User talk:Cullen328/Archive 103

Hello Cullen328, following is a draft of Nandipha Magudumana's legal issues. You instructed me on this discussion to present the draft to you before moving it to the article. I tried to narrow down the content as much as I can as there's way more to the story. I literally spent over 4 hours working on this, please help me make this work.

dxneo (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

dxneo, I do not approve of is facing prison time in an article about a person who has not been convicted. I think this material is far too detailed, and it should be condensed to two or three sentences. Your proposed content reads like you are making the prosecution's case for them, and I would encourage you to be careful to avoid that kind of tone. Cullen328 (talk) 01:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I didn't see any text in your cited reference corroborating that Groundhog Day (film) is "widely considered one of the greatest comedy films" of all time. Also, "widely considered" are weasel words per MOS:WEASEL. If you can clarify, please update the discussion on the article's Talk Page. (Please do NOT just remove the tags. Justify your edit instead.) Thanks! -- David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 22:43, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Davidbspalding, I disagree with your tagging and your other characterizatons, and have explained why at Talk: Pennsylvania Polka (song). Cullen328 (talk) 02:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about this. No edits, no filters tripped yet. Knitsey (talk) 19:06, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Knitsey. Neither Jim nor Cullen are unusual names, so I do not think anything needs to be done. Cullen328 (talk) 19:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey, did you mean to make this reply on ANI or was it meant for Talk:Kamala Harris#Kamala Harris identifies as Indian american in her own book? Raladic (talk) 07:06, 5 August 2024 (UTC):

Hello, Raladic. Why do you care whether or not I replied in both places? Is my opinion on the matter somehow unclear to you? If so, I will be happy to clarify. Cullen328 (talk) 07:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I am slightly confused why you made that reply to me at ANI, yes. I never argued anything to the contrary of what your reply is saying.

The ANI report is about the conduct of the other user to which you replied to in the other thread, so I am slightly confused why you added the reply to me in the ANI thread instead. Raladic (talk) 07:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Administrator changes

Isabelle Belato

• Ian.thomson
• Modussiccandi

Interface administrator changes

Izno

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49

Technical news

• Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
• Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ

While I certainly don't think that bloodofox's first reaction should have been to run to ANI, I gotta say that "userpage clearly espouses neopaganism baloney" isn't really a great thing for me to read as I perused ANI this morning. Unlike myself, bloodofox doesn't actually state they are neopagan in any way on their user page - the fact that they are interested in Germanic paganism and folklore does not necessarily have any bearing on what their own religious views are. I mean, I'm a practicing Roman reconstructionist (i.e. neopagan) and yet a large chunk of my contributions are to medieval Christian bishops. Also - would you have said to a Jewish editor "userpage clearly espouses Jewish baloney" or to a Muslim editor "userpage clearly espouses Islamic baloney"? I have a great deal of respect for you in general Cullen, but that bit really did not sit well with me. Ealdgyth (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

You are right, Ealdgyth. I was overly sarcastic and dismissive. I apologize to you and to Bloodofox. Cullen328 (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

No worries... we can all have bad days - and I will admit I'm a bit raw this week too - had to put my oldest mare to sleep on Monday and it's made my week The Suck, for sure. Thank you for the apology, although it really wasn't necessary. Ealdgyth (talk) 18:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both!!! I came here to say much the same thing, only to see that Ealdgyth had got here first, and you'd apologized. I really didn't expect to see you dismissing anyone's religion out of hand (or conflating a list of ancient Germanic topics with neopaganism, but it was the religious dismissiveness that shocked me.) Yngvadottir (talk) 10:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and jump in here and highlight that if @Cullen328: had made those blatantly discriminatory comments about any "major" religion his account would have been nuked out of orbit without a second thought, apology or not.

We need some changes on Wikipedia. Or at least a transparent hierarchy of what religions are acceptable for Wikipedia users to openly insult and discriminate against and which are not. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Bloodofox, please note that I agreed that I made a mistake and I apologized. Cullen328 (talk) 22:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328:, thank you reconsidering your comments. I appreciate it. Although I don't think we have crossed paths before on the site before, I can see from the work you're doing that you're a great editor. I wish we had encountered one another here under happier circumstances. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cullen. Quick question. I had a speedy delete of an article I was composing in my Sandbox. Is that normal practice? --Derek J Moore (talk) 10:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Derek J Moore. Yes, this is normal. Your sandbox was deleted for "unambiguous advertising or promotion". The policy language is at WP:G11. Promotional phrases like drive research and innovation and especially undertaking audacious research projects to enable global competitiveness are not permitted anywhere on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 16:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen, I certainly do not believe such hyperbole. I do not buy the hype of higher education. It would have been modified in the sandbox before publication. Just surprised that people are looking at my sandbox. Isn't this where all the rough work gets done? Derek J Moore (talk) 19:47, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Derek J Moore, editors who patrol Special:RecentChanges and its derivative feeds will see edits made on any page on the project, including user sandboxes. Certain patterns of text may also trigger a logged entry by an edit filter, some of which have been designed to spot things like promotional or advertorial language. As you may imagine, the English Wikipedia is a tempting target for marketers and SEO types.

I'm not an admin, so I can't see the contents of your deleted sandbox, but it sounds from your comment just above that you may have been copypasting from your sources? Since all non-deleted revisions of all Wikipedia pages are publicly visible, we can't just copypaste text here and then modify it as we go: this is almost always a violation of the source's copyright licensing. In other words, user sandboxes are not before publication: if you have saved text into your Wikipedia user sandbox, it has been published, in the operational definition chosen by the site owners' legal department. Folly Mox (talk) 12:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Folly Mox. Thank you very much for the comprehensive reply. I was not aware of Special:RecentChanges and I can see how that text combination would have triggered an alert. Derek J Moore (talk) 16:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@Folly Mox see my thanks above. I am still getting the syntax right. Explanation is appreciated Derek J Moore (talk) 16:36, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Kris Kristofferson § Lyme Disease - revisited. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Cullen. I would like to invite you to join the discussion about "Label" or "distributor" at the album release history table. Leave your comment if you like. 183.171.122.114 (talk) 09:38, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no interest in that conversation. Cullen328 (talk) 18:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello!

I hope I do a good job and do not get banned and I will start with quick edits. Do you think my first 2 edits are ok?

Best, --Cloud899 (talk) 16:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cloud899. There is no article Ashlan Chidester (Author), so you should not try to add that link to a list of notable people. Cullen328 (talk) 18:38, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

My bad :( - should I just write the article first before resubmission? Thank you Cloud899 (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Cloud899, yes, assuming that the person is notable. There is an essay about this very thing, Wikipedia:Write the article first. You do not need the author disambiguator in the title, because there is no article about another Ashlan Chidester. Cullen328 (talk) 19:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Quick facts

story · music · places

Close

Today I have three "musicians" on the Main page, one is also the topic of my story, like 22 July but with interview and the music to be played today -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

On 13 August, Bach's cantata was 300 years old, and the image one. The cantata is an extraordinary piece, using the chorale's text and famous melody more than others in the cycle. It's nice to have not only a recent death, but also this "birthday" on the Main page. And a rainbow in my places. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey Jim! Hope all's well. Just wanted to point out User talk:NSCA Wiki#August 2024, where a promotional editor appears to be evading your block, continuing to make spammy edits from a new account. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 18:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bsoyka. Thanks, I am fine. I have blocked the sock. Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

is not a drawer I'm familiar with, but apparently it's been stinkin' up the joint since 2009. Feel free to email if you'd like the few details I know. DMacks (talk) 04:03, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

DMacks, I have never claimed to be a skilled sockpuppet detective although "obvious sock is obvious" is a phrase I pay attention to when a good faith editor is analyzing things. I an great at blocking obvious immediate trolls and socks, but not so much those requiring in depth research. If you can be a bit more specific, I will take a look. Cullen328 (talk) 06:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

ygm. DMacks (talk) 14:43, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

This is a new category. I've not looked through all the linked articles but I'm not seeing any connection? I'm not sure what to do with this. Thanks in advance, Knitsey (talk) 21:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Knitsey. The connection seems to be murders committed by incels, and Rodger was the original. Cullen328 (talk) 21:37, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I wasn't sure, it was the copycat bit that threw me. I thought that there would need to be explict information on the incidents being a copycat. Thanks for answering though, much appreciated. Knitsey (talk) 21:39, 17 August 24 (UTC)

Knitsey, I am not saying that I like how the category is named, but I do not work with creating categories very much. Cullen328 (talk) 21:51, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

I've never even added one! I'm sure if there is a problem someone will pick up on it. Knitsey (talk) 21:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello there. Can you explain this edit? Thx. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 03:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Ivebeenhacked, it is utterly inappropriate to say in Wikipedia's voice that a miracle happened. That kind of writing simply does not belong in a neutral encyclopedia. It says that supernatural forces were involved in this plane crash, which is ludicrous. Cullen328 (talk) 03:10, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thx for the info. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 03:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cullen!

I hope you're well. I'm currently in the process of creating a Wikipedia article for the Canadian singer-songwriter RIELL, but my attempt to publish the page was automatically flagged as harmful and disallowed. The content I've added is well-sourced, neutral, and I believe it meets Wikipedia's guidelines. However, I'm having trouble moving forward due to this error.

Could you please assist me with resolving this issue, or advise on how to correctly format the page to avoid this problem?

Thank you for your time and help. Best regards, Slopix Slopix (talk) 11:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Slopix. This is the only edit that you have made from this account which was established in 2018. Were you editing from another account? If so, which one? Cullen328 (talk) 16:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

So I tried to create a page over at: []

However, upon publishing the page I got the following:

"This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: -"

I'd love to start contributing as I have a deep passion for music and up-n-coming talent. Should I maybe create a new account and give it a shot or do you have any experience with this issue.

I appreciate your time and assistance a lot!

Best,

Slopix Slopix (talk) 00:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Slopix, that is something on the Swedish Wikipedia. This is the English Wikipedia which is an autonomous project with different policies, guidelines and administrators. English Wikipedia editors and administrators cannot help you in any way with any dispute on the Swedish Wikipedia. Take up your concerns on the Swedish Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 05:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Cullen. I noticed your response to the truly bizarre "question" (if that's what it was) at WP:Teahouse#Education Minister. I couldn't make hide nor hair of it, either, and this coming from my position of affinity with foreign languages and trying to deal with fractured English as much as I can. But this one stumped me.

Pretty often, I don't understand a user question, but I have a gist of the topic, and I try to answer in a general way, addressing the topic the best I can without knowing if that is really their question or not. With this one, I had no foothold at all. And then I though of AI, which I have been playing with on and off for a year or so, and one of the things it does really well, is summarization of poor English. So, I thought I would throw this at Chat GPT, explained the situation, and asked it to recast it in plain English. Here is what they came up with, fwiw:

== Education Minister ==
Publish the copyright Law in your License format,graphics,photographic, and files
wat is he in copyright Law in 9
1. The Laws in company
2.publish and attribution
3.copyright law for in License
4.Errors and Fakesvg
5.JPEG or svg 
6.the knows in images in copyright Laws?
7.Raster and vector versions other in 
8.Author the gives copy to commons in Wikipedia or Wikimmedia 
edia commons
9.copyright law in the United States [[Special:Contributions/2A02:CB80:4225:8D68:E817:ADF4:1B11:D6B5|2A02:CB80:4225:8D68:E817:ADF4:1B11:D6B5]] ([[User talk:2A02:CB80:4225:8D68:E817:ADF4:1B11:D6B5|talk]]) 08:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

At the very least, I find this very interesting. There is, of course, no way to know if this accurately represents the OP's original intent, but given that I had next to zero idea of their intent, this at least gives me a hook, or someplace to start, to respond in my tentative, gist-y kind of way, and I might just provide a few links about image copyright at Commons, or something like that.

Also, I thought you might be interested in this as a possible technique for clarifying user questions, if not for ones this hopelessly far out, maybe for ones a little closer to English where one can almost grasp the meaning, but where a little clarifying assistance would be helpful. I hope you find this useful, or at least, interesting. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 07:57, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mathglot. Mildly interesting, I guess, but a commercial robot trying to make sense out of gibberish will struggle to make sense in an unpersuasive way, because nonsense is still malarkey, no matter how much AI power is thrown at it. And I am unpersuaded. Cullen328 (talk) 08:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

If you have an opinion, please join:Talk:Cobra_Crack#MOS:ITAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Wow. Three separate reports over three minutes at AIV. I can't remember seeing that recently. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Ad Orientem, some knuckleheads can sow a lot of chaos in just a few minutes. Cullen328 (talk) 01:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Wisdom. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Since I'm here, what is your opinion of Leonard Padilla? IMO the claim to notability looks weak. He appears to be something of a local personality who has gotten some local news coverage, but I'm not finding much outside of a narrow area of California. A cursory search didn't uncover much more than what's cited in the article. Any thoughts? -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Ad Orientem, I think that the sources now in the article are sufficient to establish notability, and there are other sources. Here's another reliable source published in San Francisco, and bylined Linden, California. Here's coverage of one of his big cases in the New York Times. Here is CNN coverage of his involvement as a bail bondsman in the Death of Caylee Anthony, a very high profile Florida case going back 16 years. As for a narrow area of California, I see that you have some past connection with Merced. Sacramento is of course the capital of the most populous state and the population of its metropolitan area is about 2.4 million people. I spent 40 years traveling around Northern California several days a week on business, know this area like the back of my hand, and I do not see the zone defined by Sacramento, Lodi, Linden and San Francisco as being a "narrow area". A drive around those four cities would take about four hours in ideal traffic conditions and would cover about 250 miles. The San Francisco Bay Area has a population of nearly ten million so we are talking about a region of about 12 million people. Orlando is nearly 2500 miles by air and 3000 miles by road from Sacramento. You can calculate the New York mileage yourself. So, I believe that this bail bondsman/bounty hunter is almost certainly notable and I consider it highly unlikely that the article would be deleted at AfD, especially since several of the reliable sources truly devote significant coverage to this person. The one thing that I will say is that this six sentence article is that it is as boring as dry unseasoned mashed potatoes, and completely fails to explain why this flamboyant personality is interesting and worth reading about (and notable). Any competent editor could dramatically expand that article based only on the reliable sources already identified, and maybe yield a DYK and a Good article out of it. I do not write in depth about "true crime" very often, although I did expand Tony Serra after attending a wedding where he was present in 2018, taking some photos, and delving into the sources. For what it is worth, both these men were part of the criminal justice system, and both ended up serving time in prison. Cullen328 (talk) 04:46, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look and your reply. Based on the added sources you found, I'm inclined to agree it passes N. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

You were the third admin, after Johnuniq and Liz and an ANI discussion, to warn R.R. Blaze This "hero" stuff must end now, or you will be blocked, on 10 August 2024. Yesterday they inserted into Nikola Tesla Tesla's fans the world over see him as both hero and martyr, a rival of Thomas Edison, a tireless engineer of progress, and a prophet of modernity whose reach often exceeded his grasp. Their claim today that I myself removed it actually applies only to their rewording of their initial nemesis of the mighty Thomas Edison; "hero" remained until another editor reverted the whole thing. Is it time to treat them as duly warned and WP:NOTHERE? NebY (talk) 18:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

NebY, thanks for the report. I have indefinitely blocked that editor. Cullen328 (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. That was quick! NebY (talk) 18:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox academic on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

i don't know how to edit anything Me and you forever1215 (talk) 16:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Me and you forever1215. Follow the process at Help:Introduction. Cullen328 (talk) 17:03, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to create my first article. Can you give me a short explanation on where to start? Also, my article is about a 24 years old dog breed. Which category would this be? --LC2024 (talk) 20:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, LC2024. I suggest that you spend a few weeks improving existing articles about dogs or any other topics that interest you before setting out to write a new article. Brand new editors who immediately set out to write a new article commonly fail because they do not understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Do a lot of reading before starting to write a new article. The most important thing to know is that everything you write must be verified by a reference to a published reliable source. That means that what you know only from your personal experience has no place in the article. I recommend that you begin by gathering up and properly formatting all of your references before writing a single line of prose. This list of references is the skeleton of your draft article, and then your task is to accurately and neutrally summarize them. Your first article has lots of good advice.

You can find lots of good information at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dogs. Unfortunately, Wikipedia:WikiProject Dogs/Dog breeds task force is inactive but the information there remains relevant, including advice about categorization. Take a look at List of dog breeds and try to model your work after Good articles such as Scottish terrier and Featured articles such as Beagle.

Please be aware that you should declare any conflict of interest that you may have. I hope this helps. Cullen328 (talk) 21:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi. How do I start contributing? --Sinag08 (talk) 08:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Sinag08. Follow the process at Help:Introduction. Cullen328 (talk) 17:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

Pppery

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Oversighter changes

Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

• Courcelles
• GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

Hi Cullen328. User talk:Deepfriedokra/talk might be an attempt to circumvent your temporary protection of Deepfriedokra's user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Clearly an attempt by a blocked or banned user to circumvent some restriction, for sure. I deleted that page, Marchjuly. Thanks for noticing it. Cullen328 (talk) 04:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Was recreated by another IP. Likely another block evasion. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Deleted again, Zinnober9. Next time, I will salt it. Cullen328 (talk) 05:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

it's been recreated yet again. Is there a way to prevent the creation of subpages in Deepfriedokra's user namespace by IP accounts? My guess is the IP hopper will just chose another "name" and continue to create such pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Marchjuly, I deleted it again and salted it. Anything more sophisticated than that is beyond my technical capabilities. Maybe someone at WP:VPT might have a better idea. Cullen328 (talk) 07:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi ! I'm Humble cee --Humble cee (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Humble cee, what is your question? Cullen328 (talk) 22:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Noticed you posted at BLPN recently, so hopefully you can help me understand a concept...

Say we have a claim that is made about a well-known living person in a non-BLP article. The claim is about their career specifically, and may be more about a decision an entity (or third-party) made involving them, but they are mentioned in the claim and in the article.

The sole basis for the claim relies on an EXPERTSPS that is generally considered reliable. Does that automatically disqualify inclusion on Wikipedia per WP:BLPSPS? Before you answer, here are a few things that muddy the waters:

• There are several medium-quality secondary sources that have picked up on this EXPERTSPS report and regurgitated it, providing some brief analysis. However, they all refer to the claim with attribution and caution, using phrases like "reportedly", "according to", and "may have". In other words, these secondary sources did not independently verify the claim.
• There are only a handful of medium-quality sources that did this, but within this industry, you would have expected a lot more, especially if this news was significant.
• The claim itself is fairly mild and trivial, and it does not really impact the living person's reputation; not something you would necessarily deem positive or negative.

Is this a BLPSPS violation or even a BLP concern? Sorry, I'm just not well-versed in this area. Thanks in advance! --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, GoneIn60. This appears to be a borderline area the way you are describing it, and the best decision probably depends on the specific context. Which article are you talking about? Always keep in mind that WP:BLP says Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. That is mandatory. Cullen328 (talk) 03:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, there is an active discussion going on right now in the form of a straw poll (which I'm sure you would quickly spot from my editing history), but it just kind of dawned on me that BLP might apply here. Wanted to be sure before I brought it up. I haven't weighed in with a !vote and was actually acting more like a moderator, trying to keep the peace and seeing it through to completion. Things had gotten a bit contentious earlier. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 03:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

To be frank, it strikes me as trivial gossip. If I was interested in the topic, I would oppose inclusion. I think that it is bordeline regarding BLP policy. I'm just astonished that someone thought it was a good idea to list 15 actors as "stars" in the lead section. I saw the original film during its first run at the Coronet Theater in San Francisco in 1977, and remain amazed that Hollywood is still trying to squeeze money out of this franchise 47 years later. Cullen328 (talk) 04:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Pinging GoneIn60. Cullen328 (talk) 04:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

That was my initial reaction as well, trivial. I suspect a widely-published discussion would draw the same conclusion.

The problem these days is that any localized discussion within the TV and film realms is likely to run into what I call these segregated think tanks (for lack of a better term), formed by large groups of editors that primarily live here. Each one specializes in a topic of interest, such as the MCU, and if you dip a toe into their pond, they are going to notice! They do great work, of course, but occasionally helpful changes and suggestions are weeded out prematurely by the swarm. That's not how things have been always been done. Change doesn't come easy in these parts, and you wind up with nonsensical leads with 15 actor names (because we're following an old rule that needs updating) or inserting trivial details (because our MoS says so).

Anyway, rant over! I appreciate you taking the time to review. Thanks for the feedback! --GoneIn60 (talk) 05:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

GoneIn60, unless major policy violations are going on, I tend to stay away from fan-dominated pop culture topic areas. I was pretty much done with comic book inspired films by the release of the 1978 Superman film. Call me narrow minded and judgmental, but I consider this type of thing to be the realm of children and adolescents, and I am bemused by full grown adults who remain really big fans of this stuff until old age. Cullen328 (talk) 06:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Ha, that's fair! It used to be less-accepted back in the day, but now you're not so hip if you're not donning a Captain America T-Shirt. Personally, I never cared much for comics, superheroes, and the like when I was growing up (Gen X here), but I always loved cinema. You're wise to keep your distance from the kids, but my passion for film keeps me close to the action...unfortunately closer than I'd prefer to be. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 06:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		Your nitpicking got into my head. Ha! GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 21:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

GustavoCza, my goal is clarity. Cullen328 (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I hope I am not doing something utterly wrong by approaching you. An editor in a very politically charged talk page discussion I observed today was arguably WP:CASTINGASPERSIONS fairly intensely. I then noticed that the account had basically only ever edited post-1992 politics talk page discussions. One of their first such threads was called "This is fascism". Isn't all that actionable per WP:NOTHERE? Biohistorian15 (talk) 18:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll just post it to AN/I. You may ignore the info.Biohistorian15 (talk) 10:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I sympathise with you question. "in need of new hobbies" does seem odd. (When I started on a Ph.D., I already had hobbies; and I continued to pursue them, doing less work than I should. A foolish decision, to be sure. But going out of my way to look for distractions would have been even more foolish.) Maproom (talk) 21:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I know you are a busy man, but would you be so kind to help my new friend Feeglgeef? They could be a good new vandalfighter but they respond badly to criticism and they need more guidance. We butted heads a bit so they are unlikely to listen to my advice. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 07:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Polygnotus. I have taken a quick look and saw your argument with Feeglgeef. I followed up on an IP they reverted who was spamming a dentistry website into a number of dental articles. I reverted some of that spam and blocked the IP for a week. Anyway, I need to get some sleep and then tomorrow, I will have a medical procedure not on my teeth (I had a dental crown installed a couple of weeks ago) but rather laser surgery on my "good" eye. I hope things go smoothly but my vision may be adversely affected for a while. Continue monitoring please. Cullen328 (talk) 08:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah, then please ignore me, your todolist is far far more important; and I can ask someone else. I am in no hurry. Thanks for blocking that IP, hopefully that IP finds a new hobby, and sleep well and good luck! Polygnotus (talk) 08:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Unrelated to my own teahouse question, recommend blocking this disruptive IP that's been active in the section immediately below mine. The Kip ^(contribs) 22:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

The Kip, I have extended their block to one week and revoked their talk page access. Cullen328 (talk) 22:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I didn't spot that WMF had already made a comment at the article t/p (my bad; by the ANI case, I meant this) and thought it to be a new development because it popped up on my X feed! Apologies, TrangaBellam (talk) 11:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

No apology needed, TrangaBellam. Cullen328 (talk) 16:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi

Hope your well

I would like to create a new page for group reciters just wanted to know how can i create a new page. --Bukhari110 (talk) 20:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bukhari110. Are you familiar with the Wikipedia article Qira'at?

It is very difficult for a brand new editor to create an acceptable new article. I recommend that you spend several weeks at least learning about Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines, and improving existing articles. During that time, study Your first article. Gather your references to reliable sources before you begin writing prose. Wikipedia:Writing Wikipedia articles backward has great advice. Cullen328 (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cullen328. I'm very sorry to bother you here with this case again. As I have pinged you on Commons, I imagine you are aware that de Quintal has been harassing me across various projects, including this English Wikipedia, the Portuguese Wikipedia, and Commons as well, as mentioned before. Now that he is blocked here, he has shown up on the Spanish Wikipedia, where I rarely edit, inviting me to a WhatsApp group (?!?!?!) that apparently also includes a long-term abuser named "Quintinense" (who has previously harassed and legally threatened me on Wikidata). I would like to know if it's a case for a permanent block here or if I should pursue the global lock of de Quintal. Thank you, RodRabelo7 (talk) 23:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, RodRabelo7. I am an adminstrator only on the English Wikipedia. Though I speak a few words of Spanish haltingly, I am nowhere near fluent, and I speak no Portuguese. I upload images occasionally to Wikimedia Commons but am not really familiar with their administrative procedures though I have made a handful of comments there. This is what I can promise you. If the editor in question engages in further disruptive editing here on English Wikipedia, and I learn about it before another administrator (I could be asleep or doing something fun or useful off Wikipedia), I will block the editor again, and the block will be much longer or indefinite. As for a global lock, please read this Meta page. I know very little about it. In fairness to Fox de Quintal, I am pinging them so that they know what I am saying about them. Cullen328 (talk) 02:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, could I bother you with something so I don't need to open an SPI on it?

Last month you blocked Hangama1, whose only edit was to a film promo, Draft:Hangama Dot Com, in which they clearly have a COI based on the user name.

That draft was abandoned, but new user Rickmood duplicated it into Draft:Hangama Dot Com 2. This account was registered after Hangama1 was blocked, and is an SPA with interest in only this topic, which seems ducky to me. (I did ask them about this at the AfC HD, but they conveniently didn't hear me.)

If you don't think they're the same, let me know. Or if you don't feel comfortable blocking on such circumstantial evidence, I can take this to SPI, just didn't want to go there automatically as it's backlogged.

Thanks either way, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, DoubleGrazing. Although the drafts are not identical, vast swathes are the same, word for word. I have indefinitely blocked Rickmood as a sockpuppet. Thanks for noticing. Cullen328 (talk) 16:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, i want to edit content about: CFO | Investor | Financial Advisor | Tax & Business Consultant | Networker | Entrepreneur. --Prateektosniwal (talk) 06:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I blocked this account. Cullen328 (talk) 17:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Julian Assange on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jim. Would you mind taking a look at Maicon Nogueira? I'm not seeing anything that might establish Nogueria's Wikipedia notablity per WP:NPOLITICIAN or WP:BIO, and I think the page might've been created because the subject is currently running for local office. I thought of draftifying the article, but just want a second opinion just in case I'm missing something. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly. I think that it is likely that the mayor of a city of about 900,000 is notable, but serving as the Municipal Secretary of Youth of Campo Grande is not a plausible claim of notability. Consider this unreferenced and non-neutral gem from that article: The work of SEJUV is of great importance to the local community, as it provides young people with opportunities for training and development, preparing them for the job market and encouraging entrepreneurship. In addition, the department plays a vital role in the formation of conscious and active citizens in society. I do not read Portuguese and don't claim expertise in Brazilian politics. The article looks like a campaign brochure masquerading as an encyclopedia article to me, and I do not need Google Translate to know what candidato a Vereador de Campo Grande, MS means in the headline of the first reference. Whether draftification or AfD is the best option, I will leave up to you. Cullen328 (talk) 05:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Jim for taking a look. I drafity the article and post a message about it on the creator's user talk page suggesting that they continue working on it and submit it via WP:AFC when they think it's ready for review. If they move it back, I'll bring it to AFD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Screw-your-political-censorship (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is an obvious sockpuppet of Nothing-nothing-at-all (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who I now see is a sockpuppet of Agoraagoras (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). DuncanHill (talk) 10:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, DuncanHill. You are correct and I have noted that in the block log. Cullen328 (talk) 17:41, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Caracas-squirrel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is another. DuncanHill (talk) 22:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, DuncanHill. I blocked the latest sock and semi-protected the three target articles for three weeks. If it starts up again, I will protect for longer. Cullen328 (talk) 01:59, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 09:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)