User talk:Bishonen

This user misses Doug Taylor.

Enabling bullying

By unblocking User:EEng you are effectively saying that certain people can do whatever they want on wikipedia, harrass and bully anyone they want as long as they are popular enough and "it's only a joke". Admins are meant to stop this behaviour not to encourage it. Please consider your position.Nigel Ish (talk) 13:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever else one might say, my post at issue was completely serious, and presented as such, so your idea that there's an only a joke defense in play shows you have not the slightest understanding of what's going on in this controversy. E Eng 02:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng: Yes, Nigel Ish seems to associate you with the "it's only a joke" defense—which does not apply here—but perhaps you should reflect on why that might be. Paul August ☎ 12:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC) (EEng's self-appointed personal scold.)[reply]

Welp, if the purpose of the block was to stop disruption, it failed in that purpose. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:37, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And that's because people like you support disruption as long as it's from one of the favoured few. If a normal editor acted like EEng then they would be told to stop and if they persisted would be very quickly permablocked with no way back, but as long as you've got admins who've got your back you can do anything. Wikipedia cannot pretend to take harassment seriously while this "one rule for them and another for us" continues.Nigel Ish (talk) 15:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And if you think your characterization of DFO has even the slightest validity, then you really have not the slightest understanding of what's going on. DFO absolutely hates my guts.^[FBDB] E Eng 02:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@EEng: Now, now. None of that. I absolutely hate when you add content that is insulting/belittling/so insensitive of feelings that it is indistinguishable from cruelty. all kidding aside --Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Together we've beautifully illustrated the distinction between criticizing the edit, not the editor – the comment, not the commentor^[1] – which is indeed the at the heart of all this. Look, when the tenth person in a row showed up to seriously propose that the article read ...
Keiynan Lonsdale is a Nigerian-Australian actor, dancer, and singer-songwriter known for roles in The Divergent Series: Insurgent (2015), The Finest Hours (2016), and Love, Simon (2018). Tree has also worked as an MTV VJ, and released original music recordings.
Lonsdale got his first acting job in 2007, with a bit dancing part in the film Razzle Dazzle: A Journey into Dance. The following year, tree appeared in an episode of the Australian television medical drama All Saints. Tree released a single on iTunes titled "One and Only" in 2014. Tree then played a supporting role as Uriah Pedrad in The Divergent Series: Insurgent (2015), the second film in the series. Tree briefly reprised the role in The Divergent Series: Allegiant (2016). In 2016, his single "Higher" was included on Connor Franta's curated album Common Culture, volume 5. Tree next appeared in the historical drama The Finest Hours (2016) as Eldon Hanon, the youngest sailor involved in a rescue at sea. In 2015, tree auditioned for the role of Jefferson Jackson but this role was given to Franz Drameh.
Tree identifies as queer and prefers not to label treeself to a specific sexuality.

... I'll admit I went a teench overboard. But still it's the concept, not the concept-or. all kidding aside E Eng 14:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, at least a "teench", but thanks for admitting at least that (a little more of that would go a long way). But it's the "overboard" thing that people will take notice of, not the other. Paul August ☎ 14:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well you must admit that Tree identifies as queer and prefers not to label treeself to a specific sexuality qualifies as overboard as well, so my reaction can't be called entirely disproportionate. Being labeled transphobic didn't have much of a calming effect either. Ya know, if GW had simply said, "To be clear, you're criticizing the idea of using tree in the article, not your fellow editors, right?", I'm sure I would have said, "Well, I did let myself vent a bit there, and I know I need to keep in mind that not everyone understands why we can't incorporate an avant-garde wording like tree into an article", and that would have been the end of it. But no, she had to go all ex-arbitrator authoritarian on me.
Remember that her original justification for removal was NOTFORUM, which was clearly inapplicable – whether you like the form of expression or not, my post directly addressed the wording of the article. The later shifts in rationale (BPL? No? OK then, how about NPA?) make it clear that the starting point was a visceral dislike, and the reasoning was ginned up later. E Eng 15:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with most of that, (however I will AGF about other peoples' motives), and in particular I agree that given such provocation your emotional response was understandable, but the fact remains that ... two wrongs don't make a right. Paul August ☎ 16:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nigel Ish: I realize you are angry, and that was a heated utterance. However, it's 1) a personal attack, and 2) quite unfounded. At no time did I say the block was wrong or that he should be unblocked. In fact, I said that his conduct is becoming increasingly inappropriate and that he needs to stop. Thanks, sorry bish1 --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:27, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nigel Ish. I understand your point. But I assessed the consensus of the ANI discussion and found it to be obviously in favor of an unblock. When an admin finds an obvious consensus, I think their appropriate action is to implement that consensus. That's my position. Bishonen | tålk 15:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

(multiple e/c's, i expect this post is less useful now) It's a constant source of bemusement to me that people otherwise so enamored with the idea of civility can say, repeatedly and with a straight face, things like "people like you support disruption as long as it's from one of the favoured few" (emphasis mine). That kind of vilification of other people's motives is an exact replication of the tactic "Democrats want to destroy America". It is much worse, much less civil, much more damaging, than rudely saying someone is being dumb. In a way I guess it's understandable; people are emotional. I'm certainly not proposing some kind of action. I'm sure Bish certainly expected incivility from people when she unblocked. But the logical dissonance is kind of jarring. Perhaps Nigel Ish would like to rephrase, and comment on the cost or benefit of actions, not your motives. Or maybe they wouldn't. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fundamentally there seems to be a refusal to admit to responsibility for admin actions - If you use admin powers either by blocking or unblocking then you personally must take responsibility for your actions (rather than hiding behind "it was consensus that forced you to unblock". Bishonen's actions, by unblocking EEng, supports the toxic culture on Wikipedia when the mocking and abuse of real people is applauded so long as it is from the right people and is considered amusing by those with power and influence, just as those who carry out the toxic actions or applaud from the wings. But as it is clear from User:Deepfriedokra and User:Floquenbeam comments that criticism of your actions will not be tolerated and is considered a personal attack, I will not comment here again.Nigel Ish (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh come on. The responsibility of an admin, in this situation, is to judge consensus, and act on it. You may certainly disagree with their judgement concerning consensus, but you can't expect them to be responsible for, or agree with, or defend that consensus. And for an admin to see a clear consensus to unblock and not do so because they disagree with the consensus, is for that admin to substitute their judgement for that of the community. Something we don't generally want. Paul August ☎ 16:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Righteous unblock Bish. -Roxy the sycamore. wooF_
Glad to see this unblock, Bish. Not so much for EEng's sake, but for everyone's. I obviously think the block was incorrect, but was willing to defer to consensus if it had been in favor of keeping the block. But I think it was really important that there be no precedent established that an admin can demand an overwhelming consensus to overturn one of his blocks or else he'll go to ArbCom. In this case, we were lucky there was a consensus to unblock, and that claim could be challenged. If there had been no such consensus, I worry that HJ's rhetoric would have appeared to have been sustained, and next time another admin would try to make the same demand. I should have guessed you weren't afraid of ArbCom. (maybe relished the prospect? just a little? :)... ) --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to admit that HJ's threat gave me pause. But, of course, Bish has bigger cojones than me. Paul August ☎ 18:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And just imagine how big Bishzilla's are! --Tryptofish (talk) 18:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the broader context here is gender identity I think y'all better cool it. E Eng 02:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bish has reversed two blocks on mine that required a large amount of chutzpah. I have no hard feelings or the slightest desire to run to the parents, but guts is not a trait Bish lack -- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 18:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two, Guerillero? [Thinks. To no avail.] I only remember the one a month ago... I typed the username at first, but perhaps we needn't actively encourage somebody less tolerant than you to start a list of "reasons to desysop Bishonen". Bishonen | tålk 20:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For making the hard decision with dignity and grace. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, young Fritter! Bishonen | tålk 20:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]
- It’s her birthday (well, past midnight here, anyway), and what else can one do, but … —Sluzzelin talk 23:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The whole thing makes me think of Asterix village fights (with rotten fish as melee weapon). —Paleo Neonate – 01:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PaleoNeonate: Mon dieu. You've hit upon the perfect description of ANI. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:42, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Made-up word

Bish - ~~You The Man!~~ I mean, ~~You The Woman!~~ I mean, You Wikipedia's Oak Tree! JoJo Anthrax (talk) 15:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Platinum Goddess

Hey Bishonen. I might have accidently copied your Platinum Goddess to my Sandbox and NL page. Slight Smile 19:33, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, Slightsmile. I hope it made you smile. Could you give the creator MjolnirPants credit in the history, please? Bishonen | tålk 20:37, 27 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I want MPants back (yes, I'm aware I blocked him, but doesn't change that I want him back.) TonyBallioni (talk) 20:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did a quick look through MjolnirPants talk page. “We love you but you're outta here and please come back because we love you so much”. I'm not sure what you mean “give credit in the history” but if you show me I'll do it. Slight Smile 21:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just mention him in the edit summaries. I realize you have already added the goddess to those two pages and published edit summaries for the additions, but you could perhaps add dummy edits, so as to be able to say "btw the Platinum Goddess is the work of User:MjolnirPants" or similar in the new edit summaries? Bishonen | tålk 21:36, 27 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I miss him too, and I took the liberty of linking to here on his talk: [1]. Just so you all know. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:31, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is another one that I miss a great deal. There is getting to be too many of them. -Roxy the sycamore. wooF 21:06, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed, Roxy. These people work so hard, and then burn out, I think. (Not me, I'm lazy.) I miss MrX. And AndyTheGrump... though Andy is editing again. Fingers crossed he's seriously back, and pacing himself better. Bishonen | tålk 21:24, 2 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I hadn't even realized that MrX had stopped editing. sigh --Tryptofish (talk) 00:33, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. Guy was kind of a douche, if you ask me. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:10, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is that you, Hammerpants? I see you got unblocked. Good stuff, but Guy who? Bishonen | tålk 22:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

MjolnirPants, of course. Heard he got indeffed and everything. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that guy. Sorry, we have all these highly active Guys. Don't talk like that about MjolnirPants, he of the Platinum Goddess! Bishonen | tålk 22:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

He don't scare me. Bet I could take him in a fight. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The little at-work user obviously don't realize MjolnirPants protected by powerful benefactress Bishzilla! If little MjolnirPants has split personality disorder, so does Bishonen, don't forget. More better personalities! bishzilla _ROARR!! pocket 22:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

On that note, good night. Why people insist on working in the middle of the night is beyond me! Bishonen | tålk 22:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Who is this guy? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 23:08, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some douche I could beat up, but won't, because I don't like the idea of being eaten. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March flowers

Thank you for missing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Koli socks

Hello, Bishonen. This is regarding a highly disruptive sock master who has spammed this project with unreliable/fake Koli-related claims over the last few years. Sitush used to take care of the mess created by him. But he is editing using a mobile which is in itself a challenging task. You have also blocked him at least once: User talk:Thakor Sumant Sinhji Jhala#You have been topic banned from caste-related pages. His numerous socks have again created many Koli-related articles, which are either unreliably sourced or contain made-up claims. His articles are practically always about nonnotable or made-up Koli-related stuff, which at best gets passing mention in reliable sources. Today Oshwah has blocked his 30-odd sockpuppets: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Thakor_Sumant_Sinhji_Jhala/Archive#28_March_2021. Can you or any other admin nuke the mess created by him?

Also, he edits as an IP hopper in a highly disruptive way. I don't know anything about IP ranges, but the first 8 digits of the IP hopper's range always looks like "2401:4900:", e.g. [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], etc. So, is there a way to block this IP hopper?

Finally, Udham Singh has been continuously disrupted by all sort of POV pushers. And the above Koli sockmaster has also jumped on the bandwagon – see here for more details. Even a very experienced admin (Utcursch) has wasted a lot of time in reverting his made-up/unreliable details. So the page needs to be semi-protected for a long time. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NitinMlk, yes, indeed we miss Sitush. Taken as a general problem, this is above my pay grade. I'm going to ping @SpacemanSpiff, RegentsPark, Abecedare, and Vanamonde93:. Wow, that's a lot of socks flushed at the SPI. Unfortunately it's quicker and easier to create them than to report and block. :-( Therefore, I've no doubt Udham Singh needs semi. I've given it a year. But as for cleaning up the other messes this villain has created... no. Sorry. I'm not up for that, it's too much and too difficult.

As for the IP range, I thought for a moment you were saying the first four groups of digits were always the same — that would have been great, and I could have blocked very easily! But of course I was misreading, and it's far from easy. I'm just going to bed now, but tomorrow I'll do my best with the 6 IPs you link to, meaning I'll block the 6 relevant /64 ranges for a month or two. (I understand you don't do IP ranges, NitinMlk, but this information may be useful for my talkpage stalkers. Er, Johnuniq? Do you think that would be a relevant action?) Bishonen | tålk 21:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I looked at the six IPs. There is not much value from the edits on the large 2401:4900::/33 range that covers all six. However, it would be a bit courageous to block it for any significant period. There is nothing that can be done at the moment with the six /64 ranges covering the individual IPs because they are either currently blocked or haven't edited for a long time (October 2020). Johnuniq (talk) 02:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks very much, John. That means there's nothing I can do wrt the IPs, NitinMlk, other than protect articles. Do you have any others besides Udham Singh to suggest for semi? Bishonen | tålk 08:58, 30 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

This sock master targets a large number of articles, but his most targeted one is the Koli people article. Luckily, it survived this time because it was given 'extended confirmed' protection last year: [8]. But the protection will end next month and his socks will again mangle the article completely. ~~So the page needs 'extended confirmed' protection for an indefinite time.~~ Also, I might request you in the coming days to protect List of Brahmin dynasties and states, as the page is continuously disrupted by a different sock master: this one is the latest suspected sock of that sock master. But I will have to file an SPI first. Thanks. - ~~NitinMlk (talk) 19:24, 30 March 2021 (UTC)~~ NitinMlk (talk) 20:35, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Mann

I heard that Danny Mann just got deleted from Wikipedia, and I wanna bring him back onto this wiki were he absolutely deserves.

Hi, Alexkrzywicki1. The article Danny Mann was deleted in June 2020 after a deletion discussion here. The subject was not considered to fulfill Wikipedia's criteria for notability, please see Wikipedia:Notability (people). I see you have written the exact same note to four different admins. Please don't do that, as it wastes admin time. We're volunteers like you. Stick to one person. Note, you can sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which will turn into a signature + timestamp when you publish. Bishonen | tålk 20:56, 2 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

God! Isn’t life boring, that I’m now reduced to reading comments about people that no ones heard of. If I knew who he was, I’d write him a page. I wonder if I’m the only person stuck in a freezing cold England and climbing up the wall with boredom. The snow has ruined my magnolias and I’ve been banned from touching a paint brush (the decorating type) I’m sick of the two pages I have I user-space. Can’t even go to the pub, not that did anyway, but it was nice to know I could if I wanted to. Too early in the day for a drink, there has to be more to life than this. I think I’ll go and research Danny Mann, who know he might own a Palladian pile somewhere which would make him notable. Giano (talk) 10:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Look! He’s terribly famous, even more credits than Meghan Markle. Admittedly, he hasn’t tried to bring down the British monarchy by not knowing his own wedding anniversary or understand letters patent, but he’s acted about here and there, we have all sorts of odd people who’ve done that. I would copy paste it all in, but I expect there’ll be some rule about it, and I am very law abiding. Giano (talk) 10:24, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

K::*Review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danny Mann first because a recreated article would be speedily deleted unless it had significant differences from the original, particularly regarding what sources showed notability. That is, if no new sources are available other than those mentioned in the AfD, Danny Mann will have to remain at Simple Wikipedia. Johnuniq (talk) 10:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously a far more simple project than this, although I can’t believe its arbs are any more simple than ours. Giano (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

100% canvassing

Talk:Midsommar_(film)#Requested_move_8_April_2021 If you can think of an actual argument for oppose, please join. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:28, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, mr Fröding. No.. not really. Not sure I can make myself care what the article is called... but the film sounds great. I love the fateful pissing on the ancestral tree and the ättestupa. The man "wearing Mark's clothes and skinned face" might be influenced by Men in Black, I suppose? Still, it's a nice touch. PS, I didn't know you had your own article on sv wiki! Bishonen | tålk 14:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

It's a poem that's really easy to learn by heart. Oh well, when little Estelle innocently types "Midsommar" into en-WP, that'll be what she finds. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:48, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check Yadav page

Hi, first of all, nice to see u after a long time. I am just very busy, so instead of filing WP:ARE and involving there I am contacting you. Shital V Yadav, a new user is at disruptive mode on Yadav related pages. I believe him of being a sockpuppet of another blocked user. But since lot of warnings have been given, it is enough to take action against the vandal who also have WP:CIR issue as he is removing image from the article.Heba Aisha (talk) 18:42, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! and now he is reverting all my recent edits on various pages. Totally disruptive.At Politics of Bihar and many others. It will take a lot of time to undo all of these reverts. If any stalker who is also an admin is here, take appropriate actions on Shital V Yadav Heba Aisha (talk) 18:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

please see this case too, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vipinahir. Heba Aisha (talk) 21:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Heba Aisha I'm asking why are you not providing valid references for both images on Yadav page ?? if you add both images with references then I'll never make any changes but you are simply reverted my edit , I checked so many times after that removed the both images.

Hi, Heba Aisha. I see the SPI resolved the matter while I slept. The best kind of resolution. Is there anything else that needs reverting? Bishonen | tålk 08:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, its resolved, I m nominating various stubs created by the banned user for delition under G5 criteria.All of them are related to politicians of Yadav caste. If I found someone notable enough, I will create article in future. But at present, I don't think its good to keep them. Btw thanks for responding. Heba Aisha (talk) 10:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yadav caste related pages are new hotspots

This is very difficult for people like me to verify edits of the users who are here for promoting their own caste and end up distorting historical articles for upward mobilisation on Wikipedia. It becomes more difficult when I found myself alone editing the articles related to some particular topic using quality sources neutrally. Sitush and others who were doing this are not active now and I would like to tell you that just like we faced the problems in Rajput related pages few months ago. This time Yadav caste related pages are new hotspots. Please keep a tab on my talk page and the pages I visit as these users have distorted large number of pages in very short period of time. Thank You.Heba Aisha (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this too Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kroshta. Heba Aisha (talk) 20:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Heba, I don't have that kind of time. I'm pretty busy in real life. Bishonen | tålk 14:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

IP address being blocked

How does a IP address gets blocked especially when one didn't do anything wrong. Cwater1 (talk) 22:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Cwater1. That can happen if an admin blocks an IP range that there's a lot of vandalism from. Then there may be "collateral damage", meaning innocent IPs are also caught up in the block, though admins try to avoid this. Also, an account can have their IP address blocked if that IP was recently used by a blocked user, known as an autoblock (follow the link to see how to fix this). Have you had any IP block problem yourself? Bishonen | tålk 08:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, I have. can I get on trouble for having the IP address blocked? Cwater1 (talk) 00:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm sure you won't get in trouble, Cwater1. As I said, it usually happens because somebody else did vandalism. What happened? What kind of message did you get? Bishonen | tålk 13:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

My IP address was blocked. Not sure how someone gets on my IP address. Cwater1 (talk) 14:59, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How does someone else use my IP address? Cwater1 (talk) 02:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unless your IP address is static, it'll get re-assigned to other people sometimes. Johnuniq, could you advise Cwater1, please? I'm not very good at this. Cwater1, please tell us what kind of message you got when your IP address was blocked. It'll help us to help you. Bishonen | tålk 09:01, 26 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I replied at User talk:Cwater1#IP address and I think further discussion should occur there. Johnuniq (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, John. Bishonen | tålk 11:48, 26 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Please do not add troll comments like this one to my talk page

"Vapourmile, it seems to me you are confusing Guy Macon with Emmanuel Macron. Some people can be offended when you persistently get their names wrong, so please try not to. Bishonen | tålk 16:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)."

Vapourmile (talk) 16:43, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bishonen: I've mentioned you at ANI in the context of Vapoumile's Official Complaint about Guy. Acroterion (talk) 16:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Acroterion. The Gojira 1954 poster is pretty cool, isn't it? Don't post here again, Vapourmile. Bishonen | tålk 19:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I gotta love that poster, not least because it's two years older than I am. The facial expressions on the two people at the lower left are intriguing. Neither looks frightened. The man looks seriously pissed off, and the women looks a bit enamored of Gojira (which probably explains the man's expression). --Tryptofish (talk) 19:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Researching further (as I am wont to do), I see that there is Gojirasaurus, denigrated by Wikipedia as a "dubious genus". (On the other hand, I know a fair number of dubious "geniuses".) --Tryptofish (talk) 20:05, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. Me and Trypto are the same age. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 20:41, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have my sympathy. (But maybe dog years and fish years are different?) --Tryptofish (talk) 22:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Bishzilla, a truly mature lady, briskly stuffs both the young little users in her pocket.] And stay there! Sit on sofa! bishzilla _ROARR!! pocket 20:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Gimme the popcorn, Roxy! And where's the remote? --Tryptofish (talk) 20:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I should thank Bishzilla for reminding me that I'm far from the oldest individual here (by millennia, it seems!). An interesting bit of wiki-anthropology: when I joke on EEng's talk page, he tells me to get off his lawn, and when I joke here, I wind up inside a giant lizard, sitting on a sofa. So many bossy oldsters! --Tryptofish (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish emigration to the United States FA concerns

@Bishonen: Greetings! I saw that you promoted Swedish emigration to the United States and thought I should inform you of my concerns about the 2007-nominated article. It is mainly about references; many paragraphs are either unreferenced or are supported by just one. Could you take a quick look at the article and see if it could be improved? Cheers. Wretchskull (talk) 10:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Wretchskull. It would entail a lot more research in an area that is no longer "hot" for me. Altogether, I'm really not crazy about trying to re-source articles I wrote once, especially when it was so long ago. If somebody wants that one to stay featured, I'm afraid they'll have to adopt it. Bishonen | tålk 19:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Welcome

How are you? , Just came here after seeing you active. Most of the old people which I found here are missing now, including some good admins. Hope you are enjoying the real life. COVId has striked once again in India and government has strictly enforced lockdown once again, and made us jobbers. How's the condition there. Heba Aisha (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Heba. I'm not Japanese — I'm half a world away — I just have a misleading username. See my responses here. We're having a nasty third wave of infections where I am, which is in Europe. Bishonen | tålk 13:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Request for protecting the article on Varma (surname)‎

Hi Bishonen, hope you are fine. Would request you to protect the article on Varma (surname)‎ from persistent vandalism by a particular user (or as a sock) in spite of all explanations in edit summaries as well as warnings on the user's talk page. Please help. Thanks & Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 10:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ekdalian. I have blocked the user indefinitely from editing the article. One of the newfangled partial blocks. They can still edit the talkpage, in case they take a notion to discuss. Do you think the article still requires protection? Please let me know if further socks or IPs turn up, then I'll semiprotect. Bishonen | tålk 13:13, 20 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks Bishonen for your prompt response / action, as usual. I shall let you know in case socks turn up, and the article requires protection. Warm Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 13:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pahela Baisakh Page

Dear Bishonen

I once again turn to you for advice.

I had previously reached out to the Administrator's Notice Board, Neill N, Soumya Biswas, Sarah Welch and Firestar 464. I haven't heard from any.

Please have a look at the Pahela Baishakh page.

There has been a controversy there since at least April 2017. This pertains to the origins of the Bengali New Year. There are two theories - Mughal and Vikramaditya/Hindu/Bikramaditto/Indic.

More recently, key information supported by citations pertaining to the latter theory were deleted. Since April 15, I tried restoring some of that information from previous versions compiled by editors like Sarah Welch (who is one of the best on Indic issues). Whenever I did so, the material I restored was reverted. I would like to desist from edit warring but felt that I needed to get my point across both in the Talk Page and by reverting the deletions.

I didn’t delete any existing material. I only restored material from before. It not material that I introduced. I only restored although I may have revised the wording used earlier.

The Pahela Baisakh page will benefit from an independent review. I did try explaining what I did on the Talk Page. I didn’t succeed. Three or four individuals, including anonymous IP numbers, who may or may not be subject matter experts were very active in reverting my efforts. I am not sure whether sockpuppetry is involved. The information I restored is called "junk", "a lie", "irrelevant" etc. I seek an independent read of what's happening. I would appreciate your advice. You would be neutral as an outsider.

This is not a complaint on any individual. Its about the page's neutrality.

Thank you

Dipendra2007 (talk) 00:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Dipendra2007. I'm afraid I'm very far from a specialist in these matters, and I must decline to intervene. An IP who fails to sign on the talkpage does seem inexperienced, but on the other hand they discuss properly and there is also another user speaking against your version. Since you have already tried WP:AN and several users individually (who I do believe know more about it than I do), it's hardly for me to put my oar in. Perhaps one of my knowledgeable talkpage stalkers may have a comment for you. Bishonen | tålk 07:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Ok. I hear you, Bishonen. I may intermittently, respectfully and selectively revert as the editors do not seem to be amenable. There is an element of rudeness in the comments made on my Talk Page. The material I reintroduced was from Sarah Welch's page which in my view was rigorous. cheers Dipendra2007 (talk) 16:23, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Applying for Release to Elsewhere

Yes, I have read the book (and your page on self-blocking policies). I ask, however, that two customary terms be ignored:

The prohibition from emailing others. I would like to voice concern to the ArbCom over something a certain functionary did (not you).
The waiting period. I have asked for Release from User:TonyBallioni a day ago.

Let this be as long as you would like to grant (other passing admins could assign anything up to indefinite), and take note of my "will" at my user page. --NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 15:56, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noting here, NotReallySoroka, that if you go to Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee, the committee's email address is published. The block that would be applied by Bishonen would prevent you from using the "Email this user" link, but nothing prevents anyone from emailing the Arbcom directly. However, if you are going to pursue something along this line, I would suggest that you hold off on being blocked until that matter is resolved, as you are not truly disengaging if you are bringing a matter to arbcom attention. Risker (talk) 18:00, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Risker. It is a relatively minor matter that does not involve myself, so it can go. --NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 18:33, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, NotReallySoroka. I've read the request you wrote to Tony Ballioni, before you removed it, and the insight it gives me into your motives for this request worries me. I don't like the connection with a particular Miscellany for deletion, and I don't understand why you changed from Tony to me. Also, I especially don't like your intention to keep worrying at wikimatters, which you describe above ("I would like to voice concern to the ArbCom over something a certain functionary did"). Altogether, I don't want to do this, sorry. There's too much baggage with it. As you have seen, since you have read my conditions page, I will decline these things at my discretion, and that's what I'm doing now. I wrote this before I saw Risker's comment and your reply to her, but I'm afraid those don't change my mind. Bishonen | tålk 19:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hello. Your point with the MfD is a rightful worry, indeed, though as of now it is not the only now. I deleted the request to Tony so as to think twice, but now my mind is set. I found you because you are still activity.

As for the wikimatters, it does not involve me and I can just talk it out with the fuctionaries involved.

NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 19:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In relation to the debate over the article about climate change

Deletion review for List of scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus on global warming

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus on global warming. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Epimonide (talk) 13:58, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Epimonide. Is this your first account? Bishonen | tålk 16:32, 24 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Just, y'know, wondering. E Eng 18:27, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference Epimonide, the consensus at the discussion (see: WP:PROD) is not the same as "speedy" (see WP:CSD). And "Just, y'know" cause 2 of the first three edits are at WP:DRV. Not the usual entry point for a new editor. So I agree, it's not unusual to "wonder". IJS. — Ched (talk) 18:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know, nor do I understand what all this means, so I will just answer Bishonen. No, this is my second account; I do not remember the credentials to my first account. Well wishes, Epimonide (talk) 19:26, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Warning

You block me?, I not do nothing. That behaviour needs to be checked. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. --Pedro158 (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't blocked you. Get a grip, and don't put nonsense on my page again. Thank you, Tryptofish. This comment may stay, but I ask my tp stalkers to remove any additions from the same user. I'm going to bed. Bishonen | tålk 21:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Never mind, little stalkers, I see Ched just indeffed the user. Well, I guess they weren't a very hopeful case. Bishonen | tålk 21:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I couldn't find anything productive in history, and I seriously doubt there would have been anything positive in the future. If any of the adminy types that (talk page watcher) your page think I'm wrong - I won't contest an unblock. The "I am make moar better edits" stuff just doesn't play anymore for me however. — Ched (talk) 22:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Walpurgis!

No public celebrations this year either, but at least it is sunny (and not snowing!). There will be some serious herring in the Bonadea household this afternoon. I hope your Valborg eve is enjoyable, whether you celebrate it or not. [9] --bonadea contributions talk 08:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dammit. Missed schmutziger donnerstag again. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 10:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No Majbrasa this year! Sad! Roxy the dog, you can always keep your powder dry for the Oktoberfest ("beer festival and travelling funfair"). Bishonen | tålk 11:09, 30 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Many years ago, I spent a week drunk, dressed as a Monk in Munchen during Oktoberfest. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 11:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sock

Hey Bish, KażdenIPmożeWlKlNGERbyć iskajcieSEsami (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sock of Wikinger, please revoke email access and restore the autoblock you accidentally removed while revoking TPA. Thanks! Java Hurricane 12:35, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, JavaH, done. Little talkpage stalkers: a global lock would be good also, or at least on Commons, if anybody with those tools reads this. Bishonen | tålk 12:44, 1 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Requested and received. :) Blablubbs|talk 13:31, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Blablubbs| and Ymblanter. Bishonen | tålk 19:01, 1 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Sure, no problem. I had your Commons page on my watchlist, and this is why I was able to act quickly. In other cases, you can just ping me.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Just saw this deletion request. You might consider uploading it to en.WP per Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. Unfortunately, Commons doesn't allow non-free uploads, and since toys are copyright protected, the image will be deleted. Atsme 💬 📧 13:29, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Atsme, but I wanted it for a particular purpose, which it has long since served, so I guess I don't really mind if it's deleted. Bishonen | tålk 18:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Personal attack in edit summary by POV pushers

Hi Bishonen.. Hope you are fine. Sorry to bother you, but can something be done about the personal attacks in Edit Summaries by IP editors in the article on Baidya, one on the revision dated 30th April and another again in the recent one yesterday! Please help, if you can. Thanks & Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 13:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Ekdalian. Fortunately the IPs both belong to the same /64 range, so I could easily block them (and all their brothers and sisters) from the article with a long partial block, 3 months. I've revision deleted the edit summaries. Bishonen | tålk 18:14, 4 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you so much, Bishonen! Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 05:10, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stonkaments

I hate to be a pest, but could you instruct Stonkaments (talk · contribs) to stop commenting on my talk page? I told him to stop a few weeks ago, and I just undid the fourth unwanted comment they've made since then. Their second and third edits there were pure trolling; posting a D/S notice immediately after me and Trypotofish were discussing the fact that the page is under D/S. Note that this happened less than 3 hours after I reiterated that I didn't want them commenting on my talk page, and less than a day after I'd first told them not to comment on my talk page. There's no doubt Stonk is well aware of my wishes, and our community norms here, since they've been asked to stop commenting on others' talk pages.

Their latest comment is a transparent attempt to disrupt efforts to put together an FAQ for the page, where they're currently engaged in throwing shade all around, after already being told by the most sympathetic admin to their cause to drop the stick and step away. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:26, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to help improve the proposed FAQ, not disrupt it. I forgot that I was asked not to comment on their talk page―I apologize, it won't happen again. Stonkaments (talk) 18:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit surprised that Stonkaments would have forgotten that, but we can AGF, I suppose. I'd encourage one of those fancy new kinds of single-page blocks, that just blocks posting to MPants' talk pages, along with a formal warning.

@MPants: when you reverted the comment, you used a vulgar edit summary. Given past history of how that has been wikilawyered, please don't do that any more. And don't anyone else get any ideas from what I just said. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tryp, you know I respect your views on most matters a great deal, but you're really not helping here. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input. Out of curiosity, wouldn't AGF call for a warning before a block? I ask because I would appreciate the opportunity to demonstrate good faith and show that it was a genuine mistake due to forgetfulness. As way of explanation: due to my (over-)involvement in the R&I discussion recently, I have been on the receiving end of a lot of hostility, and I genuinely confused MPants with another editor who has directed hostility my way[10]. Stonkaments (talk) 18:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm really not helping here, I'm being a bit, shall we say, nuanced, when I refer to AGF. In other words, I don't really believe for a minute that you forgot, but I also don't think it's worth arguing about. And I think that if you get a talk-page partial block, you should consider yourself fortunate. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will by no means block an editor to reinforce a promise they make above ("I apologize, it won't happen again"). Just don't forget again, Stonkaments. Nor will I reproach MjolnirPants for using a salty expression when reverting a post from somebody they had, after all, already told they weren't welcome. OK. Everybody happy, I hope. Bishonen | tålk 19:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

That's all I asked for. Thanks, Bish. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:20, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since I seem to be in the position of clarifying, I never asked Bish to do anything with respect to the salt, or the pepper, of the edit summary. As Bish correctly understands, there should be nothing wrong with that. But some admins, who should know better, think that they have to be civility enforcers, and I'm trying to get MPants to understand that he can fall into a trap with that. It does him no favors to pretend otherwise. Let's not repeat history. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:26, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tryp, I've literally acknowledged your point twice at your talk. Ever heard the expression "don't sell past the close"? ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:43, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was responding to Bish, not to you, now let's drop this. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Facepalm I directed a comment at MPants, and Bishonen responded as though I had directed it at her, so I responded to Bishonen and MPants acted like I had directed it at him. Sheesh! Now let's drop this. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:57, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Thank you. I'm old, don't remind me. Bishonen | tålk 12:33, 8 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Sarah.Xenos

Just an FYI, Sarah.Xenos finally returned to editing on 5 May, still making basic errors. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yees. Thanks, AussieLegend. I'm not ignoring this, but I'll hang fire for a bit, and watch. Bishonen | tålk 08:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

AussieLegend, I've had enough of the user's continued errors and their unresponsiveness; I've blocked them indefinitely, again with a nice block notice both on their page and in the log. We shall see what happens, if anything. Bishonen | tålk 15:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

It's a shame that it had to come to this but it's for the better. Cheers. --AussieLegend (✉) 02:13, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, as soon as she was indeffed, she did respond, AussieLegend, with one sentence — you can see my own reply on her page. I won't unblock without considerably more show of willingness on her side. Bishonen | tålk 10:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

A beer for you!

Many thanks for your help. Very much appreciated. Denisarona (talk) 09:24, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aaahh. [Swigs deeply.] Is it Oktoberfest already? Thanks, Denis. Bishonen | tålk 09:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Going for a short break, case closed, but feeling tired of it. Keep taking on vandals. Heba Aisha (talk) 12:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yum. Perfectly ripe. Thank you, Heba. 🍰 Bishonen | tålk 13:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Advice on probable Smurf account

I have encountered a user using what appears to be a Smurf account and I was going to file an SPI but Twinkle does not allow a report that has only one named account (clearly I have no knowledge of the main user account). They appear as a new user and created and submitted a polished Draft within 2 minutes of arriving and are now pushing hard to get their Draft reviewed and accepted. I believe that they may well be block evading or part of a meat farm. Any advice on how I deal with this would be most welcome. Thanks Velella ^{Velella Talk} 22:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Velella. Not all knowledgable purported newbies are socks in the negative sense. Compare the distinction between "Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts" and "Legitimate uses" in WP:SOCK, and see also WP:CLEANSTART. But I'm not saying you should do nothing, if you suspect an inappropriate use of multiple accounts here. Perhaps start by giving me the account name so I can take a look? Use e-mail if you like. Bishonen | tålk 00:51, 17 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

PS, after taking a look at your page, I think "smurf" means an UPE rather than a sock — right? If it's the account I see on your page, never mind about e-mailing, I'll take a look tomorrow. Now I'm actually officially asleep (and a bit stupid, as you can see). Bishonen | tålk 01:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Many thanks. You are right about the user but it is not UPE as they as they did, reluctantly, make a declaration, but they also claim 4 to 5 years experience and clearly know their way round Wikipedia and seem so very intent on getting their draft approved. I find it very difficult to believe that they haven't spent some time on Wikipedia, but if so, why not use their established user name? The way they behave could easily lead to a block if they cross the line of civility and I suspect that this is what may have happened in the past and they are now block evading. I would be happy to be proved wrong, but I have no reasonable idea of how a user appears full skilled in the ways of Wikipedia otherwise? Many thanks for any light that you can throw on this case. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 08:25, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Velella, an earlier version of the article was deleted as non-notable ("Fails WP:NCORP") on 16 Feb 2021 following this AfD. That version had been created in 2016 by an SPA called Tnodett. The current draft isn't very similar, not in text and not in sources, so I'd presume it's not based on the deleted article. (I suppose it also follows that TullikaInode1 isn't particularly likely to be a sock of Trodnett.) Nevertheless, if an article is deleted on notability grounds, it's not likely that the subject has amassed much notability a mere three months later. And the sourcing is just as weak for the draft as for the deleted article. If the two versions had been more similar, I could have speedied the draft, but as it is, I won't do that. However, it absolutely needs to stay in draftspace, where we can AGF that it's being improved. I'll write to the user on their page... when I get back from the Coop. Bishonen | tålk 13:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Many thanks for your advice and investigation. My suspicion was that the company was employing a paid editor to make an article stick where it had failed before. If this was so, then the current editor probably has a number of other articles to their name, probably all under different user names. Regards Velella ^{Velella Talk} 17:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or else they genuinely work for the company. In any case, it's like trying to hold back the tide, isn't it? I just posted on their page. Bishonen | tålk 17:27, 17 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I'm just putting this here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, Banarne. Excellent. Bishonen | tålk 19:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

A beer for you!

Many, many thanks (this will help while waiting for October!!). Denisarona (talk) 12:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for assistance

Could I please get your help on Endowment_(Mormonism), I was about to engage in another edit war, but felt it would be counterproductive, and seek a cooler head than my own. Epachamo (talk) 10:37, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Epachamo. I've posted a sharp warning on the user's page. Bishonen | tålk 11:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Request for protecting the article on Baidya or blocking the caste warrior(s)

Hi Bishonen.. hope, you are fine. The article on Baidya has become a subject of edit warring by POV pushers. Once I have reviewed the content added, I found out that the editor is citing a Journal by a Baidya editor only in order to validate what the Baidyas have claimed all through, I mean Brahmin status, possibly claimed by most of the castes, as you know. Also, I have clearly explained on talk page that all the three other sources, mentioned as supporting ones by the user on the talk page itself, are Raj era sources and cannot be considered as per long-term consensus. Now, another user, Bengaliwikipro (not sure, may not be a sock) is reverting the edits without any explanation, and is now engaged in edit war in spite of explaining everything and warning the users (in the article's talk page as well as edit summaries). Please help! Thanks & Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 11:26, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ekdalian. I have partial-blocked Bengaliwikipro from the article for six months. Hopefully, that will encourager les autres. Please let me know if the disruption persists. Bishonen | tålk 11:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you, Bishonen. Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 13:17, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please choose the discussions on my talk page

Hello buddy, I request you to kindly close the ongoing discussions on my page as they are all solved. Thanks You. EditGodGuru45 (talk) 13:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not necessary to close discussions on user talkpages, EditGodGuru45. Also, I disagree that they're "solved". Since you're here, I'll just ask you to listen better to experienced editors, rather than assume you know better. Wikipedia goes by reliable sources only; not by your personal knowledge. Therefore it's quite inappropriate to be telling other editors that they don't know as much as you, or even that they "know nothing", as you said to Yamaguchi先生. If they have more Wikipedia experience, it's, on the contrary, likely that they know more about the principles for editing here. Bishonen | tålk 14:01, 27 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Harassment

Sorry for the Harrasment I will not do again -- did not see the message regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SadirahFierg (talk • contribs)

Good, thank you! Please remember to sign your posts with four tildes ( ~~~~). Bishonen | tålk 16:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

2001:8004::/34

2001:8004::/34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Recently partially blocked. I am seeing new vandalism,[11][12][13][14][15] but also some reasonable edits, so it is likely that more that one user in in that range. Not sure what, if anything, should be done. Maybe block a smaller range? --Guy Macon (talk) 02:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Guy, you picked the most recent admin in the log, but I'm afraid that flatters me. I added a page (Sushi) to the partial block which had already been placed, but that doesn't mean I have an understanding of these big ranges. /64s, those are what I can handle. I suggest you place a call to one of the more competent admins involved, such as Favonian. Bishonen | tålk 08:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

@Guy Macon: Don't know about the "competent" bit, but I make up for it in bloodthirst: 2001:8004:c40::/44 blocked site-wide for a month. This covers most of the miscreants you reported, though not 2001:8004:2730:97de:c1b7:ca7e:a435:2591. Favonian (talk) 09:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hail to the Terminator! Bishonen | tålk 09:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Welcome home, Favonian. We knew you'd be back. After all, it was programmed in you. Oh, and you executed that programming beautifully! You are an infiltration prototype. The only one of your kind. We resurrected you. Advanced Cyberdyne's work. Amended it. The human condition no longer applies to you. Accept what you already know. That you were made to serve a purpose. To achieve what no other machine has achieved before. To infiltrate, find a target and block that target from editing Wikipedia for 30 days.[16] --Guy Macon (talk) 12:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your offerings of flattery have been accepted, oh faithful minions. So far, you've only been exposed to my messages in writing. When we get full audio, my sinister, somewhere-in-Europe accent will firmly establish my connection to the Immortal Arnie. Favonian (talk) 12:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sivakasi Riots article bothered by a sock?

The contents of the Sivakasi riots of 1899 article are being deleted by a new user called Vendsoil. Based on the way he edits, he is most probably the sock of EruTheLord. I have filed a complaint accordingly here. Please go through this issue when you find the time. Thank you.Mayan302 (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mayan302. Thank you for creating the SPI. I'm not sure why you ask me specifically to look into it? I haven't had anything to do with EruTheLord other than a warning in August 2020. May I suggest El_C would be a better admin to approach if you're becoming impatient with the lack of response at the SPI? (Though I'm sure admins + CU will get to it eventually.) Bishonen | tålk 15:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Bishonen. I don't know a lot of admins. :). Thank you for your help! Mayan302 (talk) 04:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see the SPI was successful. Well done, Mayan302! Bishonen | tålk 11:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you!Mayan302 (talk) 16:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liar

Well, if you must know, it's a bottle brush tree.😜 --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Would that be the Grevillea paradoxa? Bishonen | tålk 16:11, 30 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Persecution of Dalits

Hello. How are you?

While I was away, Persecution of Dalits was redirected. The content I added was totally unalike from how it was prior 2008.

2008 Version - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Persecution_of_Dalits&oldid=235205811

My version - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Persecution_of_Dalits&oldid=1025630024

Now expanded more. What should I do to avoid another redirect and expand this article? Friendly Eagle (talk) 18:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Friendly Eagle. You should discuss on the talkpage and explain why you believe it should be an article rather than a redirect. Bishonen | tålk 20:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

small issue with SoftLavander

Hi this user removed something from my user page what are the rules on Wikipedia and what is a SOAPBOX I put a link on it because I saw that the user Riquix put his own website ... regards SadirahFierg (talk) 09:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, SadirahFierg. You can read about what you may have in your user page at WP:UPYES. Among other things, it says there that "You are also welcome to include a simple link to your personal home page, although you should not surround it with any promotional language", which is pretty much what you had, so I'm not sure why Softlavender removed it. But they are an experienced editor who would not do so at random, so I suggest you ask them on their talkpage. Note, though, that if people provide a link for you, you should click on it, rather than ask somebody else. Softlavender did explain their edit in the edit summary — though in my opinion possibly not sufficiently — by linking to WP:NOTSOAPBOX. Click on it to see what a soapbox is, please. Bishonen | tålk 11:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

[1] Made-up word

[1]