| Revision as of 03:17, 26 September 2015 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,298,157 editsm Archiving 3 discussion(s) to User talk:EdJohnston/Archive 37) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:59, 26 September 2015 edit undoMusicAngels (talk | contribs)1,089 edits →IP-hopping editor is back again, 3 new IP-hopps in last 24 hrs: More IP-hopping and misconduct continuing again on new articles and pages.Next edit → | ||
| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
| Posssibly you could glance at IP128.90 for that editor. ] (]) 14:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC) | Posssibly you could glance at IP128.90 for that editor. ] (]) 14:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :A check of suggests that a rangeblock would not be worthwhile. The IP editor was posting at ] and at ] but I don't see enough abuse to justify semiprotecting any talk pages. At least not yet. ] collapsed one of the sections at ]. If you think that some previous blocks ought to be renewed, let me know which ones. ] (]) 16:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC) | :A check of suggests that a rangeblock would not be worthwhile. The IP editor was posting at ] and at ] but I don't see enough abuse to justify semiprotecting any talk pages. At least not yet. ] collapsed one of the sections at ]. If you think that some previous blocks ought to be renewed, let me know which ones. ] (]) 16:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
| : I am not a troll! I can't help the change in IP addresses and I object only to the bullying tactic of ] who has refused to acknowledge the rights of IPs to edit. If my system gives me a new address every time I log on, what can I do? Hopping implies I am hopping. I'm sitting in one place. ] (]) 18:59, 19 September 2015 (UTC) | : I am not a troll! I can't help the change in IP addresses and I object only to the bullying tactic of ] who has refused to acknowledge the rights of IPs to edit. If my system gives me a new address every time I log on, what can I do? Hopping implies I am hopping. I'm sitting in one place. ] (]) 18:59, 19 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
| Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
| {{ping|Drmies}} Note: I just place page protection on ] and ] for edit warring. ] (]) 18:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC) | {{ping|Drmies}} Note: I just place page protection on ] and ] for edit warring. ] (]) 18:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ===Troll is back again, possible reconsider=== | |||
| Hi EdJohnston; Thanks for the explanation on the range block for IP=128. I read through all of the many accounts there and it does not seem that any large scale or even medium scale Misplaced Pages contributor would be badly incovenienced by a range block. The IP-troll is back again here and there does not appear to be any end in sight for him (apparently he feels empowered at the Poetry page deletion caused by his WP:Hoax). I am requesting that the range block be re-considered, and if needed individual IP-accounts be restored upon request only. Otherwise I am in the position of having to request up to 22 selective blocks on the IP-range, and more as needed, since this IP-troll is now at it for 3 full months and seems to have more than a simple fixation at this point, possibly behavioral or maladjustment issues for all we know. Anyway, I will continue to support you in your decision either way, and will continue collecting the now very long list IP-hopps by that editor. @Drmies; We now have a drop-in editor from one of the IP-account ranges indicating that it is Univ of Maryland; does that match with your previous investigation anywhere? ] (]) 14:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==Need input== | ==Need input== | ||
Revision as of 14:59, 26 September 2015
Deletion review for Poetry in the early 21st century
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Poetry in the early 21st century. 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. MusicAngels (talk) 15:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- The Drv looks like it is duplicated now after your edit there. I thought you had requested I repost the matter there, otherwise I would have indicated that it was repost as I did in the text for User:Bear above on your Talk page. MusicAngels (talk) 16:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- WIth your permission, I'll remove the material you copied from the DRV and replace it with a link to a section of my user talk. My user talk is not the proper place to get consensus to overturn a deletion. EdJohnston (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hi EdJohnston; I am following your lead in this, since my original thought was to file this a WP:Vand which you corrected. I am much moved by the comment of User:DGG this morning who is apparently trying to prepare a more detailed Drv comment. @Drmies: We appear to have a full id on the editor who started the hoax in case anyone is still watching this, who is User:JR and who has self-identified on his user page as a high school poetry teacher preparing to save his school from articles that do not mention his favorite poets Cordelia Ray and Allson Whitman. His addition came late last week on the Drv page and his concerns of being a poetry teacher and an admirer of these 2 poets match fully with the edits made on the Talk page and the article which he was making as an IP-hopping editor last week, and which resulted in the article's eventual deletion. Drmies has counted, I think, 8 disruptive IP-hopping attempts with blocks and the following words: "that IP, or those IPs (there's probably three or four distinctly different sets), are trolling the hell out of my talk page." Possibly the two of you can decide on the best message to send him. MusicAngels (talk) 15:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- MusicAngels, are we talking about the deletion or about the troll? The two have nothing to do with each other in the sense that nothing in that deletion or DRV process affects what should be done to the troll, and vice versa. Are you saying DGG knows the account name of the troll? Drmies (talk) 20:27, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Drmies, regarding the Drv, the comments from DGG seemed very useful and his follow-up on the specifics once he looks at them might be pertinent. Separately, regarding the troll identification, it is here: . Apparently your multiple blocks on the various IP-hopping addresses has caused him to finally sign in and inadventently self-identify himself (which you can see by looking at that editor's User page where he identifies himself as a high school teacher who is out to protect his students from articles he does not like, and he names his favorite poets which are the same as the claims from the IP-hopping addresses). The self-descriptions we have from the IP-editor on the deleted article Talk page matches with the self-description of the logged-in User account I just provided in the link. MusicAngels (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- MusicAngels, please give me a few of those diffs, where the IPs and the account profess the same interests etc. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 22:22, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Drmies, regarding the Drv, the comments from DGG seemed very useful and his follow-up on the specifics once he looks at them might be pertinent. Separately, regarding the troll identification, it is here: . Apparently your multiple blocks on the various IP-hopping addresses has caused him to finally sign in and inadventently self-identify himself (which you can see by looking at that editor's User page where he identifies himself as a high school teacher who is out to protect his students from articles he does not like, and he names his favorite poets which are the same as the claims from the IP-hopping addresses). The self-descriptions we have from the IP-editor on the deleted article Talk page matches with the self-description of the logged-in User account I just provided in the link. MusicAngels (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- MusicAngels, are we talking about the deletion or about the troll? The two have nothing to do with each other in the sense that nothing in that deletion or DRV process affects what should be done to the troll, and vice versa. Are you saying DGG knows the account name of the troll? Drmies (talk) 20:27, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hi EdJohnston; I am following your lead in this, since my original thought was to file this a WP:Vand which you corrected. I am much moved by the comment of User:DGG this morning who is apparently trying to prepare a more detailed Drv comment. @Drmies: We appear to have a full id on the editor who started the hoax in case anyone is still watching this, who is User:JR and who has self-identified on his user page as a high school poetry teacher preparing to save his school from articles that do not mention his favorite poets Cordelia Ray and Allson Whitman. His addition came late last week on the Drv page and his concerns of being a poetry teacher and an admirer of these 2 poets match fully with the edits made on the Talk page and the article which he was making as an IP-hopping editor last week, and which resulted in the article's eventual deletion. Drmies has counted, I think, 8 disruptive IP-hopping attempts with blocks and the following words: "that IP, or those IPs (there's probably three or four distinctly different sets), are trolling the hell out of my talk page." Possibly the two of you can decide on the best message to send him. MusicAngels (talk) 15:46, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Section break for access
@Drmies: Regarding the requested diffs you just made above and which are available, they are in 4 parts, identifying the troll as follows:
- (1) Both the IP-hopping troll and the identified user have self-identified as a poetry teacher with "academic" concerns having the same favorite poets.
- (2) Both the IP-hopping troll and the identified user have identified the same favorite poets Cordelia Ray and Allson Whitman (links:H. Cordelia Ray or Albery Allson Whitman).
- (a) The identified user indicates this on the current Drv page here:
- (b) The IP-hopping troll indicated the same favorite poets by edits made to the article now deleted ("Poetry in the early 20th century"), which I cannot link here, but which you should have access to from your account. Note that the edits on the article pages themselves were typically done on weekends and then removed after the weekend, back-and-forth).
- (3) Both the IP-hopping troll and the identified user have used by list of contributions History page in order to identify pages which I edit and which they both zero in on.
- (a) The identified user used my list-of-contribs History to locate and comment on the Drv in progress now
- (b) The IP-hopping troll used my list-of-conribs History to locate and troll on the Talk:Birdman page (otherwise these two pages, the Birdman (film) page and the Drv page, are random and unrelated pages) which was done here , and here , and here .
- (4) Both the IP-hopping troll and the identified user are chronologically linked after the needed sequence of blocks you have executed from your account to control the IP-hopping which then, and only then, caused the identified user to use his password account in order to be able to sign-in (do we have the IP-address of this sign-in) and to try to prevail again on Drv now that so many of those IP-hopping accounts have been blocked.
The appearance is that it was only your making those needed blocks which caused him to finally sign-in to be able to continue editing, or otherwise the IP-hopping and trolling would extend indefinitely. What is the best message to send him. MusicAngels (talk) 17:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- MusicAngles, the Cordelia and Albery items would have been some evidence, but I cannot find them mentioned in the article (and I looked at many versions) or the talk page (ditto). That they may have found your edits in the same way, that's not much, and that they signed in after a bunch of IPs were blocked isn't much either--after all, the DRV wasn't semi-protected. So, I'm sorry, but I don't see it, and given that many of the IPs geolocate elsewhere (though there were a few in Texas) I can't really use that either. Ed, can you give it a go? Drmies (talk) 18:01, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Drmies: Whether they are sockpuppets or meatpuppets I can leave for both of you to decide, but the IP-hopping troll is now fully joined with the registered account mentioned above here , and ready for more test edits on the Cordelia Ray, James Corrothers, and Albery pages together. On the related articles for Cordelia Ray and James D. Corrothers, their last edits were to start to republish their favorite long poem at length on the article page itself here . I assume their next test editing targets shall be the FA article for W. E. B. Du Bois and the sibling article on Paul Laurence Dunbar. MusicAngels (talk) 16:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- EdJohnston and @Drmies: IP-hopping troll is back again apparently to continue what appears to be another sockpuppet of meatpuppet hoax. The recent edits by the sign-in name JRW... appear to have no verification on the Misplaced Pages sibling pages for Du Bois and Dunbar which he is claiming as "general knowledge". I am out of good-faith reverts on this and either have to report him for edit warring, or report the IP-hopping account for vandalism or another hoax. Let me know if you have a better solution since the IP-hopping troll is still out there with no one else investigating. Here are two of the apparent further IP-hopping troll accounts bolded:
(cur | Prev) 192.12.13.14 (talk) . . (6,292 bytes) (+282) . . (→Stop making serial reverts against Misplaced Pages policy) (undo)
(cur | prev) 12:34, 4 September 2015 Neuroxic (talk | contribs) . . (6,010 bytes) (-376) . . (tidying) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 11:10, 1 September 2015 Neuroxic (talk | contribs) m . . (6,386 bytes) (+1) . . (sp.) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 11:06, 1 September 2015 Neuroxic (talk | contribs) . . (6,385 bytes) (+6) . . (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 04:19, 1 September 2015 Neuroxic (talk | contribs) . . (6,379 bytes) (+87) . . (vacation time...) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 15:35, 31 August 2015 EdJohnston (talk | contribs) . . (6,292 bytes) (+300) . . (→Stop making serial reverts against Misplaced Pages policy: Attribute an unsigned comment) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 11:27, 30 August 2015 199.48.243.168 (talk) . .
- I now notice that the IP-hopping account has filed an ANI on my account if one of you could look at this. MusicAngels (talk) 16:30, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
IP-hopping editor is back again, 3 new IP-hopps in last 24 hrs
@EdJohnston and @Drmies: Thanks to both of you for the blocks you have placed and the page protects. No sooner than the blocks expired than the IP-hopping troll has returned in the last 24hrs for 3 more IP-addresses. That's a total of 17 addresses so far. In case one of you might be able to look at this, here are the most recent IP-hopping addresses for what you have both been calling trolling and probable sock activity, now taking place at another admin page at DGG:
(cur | prev) 22:31, 17 September 2015 128.90.95.145 (talk) . . (499,294 bytes) (+578) . . (→Your useful comments) (undo)
(cur | prev) 10:15, 17 September 2015 128.90.39.243 (talk) . . (490,184 bytes) (+9) . . (→Your useful comments) (undo)
(cur | prev) 10:14, 17 September 2015 128.90.39.243 (talk) . . (490,175 bytes) (+1) . . (→Your useful comments) (undo)
(cur | prev) 10:13, 17 September 2015 128.90.39.243 (talk) . . (490,174 bytes) (+916) . . (→Your useful comments) (undo)
(cur | prev) 01:25, 16 September 2015 128.90.91.69 (talk) . . (474,294 bytes) (+7) . . (→Your useful comments) (undo)
(cur | prev) 01:24, 16 September 2015 128.90.91.69 (talk) . . (474,287 bytes) (+477) . . (→Your useful comments) (undo)
Posssibly you could glance at IP128.90 for that editor. MusicAngels (talk) 14:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- A check of range contributions from 128.90.0.0/16 suggests that a rangeblock would not be worthwhile. The IP editor was posting at User talk:DGG and at Talk:Birdman (film) but I don't see enough abuse to justify semiprotecting any talk pages. At least not yet. User:Drmies collapsed one of the sections at Talk:Birdman (film). If you think that some previous blocks ought to be renewed, let me know which ones. EdJohnston (talk) 16:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- I am not a troll! I can't help the change in IP addresses and I object only to the bullying tactic of User:MusicAngels who has refused to acknowledge the rights of IPs to edit. If my system gives me a new address every time I log on, what can I do? Hopping implies I am hopping. I'm sitting in one place. 128.90.95.215 (talk) 18:59, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- My problem isn't the hopping; it's the disruptive nature of some of your edits. Plus, there are some concerns about whether you're editing while logged out, which, depending on the circumstances, can be a violation of policy. Drmies (talk) 18:02, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
@Drmies: Note: I just place page protection on Cordelia Ray and James D. Corrothers for edit warring. Bgwhite (talk) 18:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Troll is back again, possible reconsider
Hi EdJohnston; Thanks for the explanation on the range block for IP=128. I read through all of the many accounts there and it does not seem that any large scale or even medium scale Misplaced Pages contributor would be badly incovenienced by a range block. The IP-troll is back again here and there does not appear to be any end in sight for him (apparently he feels empowered at the Poetry page deletion caused by his WP:Hoax). I am requesting that the range block be re-considered, and if needed individual IP-accounts be restored upon request only. Otherwise I am in the position of having to request up to 22 selective blocks on the IP-range, and more as needed, since this IP-troll is now at it for 3 full months and seems to have more than a simple fixation at this point, possibly behavioral or maladjustment issues for all we know. Anyway, I will continue to support you in your decision either way, and will continue collecting the now very long list IP-hopps by that editor. @Drmies; We now have a drop-in editor from one of the IP-account ranges indicating that it is Univ of Maryland; does that match with your previous investigation anywhere? MusicAngels (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Need input
I would like to invite you to comment on Talk:Monadnock#Requested_move_12_September_2015. Lappspira (talk) 17:28, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, that looks like a hard question (whether monadnock or inselberg is better) and I don't have a comment. EdJohnston (talk) 16:18, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Regarding the protection of Elvin Ng
- Elvin Ng (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Jaslynnng (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hi, why did you protect the page 'Elvin Ng'? What we did? He is a singapore actor.. Why can't we update his things? So from now on, we can't update his wikipedia? Then who is going update his wikipedia? We are his managers from singapore! Jaslynnng (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- Semiprotection was requested at WP:RFPP. The Elvin Ng page has no shortage of editors. Per WP:COI, if you are affiliated with Elvin Ng you should not be updating his page anyway. Feel free to propose any changes you think desirable at Talk:Elvin Ng and others will consider them. EdJohnston (talk) 16:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- I really don't get it? If you don't let us to updates his recent news on his page, then who else going to update it? U??? Do you know him well? Or you mean just leave his page blanks? Jaslynnng (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- You've previously been warned by administrator Krakatoa Katie for your edits at Elvin Ng. You removed that post from your talk page, so I'm not sure why you are bothering to have this conversation with me. Why not ask KrakatoaKatie for her advice about your future editing? EdJohnston (talk) 16:47, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- My apologies, EdJohnston, for not simply opening an SPI, but it looks likely that this account was opened after Jaslynnng received a final warning, just to perpetuate this slop. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 23:18, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- You've previously been warned by administrator Krakatoa Katie for your edits at Elvin Ng. You removed that post from your talk page, so I'm not sure why you are bothering to have this conversation with me. Why not ask KrakatoaKatie for her advice about your future editing? EdJohnston (talk) 16:47, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- I really don't get it? If you don't let us to updates his recent news on his page, then who else going to update it? U??? Do you know him well? Or you mean just leave his page blanks? Jaslynnng (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Got some problems between two users on Talk:Proportional_representation
- Proportional representation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- BalCoder (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hi Ed, I was wondering if you know of any Admins who are interested in Politics/Voting Systems who would be able to help mediate and settle the dispute. The two users are reverting each other and I have attempted some basic mediation without much effect. Any help appreciated (even suggestions), Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 08:39, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- I left a note at User talk:Ontario Teacher BFA BEd. If you have time to do so, it would be helpful if someone (anyone) could list out on the talk page what some of the questions are that are in dispute. Eventually someone could open an WP:RFC for one or more disputed items. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:17, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- It would appear that they have deleted the note. Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 11:15, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello EdJohnston ,
I recently added a table explaining the three electoral systems as: Proportional Representation Systems, Mixed Member Systems, and Plurality/Majority Systems.
| Collapse for ease of navigation. EdJohnston (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2015 (UTC) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
These systems already existed in the Proportional Representation article prior to my contributions. I have also added a plethora of sources substantiating this information. User:BalCoder is the only editor who has disagreed with my contributions. Additionally, he/she has refused to provide any sourced information to substantiate his/her opinions. I would welcome a mediation process. I would also welcome any editor who is willing to put the time and effort into providing sourced contributions to the article. In the mean time, I would appreciate it if Balcoder would leave the article alone while awaiting an Admin. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 20:33, 17 September 2015 (UTC) References
|
- Hello, Ontario Teacher. It's good that you want to make contributions. It's bad that you appear to see the other contributors as a mere annoyance in your path. There is no substitute for getting WP:CONSENSUS. If you are all well-intentioned, that should be doable. EdJohnston (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello EdJohnston, I welcome and appreciate the feedback and contributions from other editors. This is why I have, in good faith, sought and continue to seek a WP:CONSENSUS on the Talk:Proportional representation page. However, there is one specific editor who has chosen to arbitrarily reverted any and all of the content I have posted, regardless of how noncontroversial it is. Updates to the article in regards to which nations currently use PR have been reverted. For instance, Russia switched from List PR to MMP in 2014. This sourced update was reverted without explanation. In particular, minor edits Help:Minor edit that I have made that only pertain to spelling and grammar errors and the addition of Wiki-links Help:Link to the appropriate articles have also been reverted without explanation. Thank you for your assistance in the mediation process. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 22:00, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- I encourage both you and the party you are referring to (User:BalCoder?) to get consensus before making further changes. In any event, User:Abecedare has put Proportional representation under full protection until 1 October, so no progress will occur unless you are willing to discuss. While we are here, I hope that this Toronto-based IP 24.114.70.23 is not you editing the page while logged out, because that would be a policy violation. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 22:24, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
References
- "Putin signs into law Duma mixed electoral system: http://sputniknews.com/voiceofrussia/news/2014_02_24/Putin-signs-into-law-Duma-mixed-electoral-system-5992/". Radio The Voice of Russia. 24 Feb 2014.
{{cite web}}: External link in|title=
CFD
See WP:DEFINING. People imagined that they'd restrict categorisation by saying "don't have categories for things that aren't defining", but instead of arguing over whether categories are relevant, they now argue over whether they're defining. I don't subscribe to the concept as a whole, especially because the professionals don't make such strict standards, allowing topics to be categorised on grounds still relevant but not as precisely tied to the subject of the article. Imagine a category for "Marriage with deceased wife's sister"; it would be deleted here because it could only be applied to Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act 1907, but with LCSH we can (and do) apply it to a work mentioning the subject even if it's only a side topic and not the core subject of the work. Nyttend (talk) 00:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
- PS, in case you're not familiar with it: LCSH = Library of Congress Subject Headings. I didn't have a cataloging class in library school, but I spent the first half of this year on a 1300-item cataloging project, so I have a little experience with the concept. Nyttend (talk) 00:54, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
RGloucester
Thanks for the ping. Cut a long story short - RGloucester didn't get his own way, threw all toys out of pram, went on a talk page move rampage and is now indeffed. Mjroots (talk) 18:52, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
- Holy moly, what a mess. I think Favonian's "or something" captures it nicely. Shame. Drmies (talk) 18:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- If history repeats itself, RGloucester may return one day. Though he is testing people's patience. EdJohnston (talk) 18:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Some messed up moves
I'm not sure what the intent is (else I'd move them myself), but Talk:Bell (disambiguation)/Agusta Aerospace Company didn't seem to end up in the right place, nor did Talk:Bell (disambiguation)/Agusta BA609, Talk:Bell (disambiguation)/Agusta BA609/Comments. It looks like you moved with all subpages moved also. Can you get them to the right place? --Izno (talk) 13:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- Not clear why those pages are here. The ones that are only redirects can probably be deleted by G6. If there are any comments posted they could be moved to the respective talk pages of the live articles. What do you think? EdJohnston (talk) 13:58, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- That's fine with me. I just happened to have one of the pages on my watchlist. --Izno (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) They got caught up in the recent move of Bell to Bell (disambiguation) because Misplaced Pages's software assumes Talk:Bell/whatever is a subpage of Talk:Bell. I've deleted a couple and moved one back, think it should be alright now. Jenks24 (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- After a little research I figured the same and moved a few of them on my own. --Izno (talk) 14:59, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- Ah yes, the tricky slash-named articles. Topics with embedded slash can sometimes be named in equally acceptable ways that are minus the slash. I looked into the Bell/Agusta company and it seems it has been renamed to drop the 'Bell': see press release which says that these aircraft are now made by AgustaWestland. Probably there should be an RM at Talk:Bell/Agusta Aerospace Company to get some publicity, because aircraft such as BA609 will now be AW-something, and this may require changes in article text.
- After a little research I figured the same and moved a few of them on my own. --Izno (talk) 14:59, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) They got caught up in the recent move of Bell to Bell (disambiguation) because Misplaced Pages's software assumes Talk:Bell/whatever is a subpage of Talk:Bell. I've deleted a couple and moved one back, think it should be alright now. Jenks24 (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- That's fine with me. I just happened to have one of the pages on my watchlist. --Izno (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- The first paragraph of the article suggests an acceptable name for what we are calling Bell/Agusta Aerospace Company could be AgustaWestland Tilt-Rotor Company, though the cascade of corporate name changes may not be over. User:Huntster has some time ago renamed Bell/Agusta BA609 to AgustaWestland AW609, so that one is taken care of. See a recent corporate update. EdJohnston (talk) 16:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- Assuming that Bell/Agusta Aerospace Company is still correct at least as a piece of history and doesn't require merging, or renaming as the Tilt-Rotor Company I'd suggest moving it to Bell Agusta Aerospace Company to get rid of the slash. EdJohnston (talk) 16:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- I did the move to Bell Agusta Aerospace Company. No objection if anyone wants to reorganize this material, which is now only historical. EdJohnston (talk) 23:43, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- Assuming that Bell/Agusta Aerospace Company is still correct at least as a piece of history and doesn't require merging, or renaming as the Tilt-Rotor Company I'd suggest moving it to Bell Agusta Aerospace Company to get rid of the slash. EdJohnston (talk) 16:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Question
Hi Ed, this is a procedural question: once an appeal has been declined at WP:AE is it permissible to appeal against WP:AE's decision at WP:ARCA? Thank you. Soham321 (talk) 14:16, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. See WP:AC/DS#Appeals and modifications for your options. EdJohnston (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
So where did it go?
Hi. I saw your note on the Classical project page about the Catullus bibliography. The link you gave is now suddenly a redlink, so, having noted with great pleasure that such a bibliography page exists, I now can't find it! Can you tell me where it moved to? Thanks -- Andrew Dalby 16:25, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- See Talk:Catullus/References/talk. Always tricky when an RM discussion disappears due to the move. I left a note back at the WikiProject. EdJohnston (talk) 17:31, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
ARCA appeal
You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Imposition of an Arbitration Enforced Sanction against me by Bishonen and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Misplaced Pages:Arbitration guide may be of use.
Thanks, Soham321 (talk) 20:00, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Is this a possibility
Back again. After our earlier correspondence (see User talk:EdJohnston/Archive 37 and earlier) I wnet to sockpuppet investifations (see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/114.167.178.175) but to no avail. Not that I expected much. I can now add to the list of IPs 153.202.189.1, who yesterday reverted a whole bunch of my edits - ones that as another IP he had previously reverted twice or more. But, some of my edits were also reverted by Special:Contributions/Walter_Görlitz. This user's contributions record shows he was editing from 13:22 until 13:27, when he edited some of the articles concerned, largely by replacing what the IPs wanted. Then there is a break in his editing between 13:55 and 14:05. Between 13:54 and 14:15 the IP did his stuff. Is there a connection or a fantastic coincidence? Emeraude (talk) 08:33, 24 September 2015 (UTC)