Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:13, 17 January 2018

Archives: 2011; 2012; 2013; 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017

Donguz Formation

Hi Ymblanter! Donguz Formation was recently created and could use a couple of edits so it doesn't get speedy deleted. Do you have time to look at some Russian sources? --Tobias1984 (talk) 07:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I will have a look, but this is clearly not speedy deletion material. Added to the watchlist just in case.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Canada lists

// There are a number of problems with the Canadian historic places lists. They include:

• provincial lists are too long (some are over 1,000 entries) and need to be split
• lists are not sorted, and are not sortable even by municipality, due to the way the address was dumped
• don't use {{coord}}, so can't use {{GeoGroup}} for mapping
• references numbers (into the CRHP) are sometimes inaccurate, and need to be verified
• the same place may be multiply designated (federal/provincial/municipal, sometimes multiple federal)
• there are missing entries due to the way the data was retrieved

I have no easy ideas on how to address the last point, so am focusing on the other items. What I'm doing is a multi-step process:

1. Fill out the municipality field in the {{HPC row}} templates and deleted the municipality (and redundant "Canada") from the address field (if no municipality is given, try going to the referenced CRHP entry to figure it out)
2. Sort entries by municipality and count entries to figure out how to split the list. This is generally along the lines of counties or their equivalent (some Canadian counties have been supplanted by regional municipalities, see the Nova Scotia list for examples); you'll have to figure out which counties places are in
3. Split the big list; I've not been explicitly seeking consensus, but if the history indicates it might be needed, best check for it. The remaining steps are then done to each sublist.
4. Validate that the id numbers actually link to the proper CRHP listing. If they don't, find the right one by searching the CRHP (every listing I've seen with a wrong id was listed under a different one)
5. Merge duplicated listings where possible (it isn't if there is more than one federal designation, for example, but provincial and municipal listings can be merged into those)
6. Sort the list by primary alpha words (see the Nova Scotia or PEI lists for examples)
7. Change references to {{HPC row}} to {{HPC rowt}}, which uses {{coord}}. This requires changing "lat" and "lon" to "latd" and "longd", and changing the sign on the longitude. (IMHO the last is lame, but the template was already in use on several lists before I took this on)
8. Make sure municipality names are linked (I usually do this in conjunction with one of the other passes, and don't worry about redlinks)
9. If the name field contains pipe links, add "namea" field containing just the name, otherwise the coordinate field gets screwed up
10. Add {{GeoGroup}} and a locator map to the top of the list

I have done this for Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI (almost done), and am starting in on New Brunswick. Others have previously done work on the Canadian territory lists (Yukon, Northwest, Nunavut, all fairly modest in length), and those for British Columbia and Saskatchewan. This leaves Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec to do, where some splitting has been done, but little else.

Things this work does not do fix:

• making the list sortable by address, which would require adding sort keys to the municipality field so that the listings get sorted properly within municipality (see {{sort}})
• making the list properly sortable by name (I tried putting sort keys in the name field, and it caused problems with the coordinates)

Did I mention this is tedious work? Thanks for helping! Magic♪piano 20:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanations. I will have a look at Alberta tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:56, 22 August 20/13 (UTC)

Japan

Hi Ymblanter, in case you want to help: The Historic Sites of Japan need to be converted to use {{NHS Japan header}} and {{NHS Japan row}}. For now only the national part. I did a couple as examples. Multichill (talk) 15:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello; Is it possible to do any conversion by ?bot? as seems to have been done for these Chinese ones? The format of the Japanese lists is intended to be internally similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I guess this is more a question to @Multichill: than to me, but I guess if it were he would do the conversion himself without asking me. Let us wait what he answers. If the conversion is not possible, I volunteer to do at least some of the manual conversion (one-two lists per day).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I tried converting with a bot, but didn't manage to do it without too much mess so I abandoned that. Multichill (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Cleaning up the Belarus geographical mess

I'm getting unstuck in trying to compile a table of terminology for the Belarus geographical naming conventions. There appears to be a flood of new articles and stubs recently and it appears that English Misplaced Pages is now leading the way with transliteration/transcription norms (which, as we know, simply isn't Misplaced Pages's role). As the contributors don't seem to know what to do other than follow the current directives, we're ending up with orphaned pages and broken links absolutely everywhere.

My thoughts are to follow the Belarusian government standards for the English speaking world (which DON'T involve the irritating version of what is essentially Latinka), i.e. as laid out per this map and other official sites. What's good enough for the Belarus government should be good enough for us.

You can check the sad beginnings in my sandbox. Any constructive input from sensible Wikipedians would be appreciated.

I've left this message on Ezhiki and TaalVerbeteraar's pages as well. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

The beginning seems reasonable, thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Kirghiz Soviet Socialist Republic

Greetings. Any chance you could proof/source improve my Russian translation of the history and expand it further?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Визовая политика.

Спасибо за статью о визовой политике Фарерских островов.

Если есть ресурс, может сможете оформить статьи для Ватикана, Монако, Сан-Марино. Статьи об этих государствах отсутствуют, потому что источники на итальянском и французском, а в этом мало кто разбирается. Norvikk (talk) 18:58, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Я посмотрю, но не сразу. Сначала у меня Гренландия.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Nice job clearing the backlogs that pop up at RfPP, AIV, and UAA. Hopefully somebody else will help you one day. RileyBugz投稿記録 16:02, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

@RileyBugz: "Hopefully somebody else will help you one day." Try CambridgeBayWeather, MelanieN, ... ;) Samsara 10:35, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

protection

why protection this page Monument to the Lion of Judah?--Meskel1 (talk) 18:12, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Because of the edit-warring and disruptive editing. Please seek consensus at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Ilirpedia

As the closer of the ANI thread, you may find this of interest: . Khirurg (talk) 19:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done, blocked for 3 months given the previous achievements.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, appreciated. He clearly wasn't going to stop. Khirurg (talk) 20:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Still ranting about "Misplaced Pages censorship" even after his/her latest unblock request was declined. Dr. K. 17:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Somebody needs to revoke the talk page access but this obviously will not be me.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

No pressure Ymblanter. Thank you for your help in ending this disruption. Dr. K. 23:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Tajikistani parliamentary election, 2015

A couple of points – I'm struggling to see how it's "clearly controversial" – the naming convention for election/referendum articles requires to demonym to be used, and Tajik is the common demonym. Also, all of the articles were moved and you've only moved one back so now there's inconsistency between the articles. Do you mind moving this one back to the Tajik title, or are you going to insist on an RM? Cheers, Number 57 14:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I do not mind moving it back, but could you please first explain why Tajik is a common demonym? To me, it denotes ethnic Tajiks, whereas Tajikistani denotes all citizens of Tajikistan?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Tajik is what would normally be used when describing anyone from Tajikistan regardless of their ethnic group (as we use Spanish general election, 2016 despite Spain being home to Basques, Catalans, Galicians etc). See, for example, these stories on the BBC. The first one in particular uses Tajik to refer to multiple things related to the country. Number 57 15:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok, good, I am not totally convinced but I will rename it back.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:32, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Liberty University Motto

You removed the LU motto and called it vandalism. It was changed a few weeks ago. This was announced during their convocation and is clearly marked on their website. "We The Champions" is LU's new motto.

If you are able to reliably source this information you may return it to the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Check out their website on the top left, right next to their name. www.liberty.edu

I am not going to take any content decisions except for reverting vandalism and BLP violations. Please go to the talk of the article and discuss it there.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Yaroslav, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 20:23, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at WP:AN regarding regarding inquiry about the deletion reason and state of an deleted article. The thread is "Deleted article check". Thank you. --Snaevar (talk) 08:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Rockefeller University

I only saw later that we protect-conflicted. Reverted everything to your earlier decision and cleaned up. Sorry. Samsara 10:35, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Actually, it was ok for me to have it pc- and longer protected, but let us keep it like it is now and increase the level of protection if things go out of hand. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:38, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

I wanted to silently thank you for your reply, but just then you removed it. I wanted to make sure you didn't think the thanks were for removing. Hence: thanks! (ﾟ⊿ﾟ) ---Sluzzelin talk 19:49, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

West Kazakhstan Region

Just made several edits to https://en.wikipedia.org/West_Kazakhstan_Region All of the information is from the translation of the Russian version of the page https://translate.google.com.au/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%25D0%2597%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BF%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B4%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE-%25D0%259A%25D0%25B0%25D0%25B7%25D0%25B0%25D1%2585%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BD%25D1%2581%25D0%25BA%25D0%25B0%25D1%258F_%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B1%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D1%258C&edit-text=&act=url

- SW4NSQ4D 30-09-17

Thank you. Have in mind however please that Misplaced Pages (including the Russian Misplaced Pages) can not be reliable source and can not be cited. I removed material cited to the Russian Misplaced Pages.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:08, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Comment on Wikidata

Hello. I figured I'd ask here, when talking about visibility of descriptions, did you drop the word "app"? Currently, the existing descriptions are already not shown on mobile web for English, I'm not sure if someone could be confused by that sentence. Have a nice rest of your day, Elitre (WMF) (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Forgot about this - could you clarify what you mean by "validation"? I can think of so many meanings that the only appropriate thing to do is just to ask right away! Elitre (WMF) (talk) 15:23, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Erica. I am not using mobile interface and apps myself, but people are excited (positively or negatively) about descriptions where they are shown on the English Misplaced Pages, so I was talking about those (I guess this means app). Concerning validation: My idea was that starti ng say from tomorrow descriptions are not shown on the English Misplaced Pages. However, they continue to exist on Wikidata (nobody is goring to remove them from Wikidata, and this would be considered vandalism). My idea was that the English Misplaced Pages users will create their own descriptions, but if a descriptions exists on Wikidata they will be show it at the moment they want to create a new description, and instead of creating a new one from scratch they could validate the existing one for usage on the English Misplaced Pages. As soon as it is validated it will be shown in the app. I hope this clarifies my idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

IP hopper you blocked is back

Hi,

The IP hopper you blocked is back again evading his block on IP 72.52.87.66. I have already reported the IP to ARV. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:18, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done, thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi again, I think the IP hopper is back at this address now 85.154.83.2. He is not editing the same set of articles but a different article now. I have also created a page (User:Adamgerber80/Oman IP Hopper) to track the IPs which are associated with this editor. I think the editor is a long term offender whose account has been blocked in the past. You can see a pattern of articles which the editors edits(Pakistan and Indian defense related with a POV) and that most of the IP's are from Muscat, Oman. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

I am afraid you need to ask someone to apply a range block.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC) ARV?

The editor is back at this IP 5.36.80.147. Should I report him to ARV? Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 22:57, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

ARV does not exist. It is probably better to open a sockpuppet investigation, or to add to the existing one.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:12, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Rambling Man AN close

Sorry for leaving a message after you'd posted the close-in-progress template—I had the edit window open and was finding a diff, so didn't see the intermediate edit. Feel free to remove it if you'd like. I was going to null edit there to say the same, but don't want to risk messing up your close with an edit conflict. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:44, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

No problem, I saw it, and I do not think it is going to affect the closing statement in any way. Thanks for leaving a message though.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

:) Asialalala (talk) 10:06, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

hi - iam first time on wiki - i dont know how to send you a message:) so i write here: thank you for my site on wiki, i send you link to photos, i dont know how to use it:)) all the best. asia Asialalala (talk) 13:00, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

thumb|Joanna Zastróżna, Andrzej Chyra, "Las", film set, Fuerteventura, 2015

https://commons.wikimedia.org/File%3AJoanna_Zastr%C3%B3%C5%BCna%2C_Andrzej_Chyra%2C_%22Las%22%2C_film_set%2C_Fuerteventura%2C_2015.jpg

Thanks, I will take care of this.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:03, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Question

First, thanks for answering the AN3 post on Cathry. I'm not sure if you've seen their response to your block notice on their talk page yet since you speak Russian. Russian is not one of my languages, but Google translate says something about skypochats, which a quick google shows it's pretty not safe for work content. I'm guessing that's just a weird quirk in Google translate (I know it's not great with Russian), but I'm curious what was actually intended meaning there. The amount of times I've had Russian speaking friends at work talk about lost in translation things never ceases to entertain. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:26, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

In Russian Misplaced Pages, and IRC cabal are actually using skype. She meant that (that someone from the Russian Misplaced Pages, where she is currently blocked for two weeks, hence the current activity here) contacted me off-wiki and asked to block her. She is plain wrong, I am not editing the Russian Misplaced Pages and never discuss such things off-wiki. As an adept of conspiracy theories, she will never believe this anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Wow, that's was not as mundane as I thought it would be. Hopefully you won't need to utilize it, but the aspersions principle we wrote at the GMO ArbCom was intended in part to deal with accusations like that to a degree. Thanks for being aware of situations a lot of us involved in this recent issue didn't know about. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I guess she will be indefblocked pretty soon anyway. Casting aspersions is indeed not nice, but I was so many time accused in being pro-Russian, anti-Russian, pro-Ukrainian, anti-Ukrainian, pro-Armenian, pro-Azeri, being on a payroll by Putin, being on a payroll by Trump, etc, that I basically got used to it.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:41, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Salting

Hi.
Would you please process the requests at Vicky Kadian (actor), and here? Thanks a lot. —usernamekiran(talk) 14:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I do not have enough skills needed for SPA and stay clear of it unless I am very well familiar with the sockpuppet. My apologies.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Protection

Hi Ymblanter! a few days ago you put PC1 on Anzu Lawson due to persistent socking (at my request). The socks are now gaming autoconfirmed and getting their edits in anyway, see . So PC1 doesn't seem to be working any better than semi-prot would. Any ideas? I'd hate to put full protection on it but this serial promoter/copyviolator is pretty relentless. Thanks, Crow 15:41, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

I blocked the latest sock for 31h (and was close to blocking them indef per WP:NOTTHERE - if they continue uploading copyright violations, pls let me know). I guess for the time being we can leave it with pending changes, but if new sock appear I am afraid full protection would be the only option.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:47, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks! Crow 15:52, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Cara Delevingne

Hello! You semi-protected Cara Delevingne about a year ago. In the day and a half since that expired, nothing good has happened. Would you be willing to extend that protection? Some of those edits should probably be revdeled too. Rebbing 23:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done, protected indefinitely and revision-deleted some edits, thanks for making me aware of the problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:27, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

User talk:FUKKKING FAGGGIT

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

They formally filed an unblock request. This is an obvious nonsense, but it would not be appropriate for me to deal with it.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:06, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Fastjet Mozambique

Forgive me if I am missing the point, but I don't understand what the banner you seem to have put across this new article indicates? If it refers to some violation of copyright (I notice the words (→‎History: copyvio) ), then what bit are you referring to (I don't see it myself)? Second, if there is a violation, does this require the deletion of the entire page? Can we agree a way forward? Thank you. Carbonix (talk) 18:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the paragraph I removed was copied verbatim from a source (Google gave two sources actually, both were press releases or smth of this sort). As far as I am concerned, the article is fine now and does not need to be deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:05, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok, fine.... but for future reference, why did you not just delete the offending text? I cannot even go in to the 'Compare selected revisions' facility to check what you deleted! And the date of my edit is crossed out, which implies it didn't happen, which seems odd to me.... Thanks again; I haven't come across this before. Carbonix (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I deleted it and then revision-deleted your edit, so that the text of the edit is not visible any more (except for administrators). This what we are required to do in case of copyright violations, see WP:COPYVIO.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:29, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you - I'll check it out so I have a firm grasp of the rules! Carbonix (talk) 18:35, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, please do.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:37, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Protection of Blade Runner

Your page protection of Blade Runner 2049 appears to indicate preference against Prisonmonkeys and to choose to add two or three new contested sentences about the character "Joi" without consensus. Since the other editor does not appear to be making any progress toward getting consensus or continuing any useful Talk discussion, could the plot summary delete the 3 added short sentences on "Joi" which still do not have consensus. According the BRD, Prisonermonkeys is normally allowed to revert and request discussion before an edit addition is given protection status. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 20:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

No, I just protected on the last version. Please read WP:WRONGVERSION.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Helping with categories

Hi, thanks for helping with categories. Please could I ask you to follow the WP:CFD processes more fully? I know there are a few parent categories waiting to be deleted from the September 10 decision, listed at WP:CFDW. There is no hurry to fix these; they will automatically become empty once the follow-up nomination at CFD Oct 9 gets agreed (and a {{db-c1}} nomination for the India one, see ).

Also, please check for backlinks before de-listing categories after deletion. For example, you deleted Category:Portrayals of women & Category:Portrayals of men, but have not resolved the links to those pages from other categories, thus creating red links. Please see WP:CFDAI for recommended practice.

When deleting category redirects, it's also more helpful to use the deletion link within the category redirect template, rather than using C1 as the rationale, as the deletion link includes preloaded text which links to the new name.

I hope this is helpful, and that you will keep up your involvement. CFD could certainly do with additions to the regular "team".

Kind regards – Fayenatic London 20:42, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, thanks. This is indeed helpful, and I will take into account.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Objective Historian

Objective Historian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) appears to be placing Arab(the ethnicity) into article(s) without proper sourcing or giving Arab ethnicity undue weight into the lead of articles. Would you be inclined to discussing this with them? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I merely followed the example of others -- namely, placing Persian(the ethnicity) into article(s) without proper sourcing or giving Persian ethnicity undue weight into the lead of articles. Would you be inclined to discussing this with them? Thanks. Objective Historian (talk) 05:28, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:MOS, ethnicity should not be in the lede, be it Arab or Persian.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:18, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

50 edits in total. One of the first things he did was removing Persian from the lede of Al-Khwarizmi and al-Tabari. Mind you the Al-Khwarzmi page was fully protected until a few days ago, for the same reason. "Mr new editor" completely ignored that, as well as the talk page, where other "keenly interested people" have tried to remove the mention of him (al-Khwarizmi) being Persian from the article/lede. Though all these attempts have been unsuccessful, and the article had been protected until recently, he just hopped in and removed it. Cuz why not!

The words of this "legit new user" are completely disproven by his editorial pattern. He removes sourced mentions of "Persian" from the ledes of articles ("undue weight"), yet he adds "Arab" to the lede of other articles, without sources/edit summaries Even Yosemite Sam would laugh at this nonsensical behavior.

No need to be a rocket scientist to realize what this is all about. - LouisAragon (talk) 08:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Actually, 28 edits. If they continue they are likely to be blocked.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanksgiving

Thank you for informing on the copyright problem. Surely I will make it correct within a few minutes. It is my request to copyedit or review the page for further development. with regards. Pinakpani (talk) 16:34, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Once the copyvio is out of the article, I will remove the template and revision-delete the edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Pls review the page of Khairul Manazil what I have made. recently I have deleted the words violating copyright provisions and provided new references for it. thank you Pinakpani (talk) 06:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Great, thanks a lot.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Electoral Commission

Just in case you have pings turned off, or the software messed up, I've closed Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Electoral Commission, and ... (drumroll) ... tag, you're it. Please take a look at that page for a couple of comments I made in the close. Good luck. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I have seen it indeed before I went to bed. Looks like I have some work ahead of me.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:57, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Scomber indicus, Ymblanter.

Unfortunately Nick Moyes has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Copy vio concerns in a number of articles. I will reflag this and leave a message on the creator's talk page.

To reply, leave a comment on Nick Moyes's talk page.

Nick Moyes (talk) 15:13, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

To be honest, I can not see how it could be copyvio, however, fine with me.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

The second paragraph was copied from a blogspot page. The rest is fine, though. Primefac (talk) 16:20, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I thought it was not copyrightable but now I double checked, and I see it is indeed likely (slightly) above the threshold.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Revdel

I emailed Oversight, asking for help with all of today's edits at Kidz Bop. I think it's been over an hour with no response. Could you revdel those four edits? CityOfSilver 20:12, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Sometimes it takes several hours for oversighters to respond, I think they are less available on Saturday.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I should have guessed. Thanks for the quick response. CityOfSilver 20:21, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

No problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to keep pestering you but I just looked again and my edit summary there is looking like an ill-advised move on my part. Could that get deleted too? CityOfSilver 20:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

No, I am afraid this would be against the policy. The oversighters will in any case react to your e-mail, if they decide it is needed they will do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

However it's supposed to me is fine. Thanks again. CityOfSilver 21:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism

Hello Ymblanter, IPs are consistently vandalizing article Gorkhaland and Indian Gorkha without proper information. Please semi-protect this articles indefinitely.--Shanaya1 (talk) 13:42, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

No, it is not going to happen. First, we only protect articles indefinitely if they were previously protected for finite periods of time, many times. Second, it looks much more like content dispute than like vandalism, and, to be honest, your own contribution is not that constructive.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

So what is the solution ?? IP 157.49.1.60 putting information out of nowhere. How to stop such IPs. At-least you can make it one month semi-protection or you can also make require "autoconfirmed" permission.--Shanaya1 (talk) 14:24, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I see that you have been on Misplaced Pages for two weeks. May I please ask that you study our policies, particularly on article protection, but also WP:VAND, before making additional requests. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Definitely I will read those policies, but right now please do something to stop this new IP.--Shanaya1 (talk) 14:30, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

If you do not like their edits does not yet mean they need to be "stopped".--Ymblanter (talk) 14:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for helping whilst I was away

Thanks for helping whilst I was away (for example). I am very grateful that you kept an eye on my talk page, etc.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy renaming nominations

Oh, sorry for the mistake, will add them! Geregen2 (talk) 14:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

No problem, I will help you a bit.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Done from Ternana down.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:43, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Gabor Szabo

Thank you. PaulCHebert (talk) 17:46, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Category deletion per CSD C1

Hello!

I have a small request: when deleting categories such as Category:Rape myths of Persephone that are empty following a category merge, would you kindly include a link to the target category and/or to the discussion page in the deletion reason, so that editors can trace what happened with the category? Without one of these links, the reason for the deletion becomes more obscure (especially to non-admins).

Thanks in advance! -- Black Falcon 03:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure. The category move is shown anyway, and I though this would be sufficient in most cases, but I can indeed give a direct reference in the deletion reason, thanks for noticing.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate it, thanks! -- Black Falcon 03:41, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Please retract some statements

In the heat of the moment, you yesterday made some unfounded accusations and added some unfortunate innuendo. Would you please retract your statements at AN about me stalking you and making a "fucking lie", your request to topic ban me from mentioning Wikidata, and the unfortunate choice of innuendo in "reminds me of" something "after which one user was indefblocked.", which if not intended to reflect on my fate was a totally unnecessary, chilling addition. Getting an action criticized is no fun, but it doesn't give us a free pass to retaliate with whatever attacks we like. Fram (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Look, you started by stating that I promote spam (in my capacity as Wikidata bureacrat). Before this gets retracted (crossing out + apologies), I do not see any basis for our further communication. Ever. Have a good day.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:04, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I did not say that you promote spam, I said that you promoted a spambot, i.e. you granted a brand new editor the right to be a botop and you granted his spambot the right to add its spam to Wikidata (and through it to enwiki and perhaps other wikis). Quote: "their admins and bureaucrats promote spambots". This is what bureaucrats do, they "add the administrator, bureaucrat, account creator, reviewer, or bot user group to an account.", which is described in the section "Promotions and RfX closures". Fram (talk) 08:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are also reading in my words what I did not say. To be honest, the last two days I find communication with you extremely unpleasant and even traumatic, and I would appreciate if you would relieve me of it. Otherwise I will have to file an ANI request.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

If you would explain what in your words I'm reading that you did not say, it would be helpful. if you would indicate what in my reply above is not sufficient or correct, it would also be helpful. You are of course free to file an ANI request, but if you don't retract your statements I will either file at ANI or directly at ArbCom (as admin behaviour ends up there anyway). I will not let me be accused of "stalking" out of the blue, without any evidence, and certainly not by an admin (who adds some more personal attacks and chilling statements). People can have disagreements, even heated ones, without slinging such mud at AN and hoping to get away with it without any problem. Pretending to be the victim may have seemed like a good tactic, but it didn't work when you tried it at AN and it won't work now. If it is stressful and traumatic for you, it is all of your own making. Fram (talk) 10:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Go to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I see now that you had removed the section between your post here and my reply: . That's not a retraction though, that's just adding more insults without any indication that you see any problem with your statements. Fram (talk) 10:11, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Again, you made a number of statements which I read as false and offensive. In response, I made a number of statements which you read as offensive and possibly false, but I do not, and I actually did not mean to read them in a way you read them (for instance, as I previously made very clear, by referring to an infinite block of the user I did not mean you need to be infinitely blocked - quite the opposite, I do not think you should be blocked, however, I find it surprising that you make statements similar to what users have been blocked for and do not see any problem with these statements). You come to me asking that I "retract" statements you find offensive, because you find them offending. Fair enough. They might indeed have been unnecessary. In response, I ask you to "retract" your statement which came first and which I find offensive, and in any case unnecessary. And the whole thing actually started with this statement of yours. You refuse saying it is not offensive. Ok, fine. If you make zero effort trying to understand what I am saying, why should I spend my time trying to understand what you are saying? I have formed an opinion about you, but you probably should not care.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

You really can not see the difference between saying that you promoted a spambot, when you promoted (gave botstatus) to a bot which was spamming; and saying that I am stalking you, without any evidence of any actual stalking? How are you capable of acting as an admin if you are not able to see the difference between these situations and the lack of evidence for your (actually much more serious) accusation? Nevre mind the fact that I just noted your role in one problematic situation in a disucssion about the general issue (Wikidata on enwiki and in general), when you barged into an unrelated thread at AN, made your accusations, and asked for sanctions based upon it? You really can't see the difference? Fram (talk) 10:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

No, I do not see the difference. You made an unnecessary (you can easily go on you Wikidata rant without it), false (I did check the edits before granting the bot flag, I checked them afterwards, and they were ok until the website they used changed urls and some references suddenly started to point out to the spam page) and offensive statement (which I read that I promote spam). You do not see any problems with this statement and believe it just expresses facts. After that you added another one, which I found even more offensive. Now you are adding more. Fine. I am probably not capable of acting as admin, all my admin actions must be reverted, and I am a piece of shit. I am fine with that. How many times should I tell you here that I find no pleasure and no interest discussing this issue with you? Start an ANI thread and do not forget to make a reference to this discussion, or, rather, my attempt at discussion since from your side it is a monologue.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

After reading Stalking, may be indeed you actions are not yet to that level. I am afraid this is the only thing I can give you.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:57, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

How gracious of you, "not yet at that level" of obsessive and potentially criminal actions! Anyway, no, I could not make my statement about Wikidata without refering to the bot approval. It is one thing that an editor is adding spam without anyone noticing it, it would simply show again the lack of oversight Wikidata has. It is a completely different thing when anyone can request a bot and get it approved without any indication of who they are (not as a person, but their wiki-credentials), no check of whether their source is in any way reliable, no concern whether they may be self-promoting (the username was a clue), ... This shows a more ingrained problem at Wikidata, a difference in culture. Even after the problems were pointed out, you maintained that the bot approval was policy-compliant, as if that was somehow an excuse or something we should just blindly accept (and like I said elsewhere, it wasn't even true since the bot approval policy at Wikidata requires a lot more than three test edits anyway). And then you started (and continue to) overreact quite badly. Anyway, it seems we are done here, I'll think about it and let you know if and when I start an ArbCom request (no sense going to ANI as they can't desysop anyway). Fram (talk) 11:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom case

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Crosswiki issues and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Fram (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Requst

Hi! I am Newblog32, I have a requst for you that is please review the page of Imperial house of Khora Siyal. Newblog 32 (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Newblog 32:, the text is presumably copied from another Misplaced Pages article, please indicate this on the talk page or in an edit summary. Also, though this is not crucial for reviewing, I would like to see more context in the lede - I understand this is about India, but what time and are there any specific Indian states involved? Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi! :@Ymblanter: now I fix up approximately all problems of article Imperial house of Khora Siyal. The older version of article was not totally copied but its some sentences were match to Janjuhana family article because it is very related to it. However, please now check the article Imperial house of Khora Siyal and review it if you think that it is able for that. I also added the more information to this article. Thanks

 Done, but please clean up the language further.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:02, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Thanks for suggestions. I also had written two more articles of Misplaced Pages that are Nawab Mehar Polo Bahadur and Nawab Mehar Muhammad Safiullah UmarAli Khan Bahadur. Please also check them and review them if they are able for that and give me suggestions which help me further for better writing. Once again thanks for your suggestions.

I will unfortunately have very limited availability until Nov 11, and there are some issues I can not postpone. If by that time the articles have not been reviewed, pls ping me, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newblog 32 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ymblanter:,the pages that I said you for reviewing before few days have reviewed but please now visit the page of Sultante-e-uzma empire of Khora Siyal and review this page if you think that it is able for that. Thanks. Newblog 32 (talk) 16:23, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Проверить статью на английском языке

Добрый день. Перенесите, пожалуйста, статью в ОП английской Википедии. Ранее я размещала статью на украинском языке. Ее проверили, одобрили и перенесли в ОП украинской Википедии: https://uk.wikipedia.org/OWOX Теперь я перевела статью на английский язык и хотела ее разместить. Помогите, пожалуйста, одобрите размещение и можете, плиз, переименовать название статьи на OWOX, а то у меня не получается. Ссылка на англ. версию статьи: https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:%D0%93%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%B3 Буду очень вам благодарна и признательна!OWOX (talk) 08:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Добрый день. Я переименовал статью, проблем с английским я там особенных не вижу, дальше вам надо отправить его на одобрение (submit for review) и посмотреть, что Вам скажут. Я не уверен, что компания проходит по нашим критериям значимости, но там как-нибудь разберутся.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Спасибо большое, что переименовали и проверили. А вы могли бы ее перенести в ОП английской Википедии, ведь вы ее проверили. К тому же вы же опытный администратор английской Википедии и у вас есть на это авторитет и права. Я буду очень вам благодарна.OWOX (talk) 12:52, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Нет, у нас есть для этого процедура, которую я описал выше.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Local government wiki

If you want to 'make use of' feel free. Jackiespeel (talk) 14:35, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you but probably not, overloaded anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Sometimes more convenient than a sandbox here. Jackiespeel (talk) 22:23, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Stepped on you at Raila Odinga

We decided to semi at about the same time, but I set a longer duration (there's been quite a slow edit war from history). If you want, please feel free to re-protect with a different duration. Cheers. - Penwhale | 09:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

A longer duration is perfectly fine with me, thanks for alerting me.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Categories for discussion/Speedy: Category:Port Adelaide Football Club (AFL) players→Category:Port Adelaide Football Club players

Hi Ymblanter, I'm not sure if something's gone wrong or not, but since you made this edit, the category move hasn't been processed. I'm not sure if it just takes a little bit of time of not, but it's been over 48 hours since your edit so I thought I'd let you know just in case something's gone wrong. Thanks, Flickerd (talk) 10:05, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done, likely a redirect was holding it.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi. I am becoming increasingly concerned that User:Jax 0677 account is no longer appropriate for inclusion in the autopatrolled group. Perhaps you could take a look. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:45, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done, I agree--Ymblanter (talk) 10:03, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

November 2017

Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Misplaced Pages's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages become difficult to read, strain the limits of older browsers, and load slowly over slow internet connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 100.4 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Not even a hundred topics, but, yes, thank you, at some point I will archive it manually.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:58, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Suggestions

Did I put my suggestions for people I think would make very good arbcom members and who should consider running on the wrong page? I wasn't sure where was the right page to put them, but the talk page for the page called Nominate was my best guess. Can you let me know where it belongs? Thank you. 108.175.233.87 (talk) 18:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I am afraid these users' talk pages are the only option.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:32, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

My autopatrolled rights

I notice that my autopatrolled rights were removed without any reason given. Can you please enlighten me, and {{ping}} me when you respond? --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I looked at the recent articles you created. Some of them were speedy deleted, some others were substandard (such as lacking references - probably you planned to add them later or failing WP:MOS). In this situation I decided it is better if the new articles you create get an extra pair of eyes. For you nothing really changes, but if you are unhappy with this decision you can of course apply for the flag at Misplaced Pages:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:15, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

• Reply - I asked to be pinged when you replied, so that I would be notified of your response. I am not aware of many articles in 2017 that have been speedily deleted. I think that I have been very diligent about adding references to article that I have created. Can you please provide specific examples of speedy deletions or lacks of references that carried on for a long period of time? --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:20, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

@Jax 0677: My apologies, indeed Christopher Mirasolo was not speedy deleted but as a result of AfD, and other deleted items were redirects. This is not good, but at least this is not a speedy deletion. However, I am afraid my other impressions were correct. This is not how an autopatrolled user must start the article, even of they plan to expand it within an hour. It was additionally not added to any categories, which is a requirement for a patrolled article. This is a waste of time of new page patrollers. This one: By the Way (disambiguation) was indeed speedy deleted, and at the time you created it it was already amenable for speedy deletion (the target was not a dab).--Ymblanter (talk) 20:42, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Naz Shah Bradford West majority

The number of votes Naz Shah received was 29,444, but the source which you have cited clearly states "LAB majority 21,902". Please search the source page for the word "majority" and you will see what I mean. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kam2peace (talk • contribs) 10:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

This is ok, but the article is currently written in such a way that the number of votes is stated, not the difference between the numbers of voted received by her and the next candidate (which is the majority). And if you ask me, it has more useful info, but in any case it should be discussed at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Vantage FX

Hi Ymblanter, you G5'd this page 4 days ago, but there are no further notes given about the blocked user. This article has now been re-created. I wanted to flag this up in case the users are related? Cheers, _pseudonym Jake Brockman 08:19, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me, I speedy deleted the article. This time it is a different user (the previous one, User:Richardaldinho, was blocked for undeclared paid editing, and not by me), it was registered quite some time ago but only made a handful of edits, most of them being problematic. I do not see why I should immediately block them, but we probably need to keep observing.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. The user might be worth keeping on eye on. The other article created, Bobble Keyboard, is also a re-creation of a company article that was previously speedied as promotional and later AfD'd as failing NCORP. I have now G4'd this._pseudonym Jake Brockman 09:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Again, this is not a literal recreation (though too similar, and I deleted it anyway), which would get the user indeffed. I am more and more inclined to an indef per WP:NOTTHERE (undeclared paid editing), but probably we do not have enough evidence yet.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:11, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi there. Seems they are at it again. This time as VantageFX (without space). The editor indicated he's paid on his talk page. I AfD'd for now as it really lacks notability and corpdepth, but may be a case for a speedy given history. _pseudonym Jake Brockman 17:33, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, let it go through AfD (which it is probably not going to survive).--Ymblanter (talk) 18:23, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Texas was a republic

Hi Ymblanter:

Thank you for reviewing the article, Laura (1835 steamboat). There is something different about Texas relative to the other 49 United States: it is the only state in the U.S. which is a former republic. When this steamboat was in use, between 1835 and 1840, Texas was an independent republic. I forgot that the WikiProject Texas template loads this information for the United States. Therefore, I will be removing Category:Steamboats of the United States from the article. cheers, Oldsanfelipe (talk) 17:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

This is ok as soon as the article has categories (before my edits, it had none).--Ymblanter (talk) 18:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Protection of 2017 Zimbabwean coup d'état

Hi Ymblanter, you SP'd the above article, but there was only one case of vandalism immediately prior to the protection, and from what I can see, only two instances in the entire history prior to the SP. Could you look again at this? Thanks. 141.6.11.24 (talk) 11:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

I have seem two cases, which, in conbination with the fact that the article is about current events, was for me a sufficient reason to protect it. You can post an edit request at the talk page, it is now very well watched, and I am sure if the request is reasonable it will be quickly implemented.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for looking at it again. I've put in a formal request for un-protection. 141.6.11.24 (talk) 13:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

FYI

Sabrina_Ho_(何超盈) has been created. I've tagged it. BusterD (talk) 14:18, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I already figured that out. Deleted and semi-protected.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

I noticed the subject in my watchlist chatter. Appreciate what you folks do... BusterD (talk) 14:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Another search for the subject finds this: User:Angrylala/sandbox. Another likely sock? BusterD (talk) 14:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Jeez, this is getting nuts. At this point I"m assuming all recreations are socks. Primefac (talk) 14:35, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Never mind, that thing's been around for ages. Probably not directly related... Primefac (talk) 14:36, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

93.188.36.237

That IP address looks like a revert-bot. I was just about to block it too, but you beat me to it. Thanks. ~Anachronist (talk) 08:44, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Looks like our friend from Macau, from a sockfarm massively blocked a couple of days ago. But anyway, a good thing they are blocked now. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:48, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I have seen a lot of this type of activity in recent hours. How can I learn more about what a "revert bot" is and the best way to defend the project? Cullen Let's discuss it 09:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I do not think there are general recommendations. I guess once you see rapid destructive activity, you want to block the offender ASAP, just because everything would be cleaned up. Other than that, if you have good ideas who it could be, you may add them to SPI, or even bring them to ANI. Otherwise, there is probably nothing to do.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I have seen several of them in action and speedier administrators have blocked them before I could get to it. I got one of them. Cullen Let's discuss it 09:29, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Kiev Oblast

Kiev is administrative center of the Kiev Oblast! Please visit Kiev Oblast page and read it Tunyk (talk) 10:06, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

May be you should finally start reading what you edit? After your edits, the template says Kiev belongs to Kiev Oblast. This is a false statement.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:12, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

About a page you protected

I saw you 30/500 protected the page Israelites back in December, but it was way before the Arab–Israeli conflict started in 1948. So i'm asking you to bump it down to semi-protection. Thanks! Gary "Roach" Sanderson (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)

@Gary "Roach" Sanderson: at the time, there had been some disruptive editing going on from accounts that wouldn't be affected by semi protection, but it appears that most of those accounts are blocked now, so I agree the article is probably safe enough at semi-protection. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:10, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Now I reduced it to semi, let us see what happens.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:12, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! Keep up the good work! — Insertcleverphrasehere 05:08, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:40, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Cheese Whiz

I would like to ask why you have "protected" the cheese whiz article from "vandalism." I'd like to know what "vandalism" you are referring to? Oofington (talk) 17:38, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Since you are most likely an experienced editor evading a block, I am sure you know where the page history is, and also how to determine vandalism.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:40, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

"Youtube is not a reliable source"

In this edit you wrote "Youtube is not a reliable source". Could you yourself provide a source for this claim of course, please? Thanks. Bonomont (talk) 19:43, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

WP:SELFSOURCE--Ymblanter (talk) 19:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Can't see Youtube there. And for good reason - many youtube pieces are indeed well researched pieces. To recapitulate, I say that the New York Times video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZmrIkRDMsU is a good source. And you claim that because it is hosted on Youtube, it cannot be a good source. Your claim does not make any sense. Please explain yourself. Bonomont (talk) 20:06, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Youtube is a self-published source, and therefore can not used in a source in our articles. The only two exceptions are official youtube channels of media which are reliable sources, as well as information about youtube itself.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:08, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Which this is. Like I mentioned, this is by the nytimes. So, will you retract your claim? Bonomont (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

If this is by NYT, cite NYT, not youtube.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm not your monkey. If you remove my claim, and now think that it should be changed, do the change yourself instead of putting up a publicly critizining fact-template. You should make things better, not just put of marks of critics. Bonomont (talk) 20:13, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

I am not your monkey either.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

If you deface something, you fix it. Bonomont (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Look. You never mentioned it was NYT prior to this discussion, you just said youtube. You did not care to insert the link into the article yourself, leaving there contested unreferenced claim. You came here and started talking to me as if you are my boss. You are not my boss and will never be. When you refer to Misplaced Pages policies every time it is wrong because you did not even care to read the policies. And the article was already fixed in the meanwhile by a user who, unlike you, was interested in bringing the article to Misplaced Pages standards. Your contribution on my talk page is not really helpful.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:49, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

declared paid admins?

Re your "In the past three years at least two administrators stated that they did perform paid editing, at least one of these cases was pretty much high-profile, but nobody really wanted to desysop these administrators" at Arbcom requests. Could you name names and fill me in on the very basics. I suppose I could name 2 but they seem like special cases: 1) was from just before the ToU change, and his story was always vague and changing; 2) was de minimus and seemed like a guy blowing off steam - an admin who I've never seen use his tools. You may email me if you don't feel like discussing this in public. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 03:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Both cases I know were before the ToU change, but I do not think it makes a difference - if at the time there were strong consensus that the admin flag is not compatible with paid editing, there certainly must have been initiatives like opening RfC on paid editing, and there was nothing like that. Both disclosures were public, by the high-profile one I meant Sarah Stierch - she was immediately fired by WMF, but there were no serious attempts to discuss her admin flag. (To be clear, I am not advocating at all a desysop in her case - I think it was stupid in her situation to accept payment, but she was sufficiently punished for that already).--Ymblanter (talk) 04:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Starkville, Mississippi

You protected this article. How about reverting the vandalism too? It is not "The campus of AJ Brown University". Also, the Nickname is not "AJ Browns house" and the mayor is not AJ Brown. All 3 of those vandalism edits need to be reverted. It needs to go back to the last version of November 20 as all of the vandalism started today, November 24. WikiWhenBoredAF (talk) 01:22, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Has been done while I was sleeping, thanks @Acroterion:--Ymblanter (talk) 07:23, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Київ

Ти мокшанине краще знаєш, як називається наше місто?. Ти путлєрюнґе можеш вказувати як писати масква чи москва, а до нашого міста свої криваки не пхай. — Preceding unsigned comment added by А.Теребун (talk • contribs) 05:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Ik spreek geen Oekrains.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Motion: Crosswiki issues

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

The Arbitration Committee has considered the request for arbitration titled "Crosswiki issues" and decides as follows:

(A) Whether and how information from Wikidata should be used on English Misplaced Pages is an ongoing subject of editorial disputes, and is not specifically addressed by current English Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. Aspects of these disputes may include disagreements over who should decide whether and when Wikidata content should be included, the standards to be used in making those decisions, and the proper role, if any, of the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) in connection with this issue.

(B) To allow the English Misplaced Pages community to decide the policy issues involved, the Arbitration Committee recommends that a request for comment (RfC) be opened.

(C) While the RfC is being prepared and it is pending, editors should refrain from taking any steps that might create a fait accompli situation (i.e., systematic Wikidata-related edits on English Misplaced Pages that would be difficult to reverse without undue effort if the RfC were to decide that a different approach should be used).

(D) Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all discussions about the integration of Wikidata on the English Misplaced Pages for a period of one year from the enactment of this motion, unless ended earlier by the Arbitration Committee.

(E) Editors should abide by high standards of user conduct, including remaining civil and avoiding personal attacks, in the RfC and in all other comments on Wikidata-related issues. Editors who are knowledgeable and/or passionate about the issues are encouraged to participate and share their expertise and opinions, but no individual editor's comments should overwhelm or "bludgeon" the discussion.

(F) The request for an arbitration case is declined at this time, but may be reopened if issues suitable for ArbCom remain following the RfC.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:23, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Motion: Crosswiki issues

Thanks for informing me, though it was obviously on my watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Kiev edit revertion

Hello! You revered my edit without any explenation. What's your reason?--Skoropadsjkyj (talk) 20:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I actually reverted it back within seconds.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:36, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh, now I see. Well then. Good night!--Skoropadsjkyj (talk) 20:41, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Zeyrek

I was thinking it was a duplicate article, I understand what you are saying about the World heritage site, so we can create an article & have the disambiguation for the 3 Zeyrek articles. Or we can live it as it is if its better? Tiwahi (talk) 15:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Well, if you think a dab is needed (which I agree with) just move the article and create a dab on its place (probably we will need to fix the backlinks). It looks like the easiest solution.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

• Ymblanter, please see their recent contributions and talk page. Drmies (talk) 19:39, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

  It looks like we have some work to do. Everything needs checking.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ymblanter Hi let me know if it still can be done, I will do the surface editing (but someone has to do something about the edit summary to satisfy the wikipedia editing etiquette). If you can do the edit summary, I will go ahead & do the rest. If the edit summary is lots of work, then we leave it as it is, thanks again for your time. Tiwahi (talk) 20:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Nationality

Hi. I just wanted to check about this edit. Some Canadians identify as Quebecois (particularly separatists) which is recognized as a nationality in Canada. I don't list every Quebecker as a Quebecois, but in some cases it seemed appropriate. (I might, for example, list nationality as Quebecois but citizenship as Canadian in the infobox.) Thoughts? – Reidgreg (talk) 21:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

I do not know. I checked WP:MOSBIO before making that edit, and it does not leave us too many options, though one can probably always make exceptions for good reasons.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

OK. I suppose for the general reader it's better to stick with a broader category of nationality, particularly in the lead, or at least to include the broader citizenship/nationality and note the identified nationality with proper sourcing. – Reidgreg (talk) 17:12, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I think so. In this case, it might be important that she is French-speaking, but since the article is reasonably extensive I guess this point has been made clear.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:26, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

No war editing yet. You jumped the gun in freezing the GcMAF page

I understand that it takes 3 undo's within a 24 hour period to constitute war editoring. I have only done 1. On what basis is my update to the "GcMAF" page being denied? It was reviewed by 2 other editors before being posted. The references are valid and the informnation is correct. This update builds on a previous reference by another editor. That previous reference ties Efranat Ltd to GcMAF, EF-022 and papillomatosis. The new reference clarifies what the old reference means and spells out the exact FDA action. I think your action was ill conceived and inappropriate. Why are you protecting an out-of-date posting for GcMAF. Look at the Efranat Ltd website. This information is also posted on the Efranat Ltd company website. I have emailed the FDA for information on their official announcement. Then we will go to arbitration if you persist in your error. The following is correct.

In May 2017 the U.S. Food and Drug Administraion (FDA) granted both an Orphan Drug Designation and a Rare Pediatric Disease (RPD) designation to Efranat Ltd to develop a GcMAF treatment for Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis (RRP).

PageMaster (talk) 19:38, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Please go to the talk page and discuss it there.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Mister wiki case has been accepted

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

You could help in saving Yuva Jet

As the reviewer of the article you could help save it.Thanks ! Bingobro (Chat) 09:09, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Its gone maybe you could comment on its DRV page (December 3rd) . Bingobro (Chat) 08:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ymblanter. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:People from the Gold Coast, Queensland by occupation CfD discussion

Where exactly is this CfD discussion? The link provided doesn't reveal it. Thanks Kerry (talk) 09:32, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond:, Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 November 25#People by city and occupation--Ymblanter (talk) 09:36, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Michael Middleton (academic)

Thank you for creating Michael Middleton (academic). I can't tell if he is African American, in which case we could add Category:African-American academics.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I though about it and googled the photos, apparently he is not (though I am not 100% sure).--Ymblanter (talk) 09:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Not sure if you're interested in Fisk University--I have started Kevin D. Rome, and I'd like to create a succession box with the list of all the presidents.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:56, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, not exactly my topic, but I will have a look--Ymblanter (talk) 10:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

There are at least two sources that directly state that he was black/African-American:

• Arkin, Daniel (November 12, 2015). "University of Missouri Board of Curators Name Michael Middleton Interim President". NBC News. Retrieved November 13, 2015., he was "the third black student to graduate from Mizzou's law school".
• UM Board of Curators appoints Michael Middleton as interim president of the University of Missouri System, University of Missouri System, November 12, 2015, "Middleton was the third African-American graduate student to graduate from the MU Law School".

-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:24, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Tnx, will check later whether may be this should be added to the article--Ymblanter (talk) 13:52, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I replied on User:Toddy1's talkpage.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Revert of Judith Newman

https://en.wikipedia.org/Judith_Newman <--- This page. Your reason for reverting it was that my user was a 'single-purpose account'. This is actually my usual nick on all my usual media. You will also note that I am not sitting behind a proxy or vpn. I plan to use it more than this if energy allows (ugh, depression). So can you please give me context apart from 'you created the user just for this'? Is that even a legitimate reason in the wikipedia moderation rules?

Was there something in the edit you felt was wrong? I edited it to try to make it more neutral and provide more context. The source was not the best, but as the book is not searchable at the moment it becomes difficult to show more than that the author explicitly talks about it being in the book. Please advise so I can improve the edits. The 'has been accused of beeing "anti-autistic"' should at least stay, because the airquotes, tone, and choice of words doesn't really seem NPOV.

Yes, indeed please check our policies, WP:RS and WP:OR, as well as WP:BLP--Ymblanter (talk) 13:51, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Wait. So things the *author* has said in *written form* cannot be used as a reference with a link as to why there is a call going out for a boycott? Its both a verifiable source, neutral point of view (descriptive, not adding value).. hmm. Though, you are actually right. Me drawing the conclusion that the two things are related is technically original research without linking to written articles saying it, isn't it? Would it be an alright addition if I could link some of the articles describing the boycott? Some of them are from newspapers. Legitimately trying to improve the article *and* learn the rules for future reference :). You can also tell me to bugger off if you don't have time/energy to spend.

The language there though, that should be an alright edit regardless, i think? removing the airquotes, changing "anti-autism" to the more respected ableism? The whole sentence has a weaselword'y tone too. Popping off to bed. If you have the time to give me a few pointers or comments that would be great. I'll try to not be so defensive :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnusjjj (talk • contribs) 16:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, adding a couple of references (which satisfy our requirement for reliable sources) which show not just that she said this but that she generated some attention would be fine with me. Concerning "anti-autism" vs "ableism" I do not have a strong opinion, this can be reinstated as fas as I am concerned.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:48, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Kalininsko-Solntsevskaya Line

Kalininsko-Solntsevskaya Line - the line article was moved, then deleted and overwritten with Aviamotornaya (Kalininsko-Solntsevskaya Line). Could the history be split and the situation before Dicklyon hopped in be restored? And please restore Shosse Entuziastov (Kalininsko-Solntsevskaya Line) also the version as done before Dicklyon hopped in. Now SMcCandlish also joined the move war. WP:RUSSIA was fine without these users. 85.181.113.152 (talk) 03:47, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Page content undeleted by User:Jenks24. But he re-introduced ambiguous names Shosse Entuziastov (Moscow Metro) (there are two), Aviamotornaya (Moscow Metro) (there are two). Why would one do that? The year-long-standing convention is to use line name in case "X (Moscow Metro)" is ambiguous. All links point to the disambiguated name, and readers get confronted with a redirect. 85.182.117.227 (talk) 07:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

They have been the long-standing title for years without problems. If you want them moved, please start a requested move discussion at the talk page rather than making requests at RM/TR and half a dozen individual editors' talk pages – that is how this mess began. One week at a title you claim is ambiguous will not kill anyone and we will end up with a clear consensus on exactly what the new title should be, rather than the move warring that has taken place over the last day and a half. Jenks24 (talk) 07:26, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Death of Daniel Shaver

How is the version you chose the "good" version? Are there reasons for your choice? Several (at least 4) editors supported the version you removed; only 1 user (and a vandal, at that) supported the version you selected. Care to explain your reasoning?2600:1017:B404:BD76:E0B5:71EF:2B77:1EF6 (talk) 09:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Ever heard of WP:BLP?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:42, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Ever hear of WP: Consensus? Nothing in the article violated BLP to begin with, and you're abusing your tools. Do I need to report you for misuse of your tools, or are you going to revert it yourself? If you have a view on the article content, you are welcome to discuss it on the talk page, rather than act as a dictator. 2600:1017:B404:BD76:E0B5:71EF:2B77:1EF6 (talk) 09:45, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I though you are joking, but you appear to be serious. Sure, pls report me.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:47, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

NP. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B404:BD76:E0B5:71EF:2B77:1EF6 (talk) 09:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Ahma Shameel

Thanks for dealing with User:Ahma Shameel but, now that the local user page has been deleted, the global user page shows through and it's just as self-promotional. Would some kind of block notice on the user page prevent the advert showing up? User:Ahmed Khokhar seems to be a sock puppet. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 11:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Cabayi (talk) 11:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for deleting the Abdulrahman Elsamni article per A7 as article has no indication of importance (people, animals, organizations, web content, events). That article does not appear to be a hoax. 156.208.238.201 (talk) 13:23, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for Abdulrahman Elsamni

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Abdulrahman Elsamni. 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.

Block evasion again?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:39, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

As someone with a close-to-zero working knowledge about range-blocks et al, are they going to be much-helpful in the scenario? :)Winged Blades 14:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

They should hopefully solve the problem, but I do not feel confident enough to impose range blocks.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:05, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm working on it. They're editing from various proxies/webhosts, though, so they can probably just pop up on a new one. Ping me when you see them on an unblocked IP. ~ Rob₁₃ 16:47, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. The latest samples I know of were editing Yaroslav Blanter--Ymblanter (talk) 16:48, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I whacked one more range over there. ~ Rob₁₃ 16:51, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. These two, User:WorstKing and User:XMalikShabazzX, whom I blocked in the morning, seem to be from the same sockfarm.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:35, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

IP who is active at Moscow metro stations might be a globally banned editor

Seeing your comment here, I wonder if you want to say anything at this SPI, which is about an IP-hopper active in a Metro page-naming dispute. There are some IPs beginning with 78.55 named in the SPI. The IPs all seem to be on DSL lines supported by the same company in Hamburg, but a rangeblock looks difficult. @BU Rob13: has been evaluating the SPI. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for pointing out.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:06, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for taking action. Been a struggle with this chap for a little while. Had no idea there was a larger story here. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TastyPoutine (talk • contribs) 21:43, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

They sometimes have good ideas, the problem is their persistence when the ideas are not accepted. Typically they create too much mess, and the IP range is too wide to be blocked.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:45, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Something is better than nothing. This has been a nightmare. TastyPoutine 21:47, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

It will continue being a nightmare, they typically use an IP address for a few edits and hop to the next one. It is just you can roll the edits back or stop reacting to them.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:48, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Heads up just blocked another that posted a report to ANI. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:14, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I would be very much surprised if this is the last time we have heard of him.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:03, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Nataev

Администратор Узбекского Википедии Nataev предпочитает цензуру и заведомо-ложный провокации. Этот человек находя в территории Киргизии, про своей первый родине Узбекистана пишет всякие гады на Узбекском языке, призывает людей к Евромайдан в Ташкенте. UzbekRU (talk) 06:15, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

English translated https://translate.yandex.ru/

Nataev

The administrator of the Uzbek Misplaced Pages Nataev prefers censorship and knowingly-about the provocations. This man is finding in the territory of Kyrgyzstan, about his first homeland of Uzbekistan writes all sorts of reptiles in the Uzbek language, calls people to the Euromaidan in Tashkent.

If the translation is wrong, sorry. Write me the answer in Russian language in my mail UzbekRU (talk) 06:15, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I do not see what relation does it have to me.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I suspect this is related to Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/Никита-Родин-2002. The user is blocked in Ru Wiki with reference to users that were part of this long running sock case. See . _pseudonym Jake Brockman 08:37, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. May be they should be blocked here as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:56, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. I flicked a note to Bbb23 for his views and for possible action. _pseudonym Jake Brockman 16:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for protecting Cerro Largo F.C. page as the Loki Doki fans were starting to vandalise the page and I needed to make it stop so at least it should be protected for now. Matt294069 is coming 10:36, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. I also blocked the latest user as vandalism-only account.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:39, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

	Happy Holidays
	Wishing you a happy holiday season! Times flies and 2018 is around the corner. Thank you for your contributions. ~ K.e.coffman (talk) 00:19, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, also happy holidays to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI involving JamesHarrison2014

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive_editing_by_Jamesharrison2014. Billhpike (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I have seen this, but my involvement is marginal, and I am not sure that I have any time today.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Unpleasant/combatative tone of user "Kober"

Hi Ymblanter,

I'm a big fan of Kober's work. Its rare to see an editor who's been active for so long on Wiki, with such outstanding (overal) editorial conduct. He's the author of many great articles, and is "naturally" gifted with a writing style (i.e. prose) that's pleasant to read. When I first came to Wiki, he showed me (not sure whether intentional or not) the way about numerous things. Having said that, in more recent times, I notice a significant increase in hostility (i.e. "combatitive" tone) from Kober, that severely obstructs the possibility to work with other WP:GOODFAITH editors. If I may, I will list some examples of the recent past, that, hopefully, will illustrate the point;

• On the Talk:Bagrationi_dynasty#Washlist_of_non-RS/outdated_sources page, in February 2017, I listed numerous sources that were in clear violation of WP:RS. Many of these sources were added to the article by Kober himself long ago. Instead of commenting on the issue, he responds to me "These source may fail our standards, but the fact that the dynasty is one of the oldest in the word remains in place whether someone likes it or not." When I then responded "You sound mad, not really needed", Kober replies "Sound mad? Your unprovoked attack goes beyond the content dispute. Next time you insult me you will be reported. Clear?". So instead of commenting on a topic, which was clearly intended to improve the content of the article... yeah, no need to fill in the rest.
• On the Bakhtrioni uprising page, on 29 August 2017, he changed "general revolt of nobles in the Eastern Georgian Kingdom" (wich was clearly sourced, by Iranica), into "a general revolt in the Eastern Georgian Kingdom". In his edit summary, he says "nope. Tushetians, Khevsurs and other highlanders with no established feudal system come to mind."
• Idem on the Kingdom of Kakheti page, on 29 August 2017.. Its clearly visible how he changed the version sourced by the Encyclopedia Iranica, into something else. Edit summary: "rewording to reflect what really happened in the Bakhtrioni uprising." -- as if I was deliberately disrupting the article!.
• One day ago (21 December 2017), he continued this behaviour of unpleasant communication on the Safavid Georgia page. First off, he wrote "how come persian goes first in the overwhelmingly Georgian-speaking territory?", about an administrative province of an empire based in Persia, the official language of which was Persian. Then, he says "(...) the article is clearly slanted towards Iranian imperial perspective." An extremely odd accusation (?) as well, given that the article is clearly about an administrative entity of an Iranian empire..

I don't know what the reason is behind all of this, but I think the way he presents himself has become almost too unpleasant to bear. Naturally, this is not some kind of "plea" for admin action. I'm just asking for your opinion as a mod on this matter, as you happen to be active in these topic areas. For example; what should be done about this in the future? I mean, the option wasn't even there to write this material on his own talk page first, given how he refused/forgotten/? to reply to all my other Wiki content-related inquiries on his talk page, dating all the way back to early January 2016.--.
I'm always open for discussion, as long as the intents are in good faith and meant to improve the articles. For example, even on the Safavid Georgia page, I could really "agree" with 98% of the changes he made; its just his tone that really needs to change. Another problematic aspect of the issue is, is that he also doesn't bother creating talk page sections; he just makes the edits while releasing his combatitive tone in the edit summaries. Provide sources, speak less combatitively to others, create talk page sections if there are worrisome parts in an article that need to be changed. That's all we're politely asking for. Not for every "petty" thing, but you get what I mean. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Did you try to raise the point with them?--Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

I did here.. If you scroll a bit down; "Kober, responding with (...) and removed the material altogether."
He never responded to that. Thus, I did not attempt to discuss the "incidents" that happened later either. Partly due to the fact as well, that in general, he never replied to other content-related inquiries on his talk page for a long period of time(see main text above). I think any other comment about his 'tone" from me would probably again be misconstrued. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:34, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Let us see first whether they respond here after getting the notification.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

I really wonder which of the above examples is illustrative of my "combatitive" (sic) tone? I find these accusations disappointing, but still slightly amusing. --Kober 19:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

P.S. Louis, do I still "sound mad"? --Kober 19:33, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

P.P.S. The reason why I did not respond to your comments on my talk page here (1 January 2016), here (28 May 2016), and here (22 June 2016) is that I was not really active on Misplaced Pages at that time. I made only 63, 49, and 18 edits in Jan 2016, May 2016, and June 2016, respectively. As for my edit summaries, I don't really understand why you find them offending or otherwise targeted at you personally. I'm not going to respond to these ridiculous accusations anymore. However, you are and have always been welcome to discuss content improvement with me. Madly kind regards, --Kober 19:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

• "I really wonder which of the above examples is illustrative of my "combatitive" (sic) tone?"

I believe the diffs were more than self explanatory.

• "P.S. Louis, do I still "sound mad"?"

Not sure why you're making a strawman when someone is trying to adress something in a serious way?

• "The reason why I did not respond to your comments on my talk page is that I was not really active on Misplaced Pages at that time."

You could've responded later as well. Especially considering since I wrote you like, I don't know, 3 times on your talk page? Apples and oranges IMO. If someone wants to do something genuinely, he does it.

I stand by it that Kober has developed an increasingly combatative tone vis-à-vis his communication with other WP:GF editors. Does this perhaps have to do with btw?--. Just curious.

Anyhow, I just wanted to let an admin know what I empirically noticed. That does, of course, not dissemiate the fact that you're a great editor. Thanks; same goes for you ofc! Always are, and always have been welcome to discuss anything with me. Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 14:29, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

"Kober has developed an increasingly combatative tone vis-à-vis his communication with other WP:GF editors" - This is a serious accusation. I suggest you drop your tutoring tone and groundless accusations and stop bickering. And you attempt to link me with Jaqeli and the sanctions imposed on him is really pesky. What I have "empirically noticed" while working on Misplaced Pages is that such a behavior is usually a subtype of veiled WP:OWN. I am putting a big period on this conversation. I won't respond to you here. If you want to discuss contents, you know where and how to do that. Good luck, --Kober 09:09, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Nathan Kress

Just wondering if you would consider extending you PC1 set for Nathan Kress ? - FlightTime (open channel) 18:37, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:45, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Happy holidays :) - FlightTime (open channel) 18:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure, happy holidays to you s well.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays

From Stave one of Dickens A Christmas Carol Old Marley was as dead as a door-nail. Mind! I don’t mean to say that I know, of my own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about a door-nail. I might have been inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile; and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country’s done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that Marley was as dead as a door-nail. So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD|Talk 00:24, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, also happy holidays to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:04, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Wishes

No pictures and all; just wishing you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas and a pleasant 2018:)Winged Blades 13:01, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, also best wishes to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:22, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

protection of University of Paris

Hello,

I have requested the protection of University of Paris. However the same user that has been erasing content from the article changed , once again, the article minutes before the protection. Now the article is considerably smaller and protected. Could you revert the article to its biggest format, as it was some days ago, and then protect it?

Thank you Canyouhearmemajortom? (talk) 12:58, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

No, the edits are not vandalism, and it would be inappropriate for me as administrator to take sides in the editing dispute. It is semi-protected, meaning any confirmed user can edit.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:18, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

AFD

Are you sure about your phrase:--even the notability of the group is questionable in your nomination statement at this AfD. In the academic community, OMICS Publishing Group is the textbook example of predatorial open access! Also, paging JzG who may be able to provide some interesting insights.Regards:)Winged Blades 15:59, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

There was no link to the group in the version of the article I nominated for deletion as far as I remember - but even in the article about the group two first two paragraphs explain that it is actually a bogus scheme - which is unlikely to create notability for its founder.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

OMICS is notable - very few publishers have been slapped down by the FTC - but it is very, very likely that Genome$100 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is an employee of OMICS violating their company wide siteban. Guy (Help!) 17:46, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Hello Ymblanter, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018. Happy editing, Chris Troutman (talk) 00:32, 28 December 2017 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thank you, and also best wishes to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:21, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

when is a native name not a native name? (When it is given in a language other than the main language used by the natives.)

Hi Ymblanter. While reading the Simferopol article I noticed that the infobox gave the 'native name' as the Ukrainian version of the name, despite the fact that Russian is by far the main language across the whole of Crimea. Assuming this was an error, I corrected it for all 14 Raions. If you are telling me that the consensus was reached that the native names of all these places should be deliberately given in the second language of each area rather than the native language, I am surprised that such a consensus was reached (though I don't disbelieve you.) I would not have agreed to such a consensus as, in my opinion, the native name should be the name as would be used by 'the natives', which would undoubtedly be in Russian. That said, I have no intention of becoming involved in edit warring. Lin4671 (talk) 19:20, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I responded @ your talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:21, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Linda Sarsour

Greetings. Just wondering if there should be some kind of admin response specifically to this talkpage comment, beyond the closing of the discussion. Not sure if I should bring it up at WP:AN/I or maybe WP:A/E (the editor has gotten DS alerts from both me and MShabazz). The tone and content of this rant – calling other editors "a pack of Leftist POV-pushing wolves" and replying to the one female admin on the page with a lengthy screed containing borderline-sexist language – seems beyond the usual soapboxing even for this page (whether the gender-specific "schoolmarm" dig is significantly sexist or not, the admin does seem to have been targeted for unusual hostility). Any advice would be welcome. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I closed the discussion specifically to avoid blocking the user, which seems to be the only alternative.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

OK. I have asked the user to redact the comment, though I don't think they will. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 17:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Megadeth page and album sales

According to Megadeth's own Facebook page they have sold over '38 million' records and thecpage doesn't reflect this, adding a figure which is completely unsubstantiated. It's a random figure and cleasrly incorrect, yet it still hasn't been changed. Wiki sites need to provide the best/correct information and the info. on the Megadeth page is incorrect; the page has been blocked from editing because that correct change was made, so what is going on? The correct info. is on Megadeth's own web page. MetalMilitia80 (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

I am not involved with the article. If consensus has been established on the talk page, pls apply with WP:RFPP for unprotection (or file a protected edit request).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Oakland Raiders

Can I suggest that the Oakland Raiders article be semi-protected, as you have just done for Jon Gruden, for the exact same reason ? Thanks. Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Yazidi vandal

See https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?limit=250&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=2A02%3A8108%3A4DC0%3A3B51%3A*&namespace=&tagfilter=&start=&end= And my posts at WP:RSN. Doug Weller talk 06:19, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. My experience with them that they just replace Kurdish or Yezidi Kurdish with Yezidi, without ever discussing anything, and I usually just revert on the spot.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

For the record...

...semi-protection isn't working because the socks are actually autoconfirmed. I only bothered to check Secret pink drink, but the account was created in 2016, and has enough edits (albeit now-deleted). Does mean they'll eventually run out of socks, though, so semi-protection is still a good idea. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

I see indeed that they were created in 2016, but I thought they should have a number of edits before getting the status. The protection expires in 12 hours, and, if they are yet not tired then, they can use new socks, but I guess now we need a short break from them.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:51, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Minimize protection..

Hi, Blanter, did you mean to sysop-protect Kashmir conflict for a period of approx. 1 year?Winged Blades 03:26, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

To be honest, I do not remember, but I have restored the semi-protection now, we can see if the disruption resumes.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely perfect after your 2nd correction:) Winged Blades 11:54, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Kashmir conflict

Hi Ymblanter, The musicbot removed {{pp-semi}} from Kashmir conflict. I don't know why. In any case, the article was previously ec-protected. I would appreciate if you revert to this status. The topic is still hot and there are meatpuppets galore. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Protection request

I know this usually isn't the standard but I was wondering if you could take a second look at putting protection on Celebrity Big Brother 21 (UK). Especially this revision. IP editors are adding info in wrong fields in the infobox where it doesn't belong, reordering content without explanation, and adding rumors of new houseguests that have not been confirmed. The page has been protected in the past and it seemed to fix the problem. TheDoctorWho Public (talk) 15:23, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I checked the edits for the last three days, and I found a couple which might qualify as disruptive. This is currently a high-traffic page, and IMO protection is not justified. Sorry.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Alright thanks for double checking. TheDoctorWho (talk) 16:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Women's sport competitions at the Olympic Games

Do you think this category makes sense? Currently, there are only a handfull of articles in there, from the 2018 Olympics. Since most of Olympic sports are both for men and women, this would make about a half of sport-related articles fall into this category, making it useless to navigate. --Tone 09:45, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

I created it because for 2014 Olympics, all (or almost all) articles on women's sport were in category Category:2014 in women's sport. I did not find them useful, but removing them was not really an option (though if they survive I will create categories for men's sports), and they were all landing in a generic category. I therefore decided to create a dedicated category for 2018 (and eventually expand it to all Olympics). I agree that it might need a more general discussion; pls go to CfD or start a discussion elsewhere if you feel like it.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Ok, let's use CfD for the discussion venue. I am sure there is a better way to categorize those :) --Tone 10:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Good. I will continue adding the category for the 2018 olympic events (if the consensus is delete, it would be very easy for me to remove it), but will not create any similar categories until CfD has been concluded.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:22, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good! I started the discussion here: Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 6. --Tone 10:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I tagged another one for deletion and will add my comments shortly.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:13, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Tone:, @BrownHairedGirl:: let me make sure that we all understand the result in the same way. I see it like this: Category:Women's sport competitions at the 2018 Winter Olympics is moved to Category:Women's events at the 2018 Winter Olympics; Category:Women's sport competitions at the Olympic Games is moved to Category:Women's events at the Olympic Games; I create the intermediate category Category:Women's events at the Winter Olympics; the content of Category:Women's sport competitions at the 2018 Winter Olympics is split into categories such as Category:Women's alpine skiing at the 2018 Winter Olympics.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Something like that, yes. Try setting up one set of categories, such as for Alpine skiing, to see that it works. --Tone 18:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

(ec) That would be my understanding, tho personally I'd hold off the final stage until you have done the crude split by gender and see how many articles are involved. Maybe the final layer (Category:Women's alpine skiing at the 2018 Winter Olympics) might not be needed?

Either way, it's a simple enough AWB job. With an AWB script it could probably be semi-automated. If you do 2018, I can knock up a few scripts to create and populate categs for previous years. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

The 2018 events pages are not yet ready, but I created Category:Women's events at the 2014 Winter Olympics and added all relevant events there so that we can have a look. From what I see I guess that creating Category:Women's events in cross-country skiing at the 2014 Winter Olympics may be reasonable for biathlon (6 entries), cross-country skiing (6 entries), and speed skating (6 entries); likely reasonable for alpine skiing (5 entries), freestyle skiing (5 entries), and snowboarding (5 entries), and might be reasonable for short track speed skating (4 entries). It was already created before me for ice hockey. For other sports I would say they are not needed (though we likely need Category:Women's events in curling at the Winter Olympics). Thoughts about this?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I just wanted to suggest that. It makes sense when there is more than one article in the category, such as in skiing, snowboarding, etc. Are there any other mixed events apart from ice skating? Ice hockey also has more than one article per gender as there are roosters and qualifications. So I would suggest to continue this way. Women's events at the 2014 Winter Olympics should be a parent category. --Tone 17:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Yes, there are mixed events in alpine skiing, biathlon, luge, and curling unless I am missing smth.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Please check if you like what I did at Category:Women's Alpine skiing events at the 2018 Winter Olympics, I believe this is how the category tree should look like. --Tone 17:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I am in Japan this week with intermittent e-mail access, I will check it as soon as I can.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:13, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Tone:, the category is perfect, thanks a lot. The only thing is that it probably use "alpine" non-capitalized, Category:Women's alpine skiing events at the 2018 Winter Olympics. English is not my mothertongue, but if you do not object, I will rename it.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I think it uses Alpine due to being named after the Alps. I would assume the same holds for Nordic. At least the article uses it in this manner. --Tone 08:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree for Nordic combined, but I am not so sure for Alpine skiing - the article uses it inconsistently. Do you know any lace better than WP:Village pump (miscellaneous) where we could get useful input?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Right, it is inconsistent. Ok, Village pump sounds like a good place to find answers :) --Tone 08:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Good, thanks, I will try.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous)#English usage--Ymblanter (talk) 13:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

@Tone:, the VP did not produce anything useful, but I found Category:Years in alpine skiing, which is full on non-capitalized categories. Should we go non-capitalized, and if someone makes a strong case, it can always be taken to the speedy renaming?--Ymblanter (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, why not. As you say, speedy renaming is always possible. I created cats for snowboarding and cross-country skiing in the meantime. But I guess automation will be required for a large-scale implementation. Let's do men's and mixed as well. --Tone 08:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I have seen this, thanks a lot. Let us continue adding the categories, I created women's biathlon today. For 2018, not yet all pages are ready, I am busy with creation of them as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

2018 Winter Olympics pages

Hi, I noticed the articles you are creating for individual events at the 2018 Winter Olympics are incorrectly referenced For ex. everything you have sourced goes to the venues page of the official website. There is nothing to do with the schedule here. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:11, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Tobias Conradi

Are you available for a User:Tobias Conradi intervention? User:85.180.42.86 is edit warring over three articlesTastyPoutine 17:10, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done, I protected two articles, for Sokolnicheskaya line they might be correct, but I unfortunately have no time now to search for sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

i sources the whole section myself but thanks. TastyPoutine 17:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I have never heard that there were any specific plans to extend the line to Kommunarka, and I guess I would know. One needs to analyze sources carefully and see what was exactly announced. Typically, in Moscow they come up with all kind of crazy ideas where metro can go, and before a project exist they are typically worthless. I might be wrong on this particular one though.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I hear you. It’s certainly not under construction but I figured an announcement by the city was at least definitive enough for “future plans”. Plans change but that’s why you try and source the stuff. And adjust as time goes on.

But I don’t want to litigate on your talk page. Thanks for the help. TastyPoutine 17:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Vladimir Bibikhin

Hi Ymblanter, I was wondering if you could take a look at the Vladimir Bibikhin article, if you have the time. It has further reading, bibliography, monographs, translations, all in Russian. Thanks.scope_creep (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

I can have a look but possibly only next week. pls ping me if in the middle of next week I still not have touched it - it will likely mean I forgot. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Speedy

Hi Ymblanter At Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Speedy, did you intend in this edit to put "Category:Church of England churches in Taunton Deane" etc in the commented-out header?

I presume that it was a v rare error in your great work processing speedies, but thought I should check. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

No, certainly not. Thanks for noticing.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata

Sorry for asking a fairly basic question here (because I was quite frustrated). For Wikidata, when I want to add cross-wiki links, I assume I just click "Edit links" > to Wikidata page > Click beside Misplaced Pages > add the language. But it never works for me (Cannot click "Publish"; I tried to input the language code at the bottom where it says "wiki" but nothing ever happens. In the end I just do it the manual way, but this is not supposed to be difficult, right? Apologies again for the rant. Cheers, Alex Shih (talk) 03:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

No, what you describe does not seem right. Could you please provide any examples (WD Q-item and what link you wanted to add? I am on mobile, so I might be unable to check it until my (Japanese) evening.--Ymblanter (talk) 03:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response. For example, I was trying to add ja:コレカ to Coreca; The help link at WD says "add a site link by specifying a site and a page of that site", but I cannot get the "publish" link to turn blue no matter what I do. On a personal note, didn't know you are in Japan also. Alex Shih (talk) 03:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Just to add, interestingly enough, when I do it from reverse (in this case, clicking "add link" from Japanese Misplaced Pages), it worked out fine (although the interface is equally as frustrating; asks me the language I want to add, but wouldn't respond to neither "English" nor "英語"; only responds after I pasted the full link, then the system detects "enwiki"). Alex Shih (talk) 03:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I am only in Japan this week, flying back on Sunday. I will have a look as soon as I can connect my laptop to internet (either get the wireles working or get to the hotel in the evening). what you describe is very strange.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you sir. Actually I finally got it working; looks like I just didn't click the down/up arrow for the dropdown menu to appear (naturally I only pressed enter). I feel like an idiot, but I think there should be an indicator somewhere about that. Anyway, thanks and sorry! Alex Shih (talk) 04:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

No problem, great that you got it working. Indeed, the usability of the Wikidata interface still can benefit from some improvements.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Your weird moves to articles German National District and Azovo German National District

Hi there. I'm very confused as to why you moved the two aforementioned articles. Are you a native English speaker? Nemetsky is properly translated as German in English. It is by the same token that there is an article on Jewish Autonomous Oblast and not Yevreyskaya Autonomous Oblast. -- Gokunks (Speak to me) 06:32, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

No, I am not a native speaker. I believe this is irrelevant. We do not translate names, we follow the most recognized names. You might have noticed that all several thousands of Russian districts are named in a uniform way, such as Porkhovsky District, and the move like this is in no way technical and uncontroversial, it requires at least a RM (in which all districts would be included). Also pinging @Ezhiki:--Ymblanter (talk) 06:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, but I don't really have much to add to what you've already pointed out. Russian toponyms are seldom translated, they are normally transliterated. Some extremely well-known places would have a commonly recognized English name (Moscow and Red Square immediately come to mind; and the names of the larger entities—such as republics, krais, oblasts—fall into this bucket as well), but neither of the two districts in question are "well-known", and at any rate, the practice of using a commonly recognized name is not the same as "translating" a toponym. One can occasionally find translated Russian toponyms used in literature, but those occurrences are not commonplace and often serve a purpose different from that of an encyclopedia. Unless one can conclusively demonstrate that a translated variant is indeed commonly used in English-language literature (in which case it would probably fall into the WP:COMMONNAME realm anyway), romanization remains the best standardization tool for names of obscure places, as coverage of such places in English is either minimal or altogether non-existent.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 12, 2018; 14:39 (UTC)

POV Vandalism

You have to stop messing with article content that has NEUTRAL REFERENCES. Untouchable, OK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.119.59 (talk) 13:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

From an outsider's perspective, it looks to me like adminship is mostly a thankless task... so here is a cuddly kitten as a token of appreciation. :)

–FlyingAce 15:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Question about relationship of Infobox and Wikidata

Hi Ymblanter, what is your opinion in regards to Infobox and Wikidata, or can you point me to the direction where your thoughts have been expressed? Best, Alex Shih (talk) 19:02, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

I am personally using for example {{Infobox Russian District}} which uses Wikidata for a number of entries, and this is very convenient, but IMO before we get expanding the Wikidata usage in templates, the problem of vandalism in Wikidata must be solved. Again IMO, for the time being Wikidata is understaffed (by far the biggest Wikimedia project in terms of the number of pages, and the community is nice but small), there is very little chance that most Misplaced Pages editors will ever edit Wikidata consciously (i.e. excluding automated edits), and the only solution now would be to replicate the Wikidata edits here by bots; the infoboxes are watched, and these edits would be swiftly dealt with. I seem to be in a minority; both Wikidata supporters and Wikidata opposers do not like this approach, and it was not even considered when RfC was planned.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Please either retract your blatant personal attack made here, or provide some good evidence of me "lying" in that section. Fram (talk) 08:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

At the Arbcome case, which you filed against me and which failed miserably, you made a number of deliberately wrong statements about me; you retracted some and you refused to retract others. A lie is a deliberately wrong statement. You say about me "You are the one who refused to engage further with another experienced editor because you are an admin and they aren't". This is incorrect, and this is deliberate, hence this is a lie. I never said this. I said that (i) they consistently fail to understand what Wikidata is; (ii) they have way less experience that I have, both at Wikidata and Misplaced Pages, and they still are sure they understand everything better than I do (that whet they explicitly said). Now retract this.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

I can not retract anything, it is in the hatted section. You still can retract your lie.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

I retracted my mistakes at the ArbCom case; there were no lies in what remained (the ones I retracted were not "deliberately" wrong, they were wrong, e.g. confusing something you said with something someone else said. Making "deliberately" wrong statements is morally wrong and something that can easily backfire anyway). I guess ArbCom would not have let such remaining lies pass by without discussion. Now, let's look at what you actually said. "Well, both communities felt confident enough to award me administrator privileges, something which I have not seen you to achieve with either of them. But, as I said, you are certainly entitled to have your opinion on the subject, even if it is completely uninformed and aggressive. This is ok with me. I am not even going to report you for a personal attacks. But I hope you will excuse me if I stop spending my time replying you." There is no lie in my statement. You clearly said "I'm an admin, you are not, so while you may have your own stupid opinion, I'm not going to reply to you any further". By the way, this time it is your statement which is the first to be hatted, which you seem to place particular value on... Fram (talk) 09:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Your problem is that you read my statements and then decide I said smth I did not. After I protest, you must retract your statements. In this case, I did not say what you want to ascribe to me. First time, it might have been a mistake. After I said two times that you reading is wrong, it becomes a lie. I did not say "I'm an admin, you are not, so while you may have your own stupid opinion, I'm not going to reply to you any further". --Ymblanter (talk) 09:07, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Umm, I quoted what you actually said above.

• "Well, both communities felt confident enough to award me administrator privileges, something which I have not seen you to achieve with either of them." = I'm an admin, you are not.
• "But, as I said, you are certainly entitled to have your opinion on the subject, even if it is completely uninformed and aggressive. This is ok with me." = you may have your own stupid opinion
• "I am not even going to report you for a personal attacks. But I hope you will excuse me if I stop spending my time replying you." = I'm not going to reply to you any further.

I see no reason to retract anything because you now claim that what you said was not what you said. Continuing to claim that I lie is making further personal attacks, which isn't very smart. By the way, asking for votes to be struck? Wow, there really are no limits to what you'ld do, are there? Fram (talk) 09:13, 17 January 2018 (UTC)