec 18th - March 17th had to be revdel'd due to copyright problems, of which I just found at least two more. Take a look at my sandbox and let me know if I need to dig more, if you'd be so kind. Also, should I request revdel for the copyright concerns? I think this whole page will need to be checked for copyright issues. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I tidied everything up in my sandbox. Do you think that much is overkill, or not adequate? I don't have any ANI experience so I don't want to screw the pooch. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:23, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
That looks pretty good to me, though if you take it to ANI, I'd leave out the bit about removing stuff from his own talk page; per WP:OWNTALK, that's perfectly fine, as long as he's not altering what other people wrote. The essential issue is that he's clearly editing in a very slanted fashion, and you have plenty of diffs to support that. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
That was removed from the article talk page after being responded to. You and Drmies both reverted him at the time, and one other person restored more of the comments later. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I see what you mean now about him removing his comments from the article talk page, though he makes some sort of claim about "personal security." Regarding the copyvio stuff; the big question is; has he been warned about that, yet is continuing to do it, or did you just discover it? OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
We discussed it on my talk page, where he said he's used direct quotes before. At least one of those copyright violations has come since then. I think I linked to the conversation on my talk page in my sandbox. The first copyright violation is why there are 4 months of deleted revisions on the article. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Not sure what there is to discuss. You've done so much work in the article--do you have a list of edits they made that were copyright violations? Right now I'm looking at your reverts. With a list, we (that is, the admins, and experts like Diannaa) can consider if there maybe should just be a block for that--and God only knows how much should be revdeleted. Another option is to issue a topic ban for this article, but while an edit like this is clearly unproductive, we'd need more than a few to make the case. Drmies (talk) 23:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Not sure if you've seen this, but User:ScottishFinnishRadish compiled quite a few examples here. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
There's also copyright violation that led to 4 months of revisions deleted. Seems any time I start verifying sources it's either a violation or three source doesn't match the prose. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I saw the page with the pull-down menus--I'll take a simple list. But that's only two examples--I can't go and block for that. I looked at a few other menus. But look, if you complain about them adding this (and I'd remove it saying "not everyone is run by the president"), then the same applies to this--it's like in all those articles on American universities, where the president/chancellor gets to brag about the GRE scores or the football team. And this, I'd remove that too. Who cares what an Italian undersecretary said? What is Raxanreeb anyway? No, I can see problems with their behavior, but that page does not give me any good grounds for action. Drmies (talk) 00:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
The list is more aiming for a topic ban for bad faith editing, and the gist of most of the diffs is they add everything remotely related that's negative, and remove anything positive. After the removal about the Italian undersecretary there were 7 paragraphs, all negatively framed quoting everyone from the mayor of Mogadishu to an al Shabab functionary. The diffs are trying to establish that pattern. The additional copyright issues came up while I was reviewing sources and history. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Drmies, while cleaning more of the article I've so far found and logged four five many more examples that can be seen in my sandbox. I'm sure I'll find more as I go along. Is this severe enough to have to request a revdel? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
OK--first of all, if you want me to revdel anything, I need the diff where they stuck it in. I can't give you this one--that's messed up punctuation and stuff, and they are clearly a poor writer and editor in English, but it doesn't warrant revdeletion, IMO. I will agree with you on this and this. The others, it's just too short, and the ones that have names and dates, that's typically not so quickly seen as a copyvio. Drmies (talk) 20:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
This was an entire paragraph in our article and that they no longer recognise Mohamed as the President of Somalia since his term expired without any agreement on the path toward elections to replace him is exactly the same as the source except they change "a political" to "any". Is that an acceptable level of change to avoid close paraphrasing or copyright issues? As far as the revdel, I'm asking if any of this is severe enough to warrant it, since I'm pretty unfamiliar with the thresholds for copyright problems. Also User:Ohnoitsjamie, should we take this somewhere else to not clutter your page? The big problem I'm seeing right now is that the user just opens sources, finds a line that reflects poorly on the article subject, copies and pastes it then changes a word and cites wherever he copied it from. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I thought I just gave you two examples (after going through a bunch of them) that I'm willing to revdelete if you give me the original diff where the offending text was added to the article; right now I'm less interested in more discussion. Yes, doing this on the article talk page is probably a good idea. Drmies (talk) 20:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Ohnoitsjamie, would you possibly have the time to check my mock-up ANI report in my sandbox and let me know if that looks more or less correct before I post it? If it doesn't seem good enough I'd rather not waste anyone's time on an ANI. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I made a few copyedits to your intro; let's hold off on filing it until the behavior resumes, though. I'm going to be pretty busy for the rest of the day but I'd like to review it again before you file it if you don't mind. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I just made another copy edit to tidy a bit more up. There's no rush on checking it again as I'll wait until their editing resumes before filing it. I look forward to another 20 sections on the article talk page, one for each edit I made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:16, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Looks like the behavior started up again. Unfortunately I'm pretty much stuck editing by phone until Tuesday so I can't check the new additions for copyright problems and add more diffs to the npov section until then. I can tell they're mad at the removals because after adding a ton to make the subject look bad they removed some of the little neutral and positive coverage. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I added two more NPOV links and another copy/paste from source from the recent editing to the collapsed links. Should I post this to ANI today? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Ohnoitsjamie, have you had a chance to give it a final review before I file it? It doesn't seem like anything has improved. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
If you feel that you've reached an impasse, feel free to proceed. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:05, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. Would it be prudent to put a notice of the ANI discussion on the article talk page, or just let it ride as is? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:28, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
It is most important to notify all participants, but in this case, a notice on the talk page would also be useful. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:45, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks again for the help. One last thing (I hope, because I feel like I've been bothering you for a week), should I U1 my sandbox or is blanking it sufficient to not fall afoul of WP:POLEMIC? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
As far as I'm aware, there are no issues with using user/sandbox space to draft something you're willing to post at ANI. You could blank it after the issue is resolved if you'd like. It's in the history regardless. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:06, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Sorry to pester you again, but it's there a trick to get some uninvolved admin review at ANI, at least for the copyright issues which seem fairly unambiguous? I don't want to post anything on the copyright noticeboard or request a copyright revdel while there's an ANI thread active. It's discouraging when three people have supported my report, but there's almost no uninvolved discussion. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
I revdel'd a couple of them. If any there any further copyright violations it may be appropriate to open a new incident. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:08, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Well at least I can say I tried before I remove the article from my watchlist and ignore it forever. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:15, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Your opinion on this article?Edit

Korn's eight studio album is currently listed as Untitled Korn album on Wikipedia (which seems odd to me). They also have another "untitled" album (their debut), which is listed as Korn (album). Adding to this, they have yet another pseudo-untitled album, Korn III: Remember Who You Are (their ninth album).

Should their eight album stay listed as it is, or should it be changed (if it was up to you)? If so, to what? Online stores such as, Amazon, iTunes, and Spotify lists this album simply as Untitled, while listing their debut as Korn.

Your thoughts would be much appreciated, thanks. 2001:8003:3302:BC00:6148:85D8:8D88:64FF (talk) 08:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

If it was up to me, I'd go with Untitled (Korn album), which reflects how the band, retailers, and reviewers refer to the album. At first, I was thinking it should be Korn (2007 album) but skimming through the talk page and references it sounds like the word "Untitled" is registered with the RIAA as Untitled and described by the band as "Untitled" (whereas they'd describe their first album as simply "Korn"). In some cases WP:COMMONNAME comes into play, e.g. Led Zeppelin IV, but I'm not under the impression that fan names for Korn's 8th album are widespread enough to invoke that policy. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Much appreciated, thanks. 2001:8003:3302:BC00:6148:85D8:8D88:64FF (talk) 19:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Ohnoitsjamie Im Phantom Digital I Was Just Wondering If We Can Chat about helping me learn more about Wikipedia

Sincerly, PD

You can learn about our notability policy here. Wikipedia is not a fandom site; I've deleted all of the articles you've created. If you attempt to create them again without going through the WP:AFC process, you'll be blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:48, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Personal attacksEdit

You've left a couple of warnings for a new user about their unsourced content[8][9]. I've been reverting some of it on my watchlisted pages, noticing today that they're also logging out to insert it [10][11] which I warned them about on their talkpage [12]. They just left this response on my userpage [13]. Their editing history, both logged in and out, is all about fan promotion of Zack Snyder, and there are clear WP:NOTHERE vibes that the personal attack on my userpage pretty well crystallizes. Grandpallama (talk) 15:54, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

A goat for you!Edit

Boer Goat (8742860752).jpg

Thank you for assuming good faith on my incorrect AIV report. Cheers!

EpicPupper 20:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Ha, thanks! OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:33, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Jacksonblack11 continues to make disruptive editsEdit

You posted a warning about a subsequent indefinite block (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jacksonblack11&oldid=980885799) which the user manually removed (along with other warnings about disruptive edits), after which the user continued to make disruptive edits, and attacked those who politely advised against such edits (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jacksonblack11&diff=977467738&oldid=977456852) The user has numerous problematic contributions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jacksonblack11) that the user habitually marks as minor. -- Jibal (talk) 01:17, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

That user hasn't edited since March 21. Am I missing something? OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:31, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
The user only edits occasionally. It seems to me that a warning (in Sep 2020) that subsequent disruptive edits will result in an indefinite block should not be made lightly, yet they have made at least 5 edits since then that were reverted and that they were warned about. I noticed this and thought I should bring it to your attention, but I'll leave any action to your discretion. I have no particular interest in the user or the articles they edited and will promptly forget about this. P.S. There was another block earlier in Sep 2020 and the unblock was declined with "To be unblocked, you will have to commit to sourcing all your edits from now on" but the user has not stuck to that. -- Jibal (talk) 01:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
If the disruptive editing resumes, an indefinite block would be appropriate, but blocking a user a month after they've last edited (in the absence of evidence that they are a block-evading sock) seems unwarranted. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

SneedEdit

Steady on! That entry is why many people search for Sneed, and I saw that it wasn't mentioned, but some other TV character was mentioned right above. I don't mind someone undoing an edit if they don't think it's a help, but this was an edit made in good faith to benefit the readers of Wikipedia, and you jump to making ban threats in response? Blimey! NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 22:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes. I suggest that you don't do it again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Tanner MageeEdit

Hey, I noticed you deleted this G5 back in 2016. If there's anything worth working with there, would you mind restoring this? I'm interested in writing a bio on this person and having the restored page might be useful. Thanks! Elli (talk | contribs) 14:00, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I've partially restored it (minus some stuff missing sources and deprecated infobox params). OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:07, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Daniel Lee (designer) Problems with user: KnewdatesEdit

Heja, firstly, thanks for stepping in earlier, this issue from the Soho House (club) page unfortunately continues and now I am being accused and attacked on the talk page of Daniel Lee (designer) after having asked for help and comment to begin with. I have refrained from reverting the page to the version before Knewdates (your last revert) as I do not want to deepen the problem and so I am hoping you could step in again to arbitrate the situation. I have logged the problem on the admin page more precisely: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Regading user Knewdates for bad faith editing and what I see as intimidation Daniel Lee (designer)

I've also let the user know on their talk page that I have logged our issue on the admin noticeboard per standards, though I'm not very technologically adapt and I am not sure I did it correctly.

I'm actually kind of freaked out that the user Knewdates is trying to out my real-world identity after he posted someone elses twitter profile when looking up the moniker "talonx". I am a neurodiverse person and being on wikipedia is already too much social media sometimes, especially encountering people like this user. This situation is highly distressing to me and I feel like that was the intent, is their anything further I can do to protect myself that I am not already doing. I have been editing controversial topics (I have an academic background and am good at parsing data and citations for topics that are undetermined) and pages for marginalised people (being one myself) since wiki started. I Have not experienced this kind of pushback or what I see as threatening behaviour before. Please help! talonx78.55.186.185 (talk) 08:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

We have a policies on WP:HARASSMENT and specifically on WP:OUTING, though I'm not sure if connecting the username (that you're appending to your posts voluntarily) with a Twitter account is crossing that line. Whether or not the material about the Berlin house parties belongs in Lee's page is also debatable. I lean toward our WP:NOTNEWS policy on such matters unless the incident is widely reported; in the case of Lee, I'd say it's more connected to the company than the individual. In any case, for simple disputes like this, protection of the page really isn't appropriate. Talk pages are used for arriving at a consensus on whether that material should be included or not. If there's a stalemate in a disagreement between two editors, you can request a Wikipedia:Third_opinion. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:31, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Can you pull talk page access from User:207.163.15.122Edit

Copy/pasting edit requests on to their talk page, as well as piles of email logs and templates and such. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry to go straight to you, but it seemed quickest. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Done, and revdel'd. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
If there's an account that's going around changing numbers for GDP rankings and the like for Indian cities do I have to take that to ANI, or is that something I can just ask you to look at real quick? Also, you can just tell me to buzz off if I'm pestering you too often. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
If they've been given a level 3 or 4 warning for posting unsourced content, you could post at AIV; I'm on at the moment, so I can look at it. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:37, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
I just gave them a level two after fixing seven articles. They already had a level 1. Someone pointed out the issue in an edit request. It was some pretty shady number changing, as well as reordering lists. They're not editing right now, so I guess I'll have to wait to see if it starts up again. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:40, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Ok, so I think I found my first sock, looks like its Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Blscholljim/Archive. Problem is I have no idea how to open a sockpuppet investigation. Is it acceptable to just ping one of the admins that blocked them before? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
I think pinging an previously involved admin is fine unless they ask you not too, provided that it's an ongoing issue. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks again for the help. It is my grandest hope to not have to bother you again for a long while. I did manage to open the sockpuppet investigation, so I guess I'll let that ride. I am genuinely sorry that I keep popping up on your talk page asking for help, I feel like you probably have better things to do than respond to me. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Bob NewhartEdit

These edits by IP 115.134.228.155, which I just reverted, look similar to those of blocked IP 210.186.143.82 (one you blocked more than 24 hours ago). Clear case of block evasion. MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:17, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Good catch, both blocked for 2 weeks. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:13, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Guidance on AfDEdit

I created a new article on Gagandeep Reehal, but it has been marked for AfD. Can you guide or help in this? I have provided proper citations for every detail mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrexcoder (talkcontribs) 22:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

: You can read Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_contribute. My !vote in the AfD indicates that I don't believe the subject meets our WP:BIO notability criteria. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

If the article gets deleted, will it be possible to draft a new article on the subject in future if it becomes notable enough as per Wikipedia guidelines. Mrexcoder (talk) 23:26, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, if there are significant new reliable sources available that are about the subject (and not just mentioning him in the context of articles about the company). OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


Okay, thanks for the help Mrexcoder (talk) 23:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Tawny KitaenEdit

Could you temporarily protect this article? What appears to be a death hoax is propagating. Even TMZ, who know when people are dead before they do, is not reporting this, but the Twitterverse is on fire. Not one edit has included a source, much less a reliable one. General Ization Talk 03:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

The trolling persistsEdit

122.56.199.75 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I'm a little surprised that this means so much to them. DÅRTHBØTTØ (TC) 06:34, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

It's getting rather severe on AN/I. Maybe widening the range of the block is in order? I don't mean to rob Auckland of the opportunity to contribute, this this is getting rather absurd at this point. DÅRTHBØTTØ (TC) 07:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Looks like ToBeFree already took care of 122.56.192.0/20. I try to avoid a lot of collateral damage on rangeblocks, but sometimes it can't be avoided. I've added your talk page and a few others to my watchlist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:13, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I found something that may be worth a little digging. Check out Draft:Royal New Zealand Air Force Police and take note that both I.P. addresses from the ranges of 115.189.0.0/16 and 122.56.192.0/20 have edited it. Also, the draft's creator seems to edit many of the same subjects (predominantly air force content) as the troll's range. It may just be a coincidence and because someone who is an aviation aficionado edited from the same areas as the troll did, before they arrived. Yet, a user compare report may clear the air a bit. DÅRTHBØTTØ (TC) 04:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
It's possible that it's the same editor, but given that we're seeing a lot of dynamic ranges, it's equally possible that it's an unrelated editor. Given that, I think we're left with what we're doing now; blocking a range as soon as it starts being disruptive, but short of blocking all of NZ, I'm not sure if there's anything "preventative" to be done. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
It's somewhat ironic that you mentioned "short of blocking all of NZ", as they left this on one of the talk pages without the banned range. It appears as though their tactic as of now is to be disruptive as soon as the range blocks lift, which will do all but keep all of Auckland blocked. It's quite unfortunate, as there are a handful of good contributors in that area - including academics. DÅRTHBØTTØ (TC) 04:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Please make me an adminEdit

So that I'll add enlightenment information to Wikipedia Get Englightenement DroneExagesimal (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

OK. Oops, hit the indef block button instead. Sorry. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, but this thread is delicious. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Stubborn IP range at Music of DetroitEdit

Hello Ohnoitsjamie

I find myself in the unpleasant position of edit-warring with an IP user at Music of Detroit. The IP user keeps adding the same unsourced text involving "the band Pittbull leading the way into the future". I keep reverting, leaving my "unexplained and unsourced" edit summaries. The actual IP address can vary, but they all resolve to Chicago (Near South Side), Illinois.

Can I persuade you to look at this behavior and possibly block (or warn??) an IP range (I don't really know what tools you have for that)? Or should I go formally to AN/I or AN/V (where's best)? And do I deserve an EW warning myself? I've tried communicating beyond WP:ES at their Talk pages, but I've never gotten any response, even via edit summary, other than reinstatement of the unsourced, promotional text (see User Talk 1427, Talk page 544F, each with two messages from me, and now User Talk 154C, with a more extensive message).

Thanks, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Ranged. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Robert PattinsonEdit

The one with the "tested positive for COVID-19" information in the personal life section, which was removed without a valid reason. You can compare selected revisions if you want to. ภץאคгöร 07:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Hmmm, maybe the diff tool was acting up; it made it look like a lot more than that was reverted. OhNoitsJamie Talk 12:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Notability of Richard SillmanEdit

Greetings ! Since there is a wiki requirement for 2 (two) verifiable references to be notable for an Alumni (i.e. Walnut Ridge High School) there is indeed 2 verifiable references for Richard Sillman even if one reference is in a non-online library. Please see other Alumni on that same page that have "NO" references at all. Those should be the ones you should remove. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggle987 (talkcontribs) 14:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

This issue isn't whether the subject is an alumnus of the school; rather, there is no evidence the subject meets WP:BIO notability guidelines. You've been warned twice about this; do not add the name again. Most of the other names mentioned the article have references regarding the school in their article. Some of the football players are missing references, but those are easily found at sites like pro-football reference.OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:25, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

New message from AntoineHoundEdit

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. You have new messages at AntoineHound's talk page.
Message added 15:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

AntoineHound (talk) 15:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

2603:6080:F501:BE00:0:0:0:0/64Edit

I've already reported at AIV, but just incase... this IP range that is persistently disruptive on The Masked Singer (American season 4) has resumed their disruptiveness immediately upon the end of their 1-week block you issued just last week on May 7. Definitely will likely need a much longer block, as they clearly don't seem to care enough to stop and would rather continue adding a previous season's contestant in said article. Thanks. Magitroopa (talk) 18:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

KEdit

Instead of blocking me fix that and assure that Wikipedia doesn’t spread false Information Apo 5849 (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

@Apo 5849: Why would anyone make an effort to help you when you're clearly refusing to move a finger to help yourself? I directed you to the talk page and left links to various articles that could help you understand how Wikipedia works, but judging by the way you keep sticking to your first point, it's fair to assume that you haven't read any of them. Should you get blocked, you'll only have yourself to blame. M.Bitton (talk) 18:13, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

FYIEdit

this is now at RFUD. YODADICAE👽 00:00, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Several other people are telling him the same things I tried to patiently tell him. Good life lessons. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:29, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Educate yourself! Don't you have any regard or care for AUTISM??!!Edit

Hey, don't you have any care about Autism or awareness, bro? Educate yourself! There are lots of notable people who are trying to make a differents, but you guys don't allow that? Stop HATING! We're in the 21st Century. Most things (such as ableism) should be outlawed and unheard of by now. BCMj16 (talk) 00:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

OhEdit

Hello Pinoy pop isn't a disambiguation please back P-pop again the revision history of P-pop was gone thank you Hyunsukie (talk) 01:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to fix your mess. If you redirect it again without a consensus, you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
While we're still on this topic, you think it'd be a good idea to move protect Pinoy pop as well, or would that be going too far? SkyWarrior 02:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

On this topic as well, this is my first time requesting this, but is it possible to merge part of the history on Draft:Baby_Blue_(group) to Blue Blue? From rev id 603949431 to id 130851088. This was originally a redirect before the banned editor hijacked it. – robertsky (talk) 03:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to help, but I'm not sure how to do that. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

NonsenseEdit

I just came across this nonsense which I promptly deleted as pure nonsense, can you remove or delete from the history as well? Celestina007 (talk) 01:01, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Looks like someone already did, thanks! Someone is mad that we've protected all of their favorite vandalism targets and put some other countermeasures in place. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Haha, I thought as much. Celestina007 (talk) 02:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
The link they were referencing is so silly that I used to link to it from my userpage, along with other sordid details just as outlandish. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:33, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

No citation.Edit

Hi, 15 days ago, you left a message on my talk page. What article where you talking about? Garfield Cat & Lasagna (talk) 15:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I left you a warning on May 18th regarding the only edit you made on May 18th. See our verifiability policy for more information regarding our sourcing policy. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Pencil awardEdit

Not sure if you've seen but within the last 24 hours there's been a new user insisting on adding the Pencil Award gag to the Ryan Phillippe article. I warned them to no avail and I know you usually address it pretty quickly. Thanks. NJZombie (talk) 23:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppetEdit

user:Highheels48 appears to be quacking, based on their edits to P-Pop. (They did the classic cut-and-paste move of Pinoy pop to P-pop.) I know you've handled some of the user:Philippinesfan socks in the past, so I thought I'd leave a message here. Let me know if you'd like any more info. Thanks! palindrome§ǝɯoɹpuᴉןɐd 23:27, 14 June 2021 (UTC)