User talk:Rsjaffe/Archives/2025 1

as records, I've maintained archives for 4 years now. zoglophie^•talk• 21:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

See WP:DELTALK. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thankyou. zoglophie^•talk• 21:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking Mehedi Hasaan Shadhin. Did not notice that the websites were related. Similar spam edits and drafts were also recently made by other users (who could be blocked): Angelina725 - lanemario22 - pascuaflorida3 - Penelopenguyeno. The spammed websites could also be blacklisted: cookwithcooker.com - fireongrils.com - rhiannaalvarezcookerlover.blogspot.com. Johnj1995 (talk) 04:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Odds are good that there is a sockpuppet/spam farm situation here. Do you want to report it? Are you familiar with reporting to SPI? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:25, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The other thing I noticed is that the web sites probably are "fronts". They don't represent physical businesses. Look at the addresses on https://www.cookwithcooker.com/contact-us/ and https://www.fireongrills.com/contact/ ! — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi. There was a mistake in the SPI closure for the Gilberatalessandro054 case, and most of the accounts have been unblocked (see User talk:UtherSRG#Sock blocks). You performed a string of G5 deletions tagged as a result of the case between 22:39 22:45 UTC yesterday, which should probably be reversed (unless other reasons for deletion apply). --Paul_012 (talk) 14:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeeps. Well, I went through those and undeleted the ones created by now-unblocked editors, removed CSD tags, and left message Blocked by mistake. See Special:Permalink/1266440973#Sock blocks and Special:Permalink/1266251574#Gilberatalessandro054. Now unblocked. That was a mess. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:08, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for this, not seen a reversal like that before especially given the other issues. CMD (talk) 00:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Rsjaffe, for the fixes. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, many thanks for speedily deleting the Bodiadub pages I nominated. Could you please consider salting them? They have already been deleted previously; see the logs in the SPI I linked. Again, thank you. Janhrach (talk) 21:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

When I deleted them, I salted those that were repeatedly recreated. I'll go look back and see if any others need that. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I did not know that salting does not show up in my watchlist, so I didn't know you had already salted them. Janhrach (talk) 21:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I just reviewed the Bodiadub pages. None of them were recreations (used different spelling). At this point I won't salt those as the number of recreations over the two spellings are not enough in my opinion to do so. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm sure there are others who disagree, but imo in this kind of case, where multiple spellings of the title are possible, it's better not to salt - because we actually do want them to keep recreating the article in the same place so we can more easily catch them and delete the article when they do. Patrollers are more likely to notice it's recreated if it has a deletion log. -- asilvering (talk) 00:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Blocked sock anon 62.74.24.220 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is now editing as 62.74.24.207 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Cheers Adakiko (talk) 05:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Rsjaffe!

Thank you for doing the speedy deletion of Eric Gilbertson (climber).

Now that the article has been deleted, should the AfD be closed?

Cheers! KnowledgeIsPower9281 (talk) 18:10, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes. I can close it. It's a snow delete there anyway. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

There was a fairly strong support for salting it. Can that be done please? Graywalls (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm generally hesitant to salt unless it's created lots of times. Further, the problematic editor has voluntarily backed away from this subject, so I'll leave it unsalted for now. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Well, I am not sure why the creator asked for speedy rather than just letting it close naturally. It was already halfway there. It is still considered a full delete, rather than a "soft delete" at this point, right? It says "(G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page – If you wish to retrieve it, please see WP:REFUND)" and I have reservation about it if it has been left as a softer delete than if it was allowed to close naturally. Graywalls (talk) 06:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I've salted it with a note about the parallel AfD so that it'll be clear to an admin that there was a parallel AfD. Next time I'll snow close the AfD without acting on the CSD so that it won't cause such confusion. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

Sennecaster

• Daniel
• Hog Farm

• BozMo
• Ferret
• John M Wolfson
• MaxSem
• Panyd
• Tide rolls
• Titoxd

CheckUser changes

• Daniel
• Elli
• Liz
• ScottishFinnishRadish
• Theleekycauldron

Worm That Turned

Ferret

Oversight changes

• Daniel
• Elli
• Liz
• ScottishFinnishRadish
• Theleekycauldron

Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, Wikipedia:Notability (species) was adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

• Following the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: CaptainEek, Daniel, Elli, KrakatoaKatie, Liz, Primefac, ScottishFinnishRadish, Theleekycauldron, Worm That Turned.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

Hello, can you tell me if the 173.175.200.238 recent user edits are vandalism or not? He has done a lot of reverting in a very short time and I wonder if this is correct, this is not a dispute about the content, I just want to avoid a case of vandalism, I don't know what to think about it SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

It's a dispute in that there is disagreement as to whether their edits are correct or not. I'm not saying you're in an argument with them.

I'm not an expert in that area, so I don't know whose edits are right. The IP editor seems focused on reverting the edits of 2601:14D:4B80:1950:4099:63CD:455C:525A (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) and has warned them about violating WP:MOS. I suggest continuing to discuss with them on your user page, and come to a better understanding of what's going on. If you see 173.175.200.238 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) changing facts to be incorrect, then we may be looking at vandalism. Short of that, it's a dispute. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for giving your perspective on the situation. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 20:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Regarding User talk:213.42.6.35, the page-creation is from an IP that is on an extensive vandalism spree and evading several blocks. I could see it G3/G5 (DENY, etc.), and especially to avoid harassment of the IP whose page it is. DMacks (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. Done. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

And thanks for the quick re-check! The problem is Special:Contributions/37.111.144.0/20 if you're interested. DMacks (talk) 16:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey Rsjaffe;

[Sorry for the wall of text, I ended up doing a lot of thinking out loud. I hope this is somewhat valuable.]

I’m not sure if I’m doing this right, as I’ve never posted on Wikipedia before. I followed instructions on a Wikipedia help page that said to contact the relevant admin in the case of questions about any specific article deletion… that page was this one, and I then saw you had a banner stating that the best form of contact would be posting on your “talk” page.

I was just curious about the deletion of the article of American climber/highpointer Eric Gilbertson. As of right now, if you Google his name, his Wikipedia article is the top suggested search result. However, clicking on the Wikipedia link redirects to a page on deletion, so it’s a dead link. It says it was deleted by user:Rsjaffe.

I’m not sure what my question is, actually. I’m sure not every interesting or notable outdoorsperson needs their own Wikipedia page, but I was wondering if this means Wikipedia is adopting a new policy of cracking down on articles about notable peakbaggers, highpointers, FKTers, mountaineers, explorers, or endurance athletes. I could see the argument that these forms of outdoor recreation, although increasingly popular, are still too niche for their most prominent figures to have their own Wikipedia pages. It can be very tricky to determine notability in a community that often eschews traditional media attention or mainstream notoriety.

Off the top of my head, most comparable figures seem to have current articles, but some do not. Just considering the relevant reference class, it looks like their are current Wiki pages on Andrew Skurka, Russ Cook, Nimblewill Nomad, Eric Larsen, Nims Purja, Jake Meyer, Francis Tapon, Ray Jardine, Tom Davies, Jeff Browning, Warren Doyle, Ginge Fullen, Karel Sabbe, Dale Shewalter, and Brian Robinson; other prominent individuals in this broad reference class, like Edward Earl, Justin Simoni, Nick Fowler, and John and Alyson Kirk, for instance, do not have their own pages.

Obviously others who have always deliberately sought to stay out of the public eye (Petter Bjørstad, Adam Helman, Steven Song, Bob Packard, Adam Walker) or who are already attracting notoriety but are in the nascent stages of their careers (Will Peterson, Max Jollife, Jackson Marvell, Georgia Porter) are not going to end up on Wikipedia, but it does seem like the line is unclear and the qualities for inclusion in this general area are poorly defined.

I’ve rambled here for a while, but do you have any thoughts on how Wikipedia could contribute to greater clarity around this space?

I hope I’ve done this posting thing correctly.

Thank you very much, Respectfully, FE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:250E:1500:E48A:7AF1:ECA9:4A13 (talk) 19:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

That article was deleted at the request of the author and as consensus on a deletion discussion. Whether or not an article is suitable depends mainly upon the objective third-party in-depth sources for the subject. At the time of deletion, the deletion discussion conclusion was based on the lack of good sources. If you are able to properly source an article for Wikipedia, it probably would be fine for inclusion. Sources count more than an individual's accomplishments do, as Wikipedia depends upon verifiable third-party information for articles. So it's less about being deserving of an article and more about being noticed and reported on by others. You can look at WP:GNG if you are interested in gathering information together that would support an article for him. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I see you deleted Draft:Text huso3 and User:Vdarveau/huso-topic3-reworked as copyright violations. Those two are not eligible for G12 as the source site is CC-BY 4.0 which is an acceptable license for Wikipedia. Although Vdarveau did not attribute the sources, I did repair the lack of attribution for both. Please reverse the deletion. Thanks, -- Whpq (talk) 18:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Done. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

My browser doesn't allow me to use a real barnstar, but let this act in its place. Thank you for reducing my stress. We've gotten a lot of criticism in social media lately, and you have done fine work in preventing a possible public relations disaster. Bearian (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey, since you seem to have attracted an IP hopping vandal, let me know if you would like your user talk page protected for a few days. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, but it’s ok without. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:50, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for your great contributions to improve this project. Maliner (talk) 20:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for blocking the vandal who harassed me! 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 04:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Maths, science, and technology" 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 22:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

A user you blocked, BUU SKIBIDI, used their talk page in an inappropriate manner after you blocked the user. See Special:Diff/1271834304. Yoshi24517 and I recommend removing this user's ability to edit their own talk page. Z. Patterson (talk) 01:33, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

They are allowed to delete block notices. About the only thing they can’t delete are declined unblock requests. See WP:KEEPDECLINEDUNBLOCK. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:49, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

If they added inappropriate things, I’d block the talk page. But deletions, no. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe: I understand now. Thank you. Z. Patterson (talk) 01:51, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Just notice this recently created account has a username that might violate Wikipedia:Username policy indicated by their first three letters, apart from being only a vandalism account. Galaxybeing (talk) 03:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. Looks like they're already blocked. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:00, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm struggling to understand how blocking me would address your concerns. Honestly, I'm disappointed by the personal attacks from other users, which I don't believe are constructive or respectful. I firmly believe that Wikipedia's credibility is compromised by the presence of inaccurate information. I stand by my assertion that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. If you choose to block me, I accept that decision, but I hope in the future, you will take steps to address the issues I've raised. I also hope that users will focus on improving content rather than tracking individual editors' contributions. Mr. Accuracy Specialist (talk) 06:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Please respond at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Mr. Accuracy Specialist. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 07:03, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to respond to the ANI report as I feel it may lead to further personal attacks. I believe my points are being disregarded, and I'm concerned that engaging with these users will not be productive. They've asked me to explain, but I'm unsure if it's worth investing time when the discussion has become confrontational. I think it's best to focus on improving the content rather than engaging in unnecessary debates. Mr. Accuracy Specialist (talk) 07:03, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

If you think I'll ask to be unblocked, then I'm sorry to disappoint you. I refuse to bow down and compromise my standards to appease individuals with low standards who don't even hold a doctoral degree. I stand by my principles and maintain that Wikipedia's credibility is compromised by the presence of inaccurate information.

WIKIPEDIA is FAKE COMMUNITY.

FULL OF FAKE INFORMATION. HOME OF UNRELIABLE SOURCES. Mr. Accuracy Specialist (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

To FACT-CHECKED you and debunked your argument on me.

There are two main issues here. Firstly, regarding personal attacks: I didn't initiate the insults. Every time I made an edit, someone would revert it, even though I explained that I removed unsourced content. Despite this, others continued to edit.

Secondly, regarding disruptive edits: What's wrong with removing uncited claims? Isn't that a necessary step to ensure accuracy? I fail to see the logic in criticizing me for this. It seems that you, like the others, are failing to comprehend the importance of verifying information. Mr. Accuracy Specialist (talk) 07:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

List of Danish flags I can see you have tried to reach out to me, but I have also replied back to you, but yes, there are reason why those flags is here, because some of the flags have been used by Denmark, and some of those flags are still been using buy some minorities in Denmark and regions unofficial flags only too represents peoples of those regions. And removing those flags from this list, those people they are doing this have none respect for Denmark and something like that is more or less considered vandalism.

And the removal of flags from the historical flags is also not in order because Denmark has had a great many areas and countries under it throughout time and that is also why it was divided with times and years for each time Denmark gained some land and lost some land and also flags from the royals with people who choose to remove these flags have absolutely no respect for which from Denmark the Danes or the royal royal family from Denmark

80.208.68.164 (talk) 10:02, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

So yes, you have none reason to do this at all, because you cannot block someone without any reasons that is against Wikipedia and you know that because you have been here for 17 years, you should know that that should always be a reason for that if they are not a reason that means you are actually, you are abusing this thing to block others or so that you cannot edit various things and cases, and because you have no reason to do this, you are actually abusing this thing which is against Wikipedia guidelines and rules and because you have chosen to do this which is not right, you may risk being shut down or prevented from editing things and cases on Wikipedia because you have chosen to abuse this thing, but you should know that because you've been here for 17 years and because you've chosen to abuse this thing, maybe some other administrator chooses to close your profile down, maybe because this just looks like abuse or you have abused this power and you choose to block someone and prevent someone from editing a page but without any reason to do so because you have no reason. 80.208.68.164 (talk) 10:11, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

the only thing that you might be left in is that they have to go and talk to you to get this thing opened again so that you can edit on this page again but again you have no reason to do this and that is nothing more than abuse of this power that you have but you have no reason to do it because you always have to leave a message why you choose to do this but you have not done that which is actually an abuse and negotiating people in editing on the page mentioned here, List of Danish flags.

00:39, 2 February 2025

80.208.68.164(talk)

00:39, 2 February 2026

11 months, 30 days, 14 hours and 33 minutes left

Rsjaffe(talk)

editing

pages

List of Danish flags

anon. only

See discussion on this user's talk page. Reverted by multiple editors, ignoring concensus.

I Have not ignored anything at all, but you have to leave a message to how and see why I should be unlocked again/ unblocked again. But again you have none reasons do it anyways. To do this to begin with at all.

you haven't really given either on this website or on this page on Wikipedia I have but you haven't there are many others like me who have but you're just an administrator or something like that but you don't know everything /you don't know about everything that has happened on this website, you would only know that if you had edited this website yourself, but you haven't and I haven't ignored anything at all, I've just added these flags because it is part of Denmark's history and many of these flags represent different peoples who live in Denmark and possibly Greenland and the Faroe Islands, or the Danish minority who live in Schleswig-Holstein in Germany and so on. And I have also added other flags because Denmark has also had many areas and take clothes over time yes they have lost land over time but that was also why the historical flags are also the other and so much else in other colonies and also flags as people have chosen to remove as they have something to do with political flags and parties in Denmark and not other countries. but yes Denmark has had really many like England as an example the other countries in the Nordics and some of India and many other countries that people don't know that Denmark once inherited or had in their possession but that's why you have Wikipedia so people can learn something about other countries and maybe even learn something like them maybe if they already but just in a completely new way. 80.208.68.164 (talk) 10:21, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

I was genuinely surprised to see that the MarkMeets Wikipedia page was speedily deleted, despite its clear notability and longstanding presence in the media industry. Given that similar outlets such as Popjustice, The Line of Best Fit, Far Out, and even major media brands like Deutsche Welle have their own pages, it seems inconsistent for MarkMeets to be excluded.

MarkMeets has been an influential and widely recognized source for entertainment news, celebrity interviews, film coverage, and industry insights for over 20 years. It has been cited in major publications, collaborated with global media brands, and is a trusted source for industry professionals and audiences alike.

The deletion appears to be a premature decision that may not have fully considered the brand’s extensive contributions to the entertainment industry and they have many mentions on wiki. Maybe thet wiki editors do not specialize in this area of media / organization (my friend did not know the BEE GEES, they does not mean they are not KNOWN).

The page was written with neutral, verifiable, and well-sourced content, adhering to Wikipedia’s guidelines. I kindly request a thorough review of this decision and ask that MarkMeets be granted a rightful place on Wikipedia, just like its comparable counterparts.

I would appreciate any clarification on specific concerns that led to its deletion and would be happy to address any issues necessary to ensure compliance with Wikipedia’s standards.

SO many other similar pages are live, it's odd that this one was over-looked with a retired medical person making a decision? NigelJong (talk) 13:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the article to Draft:MarkMeets, where you can work on it. I strongly warn you not to publish it on your own. It has been deleted five times, of which this was only the latest. Recurrent creation of non-notable articles can make it much harder to publish the article in the future if you can show notability.

Wikipedia is not a business directory, so a company is not entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists. All topics must be notable by Wikipedia's definition to merit inclusion. For this to happen, the company must have already received significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources.

As to your arguments about why the article should exist:

1. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a relevant argument. See the link for reasons.
2. Wikipedia:GNG explains what is needed to make an article eligible for inclusion. Please read that and see that you find independent in-depth reliable sources discussing MarkMeets. What is there now are not independent sources.

Yes, I am not a subject matter expert. I am one of about 400 active administrators on English Wikipedia. We were chosen by the community because they trust us to interpret and enact Wikipedia's rules. The article was deleted because there was no credible claim of notability.

Again, read the notability requirements listed above and ensure that you have satisfactorily satisfied those requirements before submitting the article for consideration. If you do submit the article, use the button at the top of the article Submit the draft for review! This will notify the people who review articles for creation, and they will either move the article to mainspace or give you valuable feedback as to how to improve the article. This way, the article is much less likely to be deleted again.

I wish you well with your editing and feel free to ask me or others if you need more advice. You may also seek help at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello! You blocked @Wigglebuy579579 inter alia for creating incorrect references and articles. I think this has happened again at Demographics of Lebanon. They first inserted a table with an incomplete reference (to the Lebanese government’s statistics authorities’ homepage rather than any specific page), and then later made 26 rather weird edits that radically changed the content of the table (again with no link). A full explanation is at Talk:Demographics of Lebanon § Table of ethnic groups. Would you mind stepping in? Thanks. Docentation (talk) 20:16, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

@Docentation This case of editing on "Demographics of Lebanon" happened way before I was blocked for creating new pages with incorrect references and adding data from questionable sources. What do you mean by this happened again? Wigglebuy579579 (talk) 20:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

You can check for yourself. Respectfully. Wigglebuy579579 (talk) 20:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean here. Obviously other users have edited the page. The edits I’ve attributed to you were made by you—that can be seen in the diffs linked. Presumably there’s no guarantee you were caught immediately after you started adding incorrect references and you could have been adding edits with false data long before. Indeed, in the last month you’ve had two drafts deleted for that reason—probably independent reason to resume the block. If you can clarify the precise place on the CAS’s website you found the table, go ahead and reinsert it (correctly). Docentation (talk) 20:29, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

@Docentation as rsjaffe mentioned, the last edit that I made on "Demographics of Lebanon" was on the 19th of December, 2024. And on the 10th of January 2025, everything regarding my pre-block behaviour was sorted out as all of my activities on the various articles that I edit are visible, Including the edits that I made on "Demographics of Lebanon". I was unblocked with a clear set of conditions that I have to follow otherwise I'd be ousted again with even less odds of being unblocked again. you can check my activity to see whether I have broken any of those conditions since then. Regards Wigglebuy579579‬. Wigglebuy579579 (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

@Docentation You removed that data? great. Wigglebuy579579 (talk) 20:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

The last edit I see there by @Wigglebuy579579 is 19 Dec 2024, and the block was 10 Jan 2025, so this does not concern behavior post-block. We've addressed the pre-block behavior and @Wigglebuy579579 has agreed to conditions, and our concern now is that @Wigglebuy579579 prospectively follows those conditions. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Ok fair enough, I failed to check the dates. I'm slightly confused as to this approach; until I checked, nobody determined whether the edits @Wigglebuy579579 made to Demographics of Lebanon were accurate. We still don't have a clear answer as to which if any of the versions of Wigglebuy’s table was actually published by the Lebanese Central Administration of Statistics, and, if so, what the original link is. Even if Wigglebuy is perfectly inoffensive from now on one might expect some help in cleaning up. If the unblock really doesn’t require any help to others in cleaning up the earlier mess, I suppose this admittedly isn’t administrator business. Docentation (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2025).

Administrator changes

• Arcticocean
• Wugapodes

Euryalus

CheckUser changes

• Firefly
• L235

Oversighter changes

• Firefly
• Guerillero
• L235
• Moneytrees

Technical news

• Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
• A 'Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been closed.

FYI, the relevant range you need to be blocking is not the /64, but actually the /45 (2601:586:D030:0:0:0:0:0/45 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial))). This range belongs to Xfinity Wifi (a public Wi-Fi service) in the Savannah metropolitan area. It's been especially used by the blocked sockpuppeteer Juantheman96 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) lately (most recently in December 2024), but I'm not sure if that user is him or another unrelated troll (politics are one of Juan's special interests). I had luck getting one admin, Graham87, to block his IP socks when they pop up, but he got desysopped for his excessive blocks. wizzito | say hello! 06:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I only blocked for a brief period and the other edits in this range are old now. There’s also other activity in this /45 that would be collateral damage. For now, I won’t extend the block; rather playing whack-a-mole as each /64 shows up. I’d reconsider after some experience with this, or you can talk it to SPI or ANI for further analysis. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:14, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, will do so when possible. Best to just wait this out. wizzito | say hello! 06:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

just didn't know also sorry Ererer333 (talk) 08:23, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I was the first author of this article and I want to remove this whole page and I want to remove content as soon as possible and that is why I have been trying to delete the article please unblock me and help me deleting this article Rohitbisht1985 (talk) 06:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Being the first author does not give you any rights over the article. I have been deleting some of the negative information, as it was about her father, not her. Come back to the topic you started Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Page deletion which I have made to discuss further. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:54, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

FYI I changed the block duration for this editor to indefinite; a closer look at the filter log shows multiple edits with racial slurs in all caps included in the edits. Clearly NOTHERE in my opinion. Best, Spencer^T•C 02:01, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible to revision delete these diffs (1 2 3 4 5 6) by [[Special:Contributions/2409:408C:1CB5:9E01:DADA:B152:CFC1:7C0F]? Cheers, Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 18:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for notifying me. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi rsjaffe,

I saw that you were able to quickly revert most of the damage, presumably with some tool? but there are still a score or so of hits for the link -- see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=20&offset=0&profile=all&search=3f8Vokx&title=Special:Search&ns0=1&ns9=1&ns12=1. Do you have a quick way to fix these as well? --Trovatore (talk) 05:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and do the ones that don't need admin tools. --Trovatore (talk) 05:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, I looked at some of those, and they may need manual editing. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Looks like they're all gone now. The search must have found them in a stale cache. Thanks, rsjaffe, nice work. --Trovatore (talk) 06:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors Annual Report Our 2024 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Introduction Membership news and election results Summary of Drives, Blitzes and the Requests page Closing words – Your Guild coordinators To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:37, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).

Administrator changes

• Jarry1250
• Lethe

CheckUser changes

• AmandaNP
• Drmies

Oversighter changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
• A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
• A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.

Technical news

• A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
• Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.

Hello Rsjaffe, I was only issuing a vandalism warning for a page, but I was blocked without a clear reason. Could you please review my case and clarify why this happened? Many sources in the Rendang article are inaccurate and even discuss fried chicken instead of Rendang, making them unreliable references for the page. Moreover, some citation sources were recently published to distort history, which they fabricated using their own logic. This is not the true historical account that has been reported for a long time. I kindly request a review and a clear explanation regarding this matter. Thank you for your attention.

• The block I issued was for edit warring. See WP:3RR. It was for your behavior. Whether you’re right or wrong wasn’t the reason for the block. See WP:AVOIDEDITWAR for advice for future disputes. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 14:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	I'm so glad you are an administrator. There can be a tendency among some admins to be a little trigger-happy and I prefer your attitude of letting discussions evolve as sometimes disputes can be resolved without sanctions being imposed. It's nice to the human side of administrating. Liz Read! Talk! 06:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! It’s a big contrast between ANI and AIV, where speed is sometimes useful. I’m trying to keep balanced, which is hard when you see so much ill-willed vandalism going on in AIV. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:21, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi. In January you protected 500 Series Shinkansen with pending changes protection after a request at RFPP. If you look at the recent edit history of that article, would you say that pending changes protection is the right fit? The CBANned editor still regularly returns to editing that page, bunch of reverts are made, rinse and repeat. On some occasions, the edits get confirmed by other editors and later still reverted on the basis of WP:BANREVERT by editors recognising them as ban evasion. Is this the desired outcome of pending changes? Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 22:47, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

No, that page history is a mess. I've changed the protection to semi- for three months. Thanks for telling me about the issue. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:16, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 21:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Theory of multiple intelligences on a "Maths, science, and technology" 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 00:31, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

You left https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/examine/log/40362212. Though it isn't so public, it still contains the same material that was revdelled earlier. JayCubby 05:58, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I haven't done anything about the filter in past events. Don't even know if I could. Random people aren't going to be looking for that. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:29, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey there! — Earlier today I rolled back edits by User:TheDepotMuseum and left a COI warning on their talk page. Since it's clear from their username that they didn't know about they were doing anything wrong, should we maybe unblock to see if they are willing to edit in accordance with policy? Cheers, Patrick (talk) 00:04, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Most promotional editors don't know the rules yet get blocked for a combination of a promotional username and promotional edits, particularly in mainspace. This user has a promotional username and put links to the museum in several articles, which is the sort of behavior that gets promptly blocked by many admins.

For them to successfully edit, they're going to not only address the COI you warned them about, but also their username. The warning I look for to see whether someone is trying to address this combination is {{uw-coi-username}}, which addresses both the COI and username issues. If I see that warning, depending upon the user's prior behavior, I may hold off on blocking to see the response.

I'll withdraw the block (and I added the warning). Please monitor the user and I will try as well. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:28, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate it. Your instinct is probably right, but it's nice to provide them a chance to make better informed edits. Cheers, Patrick (talk) 14:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Be sure let your goat socialise often!

Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 01:43, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello mr Rsjaffe. Can I edit dosojin, Tennin, Otsuchi, kanabo and Sasumata pages by adding more interesting informations about those articles please??? 2.87.68.196 (talk) 16:40, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes. I suggest you look at WP:NEWBIE first. Your edits need to be supported by reliable sources and need to be relevant to the article. Good luck! — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2025).

Administrator changes

• Giraffer
• Goldsztajn

Dennis Brown

• Cyclonebiskit
• Nohat
• Someguy1221

Bureaucrat changes

Barkeep49

CheckUser changes

0xDeadbeef

Oversighter changes

GB fan

Moneytrees

Miscellaneous

• Sign up for The Core Contest, a competition running from 15 April to 31 May to improve vital articles.

Guild of Copy Editors April 2025 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the April 2025 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing. Election results: In our December 2025 coordinator election, Wracking stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, and Mox Eden were reelected coordinators, and IQR and WikiEditor5678910 were newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC). Drive: 55 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive 33 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 611,404 words in 237 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: 14 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 10 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 46,749 words in 18 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Drive: 47 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive. 28 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 479,172 words in 207 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 13 to 19 April. Barnstars will be awarded here. Progress report: As of 9:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 89 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,264 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, IQR, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and WikiEditor5678910. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, reaching out directly as you were involved in this discussion. Since then, I started an AN thread tracking the IP user's block evasion, which aged out until a recent SPI, and they have once again returned as an IP (see also assistance from Malcolmxl5).

As I see it, this user is committed to evading any block via proxies. Most likely, they will find ways to evade specific page protections, but if possible I would like to raise that request again - starting with the most recent evasion:

• Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences/History
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Article requests
• Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Economic theory and history/M-S
• Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences/History

Rather than protecting all WP:RA subpages at once, I could continue to update this request list if you see this as an acceptable solution. Cheers, Tule-hog (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I've blocked that IP as a compromised proxy per https://proxycheck.io/ . I think we should wait a few days before deciding to protect the pages. The change to registered accounts, as seen in the sockpuppet investigation, is sort of encouraging, as that means that the ip blocks had an effect. I'd like to see if we can limit the ability of this person to cause disruption before we decide on a more blunt tool like page protection. OK? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:34, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Today I uploaded a theoretical concept that I'm working on to prove a new method of English language assessment which is a new type of test system that can be used around the world by teachers of any school for free. Is there any violation of publishing something that no one else has done in the world and you are the creator of this concept, practice or theoretical framework. Synergism77 (talk) 06:02, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for more about this. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 12:53, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

May 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Pages Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:37, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I took care of it to the admin level, but it will need OS. DMacks (talk) 20:48, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. @Kansas Bear, have you reported this for oversight? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:39, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

No, since I'm not sure what that means. This is my first involvement with WP:OUTING. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:24, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Open Special:EmailUser/Oversight and contact them with the diff

and the reason it should be oversighted (which is a string method of hiding the info). — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:20, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Rsjaffe, I had a bit of a question. Isn't WP:CANVASSING and WP:NOTAVOTE contradictory to the essence of each other? If consensus is not determined by counting votes, then why does it canvassing affect it? Wouldn't more arguments benefit the discussion?

Also, how exactly is consensus determined? Is it determined by counting the number of arguments? Or the number of people supporting the argument (which would make it a vote)? PadFoot (talk) 13:42, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not going to get into a debate about the policies. If you want to have a discussion about them, I suggest the Teahouse. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:29, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Maybe it's worth soft-blocking them? They went so far as to use the mentorship module to ask a question, which, to me, says they're not a deliberate spammer (just someone misled on the nature of Wikipedia). JayCubby 20:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

It was a pretty spammy page. No attempt to be anything other than an ad. There's a narrow difference between soft and hard block, mainly in that for the soft block the user can ignore the old account and set up a new one without addressing the block issue. I'd rather see them address the issue. The odds of someone who starts out this way becoming a useful contributor seem pretty low. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:28, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Did I hear a quack from Sumavasumathithottakkattukara?   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

On your closure of this discussion - a WP:CBAN discussion was ongoing. I think either the close should be reverted or reclosed enacting the (unanimous per the "over 24 hours without any objections") ban? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:43, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, the discussion was wandering all over the place, so I don’t think I can reclose as cban. I’ll reverse my close and let the discussion proceed. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 12:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Appreciated! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:19, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rsjaffe, two more revisions need to be revdel-ed, I guess I didn’t tag them when I was requesting revdel. Happy admining :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:40, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

It looks good to me. I don't revdel the edit that deletes the copyvio as, after revdel of the preceding copyvio text, that edit won't show anything in the diff. Am I missing something? IF so, please give the diff so I can look at it again. Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:44, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Ahhhhh, this looks good to me too ;) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

FYI a bot has been used to remove the page protection you added to the JT Pettigrew page earlier today. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 22:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I checked. The bot removed the lock symbol, but didn't change the protection. It's move protected, but the bot is a little confused. No big deal, though I agree it's confusing. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello Rsjaffe. Could you unhide the edit Tzar's suspected sock made, so that everyone can see it? Thanks. Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 06:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Are you talking about Special:Diff/1288879188? Admins can already view that if they need to. I’m not sure what good uncovering that would do. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that diff. Whoever is under that account, whether it's Tzar or not, should be shamed on, rather than being suppressed. Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 06:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Ok. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:39, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

There's a thought that the sock-fest is a joe-job. CU matched the recent ones to each other but could not definitively link to TzarN64. I think the close of WP:ANI#User:TzarN64 might need a little more nuance.

I also disagree with unhiding that edit (was my action), since WP is not in the business of shaming (instead DENY-like and making the situation worse). But I don't feel strongly enough for the rev-del issue to go any further than leaving this note here. DMacks (talk) 12:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I’ve reworded the close request now. Even when I closed it, the possibility that it was a Joe job was being entertained, which is why I worded it as I did, but I should have been clearer. I had quickly closed the discussion to hopefully stop the socking.

As to the rev-del, I had interpreted the request as not active shaming but rather of leaving the attack in the history in case others wondered what happened. Lots of other attacks are just deleted without being revision deleted and I saw this as similar, keeping this in the history per the target’s request. However, I do see your point, and I should have inquired more about what @Freedoxm was going to do once it was back in the history. I’ve pinged @Freedoxm so they can see our concerns about that. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 13:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. DMacks (talk) 13:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).

Administrator changes

Rusalkii

NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)

• Master Jay
• Orderinchaos
• Roger Davies
• Tinucherian

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, administrator elections were permanently authorized on a five-month schedule. The next election will be scheduled soon; see Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections for more information. This is an alternate process to the RfA process and does not replace the latter.
• An RfC was closed with consensus to allow editors to opt-out of seeing "sticky decorative elements". Such elements should now be wrapped in {{sticky decoration wrapper}}. Editors who wish to opt out can follow the instructions at WP:STICKYDECO.
• An RfC has resulted in a broad prohibition on the use of AI-generated images in articles. A few common-sense exceptions are recognized.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

No offence I'm not trying to be rude, but how is it my fault? Your making it sound like I'm at fault too were all I was doing is preventing that IP user for making spam edits over and over countless times on the Strasburg Railroad and CN 7312 articles. I didn't even find myself for any wrongdoings in my part. What you said made absolutely no sense, because I have nothing to do with that IP's vandalism. So your saying I'm not allowed to stop and prevert an IP user for vandalizing an article? That makes no sense. But It still does need to be protect because he's been doing it countless times, you should at least put in the Wikipedia:Pending changes protection, it would definitely be a really big help so I wouldn't have to keep reverting his vandalism edits again. My apologies if my reply sound a little harsh, its just your response didn't make sense to me. I just wanted to understand what you mean?2601:188:C405:F440:4846:293E:8DCB:6085 (talk) 19:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I wasn't saying it was your fault. Only that the edits are very intermittent (two days this year, for example) so not requiring protection. I also commented that providing feedback to the editor can help. It is our responsibility (all of us) to communicate to another editor when there is an editing problem. That doesn't mean the user's edits are your fault, only that communication might help solve the problem. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:14, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, I misunderstood where you were coming from. My apologies. 2601:188:C405:F440:3045:AF08:9F1A:852A (talk) 19:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi - you OK to revoke TPA on this one? Patient Zero^talk 01:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, that was an impressive amount of vandalism. Thank you for alerting me. TPA removed. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:34, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

No worries! I thought the same, it was certainly a lot to scroll through...! Thank you for that, much appreciated. Patient Zero^talk 01:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

And now email access removed. Don't know if you received any. Rat sent me like 6 emails. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Goodness me! Thankfully I avoided that, but they are now vandalising on frwiki, so I reported them on there too. Patient Zero^talk 01:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

This page is something I would imagine qualifies for speedy deletion, but I'm not sure if such cases are G2 or G10? For revdel I'd say its RD2. Also that account seems trivially nothere. I would post this at a noticeboard but given the content I'd rather not. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 00:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Clear intent to disparage ("an hero" being 4chan slang for someone who dies by suicide). Disgusting vandalism. I've G10'd it. Patient Zero^talk 03:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't around earlier to take care of it. Looks like it's all removed now. I'll double-check to make sure. Thanks for notifying me. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

No worries! I believe everything has been taken care of now. Hope you've had a good day! Patient Zero^talk 03:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi rsjaffe,

I hope you're doing well! I came across your wiki and really enjoyed your content about leather. It’s clear that you’re passionate about quality craftsmanship and materials.

I recently published two in-depth articles on leather that I believe would bring value to your readers:

1. Full-Grain Vegetable-Tanned Leather: A Complete Guide
2. Mastering Leather Embossing: Create Custom Personalized Gifts

If you're open to it, I’d love for you to check them out and consider linking to one (or both) of them if you think they would be a helpful resource for your audience.

Let me know if you'd like more info or if there's a way we can collaborate further. I'm always open to partnerships and mutual support.

Thanks for your time and consideration!

Best regards,

Theodoros301

https://theodoros.biz/ Theodoros301 (talk) 09:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Rsjaffe

I saw that you once edited the article "Scouting in Kyrgyzstan." So I wanted to ask if you have any contact with Scouts from Kyrgyzstan? I'm a Scout from Germany and will be in Kyrgyzstan for four weeks in July with a group of eight other Scouts. We hope to meet Scouts from there. However, we don't have any contact details yet. Could you help?

Best wishes,

David 2A00:FBC:E1EC:798C:F53B:F101:3468:73E7 (talk) 09:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I don’t have any contact with them. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 13:50, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you anyway. D2a0v0i5d (talk) 18:58, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Rsjaffe I'm responding to a comment you left on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive371 (Mauriziok Creating Copies of Articles). Of the 24 drafts you posted, I only left the ones I'm working on recently. Once I'm done with them, I'll delete them. Mauriziok (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Late talker on a "Maths, science, and technology" 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, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

You've blocked Orion Gavin Douglass twice this month, but they're continuing to edit disruptively, making small changes then quickly reverting themselves, making the same change and reverting it again, as in the last hour at Lepidus (Special:Contributions/Orion_Gavin_Douglass). That came after I'd warned them for similar behaviour at Julius Caesar, Pompey and Pixodarus today. Would you like to take further action or intervene in some way? I think they want to contribute but somehow can't. NebY (talk) 16:26, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Could you take this to WP:ANI? I think this requires more discussion, hopefully including the editor in question, before taking more drastic action. Primarily because, as you’ve said, it appears they mean well. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:56, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

That's fair, thanks. Just now I started an ANI report, then abandoned it because diffs show their last few edits have been a bit less disruptive and a bit constructive. They might be working out how to help. (Or working towards EC status - I woke up cynical today.) I'll watch. NebY (talk) 12:04, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Ah, indeffed anyway after they made things clearer by inserting superfluous mid-sentence spaces in nearly 200 articles. Sigh. NebY (talk) 16:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

It’s worth trying to get them to be productive , even if it might eventually not work out. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:34, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes. We have to hope - that's what this encylopedia was built on! NebY (talk) 17:53, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Pertaining to this closed report, I believe that 2A02:C7C:E1BA:CE00:0:0:0:0/64 is the same actor. If I should open a different ANI report or report this at a different venue please let me know. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 20:42, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the identity so another report may be needed. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Wasn't sure if this neededrev/del. If so, this ip edit will need it too . Thanks, Knitsey (talk) 00:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I've been reading through that article and there is a large amount that is unreferenced. The contents of the edit are mentioned in another section (also unreferenced). I wish I had never seen it now. I need sleep so I will leave it with you but someone might need to message Sshin02143 who has added most of the information about referencing? Knitsey (talk) 00:59, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I revdel’d two ip edits and the Sshin edit. I’ll look at talking to Sshin. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:31, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you rsjaffe, sorry to have dumped it on you. You're a star. Knitsey (talk) 16:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Rsjaffe,

I believe that we had some mistaken tagging of User pages by editor Folkezoft. Many editors don't get the WP:G13 criteria correctly.

Please make sure the User pages fit the G13 criteria before deletion. Just because a User page is old, doesn't mean that it is eligible for CSD G13. It needs to have an AFC tag or only have the Article Wizard template on the page. The bots do a good job identifying pages so if you see several dozen editor-tagged CSD G13s, the editor probably has judged them incorrectly and they need to be untagged. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh, so a {{Draft}} template with something else on the page should be kept. OK. I'll undelete the ones I deleted. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I see we've just started SPIs on Neogoodwriter. Note the edits to the Neo Hanzi article I linked. Someone getting their accounts mixed up by the look of it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I consolidated the two SPIs. It's probably clear enough for me to do the sock block, but since I initially blocked for disruption before I saw the sockpuppetry evidence, I'll leave it at SPI for someone else to manage. My duplicate report includes some more Neo Hanzi evidence. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:33, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Turns out they're part of a large UPE ring Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hallowme. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:55, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Per WP:ROLE, the User:ChenangoCountyHistoricalSociety account should be blocked, not just partially blocked. Thoughts? --Hammersoft (talk) 14:46, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Since 1) they were also trying to edit logged out and 2) they were forthcoming as to who they were, I’m trying to get them to read and comply with the notice I gave them. I thought a full block might encourage logged-out editing. It is an experiment, but I figured the partial block would be enough to stop the disruption while we see what they do next.

It’s probably a failed experiment by now, but at least the problematic editing is stopped — rsjaffe 🗣️ 15:20, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Yeah :( I've also changed the visibility on two edits on the article, as the content was copied from their website, albeit with minor modifications. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:22, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

This user has been adding unsourced information at Britain's Got Talent series 18. Feel free to block them, and also please answer my request for said article at WP:RFPP. --PawPatroler (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

There's a red link that is supposed to point to Gaddar Telangana Film Awards at the top of the discussion on ANI where it says "PBLOCK", maybe it would be better to find a way to fix it? » Gommeh (he/him) 20:20, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

It's fixed, thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:27, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rsjaffe, I didn't want to clog up the noticeboard, so I hope it's okay to reply to this on your talk page:
Okay, great and thanks for letting me know. I should've realised it was a soft block. I reported to AIV rather than SPI as I'd recently read WP:SPIEXPENSE, so I was trying to save time, but I clearly had the opposite effect. I'll bear all of this in mind for the future. Apologies and thanks, Referentis (talk) 18:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

I believe a bit more in SPIs than the essayist does, partly because I’ve been helping with some of the simpler ones. SPIs really help in detecting future disruptions by the sock master, and so the expense is partly recouped through future savings. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

That makes sense, thank you. Really appreciate your advice on this. Referentis (talk) 21:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi rsjaffe, would you be kind enough to re-instate my post without making it live so I can make the required adjustments please. Regards A46 Caistor Top (talk) 16:53, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm sending you an email with the text in it, as it is completely inappropriate for Wikipedia unfortunately. Wikipedia is not a social network nor a place to solicit signatures on a petition. In particular, Wikipedia is not a soapbox. See WP:SOAPBOX. If you want to start writing a suitable article, my suggestion is to use your sandbox as a less-visible location: User:A46_Caistor_Top/sandbox. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:03, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Despite two reports (one to ANI and one to request for page protection increase), a blocking of the IP sock User: 212.95.5.25, and auto confirmed protection of the page, the vandalism (and almost certainly sockpuppetry) immediately returned to the Chechen genocide page, with a user by the name User:Hurycane with only 55 edits making the exact same kind of edit to the infobox; vandalizing it by removing sourced material with no explanation. Any help would be highly appreciated. Perhaps it would be best if you add the page to your watch page to patrol for any further vandalism incidents or increase protection to extended confirmed? 24.180.50.170 (talk) 17:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Looks like other admins have taken care of things, blocking the User:Katify sock and protecting the page for three months. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

-- R3YBOl (🌲) 21:40, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Your prod links to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1189#h-Average_kurd_and_DataNomad,_again-20250607162300 but I don't see mention of this article there. What is the reason for requesting deletion and why do you consider this to be an uncontroversial request? ~Kvng (talk) 22:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

You'll see the discussion towards the end of that, which explains why we decided to Prod the articles and why that link was used as the justification. It's a difficult situation, in which many articles (30-40) were created with difficult-to-access references and subtle issues. The Prod was attached because we felt there was a rebuttable presumption that the articles contained significant inaccuracies or distortions in a contentious topic, realizing that some may be ok. Feel free to de-Prod if you find the label is inappropriate for this article. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Gotcha. Please see ongoing discussion at User_talk:Asilvering#User:Leslie. Prod doesn't seem like a good tool for these problems. ~Kvng (talk) 23:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

why do you not i cant edit the page Neil Pearl why not i dindt do anything 2600:387:F:7519:0:0:0:7 (talk) 02:13, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

There's been too much vandalism of that page by IP editors in your IP range. You can make edit suggestions on the article's talk page. See WP:ER for more information. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:20, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello so is the er like the whikipedia hospital? m? I say because it tells me i cant go to the neil pearl page, idk who that is was he the guy that broke your site if that is true im sorry 2600:387:F:7519:0:0:0:7 (talk) 02:24, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

You cannot edit the Neil Peart page. However, you can put in an edit request on Talk:Neil Peart. If you click on WP:ER, you'll get more instructions on how to make good edit requests. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:34, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Related to this... when would it be time to possibly consider fully blocking the range? It seems there are certainly some within the range that are actually/trying to be constructive, but as far as I've been seeing recently, 2600:387:F:5E36:0:0:0:0/64 had to get blocked due to quite obvious vandalism across a few TV articles, and recently there's been two IPs within the /43 range (, ) targetting Mayberry R.F.D., both from this /64 range. Also appears to have recently been used as part of vandalism/block evasion on Michael Palance, as well as edits like this and I'm sure many other instances of vandalism. Magitroopa (talk) 06:02, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Every time your name has appeared in my watchlist or my notifications, it comes with you making the state of the project or my personal experience editing markedly better. I don't think you get as much appreciation as you deserve for all of the hard work you do to make Wikipedia the best it can be.

Taffer😊💬_(she/they) 18:48, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, you indeffed User:Kevinkohute39 yesterday for legal threats but appear to have not done the same for 172.110.27.91, the original (and obviously connected) IP. Electricmemory (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Right. We don’t indef IP addresses except in extraordinary circumstances, as they usually rotate amongst users. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 14:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Regardless, that IP has edits that need to be revdel'd. Electricmemory (talk) 00:01, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Done. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:58, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi you replied to my discussion on the Wikipedia's ANI page , Thanks for that but I do not understand what you said. I am new , can you please help me understanding your comment saying 'Continue with your original topic ' . Msmimiin (talk) 18:51, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

You started with Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Concern about editor CNMall41's behavior: COI accusation, tag addition without discussion, and article flagged without due process, then later posted Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Request for Review of COI and Notability Tags on "Shashwat Singh" Article. That second post is about the same basic issue and should be addressed in the original topic. Opening up multiple topics on multiple noticeboards about the same issue is seen as disruptive forum shopping. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh it was my mistake. By mistake it has been posted twice . Apologies. Thanks for pointing it out . It won't happen again. Msmimiin (talk) 19:38, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

You blocked GhostDanceBand at 14:22, 19 June 2025 for making legal threats. MyAmendment is created 18:51, 23 June 2025 and immediately repeats an edit made by GhostDanceBand at Ghost Dance (band). GhostDanceBand MyAmendment. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 03:15, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

With only one edit I'm personally not sure enough yet to presumptively block as a sock. There's some differences in behavior (not stated here because WP:BEANS) so I'd like to see more edits to make sure.

Ways forward: 1) engage with editor (e.g., revert, then engage in discussion if they revert back) and see what they do, which should make the pattern clearer, or 2) file a sockpuppet investigation. If you do go the first route, ping me when you have more history with this person. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Your assistance is appreciated. I created a page for the nonprofit 21st Century Green-Book Project. It was moved, but I do not see where it is and I have additional updates for the page. Can you provide a link to the page?

I am the founder and current Executive Director for the 21st Century Green-Book Project. We are engaged in a pilot test of the site for Baltimore and Houston. I want to add information about the pilot that will run from Juneteenth through Labor Day 2025.

Thank you Lbcconey2525 (talk) 13:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

I located the page. Please disregard the earlier request.

Thank you Lbcconey2525 (talk) 13:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Just reaching out as I saw you implemented a block for disruptive editing for the IP range 2600:387:0:0:0:0:0:0/43 If it helps in your investigation, I noticed one IP in this range, 2600:387:F:6314:0:0:0:4 has made some non disruptive/ but clearly COI related edits on pages related to Brady Brim-DeForest Nayyn (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Deb,

I noticed that the draft Draft:Mazen Kalassina was recently deleted under G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion).
I understand Wikipedia’s policy on neutrality and would like to rewrite the article with a stricter encyclopedic tone.
Would it be possible to userfy the deleted content (move it to my user sandbox) so I can revise it properly and resubmit through the Articles for Creation process?
I’m committed to following COI and sourcing guidelines.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Thelightang (talk) 21:44, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@Thelightang:, I think you meant this for @Deb: since they're the one who deleted it? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:07, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @Thelightang. Please go ahead and rewrite the article in draft and submit for review in the usual way. No one will stop you. But bear in mind that, even in your sandbox, it must comply with the guidelines, which is why I won't restore the deleted, non-compliant version. Deb (talk) 07:39, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors June 2025 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June 2025 newsletter, a quarterly-ish digest of Guild activities since April. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. Hall of Fame: Congratulations to Dhtwiki for their well-deserved addition to the Hall of Fame last month, and thanks to GoldRomean for the nomination. Election news: Voting in the mid-year coordinator election ends at 23:59 on 30 June. Results will be announced at the election page. April Blitz: 14 of the 25 editors who signed up for the April 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited 92,769 words in 30 articles. Barnstars awarded are available here. May Drive: 31 of the 54 editors who signed up for the May 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited 384,392 words in 216 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. June Blitz: 10 of the 12 editors who signed up for the June 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited 26,652 words in 13 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. July Drive: Our July 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive will begin on 1 July and finish on 31 July. Barnstars awarded will be posted here. Progress report: As of 02:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 148 requests since 1 January, and the backlog stands at 2,270 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:19, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Rory,

I don't know if you have noticed but it seems like lately, we've had a lot of editors, even experienced editors, bring minor disagreements to ANI, even cases where they have never made any contact with the editor they are complaining about. Many editors seem to communicate only by posting templates and never actually contacting another editor and, you know, having a discussion.

I'm not sure that I've always handled this in the best way, I, unfortunately, can turn to sarcasm too easily, but I hope some of the admins who regularly patrol the ANI board can act to discourage these unnecessary reports. It's almost as if the editor is bored and just wants to stir up the drama. But often these incidents involve brand new editors who don't know anything about Wikipedia policy and can't be expected to behave as if they have been here years. I noticed an example of this right now, the editor accused of "gaming" who had only made 33 edits and I approve of the way you handled it.

Thank you, in advance, for keeping this in mind when you are looking at future reports. If they are not "urgent incidents and chronic, intractable behavioral problems", then maybe they should be referred to DRN and closed! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:37, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Sarcasm can be a natural coping strategy to stress, and I fall to it too, and have to self-censor at times, sometimes just before I hit the reply button.

I've found real engagement at AN/I takes a lot of time, which is why I now only intervene in certain discussions, lest I spread myself too thin. The time needed to rein in some of those run-away-train discussions is immense, and requires continued attention and a lot of careful reading, rather than sporadic attempts at fixing the discussion. It's also tempered my enthusiasm at requiring a notice-board discussion prior to an admin recall petition: the one discussion that did occur at AN/I turned into a train wreck even though the issue at hand was fairly simple.

Today I did decide to spend more time at AN/I (I realized I had drifted away to other tasks), so I'll try to intervene some more, but I'm going on vacation very soon so my involvement will be sporadic until late September. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:19, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

This user is making Legal Threats Untamed1910 (talk) 01:30, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Blocked. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:33, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Can you advise what to do. I am the owner and I gave it to NY weekly site to publish. I have full rights. Please help and I believe I mentioned the same in wiki commons when uploading Dr Meenakshi Ravi (talk) 04:36, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Ask for help at the Teahouse. It may be difficult to establish full rights, as the newspaper article states the photo is courtesy of @thefotomafiausa and the phot itself is marked as coming from instagram. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:42, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Ok I did. ThSnk you. You are very kind. Could you check if my draft is good to submit review other than that the image ? ThSnk you again. Dr Meenakshi Ravi (talk) 04:44, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you for blocking my second vandal! 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 03:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Sabbir142 103.100.235.226 (talk) 23:00, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

@[[User:Sabbir142| 103.100.235.226 (talk) 23:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

The guy you guys blocked? I reverted his edits, making ALOT of personal attacks, and turns out, he has alot of pages making personal attacks at @Magnolia677 for no reason, I think we should possibly global block him. Shaneapickle (talk) 16:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

That's user:Mid Atlantic Baby, who does this chronically (e.g., many times a day). I'm deleting all those pages. Thanks for raising attention to it. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

did he change usernames because he is not registered on this wiki Shaneapickle (talk) 16:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Typo on my part: User:MidAtlanticBaby— rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

just a question, why do people just remove the talk page for globally locked people?, like let others see the talk page and drama. Shaneapickle (talk) 16:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

This isn't a spectator sport. We do our best to ignore long-term abusers (WP:DENY)— rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2025).

Administrator changes

NuclearWarfare

Interface administrator changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

• Following a talk page discussion, speedy deletion criterion G13 has been amended to remove "Userspace with no content except the article wizard placeholder text."
• WP:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts was upgraded to a guideline following a RfC discussion.

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
• Administrator elections will take place this month. Administrator elections are an alternative to RFA that is a gentler process for candidates due to secret voting and multiple people running together. The call for candidates is July 9–15, the discussion phase is July 18–22, and the voting phase is July 23–29. Get ready to submit your candidacy, or (with their consent) to nominate a talented candidate!

Hello, I see you did this block recently. Please also consider , likely a return of KarenYangNY/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AntonChigurhs gun/Archive.

FYI-ping to @NinjaRobotPirate, who has dealt with this sock before. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:10, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I opened Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1193#Content dispute at Shubhanshu Shukla involving numerous accounts/IPs and edit-war which you closed as a content dispute. I think I did not phrase the report correctly, but it was essentially a behavioural complaint against an editor, if you read it, specifically the last paragraph. I think there has been an attempt at POV-pushing from someone already known to be a chronic sockpuppeteer. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 20:31, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

I closed it with Doesn't look like administrative action needed, at least not yet. I thought it was premature at the time, as the discussion did not show administrator-actionable behavior, but did show that it could get to that point.

I see a sockpuppet investigation was opened yesterday: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mr Anonymous 699. If you think behavior is now actionable, you can file a new report focused on the one person who you think needs action if ANI is also necessary (that is, there is behavior that, even absent sockpuppetry, should result in action against the user). — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:45, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Actually, I was just made aware that they are facing an arbitration case that encompasses this article within its ambit. So, I will probably not need to file a new WP:ANI report until that's settled. Thank you for responding, and sorry for wasting your time due to my lack of awareness of the stuffs happening around. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 20:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

No worries. You're trying to protect Wikipedia, so I understand you raising your concerns. Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:58, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey thanks it's my first submission, wasn't sure if I was doing it right. What else do I need to do to get it live? Thanks for the help I really appreciate it. Altadenapalms (talk) 03:00, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Read very carefully the contents of the box at the top of the page. It has info on how to submit for review and also info on properly declaring a conflict of interest. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:06, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Im still a bit confused as to what I did wrong... and is it being reviewed or I need to change things? What do I need to change if so? 24.205.77.28 (talk) 23:05, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

It doesn’t get reviewed until you submit it by pressing that button in the box at the top of the article labeled submit for review. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:21, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).

Administrator changes

• DDima
• Gimmetrow
• Huon
• Johan Elisson
• Spangineer
• The Land

Interface administrator changes

0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

L235

Oversight changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

• A new feature called Multiblocks will be deployed on English Wikipedia on the week of June 2. See the relevant announcement on the administrators' noticeboard.
• History merges performed using the mergehistory special page are now logged at both the source and destination, rather than just the source as previously, after this RFC and the resolution of T118132.

Arbitration

• An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 17 June 2025. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in June 2025, with over 1,600 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in June 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Could you please add Kotaku to that block? This one in the range is altering the gamergate section in the article. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 15:33, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

You recently blocked the above as a sockpuppet: FYI they appear to be back as User:扡透攝扡ピオラ. Dorsetonian (talk) 10:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Now 騅黜堧黧嚼騅 Dorsetonian (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Although you said you were ok with your close being reverted without being told - just wanted to let you know, as a courtesy, that I have done that. DeCausa (talk) 17:48, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2025).

Administrator changes

• CoconutOctopus
• Curbon7
• Hinnk
• Jlwoodwa
• Kj cheetham
• KylieTastic
• Ser!
• Smasongarrison
• UndercoverClassicist

• Bbb23
• Beeblebrox
• David Gerard
• Oleg Alexandrov
• Satori Son

CheckUser changes

• Alison
• Bradv
• Joe Roe
• RickinBaltimore
• ST47

Oversight changes

• Bradv
• RickinBaltimore

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, G15, has been enacted. It applies to pages generated by a large language model (LLM) without human review.
• Following a request for comment, there is a new policy outlining the granting of permissions to view the IP addresses of temporary accounts. Temporary account deployment on the English Wikipedia is currently scheduled for September 2025, and editors can request access to the permission ahead of time. Admins are encouraged to keep an eye on the request page; there will likely be a flood of editors requesting the permission when they realize they can no longer see IP addresses.

Technical news

• Administrators can now restrict the "Add a Link" feature to newcomers. The "Add a Link" Structured Task helps new account holders get started with editing. Administrators can configure this setting in the Community Configuration page.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Indian military history has been closed.
  • South Asia (WP:CT/SA) is designated a contentious topic. The topic area is specifically defined as All pages related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.
  • The contentious topic designations for Sri Lanka (SL) and India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan (IPA) are folded into this new contentious topic.
  • The community-authorized general sanctions regarding South Asian social groups (GS/CASTE) are rescinded and folded into this new contentious topic.
• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 31 July.
• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 11 August.

Miscellaneous

• Wikimania 2025 is happening in Nairobi, Kenya, and online from August 6 to August 9. This year marks 20 years of Wikimania. Interested users can join the online event. Registration for the virtual event is free and will remain open throughout Wikimania. You can register here now.

FYI, this LTA range has already resumed their usual disruptive editing/edit warring reverts immediately following release from their recent month-long block. Also as noted in my AIV report, a larger/different range may be needed to be blocked here. Thanks in advance. Magitroopa (talk) 21:28, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

It got blocked before I looked at it. The /48 would have significant collateral damage for little gain, so I think the blocks are going to have to be narrower than that. If the /64 isn't enough, you can make a request for wider. I'm going to be intermittently available for the next 1.5 months, so it might be better to ask someone else if you need relatively quick action. Thanks for your report. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:44, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome back from your WikiBreak. (I've tied up some loose ends at home and and now really get out on my WikiBrake.) Since I can't comment on the ANI, I hope this message reaches you. I regret that some of my edits annoy some editors. As the Wikipedia:Glossary says, Cosmetic edits do not change how a page actually appears. With this definition in mind, I do not think my edits are simply cosmetic. The readers will actually see what I've changed. And the vast majority of my edits are gnomish -- fix the hyphens and dashes and spaces, etc. And I'm "annoyed" that some editors are annoyed themselves about my wikignome efforts. But I try to take heart from Illegitimi non carborundum -- if other editors get annoyed perhaps it is their attitude that's at fault. When Uncle Sam gave me an offer I couldn't refuse, I became a US Army medic and was sent to Madigan General Hospital in Washington State. While checking in for the first time at the orderly room I saw a plaque with the slogan. I repeated the English version out loud and the First Sergeant heard me. He jumped up and said "SRich is the first soldier to come through here knowing about that slogan. You (Company Clerk) take good care of him!" Moreover, the stoical idea of enduring nagging from my spouse has kept my marriage going. That's what some of this is about. Keep on improving Wikipedia even if some editors get annoyed -- many, many other editors approve of my efforts. (But I do need to figure out how to appease the easily annoyed sector.) Thanks for reading my little rant. I'm now headed out to visit the library. – S. Rich (talk) 23:34, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I am brand new to wiki, thank you for your valuable inputs. I appreciate. I am working on the draft. Could you help me understand i am doing it right way. Dr Meenakshi Ravi (talk) 03:49, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

I suggest asking at wikipedia:Teahouse. That is a good place to get assistance.— rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:22, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Rsjaffe. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

~delta ^{(talk • cont)} 07:49, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Rsjaffe,

I hope you are having a good summer. I wanted to ask a question about a range block you imposed. It's the area Special:Contributions/2409:4000:0:0:0:0:0:0/22 and so far, just today, I've run into 7 different IP accounts editing the project that fall under this range block that appear to be completely unrelated. I was wondering if this range was too wide and might be covering a large number of editors. I'm not experienced in range blocks but most of the ones I run into run to /32 or /64, not /22. If you have any admins who are also talk page stalkers, maybe they can weigh in on this decision. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:15, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I’m having a busy summer, with intermittent Wikipedia access. But here I am this morning (for a bit). Hope your summer is good as well.

That range has had a number of different blocks. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=2409%3A4000%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%2F22&type=block. Currently, it is blocked only from two pages talk:Nym and Haryana Police. I feel pretty comfortable with narrow blocks like this on wide ranges, as the odds that unrelated users in that range are affected by that restriction is very low, though not zero. It’s a good approach to a IP hopper working in a broad range. You’ll see I only added to the original block by @Sdrqaz. You might want to talk with them to get their take on this range. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Checking three IPs (a, b, c) from Talk:Nim on a range calculator gave me a /24 already, which I chose to widen to /22 because Bullseye told me that it would be a better range to choose. Since it's a partial block, it shouldn't affect innocent users at all unless they wish to edit the listed pages as well, so I agree that the chances of collateral damage are very small. Sdrqaz (talk) 00:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Please remove talk page access from this IP. See for example. Meters (talk) 07:00, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Done by Materialscientist. Meters (talk) 07:35, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I think Shazzan25 (formerly Shabooziee; an account you recently blocked) might be another sockpuppet of BuickCenturyDriver. The LTA is notorious for messing around in WP:AFDs with new accounts. Past sockpuppets of BCD included Vaccerio, Veccoier, Vaccerie, HiroweWiki (impersonating account), Lofty abyss iv (impersonating account), and more. The sockpuppets also often add an extra requests for unblock category when requesting unblock (Examples: ). The information at this SPI report also has useful points about the activities of the BCD sockpuppets. ~SG5536B 08:33, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I had contacted other admins to help me identify whether this was BCD, as I wasn’t sure enough on my own. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 14:36, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

but was this meant to be only 31 hours? I saw what they were writing and, well. It seems a little, lenient, perhaps? Not questioning your judgement by any means. Cheers, —Fortuna, imperatrix 15:16, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that. It was a misclick. Indeffed now. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:52, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I guessed so, as TPA was revoked same time. Justice is done, and seen to be done  :) —Fortuna, imperatrix 17:33, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Blocked for sock puppetry: This user did not make any inappropriate talk page edits. Please notify them on their talk page that email and tpa are back. Guy with a Kick^TALK 00:22, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Why did you send me this message? I was not involved with that case. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:11, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe: It was not you who blocked them, it was DMacks. Go to their talk page and post them a message that Theonepoppa6 needs their email and talk page access restored. Guy with a Kick^TALK 16:35, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

If you have an issue with an action an administrator took, contact them directly. Do not try to use an intermediary. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:12, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, OP is now CU-blocked to the same sock-drawer as the user they are discussing. DMacks (talk) 21:20, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. It looks like you tweaked the block on me so that I cannot comment on the block. Please fix this tweak so that I can comment. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 19:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Removed the Wikipedia: block so you can comment. Remember, do not reformat ISBNs while the discussion is ongoing. Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:18, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2025).

Administrator changes

Euryalus

• Admrboltz
• FloNight
• Floquenbeam
• Ganeshk
• JesseW
• Night Gyr
• Nixdorf

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

CheckUser changes

AmandaNP

SQL

Oversight changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open on whether use of emojis with no encyclopedic value in mainspace and draftspace (e.g., at the start of paragraphs or in place of bullet points) should be added as a criterion under G15.

Technical news

• Administrators can now access the Special:BlockedExternalDomains page from the Special:CommunityConfiguration list page. This makes it easier to find. T393240

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been closed.
• An RfC is in progress to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Hello, Rsjaffe,

There is an IP that has been posting a lot of messages targeting Acroterion and other admins so I did a range block for User:216.209.188.0/24. But I'm not experienced in imposing range blocks so I was hoping you could review this and see whether it was too big/wide or not big/wide enough. Individual IP addresses have been getting blocks just lasting 2 or 3 days but this has been going on now for a few weeks. Thank you for your help. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

In that /24 I only see 216.209.188.104 being disruptive and being blocked (before your range block). What other IPs were causing trouble? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:07, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh, damn, now that you're asking, I don't have a list. But over the past two weeks, I've seen these copy and paste messages against Acroterion and sometimes zzuuzz, too. I'll be better in the future and start keeping track. I assumed it was an editor whose unblock request was turned down by one of these admins. I really must go to some policy page that explains IP ranges better so I can see how to view other accounts included in a block. My question was mainly because I don't know how broad to request, this one was /24 but I also see /32 and /64 used, too. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

I use User:Daniel Quinlan/Scripts/RangeHelper to help me understand what range width to block. In particular, the range selector helps narrow the range: display a wide range to examine the edits, activate "range selector", then check the boxes for the specific IPs causing the problem. You'll see a calculated range that covers those IPs. It takes a bit of practice to get facile with it, but it is a lifesaver for me. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:17, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey, you confused me with that {{db-banned|user=South Asia Social Groups XC requirement}} as I had not noticed the other use of G5. I assume you meant {{Db-gs|sasg}}. Although I admit I had to look that up :/ Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, twinkle had a brain-fart, as the G5-gs option didn't show up for that article (maybe there's a problem with drafts), so I tried to shoe-horn the problem into the usual G5 tag. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:14, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rsjaffe. Thanks for blocking InGlas - I was a little hesitant to list them at UAA. I'd asked about defunct WP:CORPNAMEs in the past (Wikipedia talk:Username policy/Archive 22#Defunct WP:CORPNAMEs, Wikipedia talk:Username policy/Archive 25#Defunct organizations) but the consensus was weak. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:40, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

I was swayed by the extreme spamminess of the article. It sounds like it is still advertising something. That and the name could be shared, although that is certainly weaker for a former company. I could see people disagreeing with me. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 14:44, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

i read the rules. i did not break any. give reason for deleting my page please. - Daniel DiamondThumb (talk) 15:51, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

JBW, on your talk page, gave a great explanation of the problem. There’s really nothing I could add to that. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:08, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

i agree. ty. DiamondThumb (talk) 17:17, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Hope you're having a good evening/afternoon/morning/etc. This one should be familiar: 2600:100E:B0A9:1C67:E943:A751:5760:1386 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) --tony 03:21, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

It appears that this ip has added copyvio to Pier Paolo Pasolini, see [:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pier_Paolo_Pasolini&oldid=1312604371] confirmed 75% copyright violation per this [Pier Paolo Pasolini | Earwig's Copyvio Detector] Untamed1910 (talk) 17:02, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Looks like a site that copies Wikipedia, so correspondence doesn't prove copyright violation. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:03, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

There's an appeal at UTRS by TheWikiEditor10. You blocked the account, quite rightly. You blocked without talk page access, although the editor had made only two edits to their talk page, both of which were just removing messages which had been posted there. I don't see any talk page abuse in that, so why did you block talk page editing? JBW (talk) 09:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

I’m trying to remember, but for the life of me I can’t figure out why I did that. Maybe because of the rapid userspace vandalism. In any event, I’m fine with restoring talk page access. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 13:55, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. JBW (talk) 21:09, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

You blocked 2A06:5906:2047:2900::/64 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) for a month on Aug 17 for persistently adding unsourced content - now after their block was released, they are making the exact same type of edits that got them blocked that month. ~delta ^{(talk • cont)} 00:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Blocked. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:49, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Enter your username (username policy) attacked Izno's talk page again. ZLEA ^TǀC 03:27, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Now at 50.48.200.149 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) wizzito | say hello! 00:04, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

/18 is still a good idea to block, or 50.48.200.0/21 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) gets the last 3 IPs. wizzito | say hello! 00:06, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2025).

Administrator changes

• Billinghurst
• Crisco 1492
• DarkFalls
• Spike Wilbury
• Valereee
• Ergo Sum

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

• After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

Do you mind expanding the rangeblock to the /23? They're back on 137.99.143.245. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 00:47, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

A new message at AIV for your attention. Thanks. 203.145.94.15 (talk) 21:04, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Rsjaffe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Loco Loco (musician), a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:07, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Do you know why the Zjholder LTA case says that he’s based in Wisconsin? It looks like he’s based in MSP, given the usernames MinnetonkaMN and Brooklyn Park MN 172.58.183.33 (talk) 03:53, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rsjaffe. There is another IP restoring the personal attack at Talk:Estonia. Do you think it is a good idea to request page protection here? They are re-using the same IPs at the moment so I am not sure if it is enough to block those IPs/ranges. Thanks. Mellk (talk) 15:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Maybe. Give it a few hours. I’ll block what I can and see if they give up. We hate to protect talk pages. The disruption is hidden from casual visitors so the cost benefit calculation is different for talk pages than for articles. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:05, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Rsjaffe. Just a quick one regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Divata. As a non-admin, I was unable to close as delete. I realise now that closing as 'procedural close' shows up as 'UNDETERMINED' on the stats site. I was just wondering if you wouldn't mind formally closing this AfD as 'delete' to correct the undetermined error. Thanks! 11WB (talk) 20:00, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@11wallisb: It might be better just to change it to "Speedy delete" like in this instance. Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I'm aware non-admins are not supposed to close as delete per #3 of WP:BADNAC. Though I do note it's an essay, to my knowledge BADNAC is generally upheld by the active administrators and editors at AfD. That's why I've contacted @Rsjaffe here. (The article is in draftspace at the moment due to an ongoing AN/I involving the author.) 11WB (talk) 20:12, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I should have started that message by explaining that due to the article being in draftspace for the purpose of an ongoing AN/I, it has left the status of the AfD in limbo. 11WB (talk) 20:24, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Why don't we wait until the draft is deleted before trying to fix this? I (or someone else) will delete it once the AN/I thread is done. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:27, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

No problem at all! Just thought I would highlight this to you, as I saw the error and realised the specific situation was not something I had encountered before. I'm not going to touch the AfD now, I'll leave this for another editor/admin to edit if they feel it is necessary. As it's only a five second edit to fix, I'm not too concerned about it! 11WB (talk) 20:33, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

If an article has already been speedily deleted, non-admins can close the discussion as "speedily deleted". That would not be a BADNAC. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:50, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

My watchlist say "Rsjaffe talk contribs changed visibility of 55 revisions on page Lithuanians: content hidden (RD1: Violations of copyright policy: https://www.vle.lt/)"

It appears that this user JorkaSSS (talk · contribs) added literal translations from vls.lt in a number of other pages. --Altenmann >talk 21:01, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

The best place to go with this issue is Wikipedia:Copyright problems. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Chances are that they probably need a CCI, since there was copying found from their older contributions over time as well as noted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lithuania. I'll request one if no one does soon. Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe I thought I would let you know that a account you indefed created a new one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ATheCheekyLab&redlink=1 GothicGolem29 (talk) 01:54, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Which indeffed account? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:15, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Mycheeky date https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMycheekydate&redlink=1 GothicGolem29 (talk) 02:16, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

It was created prior to the block and unused, so it wasn't a sockpuppetry effort. I did block it as a related account to the primary blocked account. Thanks for alerting me. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:59, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Ah ok apologies for the mistake from me. No worries. GothicGolem29 (talk) 21:35, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

I had to look at that pretty carefully myself to figure out what was going on. The account did need blocking, but not with a label of sockpuppetry. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:46, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok fair enough thank you for sorting it out GothicGolem29 (talk) 22:11, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Truth69420 I have difficulty with seeing these posts as constructive. Others may wall see them differently. Doug Weller talk 11:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@Doug Weller:. Thank you for your feedback and @JBW:'s: (Special:Diff/1318011070). I think JBW said it best Sometimes there can be a narrow line between a joke account and a troll account. Perhaps it's best to avoid going anywhere near to that line. I've obviously irritated people whose opinion I respect, so I'm going to stop making jokes with that account outside of very obvious joke areas (e.g., April Fools').

I will say that I thought I was doing ok with that account: see my explanation of my thoughts about the joke account in my EfA statement (I dedicated a whole paragraph in my Nomination statement to it: Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Candidates/Rsjaffe) and any feedback I received prior to yesterday was positive. But thank you for alerting me before I irritated even more people, as that was far from my purpose: its purpose was to make people think twice about prejudging usernames. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:57, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

My biggest problem with your use of that account is that sometimes you have made a joke of significant concerns involving an editor. Doing that runs the risk of conveying the message to that editor that the issue isn't really to be taken seriously, especially in the case of a new or newish editor, which potentially may make it more difficult to convey the significant point to that editor. Mentioning Doug Weller for information. JBW (talk) 22:09, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

And thank you for your response. Doug Weller talk 08:20, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

hello, my page on my langauge was removed, please can you restore it, it is for my highschool langauge class? i will remove it once the assignment is done if you want? Floplord (talk) 02:57, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Wikipedia is not a hosting service for class projects. See WP:NOTWEBHOST for more on that. Please find an alternative location for your class work. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:02, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

I saw the page while patrolling new users and it said that the user had been indeffed for harassment

I'd just like to clarify the why; e.g. is there sockpuppetry that I haven't heard of? Whyiseverythingalreadyused (talk) 04:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

You have to look at the edit filter log to see the issue. I’m not sure as to whether you can see all the logs (some are hidden from most users). — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:47, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Oh thanks

Lemme see Whyiseverythingalreadyused (talk) 05:31, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Yep I see now Whyiseverythingalreadyused (talk) 05:33, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, saved me a trip to RfPP. By the way, 75.180.215.236 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) is probably Lumtuskyprof as well.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:05, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I also protected List of Lumbees, which was catching the same disruption this month. Agree about 75..., but that's stale--only used one day about 2 weeks ago. May have rotated to an innocent person by now, so I won't block. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Rsjaffe. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I was granted Temporary IP address viewer rights a few days ago, but I noticed after making some edits that I actually do not have this right. When I checked my user rights, the IP viewer permission was not listed. What could be the possible reason for this? I hope you can help me. Thank you. - Arcrev1 (talk) 06:11, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

The request was a couple days short of the 6 months requirement, so the approval did not "stick". I'll fix that now, as youre beyond the six months. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 11:32, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe: Thank you so much. 😊 On the mobile interface, the time appears to be advanced. For example, when I submitted my request on the request page, it showed that my account was already 6 months old. My apologies for that. I just want to ask, does this right work on the mobile interface, or do I need to use the desktop view? Or is it not functional on mobile at all? I mainly use mobile. - Arcrev1 (talk) 11:51, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the mobile interface, but it should work. once temporary accounts start, check it out. If the are problems then, I suggest going to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) to discuss. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 11:56, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. - Arcrev1 (talk) 12:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Rsjaffe. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 17 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 15:13, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2025).

Administrator changes

Toadspike

• Elahrairah
• Juliancolton
• Magnus Manske

CheckUser changes

asilvering

Guideline and policy news

• The speedy deletion criteria U5 has been repealed, with U6 and U7 replacing it. See the FAQ for more clarifications.
• Community-designated contentious topics may now be enforced and appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (AE) as a result of an RfC.

Technical news

• You can enable a handy user info card next to usernames, which when clicked displays edit count, blocks, thanks, and other information. To enable this feature, visit Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been closed
  • Uninvolved administrators may impose an AE participation restriction on any thread at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Hello, Rsjaffe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Loco Loco".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

It wasn't my draft, but the original author is indeffed anyway, so a notice to them wouldn't be useful. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:21, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

hey so why did you collapse the LLM generated content like that at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lighthouse_(British_organisation)&diff=prev&oldid=1320811933 instead of what I did? ~2025-30597-01 (talk) 22:52, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

See WP:AITALK. And also: Editors should not use LLMs to write comments generatively. Communication is at the root of Wikipedia's decision-making process and it is presumed that editors contributing to the English-language Wikipedia possess the ability to come up with their own ideas. Comments that do not represent an actual person's thoughts are not useful in discussions, and comments that are obviously generated by an LLM or similar AI technology may be struck or collapsed. Repeating such misuse forms a pattern of disruptive editing, and may lead to a block or ban. from Wikipedia:Large_language_models#Communicating.

It's in addition to what you did, and not a replacement. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:14, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

oh, i skimmed through it and i didn't see the "may be struck"

thanks! ~2025-30597-01 (talk) 23:37, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

He has continued to edit, now using ~2025-33244-71 and ~2025-33138-62. Should I just continue logging at SPI, or is there anything else that can be done about the logged out editting? Spike 'em (talk) 14:01, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

SPI is correct. I’ve blocked them and tried to prevent further attempts. But this is a case where temporary accounts make it harder to track and block, as this user knows how to dump accounts rapidly. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 15:36, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. From what I read, temp accounts are cookie based, so it sounds as simple as editting in a separate In Private browser session each time. Will continue to log and hopefully they'll get bored soon. Spike 'em (talk) 15:41, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey, I wasn't sure what to do about this. I found this weird conspiracy theory article at Unspecified/weirdly placed RCMP detatchments that appears to be entirely WP:OR. It was worked on recently so I don't think I can draftify it. Is PROD or AfD the only way about this since it doesn't seem to fit a particular CSD criterion? TornadoLGS (talk) 05:03, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Letting you know that, even before your range block for vandalism of this page expired, they got around it. Re-reporting to you directly as you said and also equesting actual page protection now. λ NegativeMP1 17:15, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, they're bouncing around a lot. Protected page. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:14, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, you create protected Eric Gilbertson (climber). I wrote a new draft at Draft:Eric Gilbertson (climber) with many sources published since the last discussion. Are you willing to move it to mainspace? (t · c) buidhe 22:03, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

I added an Article for Creation template to the page. Submit the draft for review. If accepted, we can then fix the protection. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:13, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

It is not possible to review an article in AFC if the mainspace target is create protected. See also the discussion here. (t · c) buidhe 04:47, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

I have unprotected the article title. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:07, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

User talk:Vin79745 tony 20:23, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Revoked TPA. Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:26, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

This user needs his talk page access revoked as it appears that this user is miss using his talk page while blocked. Untamed1910 (talk) 03:09, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Done. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:19, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rsjaffe, hoping this finds you well. Now with the new IP masking, I can't use geolocate anons anymore, but any suggestions on how to find out? I mean, if I suspect an IP made disruptive edits in the recent past and is continuing to make them (but masked) now, where/if can I ask? Cheers! —Fortuna, imperatrix 07:02, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I believe you are looking for WP:RFP/TAIV. GrayStorm^{(Talk to me|My Contribs.)} 07:06, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

@GrayStorm: Heh. I see what you did there  :) I don't think I qualify for the ticket, but I thought there might be an SPI-style page for reports or enquiries. By the way, nice self-portrait on your UP, but I don't think much of the weather there! —Fortuna, imperatrix 07:36, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

You do qualify for temporary account IP viewer, which should give you the information that was previously available. Just apply at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Temporary account IP viewer. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 11:23, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Understood, just that I don't do much vandal fighting. Although I'm not unknown at SPI, I guess. Thanks for the info! —Fortuna, imperatrix 12:36, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Just to say, thanks very much for sorting that Rsjaffe, much appreciated, and talk about Rapid Response  :) But, did my linking to this subsection of your talk ping you? If so, apologies—I didn't think it would, and I certainly wouldn't have put you on the spot like that. Thanks, and apologies again! —Fortuna, imperatrix 17:32, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

no worries. I wasn't pinged. Just happened to be looking at my watchlist then. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:35, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Happy coincidence then! Thanks again, —Fortuna, imperatrix 17:41, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Please redact the Japanese edit summaries as they contain death threats against Tetsuya Yamagami. Thanks. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 05:29, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:38, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe: I realize now that the entire history of the page is death threats (including the page content itself). I think it qualifies for G10. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 18:41, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Handled. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 23:27, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, why'd you use yellow here? Looking to learn... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:03, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Well, you won’t learn much from this one. I misclicked. My mobile device has problems with the discussion closer dialog. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:07, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

HAHA! Fwiw, I was having the same issue until I upgraded to User:DaxServer/DiscussionCloser-new.js. The new version is working much better on mobile! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:12, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Will try it. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:13, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

While publishing a page my IP was blocked by you. This is the first time I am publishing on wiki so there's no history of issues here/ Any particular reason why this was done? ~2025-37500-70 (talk) 18:22, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

There's a long history of abuse on that IP range. The best way to proceed is to register an account. Most of the blocks affecting that range don't block logged-in users. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:33, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rsjaffe, I believe you saw my previous thread so you may have context on the behavior. The TA user is still making personal attacks against me and others. This is after 5 warnings on one of his other TAs, and 2 warnings on this one. BMWF (talk) 09:25, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

The TA was blocked so this is no longer an issue. BMWF (talk) 22:31, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello Rsjaffe, I see that you have speedily deleted a page that I recently created without any prior warning. SkyChoice Communications. It would be greatly appreciated if you could please change to proposed deletion instead in order to provide an opportunity for rewriting some of the page to resolve the issues you have raised. Thank you. NRG3K (talk) 10:15, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the page to user:NRG3K/Skychoice. Please address the issues promptly, as another patroller could still mark it for deletion as overtly promotional given its current state. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 15:26, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

I've always had a bit of an eye for when IPs are linked together and have over the course of my time added them to the SPI queue, however recently I got a little confused. I've just had another looked at one AfD (FIFA Peace Prize, where I thought I saw two IPs from the same pool, and struct them, it was reverted. Now I come to think of it, I don't think I am seeing IPs anymore am I? Just so I understand, do I need to sign up to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Temporary account IP viewer now in order to view IPs that may be up to no good?? Regards, Govvy (talk) 19:10, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes. And, if you do, be careful to follow the rules about avoiding publicly linking specific IP addresses to Temporary Account names. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:12, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe you blocked me but allow me to point at:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Quantum_beams_inside_a_spherical_volume

• The last remark:
Keep No this is important stuff and is part of Spherical harmonics or special functions dealing with the surface of a sphere and quantum mechanics. If anything the content should be merged with another related page on math or physics. Agnieszka653 (talk) 04:35, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
Please be specific about what content should be merged and where. Also check whether the citations actually support the statements: the likelihood of hallucination is high. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 05:12, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

and this:

• I have decided that I cannot ask professional physicists to repair pages on wikiversity, so I am withdrawing my block request. You can contact me on Wikipedia if you want to know more; I will not respond on wikiversity. (Ldm1954)
• If you wish, send me an email by Wikipedia.

Thank you for your time. Harold Foppele (talk) 14:26, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2025).

Administrator changes

• Chaotic Enby
• Rjjiii

Valereee

• Fathoms Below
• Tamzin

CheckUser changes

Spicy

Technical news

• Starting on November 4, the IP addresses of logged-out editors are no longer being publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account associated with their edits.
• Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). T382958

Miscellaneous

• The December 2025 administrator elections are scheduled from Nov 25 – Dec 15.
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in December 2025, with over 1,000 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

@Rsjaffe:,I would like to report harassment and vandalism by three users: user:Favre1fan93, user:Gonnym and user:DMacks. f you could please review my talk page User talk:Harold Foppele and its revision history, you will see that these three users interacted with me for about six hours in a way that I experienced as harassment..

Additionally, user:DMacks moved the article "Polonium dichloride dibromide" to Draft:Polonium dichloride dibromide and deleted most of the text. This text was NOT created by me but mainly by @Graeme Bartlett:, @PhoenixCaelestis:,@LaundryPizza03:.The notification about the move appeared on my talk page at 16:23 UTC, which was 11 minutes after (16:12 UTC) when the harassment began. This timing felt very coincidental. user:DMacks got involved since that time.

If some editors have a problem with me, that is one thing — but threatening me is another. Statements such as “Do not remove parts of it again” (or else?) and “Removing others’ comments is prohibited…” were presented to me as warnings, but in this context they came across as threats.

I hope this situation can be addressed, as I consider this behavior to fall under WP:VANDAL and harassment. Thank you. Harold Foppele (talk) 12:15, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm not seeing harassment. The comment about removing parts of other people's comments is referring to the policy about what you can and can't do with your talk page. If you are unhappy with how they discussed things with you, you should discuss this with them directly--such as on their talk page or yours. If, after that, you still feel there is ongoing harassment, you can refer the issue to WP:ANI, but that could backfire on you if others agree that you weren't being harassed. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 12:47, 9 December 2025 (UTC

@Rsjaffe:, Just for my understanding now, six hour of forward backward editing undo redo is not harrasment? Just to clarify, I was archiving some of my talk page and they kept re-editing and undoing my edits. For SIX hours long and than it stopped. So now the page is as I wanted it to be. But, if you cannot do anything about that, I shall take it to WP:ANI. Cheers Harold Foppele (talk) 14:37, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

I wish to clarify my role. My sole edit to the page is this diff, which fixed some headers, fixed the placement of in-text references, and added a "citation needed" tag. I changed no information and am not a major contributor in any way. PhoenixCaelestis ‣ _Talk // ^{Contributions} 13:18, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on your user page, User talk:Vaibhav.qvolv, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Felicia (talk) 14:22, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Wrong user. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:47, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi! It looks like you marked an article I published for deletion. I checked with one of the other editors to get a clearer understanding of what i did incorrectly and i realize now that i should not have run my initial draft through AI for tagging the references. I am a work study student at Muhlenberg College and am working on getting a few of our notable profs who aren't currently listed on wikipedia on the platform. Mr. Dean was my first one and I'm learning the best practices. I'm going to be uploading a new article about Mr. Dean that I did NOT run through any AI for coding or proofing. I wanted to let you know so that you can check it again and offer edits or help. I'm sure it will need some. Thanks! THRGuru1115 (talk) 18:59, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Is this task part of your work assignment? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:09, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm doing while at my work study job, but this is independent of that. Just doing this during down time, so it's not a paid thing if that's why you're asking. i'm a student studying playwriting and dramaturgy and hoping to do some editing related to theatre and performance on this platform in my spare time. i want to start with getting some of the notable theatre profs here at muhlenberg on wikipedia first. THRGuru1115 (talk) 19:35, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

OK. Couple of suggestions. 1) Read WP:NACADEMIC carefully. Lots of professors do not meet notability criteria for inclusion, so look at the criteria: if those apply, make sure information about the prof related to the criterion affecting notability is included in the bio. Also, note that some professors who do not meet the academic criteria for notability might meet other criteria--see WP:BIO if they do not meet academic criteria to see if another criterion applies. 2) Don't use LLM (AI) for writing a wikipedia article: As you've now found out, LLMs are great at writing stuff, but not great at accurately writing stuff. They also include info in their database that would be considered unreliable for wikipedia. Every word you write is your responsibility, even when generated by a program, so you need to be able to back up every word. Sounds like you've learned your lesson there, but it's an important message to repeat. Good luck on your work. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:50, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for this advice. THRGuru1115 (talk) 12:47, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, can you please explain the block to my account in detail for edit warring. It is my opinion that the other account was warring with me or is he also blocked? And if you review my most recent comment to his post then that explains better. The edit was for a new section of the article for career, as part of his career is under “early life” which is inaccurate. Every edit to his specification was rejected, even though it’s what he suggested, he said it’s negative so I used his wording, then he didn’t like that so he said already duplicated so then I didn’t duplicate and added a new section. I cannot see what was wrong. PolitickingAnalysis (talk) 23:11, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

There is a more extensive discussion about this at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#PolitickingAnalysis. In brief, you were in a one against many dispute in which you made more than three reverts. Going past that line is a bright-line violation of edit warring policy. I think it is most useful for any further discussion to be on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#PolitickingAnalysis, since there are many other people there discussing this as well. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:55, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Would you mind attending to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#6-7 meme if you have time? This page has been getting quite a lot of vandalism over the last few hours. Entranced98 (talk) 22:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Gave it a year of semi-protection. If that isn't enough, a longer period can be enacted then. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:12, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

You may wish to revoke TPA. Cahk (talk) 08:49, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 11:55, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Why didn't you record your EC protection of Bohora at WP:AELOG/2025#SA? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:04, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

There is now automatic logging if you properly tag the edit summary for the protection. See Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/2025 All sanctions and page restrictions, except page protections, must be logged by the administrator who applied the sanction or page restriction at Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log. Page protections must clearly note in the protection reason that the protection action is an arbitration enforcement action and link to the applicable contentious topic page (e.g., WP:CT/BLP), which will cause the action to be automatically logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/Protections. (emphasis mine) — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:35, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the considerate and detailed closes. Hope you have a safe and healthy holiday season. Star Mississippi 01:47, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rsjaffe. Since you blocked Special:Contributions/~2025-40162-16, maybe you could also take a look at Special:Contributions/~2025-35840-54 since it looks like the same user. The edits made by both accounts are quite similar and made over roughly the same period of time at a similar WP:MEATBOT pace. FWIW, I only noticed the this because the accounts were adding flag icons to section headings and also kind of usurping articles about events taking place in a give year for a given region and moving them in a slightly different direction content wise. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:45, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, blocked. The blocks on the ip expires on the 28th. If they return, it can be blocked longer. They change TAs quite rapidly, so it’ll probably be a different account . — rsjaffe 🗣️ 06:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:23, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello Rsjaffe: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ~2025-42505-47 (talk) 10:57, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

~2025-42505-47 (talk) 10:57, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/Plan of Israel to take over Gaza City has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. CNC (talk) 22:20, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/Operation Narnia has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of airstrikes during the Iran–Israel War has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:21, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/June 2025 Israeli strikes on Iran has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/June 2025 Israeli strikes in Iran has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/Tal al-Sultan Ambush has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:30, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Rsjaffe, 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 heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 09:04, 25 December 2025 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 09:04, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

I imagine this is already actionable. The rest of their contribs really don't seem promising either. ⫷doozy (talk▮contribs)⫸ 02:24, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

I created The ECG Quiz Wikipedia page, which was tagged for Speedy Deletion. I disagree with this assessment and respectfully request a review of the G11 speedy deletion of the article The ECG Quiz.

The deleted article was purposely written in an encyclopedic, neutral tone and does not meet the criteria for unambiguous advertising or promotion. While the subject is a commercial educational website, commerciality alone does not qualify an article for G11 (see articles on Duolingo, Khan Academy, Coursera, etc.). The content contained no calls to action, no praise or superiority claims, no testimonials, and no promotional language.

The article focused on:

• The purpose and background of the platform
• Its educational design and methodology
• How ECG interpretations are structured and evaluated
• The intended professional audience

All descriptions were factual and informational, consistent with WP:NPOV and comparable to accepted articles on other commercial products (see articles on Spotify, Grammarly, Chegg).

If there are concerns regarding notability, sourcing, or tone refinement, those would be cleanup or draft-space issues, not grounds for speedy deletion under G11. I am willing to improve sourcing and/or adjust phrasing as appropriate.

For these reasons, I believe G11 was misapplied and would like to ask that the article be restored for normal editorial review. Cygnus8929 (talk) 17:37, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Please use your own words, not LLMs, when writing on talk pages. See WP:AITALK. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:44, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

I wrote The ECG Quiz article. It was marked for deletion under the G11 rule. I think you should take another look at this decision. I do not think The ECG Quiz article should be deleted.

The ECG Quiz is an online platform users can use to practice reading ECGs. Even though it is a project that people pay for, the article is not trying to get anyone to use the ECG Quiz platform or buy anything from the ECG Quiz website.

I wrote the article to make sure it has factual information about what the platform is and what it can do. I followed the Wikipedia rules, so the article does not sound like I am trying to convince people of something. It just gives the facts. The article talks about the background of the platform, the way it teaches users, how it shows and evaluates ECG interpretations, and who it is for (medical professionals and students who want to learn about the platform).

There may be some problems with this article, but these problems are usually fixed by making changes, not by removing the article under rule G11. I am ready to make changes to the article and answer any questions or concerns the Wikipedia community has about the article.

For these reasons, I ask that the article be restored so it can go through the usual editorial review and improvement process. Cygnus8929 (talk) 21:45, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Couple of points:

1. The copy in your sandbox was deleted as unreviewed LLM output, and I can see that trait as well in the article. You must thoroughly review LLM output prior to using it, and it is not recommended for new users, as there are subtle issues with how an LLM writes articles.

2. The language was promotional, describing the benefits and attributes of the software, not objective.

3. It appears you have an undeclared conflict of interest. What is your relationship to the ECG quiz?

I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Spam#How not to be a spammer. Also, you must declare your conflict of interest. See also WP:COI. And finally, the article was so full of promotional content that it would be best to start from scratch if you insist on writing about that. Note also that, for something to be included in Wikipedia, it must meet notability guidelines. See WP:ORG for information on notability for a product like the ECG Quiz. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:02, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe I appreciate your good-faith, respectful communication and your guidance to focus on more constructive edits in unrestricted areas going forward. It has always been a privilege to be part of this committed community. Thanks. Pritik Wiki (talk) 23:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)