My User Talk archives
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Go to my current talk page
My subscriptions

While I understand you're frustrated, the IP's edit were not obvious vandalism, so any blocking necessary should be left to someone else to decide per WP:INVOLVED. Suggest unblocking and referring to a noticeboard or uninvolved admin. (Also they seem to be editing from mobile so probably can't hear you). Nikkimaria (talk) 03:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I have unblocked 192.182.199.75's ability to edit Tonatiuh Elizarraraz. Peaceray (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it.

But I didn't understood the problem with my last attempt to edit (refused for "vandalism")... I posted a false positive, but it was "Declined – Edits were vandalism" but... without any explication.

I was just trying to add this template in External Links: {{Rotten Tomatoes | dirty_angels}}

[Please, excuse my poor English]
Best regards, — jeep (j33p) ॐ 11:44, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@J33p: Please see en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAbuseLog&wpSearchUser=J33p & look at the individual reports. I already referred to one, Special:AbuseLog/39908255, on your talk page. Examination of these logs reveals that you attempted to remove everything before the ==External links== header. This is shown in the log(s) by text preceded with the - on the left & the blank section on the right. Based upon your comment at your report at Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports, I think that you believed that you were only attempting to add the {{Rotten Tomatoes}} template.

Using preview should help prevent this problem. I have no explanation for why preview did not work as expected for you, but I wonder if you were pasting the entire section test into an edit window in which you were actually editing the whole article. You can also choose the Show Changes button to see what the Wikitext looks like before & after your addition.

Incidentily, since the information about some of this was already on your talk page, I think it would have been better to have had the discussion there. Using the {{ping}} or {{u}} template will alert an editor to a discussion elsewhere than that user's (as in mine) talk page. Peaceray (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nice answer, thxs Peaceray! Yes, I'll go to my talking page to eventually answer to your post (explanations).
Best regards, — jeep (j33p) ॐ 17:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 19: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce

WikiWednesday is back! You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info: Wednesday, February 19 WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce (optional RSVP on-wiki). 6:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Open Hour) 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm (Wiki Salon) (Prime Produce, Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan) Also online via Zoom

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the effort to encourage new editors and you did, in your welcome additionally, note that one of the new edits from the IP address had been reverted and make reference to vandalism. It'd turned out, however, I worked upstream from another obvious case of vandalism, found five edits in a one-day four-minute clump, and probed them all: All were vandalism from this IP user. I took the advice at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and posted a stiff warning about such behavior on the User talk page. It'd been four days since the edits. Some kind of probe or test of the encyclopedia, the clump seemed maybe to have been. In any event, your welcome ended up feeling to me sort of ill-suited for the circumstance; maybe should have been stiffer and less welcoming given the one 'conviction on vandalism charges' already known and what I'd now call the taint the conviction cast on the other four quickies already posted there on 2/4/25 when your welcome ran 12 hours later, a couple of hours after (and maybe triggered by?) the first vandalism catch.

Taken a step further, the better auto-response to such a set of facts to my mind seemed maybe have been an alert for a Wikipedian to look at the other four edits rather than in any way encouraging the new editor to feel welcome. My effort was happenstantial and I had had the time, and had the learned experience, to take all the steps required (including, now, this present one); fortunate, maybe clumsy-seeming and piecemeal but certainly an improvement for the encyclopedia and not best to be counted on; the three other of the vandalisms had already been caught (also) piecemeal before I stumbled in. But meanwhile the immediate past Prime Minister of Japan had been carrying a completely fantasized (but maybe craftily targeted) bit of educational resume for four days while his successor was in Washington (Feb 6) and at the White House (Feb 7); the fifth and final vandalism to be caught and corrected because I chose to follow my nose and ultimately do the full canvass and correctives. (The Japanese-subject vandalism now looks maybe to have been the point of the clump, the following four just '[ugly, they happened to be,] noise' to distract from the 'substantive', 'timely' one. ... Then there was trying to track down the IP number. I was out of steam; you were already doing a lot. I finally just Googled 'Fumio Kishida "princeton" cornell' (double quotes on Princeton from clicking on 'show' in a first-round Google result) and only Wikipedia showed up in Google results beyond academic citations, nothing in 'News'; that was good; maybe the fix would get the falsehoods back out of Google eventually or sooner; but still, 4,000 hits on the flawed page on Feb 7.)

Sort of a ramble from a now-less-active editor but I hope it maybe helps you and/or others. Google has eliminated the Wikipedia result to the same search, several hours later now. (But look at this current Google suggestion a few steps down: 'People also ask / Is Fumio Kishida liberal?') I'm not really prepared to step back up to more at Wikipedia, am not a 'programmer', but will consider response/suggestions. I may be wrong about ‘auto-response’ in paragraph 2 and the 'triggered' question in paragraph 1 (my programmer comment, here) but that’s how I’ve come to view these (good & amazing, generally) welcomes over the years. Cheers, all best. Swliv (talk) 12:49, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Swliv! I have thousands of pages on my watchlist & recently became an administrator. Given those & other demands on my time, I cannot investigate the edit history of every editor I welcome or warn.

I have been part of the Welcoming committee since 2012-12-01. I do believe in welcoming everyone, even bad actors, & like to see a welcome notice first thing on new user's talk page. I will note that {{Welcome-unregistered-unconstructive}} specifically admonishes an IP editor for their behavior & links to policies & guidelines that govern that behavior.

Why should I welcome a vandal? About a decade ago, I heard an editor, long a respected & an important contributor on a major WikiProject, admit that their first edit was vandalism. This editor later became a Wikimedian of the Year. I have never forgotten that.

While I know that in reality, only a very small amount of vandals can be converted to a good editor, I figure it is worth a shot. Never underestimate an invitation to contribute in a positive manner.

Thank you for your effort in tracking down & dealing with vandalism! Peaceray (talk) 20:52, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:PRICK Tiny Particle (talk) 17:45, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiny Particle: If a regular cannot follow some of the basic guidelines of the manual of style, they should not be surprised when they receive a template warning. I almost always check the number of edits a register user with a talk page has before considering such a warning. I was frankly dismayed that an editor with your experience would be disregarding basic MOS guidelines. I do not know if otherwise your editing is exemplar, but I thought my warning was warranted in your case.

Since you have linked to a redirect to an essay on Meta, let me quote from the meta:Don't be a jerk#How to deal with others: Telling someone "don't be a jerk" is generally wrong – especially if it's true. It upsets the other person and reduces the chance that they'll listen to what you say. While I have a thick skin & do not mind getting told off off by other editors when merited, I would ask you to examine & cop to your own behavior. Peaceray (talk) 18:21, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't big yourself up mate, your skin is as thin as mine. "almost always"- that is almost commendable. Tiny Particle (talk) 20:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, been around here for nearly 10 years, no author, but content in the role as picker-upper of tiny misfaults :) I do random wikiwalks (in EN and four others) as an excuse to not do things I should, that's one reason I minimize involvement; Wiki changes my IP nr every year or so, or you would have seen all the gum wrap I've picked up across Wiki. I also end up with aimless routes through random fields, i.e. no systematics, unlike the many responsibilities you seem to have taken upon you. Hat off to that, and much success and enjoyment in your future endeavours. Best wishes, T - same age & beard as you :) 84.208.78.193 (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Peaceray (talk) 23:12, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peaceray, I see you've been involved on this page before (and with Justegypt) could you take a look at it please?Halbared (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Hey there has been some edit by me in few days to either remove ambiguities from the world most viewed articles and to increase my own level of vision, but that is too limited and i wish I could create some my own pages that are not available at wiki but very essential. Sys64wiki (talk) 20:49, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I’m wondering if you can remove the user:cjfs page as it contains my name and address and I want it gone under the Formal GDPR Notice, thanks. Craigski20001 (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

cjfs already requested that User:cjfs be deleted. Peaceray (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this LTA has been on the go for years. They have another AFD that they have interfered with, can you block them from that as well? They hqve also persistantly recreated the draft article that already exists in the main space, can you delete that one as well please? I think this is the 4th time today. Knitsey (talk) 21:28, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Knitsey: I have blocked 2600:1001:B15D:EB89:0:0:0:0/64 for one week. Peaceray (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're a star, thank you. Knitsey (talk) 21:38, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it looks like you've been closing AfDs by hand - did you know there's a script that automates that? Preferences --> Gadgets --> XFD Closer. Cheers. -- asilvering (talk) 23:51, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: Thank you I have enabled XFD Closer. Peaceray (talk) 01:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | March 2025, Vol 11, Issue 3, Nos. 326, 327, 332, 333, 334 Online events: New: Alphabet run E & F | Artists+Activists | Women of the Arab World Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements from other communities: March editathons around the world Celebrate Women 2025 office hour series Tip of the month: You can access the Wikipedia Library if you have made 500+ edits, and 6+ months editing, and 10+ edits in the last 30 days, and No active blocks Moving the needle:[1] 27 Jan 2025: 20.031% of biographies on EN-WP are about women (2,047,793 bios, 410,200 women) 23 Dec 2024: 20.009% (2,041,741 bios, 408,531 women) Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,669 articles during this period! Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Alexis Kougias born 23 January 1951 https://togegonos.gr/2025/02/25/i-apokalypsi-tou-giorgou-liagka-gia-ta-genethlia-tou-alexi-kougia-kai-tin-teleftaia-fora-pou-synantithikan-den-borouse-na-sikothei-itan-katavevlimenos/ 2A02:587:CC21:8C00:A518:FB8D:F504:3C59 (talk) 07:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please take your discussion to Talk:Alexis Kougias. Peaceray (talk) 07:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Kougias Died February 28, 2025 (aged 74)https://www.in.gr/2025/02/28/greece/pethane-o-aleksis-kougias/ 2A02:587:CC03:D000:8588:6399:8E8C:2B86 (talk) 18:59, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I already saw EfalGR's edit on Talk:Alexis Kougias. So since it is there & I have already indicated that talk page is a better venue for discussing Alexis Kougias, why are you posting on my talk page? Peaceray (talk) 19:05, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in this edit you have undid my edit under the claim that "individual accusations have no citations". However, the mentioned accusations are described in the article. Please consider reading the entire article to deepen your understanding.

Best SocialTechWorker (talk) 08:11, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SocialTechWorker: Yes, the magnitude of each accusation requires that each has its own footnote, even if it is the same source. See WP:REFNAME if you do not know how to reuse a citation. Peaceray (talk) 16:06, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SocialTechWorker: The policy governing this is WP:BLPSOURCES, which states Wikipedia's sourcing policy, Verifiability, says that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not meeting this standard may be removed. Not sourcing each individual paraphrased contentious statement is a violation of this. Peaceray (talk) 16:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Thanks.

SocialTechWorker (talk) 19:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to User talk:Amsiism § Thugging

 – Peaceray (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 12: Wiki Gala @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community and visitors from the global Wikimedia Foundation for our Wiki Gala at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. All are welcome! This is a sequel to the March 2024 Wiki Gala at Prime Produce, the March 2023 Grand Central Salon and the March 2022 Wiki-Tent Brunch. The event will feature thematic video art installations and our traditional Wiki-fashion show, for which you are encouraged to dress in your finest Wikimedia clothing and accessories (bags, buttons, even books), or clothing connected to the topics you edit on wiki projects. All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info: Wednesady, March 12 Wiki Gala @ Prime Produce (optional RSVP on-wiki). 6:00 pm – 10:00 pm (Prime Produce, Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete this. It quite clearly doesn't fall into WP:A3, and the PROD had not expired. JensonSL (SilverLocust) 13:37, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SilverLocust: Undeleted, but currently it is undoubtedly a definition & thus violates the WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary policy. Perhaps I should have chosen WP:A7 instead.

Will you commit to improving it to an actual article? Peaceray (talk) 15:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What Wikipedia is not is not a basis for speedy deletion. This also isn't an A7 because it isn't "real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content, or organized event". I shall commit only to waiting 7 days before I'd delete it as a PROD. (As an aside, I believe a more common name for that subject is "fractional art investing".) JensonSL (SilverLocust) 00:14, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SilverLocust: That heading starts with A7. No indication of importance .... With no citations, it could well be argued that even that lesser standard applies to Art equity.

But more importantly, you have not answered my question above. Are you here to improve things like the article, or to complain? After all, I did undelete the article. Now are you going to do your part in article rescue, or should we go straight to WP:AFD process? Peaceray (talk) 04:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the full heading is with A7. No indication of importance (people, animals, organizations, web content, events). WP:A7 only applies to any article about a real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content, or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions. I did answer your question. "I shall commit only to waiting 7 days before I'd delete it as a PROD" means I am not committing to improving the article, and have not suggested it be taken to WP:AfD, but rather am happy for it to be deleted via the WP:PROD process. JensonSL (SilverLocust) 17:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a sharp dispute at Federal political scandals in the United States which is a long established article. An annoying editor is making large deletions without discussion. Can you help? Johnsagent (talk) 21:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnsagent: Please report such incidents to the appropriate noticeboard, such as WP:AIV, WP:AN/I, or WP:AN/EW. Individual administrators are not always able to deal with problems in a timely manner. For instance, I am about to step away from my keyboard until at least this evening.

Also as per WP:TALKNEW, Start new topics at the bottom of the page: If you put a post at the top of the page, it is confusing and can also get easily overlooked. The latest topic should be the one at the bottom of the page. Peaceray (talk) 22:06, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 27: Editing the Open Data Garden @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for an urban gardening-themed edit-a-thon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. This event will be hosted in collaboration with Farming Concrete in celebration of Open Data Week in New York City. All are welcome, new and experienced! All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info: Thursday, March 27 Editing the Open Data Garden @ Prime Produce (RSVP on NYC Open Data and optionally on-wiki). 4:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Prime Produce, Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Peaceray. I was wondering if you could be so kind as to close the RfC at Talk:Gardnerian Wicca#RfC on Open Letter (or at least provide an informed opinion). Thank you. Nosferattus (talk) 17:57, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I filed a sockpuppet investigation for Himagics8 and TeslaCivic: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Himagics8. Nosferattus (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is good because I have been occupied with opening up another sockpuppet investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nv7801 that also involves Commons:. Peaceray (talk) 05:16, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see no resolution. There was an argument over whether a source was reliable or a blog, & I frankly cannot discern either way. There seems to be no consensus on how to How to word the discussion of the open letter on "traditional" Gardnerian Wicca. Should I close it as inconclusive? Peaceray (talk) 05:20, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's too much ongoing discussion to close it now. Please keep an eye on the article though, as I don't expect the POV-pushing to let up. Also feel free to leave a comment at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Himagics8 since you have more experience with this editor than I do. Nosferattus (talk) 19:36, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Research it! It will happen,by anyone. It’s not rite when you google chemtrails on wiki that there are contradictory stories. Yes contrails and chemtrails are different, ask the hundreds of cloud seeding companies out there and the pilots and aeronautics engineers, not the government! It’s been done before (mkultra) etc. why would it not have been taken further? Not a conspiracy, it’s real! Remember people were killed for saying the earth was a sphere originally. Everything comes out eventually. It’s just a no brainer when all the information is there but they want you to ignore it. Maybe most are already numbed by their environment! Reaserchit (talk) 23:18, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Reaserchit: I already do plenty of research for Wikipedia. I am not going to do any research solely to support your point of view. If you cannot produce verification from reliable sources, you will be unable to successfully propose or make changes to an article.

I would also advise that you read the verifiability, not truth essay. Peaceray (talk) 23:55, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only looked once and found many contradictions on this topic on wiki. Just stating. Not worried. If you’re good with that then I wouldn’t trust wiki as a reliable source. Who would? Reaserchit (talk) 00:06, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Reaserchit: With any encyclopedia, & especially one of this size, there are usually inconsistencies. The best thing that can happen for Wikipedia is that new editors will embrace the five pillars & set about fixing stuff in line with the verification & neutrality policies.

Whenever I hear someone like yourself criticizing what a volunteer project has done, I find myself asking: Are you volunteering? Peaceray (talk) 03:38, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought wiki was a reliable source of information, but apparently not! Just volunteers promoting their own views😢 2405:6E00:2803:9ECC:71E9:A8A5:9A94:BF66 (talk) 04:10, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crowdsourcing corrects for points of view; you need to read WP:5P2 & the policies on verification & neutrality. Peaceray (talk) 04:23, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]