User talk:EarthDude/Archive 5

Your good article nomination of the article Tanguturi Prakasam is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 22:43, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

I think the categories should be removed or added back again, there are citations for them that I forgot to add. Firekong1 (talk) 06:12, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

You mean the Fascism in India category? The RSS article is already a part of that category EarthDude (wanna talk?) 07:09, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

If you have citations regarding RSS and Fascism, you can expand the Fascism subsection of the Ideology section EarthDude (wanna talk?) 15:26, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

hi, unfortunately i am declining your two submissions to the 2025 DCWC. Talk:Tanguturi Prakasam/GA1 has not been successfully promoted to GA yet, but can be resubmitted if this happens. Democracy in India has not been nominated for GA status, and still needs significant work on inline citations among other things. this can also be resubmitted if it goes through the GA nomination process and is successfully promoted. if you have any questions, please review the scoring page and/or ask me here. thanks! ... sawyer * any/all * talk 15:35, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh, my bad. I thoughts the submissions page was for all articles we had submitted for nominations, not all that had already been successfully nominated through the usual process EarthDude (wanna talk?) 15:38, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

no worries! to be as fair as possible, we only give points to articles which have already successfully gone through some formal process (DYK, GAN, FAC, etc.) ... sawyer * any/all * talk 15:42, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User indulging in lies, distortions, personal attacks against me

This is regarding an issue in which you may be involved. Computeracct (talk) 08:39, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I know this is kind of a question from the out field but did you just change your signature colors? :D Springee (talk) 13:00, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh haha. For the longest time, I had no unique signature and only used the default one. I changed them to my current signature around sometime in early to mid July this year. EarthDude (wanna talk?) 15:54, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

I thought you had different colors like the Earth and Dude were different colors. Anyway, I hope you're having a good day! Springee (talk) 16:44, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello EarthDude. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anna Cantoni, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Having an entry in the Historical Dictionary of Switzerland is a sufficient claim of importance to negate A7. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 20:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello EarthDude. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Francesco Maria Cantoni, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Having an entry in the Historical Dictionary of Switzerland is a sufficient claim of importance to negate A7. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 21:01, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for reaching out via my Talk Page! I replied to the speedy deletion inquest in the talk page of František Griglák, if you want to see my thoughts on the issue. I deal mostly with obscure(r) musicians so I am used to these types of inquests. I usually fix the problems pertaining to these articles with no issue, but if this is an exception we can talk about it on Griglák's talk page.

Thanks, Charlie Charlieridgley (talk) 21:02, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Well, the speedy del nom has been declined, due to the subject being a part of a notable band. I think the article as it is needs to be expanded a lot more. Information on his early life and career and such should be added. EarthDude (wanna talk?) 21:13, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello EarthDude. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of František Griglák, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being a member of a notable band is a sufficient claim of importance to negate A7. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 21:04, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello EarthDude. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Moon River (TV series), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: TV programs are not eligible for A7. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 21:06, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

@Whpq That specific article had previously been made a redirect following a discussion (Link for the redirect discussion). It was reverted by an IP without any other discussion (Link for the specific edit), as far as I can see. It was later made a redirect again by an admin before an IP, once again, change it back with no discussion. This back and forth has continued and it seems the article is back up, again, with no discussion. As such, I have reverted it back to being a redirect EarthDude (wanna talk?) 21:14, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Please stop flooding this page with requests to preemptively protect these articles. The intention isn't to place every single article under this CTOP restriction into permanent indefinite semi-protection. This is highlighted by Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Indian_military_history#Preemptive_protection_GSCASTE; "Administrators are permitted to preemptively protect articles..." It doesn't say they must be protected. Your requests are overwhelming that request que and are unwarranted unless you can demonstrate "...when there is a reasonable belief that they will be the target of disruption". You've not demonstrated it with those requests. I'm inclined to remove all of these requests. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:10, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

An admin told me to do so. I had originally only filed a single entry and requested indef extended confirmed page protection as per WP:ECRCASTE. @Daniel Case had told me that it would be better for me to file an entry for all subsequent articles individually. EarthDude (wanna talk?) 21:13, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

That isn't the intention of the restriction. The number of articles potentially subject to this number in the thousands, if not tens of thousands. Please stop, at least for now. @Daniel Case: Would you please comment? --Hammersoft (talk) 21:15, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

I counted. Its around 160 to 170. I am only linking entries that have been put in the List of political parties in India. Anyhow, these political party articles are regularly vandalised by IPs and other editors, and this protection is needed especially as this is a contentious topic EarthDude (wanna talk?) 21:15, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Can you show how All India Hindustan Congress Party was the subject of disruption? It hasn't even been edited since 2024. Further, the restriction applies to "all pages about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal", not just your targeted list. If we're going to do this, the numbers of articles are quite huge. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:20, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Not every single one has been, but most have. Take for instance, the Aam Aadmi Party. One of India's biggest political parties, its page was severely vandalised, and the vandalised version stayed in place for over a week. WP:ECRCASTE very explicitly states that all articles related to "social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal" have to be placed under indef extended confirmed page protection. The section below it further states that, if admins deem so, articles falling under GSCASTE can be placed under full protection as a pre-emptive measure. The entire point is that it is a must for articles falling in this category to be placed under indef extended confirmed page protection. EarthDude (wanna talk?) 21:27, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

No, that is NOT what it says. WP:ECRCASTE does NOT say "placed under indef extended confirmed page protection". It says extended confirmed restriction, which is linked to WP:ARBECR. ONE of the tools available is protection. It is not the only tool. You are misinterpreting that statement. Many of these articles are barely touched. Bahujan Mukti Party, 1 edit this year by a bot. Gondwana Ganatantra Party 1 edit this year by an IP that made a link. Goa Suraksha Manch, 1 edit this year...by you. Gorkha Janmukti Morcha, 7 edits this year last being in May, which reverted the first 6. Not major disruption. Bharatiya Minorities Suraksha Mahasangh, 3 edits this year none of which are disruptive. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:34, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

When a topic is under extended confirmed restriction, that fundamentally means only extended confirmed editors are allowed to edit. The enforcement of extended confirmed restriction primarily and preferably occurs through extended confirmed page protection, and in ECRCASTE, that has been the norm as well. You may not be familiar with South Asian contentious topics, but this field of articles continues to face a level of sock puppetry, meat puppetry, canvassing, WP:SOAP editing, and disruptive editing, and edit warring at a level unheard of in, say, European political articles. Having pages related to South Asian social groups be indef extended confirmed page protected is basic procedure. Why do you think even extremely obscure articles like Gihara have been indef extended confirmed page protected? EarthDude (wanna talk?) 22:18, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

@EarthDude, it's certainly not "basic procedure". I came here to ask you the same thing as Hammersoft. Please, this is filling up the RFPP queue and making it much harder to determine what in there is actually urgent. If an admin observes that a whole series of articles need pre-emptive protecting, they can do that themselves. Otherwise, please keep the requests to articles where there is some active disruption. -- asilvering (talk) 03:28, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for being a little late to the party — I had some work responsibilities. I asked EarthDude to at least make these requests individually since he had thought that the way his request was worded, I would have understood that he meant all the listed political parties. So I suggested he ask individually in the expectation that it might lead to some clarification like this.

I did not think this was unreasonable, given the volume of requests we've dealt with regarding this same restriction in PIA articles since January's ArbCom decision. I really think ECR is useless ... it's just a prelude to the eventual ECP, and thus more work for those who work on RFPP (a group that could always be larger). I should have read the decision text more closely ... yes, it said ECR.

However, at the same time, in PIA articles we have not hesitated to ECP pre-emptively in primary-topic cases where no disruption is presently occurring. And while going through RFPP today I now learned that CT/KURD has the ECR restriction, which led to two articles about World War I battles in that theater being ECP'ed indefinitely. So it didn't seem unreasonable, especially given that we expanded IPA to SA a couple of months ago and merged SASG (where we had already been ECP'ing indef at the slightest sign of disruption, and apparently with good reason) into it.

That said, if we said quite clearly something like what we've said with PIA that there is a distinction between primary topics likely to invite disruptive POV editing and other articles in the topic area but not likely to be hijacked (Quilting in Israel, say), I would be happy. Daniel Case (talk) 22:53, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

My bar is pretty low for the "reasonable belief that they will be the target of disruption". I'm thinking "is all belief that this article will be targeted unreasonable?". That said, page protection is pretty mindless work, and I only have so much juice in my drudgery tank. EarthDude, if you're willing to identify sets of twenty or so articles at a time and present a rationale for their potential disruption (recent edit warring, vandalism within the past few months, repeated unsourced editing, obviously non-neutral edits within the past few months, etc.), I'm willing to handle a couple batches a week. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 23:00, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

@Daniel Case @Firefangledfeathers @Asilvering Should I remove entries for political parties which are unrecognized by the election commission of India and which have had no major history involved, as basically all of the recognized or major ones have indeed had some form of disruptive editing if we see their edit histories. That with the exception for unrecognized and minor articles which have also had disruptive editing. Thoughts? EarthDude (wanna talk?) 07:22, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I think the criteria should be simply whether the article has seen recent disruption. The requests need to be removed until they can be demonstrated to meet Wikipedia:Contentious_topics/South_Asia#Preemptive_protection_GSCASTE. That's the criteria. Taking the inverse of that criteria in the hopes of adding clarity; "Administrators are not permitted to preemptively protect articles covered by WP:GSCASTE[a] when there is not a reasonable belief that they will be the target of disruption." (emphasis mine). --Hammersoft (talk) 09:56, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I proposed removing non recognized and non-major articles, primarily because all recognized and major party articles have already faced vandalism, sock-puppetry, disruptive editing, and edit warring, as seen in their edit summaries. I went through the edit histories of each and every single recognized Indian party, and the one only exceptions, which had not faced vandalism, sock-puppetry, disruptive editing, and edit warring, were the Goa Forward Party the Hill State People's Democratic Party, the Mizo National Front, the Republican Party of India (Athawale), the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi, the Zoram Nationalist Party, and to a lesser extent, the United People's Party Liberal. That is 7 safe articles out of a total of 71 recognized political party articles. EarthDude (wanna talk?) 12:04, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

For now, I'd recommend removing all those requests from RFPP. If you paste the list here, I'm willing to look at it once you've removed the unrecognized/minor parties as you describe. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:03, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I will remove RFPP entries that have not been disrupted. Also, in the above comment, I have listed how out of 71 recognized national and state parties, as given in List of political parties in India, only 7 have not faced vandalism, sock editing, disruptive editing, and edit warring, as seen from their edit summaries. The rest should thus be indef extended confirmed protected. The following are some of the unrecognized or defunct parties (including major and historical ones) that have faced vandalism, sock editing, disruptive editing, and edit warring:

1. Hindu Mahasabha
2. Amma Makkal Munnetra Kazhagam
3. Aazad Samaj Party
4. Gorkha Janmukti Morcha
5. Hindu Sena
6. Hindustani Awam Morcha
7. Indian Secular Front
8. Ittehad-e-Millat Council
9. Jammu and Kashmir Apni Party
10. Jansatta Dal (Loktantrik)
11. Jan Suraaj Party
12. Jharkhand Loktantrik Krantikari Morcha
13. Kerala Congress (B)
14. Kerala Congress (Jacob)
15. Kongunadu Makkal Desia Katchi
16. Lok Satta Party
17. Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam
18. NISHAD Party
19. Peace Party of India
20. Plurals Party
21. Rashtriya Lok Dal
22. Rashtriya Lok Morcha
23. Rashtriya Samaj Paksha
24. Rashtriya Ulama Council
25. Praja Rajyam Party
26. Samata Party
27. Social Democratic Party of India
28. Socialist Unity Centre of India (Communist)
29. Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party
30. Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam
31. Uttarakhand Kranti Dal
32. Vikassheel Insaan Party
33. Krishak Sramik Party
34. Socialist Party (India)
35. Akhil Bharatiya Ram Rajya Parishad
36. Bharatiya Jana Sangh
37. Swatantra Party
38. Bharatiya Kranti Dal

EarthDude (wanna talk?) 13:49, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I concur with Firefangledfeathers. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:21, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I've removed the requests from RFPPI, to avoid clogging up that page. We can keep discussing here, and I'll point here from the AN discussion. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:28, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

So, are the pages I have given going to be indef EC protected? For recognized parties, all but the 7 I have given above have faced vandalism, sock editing, disruptive editing, and edit warring, as seen in their edit summaries. I have also given the above list of 38 articles that are about unrecognized and historical Indian political parties that have faced similar disruption in the past. EarthDude (wanna talk?) 14:40, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm working my way through the list now. Looks like others have already started the work. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:42, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Pausing here. We're down to Jammu & Kashmir National Conference on the list of parties. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:06, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

EarthDude, it would help if you could ensure all the talk pages have {{contentious topics/page restriction talk notice|sasg}}. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:25, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I have done that. Hope it helps EarthDude (wanna talk?) 16:33, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Did you see disruption at Jammu and Kashmir National Panthers Party? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:27, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh, I think I had missed this article earlier. Nevertheless, seems like there was some major disruption in October 2024 but it appears it was due to a misunderstanding and not intentional EarthDude (wanna talk?) 17:12, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

No worries. I did end up protecting Mizo NF due to somwhat recent socking, FYI. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:30, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers Hey, it's been over a week, and I noticed you did not continue with protecting the rest of the articles at List of political parties in India which had faced recent disruption. I understand if things are busy over there, but I wanted it to be clarified if you will be continuing to page protect them. — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 18:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, ED. Will tackle another batch today. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:25, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers Alright. I will add the protection notices in talk pages of articles that have been protected. — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 22:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Done with the recognized, active parties. Didn't protect Voice of the People Party (Meghalaya), did you see something I didn't? Did protect Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi and United People's Party Liberal. Will look into unregistered/defunct soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:31, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers I am pinging as a reminder to protect the unregistered/defunct parties. — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 15:44, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the reminder. Done through #20. Wasn't sure enough about Peace Party of India. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:38, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers Another ping for the final batch of articles — EarthDude (Talk) 07:19, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

All done. Thanks, EarthDude. As before, it would help if you could add talk page notices. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Can you look into the two new sections ["Corrupt politicians in Akali Dal" & "Casteism by Akali Dal and its Leaders "] added in Shiromani Akali Dal added by Sandpacks. They seem to violate WP:UNDUE. PanthPunjab (talk) 06:26, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks , I will change the heading of paragraphs..... Sandpacks (talk) 06:28, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

It is extremely WP:UNDUE and WP:POV for a political party article to have sections dedicated to corruption like this. The only time I see that as DUE is if corruption has been the primary subject the party has had coverage for. As for the controversial activities section, most of it is either too minor or, in the case of caste, too ubiquitous for Indian political parties. Especially, the Opposing Simon Commission part. These two sections should be removed. If you still wish for them to be added, opening a discussion at the talk page to gauge consensus would be a better way to handle it. EarthDude (wanna talk?) 07:40, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

EarthDude and Sandpacks, please be less accommodating of extended-confirmed restriction violations. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:15, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed GoldRomean to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as lead coordinator, and Miniapolis and Mox Eden return as coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here. June 2025 blitz: 10 of the 12 editors who signed up for the June 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 26,652 words comprising 13 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. July 2025 drive: 30 of the 54 editors who signed up for the July 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited a total of 379,557 words comprising 151 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. August 2025 Blitz: 11 of the 17 editors who signed up for the August 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 65,601 words comprising 25 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. September 2025 Drive: Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive. Progress report: As of 06:43, 20 September 2025 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 222 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,010 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:47, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Tanguturi Prakasam has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 08:01, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 07:45, 1 October 2025 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:43, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, EarthDude,

Thank you for creating Fascist pedagogy.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hey, just an fyi: Redirects are NOT case sensitive, so you don't need to create different redirects for different capitalizations! Just make one with any capitalization and you're all set :)

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Shocksingularity}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Shocksingularity (talk) 22:54, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

@Shocksingularity I did not know that redirects were not case sensitive. Thanks a lot for informing me about that! Just for clarification, I did not create the Fascist education article. I stumbled upon it and was shocked to see how barren it was, considering one would expect an article on such a topic to be highly well made and highly viewed. I simply assessed it as a start class article and added some maintenance tags. I will be requesting more work on the article from relevant WikiProjects such as WikiProject Politics and WikiProject Discrimination.

Again, thanks a lot for clarifying that redirects do not have to be case sensitive. I had found it so tedious creating redirects for different capitalizations. I will keep this in mind in the future. Cheers! — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 23:10, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Not judging at all! I am a New page patroller, a role in which you check over new articles and redirects to make sure they're fit for inclusion in Wikipedia. I saw that you had created a lot of redirects for different capitalizations and I knew that must have been super tedious. I didn't know that they weren't case sensitive for a while either!

Thanks for working to make Wikipedia better and have a great rest of your day! :) Shocksingularity (talk) 23:19, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. Additionally, editors must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Erp (talk) 03:34, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Tanguturi Prakasam has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 16:07, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:EarthDude. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.