Open main menu


E-mailEdit

 
Hello, TonyBallioni. 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.
Girth Summit, email seen. I'll try to reply tonight or tomorrow. I've been very busy IRL and have fallen behind on my WP email. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:41, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
No problem, please get to it in your own time. There have been a couple of developments since I sent it, I'll send an update for you to consider. Thanks GirthSummit (blether) 08:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

UTRS 26666Edit

Hi,

Could you please look at this UTRS appeal? You're the blocking administrator and I'd appreciate your opinion :)-- 5 albert square (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

5 albert square, replied in UTRS. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:40, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019Edit

Hello TonyBallioni,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
  • Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.
Not English
  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.
Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Chris.sherlockEdit

You are involved in the case as you placed one of the blocks. You are in no position to be silencing the user's only avenue for comment, or protecting a fellow admin who has got herself into trouble in her responses to him. Please self-revert, or consider yourself reported. Orderinchaos 02:57, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

That’s not how WP:INVOLVED works. I reviewed the request, determined there was block evasion as a CheckUser, and blocked one of the socks as standard procedure in the unblock decline. I then brought his appeal to AN for community review. I’ve only ever acted as an uninvolved administrator, which was the capacity in which I hatted that discussion. I’m not going to edit war over this, but I’d encourage anyone else to restore the hatting. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:02, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
WP:CANVASS and WP:POINT, too. Great. Orderinchaos 03:16, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
I don’t think replying to you on my own talk page is canvassing. I consider that to be following WP:ADMINACCT. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Awaiting SPIEdit

Hi, I realise that SPI has been backlogged of late but is there any reasonably way to get someone to move along things at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arunkumarnaik? As I stated in my last comment there, Bishonen has put temporary protection on the article but, knowing the topic area as I do, I'm pretty sure there will be another assault on it when that expires. With that in mind, it would be handy to have a CU record for the current investigation. Do I need to find an active clerk? Is there a list or category somewhere? - Sitush (talk) 18:39, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Replied there. When more show up, file again and I'll take a look. I'm busier these days than in the past, so on-wiki less, unfortunately, but I'll watchlist it and get around to it when I see it. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:12, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

UTRS 26658Edit

Hi,

Would you be able to have a look at this appeal from Kiko4564 please?-- 5 albert square (talk) 20:59, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi 5 albert square, I'm not familiar with Kiko and from what I recall last time it required a lot of behavioural knowledge in addition to the technical stuff. Berean Hunter might be able to help better than I could. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:09, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Last time he had been impersonating another LTA and it hasn't been a year since. To me, it nullifies what he is saying in the new request and renders it insincere. He sang the same tune in the last UTRS before he was caught so it doesn't sound believable to me now...he was bald-faced lying while socking. I commented in the UTRS a couple of days ago. I not in favor of unblocking.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 00:00, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks both.-- 5 albert square (talk) 00:31, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Notice of ANI DiscussionEdit

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:KMeyer. OhKayeSierra (talk) 09:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

ARBCOMEdit

Now that I've seen this, I suspect you could do a pretty good job in that group yourself. Would you consider it? And I know we haven't interacted directly very many times, but I've seen your work. I think you'd be good at it. — Ched (talk) 03:55, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Nah, I have reasons not to both IRL and on-wiki. But I'll go ahead and nominate @El C, Amakuru, Amorymeltzer, and Vanamonde93: each of them brings something different, but each of them are sysops who have my highest respect and who I would trust with private information. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:03, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
I told Tony the same thing a couple of days ago, and I told him the same thing...but for the record; I've seriously considered. However, one of the things that has frustrated me the most about ARBCOM (not just this iteration) is that when editors raise concerns with PDs and such, there is a certain lack of response (witness my comments here, still unanswered), a lot of which I put down to the committee being flooded with demands on its time and energy. I know for a fact that I cannot supply that level of commitment for several months of the year. I don't think it would be fair, even assuming I could get elected. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:16, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Vanamonde93, While I do think we do need more ARBCOM members, I still remember TonyBallioni's action's on this page, User_talk:יניב_הורון#Block_Review and revoking TPA was I think way overboard. But yet again, someone was blocked for calling out antisemitism. Sounds eerily familiar to the ARBCOM case you're responding to and getting no response from ARBCOM, right? I point you to AE right now, where someone is now there trying to push a fringe viewpoint. When the Polish government puts up a plaque about a concentration camp, Warsaw_concentration_camp and the English language Wikipedia has an article about this hoax for years. We have a problem. It's infuriating so of course people will get upset and it drives people away and then the only people left editing are those pushing the false narrative. ARBCOM's ruling will do that. You're going to end up with a Wikipedia that distorts the Holocaust. And it's the same thing with antisemitism on Wikipedia. Sir Joseph (talk) 04:27, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Not here. Please. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
As you well know, Yanniv wasn't blocked for "calling out antisemitism" but for falsely accusing other editors of anti-semitism and "vandalism". It was a good block. Volunteer Marek 04:33, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Volunteer Marek, no, he was blocked for reverting the preposterous claim that Jews were able to come back after the Holocaust and simply go back to their homes without any trouble from the Poles. To say otherwise is indeed reverting history. Sir Joseph (talk) 04:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
No, he was not blocked for reverting any claim, he was blocked for using edit summaries which falsely accused other editors of anti-semitism and vandalism (as well as general aggressive behavior). This isn't that hard. The block explanation is pretty clear. And no, in that particular instance he was NOT reverting a "claim that Jews were able to come back after the Holocaust and simply go back to their homes without any trouble from the Poles" because nobody ever made such a clam. This is up there with the "the Polish government put up a plaque" nonsense. Volunteer Marek 04:44, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
The fact that you keep changing your story and can't make up your mind regarding whether he was blocked for "calling out anti-semitism" or for "reverting a claim" kind of shows that neither one is true. Volunteer Marek 04:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Also, the claim that "the Polish government puts up a plaque about a concentration camp, Warsaw_concentration_camp" is also false. A private individual put it up. On private property. That's the frustrating thing here. Why do you have to embellish and exaggerate? Volunteer Marek 04:37, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Fair enough. Hmmm, that's not a bad selection at all. Now that I think about it, Amory is someone I haven't talked to in ages. IIRC, I was a co-nom for their RfA, but we kind of went our separate ways recently. The others I'd certainly look at though, and would likely support based on the little I've seen. Amakuru is likely the least known to me, which likely means they've kept a low profile - but I could be wrong since I was away for so long. Anyway - I do appreciate you responding Tony, TY. — Ched (talk) 04:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "TonyBallioni".