I prefer to communicate via talk pages. Please only email me if there is a good reason not to conduct a conversation on a talk page. I do not respond to emails regarding link deletions and other issues that should be discussed on your userpage or the article talk page.

If you've come here because you want to know why I removed some external links you've added, please read Wikipedia's policies on spam, Wikipedia external link guidelines and conflict-of-interest first. Because of Wikipedia's popularity, it has become a target for folks looking to promote their sites, which is against Wikipedia policies. Wikipedia is not a free advertising platform. wikipedia

PLEASE LEAVE NEW COMMENTS AT THE *BOTTOM* OF THIS PAGE.

• Policy
  • Wikipedia:Stand-alone_lists#Selection_criteria
  • Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Lists_of_people (which refers back to the above link)
• Essay
  • Wikipedia:Your alma mater is not your ticket to Wikipedia
  • Wikipedia:Write_the_article_first
• School administrators: WP:RFCSCHOOLADMIN

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For your help here. Thank you! JeffSpaceman (talk) 19:56, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i have a sneaking suspicon that AA11super plane and that porkz accounts are sock/meat puppets would be good to protect the pages that porkz mentioned in their unblock request too localBluepikmin (whistle the pikmin) 15:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect The B has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 5 § The B until a consensus is reached. GilaMonster536 (talk) 02:31, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took a glance at WP:RFPP, and there is a user asking for something to be protected (obviously). However, they also release their username and password. Can you or another admin revdel that and block/lock the account as compromised? I don't think anyone knowing a users password will let that account be stable. That account's future is in an oblong box of trolls able to take advantage of it. right here. ☩ ^{(Babysharkboss2)} 15:39, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2601:840:4300:0:0:0:0:0/48 is a known LTA on zoo articles. Please disable talkpage and email when blocking them. DMacks (talk) 03:12, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will do in the future. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:29, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In January you partially blocked 105.112.10.207 (talk · contribs). On 19 April an editor using this IP address made a disruptive edit to Talk:Aquarius (astrology). Jc3s5h (talk) 17:42, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I partially blocked that range, which likely has many different users. I don't think the test edits to that talk page are related to the editor targeted by the partial block. I've warned the recent IP editor. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:08, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you removed the election table at Crittenden County, Arkansas, only to have it restored by a new editor. The source is "Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections", accessed on November 18, 2016.

I've never been able to find any of the data used in hundreds of these "election results" tables at that source.

I wonder if TylerKutschbach is back at it. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:37, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed you blocked the IP...you're one step ahead! Magnolia677 (talk) 15:41, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, defitely TK. I also added some new IP ranges to my edit filters. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

– PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 20:04, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply] Sorry for the repeated emails. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 01:36, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have blocked a large IP range which is part of an IP block belonging to a Slovenian telecommunications company (https://www.nirsoft.net/countryip/si.html). Due to this, a large number of users using mobile data are blocked, despite not having edited anything on Wikipedia before. 92.37.79.117 (talk) 12:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Talk page watcher) Users are free to edit from that IP address range, they must simply sign in to their account. If they don't have an account, one may be created for them via WP:ACC. --Yamla (talk) 12:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you have a moment to look at Pulaski County, Arkansas. This is likely another sock. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, tagged and bagged. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 11:14, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know this [1] was a good while ago but it gave me a chuckle, thanks :D.

GoldRomean (talk) 18:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, thanks for the goat! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at this account. They seem similar to an LTA you recently blocked, though I'm not sure if they are the same person. Thanks – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 19:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Might be the same user, but I'm not 100% sure. In the case of the IP, they are not a vandal per se, but were being very belligerent and abusive when anyone questioned/challenged their edits, which is why I added the filters; e.g., they call someone a name, get a /64 block, then make the same edits from another IP. If it is the same person, I'm OK with them creating an account for accountability as long as they collaborate appropriately with other editors without resorting to attacks. However, I haven't been following them too closely; another editor or admin may disagree with me and want to block that account, which I am OK with. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note the user has been blocked for 31 hours for logged-out editing and not communicating well. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 15:04, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The cited USA Today article is incorrect. I explain in the linked Talk topic.

I can provide Yearbook photos to verify.

I found a local newspaper story from August 1987. Philip is quoted in the story, and they list his age as 13. That, combined with Bruno Mars wishing him a Happy Birthday on July 17th, would make his birthday July 17, 1974.

Let me know how I can link to the image.

Talk:Philip Lawrence (songwriter) 99.49.59.166 (talk) 16:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, check this out. Six different accounts added that to Marvel Rivals over the past two days and it's been popping up elsewhere as well.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 23:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another one turned up today.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 04:41, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Filter has been modified by Daniel Quinlan.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:24, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was away from the computer for a few weeks, still getting caught up. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On Namudag Raj I saw that you blocked User:Oficialhistory602, on the same page is another user literally called User:Officialhistory601 (not blocked) and just recently a user named User:Offohistogram popped up, editing one of Oficialhistory602s drafts Draft:Surpur, editing two articles where Oficialhistory602 added something regarding Namudag Raj and it getting removed, and editing Namudag Raj. Maybe I'm just worrying over nothing, but I'll admit my weirdness sensor got pinged. I guess what I'm asking for is a another pair of eyes looking over this and if something should be done (SPI, something else idk) Trim02 (talk) 14:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; borderline WP:DUCK, but I think I'll create an WP:SPI as I suspect there are more. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

– PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 23:42, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ohnoitsjamie, it's been seven years since you placed this article under semi-protection due to apparent vandalism and this protection request. Looking at your overall protection log on 2 April 2018, you also semi-protected four other articles for apparently the same reason, however those protections were set to expire in six months, but not this one. Was this an oversight, or did you actually intend to protect this article indefinitely? BriDash9000 (talk) 09:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was an oversight. I try to only protect things indefinitely if the article (1) is an obvious long-term vandal magnet or (2) has history of increasing temporary protections; neither appears to apply in this case. I'll unprotect it and see how it goes. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought! I'm also weirded out how this had been semi-protected longer than Tara Strong's main article, which actually got semi-protected indefinitely on October 2020. BriDash9000 (talk) 08:20, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check this out. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 04:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hey so I've seen you've dealt with "2600:387:15:1D13:0:0:0:7" before? could you block them from editing the reptile zoo page? sorry i dont know the correct way to go around that still pretty new to wikipedia

also semi related, could you point me in the direction on how to get that page semi protected? this is the 3rd time its been vandalised the past few days (to the point this IP could also be a sock puppet to Brewe108 but i have no evidence)

anyways thanks in advance for any help you can provide, sorry if I've contacted you over something i shouldn't off HCPM (talk) 21:31, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That IP is from a very large IP range with many different users. At the moment, it has some partial blocks; those prevent users from that range from editing certain articles. We do fully block large ranges sometimes if there's too much disruption from them; this particular range is borderline; there's a mix of good faith and disruptive edits. Regarding The Reptile Zoo, that range has only edited that article once. I've removed your claims of "abuse" because that violates our original research policy; that is, it's your interpretation of a video. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is someone meant to provide evidence of it? nobody is writing a paper on something that is clearly abuse, if there is a video of someone hitting a dog nobody is going to write a paper about its so is that not usable as evidence for abuse? like what is the correct way to go about this? (also apologies if this isnt formatted correctly) HCPM (talk) 16:15, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "correct" way to go about it other than finding a third party reliable source, period. Also see WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:49, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But the issue is that the company purposely hides and removes the infomation, they commit blantant animal abuse and yet there is nowhere that speaks on it outside of dicussions in youtube videos and reddit which cant exactly be used as evidence can it? and also if you look at the articles praising it... those people have no expertise in reptiles what so ever, one article praising him is from someone who is an expert in "AI and Robotics" like? but I do see your point i just kinda.. want to know what can be done to change this? does it just have to stay this way until someone makes something that be used as a source? sorry for all this btw if its annoying its just.. something so clear cut cant be spoken about due to lack of written sources? its just disheartening i suppose HCPM (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, Wikipedia is not a WP:SOAPBOX; there is nothing to be done about your issue with this business on Wikipedia. You'll see that Reddit and Youtube are clearly categorized as not reliable sources on WP:RSP. I'm not discussing this further with you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, regarding this, I'm unable to accept the AFC because it's create-protected. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 17:35, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're saying you were prepared to accept that draft as appropriate for article space? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:52, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey — I noticed you added a new block (which will run concurrently with my block) to 88.156.215.58 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) instead of 'changing block parameters' (as normally happens when reblocking a user/block-conflicting via Twinkle or another tool). Was this intentional? If not, this might indicate a slight bug in how adding new blocks vs. modifying a current block is handled now that multiblocks are enabled here. Many thanks! — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 12:39, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After I made the block I noticed that you'd blocked the IP at about the same time; are you sure it added it concurrently? The current timestamp is still 3 days from now. I have a feeling the devs will need to tweak the new interface a bit now that it's in wider use. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:00, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Block/88.156.215.58 shows two currently active blocks (that is, two blocks running together concurrently) — did you set the block directly on Special:Block or by using a tool? (I personally used Twinkle, which probably does need some updates to make things a bit clearer now). Sorry for all the questions, just wanting to stamp out any little remaining bugs as soon as possible :-) — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 13:11, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't use any tools for blocking. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:36, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:TheresNoTime - (in dramatic reverb voice): MULTIBLOCKS!. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is "dupe video"? this media shows hilltop youth in action so it contribute to the page. יורם שורק (talk) 20:57, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dupe as in "duplicate." The video does not need to appear twice on the same article. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:16, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Ohnoitsjamie. An editor called Davidd02 has been vandalising the page Nkoranza by removing sourced content, adding unsourced content and provding sources that do not verify changes they made on the article. Various editors including I, have left a message on his talk page since May 5. But there has been no change to his behaviour. Kwesi Yema (talk) 03:38, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

My name is Davionne Jackson and I am a Grammy Award Winning Singer-Songwriter. Specifically for Chris Brown’s “11:11” project, however, I am not seeing my name under the specific recording I contributed to? I have my Grammy Recognition Certificate for the album and I would like to speak about getting my credit via Wikipedia. 172.117.205.102 (talk) 18:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need a third-party reliable source that includes that name to be able to add additional credits; your own personal social media accounts and PR sites don't count as reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:09, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Technical Barnstar
	For your work at 1161 (hist · log) – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see a serious lack of kitties here! On a more serious note, you've done great lately. Keep it up!

🪷 nahida 17:43, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

– PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your response. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 17:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning on 140.177.83.6 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) As you can see from their talk page, they've been adding "X is Jewish" nonsense, labeling non-Jews as Jews because their names are similar, since November of last year. Can we please get some kind of major warning or block? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 20:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks for the heads-up. I monitor a few other ranges who make similar edits, though this one geolocates to a different area. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:11, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't give any advanced notice before deleting and salting Jack Welsh. I went to the "discussion" page, and all of the comments were from 2020. I left my own replies on comments that I then realized weren't even about me.

Things have changed since 2020. Just do a google search for the man. He pops up in dozens of newspapers and magazines. I'm not connected with this subject, I don't really care all that much, but this process of just deleting a page SIMPLY BECAUSE it has been deleted in the PAST seems contrary to logic to me. Things change. That's the nature of time, that's how time works. Guylaen (talk) 04:30, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That article had been salted because of multiple recreations; which you have already discovered. That should've indicated to you that it was likely to be deleted again. You are welcome to use the WP:AFC process; in doing so, you'll want to note that it was previously deleted and salted. You'll need to convince reviewers that there is a signficant change in WP:DEPTH of coverage (vs getting mentioned in the news for stunts). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 11:58, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The anon user overtagging SE Asia media articles is back, editing at User:158.140.164.44. Their MO now seems to be adding dubious {{copyedit}} tags to random articles. I'm in the process of going through and reverting the worst of it. Jdcooper (talk) 11:38, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added that range to my filter, thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jamie, just to let you know, this user is back editing at User:~2025-34762-63. They have been adding {{copyedit}} and {{notability}} tags, mostly juuuust about warranted, but I'm keeping an eye on their edits in case they go rogue again. Jdcooper (talk) 14:04, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about this one; might be the same user, but as you noted, the notability tags in this case are reasonable. I did adjust my edit filters a bit so they should notify me if they start doing more pointless tagbombing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:26, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain it's the same user.. they're editing many of the same articles they used to, and they have a very distinctive style of edit summaries. But yeah, I'm hoping their editing has improved in the interim period. Jdcooper (talk) 14:57, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jamie. I'm not sure if this user: User:~2025-43378-18 is the same as the previous one (no edit summaries to compare), but they have just added {copyedit} tags to dozens of articles which don't seem to merit them. Also about Asian media topics. Jdcooper (talk) 00:52, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, they were busy; blocked a few temp accounts and ranges, thanks for letting me know! I need to tweak my filters a bit. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:40, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

– PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 00:39, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: I've replied to your email back. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 03:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making the edit, but I cannot edit any page. This is essentially I am blocked from editing. 110.145.79.237 (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A block-evading WP:LTA uses the range you are on; the edit filter is an alternative to a full block on that range, and it only trips on certain topics and wording. You'd have a much easier time if you created an account. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:05, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could I make a stand alone page for notable people in Somerset, Kentucky? 75.89.79.133 (talk) 18:15, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The current number of notable people wouldn't justify a standalone list at this point. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:04, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jamie you marked the Page "Aimsey" I've created earlier this morning for deletion and deleted it and I would love for you to restore it because I was still working on it. I just decided to take a break for a bit. I will be adding more resources and more stuff to it if you restore it. I'm trying my best to be a good editor. HiimowoomgYT (talk) 13:04, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That page was already deleted per consensus here because it didn't come close to meeting our notability criteria. That version you created didn't include any reliable sources whatsover. Please take the time to learn how Wikipedia policies work, especially regarding notability and reliable sourcing, before trying to create an article. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[section name edited because I didn't notice the above]
I see that you just SALTed Jack Welsh (YouTuber), which was an obvious workaround of the also-SALTed article using his full name, something which has been a recurring issue with his fans trying to create an article on him, as noted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Massey Welsh. Since that AfD, there have been sources that have appeared about him; however, they appear to fall short of ones needed for an article. He has been mentioned in the Guinness Book (see here), but Guinness is yellow-fielded at WP:RSP. He had a mainstream news article written about him last year in Metro here which was picked up by numerous other publications such as the New York Post, but Metro is a tabloid, plus the article only covers a single video, not his body of work as a whole nor his influence on YouTube. It might have been appropriate to list him at List of YouTubers, but that requires entries with existing articles, bringing us back to square one.

I believe I have a compromise: He is mentioned, with ref, at TommyInnit#Internet career. Redirecting the two deleted articles above there would satisfy WP:TARGET and WP:RSURPRISE, and also discourage editors from trying to create a standalone article. With me not being an admin and you being the last one involved with this, I'm placing this idea here. Mapsax (talk) 02:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[addendum, sorry] Another Guinness document says "He has also been liaising with Guinness World Records for many years", likely cementing WP:COI for a standalone article and making the redirect argument stronger. Mapsax (talk) 03:06, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't rule that out, but I'm not quite convinced that it's necessary. For one, it's questionable as to whether he should even be mentioned at TommyInnit in the first place and secondly, existing edit filters should catch any attempts to circumvent those saltings. It's quite possible that Massey will eventually have enough WP:SIGCOV to meet notability guidelines, but that's not the case yet. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:27, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Before I respond, I should note that he knows about these discussions, even showing WP screenshots recently – see this video posted July 1 (roughly 3:20 to 4:45 with a long aside in the middle).

I did fail to mention that the ref in question at TommyInnit is also Guinness. (Speaking of potential sources, had I continued to examine WP:RSP, I would have seen WP:METRO and WP:NYPOST.) It's the ambiguity of Guinness and the lack of knowing whether something is paid or not that's complicating things. Even WP:RSPF doesn't help any (note the chart in the last section). There just seems to be just enough notability to keep this in mind as being noted somewhere on WP if only through objective numbers, which is why I figured that it was worth a second look as of late, though as you note not yet at least due to lack of WP:SIGCOV. I don't know, maybe I'm being persuaded too much by Guinness Book. WP:NODEADLINE, I've made my case, I'll hang back now. Mapsax (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given the continued attacks on UK nuclear power related articles, can you perhaps take a look at my suggestions for semi-protection at WP:RPP? Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not including to protect that many articles, as I'm not sure how practical it is to protect every nuclear power station article though I certainly wouldn't object if someone else wanted to do it. There are alternative measures for handling LTAs like that. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. --10mmsocket (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just a heads up that your revdels still left the usernames visible as the revert edit summaries included them. I've hidden them now. SmartSE (talk) 23:09, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:10, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jamie,

Hi, I recently found out that my account has been stolen and I didn't have access to it. Meanwhile, someone edited a lot of pages using it, which lead to a ban signed by you. I regained control of the account, changed the password, now everything should be fine. If it is not much of a hastle I would appreciate coming back to the wiki society, healthily helping the community (of course if you are able to bring me back at all).

Thanks.

P#s. If you need any proof of my rightfulness, I also have an account on the Ukrainian wiki, which I used to create a couple of articles that have passed all checks and are live. If you need that, let me now. Timtim40a (talk) 12:56, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher). @Timtim40a: It might be helpful to let Jamie know the name of the old account. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:09, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Selangor_F.C._Under-23&diff=prev&oldid=1302605432

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ydlp19#ANI

Please can this vandal be banned, and mess reverted 93.140.39.137 (talk) 13:05, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear to me how that's vandalism, and this is not a subject area that I am knowledgeable in. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:45, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to bring to your attention a potential case of undisclosed paid editing on the Wikipedia article Santy Sharma.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santy Sharma

Kindly Review this ( Mentioned Detailed in Deletion Section )

If am wrong at some point please do let me know.

Thank you for your time.

Novaclia 🌀 Novaclia (talk) 16:19, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you offer some insight? I have a decision to make, but am sliding inexorably into a decline. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:43, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

does this affect me if my brother is permanently banned from any parts of wiki He did some nsfw activities multiple times I haven't done anything but he has and uses my device sometimes for "research purposes" i don't know what he used it for recently but I had to make an account that I use for school and I don't want my brother to affect me so

My question is does this affect my access too wiki Delta07 Qm07 (talk) 14:54, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that you are being truthful, as long as you are the only person using this account you should be able to edit Wikipedia. If your "brother" were to use your account, it would be considered compromised and immediately blocked indefinitely. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:24, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question is IF he is there how is it compromised if he used it for info for research and not editing? I need this for college so "IF"Delta07 Qm07 (talk) 15:27, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Compromised" meaning if he uses your account. I quoted "brother" because I've heard the WP:BROTHER story a million times. Please don't message me again, I'm not interested in discussing this further. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:40, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2026 United States Senate election in Michigan, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello- first of all, thank you for the deletion of the disruptive/vandal edits on both The Really Loud House and Talk:The Really Loud House. Just wanted to quickly add on that I think this should be deleted too?... Aside from that, thanks for the help. Magitroopa (talk) 18:37, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks for catching that.  Done OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi Jamie, seeing you as a frequent editor on this so I thought I'd ask you directly; I experimented with updating some info on this page and attempted to cite official govt websites, which was reverted by another admin (which could've been in part bc i was goofing around previously and in the edit summary - my fault) with the explanation that i should seek perennial sources; in a separate edit, removing info with an old citation needed tag led to your partial restoration with a citation to an official govt website. im amenable to either approach, and obv better sources would be better, but whether to include info with this kind of source appears a little subjective and open to an editor's interpretation. in your view, would you find any part of this edit to be worth restoring to the page? Tfyt 70.226.13.3 (talk) 20:09, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any obvious problems with your edit above, though I don't see the list of communities served mentioned in any of the new sources you added; perhaps that was the "unsourced" part EditorShane3456 was referring to; you'd have to ask him. Why did you write "adding vandalism" as your edit summary? That, along with this edit which appears to be vandalism is going to draw more scrutiny to future edits from this IP. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ah ok I see what you mean - I reckon I pulled the list of communities from the GFD website's home page instead of the "about us" page I cited. I'll take a 2nd crack at it. Thanks 70.226.13.3 (talk) 20:24, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now-blocked 79.135.127.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) has made some offensive edits on a number of nuclear power station articles, plus one other unrelated article. In the past you have hidden very similar edits by what I'm guessing is the very same editor on these articles. Any chance you can take a look? I have also listed a couple of the pages at WP:RPP, but feel free if you're so inclined to semi-protect those and the others. Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP-hopping LTA. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:39, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I sourced the change directly from interview from Kendrick where he says this - “I always said “Section 80” was just a warm-up for the story I’m trying to tell. “Section 80” was more about the people, my debut album will be more about me.” (Source)

This is from 2011 after it got released and before GKMC so its clear his intention was always for Section.80 to be a mixtape and GKMC to be his debut album.

On his feature on Power by Rapsody, he refers to TPAB as his second album - “My second LP had real niggas on POTUS lawn” (Referring to the cover art of TPAB)

Or on his own song Sing About Me, I’m Dying of Thirst - “You wrote a song about my sister on your tape And called it Section.80”

The consensus that this is an album is purely because of the fact that people trust wikipedia and dont make their own research.

The words of the artists matter far more than “consensus” Cerealny Kaiser (talk) 05:47, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No they don't. You need to get consensus for a change that impacts the templates and all of the other discography articles. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:08, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Helen Wheels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hell on wheels.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It always makes me laugh when a VOA does such a poor job they manage to get themselves blocked before even doing anything. Keep up the good work. Lynch44 18:29, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Perhaps not the most well-thought-out scheme there... OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:36, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was going to report it to WP:AIV via Twinkle but didn't realise that once I warn someone using Twinkle, the prefilled revision data disappears, and I wasn't quite sure where to find it again. So I appreciate your help on that front.

Regards, Shield. ^{\\ |T| - |C| \\} 00:54, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it will not be the last block, but the next one will be much longer. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. For some reason, it said my IP address was blocked by you. It led me to some random ip address that was not me. I was still able to log in to my account.

Its probably just a bug, but im letting you know anyway. Unconstructive33 (talk) 11:28, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP addresses on mobile devices change frequently. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:14, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if thisis needed just yet? I reverted an edit by Cm9122 as they purposely misgendered Hunter Schafer on the article talk page, see [2], which I reverted and left a warning on their talk page. Could you take a peek at their responses on their talk page please? They might respond better to an admin? Knitsey (talk) 18:38, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now blocked, sorry to have disturbed you. Knitsey (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glad that was sorted out quickly, thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:33, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the response given to the inaccurate accusation presented at the "User talk:98.32.141.216" page. I never have, nor ever will, use an LLM to compose any part of an edit. (I am not sure whether to be amused or insulted.) (a professor) 98.32.141.216 (talk) 15:41, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports#62.73.72.101, for filter 1202 you should switch to MediaWiki:Abusefilter-disallowed-LTA instead of the default message. Thanks. Codename Noreste (talk) 18:06, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks for catching that. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:07, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brian Daboll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please revdelete this edit as serious libel? Entranced98 (talk) 14:30, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:38, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An IP and a vandalism-only account are causing heavy disruption to this article, could they please be blocked ASAP? Entranced98 (talk) 15:04, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind taking a look at a situation? New user, User:NewJerseyFanatic2025 added a massive list of town to the lead of Jersey Shore with the simple line of “Largest cities in the region:.” When I reverted, explaining that lists don’t belong in the lead due to it being a summary of the article and that this is not the format lists are add in anyway, their response was to revert it back saying “Well, it's being added to the lead anyway.” Eight minutes later, they moved it out of the lead but it still remained in an improper format and was reverted once more. Their response was to, once again, revert back. It’s obvious by their immediate argumentative response that this user is WP:NOTHERE to collaborate or follow any sort of established guidelines. Thanks. NJZombie (talk) 03:30, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be premature label the user as WP:NOTHERE; let's start with some warning and feedback on their talk page (which I've begun). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:13, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I see you noticed, the exit warring continues. NJZombie (talk) 20:38, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of by Ponyo. I reverted all but Jersey Shore back; you can do the honors there as I've already reverted several times. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:45, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it?

Disclaimer: Wikipedia makes no guarantee of validity 178.222.183.91 (talk) 05:44, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed on that user page are those of the editor's and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of any entities they represent. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:36, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, it looks like you partially blocked 97.83.21.236 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) but they've found some new targets. Perhaps a broader block is needed? --ZimZalaBim ^talk 02:17, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That particular IP now has 4 years to find some new hobbies. Added some filters as well, thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please revoke TPA? ~delta ^{(talk • cont)} 01:36, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done, but I don't see any recent talk page edits; did someone already delete them? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:57, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: Yeah, ERCheck G3'd User talk:2605:59C0:6E11:D810:CC7E:A816:4A9A:9D4D and User talk:2605:59C0:6E11:D810:7874:F6A4:6F53:6BC3 yesterday. ~delta ^{(talk • cont)} 17:19, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jamie, Can you rd Kisan Singh to Kishan Singh of Bharatpur as an alt spelling? Looks like the page was protected a few years ago due to unrelated shenanigans. Thanks. Gotitbro (talk) 06:09, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 11:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like they've started editing logged-out after being blocked; see Draft:Our biography. Although if I were you I wouldn't have blocked them so fast as going straight to a Level 4 warning is for intentional and unambiguous vandalism, not misguided disruption. Passengerpigeon (talk) 20:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd don't feel great about blocking students in a class, but the failure to respond to feedback is frustrating. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:24, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recently noticed that a while ago you reverted an edit of mine on the page "Fastest animals" in the mammals section, regarding the addition of the maned wolf to the list.

If top speed doesn't count, what could count to define an animal's speed? Or even how fast it is positioned relative to others? Cheetahs can reach up to 120 km/h in a race, but that's not their average speed (which is even rivaled by that of its prey), what makes it objectively faster is its top speed.

As for the questionable source, I think it's something that makes more sense to disagree with and doubt. Vexiooo (talk) 12:24, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I explained the reason for the revert in the edit summary; the article is already too bloated as it is; it's not intended to be a list of every animal's speed. More importantly, "a-z-animals.com" is not likely to meet reliable sources criteria. Please take further discussion to the article's talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:58, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s 2025 and analog PAL signals are still distributed in cables by some (2 at least) cable TV providers. The map and the related section should probably reflect that. Guest826220 (talk) 17:24, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss it on the article talk page. You'll need to provide reliable sources as well. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:42, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

for that revert on the Prestonsburg, Kentucky, bus crash article. I see you've noticed this editor - I assume it's one person, though their IP changes it's always somewhere near Boston and/or Concord NH - has persistently altered ages and other information of children killed in various disaster articles - bus crashes, school shootings, bombings, fires, etc. Thanks for blocking other involved IPs (I had reported some of the recent IPs but the report went stale so nothing was done on that report). The probable master is listed here. - Shearonink (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have an edit filter for this LTA that I've adjusted in light of the recent activity. Please feel free to message me directly if they're able to evade the filter again. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:13, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will watch this article also and if I catch anon IPs vandalizing the page I will let you know if you don’t catch it. DawnB3 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a check on Kartik Aaryan’s page. Too much fake praise happening there. Aliya Zaita (talk) 11:41, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	The original barnstar for one of the originals. Happy 20th(!) WikiBirthday! Here's to 20 more :) tony 15:02, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I would've missed it had you not commented here! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:55, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well we can't have that! And hey, roughly 7 weeks from now will be 20 years since you created a page which is very special to me ;) --tony 17:10, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The formative years... :) OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:39, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Wiki B day Jamie! Hoping for many more years of good service to the encyclopedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DawnB3 (talk • contribs) 00:03, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:22, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Ohnoitsjamie. Your wiki edit anniversary was 2 days ago, marking 20 years of dedicated contributions to this Wikimedia project. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. With over 270,373 edits, your dedication is an inspiration to the community. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you all the best for the year ahead :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 14:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to just indefinitely ban this IP address. They're just going on a vandalism tear and it's clear that's all they're here for. Rusted AutoParts 16:53, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just take a look. Am in the middle of trying to piece together what is going on... So many similarities, the editing is very compelling that it's our regular suspect. This new editor has 1)changed the ages of at least 2 of the victims, 2)claimed a specific time the accident occurred which is unsupported by refs, 3)mangled some references, etc . Can maybe this poor article be protected? - Shearonink (talk) 02:34, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While a new user editing this article is a little suspicious, I'm not 100% sure it's the same user. The changes they made to the lede were contructive. Regarding age changes, while the existing source for "Reva Cheryl Matney" says she was 7, several other sources I found say her name was Rita and she was 8 [3] (Lexington Herald-Leader), [4] (KENTUCKY NATIONAL GUARD

50th ANNIVERSARY REMEMBRANCE), which leads me to believe the current source is probably wrong (Rita is much more common than "Reva.") The remembrance source also says that Rosset was 27, not 26. For now I'm inclined to (cautiously) assume good faith. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So I basically am now just using this account, idk why, guess I just like to read Wikipedia mostly. Anyways, I signed in just to ask why I keep getting blocked from editing. I am a newbie to this stuff kinds, so idk if I need to give you my IP as I was not signed in. I never made any vandalious edits on here or really any wiki before. I just changed a mistake or 2 and added a new category. Now you blocked me for sockpuppeting. Just wanted to know what is up. Did my IP catch a stray or something? - ConanHighwoods (talk)

(talk page stalker) The User:ConanHighwoods account is not blocked. What other acccounts, IP or regisered, do you use? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:52, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per Liz, there's not much to "clarify" until I have an idea of what IP you are talking about. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have dealt with the report at AN3, but my subtle comment seems to have been missed, so I'll remind you appear to be also edit warring on this article, [5], [6], [7] and the three revert rule applies to all editors. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:44, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand that. That's why I reported it to 3RR. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:55, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed you protected the page and RD'd the vandalism - thanks for that. However, since you revdelled the usernames of the vandals, I should mention that their usernames are still visible in the edit summaries of the people who reverted them. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned those up. I don't want to waste too much time trying to scrub *all* of the graffiti, but I'll continue scrubbing the easy stuff. (Fun fact; in my old neighborhood, I did weekly graffiti walks and cleaned up IRL graffiti. It's oddly satisfying). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:41, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. 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)[reply]

Hi, could you please help move Category:Speculative fiction сonventions to Category:Speculative fiction conventions? The letter "c" in "conventions" is written in Cyrillic. Regards. Medelam (talk) 14:36, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For helping take care of that Boateng nonsense. Thank you for your assistance! JeffSpaceman (talk) 16:37, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, glad to help! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:40, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please accept or deny some of the entires? It has been sitting for a week or so without getting tended to. There are categories like Tentacles/tentacle monsters in fiction that have 20+ examples just sitting there unvetted. I tried to do it myself, but idk if only users with a certain amount of edits can do it, as I saw no hub or anything that would let me. Godspeed!

ConanHighwoods (talk) 22:30, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As the subject states. Thanks. Chevroletmycarexploded (talk) 23:45, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need to find a reliable source stating that the subject is known by that nickname. I see that a columnist in The Guardian calls him EBLJT, but only a single opinion piece jokingly mentions JT. WP:BLP policies require stronger sourcing than that.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:53, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 82.173.160.29 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Do you perchance recall what led you to sockblock this IP last year? Looking at your blocks around that time, and their edits around that time, I can't piece it together. (See their recent TA edits, which I can't link, for why I'm asking.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 21:02, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having trouble remembering, but looking at the history and sequence of blocks it looks like it was a followup to a previous block; I may have been following up on an noticeboard posting. The IP's topic area isn't one I typically follow. In any cases, it's clearly the same wikilawyering user. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:11, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, no question it's the same person, but I'm trying to work out whether they're currently evading any block, or if it should just be handled as a regular user-conduct issue (which will be slightly complicated by the fact that no one can publicly cite their IP edits toward blocking the TA). Looking further, they had this false positive on a filter you maintain, which led EggRoll97 to edit the filter to remove the offending string. Perhaps that's what put them on your radar a day later, and they reminded you of someone. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 21:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You blocked this temp account some days ago, and this new temp account is now making the same edit repeatedly. Perception312 (talk) 14:06, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...and they're blocked already. nvm xD Perception312 (talk) 14:08, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 19:18, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

tony 20:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at the history and this meatpuppet issue goes back over the course of a few days at least. Not sure where this is coming from but it must be widespread. PCHS Pirate Alumnus (talk) 22:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that; a newly minted meme on some forum or Discord probably. I have some mitigations in place that should help going forward. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:20, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same thing, Discord, Reddit, Facebook, X, Instagram, Tiktok, YouTube, SnapChat, something along those lines. Same as the "67" nonsense. Blessings. PCHS Pirate Alumnus (talk) 22:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening,

Earlier today I made an edit on the page for Matthew Stafford adding an NFL record he tied. It was reverted and I didn't see a reason listed. I've only made a handful of edits and this is the first one that's been reverted. Could you let me know what the problem was so I know for future edits?

Thanks! Cultogon (talk) 02:16, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cultogon, my apologies, that was an errant click on my part. I've restored your edit. Thanks for checking with me, and happy editing! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:02, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I assume Ohnoits isn't you? RoySmith (talk) 22:24, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, that would be Lfstephens once again. Thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:40, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Check out all the "Malenia" nonsense here. This has been happening on various pages for months.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:49, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for the heads up! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:16, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please unblock me ~2025-32521-62 (talk) 12:44, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you were able to leave a message here, you are not blocked. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:06, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, could I ask what APK refers to and where it is discouraged to use in articles by the RSP? You removed it on the Dinotrux page, which I am trying to get to GA and the reviewer wants a merchandise section, which seems sensible. Also you removed toybook as well, do APK and toybook have connections which make toybook also unreliable? I am not insinuating that you did anything wrong, but was just asking to see whether a merchandise section can be sourced on it or not. Thank you, User:Easternsahara_{review this} 21:01, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Links to APK downloads usually violate WP:EL, and are rarely usuable for citations. I have a filter that monitors additions of them as they are very frequently added by spammers. My removal of the entire section may have been a case of "throwing out the baby with the bathwater"; I'm OK with you partially restoring the Merchandising section along with the toybook.com reference, though you won't be able to restore the other link as that's subsequently been blacklisted. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:13, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you gave editor Ogipur (Special:Contributions/Ogipur) a warning for spam on December 2nd. I warned him as well, on December 10th, after another spammy addition to Nestlé Purina PetCare. I see that he has ignored these warnings, and again, on Dec 15 posted to Nestlé Purina PetCare with content like "Delicious meals for mischievous cats." and "high-quality ingredients, and is available in a wide variety of textures and flavors to delight even the most discerning palates." Dialectric (talk) 18:17, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Ohnoitsjamie, 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) 16:28, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 16:28, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for publishing the edit on my behalf at White Shark (novel). I tried 4 or 5 times, I think- different edit summaries, visual, source, added more text at times. I didn’t have the patience to go and report a false positive, though, and had given up on the page, seeing a popup with the word ”detected a pattern” and some sort of orange colour warning appear each time. Wikipedia is not going in the right direction, I guess if ”temporary users” cannot add New York Times book reviews to an article and receive messages like that instead. But thank you for your commitment and friendly approach. Have a good evening/day and best wishes. ~2025-43390-52 (talk) 22:35, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately there is an long-term abuse editor who shares your IP ranges, which is why those false positives kept triggering. I'm going to see if I can tweak the filter to make it a little less sensitive. You'd be able to avoid that if you created an account (though I understand that not everyone wants to do that).

	Happy New Year
	Happy New Year! May 2026 be your best year yet! BD2412 T 01:01, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are articles that present narrow points of view and are protected by guardian editors who monitor them and revert changes within hours. An email to User:HJ Mitchell produced a comment that I hadn't given enough information, but nothing on what information was expected. If nothing can be done, how can I identify guarded pages so I won't waste time editing them or responding to COI edit requests?

Here is one reversion as an example, from a page that has four guardian editors. No one at this private consulting firm has ever spoken publicly in favor of, or against, the current president. It took User:Marquardtika 14 hours to restore the phrase "President Donald Trump." https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arabella_Advisors&diff=1329536965&oldid=1329441788

Additions get the same treatment as revisions. Entries to the talk pages are either ignored or trigger personal attacks. A request for a third opinion produced one comment, "this is obviously political" from a disinterested editor and a torrent of abuse from the guardian editors. Nothing more happened. Two posts to a noticeboard got a a reviewer who sounded more like a judge, closing them for procedural defects and then saying "this process is voluntary" and was obviously not agreed to by the guardian editors.

Where should I go from here? Julian in LA (talk) 17:39, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Seek consensus for your changes on the article talk pages and follow WP:BRD. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:44, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That was done many months ago, as shown on the talk page. As one example see Arabella Advisors#Request to review article for citation issues. The resulting change was reverted four hours later. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arabella_Advisors&diff=1316862362&oldid=1316809451

I see that you are already aware of WP:DR; I'm not sure what you're expecting from me here. You're asking a question ("how can I identify guarded pages") that I think you already know the answer to (there is no such thing as "guarded pages.") Contentious pages are more likely to be watched by many users. My efforts here are largely focused on vandalism and spam remediation, but I occasionally weight in on content disputes, and I don't "win" all of those disputes. You make your best argument, and if you don't get a consensus for your changes, you move on. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:24, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a content dispute. This is one or more editors who revert the changes of others, in one case within 120 seconds. Julian in LA (talk) 22:01, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ohnoitsjamie,

a few days ago I received a warning from you over a dispute between myself and another Borgenland. I assume you can see the discussion that was resolved and removed on the admin noticeboard page with the admin closing it and suggesting that future discussions take place on the talk page of the Sudanese civil war (2023–present).

I would like to ask for consideration of the warning removal because as I have discussed with Borgenland in the admin noticeboard page, I was not aware of what qualified as OR and Synthesis. There were some nuances I was uncertain of and it was a genuine mistake. At the end of the discussion, I was able to have a much better understanding of it. I cannot see this discussion anymore since the admins have removed it after we resolved it, but I think you can.

The other reason why I'd like to ask for consideration is because I have been very open to discussing and feedback as you can probably see from discussions with other editors and admins for other articles.

I believe the assumption that Borgenland mentioned of me purposely vandalizing the page and doing recklessly sourced edits is a bit harsh and overshadows the other contributions I've made on that page. I am very receptive to feedback and discussion. As you can probably see from the other edits I did on the Sudanese civil war (2023–present), everything was thoroughly sourced, credible and I believe adhered to the guidelines of Wikipedia. I feel focusing on that one mistake with the United States section is unfair, when compared to the other sections I helped expand upon. I only wish that the situation regarding the Sudan article was brought up on that talk page first and that good faith was assumed.

My request is because there are other parts of Sudanese civil war (2023–present) that I would like to contribute to this again in the next few weeks, but I am a little concerned with how things escalated so quickly. I understand the vigilance is due to this page being semi-protected, but I just hope that when I do contribute again, I am given the fair chance to discuss it on the article page first before automatically being blocked, especially if the issue was easily resolved through discussion.

As you can also see from my talk page. I was even a little confused when reading the comments on it, even mistaking it for a different topic than the Sudan page.

Thank you!

Fishestablishment (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to remove the warning because it was relevant at the time it was given. If you feel like you now have a better understanding of WP:NOR that's great. You can avoid being blocked by not violating WP:NOR and by following BRD cycle, and using article talk pages to get consensus for contentious material. Also note that you are free to remove most messages from your talk page per WP:OWNTALK; delete material still exists in your talk page history if someone needs to review that. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:05, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User: Ohnoitsjamie I understand. My concern though is more if in the future I make an edit, but rather than another editor discussing it with me on talk page first, will I automatically banned?

Me removing a warning has no bearing on whether or not you get blocked in the future. Given that you've acknowledged our WP:NOR policy and responded to feedback, I think it's highly unlikely you would be immediately blocked without another warning. If you are particularly worried about an edit to a contentious topic, you can always suggest it on the article's talk page first. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:50, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User: Ohnoitsjamie Okay thanks for clarifying. I was mainly worried that the warning somehow flagged my account or something of that sort. Yes, if ever I am uncertain about an edit in the future, I will bring it up as well on the talk page.

Hi! I've noticed that User:BISHA ME DY KOKA has made lots of edits consisting of adding and removing a full stop over and over. Is it possible for you to pre-emptively revoke autoconfirmed, since to me it looks like they have been gaming it?

[8][9] QwertyForest (talk) 20:24, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could be gaming, though they didn't immediately edit a semi'd page like most pgamers do. I gave them a gentle warning nonetheless, because it's still disruptive to crap up the edit history of articles. Oh, to answer your question, I don't believe it's possible to pre-remove; usually when we catch people gaming semi, we wait for them to hit 500, remove it, then tell them they can request extended-confirmed after they've made 500 real edits. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Their account was made today, so they would still have to wait the 4 days. QwertyForest (talk) 20:32, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I forgot about the 4-day component. They may have been thinking that the 10 edits would allow them to edit Mehmed II's 1467 Albanian campaign. I'll add that to my watchlist. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:35, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you reverted my edit to MoroccanOil 15 minutes after it was made. Is that related to my request relating Non-NPOV articles, above? My edit was explained on the talk page 24 hours in advance of the edit. Shouldn't you comment on the talk page and gain consensus before making a reversion? Your comment explains that the original is "more neutral." Is that required by a Wikipedia policy, or were you referring to WP:NPOV? Julian in LA (talk) 22:33, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

After you messaged me here, I looked at some of your other recent edits to get a better sense of what the issue was. Wikipedia strives to be as neutral as possible (neutrality is one of the guiding principles of Wikipedia), and changing "Controversy" to "Anti-Zionism" was not an improvement in terms of neutrality, so I restored the previous version. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:29, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can we transfer this discussion to the talk page? Julian in LA (talk) 23:55, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:26, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a comment to this article's talk page. See Talk:Moroccanoil#Controversy. My last two edits to that page were reverted within nine minutes. Is it time to resume our discussion of guardian editors? Julian in LA (talk) 01:48, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not interested in the topic areas you're editing and as I said before there is no such thing as a "guardian editor." If you are having a dispute with another editor, take it to one of the available dispute resolution forums. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Julian, your last edits to the article were vandalism [10] and [11]. Netherzone (talk) 03:48, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

...of [12]? Tons of TAs doing several kinds of disruption in many different pages. DMacks (talk) 19:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:DMacks, sorry for the late reply, I just realized that I'd forgotten to reply to this. I took a closer look at that range and applied a full block to a narrower range. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:51, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks reasonable, thanks. DMacks (talk) 19:21, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Shree Krishna Luitel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

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.

Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 17:43, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Even though your trying to remove my edits, the edit I did was not wrong, I'm not vandalizing, if I ask you one thing, that is not to revert my edits and ask other people to not revert my edits (nicely), all I want is to be a part of this special community. Sincerely, -Me Mickey Mouse Fan 123456 (talk) 11:53, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

—Fortuna, imperatrix 14:31, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am writing because I am interested in adding the Super Carlin Brothers to the notable alumni page on Cave Spring High School. Wait! Before you sigh and stop reading, I ask that you hear me out. I believe I have found sufficient evidence to finally end the back and forth once and for all. I've noticed that in the past you are the editor to be convinced of their notoriety. Every previous attempt has been reverted (To which I agree, rightfully so). Sufficient evidence has not yet been provided, per Wikipedia's terms of verifiability and reliable sources. I write to you here rather than attempt an edit myself, as I have never actually edited an article here on Wikipedia. I figured it would make more sense to discuss with a seasoned editor first, rather than attempt a change I could still be misunderstanding.

The source I would like to direct you to comes from the Virginia General Assembly. In March of 2024, The Carlin Brothers were commended with House Joint Resolution No. 367. The representatives in both the House and Senate commended the brother's creativity, reach, fan base, organizational efforts, charitable contributions, and the advocation / funding for the maintenance of outdoor spaces in Virginia. The resolution concludes with the paragraph:

RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Clerk of the House of Delegates prepare a copy of this resolution for presentation to Jonathan and Benjamin Carlin, creators of Super Carlin Brothers, as an expression of the General Assembly's admiration for their incredible achievements in business and social media and outstanding contributions to the Roanoke community.

Thank you for taking the time to read my findings. I commend you for your fierce advocation for facts here on Wikipedia. I look forward to hearing back, regardless of your agreement or disagreement with my proposal. Itchybelle (talk) 16:41, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If they don't have an article, they shouldn't be included. If you believe that there are additional reliable sources to be added to the existing draft, you may add them and resubmit the draft to articles for creation. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:43, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your method of blocking huge IP ranges just because one user messed up looks seriously outdated. Plus, you're penalizing all of us who actually use the service and create content.

A lot of us are on mobile services and networks with dynamic IPs, etc.

Blocking whole networks based on the IP space like this is genuinely amateur in today's blocking setup.

I tried using a VPN connection to Germany and tried again from there. Same result

a massive IP range flagged because of some random person's bad wiki behavior.

I strongly recommend you update your blocking methods. An IP isn't a person; it's not guilty—unless, based on the data,

it's a smaller range that belongs to a company via Whois. Then maybe you could consider a mask block.

That link (https://whois.domaintools.com/46.132.83. 103) shows you've blocked an dynamic mobile network IP range for a Nordic operator. That makes absolutely zero sense. It's totally the wrong approach. Kshji (talk) 11:16, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about this block, that's a partial block that prevents users from that range editing a small handful of articles; in other words, it's very unlikely to have collateral affects on innocent users. Furthermore, we routinely block much much larger ranges if there is too much abuse from the range. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:37, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Noticed your block today (logid 177234606) of 2409:4000::/22 (talk · contribs) for persistent spam and BE. Have possible additional info for you: a page (Gidhaur, Bihar) and a temp user (~2026-85976-4 (talk · contribs)^[noping]) that you might want to add to the block list, or just keep an eye on.

At 07:18, 2 November 2025 your blockee 2409:40e4:11:55d9:8000:: (IP geo: Jharkand, Bihar) made this promotional edit at Gidhaur, Bihar, immediately reverted by a helpful third party. Today at 10:40 8 Feb, temp user ~2026-85976-4 (IP geo: Jharkand) made substantially the same promotional edit to Gidhaur, Bihar (reverted by me). I checked the CIDR/24 range of their IP, which found these contributions from 12 IPs, all prior to 2020 except about a dozen edits in Aug. 2025 from 47.31.113.171 (talk · contribs), nearly 100% reverted, but they haven't edited for six months. Thank you very much for all your volunteer work keeping things humming; it does not go unappreciated! (P.S., is a report like this one useful to you? Because I imagine you have more powerful tools, and if not helpful, I'll save us both the time.) Mathglot (talk) 21:24, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't create the original /22 partial block, I just added a new target to it. I looked at some of the ranges around 47.31.113.199; I didn't see any recent spamming other than the example you posted above, though I did see a /19 range that's been adding unsourced caste stuff over the last two months all associated with the same temp user; I warned the temp user and created an edit filter to address that. If there is some recent spam (or larger patterns) that I'm missing let me know! Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:02, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose ~2026-92713-4 (talk · contribs) has an Italian IP?   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 00:00, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly enough, no, but I blocked the /64 range anyway as it has a very high bad/good ratio. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:26, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ohnoitsjamie. This change inadvertently reverted good changes so I restored an earlier revision. Feel free to reinstate the caps update. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I did not mean to revert your edit, just trying to get rid of the "white pele" crap. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:39, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just an interesting observation I made. You blocked my phone’s IP address due to abuse. I don’t seem connected to the abuse or your log and still seem to edit fine under my username. For a moment I thought my entire phone was banned but it was just the specific user ID. Jordf32123 (talk) 00:07, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:12, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited TUI Airways, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Varna was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:54, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

At UTRS appeal #111090 you posted a message beginning "Hello {name}..."  🫤 I just thought I'd point it out so that you can watch out to avoid doing the same again. 😉 JBW (talk) 14:32, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I guess templates don't work in custom messages. Thanks for the heads up! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]