Jump to content

User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 92

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 85←Archive 90Archive 91Archive 92Archive 93Archive 94Archive 95

About Our World is Ended

Hello, I am Japanese. I am writing this sentence using Google Translate. I usually edit the Japanese version of wikipedia. I recently learned that you created Our World is Ended page. I am very pleased with this. Thank you. And I also edited the English version of the page a little. The content is that 5pb. advertised the updated version of Judgement 7 - Our World is Ended as a "Masterpiece for Science Adventure fans". I wrote the same content on Science Adventure page. This content is a fact and there is also a source. The same thing is written on the Japanese version of Science Adventure page.

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%A7%91%E5%AD%A6%E3%82%A2%E3%83%89%E3%83%99%E3%83%B3%E3%83%81%E3%83%A3%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B7%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BA

However, I don't know if the English sentences I wrote are grammatically correct. So, would you please check the text I wrote and correct any strange points? I'm sorry to burden you. 30XTWY (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, it's always kinda felt like that article flew under the radar. Thanks for your addition to it too! Sergecross73 msg me 02:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
@Sergecross73 Hey buddy, thank you for creating the article, but I would like to inform you that a verb (is, are, etc.) in a title of a work should be in upper case (per MOS:5LETTER). I suggest renaming the article (I do not want to get involved in the article's history as I have no interest in its topic, it's just I have only concerned with using a title case). I got winded up with this article because an editor linked it to another article that is under my watchlist. Happy editing, my friend! Centcom08 (talk) 01:06, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Feel free to put in a WP:RM. When I created it, I probably didn't know which way to go, and just picked one. Sergecross73 msg me 14:30, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

K-pop editor who does not respond to talk page messages still making same edit

Hi Serge. I've asked the editor @Only1greenyoshi: twice on their talk page in two separate months (User talk:Only1greenyoshi#N/a should be present in columns where charts are no longer being published and User talk:Only1greenyoshi#STOP removing N/A from Korean Hot chart columns), and with edit summaries on over 10 reverts, to stop removing the use of a Template:N/a note from a column that denotes a chart no longer exists. They have refused to respond or acknowledge that I've asked them to stop, and even returned to manually undo my edit after I asked them to stop: [1]. They can clearly understand English, as they speak it in their edit summaries, and so I've started warning them for disruption. They also routinely add unsourced information to K-pop articles, like when a K-pop act has just released a single and album, without sourcing it. I don't know what else to do to get them to stop other than to ask you to drop them a line about it, but I'm also concerned that won't deter them so I'm kind of at a loss here. Ss112 03:19, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

To add onto the above about their regular additions of unsourced content, they've just gone on a round of updating sales without providing any additional sources: [2], [3], [4]... Ss112 05:52, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Warned. Let me know if it helps or not. Sergecross73 msg me 14:47, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Escalated to a short block since they repeatedly ignored me too, while making unsourced edits. Sergecross73 msg me 16:07, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Still adding unsourced info: [5]. Something is announced in K-pop, Only1greenyoshi is there adding it without a source. They do source some of their edits, but the unsourced info is still mixed in there. Ss112 02:41, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
I blocked them once, and have been keeping an eye on them since. That's the first unsourced addition I've witnessed since, and I think it could be be that they didn't realize that the source already present verifies the EP and the release date, but not the name. I'm going to give them a shot at redemption first. Sergecross73 msg me 14:41, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
I blocked them for a week after they refused to fix or respond over the course of 24 hours where they were decently active editing other articles. Sergecross73 msg me 20:25, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Re: Draft: William John Titus Bishop

Hi Sergecross 73, sorry for the late reply. Any input you may have about the draft or suggestions on how it may be improved would be most appreciated. JohnEricHiggs (talk) 18:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

I'd just recommend working towards proving that he meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:NAUTHOR. That's probably the only way you're going to convince anyone that he should have his own Wikipedia article. Sergecross73 msg me 18:56, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2022

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

Administrator changes

readded Valereee
removed Anthony Appleyard (deceased) • Capitalistroadster • Samsara

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
  • An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.

Technical news

  • The Wikimania 2022 Hackathon will take place virtually from 11 August to 14 August.
  • Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (T308570)

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • You can vote for candidates in the 2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
  • Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed here. There are also a number of in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
  • Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Steam Deck

I think if the Nintendo (which has little in common with the Steam Deck) is worth mentioning in the lede, then the GPD Win (which is a lot closer to the Steam Deck) definitely deserves a mention. GPD have made ARM-based handheld emulators but the GPD Win is all about portable x86 gaming and ships with the Steam client. I don't think one can consider GPD to be obscure when Valve don't seem to. They're established in this space. The Steam Deck is effectively a specialised GPD without the full keyboard, but still with support for it should the user supply one. Steam Deck is great, but it's only doing what the GPD has been providing for years. 203.221.116.94 (talk) 12:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm not saying they're not comparable, I'm saying that it's not generally helpful to list off examples of far less known things to illustrate points. Your average person has no idea what a GD Win is. Wikipedia isn't a tech enthusiast website - it's written for general audiences.
Let's say you wanted to give an example of a burger place that was similar to McDonalds. What's more helpful to the most people? "Franks Burgers", a small place with one location in a small town in Nebraska that makes burgers that tastes exactly like McDonalds? Or just saying Burger King? Extreme, but same concept. Examples don't land if they're not generally understandable, regardless of similarities. Sergecross73 msg me 12:42, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

User:StatsFreak's unsourced edit spree

Hi Serge. The user StatsFreak has gone on a spree the last few days adding all manner of unsourced chart positions across Wikipedia relating to Beyoncé's new album. I have given them warnings beginning last month but it hasn't stopped. First round of warnings (including one from another editor, and me telling them to not plagiarise Billboard's chart updates), and then a final one this month here, which they have disregarded by updating pages with links hours before they work (wrong date to boot), another edit updating a chart hours before the link had updated, adding an unsourced chart peak, adding another chart peak whose link would not show this information for over 36 hours. Is enough enough here? Ss112 09:48, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Emrys02

has made an unblock request that covers the basics. Could you leave a note there as to whether we should accept or decline. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:52, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realize anyone was still waiting up on me on that one. I don't particularly believe him, but I won't stand in anyone's way if another Admin wants to give him another shot. Feel free to unblock if you want. Sergecross73 msg me 15:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

List of Best-Selling Music Artists

Could I ask for your input on the talk page of the list of best selling music artists? There seem to be some pretty fundamental issues with the article, and you were previously involved in a conflict resolution between editors that work on the page, so you have a bit of background that might help us figure out how to proceed.

Thanks a bunch. Pacack (talk) 01:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to include a link to the talkpage. --Pacack (talk) 01:08, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
I think I'm going to stay out of all of that. Those editors keep getting into disputes that escalate to ANI. It's all rather heated and complex, and while I work a lot in the music content area, I tend to be drawn to areas that are being neglected. Lots of editors arguing over the biggest music artists in the history of music is kind of the opposite of that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Home Tonight stub removal

Hey, Serge! I just removed the stub template from Home Tonight because I think it’s start-class status. KevinML (talk) 21:44, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good. Sergecross73 msg me 23:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Is there a what to update its status on the quality scale? KevinML (talk) 00:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

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

Guideline and policy news

  • A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
  • An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
  • The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
  • Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:13, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Mary Sue

Hi Serge. I found you from your contribution to the reliable sources page regarding The Mary Sue (see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Mary_Sue), which in turn was related to the matter of whether allegations of harassment from the streamer Keffals should be included on the streamer Destiny's page (see Talk:Destiny (streamer)#Irresponsible edits).

My concern is that everything may not be above board related to the edit in question, and I hope you can take a second look as an unrelated admin. I'm not very familiar with Wikipedia editing rules or best practice so I will relate to you what I think may be relevant to this case. The initial edit to include Keffals' allegations of harassment by Destiny was made by enny43, who herself serves as a moderator for Keffals' livestream chat. The edit was reversed and soon an admin arrived to argue on behalf of enny43's edit. This admin is GorillaWarfare (see User:GorillaWarfare) AKA Molly White (Twitter: https://twitter.com/molly0xFFF). Molly is a fan of and actively supports and retweets Keffals activities on Twitter.

I'm concerned that that these edits will be railroaded through by a moderator of Keffals and an activist admin who follows and supports Keffals' activities. There are a couple of discrepancies in this matter I hope you will consider.

1) If these allegations of harassment are relevant enough to add to Destiny's Wikipedia page, why didn't Keffals' moderator enny43 or her fan GorillaWarfare (wikipedia admin) seek to also add the alligations to Keffals own Wikipedia page (see Keffals)? From my perspective, this seems very clearly biased.

2) This relates to the matter you weighed in on about The Mary Sue's reliability as a source. Currently the edit to Destiny's page can't be made because there aren't enough reliable sources. It seems to me that if the matter of Keffals' harassment by Destiny was serious enough to warrant getting added to his Wikipedia page, these "reliable" sources would have at least reached out to Destiny for a response. None of the sources did.

If you think everything is above board here, I'll be totally satisfied. I'm just concerned that biased editors are using Wikipdia as part of a smear campaign. WMO1234 (talk) 23:45, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@WMO1234: Perhaps before going wild with your allegations that I am an "activist admin" or some sort of Keffals devotee engaging in a "smear campaign" you should actually read the discussion, where I agreed that the claims should not be added until a second high-quality source is found ([6], [7], [8]). To your question 1, I did add the allegation to Keffals' page when I still believed there were two high-quality sources to support it, then removed it when I realized I was mistaken on the current consensus for the reliability of The Mary Sue. Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way, impressive that you found this out-of-the-way "AIV" on your first edit. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 00:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
You're literally actively engaged with Keffals' activism on Twitter. Also, there's a very good chance you're the most biased admin that could possibly get involved in this matter.
Not sure what an AIV is, but this was the only other admin I saw commenting about this. Thanks for the welcome. WMO1234 (talk) 00:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Hi, sysop here. Absolutely nothing wrong with Molly's edits. -- ferret (talk) 00:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
I appreciate you weighing in. I hope you understand my skepticism as a Wikipedia layperson when an admin very closely aligned with one side of a disputed matter takes the lead on things. WMO1234 (talk) 00:54, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Why? Admins are still regular editors. They aren't forbidden from doing any editing that anyone else might do. -- ferret (talk) 00:55, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
I don't at all know what a Wikipedia admin is capable of beyond a regular user, but I think I can make a couple of reasonable assumptions. I assume that an admin will have more sway in settling a disputed matter. Also, anyone with the breadth of editing history to qualify as an admin will know very well how to state their case for an edit. In the case of something that is disputed, having someone that is very biased arguing for one side seems suspect to me.
For a real example, the unbiased Bilorv (see User:Bilorv) in the Talk:Destiny (streamer) does not believe that The Mary Sue article is an adequate source to justify including the allegations in question. They said the following about it:
  • I gather that The Mary Sue and Kotaku are the sources put forward here. Though I'm generally in favour of The Mary Sue, this particular article seems to exaggerate their worst tabloid-style aspects and is not good enough for highly BLP sensitive claims, which accusing a living person of serious misconduct (possibly even illegal activity) counts as, even for attributed opinion. Kotaku does not go hugely in depth and is on its own not enough for due weight. They content seems too speculative and should be omitted at this time.
Now, once that Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard wraps up to confirm that The Mary Sue is a Reliable source, it's probably reasonable to assume that Keffals' big supporter GorillaWarfare (per her twitter history) will use that to resume arguing for the inclusion of the harassment allegations. However, going by Bilorv's argument it seems like there should still be some amount of editor discretion to come to a consensus. In such a case, I would much prefer people like Bilorv that aren't obviously incredibly biased to be weighing in on this. WMO1234 (talk) 01:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Ok. That's nice. It really has nothing to do with Wikipedia consensus building though, whatever your preferences about any specific editor are. I recommend you find something else to worry about, as this is bordering on assumptions of bad faith. -- ferret (talk) 01:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your guidance as I'm a novice Wikipedia user. I'm interested in how this plays out, and I hope editors with clear conflicts of interest don't have an undue influence on the resolution. WMO1234 (talk) 01:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm not unbiased in the slightest, as I have contempt for Destiny and would offer all sympathy to Keffals for the violence she has faced, and take her at her word on the harassment she has experienced. However, I take it as a big compliment that my bias was not clear from my comment. All editors are biased, but the best know that they are biased and act the most neutrally because they are aware of this.
GorillaWarfare has been a role model to me for many years for her incredible content writing and talk page comments. Reasonable people disagree, but that I respect that any opinion she expresses is genuine, well-informed and intelligent. GorillaWarfare's comments at Talk:Destiny (streamer) are appropriate. The Twitter comments are not relevant to this and I simply can't agree that someone should be prevented from editing an area of Wikipedia because they speak about the harassment they have been subjected to by violent misogynists. — Bilorv (talk) 18:36, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
There we have it folks... I'm just going to leave this comment in the open air: It's time for this barely (barely?) disguised (being very generous) harassment campaign to cease. A NOTHERE awaits otherwise. -- ferret (talk) 21:18, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
@Sergecross73 I'd appreciate it if you could weigh in on this matter yourself if/whenever you're able to. I'm not assigning bad faith to anyone, but it seems highly coincidental to me that the two admins that have hopped on to speak for you have both recently been involved in editing articles related to Keffals' activism. Thank you! WMO1234 (talk) 02:11, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
It's no coincidence ferret responded, we've been watching each other's talk pages for the last decade. He's truly uninvolved with the dispute, we just comment on each other's talk page comments a lot. And I really just commented because I'm pretty active at fielding questions at the Video Games Wikiproject and their source reliability discussion page. I don't really know much about the subjects in the dispute at hand... Sergecross73 msg me 03:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification! WMO1234 (talk) 05:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
I don't even know who Keffal is beyond the broad strokes. I'm not a Twitter user. -- ferret (talk) 14:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Re: Only1greenyoshi

Hi, I've noticed that you've blocked this user a while back. Just to let you know, I believe they're now using a new account (similar editing patterns with old account), but I'm not sure if this is the right place to mention it. Harushiga (talk) 16:25, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, it's fine to talk about it here. What account do you think they're using and why? Let me know. Sergecross73 msg me 16:32, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
The account is Newjeani (talk · contribs). Two similarites are the types of edits they both do, such as increasing episode counts of currently airing anime, and the time of the day they're both active on (~16:00 UTC to ~07:30 UTC next day). Harushiga (talk) 16:37, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
CU confirmed. -- ferret (talk) 17:05, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, ferret. Harushiga, please don't hesitate to notify of any further accounts they create. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 17:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Joshuadejohnson's continued ignorance of talk page messages

Hi Serge. Please see my ping at User talk:Joshuadejohnson. Various editors have approached Joshua over the years asking him to stop making the same stylistic edits—as far back as October 2014. Walter Görlitz repeatedly pointed out how to format sections and Joshua repeatedly ignored his advice from 2014 all the way through to 2021 (I can only imagine how tired Walter was of explaining the same things to him). He has also been warned for edit warring and other disruption. Last month I started a thread about his unnecessary fiddly alteration of personnel sections and misleading edit summaries (for one example just today: "added links" when he entirely reformatted a personnel section for some unknown reason—there are thousands more like this in his contribution history), in which he replied that "there are some details that I need to leave alone and I will do my best to do so". See the recent diffs I linked to in the thread—he is changing styles and making the same edits he said he would stop, and he's proven we can't trust anything he claims he's taken on board. I fully believe this history of eight years of ignoring talk page messages or claiming to have listened then returning to the same behaviour is 100% disruptive block territory. Ss112 13:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

I gave him one of my final warning/"what exactly is the misunderstanding here" comments. Unless he's got a really good explanation, his next violation is a block. Sergecross73 msg me 14:59, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Will keep an eye out. Ss112 09:25, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Question

In Lumines: Puzzle Fusion, the article mentions artist Shinichi Osawa but has his stage name Mondo Grosso in parenthesis. Is that acceptable for a FAC?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 23:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't think so, unless the stage name was more recognizable, in which you'd probably use that. (Though that's more of a music-world thing than a video game world thing, like using Eminem instead of Marshal Matthews.) Sergecross73 msg me 00:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Quick check on an article

Hey, sorry about the double-post today, but if you get a minute could you read over the plot of Man's Best Friend (The Ren & Stimpy Show) and see if you think there's anything "unencyclopedic" about it? I edited the article last month and was alerted to it again recently when the editor Erpert (whom I had just left a talk page message concerning their edits on a few other articles) edited it. Erpert initially removed the plot because it was "unsourced", and after I said plots don't need to be sourced per MOS:PLOT, removed it again and clarified that they meant "unencyclopedic". I asked them not to edit war and restored the plot, then removed any turns of phrase that might have been written a bit childishly ("butt" and so on). I think it's fine now but I figure an additional pair of eyes from an uninvolved editor can't hurt. Thanks. Ss112 13:11, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you're correct that basic, non-contentious plot summaries don't need sources. It seems to follow WP:INU's guidance. As long as it follows WP:PLOTSUM's guidance of keeping around 400 words (I haven't counted) then I would think it's fine. Certainly better than just removing it wholesale as "unencyclopedic". (Is the editor familiar with Ren and Stimpy? I mean, there limits on how encyclopedic one can write up that sort of subject matter.)
Anyways, it's probably look like WP:CANVASSing if I intervene, but I'm happy to provide arguments and moral support from the sides like this. Sergecross73 msg me 14:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
It's just under 400 words. I pointed out the general absurdity of Ren & Stimpy in my reply on their talk page, so I would hope they are familiar enough with it. To be fair, the plot summary did say Ren does "butt push-ups". Although that does indeed happen in the episode, I assume turns of phrase like that is what they were referring to so I've tried to make it more formal. Would it be considered canvassing if you intervened if they revert again? I would think that's just administrator intervention to stop an edit war. To be honest I'm more concerned about Erpert's edit warring and changing their reasoning after the first removal, so I hope that's over. Ss112 14:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Serge, please see my ping at Erpert's talk page. This is very concerning behaviour from an editor who's been here for 13 years. They removed maintenance templates despite not addressing the issues, and reverted my correction of their misuse of Template:Start date and Template:Duration (and didn't even actually read what I linked—the template documentation says they are for use inside infoboxes, and start date should only be used once) just because they think I'm "hounding" them—despite this apparent "hounding" stemming from their editing articles I edited before them (I made the redirect for Girl of My Dreams (album), and edited the Ren and Stimpy episode article a month ago). Even when I've been hounded, I've never reverted all the constructive edits somebody made to a page. I hate to "canvass" you, but this is getting to the point of WP:POINTy disruption and edit warring. I'm now barred from posting on Erpert's talk page under threat of having an ANI thread started on me. I guess that's what I get for trying to inform editors of MOS:PLOT and what template documentation states they are for. Ss112 19:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
    I've left them a note, but I believe both of you should be talking more on article talk pages or you'll both find yourself in trouble. (This is not a threat, I'm not talking about doing it myself. I just know how things go at ANI....) Sergecross73 msg me 23:17, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
    Thanks. That being said, I don't have anything left to say to Erpert—there's no active disagreements so long as Erpert doesn't continue to revert. I'm already sick of editors threatening others with ANI when you have a disagreement with them on their talk page all because they can't handle being told something simple like "this template says not to use it outside of infoboxes; this template says to only use it once in an infobox" and "we don't need to source plots". Why get defensive over something like that? Why not just take it on board and go "thanks, I'll try to change that going ahead"? Instead they argue over it like I came up with the template documentation or guideline. I don't get it. Ss112 00:39, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Tulip Drive

I invoked WP:HEY on Tulip Drive. Let me know what you think.] Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Wow, didn't expect that to be possible with how awful of a defense was put up by the articles creator himself. Yeesh... Sergecross73 msg me 18:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Not sure what to do

Tell me I'm crazy or something. This is completely unsuitable for publication, right? The creator insists this is not the case —VersaceSpace 🌃 01:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

No, that's pretty terrible. Sergecross73 msg me 01:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, now hopefully the editor will respond to my query on their talk page —VersaceSpace 🌃 02:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
I've left notes on the editor's and draft's talk page too. Sergecross73 msg me 02:11, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
I've partially cleaned up up some of the page moves and redirect mess created in this so histories are where they should be... I think. There were like 4-5 page moves so I may have missed something. -- ferret (talk) 02:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
@Ferret: is there something I did incorrectly that caused this? —VersaceSpace 🌃 02:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
No, someone did a round robin due to disambiguation capitalization and shifted the original history. Which someone then CSD'd.-- ferret (talk) 02:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Just saw this, and had to share

The world, it is a changing, here is a better source. Atsme 💬 📧 15:00, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Yikes, I wonder how that's working for them. I use them as a source less these days strictly because they've been big into paywalls lately too. Sergecross73 msg me 15:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Editors who still cut-and-paste articles to correct their titles

I've just come across another instance of an editor copy-pasting an article's content to give it a new title. I found the user HappyAppy10 had created an article for Little Big Town's new album, then saw they had edited an incorrectly capitalised article for Kelsea Ballerini's new album and went to move it and found that the editor Mediafanatic17 had cut and pasted Subject To Change (Kelsea Ballerini album) to Subject to Change (Kelsea Ballerini album). I've since reverted, asked them to not do this per WP:CUTPASTE and moved the original page myself, but it's truly confusing to me when I find relatively experienced editors doing this. There was another instance I found last month as well, and when I approached the editor on their talk page, they claimed they "genuinely forgot". Do you still find instances of this—including from experienced editors? Or am I just finding the few exceptions where editors seem to not remember attribution for edits is important? Ss112 09:25, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I see it too. Sometimes I think it's truly accidental, or due to people not understanding proper capitalization of titles. Other times, it feels like it's on purpose, to try to get around protection/consensus not to make an article yet. Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
I stumble across a few cut-paste moves, even from experienced editors. We really ought to have some way of detecting them, but an edit filter wouldn't be feasible and the text sometimes changes (e.g. to change the title in the lead). I wonder if something like a Quarry query on pairs of edits (same actor, nearby timestamp) which create a mainspace page (or expand a small one) and remove a similar amount of text from another page leaving it small (e.g. #REDIRECT [[New title]] {{R from whatever}}) could be fruitful without catching too many genuine splits and merges. I've had a go, but it fails to find the right index and runs forever for no obvious reason. Certes (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Serge, I forgot I already informed you about the editor who made this cut-paste move, and just sent an email about something else regarding them. I think it's concerning. Ss112 05:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Blast from the past

Hi Serge, remember me? Cuz I remember you! 😀 Anyways, just thought I'd pop in and say hi after seeing you active at that Sonic characters move discussion. It's been a while (6 years I think?) since I've been active at WP:VG but glad to see that you're still around!! Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 14:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Hey, good to see you again, Satellizer, of course I remember you. Glad to see you're back, I hope you stick around for a while! Sergecross73 msg me 14:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Disconnect on edits at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources

Thanks for keeping a watchful eye out for undiscussed changes to community consensus.

In the case of this reversion however, I think the edit summary mischaracterizes my previous edit. What I changed did not appear to be a local consensus by the project. Most importantly: I would not have changed an obviously established consensus without discussion.

Consistent with BRD I've opened discussion at the talk page but I think if you review the change more closely you may agree with my first edit. In short: the established consensus is cited to WP:USERG (not WikiProject Albums) and I edited the page to reflect that guideline more accurately - not with any intent to change it in any way. --N8wilson 🔔 14:26, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I've commented there. Sergecross73 msg me 14:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sergecross73/Archive_92&oldid=1114768264"