User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2013/June

So how's the "rampage of terror" going these days?

I thought I'd ask after reading this? Kauffner (talk) 03:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Is this a serious question? I don' think that commenting on what you link to would be helpful.  Sandstein  04:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Dancing on someone's grave is in very bad faith. Just why SMc felt he had to leave, and just who is responsible for that, is yet another question. Tony (talk) 04:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• Golly, I just thought you might want to what he was saying about you. It means nothing to me whether McCandlish is coming or going. Kauffner (talk) 07:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• Sorry, thanks for the notification. If users are dissatisfied with AE sanctions, they can appeal them, which the user in question has so far refrained from doing. In my view, any further discussion of the matter outside an appeal serves no useful purpose.  Sandstein  08:24, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

A topic ban violation?

[1] 76.126.32.5 (talk) 23:16, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The above IP address was blocked by a fellow administrator for making the above spurious report, which consists solely of reporting a technical edit made originally on Commons and propagated automatically through the entire Wikimedia system.

I have no interest in the Russavia ArbCom enforcement, just wanted to make sure you were aware the account was blocked after making the report, I did consider simply reverting their edit, but it's your talk page and really for you to decide what to do, and I believe the editor behind this IP may have been involved previously in making, what you described as a borderline frivolous/vexatious request so wanted to draw your attention to it, just in case you want to take further action, etc.

As an aside, have ArbCom given any consideration to how they will deal with edits made on wikis other than en.wp that could potentially breach ArbCom enforcement here when they propagate through the db automatically. That's just idle curiosity of my part and nothing really to do with the edit linked to above other than the fact it got me thinking.

Cheers, Nick (talk) 00:32, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, if people want to make an AE request, they should do so at WP:AE, and with their username if they are (as, in this case, very likely) not new users. That's because AE scrutiny extends also to the complainant.  Sandstein  08:26, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Support your AFD decision!

I support your recent AFD decision, the one where I said "Keep if cleaned up" -- you're right it wasn't cleaned up. Good decision.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!  Sandstein  13:15, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Sock from blocked user Ceco31 (talk · contribs)?

Hi, Sandstein. This user above was blocked several days ago for his disruptive editing by you, but now I suspect the new IP account ‎130.204.184.213 (talk · contribs) to be a sock from the same blocked user. He has began again with the same behaviour: changing the info-boxes on the article Bulgarians and edit-warring on the article Saint Barbara. How to deal with this case? Thank you in advance. Jingiby (talk) 16:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hm, the place for a closer investigation would be WP:SPI.  Sandstein  16:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

User:NovaSkola's appeal

Please see WP:AE#Arbitration enforcement appeal by NovaSkola. It looks like he is appealing both your topic ban and the block. I copied the appeal from his user talk to AE. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:21, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

User NovaSkola

Can something be done about this user? As i posted in the Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement page this user keeps reverting cited information which he does not like to hear about his country. In the Ibad Huseynov article he removed a cited source, from an Azerbaijani website, where they interviewed a general who fought in the war and contradicted the information that Huseynov killed Monte Melkonian but NovaSkola kept reverting it claiming the website was a blog, which it wasnt. Now he is doing the same thing with the Guba Mass Grave page. The whole page is a POV where Azeris found a grave in Guba and without any sort of studies they concluded Armenians killed Azeris there. That is what was stated on the page. I left that part alone and added a controversies section where i added the Armenian side of the events stating

Hayk Demoyan, the director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute, has pointed out that no foreign experts have examined the human remains, and that no documentary or archival evidence has been presented that mentions a massacre of Muslims having taken place in Guba

and

Armenia has twice sent letters to the President of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan academician Mahmud Kerimov, the first written by Levon Yepiskoposyan, supervisor of Human Genetics, Institute of Molecular Biology, National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia and the Armenian president of the Anthropological Society and the second by the President of the Association of Political Science Ministry Doctor of Political Sciences Hayk Kotanjian, asking Kerimov to form a joint committee to examine the remains at the grave. Azerbaijan has not responded to the letters

Each paragraph was cited but he just kept removing them and adding information which he made up. He added a paragraph about supposed rape taking place in Guba citing a book called "the men who killed me" but the book was about the Rwandan Genocide and had nothing to due with Armenia, Azerbaijan or Guba. Then he posted a line about how Amnesty International claimed 3000 Jews were killed in Guba but again the links he posted to back up his claims did not mention anything about Armenia, Azerbaijan, guba or even Jewish people. It was about Yugoslavia. http://www.icty.org/x/cases/krstic/trans/en/000719it.htm and http://www.icty.org/x/cases/popovic/trans/en/061107ED.htm. Something has to be done about this individual as after Proudbolsahye, Yerevanci and I reverted his changes and stated in our revisions why they were being reverted he kept changing them back and ignoring our concerns. Thank You. Ninetoyadome (talk) 00:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

You need to make such arguments at the WP:AE thread, and with diffs, sorry. I'm not even reading anything any more that doesn't have diffs in it.  Sandstein  05:46, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Sandstein. Thank you for the mediation. In fact I just discovered I was part of an AE thread just now. I wasn't informed or anything. I am utterly surprised that my name showed up just for one edit. I apologize if I hadn't made my case clear at the thread but it is already too late. Also, we are able to further sanctions by opening up an AE thread against NovaSkola if we want at this point right? From what I see his current topic ban is solely based off his edit-warring. What he was edit-warring wasn't considered. Correct? Cheers! Proudbolsahye (talk) 06:22, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, sorry that you weren't notified. NovaSkola should have done that, but I did not delay the closure of the thread on that account because no sanctions were contemplated against you. Yes, the current topic ban is because of edit-warring, but I advise against making additional AE requests unless the topic ban is violated or problems reoccur after the topic ban is lifted or expires.  Sandstein  08:19, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Novaskola has broken his topic ban already. Please check his contributions. Proudbolsahye (talk) 01:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Sandstein, can't I least edit Azerbaijani-sport related articles? OK, I've breached Azerbaijani political related articles but what that to do with sports? I ain't writing any political stuff in there. I'm just updating squads --NovaSkola (talk) 14:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

That aspect of your under appeal is under consideration at WP:AE.  Sandstein  16:16, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Sandstein, how long I will have to wait until the answer? 3 days already passed --NovaSkola (talk) 16:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Until another administrator closes the discussion.  Sandstein  17:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of the Meikyū Kingdom page

I have added some information in the Meikyū Kingdom talk section. Is there anything in particular that is needed to revive (and possibly change the wiki entry name) the page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Meiky%C5%AB_Kingdom I will check both talk pages for your response. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.125.224 (talk) 05:15, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I know nothing about the topic, but generally you should read WP:N. What you posted doesn't seem to meet these requirements at first glance.  Sandstein  19:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Noted. I will continue to add information and will begin citing sources, then get back to you. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.150.99.155 (talk) 02:12, 10 June 2013 (UTC) 

Nice job on Edward Snowden

--mboverload@ 19:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but I just created the redirect.  Sandstein  19:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

You've been mentioned

A disruptive IP (some sort of nationalist, probably) has brought up an edit warring charge against me here: [2]. I mentioned your block of a similar-acting IP in my response to that IP here:[3], where I requested a block of the IP based on sockpuppetry (multiple IPS by same user, pretending to be different users on the editwarring noticeboard) and disruptiveness and misrepresentation of sources that I provided the diffs for in my response: [4].Faustian (talk) 14:14, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of the "Arbortext" page

Hi,

I am intrigued to understand why "Arbortext" has been deleted when other similar companies remain, e.g. XMetal, Oxygen XML Editor, Syntext Serna, easyDITA etc.

Thanks

Pete — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter li64 (talk • contribs) 11:09, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Arbortext (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) was deleted for the reasons discussed in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arbortext. With respect to your question concerning other companies, please see WP:WAX.  Sandstein  17:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

a heads-up

Back in 2010, in WP:Articles for deletion/Ashley Kirilow you quoted WP:BLP1E when you voiced a delete for retaining a separate article on cancer hoaxster Ashley Kirilow. But you went on to say: "This means that this event can be covered in the context of an article about scams against charities, even if that article has yet to be written, but not as a BLP."

Some elements of Kirilow's story had been included in List of cancer victim hoaxes. And, while that article has been before {{afd}} there has been some back and forth as to whether BLP justifies excising some portions of the article, prior to closure of the AFD.

Earlier today a contributor excised the coverage of Kirilow from that article -- claiming that due to mental health issues -- BLP required no part of her story could be covered on the wikipedia.

I quoted your comment about including some coverage of Kirilow in a more broadly focused article.

I think both policy and common courtesy oblige me to give you a heads-up. For all I know, if you choose to read that discussion, you may agree with the excisor.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Unblock request

There's an unblock request directed to you at User talk:Evlekis. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

recent undo edit

On the page Oculolinctus under the history of revisions https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oculolinctus&action=history I saw you removed my edit ( 02:01, 16 June 2013‎ 184.39.151.104 )for not stating a source properly. I have one of the books that is very authoritative on the Fetish subject(some what funny & somewhat you don't want read it after just eating)and have been active in the community for about two decades.

The source information to cite was mentioned in the description of the page change field. I'm just at the point of editing tables right and footnotes still allude me but are on my list to learn. Oculophilia is define as fetish relating and pertaining to the eyes. Oculolinctus aka licking the eye ball is a subset of the fetishes relating to the eye ball. Often times the break out or specific activities and/or people don't get along or mesh well together. A very detailed book on the subject matter is the "Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices" By Love, Brenda viewable at http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Unusual-Practices-Brenda-Love/dp/1569800111/ Which goes in details to the numerous fetishes and objects that people can develop _______-philla to. In addition one website (of many) that contains a list of fetish terminology http://blanketfort.uninhibited.net/fics/kink/kink.html will back up the book.

I need help linking into the book for citing source and hope with information you will re add the information. With a correctly coded link to the source page in the book "Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices" which I'm guessing the best way to source it is to link in from Amazon for creating the footnote correctly?

If not I welcome advice on how to do it better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.39.151.104 (talk) 02:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, please refer to WP:CITE for information on how to cite sources and to WP:MEDRS for special considerations regarding medical topics.  Sandstein  08:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Likely sock

I believe I caught User:E4024 socking as User talk:LosPollosHermanos. E4024 wanted to get this picture removed because he doesn't like it and LosPollosHermanos joined Wikipedia less then a day later for the sole purpose of supporting the picture removal. E4024 also put one of those welcome tabs on LosPollosHermanos' talk moments later. Also notice how LosPollosHermanos shares E4024's habit of bolding his speech, which is noticeable here. I can give more examples if need be. Also notice how LosPollosHermanos was created shortly before E4024 was going to be blocked, likely as a last resort for one last attack on Armenia articles. I believe the evidence is sufficient. I recommend E4024's block be increased from 1 year to indefinite or permanent.

Oh, and the other users who tried to get the picture deleted for the same reason (not liking it) should be topic banned from Turkish articles. Wouldn't you agree? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 01:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, my talk place is not the best place for these requests. Sockpuppet concerns should be reported at WP:SPI, and topic ban requests, if the requirements are met, at WP:AE (if within the scope of WP:AC/DS) or WP:AN.  Sandstein  08:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

What about the second point? All AA2 bans seem to go to you anyway. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 16:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

As I said, that's a matter for WP:AE. But in general, just "wanting to get a picture deleted" is not normally sanctionable. It depends on the circumstances, and these can transparently be discussed at the enforcement board.  Sandstein  16:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Another topic entirely, but do you know a page that has rules Admins are supposed to follow? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 21:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:ADMIN.  Sandstein  21:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

And if I see an Admin break these rules, where should I go to report it? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

That's discussed on the page I linked to.  Sandstein  21:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Luo Meizhen

You recently closed the articles for deletion discussion on Luo Meizhen, stating that none of the keep options addressed the policy-based delete comments. I provided an extensive policy-based comment in response to the only delete comment that actually addressed policy. All the other delete "votes" we're opinion-based or simply wrong. Please reconsider in the context of the extensive comment I made in the debate. Thanks Wikipeterproject (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

You're right, I overlooked your longer comment after reading your "As per OTMF, above" opinion. Yours is the only serious "keep" opinion, but many "delete" opinions aren't much better, so I'm relisting the discussion.  Sandstein  08:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Wikipeterproject (talk) 07:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Rumi

I have removed this statement, "It seems that Turks claim themselves as the authors of everything except what they are actually responsible for, such as the Armenian Genocide.Wfgiuliano. I felt it was inappropriate, insulting, anachronistic, and had absolutely nothing to do with Rumi or the Seljuqs of Rum. I did not know if this was enough for Admin intervention/warning, but felt I should make you aware of this. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Racial epithets!

Hi, Sandstein. Following your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gora (racial epithet) as "merge", there's been a slow edit war on the merge target's page as editors wishing to implement the consensus clash with editors who insist on a source for every entry. Please could you review the talk page of the list, my talk page, and the edit history and provide us with a third opinion when you've done so? Thanks very much and all the best—S Marshall T/C 21:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Concern

Hello Sandstein,

A user who has been topic banned under WP:ARBAA2 has edited an Armenian page. He has broken his ban a few times already...see his/her [log] please. Thank you. Proudbolsahye (talk) 22:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

That page doesn't seem to relate to "Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts", which is the scope of the topic ban.  Sandstein  22:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

"Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts" relates to anything Armenian-Turkish as well. Just ask Mr. Know-It-All. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 23:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I have far better things to be doing at the moment, but I think this merits a response. From WP:AA2: "Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all pages related to Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related ethnic conflicts, broadly interpreted." One doesn't need to be a member of Mensa to know that Armenian-Turkish conflicts are related ethnic disputes. If you don't like this interpretation, your time would be better spent making a request for clarification at WP:RFAR rather than taking swipes at me on other admin's talk page - I will respect whatever ruling the committee makes on the issue. CT Cooper · talk 22:20, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

TheShadowCrow, after looking at the case page, I note that you are subject to an indefinite topic ban "from all articles and discussions covered under ARBAA2". Your comment above violates that ban, in addition to being incivil, as does this one below, and I am blocking you in enforcement of the ban.  Sandstein  22:36, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Another concern

I also wanted to inform you of another person topic banned from AA. NovaSkola has been editing Qarabağ FK continuously. Though you permitted normal non-controversial Azeri football editing, this one in particular is about a club that is named after and from the Nagorno-Karabakh region, and anything about that area is considered an AA topic. He has direcly edited parts about the clubs namesake and history, as can be seen here and here. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 23:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, please use WP:AE to make such reports.  Sandstein  14:26, 29 June 2013 (UTC)