User talk:Drmies: Difference between revisions

New SP

One day after his last block they returned and is overlapping with this blocked SP https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py?users=TheTurtleHistorian&users=Dmhw&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki. they both editing with mobile and changing mostly names and editing Chinese history. It looks like me a sock but I am not sure which master. Shadow4dark (talk) 12:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

• I looked real quick but this takes more than I can do from my phone. I’ll get back to this later. Drmies (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lord Gong has been accepted

Lord Gong, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Drmies (talk) 23:01, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Anne Amie

I need some advice on how to handle the problems with this article. The article subject has been editing her article since 2019. She received a COI warning back then, but it didn't deter her from adding unsourced, self-serving material. She seemingly edits in spurts, so after a few edits in 2019, she made another bunch of edits in March 2022, and then edited much more in the last few months.

I stumbled across the article recently and gutted it. It has two refs and then a very long list of external links, most of which are interviews and YouTubes, and some of which don't work, and, as I recall, one of which is also one of the two refs. Her image in the infobox appears to be a copyright violation; she says it's her own work (they always do), but it also says that the copyright holder is someone else.

Anyway, the subject has restored everything back to the way it was a couple of times, and my warnings on her Talk page have only served to finally get her to at least say something (rather than just edit her article).

I'm not willing to edit-war with her, although I've thus far only edited the article twice. I also don't want to invest a lot of time in this. These kinds of issues are generally frustrating, and there are so many articles like this on Wikipedia, it's not worth it. You may feel the same way and not want to get involved in it, but sometimes these kinds of things grab you, so I thought I'd try.

I hope you haven't been affected much by the storms in the south.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

• Not much, Bbb--Rolling Fork is a ways away, but that destruction was something to behold. Thank you, though; we're all good. Take care, Drmies (talk) 00:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

• Good to hear - national news reports are not often as precise as one would like. Thanks for taking care of the other.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:30, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Afshin Naghouni

Puff piece is not far off from how I see it. I don’t like it. It’s better after you’ve edited it. I have worked on this daily tweaking it. I just want to get it out of stub and make it a proper biography. what else would you do if you don’t mind. I don’t even really like the headers but it’s already done. I just want to make it better. Anything constructive would be great thanks.Kkenya (talk) 07:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I do see exactly why you did that, especially now that I’ve been comparing it. Unbelievable. You were constructive, glaringly. It’s too dark now maybe in that lead section. After 10 minutes no it’s not too dark. TyKkenya (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

not enough until recently. Then I knew something was off. What because it doesn’t describe him now but you Kkenya (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Disgaard one of those please. two replies to myself were sent at the same time. Thats a talent I didnt know I had. Kkenya (talk) 09:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Kkenya. The first revert was (in part) because of statements like "The colours on the boy's face were a stark contrast to his condition"--that's interpretation and needs to be ascribed explicitly to a source. If the source has that, cite it concisely and/or paraphrase it, and make clear who's speaking. The authority of that description must rely explicitly on the authority of the source. Further on, you wrote (and then removed) "Antix's lyrics paint a picture of Naghouni's bravery and the harsh realities of living within Iran’s Islamic regime"--the same applies to that.

As I noted in my edit summary, citing this HuffPo article is really not OK--it's a long story, but click on Wikipedia:HUFFPO, and then look at the entry "HuffPost contributors": the article you cite is by a contributor (see this link), it's explicitly marked as "blog", and it's from before 2018 (and I don't think it matters that this is the UK HuffPo). So I would not use it to make a point in a WP:BLP. Also, make sure that you don't write something, cite it, and then add something more at the end of the paragraph--it makes it look like it's unsourced. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 14:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, as I’ve gone through every little thing,, I wish someone like you would have been around sooner. I had to really look at this and I did, objectively. I genuinely appreciate what you did. Thanks again. Kkenya (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

“The colors on his face were these beautiful purples and pinks which completely contrasted to his condition.” That’s a copy and paste from the source so tell me how that’s an interpretation. Those were the artist’s words. I’m going to have to see exactly what you tell me about this. I may be seeing it differently. Kkenya (talk) 15:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

In that case, this was a likely copyright violation: if something is copied and pasted from a source, it should be acknowledged as such. It was not. In addition it was not ascribed to whoever said it--and if the artist said it, we should probably not cite those words at length. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I did not copy and paste it in the article. I copied and pasted it for you to see from the source which I cited. Mine in a short summation of what he said of which I kept out certain words specifically because I didn’t feel comfortable with the word beautiful or colours for that matter. There’s nothing wrong with what I wrote and citied.

I am still deeply appreciative of everything else including this, but you just didn’t read the source maybe because, the citation has been at end of the paragraph not the statement. Kkenya (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

{{subst:ZenAward|well-deserved ~~~~}} Kkenya (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks for clearing that up: that was not clear. But the paragraph "After five years...", that's sourced to that interview, and all the things in that paragraph that are presented as objective facts in Wikipedia's voice are actually paraphrases of what the subject himself said (and it doesn't say that he said those things). Drmies (talk) 17:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Lordy I see it. Got it. The most enlightening thing for me is the parenthetic bit. I’m thinking, ““of course he said it.” No, not established Kkenya (talk) 18:19, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Two replies

“The first revert was (in part) because of statements like "The colours on the boy's face were a stark contrast to his condition"--that's interpretation and needs to be ascribed explicitly to a source.”

and

“If the source has that, cite it concisely and/or paraphrase it, and make clear who's speaking.”

for reference only, for me, for clarity. The author/interviewed the subject, VC Mauer, is why I’m consistently surprised that many citations on WP don’t show author including some of my own I can write them in my sleep, but citing is meaningless obviously without a reliable source.

“And make it clear who’s speaking.” Kkenya (talk) 20:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

By the way, 751 of your 859 edits are to this article. Please read this guideline, WP:COI, and properly disclose any conflict of interest you may have. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

That was already bothering me. Ty Kkenya (talk) 14:51, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Quoted

I've quoted you in my recent evidence statement at ArbCom here. Due to word limitations, I only quoted a part of your statement. I hope it is ok with you. If you think I am misquoting you or that I misunderstood your point, please let me know and I'll refactor what I wrote or strike the quote out. As someone subject to being misquoted, I certainly don't want to do it myself to anyone. (To be clear, you are not a party and you are in no danger of being sanctioned for anything). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

• No, Piotrus--it looks fine to me. I actually already read your comment, and followed to link to VM's analysis (the table was too small and complex for me, haha). I think I substantially agree with the things you said, at least the things that I have knowledge of. The selective quoting totally bothers me as well. I don't know--wait, I'm not a party? I thought I was. Do you think I should contribute, and if so, where? I know, I'm a former arb and should know this like the back of my hand, but it's been a while, and I don't envy the colleagues who are on the committee now. Drmies (talk) 14:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

  The parties were culled down I think after some folks raised concerns that the initial list was too large (then a few editors recently active in the topioc area that got the bright idea to get themselves to AE got added for good measure :>).

  Given that such proceedings are usually avoided by most sane people, your input would surely be welcomed (certainly I appreciated your comments so far). What I know is that discussions are ongoing at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence, Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Analysis. Which, if any, would be of interest to you, that's of course if for you to decide :) You could check their histories to see which threads are active. I can only say that I'll be looking forward to anything you write, if you decide to join the discussions (most of which are not particularly long, all things considered).

  If you would like to make a comment directly related to my evidence (where I quote you), you could start an analysis section about it, I think? Some others have done so about some other parts of evidence already submitted. For example, another editor I quoted, Tryptofish, has done so here, with analysis (aka discussion) that already begun here. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Unreferenced material in pageant articles

I thought I'd bring this to your attention. I'm not sure exactly why, but the pageant articles are really hard to keep up to standard. Over the weekend, I made similar cleanouts of unreferenced tables in a few other pageant articles. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Disregard, now I notice they added a citation at the same time as the revert. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

It's another one of those areas inhabited by fans and a considerable number of socks. Way too many of those articles are full of factoids and flags. It's really no different from wrestling or anime or K-pop or monster trucks, unfortunately--but thanks for trying. Drmies (talk) 17:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Zen-like is what you’ve been like.

zen cookie for your help

DYK for Lynching of Allen Brooks

On 30 March 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lynching of Allen Brooks, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the site of the 1910 lynching of Allen Brooks was unmarked for 111 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lynching of Allen Brooks. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Lynching of Allen Brooks), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh (talk) 00:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

March songs

my story today

thank you! - sharing impressions from vacation on Madeira 20-30 March, pics now at 25 March with ups and downs and two cats --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

• Woohoo vacation! Madeira! Next time, take me with you. Drmies (talk) 21:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

  next year? with family? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Sock farm target

Hi, I noticed you salted Draft:Raditya Adi and blocked the the most recent user who created it. It has been re-created by a new account and I'm wondering if you could take a look. Thanks! Uhai (talk) 04:09, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks Uhai--it's all pretty desperate, isn't it. I am not sure if I actually SALTed the draft and the article, but I will. I wrote up my results at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jelitacantik, and I appreciate your help. Drmies (talk) 15:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Request range block extension

You range previously tagged on a six-month block extension to range 2402:8100:2000::/35, a range that was the source of harassment against me. I looked back to see what was going on now that this extension has lifted and it's almost exclusively vandalism/incompetence. I don't expect a ton of great edits from any given IP range, but this one seems especially bad. I'm requesting you to consider an extension. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Adding that there's no indication the range is being used in a harassing manner at present. My concern is only with what seems like a range used to make frequent CIR and vandal edits. Should've clarified that out the gate. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Administrator changes

Aoidh

KillerChihuahua

CheckUser changes

Ferret

Guideline and policy news

• A community RfC is open to discuss whether reports primarily involving gender-related disputes or controversies should be referred to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

Technical news

• Some older web browsers will not be able to use JavaScript on Wikimedia wikis starting this week. This mainly affects users of Internet Explorer 11. (T178356)
• The rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
• A link to the user's Special:CentralAuth page will now appear in the subtitle links shown on Special:Contributions. This was voted #17 in the Community Wishlist Survey 2023.

Arbitration

• The Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case has been closed.
• A case about World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been opened, with the first evidence phase closing 6 April 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Mary Tileston Hemenway

Hey Drmies, another one of my unfortunate "finds" by patrolling Recent changes. A new SPA editor, KellyJeanLynch, who claims to be a PhD student researching Hemenway, has been stubbornly adding/keeping material in the article that is either WP:UNDUE, promotional, or both. I tried discussing the problems with the student on her Talk page, but she clearly "knew better" about what was appropriate to be in the article and what was not, so I just gave up a few minutes ago. BTW, my strong guess is that Special:contributions/76.64.77.74, who edited just before her, is also her, not that I'm accusing her of socking, but that's where the addition of a great deal of material started. At this point, my main objections to the article are stated on the student's Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments on Kelly's Talk page, but the material I object to is still in the article. You made only some non-substantive changes to the article. I'm willing to try once more to remove/trim the two portions of the article I believe to be unencyclopedic, but if you think I'm wrong, I'll defer to your judgment and let it go. The truth of the matter is I want to take the article off my watchlist so I don't have to look at it. :-) So, your opinion?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, take it off, by all means. I looked at the history and made a few minor changes, also to show my good will toward the editor, but I haven't had the time to take the deep dive yet. Draft:Oscar James Campbell, Jr. is taking up a lot of my time. ;) Drmies (talk) 18:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Well, there's a lot to look at, in part because the editor made so many tiny edits and doesn't leave edit summaries. But the three big deletions that you made--some of that material (the family stuff, the brother on 242 Beacon Street) wasn't returned, and other material is now sourced--albeit it sometimes very poorly. Right now I'm looking through this to see if I can properly source one article. I would want a PhD student to do better than this, "The Late Mrs. Hemenway. Harper's Bazaar, March 24, 1894. Anyway, the situation is different now, and at least some of what you objected to is no longer there. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it's definitely better than it was. Putting aside all the minor errors (e.g., endless repetition of full names instead of just last names), there's still excessive detail on certain subjects and a little bit of the gushing is still there ("Mary Hemenway was known to be gracious and dedicated to social needs." and "The Reverend Charles Ames said she "simply went about doing good with pleasure in her tasks"." (who the hell is Ames anyway?)).--Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

As you probably already know, I haven't taken the article off my watchlist. I'm getting a kick out of watching you improve things (thanks for removing the fawning material). For some reason, I just noticed that although the title of the article is Mary Tileston Hemenway, the name in the opening sentence is Mary Porter Tileston Hemenway. Not a change by Kelly - it's been that way since its creation. Porter is her mother's maiden name. I seriously doubt at that time she would have adopted her mother's name as part of her name, but it's certainly not sourced as her name. Oh, and another thing. How does one "apparently" inherit $15M? Can I do that? I could afford to buy some more socks then; many of the ones I own have holes in them or are blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:28, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Ironmouse

It appears FreedomBoy77 made good on his promise to evade their block. There's some interesting info on CU wiki if you're interested (last link on my user page there). -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:44, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

• Hmm. Thanks. I looked at the video but did not quite understand what I was looking at--even a young person couldn't make sense of it to me. Drmies (talk) 00:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Just wanted you to know that I saw the comment you tagged me in...

...even though IP 86.28.234.94 removed it. At the time I made my initial comments I had a chat with a related admin and realize there's a lot more going on there than I initially thought. I had seen a few erroneous rollbacks at the time so I was on guard for that sort of thing. But for whatever it's worth, I'm not actually familiar with that editor prior to this. They must have gotten up to their initial round of shenanigans while I was on one of my long wikibreaks. Regardless I didn't want you to think I'd missed your message. Millahnna (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Splitting discussion for h3h3Productions

An article that been involved with (h3h3Productions) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to another article (Ethan Klein). If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. Thats Just Great (talk) 19:55, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Problems with an editor

I hate to bother you with something like this, but I'm at a bit of a loss. User Eni.Sukthi.Durres has made more than few edits, mainly to footballers' pages, that are not grammatically correct—often containing outright broken English, misused words, major typos, too much news-style detail (like subjective interpretations of how a player played in a match), and/or inconsistent chronologies. In two cases, Enea Mihaj and Jasir Asani, I have gone through the articles and fixed the grammatical issues, typos, and copyedited for spelling, grammar, and appropriate information. This user, however, has reverted my corrections and copyediting, all while aggressively claiming that they will "report me" if I don't stop "deleting useful contents." The problem is that I am fixing major grammatical problems and broken English—basic copyediting work that brings the article up to Wikipedia standards of clarity. I'm not sure why this user is so protective of their poorly written work, but I don't want to get into an edit-war with someone who insists on maintaining a poorly written, substandard article. Would you mind giving this a look and, if anything, intervening as an admin to help me establish my edits as improvements rather than assaults on this user's pride? Anwegmann (talk) 20:31, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Then why you don't improve my poor english instead of deleting all such as hasn't ever been, you must show respect to others work. However I'll wait for this user's answer and we must open a discussion at 2 players talk pages to fix step by step contents. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 01:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

It's your job to write acceptable English. Drmies (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

How much is my salary then? Or fix my poor english or don't intervene never, you revert all edits including correct updates, keep full responsibilites or 0, that's impossible, nobody has imponed a duty to you, thank you. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 21:10, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Your salary is the same as mine. Please see WP:CIR. This, "Twins in life twins also in the field of play, playing their first competitive season for Cesena under-17 squad coached by Filippo Masolini in Allievi Nazionali U17, where the attacking duo made each 16 appearances with Stiven scoring 11 goals and Cristian 14.", is not evidence of competence in English. I do not understand why you think you can just dump this ungrammatical stuff into our articles. In fact, there is not a single sentence in this edit that is grammatically correct. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Suspicious username/concerns of socking

I have recently found $tar Anonymou$, a rollbacker, on English Wikipedia. What is a bit concerning is that their username is quite similar to User:$tar Anonymous, a currently blocked sockpuppet of User:Inoxent AR. I would like to say that according to this old SPI I found (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Inoxent_AR/Archive), Inoxent AR used his $tar Anonymous account for GHBH socking. Furthermore, this user page history of $tar Anonymous- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:$tar_Anonymous&oldid=1106412240 - shows some similarities with $tar Anonymou$'s current userpage.

Could this potentially be even more GHBH socking from User:Inoxent AR? -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 01:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

• Hey, I looked, and I blocked User talk:Inoxent Anonymous and User talk:$tar Anonymou$. What I need you to do is file it (at WP:SPI) and ask for the CU who looked at this before. These two account are CU-confirmed with each other, but I have no data on the other/master accounts. It doesn't really matter anyway, I guess: the edits and the usernames make it clear enough. Drmies (talk) 12:32, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Just so we know, should we tag $tar Anonymou$ as a sockpuppet of Inoxent AR or should we leave their userpage as it is? -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 17:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
    • Well, if you file the SPI, the clerk is likely to make a recommendation or tag them automatically. Just to make things clear: I confirmed them to each other, not to the master. That identification is behavioral, in various ways. Drmies (talk) 00:23, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Pestering

I want you to know that I have chosen to regard your comment on my talk page as "pestering" me. Silly, I know, but what constitutes pestering is a purely subjective judgment, right? Anyway, I'd ask you not to do it again. Thank you kindly. OckRaz ^talk 03:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)