User talk:331dot

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Help me at Draft:Patuakhali Government College. InfoShahriar (talk) 10:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What help is it that you want? 331dot (talk) 10:40, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have added some sources, cross check those and add some sources if you find. I translated from bnwiki and added more sources. InfoShahriar (talk) 12:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You have submitted it for a review; you shouldn't do that unless it is in a state that you think it will be accepted. If I were to review it, I would decline it, as it does little more than state that the college exists and tell of its offerings. To establish notability(see WP:ORG), you must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the college. "Significant coverage" goes beyond just telling what they do, and goes into detail about its significance or influence. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 12:21, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Help me fix it. InfoShahriar (talk) 12:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can't find or provide sources for you. Do you have an association with the college? 331dot (talk) 12:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's in my area, so I know about it. InfoShahriar (talk) 15:07, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are soliciting help from several people. We can't do the work for you. If you need help to know what to look for, I would suggest that you use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 15:21, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).

Administrator changes


Interface administrator changes

readded TheresNoTime
removed TheresNoTime

CheckUser changes

removed TheresNoTime

Oversight changes

removed TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget. (T319449)



Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Danny Makkelie[edit]

I would like to talk with you about the edit you made on the official page of Danny Makkelie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikumaru (talkcontribs) 10:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rikumaru What is it you would like to say? 331dot (talk) 10:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would also suggest that you read the posts I placed on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In our opinion, Danny Makkelie is being deliberately harmed by citing what the media thinks of a specific decision. Referees make weekly decisions where public has an opinion on. This is also not written on Wikipedia and rightly so. Wikipedia is not a blog where people can express opinions and judgement. In comparison with other referees, this is not treated proportionately. Whether a decision is right or wrong remains subjective. In addition, UEFA has stated that the penalty was correct and therefore the addition has no added value and only causes damage and discussion. Rikumaru (talk) 11:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rikumaru Who is "our"? Only a single person should have access to and be operating your account- or do you represent Mr. Makkelie? If you disagree with an edit, but your removal was reversed, the correct procedure is to discuss your concerns on the article talk page(Talk:Danny Makkelie) and explain your reasoning, preferably based in Wikipedia policy or at least logical arguments, to obtain a consensus as to what the article should say. Continually reversing the removal of your edit is considered edit warring and not permitted. If discussion fails to resolve the matter, avenues of dispute resolution are available.
You also alluded to a legal threat("a jurisdictional complaint to Wikipedia"); making legal threats is not permitted on Wikipedia. We cannot stop you from pursuing legal action according to the laws of your country if you so choose to, but you cannot make legal threats on Wikipedia, nor can you edit if you have a legal action underway related to your edits. You can pursue your grievances in the courts of your country or on Wikipedia, but not both at the same time. 331dot (talk) 11:11, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To clarify, I'm not taking a position on the merits of your concerns- only saying that you are going about them the wrong way. 331dot (talk) 11:16, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Last year I already explained in a discussion that the context should be factual. Mentioning that Makkelie gave a penalty in the semi-final of the Euro is enough information. That the Spanish newspaper and or other media questioned this decision should not be mentioned on his profile. In that case we can criticize decisions made by referees, ministers, etc on wikipedia every week. If people want to know what has been written about a decision, they can turn to Google or newspapers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikumaru (talkcontribs) 11:32, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please edit this section for replies, do not place them at the top of my page. As I said, you must discuss your edits if they are disputed. I don't see where you discussed it a year ago(unless it was under an IP or a different account). Wikipedia is not merely factual, it summarizes what independent reliable sources say. If they discuss a controversial call by a referee, that's usually valid content on its face, again, unless you have a logical argument preferably based in Wikipedia policy to argue otherwise, or a preexisting consensus to point to. 331dot (talk) 11:46, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rikumaru Please respond to my question above; who is our, and do you represent this person? 331dot (talk) 11:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I think the sources in the article clearly show notability of the article subject. If you disagree, please start an AfD to settle this matter once and for all. Pavlor (talk) 14:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pavlor AFD is not supposed to be the first destination, but the last. The sources seem to say that it is an emulator and give its specifications. What's significant about it? Why do you oppose giving a tag a shot at improving the article? I have today interacted with someone who attempted to submit a draft about an emulator that was rejected, and they said "other articles are the same as my draft" so I decided to look. 331dot (talk) 14:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are very few "once and for all" moments here. Nothing is in stone. 331dot (talk) 14:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure consensus may change, once and for all... until then. As of sources, there are two sources already in the article contributing to notability of the article subject. The first one is an Amiga Review (Czech Amiga magazine) article about Game Boy emulation on Amiga, which is mostly devoted to Wzonka-Lad (with some space for two other emulators and the Game Boy hardware in general), the second one is a short article in Amiga Format (UK Amiga magazine). Other sources in the article are either too short (, of unclear reliability (Amiga Report disk mag), or primary. Assuming similar coverage in other Amiga magazines of the late 90s (which aren't online yet, so search is somewhat harder), I don't think notability is an issue here. Pavlor (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pavlor I'm not sure notability should be based on assumptions of sources that aren't in the article, but otherwise I don't have the time to invest in a battle to get the article removed, so I removed the tag. I was just taking a look in response to the situation I described above. I maintain, however, that AFD is not the first destination, but the last, when it comes to notability. Please have a good day 331dot (talk) 15:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Really sorry, I was probably somewhat annoying. I'm rather overprotective when it concerns computer history related articles (last living Amiga fan, you know...). You do great job at gatekeeping junk at the AfC. Happy editing! Pavlor (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Just a heads-up as I think you're the person most likely to see the effect, good or bad. I've added a {{clear}} at the start of {{Unblock-spamun}} so that indenting the template will no longer cause it to eject the text from its enclosing box. Feel free to revert if it causes issues, Cabayi (talk) 11:05, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cabayi Thanks. What causes the template to be indented?(especially when it is only one indent) Is it only people doing it themselves? Visual editor? 331dot (talk) 11:44, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd love to have a wise answer but, honestly, no idea. I'm guessing it's inexperienced users doing it themselves. As with most renaming stuff, it seems easier to try to make it idiot-proof than to try educating users how to do it right. They'll never need that knowledge ever again. Cabayi (talk) 11:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you take a look at...?[edit]

Hello. Thanks for your blocks of some users (User:Joycexxxi, User:Nellagangmamatay, User:ILoveBaklava123) who were treating their talk pages as chat rooms. I was wondering if you could revoke TPA of Nellagangmamatay. Additionally, there was a fourth user, User:Sweetapplecyder, who was taking part in the social media-like activity of the others. Can you block them as well? Also, they seem to only understand Filipino, so perhaps you or I could provide some information for their blocks in that language? Just suggesting. SunilNevlaFan 16:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SunilNevlaFan I only need to revoke TPA if they further abuse their access; I'm watching it. If you want to attempt to post in Filipino and explain what's going on, feel free. (I know I could post a translation but those are imperfect). 331dot (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ILoveBaklava123 and Sweetapplecyder have already been blocked by NinjaRobotPirate, so I think this has been resolved. SunilNevlaFan 16:20, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looks like there is some sock puppetry involved here, too. 331dot (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A checkuser is involved now, it looks like. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Request[edit]

Hello 331dot.

I have a small request. I am currently writing my first Wikipedia article, and I have made some good progress on it. However, I'd like the advice of someone that is much more experienced with Wikipedia Article writing than I am. I saw you on the Teahouse and it seems that you know what you are doing. Do you mind reading what I have and leaving constructive feedback?

My draft is God is my Co-Pilot (Book)

If you cannot read this, that is ok too.

Thank you, A1139530 (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm not in a position to look at it in depth right now. For feedback, please submit it for a review. 331dot (talk) 20:11, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not sure anything has changed with this editor's behavior at Talk:Yom Kippur War[edit]

See [1] and see [2] and later posts. I'm guessing they are also the IP. The page is pretty unreadable. I think a block from the talk page is appropriate, and I'm a bit concerned about them possibly trying to get ECP this way, but I don't think that's the case considering the editor's possible CIR. Doug Weller talk 11:06, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Agreed. I've reinstated the block. 331dot (talk) 11:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. Any problem with deleting most of his talk page posts since the last one? Doug Weller talk 11:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, I don't think that's a problem. 331dot (talk) 11:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:54, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello. I made a mistake opening afd for a notable person here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Humble, can you please close this as speedy keep. Thanks. zoglophie 09:02, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will; in the future, it's not necessary to approach an admin directly, simply note it in the discussion. I do dabble in AFD occasionally but it's not usually in my wheelhouse, so to speak. 331dot (talk) 09:05, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thankyou for your note. Can I close that myself? zoglophie 09:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think I've taken care of it. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I am very sorry for the failure. You gave me the opportunity and I did not use it well. I am sorry. Happy new year, health and safety Vergth (talk) 09:26, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit request[edit]

Can you take a look at the edit request I made? You said I would need one approved before I could be unblocked from a page. I replied to my mentor but they haven’t responded, nor has anyone else to the request. Not sure if I did it wrong or if it’s because the article itself isn’t protected but I’m blocked from it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnPeuPar2 (talkcontribs) 06:10, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That may work, but the edit is premature as they haven't held office yet(which is different from notability as a politician which only requires winning an election). 331dot (talk) 10:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i need to bring something to your attention[edit]

over the last month ive noticed people(often ip users) vandalising articles and the edit summary is قصة ميسي which translates to ' Messi's story' i am working on a user script where you can search edit summeries with specific words/charachters,but for now just keep a look out for it. cheers!~ ItsMeKeys (talk) 19:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thanks for commenting of the draft Draft:AliSS the article is about a known singer and the info in the article cited from the reference links the links is not an interviews and we add the massive number as we think required please adjust the article name and check the links and publish it as we think it’s suitable thanks Joelmatomi (talk) 10:39, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Joelmatomi You should only have references that are citing information in the article. You don't need a massive number of links to do that. Who is "we"? Your account should only be operated by a single person. Do you work for or represent this singer? Please tell how they meet the definition of a notable singer. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don’t represent the singer, i want to publish a new article in wikipedia, i searched for a new subject to make an article, the singer is notable and i mentioned the references and tried to adjust the article in the suitable manner, I think the info are cited and if you could check it again Thanks Joelmatomi (talk) 10:51, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Joelmatomi You didn't answer my question, who is "we"? You have submitted the draft for review and a reviewer will eventually look at it. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

we : me and my sister, we collaborate to write and search for references and interested in writing owning to achieve higher levels of success in editing 😇 Joelmatomi (talk) 11:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit war[edit]

Regarding your notice, see edits like this for an idea of why I was making multiple reverts. Blindly replacing even the wording in the url of the reference and thus creating a broken link, and the other is a single-purpose account dedicated solely to pushing the same angle! How is one to deal with this sort of malarkey? NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 13:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM Instead of edit warring, please take steps like attempting talk page discussion, dispute resolution if discussion fails, requesting page protection, and reporting the edit warring of others. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How am I to discuss with a tendentious editor who is replacing even the wording in the url of references to push their angle? That type of edit belies a state of mind which is not conducive to productive discussion.

The other account you warned is a single-purpose account created a few days ago which has only edited these same few articles to push this angle. He also made another revert after you gave them the talk page warning about edit warring. Original research has been added with that edit but I haven't reverted it again as I don't want to continue the edit war. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 13:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then I would suggest requesting page protection or reporting them as edit warriors. 331dot (talk) 13:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But you as an administrator have warned me as well as him not to edit war. I've acknowledged the warning and not continued, but the single-purpose account continued the edit war less than an hour after you gave the warning. And they've been rewarded for the ignoring the warning as their version of the article with original research included has remained live and viewable for the readers of Wikipedia since. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 13:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk page watcher) Situations like this are annoying. The IP editor is making changes that are directly contradicted by the cited sources, and is presenting no new sources of their own, but they are jumping about on different IPs making communication difficult. I have reverted their changes; I'll ask another admin to protect the page at RfPP. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 14:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually - looking at the history - I suspect the IPs are Wa944, who has been adding the same content at multiple pages about this person and his family members. I'll go and have a word... Girth Summit (blether) 14:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you Girth Summit. It is frustrating and I should've handled it better than the edit warring.

The problem seems to be that there are sources which mention this info about Fife/Scotland, but it's likely circular reporting or even citogenesis. When Alexis Mac Allister was interviewed by The Times, it's stated "he does not know if the reports that the family have roots in Fife are true", and "“I don't know if there is something that is Scottish but my family was from Ireland,” he says. “The surname is Irish.”" The Fife/Scotland info does not seem to be corroborated by himself or his family, and is largely based on the common wisdom that "Mac" surnames are Scottish and "Mc" surnames are Irish (although Mc is just a shortened version of the Irish language Mac).

Then the single-purpose account and IPs are taking this to be a conspiracy of some sort because they read the circular reporting about Fife somewhere, know it to be true and demand it be stated on Wikipedia. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 14:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have you been able to figure out where this stuff is coming from? I just took a look at the article McAllister_(surname), which has seen some strange editing in recent days about its levels of Scottishness versus Irishness. It feels like there's something going around on social media, and we are seeing the results of it here. Girth Summit (blether) 15:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's a lot of editing of these articles because Alexis Mac Allister played for Argentina in the world cup final against France on Sunday.

The Scottish/Fife angle seems to originate from a 2008 article in the Scotsman, which says (Carlos) MacAllister's roots are in Fife, with no further explanation. That's the earliest reference to Fife I can find. The article then goes on to talk about the ancestry of Alexander Watson Hutton at length. The Wikipedia page for Carlos Mac Allister at the time talks about his "Scottish sounding name", so it's possible whoever wrote the Scotsman piece about Hutton noticed this and decided to chuck in a mention to Mac Allister to pad out the list of 'Scottish Argentine footballers'. I've been unable to find where exactly in Fife the Mac Allisters are supposed to have come from, the sources just say things like "believed to come from Fife", "rumoured to have origins in Fife", or matter-or-factly state they came from Fife without expounding on it or explaining how they arrived at that conclusion. Carlos Mac Allister gave an interview to an Argentinian outlet that predates the Scotsman piece where it's said, ¿Qué relación tenés con tus orígenes? Ninguna, pero me encantaría conocer Irlanda. Algún día voy a ir. Talking about his origins being in Ireland, no mention of Scotland. The Scottish/Fife origin is possible, but it also could be a case of circular reporting that Wikipedia is regurgitating!

The Donabate info originates from a Dickie Mac Allister, which an Irish Times article says was secretary of a hurling club in Argentina and is a cousin of the future Argentina star (Alexis). That article in turn references a 2002 article, where Dickie talks about the Irish origins of his family. Recent articles have also expanded upon the connection, Noel tells a story of how they sent a letter to the hurling club in Argentina's capital asking for some information. Much to their surprise, a return letter arrived from the club detailing the Mac Allister family's history all the way back to their time in Donabate. The "Noel" here is Noel McAllister, who is related to Dickie, and specified that his relative Joseph left Donabate for Pergamino in 1865, then later also brought over his nephews John and William to Argentina. This is the summary that I was trying to get across in my edits. Also mentioned in that version is that Carlos Mac Allister said the family have Italian heritage, but the single-purpose account kept removing that bit as well for reasons unknown! NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 15:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lekto Wood Fuels Ltd[edit]

Was I being too trigger happy? Just checking why the CSD decline. Only mention of company is social media, a shopify store and companies house. Interested to know your reasoning so I don’t repeat mistake. Equine-man (talk) 10:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Equine-man I understand why you did it, but I think they did well enough summarizing what sources they provided(even if they don't establish notability) to avoid a G11 deletion. I also tend to think Draft space gets a tad more leeway. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, understand what you mean. Have a great day! Equine-man (talk) 10:32, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Samuel Clemens high school has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Samuel Clemens high school. Thanks! 331dot (talk) 19:25, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seasons Greetings[edit]

500px-Xmas tree animated.gif Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}} Reply[reply] Candy stick icon.png

Donner60 (talk) 04:46, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:28, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I renamed this user from the global rename queue a few moments ago. After that, I noticed, this account is spam-only and you declined rename request earlier. Actually, I didn't realize then, that username is not the only problem here. I should be more careful. Should I revert my action? —Yahya (talkcontribs.) 06:37, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yahya No, you don't need to revert it. :) The main problem is their editing. I just usually don't bother to carry out a rename unless it looks like the user will be unblocked soon- but there's no reason not to if the username is okay. Don't worry. :) 331dot (talk) 09:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And quite often a user like that will request a rename via Special:GlobalRenameRequest anyway. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply][edit]

Has BKFIP been seen from northern UK IPs? Acroterion (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure, but that's who I was thinking it might be. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There's the same aggressive tone and self-induced air of grievance. Maybe a cousin? Acroterion (talk) 15:52, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe. 331dot (talk) 16:23, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Happy New Year .jpg Happy New Year!
Hello 331dot:

Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters.

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 21:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 21:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello sir,there is one user who is continuously editing pages without any sources releted to seige of janjira and maratha mysore war so i want you to block him to prevent vandalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samarth Wale (talkcontribs) 17:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Samarth Wale A content dispute is not vandalism, and furthermore admins do not settle content disputes. You must attempt to discuss the matter on the article talk page, and not edit war. Avenues of dispute resolution are available as well. 331dot (talk) 17:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(talk page watcher) 331dot, if you blocked Akash Kharat the legend as a sock of Prathmesh Bhale, I suspect that Samarth Wale is also a sock of Prathmesh Bhale.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year, 331dot![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Moops T 02:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lucian Hudson[edit]

Hello, I added the Professor in Practice line about Lucian as he was given the role on January 1, 2023. I work in Durham University's communications department and was asked to update his wikipedia profile. I included a [3] citation to his university profile which states he is now a professor in practice. I'm not sure what more you'd need to approve this edit? Thanks (talk) 12:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I placed some information on your user talk page, but I will repeat some of it here; Wikipedia does not have "profiles", not a single one; we have articles. If you work for the University, the Terms of Use require you to make a formal paid editing disclosure. This would be easier to do if you created an account for yourself(so you could do it on your user page, something which IP users do not have) but even if you choose to not create an account, you must disclose. Please also read about conflict of interest; you should not directly make edits in the area of your conflict of interest- please make formal edit requests(click for instructions) on the article talk page(Talk:Lucian Hudson). 331dot (talk) 13:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Are you the only one that has been asked to make this edit? At least two IP addresses have also attempted to make it. 331dot (talk) 13:20, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, thanks for your guidance. I was unaware of the editing protocols but I shall follow your instructions. We just wanted to ensure the article had the most up to date information about Lucian. It may be that someone else in the dept has also tried to edit hence the other attempts. Thanks again (talk) 13:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Given that your own IP seems to be dynamic/variable, I would highly advise you to create an account. 331dot (talk) 14:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible undisclosed paid editing[edit]

Hi 331dot. Do you think and Veronikacuesta are possibly connected? -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The account was created after the IPs last edit, so it's possible. 331dot (talk) 11:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I only stumbled upon this after seeing WP:HD#Issues templates posted on this article. Someone has already added a {{uw-coi}} to the IP's user talk page. Do you think that's sufficient for the time being or is an SPI warranted here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think an SPI is needed as the IP has not edited since Veronika was blocked. If that's her IP, the autoblock will prevent evasion. 331dot (talk) 11:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Block Baby[edit]

The main reason for the block was the obvious logged out edit warring. See [4][5]. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:45, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, it's too bad they aren't seeing the issue here. 331dot (talk) 19:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Guideline and policy news



  • Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
  • Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IP once blocked[edit]

By the way. As you were the one who resolved my appeal for having my IP blocked for using VPN. Just to let you know that, as this had caused me a mess, I've stopped using it. So that you won't be surprised when you see that I edit Wikipedia without any problem. Best regards. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:01, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

18 days to go[edit]

⌛️⌛️⌛️ (talk) 01:39, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User talk:[edit]

Im not sure what's up with this user User talk: (almost no contribs, so guessing it was so egregious they were all revdelled). But their edits in the last few look like an intent to be disruptive. Mind reapplying the block to forstall whatever it is they are planning/playing at? (not just to your talk, they are posting in several other locations) This one was especially weird [6] Heiro 01:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll just wait it out. I'm patient like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sounds like a full block is in order. Interestingly, one editor think's it's me. - ZLEA T\C 01:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nomination of L'Enciclopèdia in Valencian for deletion[edit]

The article has already 3 different references to 3 different mass media. The reasoning that the sources provided are of "dubious notability" is a subjective and particular opinion that does not correspond to reality. They are independent digital newspapers from the Valencian Community (Spain), current and active, written by journalists.

It's not completely true that I have remove the "notability maintenance tag repeatedly removed by article creator". I only have remove the tag two times, and the last time, I added before removing the tag, another mass media reference (right now 3 references to diferent mass media), as the Wikipedia rules indicate.

I can't find the reason to delete this article and other articles of other encyclopedias wikis has no problems in Wikipedia in English, as all of these: Enciklopedio Kalblanda, Sarvavijnanakosam, Enciclopedia Libre Universal en Español, Vienna History Wiki, Banglapedia, Metapedia (neo-nazi encyclopedia!) and so on. I'm a collaborator of Wikipedia since year 2008 and I have created many articles in Wikipedia in English, Spanish, and other languages and this is a strange behavior.--Valencian (talk) 01:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll discuss this on the nomination discussion page. 331dot (talk) 01:45, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Eka Technoglies has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Eka Technoglies. Thanks! 331dot (talk) 11:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi 331dot! This was a while back, but I see you stepped in to help with an edit war on Sattriya a couple of months back. Did you happen to get a picture as to what was going on there? I came across a very odd job add for a paid editor on that article, looking to hire someone to (from my reading of the job description, anyway) protect a preferred version. No one has been hired yet, but it is one of the stranger ads I've seen, so I'm wondering what the context is that I'm missing. - Bilby (talk) 07:34, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bilby I'm happy to tell you what I can. I think there are two competing or at least differing dance groups whose representatives were edit warring over whose images should be in the article. I've been trying to get them to discuss and hash it out on the article talk page, which I don't think they've done but they have at least stopped edit warring. I'm not sure why the groups are competing with each other- maybe so their own dancers are depicted as representatives of this dance form(which I'd never heard of until I came across the edit war)
Furthermore, each group licensed the images as the personal work of the respective users when it was clear(and later admitted) that they were professionally taken. I believe one of the users corrected this but not the other. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps at least one of them has given up trying to do it themselves and wants to hire someone to. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for that. :) As no one has been hired it is just a matter of interest, but I think this is the first time I think I've seen someone specifically hired to edit war, rather than to 'make changes that stick". I'll keep an eye on it to see if anything happens on Upwork. Thanks! - Bilby (talk) 08:00, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello sir I have provided correct reason in edit summary after editing the Mughal Maratha War but it is deleted by one user without proving sources as he only stated that Sambhaji was executed which is not correct as i have mentioned in edit section. Kindly take action on it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prathmesh Bhale (talkcontribs) 13:40, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AE sanctions[edit]

Afaik, AE sanctions can only be repealed by a consensus of the community at AN or by a consensus of administrators at AE. Minaro123's appeal merited either a procedural decline or a copy-paste to AN/AE. TrangaBellam (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TrangaBellam According to the instructions provided on that user's page, it's different for a partial block(as they have access to the rest of the encyclopedia). It says "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure])." What you refer to is only for a total block. 331dot (talk) 11:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If I felt they merited being unblocked, I would have asked the blocking admin to authorize it. 331dot (talk) 11:13, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Civility Barnstar Hires.png The Civility Barnstar
Thanks for your empathetic comments helping to keep things civil WRT Vector! I imagine it can feel like a Sisyphean task, but it hasn't gone unnoticed. VQuakr (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
VQuakr Thank you very much. All I want to see is some civility, compassion, and understanding here, as well as honest information. I'm not saying people should like it, but let's express concerns in the right way. 331dot (talk) 23:49, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I appreciate the few times you've pointed out that closing an RFC isn't a straight vote count, as well. Who would have thought that closing the SashiRolls unban discussion wouldn't be my most contentious close in the past few months? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ScottishFinnishRadish: it's never the ones you'd expect. VQuakr (talk) 23:55, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Stop bludgeoning everyone at the Village Pump discussion. You are an admin and should know better. ~ HAL333 06:08, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HAL333 I totally reject the accusation that I am bludgeoning anyone. I am making legitimate comments as part of a civil discussion. I find this claim ironic given the massive unfair and (by some)uncivil bludgeoning the Foundation is getting. That said, you're going to get what you want because I'd already decided that I probably would dial back my participation there so I avoid further frustration. I don't need you to tell me what I should know. Good day. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Take a step back, look at your edit history, look at the comments you received in the RfC as well. You were clearly bludgeoning, in a very tiring way. I'm glad to hear that you were going to reduce your participation there, as it wasn't frustrating for you alone, and it isn't behaviour I'm used to see from you. Fram (talk) 09:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fram Thanks for commenting. I don't intend to look at it again. It's just sad to see what's going on there. People don't have to like anything, but they should at least be correct with the information they are basing their dislike on, and be civil with their disagreement(many are, but I've seen plenty that aren't). It's not dictators in a ivory tower who didn't listen to anyone. That's just false. It's people, trying to do their best. If people don't like it, that's fine, no problem with that. It's the intellectual dishonesty I find frustrating. There is nothing to suggest that the new RFC will be more representative than the prior one. Anyway, sorry for writing this. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Then where is the proof they are actually listening?? Then why have they not rolled backed the change yet, despite nearly the entire community demanding to do so? Then why are they not listening to the myriad of posts reporting endless flaws in the new skin? Then why is their only response the “our research” stonewall that has been debunked many times? Tvx1 19:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It’s not unfair given what they unilaterally subjected the community to. What they did is just NOT how you act in a community project. They deserve every single bit of this backlash.Tvx1 19:16, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tvx1 Thanks for your comments; everyone is of course entitled to their opinion. It is utterly false that the "entire community" is demanding anything. I've seen some praise for it, and people naturally are quicker to air grievances than offer praise. I don't wish to debate the matter further as I don't think that would help anyone, including me and you. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 19:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My main concern is not that some people don't like it- there's nothing wrong with that. It's the manner in which that is being expressed and the falsehoods it's based in. Dislike it all you want- point out every error- but people should be civil and act based on the facts. 331dot (talk) 19:30, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
For all your tireless work in a variety of areas, too numerous to mention. Your efforts definitely don't go unnoticed - thanks! Drm310 🍁 (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abuse of power[edit]

You are abusing your power by barring me from editing without an official warning or a request made. You obviously just did it on behalf of your autistic furry buddy. Can you give a single argument as to why the linguistic theory is racist? And a single argument why calling another people's rituals as "meaningless blabbering" isn't racist? İstemekistiyorum (talk) 14:18, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

İstemekistiyorum There is no requirement for warnings, but I gave you one in this edit. You also received other warnings for removing content. I have no interest in the substance of your dispute, only in preventing edit warring. Being correct is not a defense to edit warring. If you wish to contest your block, please follow the instructions that I left on your user talk page(and you removed) and an uninvolved administrator will review it. 331dot (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why my logo is diclined[edit]

The creator of the logo is me and for my website then why it is clamed to delete and diclined the article Goobleindia (talk) 10:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Goobleindia If you indeed created the logo, apologies, though that would be unusual. However, if you license it as your own work, this would mean that anyone may use it for any purpose, including commercial(which would mean others could theoretically make money off your logo and you would not be entitled to one penny from them). If you license the logo under fair use(which is what logos are typically licensed under) that would not be able to happen.
Images are not relevant to the draft approval process, which only considers the text and sources. I wouldn't worry about images until the draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia.
Please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Creation of page[edit]

Hello, i saw that you are considering the page Draft:Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (soundtrack) but it seems that it is not a page yet, it is still a draft (talk) 06:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I simply placed the submission information; anyone who feels it is ready for placement in the encyclopedia may click the "submit your draft for review!" button on the screen to formally submit it. 331dot (talk) 07:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I already did that and it is still a draft, make it a page please (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As noted on the draft, "This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,081 pending submissions waiting for review." 331dot (talk) 09:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disruptive user[edit]

Hello 331dot. Last month you unblocked Bcmh after they promised to stop edit warring. Unfortunately they have resumed this behaviour, reverting seven times at President of Singapore over the past 48 hours. Would you be able to reimpose a block? (the block last time was for two weeks as they engaged in sockpuppetry to edit war elsewhere). Cheers, Number 57 21:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Civility Barnstar Hires.png The Civility Barnstar
For engaging with patience and civility my query about why a page wasn't notable. Thank you! Pluke (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]