Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:47, 20 February 2014

Archives

Archive I Archive II Archive III Archive IV Archive V Archive VI Archive VII

The llama of drama is all tired out, time to give it a rest.

Welcome to my talk page, please leave new messages at the bottom of this page

Message left to my IP

Please enlight my on how my edit is not constructive? a regular .308 top speed is 3000 fps and my information comes from USMC scout snipers who i interviewd online and from my self in my active duty in my country, all the information i placed there is accurate, why is not constructive? And what about the time where i added information why did you changed you did it 3 times before the complete deletion of the page..ok thank you

Please see my response, below. I'm not sure if you meant to, but you removed all the text from the page. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I've only reverted you once, you'll have to talk to User:Dmol, who reverted your first edit. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:25, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Please help me!

Hello, my name is Vlad Mateescu, i used to edit on Misplaced Pages pages, but now I'm blocked, please can you put on page Pariu cu viața the actors that appear in the sequal that airs on Acasă TV? Because the page I edit was reverted. This is Media Pro wish, to create this page, you can verify the page, means a lot for us. Please put the old content and you can let the page blocked.

Thanks a lot. Please help me Matei Traian (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:10, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, first things first, please log into your original account and request an unblock. Then use Template:Edit protected to ask someone to change the page for you. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:29, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Francesco Scantamburlo

Thank you for your message concerning the IFMIF web page. Unfortunately I was not aware of the possibility of leaving comments to explain the reasons of an edit. My edit of the page was done intentionally because I am going to change soon the content which is very old. I had in mind to leave a message "page under construction". Could it be possible?

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fscantamburlo (talk • contribs) 00:27, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

You can place the code {{Under construction}} at the top of the page for that reason, but please don't blank the whole page while you're working on it. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I am sorry.. I don't understand precisely what you mean. So I can place the code {{Under construction}} but I cannot remove the old content?

Yes, add {{Under construction}} at the top of the page, then save the page, and then go ahead and make the changes that you think need to be made, and remove it when you're done. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Kushal Tandon

Hey Mark, there's a few errors that need correcting on Kushal's page also can you allow me to access it ? I run his official pages as I am the admin...please reply. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aya786 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

What you should do is go to Talk:Kushal Tandon and start a new section where you explain the changes you want made. Then add the code {{edit semi-protected|answered=no}} above your text. Also, please be aware of the WP:COI guidelines as well. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

A “thank you” and two questions

Hi.

First, thanks for all the maintenance work that you do. Basically, every time I went to WP namespace, I see you burdening a lot of work there. (Even once in WP:FAC too!)

I had two questions related to your area of work. First, in my page protection requests, is there something related to length of the protection that I must consider and somehow don't see it? Second, must an admin write a lot of articles before becoming an admin?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Lisa, thanks for the compliment. Well, as far as page protection goes, there aren't really many clear rules about length. Different admins will often have varying preferences about how long to protect articles. I usually prefer to go start with 1 week and then for subsequent protections apply them for 1 month -> 3 months -> 1 year -> indef depending on how many times it's been protected. As far as the importance of content at Rfa goes, well, that's complicated. In theory, being a content writer has as much to do with using the admin tools as does being a good photographer, which is to say not much. Generally speaking though, people want to see that admin candidates are competent writers since it looks bad if an admin does a poor job writing an article. Being able to point to some quality articles at an Rfa does a lot to improve your chances of success in practice. People like to see well rounded candidates that are skilled in multiple areas, so experience in content + WP namespace is usually what it takes to succeed. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:15, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

SPi

Cheers Mark hope all is well can you review a SPI for Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Shiyasnazar.? Thanks Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:17, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I took a look at it. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:40, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Revival of discussion of David Oscar Markus page

Deletion of David Oscar Markus page

Mark,

I was wondering if you would reconsider the deletion of the wiki page for David Oscar Markus. It appears to have a number of reliable sources and covers important material like the representation of Buju Banton and Gilberto Rodriguez-Orejuela.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.221.30.194 (talk) 20:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

   It may be possible to have the page restored, can you provide reliable sources that discuss David Oscar Markus in depth? See WP:ANYBIO for details. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:02, 8 January 2014 (UTC) 

Sorry, this was in the archive, so I'm reposting here and responding to your last message. Yes, there are numerous sources that discuss Markus in depth. For example, he was one of 8 finalists for best white collar attorney in the country by the leading publication discussion such matters -- Chambers & Partners -- in 2012 and 2011. He has written opinion pieces for the Miami Herald, and is the author of the popular Southern District of Florida blog, which has been described by the New Times as "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." He was recently named as one of the 16 most influential lawyers in Miami by Poder Hispanic Magazine. He was just profiled here and was described as a "vigorous defender." The National Law Journal said he was one of the top 40 lawyers in the country under 40 years old in 2003.

He has represented numerous famous figures, including Billy Corben (director of Cocaine Cowboys), Buju Banton (Grammy award winning reggae singer), Gilberto Rodriguez-Orejuela, and numerous others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.221.30.194 (talk) 21:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Can you find any more profiles like that? That would probably be the best way to prove notability. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

There are a number of profiles:

1. He was listed as one of the top 40 lawyers in the country under 40 years old in 2002 by the National Law Journal. 2. He was just profiled here and was described as a "vigorous defender." 3. He was recently named as one of the 16 most influential lawyers in Miami by Poder Hispanic Magazine. 4. Described by the 2013 Chambers & Partners profile as: "wickedly smart and a terrific trial lawyer. ... Clients say that he is 'thrilling' to watch in court and that 'his passion appreciation and enjoyment for his work are contagious." 5. SuperLawyers has profiled him as a top 100 lawyer in all of Florida since 2010 through the present. 6. Chambers profiled him as one of the top 8 White Collar Criminal Lawyers in the whole country in both 2010 and 2011. 7. He lectures other lawyers frequently, and has even been asked to testify before the United States Sentencing Commission. 8. He has been profiled as a finalist for Most Effective Criminal Defense Lawyer in Miami five different years by the Daily Business Review: 2012, 2011 (for two different cases), and 2009, 2006.

If this is not sufficient, there is a great deal more that can be posted as well. Please let us know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.221.30.194 (talk) 20:10, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Basically, what I'm looking for is sources that spend a lot of time talking about him in detail. Just being part of a "30 great lawyers" list isn't particularly helpful if it's just a blurb about him. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:27, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Check out this recent lengthy article, and also this one by the Jamaican Gleaner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.221.30.194 (talk) 19:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC) Sorry to be a bother, but please let us know the status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.221.30.194 (talk) 20:31, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. I really don't think that's enough coverage to demonstrate notability, but you're free to request undeletion at WP:DRV if you disagree. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:33, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Reset block on master?

Do you ever reset the clock on a block when the master account has a finite block and they've been socking (i.e Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Ronanin)? I'm not saying you should, I'm just wondering whether it's something you consider when acting on results at SPI.--Jezebel'sPonyo 22:25, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that probably is a good idea in this case. I've done it before but I forgot about it this time. I think I'll go ahead and do so.

Hey, while you are here, do you think you could take a look at User talk:DIZwikwiki and User talk:PrestonDorey? They were blocked as socks based on CU findings, but they claim they are simply coworkers. Do you think you could look into it? Mark Arsten (talk) 22:31, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Did Tiptoety get back to you (I see you mention you were going to contact him on DIZwikiwiki's talk)? It may be easier for him to rerun his findings to double check if the subset of accounts related to Highimpact059 are a false positive than for me to start an investigation from scratch.--Jezebel'sPonyo 23:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

No, I asked him about 3 days ago, but he hasn't edited since then, must be taking a break. No worries if you don't have time for it though. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Please help

-Please I am trying to help Mrk Arsten but you are not letting me please give me chances I am sure not to fail you Narutoperson(talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.43.215 (talk) 01:40, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so why were you removing all this information? Also, we don't allow people to advertise, like you were doing here. Mark Arsten ([[User talk:Mark

Arsten#top|talk]]) 02:02, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Hostile Geraldine Edwards Conjecture

I find the attack upon Geraldine Edwards entitled "Geraldine Edwards Hoax" written by Binkstersnet, and posted on your talk pages to be slanderous, defamatory, and far-fetched in general. Although Binkstersnet was within his rights as an editor in removing falsely cited references, and you certainly acted within the appropriate parameter of your authority in putting a protection on the Robert Palmer page due to vandalism, Binksternet's paranoid and frightening theory propounded about Geraldine Edwards is both unwarranted and inappropriate. He has no grounds or factual element to support his theory in general, which is pure conjecture and supposition. What's more, it's not his place within the rules of Misplaced Pages editing to mount a personal editorial based on his personal feelings towards a person. His hypothesis that a rouge IP editor from San Diego mounted a campaign to raise the profile of Geraldine Edwards to the level of Bebe Buell, slander Mary Ambrose, and attach Geraldine Edwards to the creation of Almost Famous is so preposterous as to be laughable. Excepting the illusory slandering of Mary Ambrose, there is ample appropriate cite material credibly attaching Geraldine Edwards to the creation of Almost Famous, as well as documenting her relationships with any number of high-profile musicians. Binkstenet's allegation that one of the intentions of this illusory campaign was to raise Geraldine Edwards' profile to that of Bebe Buell is unsound and illogical in theory, as well as being false. With all due respect to Bebe Buell who is both an entertainer, and has been involved with many high-profile entertainers, Geraldine Edwards is a successful businessperson and entrepreneur, and they are two completely different types of people. Geraldine Edwards is now married and goes by her married name of Geraldine Flemming-Mueller, and has publicly stated on more than one occasion that she is not interested in having her name included in any Misplaced Pages articles, which is her right. Binksternet's thinly veiled inferences towards Geraldine Flemming-Mueller are both hostile and inappropriate. As for there being a nefarious conspiracy afoot originating in San Diego with a mission statement of aggrandizing Geraldine Flemming-Mueller's reputation among groupies, well, that's beyond factitious. I am from San Diego, and I would like to point out that San Diego is the eighth largest city in the United States, with a population of over one and a half million people. Other Misplaced Pages editors who have tried to defend Geraldine Flemming-Mueller against Binksternet's attacks upon her were met with threats leveled by him. His interest in Geraldine Flemming-Mueller is unhealthy and alarming, and it would be in his best interest to step away from this situation altogether, as he fails to maintain a neutral stance, which is one of Misplaced Pages's precepts, on the subject of her. That being said, Geraldine Edwards is not a 'hoax', she's simply a woman who's living the life she see's fit, and is not interested in being included in Misplaced Pages articles. And finally, posting any inappropriate, hostile information against a living person that may harm them is clearly being flouted by Binkstenet's many malignant comments posted on Misplaced Pages's pages regarding Geraldine Edwards, one of the main guiding principles of Misplaced Pages. It's time for him to stand down.

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I thereby award you with yet another Admin's Barnstar for your continued good work at the Requests for page protection noticeboard. Armbrust 03:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 03:55, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Michael the Maven

This page was very helpful to me in learning about Michael the Maven. I was very surprised at the deletion. I have no vested interest in his notoriety, but was annoyed based on principle to see it deleted. I found out about him when searching for online photography courses via youtube. Whomever deleted it stated it was promotional in nature and lacked evidence of notability. Whomever deleted this page should not be editing without first checking out the facts- It's disheartening to find people that edit willy nilly and based purely on opinion. I found his products with many great reviews on Amazon, he has a highly publicized presence in photography magazines, has thousands of followers on facebook, etc. He also has a youtube channel that is highly visited. I wanted to tell someone about him and his photography courses but when I googled and clicked on this and it wasn't there, I was miffed. Please restore the entry. If you have issues with how you thought it was "promotional" then you should contact the person who wrote it and tell them they need to edit the article down- I didn't think that it was promotional at all when I read it, especially compared to a lot of the articles I read on here. Heatherjayneswhimsy (talk) 05:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, because this was deleted via WP:PROD it can be restored at any time. It may be subsequently nominated for deletion though. Would you like me to restore it now? Mark Arsten (talk) 05:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Mark. I don't remember if I did thank you the last time but just in case I didn't, I am sorry and thank you wholeheartedly for copy-editing the article 4 which is at FAC again and fairing better till now. I also wanted to ask you if you could do a thorough copy-edit of "Partition" when possible? Regards, Jivesh1205 (Talk) 09:23, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, I suppose I could take a shot at it. Are you still working on it? I see there's an under construction template on it at the moment. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

No, you may proceed. Thanks, Jivesh1205 (Talk) 05:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Do let me know when you are going to take a look? Regards, Jivesh1205 (Talk) 05:47, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll try to finish my pass by this weekend. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Jai Ho (film)

Would you protect this article please in light of content removals like these and I don't know what term this, maybe failure to distinguish between reel and real life? Thanks. Soham 16:23, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, looks like unprotection isn't going to work here. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:45, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

• It never does on a topic that gets spammed heavily. Thanks for protecting. Soham 04:31, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech

• WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech

There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
4. Join in discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 17:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks for the invitation. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

You're most welcome, we'd love to have you! :) — Cirt (talk) 19:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Blocking Neathbids

Well dang, that was fast! I reported him and you blocked him like 30 seconds later. Thanks! :-) --Zackmann08 (talk) 18:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! Mark Arsten (talk) 18:40, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Richard Cheese

I stand by my edit to the article Richard Cheese, on the grounds that the disambiguation page for dick cheese contains a link to Mr. Cheese's article. 76.106.123.223 (talk) 00:42, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

My apologies if you weren't vandalizing, but at a glance that seemed like vandalism to me. Does he really go by "Dick"? Mark Arsten (talk) 00:45, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

He refers to himself as both "Richard" and "Dick" in the FAQ section of his webpage.

Huh, well, I guess you are correct after all. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

relisted AFD question

I saw your relist. No direct criticism of you here, just a question about possible past discussions, etc. I have always wondered why admins (or other closers) don't tread AFDs with no comments as an uncontested PROD. If I had just clicked a different button in Twinkle, the article would be deleted automatically, and the AFD gave the "prod" a much wier audience to be objected to. Now obviously it should not be deleted with prejudice against recreation like a consensus AFD would, but why just keep relisting? Ive had some AFDs get relisted 3-4 times, and then eventually closed as no consensus! In any case, I have no real objection to a relist here, so Im not trying to ding you for anything, just a question that got rekindled in this context. Are you aware of any discussions in this vein before? 01:56, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, this comes up regularly, there was an RFC about it a while ago as well. Basically, in my mind, the thing about PRODs is after deletion the page can be undeleted if anyone objects to it. That's not usually the case with Afd, so keeping them open for longer in hope of more participation does hold some benefit for the nominator. Just my opinion, anyway. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

IPhonehurricane95 Socks

Can we at least have 2011typhoon indef blocked as a WP:VOA of IPhonehurricane95? See his talk page and his contributions for more details. LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:37, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand your reasoning here. The account was abandoned more than two years ago, what is the use of taking action now? Mark Arsten (talk) 05:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

In case IpH95 decides to revive that account (which I sure hope he doesn't), and because it was a VOA. Also, IpH95 has abused the IP 218.215.54.121, in order to support 2011typhoon, another sign of sockpuppeteering. See both account's contributions to see how they are related. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

So, has he resurrected any long-dormant accounts in the past? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Not that I know of, probably because he knows that if he did, those accounts would be blocked and he would lose access to them. But I just want to be cautious here, as we're dealing with a very notorious sockpuppeteer. LightandDark2000 (talk) 23:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

My god, man, you're obsessed. (Sorry, Mark.)--Bbb23 (talk) 23:31, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Obsessed? Not sure about that; I only want to make sure that his vandalism on Misplaced Pages is stopped for good. LightandDark2000 (talk) 23:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not inclined to spend energy on long-abandoned accounts personally, but you're free to ask another admin if you like. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Proper attribution

Hello Mark, I recently created the article for Isaiah Rashad, then a new user copied one of the sections of Rashad's article (2013-present: Cilvia Demo), made zero changes to it, added a track list, infobox and created an article for his recent album Cilvia Demo. I basically wrote the entire prose of the article as it appears on Rashad's page that was copied on to Cilvia Demo. I am pretty sure this is against the attribution policy, including Misplaced Pages:Copyrights and the guideline Misplaced Pages:Copying within Misplaced Pages. None of the steps mentioned in Template: Uw-copying were followed, and I feel kind of ripped off that this new user is frankly taking credit when I wrote the entire content that makes up the prose of Cilvia Demo. So, do I just have to live with this, is there a way to delete it and I could recreate where my proper credit would be given, or what? I was planning to create the article this week if it charted anyways, so the information would not be missing for long. STATic message me! 05:36, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, this is a tricky situation. I made a null edit to note the attribution, you might also want to note it on the article's talk page like we do when merging. I'm not sure if there's really anything else to do at this point. I don't run into this situation often though. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Psst

You might find this interesting: commons:User talk:JBingle#Blocked Unjustly. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 19:28, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, that is very interesting, thanks for the note. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:39, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Rick Joyner

Thank you.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 19:38, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem, looks like socks/meatpuppets are about, so best to shut things down for now. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:41, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:Sockpuppet of User:محبةالكتب/User:Samer154 at the Blond article -- yes, another one.

In addition to this latest WP:Sockpuppet registered account, there is this WP:Sockpuppet problematic IP by the same editor. What is the best course of action for stopping that IP? Blocking that IP for 24 hours or a few days will not help much; that IP is affecting various articles in problematic ways, and will likely jump to a WP:Proxy if their IP is blocked. Or perhaps they have a dynamic IP. All of the affected articles need to be WP:Semi-protected, as far as I can see. Flyer22 (talk) 20:58, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the note, I've semi-protected Blond. Are there any others that you think should be protected? Mark Arsten (talk) 21:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

All of the articles that the IP edited, and Chaoui people and White people. Also, Mark, I'm sure that reverting a WP:Sockpuppet does not make you WP:INVOLVED. If it's simply your preference not to revert, then I understand that that's the way you handle things. Flyer22 (talk) 21:37, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

That stated, this WP:Sockpuppet will be back in yet a different incarnation. Flyer22 (talk) 21:41, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, agreed about the reverting, I'll look through those pages some more later. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Flyer22 (talk) 21:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Mark, did you forget to semi-protect all of the noted articles that need semi-protection from this editor? With the exception of the Blond and Legitimacy (law) articles, it doesn't seem that you semi-protected the articles that 41.96.99.209 edited. Flyer22 (talk) 04:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I got another couple that I missed earlier. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Flyer22 (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

IP Sock at White American

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk%3AWhite_American&action=historysubmit&diff=593792599&oldid=593704667 complete with شاول's signature (a User:محبةالكتب sock blocked by you). Pinkbeast (talk) 14:52, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, I've blocked him. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:23, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Timing

		The Admin's Barnstar
		The number one thing I look for in an admin is to show up when needed and swing the ban hammer. You're quickly becoming my favorite admin (second only to Materialscientist). Chris Troutman (talk) 23:34, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, it's great to hear that. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:10, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi

How is my video inappropriate? It provides visual info about climbing the pyramid for people who are thinking about visiting the cob ruins. I don't see how this is violating anything I am not listing websites trying to sell anything or even my location.. when I was looking for a place to travel in mexico I was trying to find a good video of the coba ruins and could not find any. You allow photos why not my video??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adairtrainer (talk • contribs) 00:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

The problem was that you were using language like "If you are planning a trip to the coba ruins climbing the Ixmoja pyramid is a must." That kind of thing is Ok on a travel guide like like wikivoyage or wikitravel, but we don't give tourism recommendations like that on Misplaced Pages. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply

I will word it in any way you want but I just want to be able to share my video on the page for others to see what its like to climb the pyramid. You have tons of photos on the page I don't see a problem with my video? can I just say "For a better look at climbing the pyramid here is a video" in the link section?

Hmm, maybe add it in the "External links" section at the bottom. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Adairtrainer has done so, and then I've re-worded the link a bit ("check out this video" isn't encyclopedic either.) All sorted! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Removed Itesm from Cd-I page.

I got your message. For some reason, even small word edits, when I edit a page currently it appears to change the urls in the references area and various other places in an article. I am no entirely why that is happening. Especially now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leeroyhim (talk • contribs) 00:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, no worries. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:21, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Half Barnstar
	:) P☮ace-♥-33756 02:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 02:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

¡Una barnstar para ti!

	La insignia de Administrador
	Being a good steward of the wikipedia. thanks :) GeorgeMilan /Stalk 03:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the Spanish.--GeorgeMilan /_Stalk 03:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

lol, thanks. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

File: KVMX.png

I saw that you were the one that deleted File:KVMX.png. Anyway you can tell if it was in gallery format? It was being used as a previous logo for KPSL-FM, but someone took it off. If you could check, before restoring it. If it is in gallery format, then let me know, and it can stay off the article. Thanks. Also check File:KBKO.PNG (JoeCool950 (talk) 04:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC))

They were removed in this edit, looks like they were part of a gallery, yes. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Question

Hi Mark, since you are an admin that I frequently see around I feel comfortable asking you for advice on this issue. Yesterday, I BLPPROD an autobiography from a new user (which eventually had references added) and had the editor ask me this on my talk: "Clearly I have no idea how to edit / make a page? Is there a company that does this regularly that i can hire to do this for me. I am not he most tech savy individual. Thank u". (here is the diff) I'm not really sure how to respond, but I obviously know this is extremely discouraged. Suggestions? --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 07:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there are some people who will write articles for pay, but we really discourage that. Also, paying someone to write about your company doesn't guarantee we won't delete the article, as a number of unhappy customers of Wiki-PR have learned. Maybe just point him in the direction of free ways he can learn to write better, like WP:TEAHOUSE and WP:AFC. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Hero Certified Burgers logo.png

Hi Mark: Did the article that I created this file for get deleted? I can't find the article. Please reply at your convenience. Thanks, Northamerica1000 13:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like Hero Certified Burgers was deleted by User:JamesBWatson under G11 a couple weeks ago. I can userfy it for you though if you'd like to work on it. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I'd like to examine the article. Please userfy it to User:Northamerica1000/Hero Certified Burgers at your convenience, and thanks. Northamerica1000 22:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, it's there now. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, it's appreciated. Cheers, Northamerica1000 23:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Ping User:Mark Arsten: After cleaning out promotional content, expanding the article and improving its sources, I have republished it at Hero Certified Burgers. Therefore, I am requesting undeletion of File:Hero Certified Burgers logo.png, for use in the article's infobox. Northamerica1000 03:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait, it's back up now. Good rescue. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, and cheers. Northamerica1000 00:38, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Gumball 3000

I'm sure you're very nearly as bored with this as I am. However, further to this, do you think that this might justify some sort of temporary protection there? If not, NP. Either way, I'll take this opportunity to thank you again for all that you do. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I protected it. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I saw; thanks for that and everything else. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:21, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Snohomish County Herald

Mark: last year the Snohomish County Herald expose an attack piece created by City of Gold Bar and Snohomish County employees on an attack piece labeled under Misplaced Pages as Anne Block. Today I noted that the same people are back at it on Misplaced Pages's site labeled a City of Gold Bar. Inside the government officials newest attack piece they intentionally and without any independent source are stating that Anne Block had any involvement in causing he city to go bankrupt. The people who are writing Misplaced Pages's City of Gold Bar website are also involved in fake website named the Sky Valley Chronicle. The Chronicle posted threats to harm my life on its Facebook and blog posts but refuse to state who they are or who is writing for the Chronicle. I did request that Misplaced Pages stop allowing the Sky Valley Chronicle to label itself as a valid source according to Misplaced Pages s rules. I am asking that Misplaced Pages take my name out of Chronicle newest attempt to harass me via Misplaced Pages. See Labyrinth: Reardon staff linked to harassment, surveillance ... www.heraldnet.com/article/20130214/NEWS01/702149999

Ok, I removed the disputed passage, I think. Are there any more inappropriate links left? Mark Arsten (talk) 00:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	This barnstar is for all your high quality work clerking at SPI, protecting pages, and doing all those other behind the scenes things you do. Your efforts are noticed and appreciated. Diannaa (talk) 00:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! Mark Arsten (talk) 00:45, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Sandbox is being abused - is it okay to revert?

User:UsefulWikipedia (User_talk:UsefulWikipedia | Special:Contributions/UsefulWikipedia)‎ appears to be violating the sandbox policies by placing potentially offensive material in the sandbox. He also redirected the sandbox to other pages, which I rolled back as soon as I saw it.

He keep reverting my edits, and I keep reverting his. However, now that I reverted 3 times, I stopped in fear of violating the three-revert-rule. However, I wonder if there is such a thing as "edit warring in the sandbox". Seems silly, but that's a genuine question I have. The user appears to be hyped up about tonight's Super Bowl, Link. K6ka (talk | contribs) 00:36, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Note: The bots that clean the sandbox won't clean it for another 20 minutes. Someone's bound to see those comments. K6ka (talk | contribs) 00:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

User has added links labelled "Pornhub" or "Google search for porn sites". The links don't actually point to such sites (thank God) but I'm removing them anyways. Hope it's okay. K6ka (talk | contribs) 00:42, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I just warned him again, let's see what he does now. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

User continues to make his ridiculous edits to the sandbox. He cleans the sandbox and then makes the edit again when no one is watching. He even reverted one of the bot's edits. K6ka (talk | contribs) 02:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, looks like he's stopped now. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

spi / please unblock

Re Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/Hhighimpact059/Archive -- is there evidence these are socks? If I'm reading the correctly, they've never edited the same article, let alone acted in any way "abusively." Isn't likely they're what User talk:PrestonDorey claims there are, a bunch of folks sharing a computer? As Misplaced Pages:Checkuser#Guide_to_checkusers indicates, the technical evidence itself does not mean sockpuppets. NE Ent 03:22, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to unblock at this point since I can't verify whether their explanations match the evidence, I think it would be best if a checkuser were to comment on that first. I've asked a couple checkusers to comment on whether the evidence matches their explanation, but neither of them have done so. I'll ask a third checkuser to look into it, I guess. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thx. NE Ent 22:49, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Protection

I saw the message on my talk page. Yes, I would like a lengthy protection time-span for my talk page. This person has been vandalizing my talk page and following my contributions to revert or add nonsense in general; this is something that has been going on for over 10 years now. Any help would be highly appreciated. Thanks in advance. - Zarbon (talk) 03:51, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've extended the protection. Let me know if you need anything else. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Tehmeena Afzal deleted please advise

U have deleted Tehmeena Afzal but there are a lot of links I was going to add. Please advise how we can have that page back. there are appropriate links and news about her. --MinkyThePet (talk) 08:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, to have the page restored, we'd have to see significant coverage in major news agencies. Can you provide that? Mark Arsten (talk) 16:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

How to add user to list after an SPI case is opened

Hi Mark, sorry to bug ya, I opened an SPI here and submitted it, but then noticed another IP that I wanted to add to be checked out. When I edit the SPI, I see:

* {{checkip|1=75.90.247.16}}

Which resolves as:

* 75.90.247.16 (talk · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

I tried adding a second IP, like this:

* {{checkip|2=98.19.72.33}}

But that resolves with a loopback address:

* No username provided.

Is it possible to add another IP or user after I've submitted the SPI? And if so, how? Thanks, and again, sorry to bug ya. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:54, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Like this 98.19.72.33 (talk · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) Soham 17:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oh sorry, I did it for ya. Happy editing. Soham 17:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

@Soham: Thanks! So if I am interpreting this correctly, my mistake was using "2=98.19.72.33". 2 doesn't mean #2 in the list, it means something else? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

• No I think it does not but it should, it happens to all first-timers, it happened to me as well. See this page Template:Checkip for more. Soham 17:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

• Ok, I've handled the SPI for now. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

sockery

I'm being threatened with a block for removing the socks' messages from another user's user talk. I do not want to be blocked, but I do not think I should be forbidden from enforcing WP:BAN simply because my interactions with the user demanding I not do so on his user talk have been soured because of the sockpuppetry. What should I do?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, I guess since Drmies will block if you don't stop the only choice now is to stop removing them. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

But that's bull. He's violating policy by allowing a banned editor to edit. And I should be blocked because things got off on the wrong foot because of this sockpuppet?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 09:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I think the best thing to do at this point would be to discuss the issue with Drmies. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

X96lee15 attempted to start a new thread on ANI (WP:ANI#Reverting talk page edits), and I moved it to be a subthread of the thread that's already been discussing the issue (WP:ANI#Wiki-star) and he's mad at me for that now too. I can't do anything that this guy likes.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Oriol Sellarès Martínez

Please see a question I left for you at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Oriol Sellarès Martínez -- RoySmith (talk) 17:42, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've replied and closed the discussion. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:51, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Malusia22

If you look at the mad edit war on 5 January, that account was a sock of the IP. If you look at the sequence of events, the account was created just after 112.207.152.250 was reported to AIV (and four minutes before I blocked it for a week). The first thing the account then did (four minutes later, presumably the time it took to reset the router to avoid the autoblock) was post at WP:PERM/C. So basically you've got a named account that was a sock of a dynamic user on that 112.207.x.x IP. Black Kite (talk) 21:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, Ok, thanks for the explanation. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

A Tesla Roadster for you!

	A Tesla Roadster for you!
	Thank you for contributing to Misplaced Pages! Gg53000 (talk) 00:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks great, thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Petition

Hey Mark. I don't know if you are aware, but there is a petition to remove your admin rights on WP (here) on Change.org. It is obviously stemmed from ignorance of our policies. --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 01:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Only 28 signatures... I guess my fan club hasn't found it yet :) Mark Arsten (talk) 02:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Mr. LuxeTH / Special:Contributions/136.169.191.219

Can you block User:Mr. LuxeTH with expiry set of indefinite. He/she just personal attack on Talk:Under My Skin (Avril Lavigne album) and I think he's/she's the same person of Special:Contributions/136.169.191.219 as did in Avril Lavigne's singles and albums.

P.S. Tick "Prevent the user from editing their own talk page while blocked", because he/she cannot able edit his/her own talk page.183.171.177.91 (talk) 02:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Could you point out what the personal attack was? I'm not seeing it at a glance. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

What's going on here and what are you talking about? The only single I edited was Don't Tell Me (cause tautology was there). When i ATTEACKED that page? They write that people can write something about this, I just wrote it. Any questions? And yeah, i'm from another republic and that's why these IPs are not mine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. LuxeTH (talk • contribs) 06:43, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Malusia22

Hi, Mark, why aren't the tags of all those socks creating a proper link to the Malusia22 report? I know it was moved, but it looks okay to me, yet it doesn't work. That's a whole lot of socks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, that is really strange, I don't know why that's happening. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I think it's fixed now. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I should have looked at the template itself. It's not one I normally use. There are so many variants.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:52, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

in 1975 NDP MLA Bob Williams received $80,000 stolen from Nanaimo BC Charities by the NCHS conspiracy

Do a websearch on bingogate to find out more than you probably want to know about this BC NDP scandal.

The payment to Williams was revealed in the Forensic Audit of the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society, which confirmed that former NDP MLA and MP Dave Stupitch (later convicted) had stolen money from Nanaimo Charities and used it to to pay Bob Williams the equivalent (1975) of 4 years pay as a BC MLA. Other stolen money went directly to the NDP, and to Unions such as the IWA as part of a scheme to "repay" money borrowed for a money losing Building Project, the "Nanaimo Commonwealth Center".

Williams and his lawyer gave a press conference after that portion of the audit was unsealed. Williams said he did not know that the money had been stolen from charities, but confirmed that he got it directly from the NCHS, and that he had no recollection of doing any actual Consulting in return for the money he was given.

The first link below is from the website maintained by that lawyer's Law Firm.

The whole sordid conspiracy received widespread attention in BC and caused the resignation of NDP Premier Mike Harcourt, after he demanded the resignations of BC NDP President Patrice Pratt and other NDP Party Executives who approved what Auditor Parks characterized as a backdated "sham transaction" trying to undo the transfer of stolen money from the NCHS conspiracy to the NDP.

http://martinandassociates.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/40-Article-RCMP-Drops-NDP-Bombshell-Sun-29March19961.pdf

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/bob-williams-nchs-deal-1.205953

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/en/article/harcourt-resigns/

This is well documented historical fact, not speculation or unfounded lies. Forensic Auditors do not make up stuff, they uncover attempts to conceal or cover up the facts. Mike Harcourt made a point of getting one of the top rated Forensic Auditors in the Province to Audit NCHS financial records. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.180.149.46 (talk) 04:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I reverted you because you did not include a citation in the text that you provided. See WP:CITE for details. When adding negative information about living people we have to be very cautious and only use high-quality sources. See WP:BLP for details. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Anglian_water.png

Hi, the di-orphaned request on File:Anglian_water.png was for the first revision only to resolve a split media request. Even though the current version is under fair use, the previous version is not and as such can not remain on Misplaced Pages. If this this not the correct process to get this first revision removed please let me know. Cube00 (talk) 10:23, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I see now, I've deleted the old version. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Argument isn't over

OK. I was busy, but I have to continue the File:Fosters_intertitle.jpg job. I confirmed in the description that I got the image from the TV recording I obtained, but the uploader of the another image didn't confirm where was the file from. So, that one should be deleted and mine should survive. JSH-alive/ 16:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

What is the other image you're referring to here? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:37, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

File:FHFIFLogo.png JSH-alive/ 08:55, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored it for you. Make sure to tag the other images if you remove them. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Voiceoftamil

You just closed it, I guess you missed the new sock I had just mentioned. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've re-opened it for you. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Inappropriate deleting

I would like to know where to report improper deleting of post. Specifically, who is above you to speak to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.188.167.150 (talk) 18:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

In terms of a dispute about what content to include in an article, no one is really above or below anyone else. We operate by consensus when making editorial decisions. The first step if you addition is disputed is to discuss the matter with other interested editors on the article's talk page. Also see WP:DR for more options. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Protection of Satya Nadella

Hi, saw you protected the article for a week. While I saw some edits I wasn't happy with, I don't think there was widespread vandalism. Could we lower that protection to a shorter duration? Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 18:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

It seems to me like there is an abnormally high level of IP disruption at the article today, but you're free to reduce the duration if you'd like. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Vandal IP is evading his block

I think User:23.31.101.217 is User:Cvilleslacker, who is retaliating against me by vandalizing articles that I created. The original dispute happened yesterday, when Cvilleslacker removed a negative review in House Hunting, an article that I had watchlisted. You can see in the history there that Cvilleslacker engaged in a lengthy edit war against several editors, including User:Materialscientist, who eventually blocked him. I left him a message on his talk page advising him to simply let the review stand and discuss his concerns on the talk page. Tonight, a new vandal IP from Charlottesville, VA has appeared. Unsurprisingly, House Hunting (the film) was shot in Charlottesville, VA, the director lives in Charlottesville, VA, and the vandal IP is using a Charlottesville, VA IP address. I think the evidence is rather overwhelming that we're dealing with both an block-evading IP and an conflict-of-interest. I don't think that Cvilleslacker is going to give up his vendetta against me after getting a few templates warning him of edit warring. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've blocked the IP as it's clearly up to no good. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Transformers: Age of Extinction

Hi Mark. Hope things are well. Thank you for adding the protection to Transformers: Age of Extinction. I am just wondering if you would be able to possibly extend the protection for another week or two? I am really busy on and off Misplaced Pages, and I can't devote enough time to that article at the moment. The reason being, is the page was flooded with information from TFW2005.com, which is a fansite forum. I went in and removed those all (then asked for the protection) and am attempting to rebuild the sources with reliable ones. I can already tell that there will be some strong opposition from biased fans when the block comes off (Here and here) and I would like a bit more time to try and add some more to the page. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've extended it some. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

SPI Usage

Thank you for telling me the proper procedure for adding an entry to an SPI investigation for Malusia22. I thought if I restarted it, it wouldn't be connected, but I'm glad things are set up the way they are.Naraht (talk) 17:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it can get kind of confusing, let me know if you have any more issues. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for your dedication in counter-vandalism! ~~Junvfr <~_~> (talk) 01:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

My talk page

Would you be interested in protecting my talk page? An IP hopping editor is now stating, "Not only that Yoel Natan likely is a reference to a terrorist organization with who you have remarkable same line thinking. https://en.wikipedia.org/Kahanism" --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, sure, I've protected for three days. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:33, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Is accusing another editor of being a terrorist allowable? --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

No, that violates all kinds of rules. I'd consider blocking, but if he's hopping from IP to IP then protection will be more effective. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:38, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Well, I had to finish laughing before I could ask for the page protection. Thanks again. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Narendra Modi

Query since you are admin, can you host a page with a section for speculation like "Possible Prime Minitster" in Narendra Modi, that has been going on for some time and I am sure speculation is not wikipedia, only facts, past or present. If you can give your opinions, Thanks. thevikas (talk) 09:17, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, we should only stick to facts, but it may be a fact that reliable political commentators have described him as a potential PM. The closest equivalent in American politics that I can think of would by Hillary Rodham Clinton, and her article mentions 2016 poling as well. So I guess it depends on the sources you have. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

FYI

See . Given the two recent unblock requests - both essentially the same message, both completely inappropriate and the last one repeated despite Daniel Case's warning - I've extended the editor's block indefinitely. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. Feel free to reverse my action if you see it unfit. Regards, m.o.p 17:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, works for me. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:33, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

How I Met Your Mother

I've not requested semi-protection extension for a long time. According to the article, the series will end on March 31. I would expect higher view rates and possible vandalism. Can you extend protection time on this article?

I messed up an SPI

Hi Mark, firstly, sorry, secondly, I messed up and need a hand. I opened an SPI here but it should have been in this account. I've re-opened AllenComedian1999 and added the details, but Brian Allen Conley should be deleted. (The correct name was Bruce, anyway) Gaah. Lazy, sloppy. Sorry, and thanks for your help. :.( Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:40, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Alright, that was fix easily enough. I'll take a look at the SPI later tonight. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks man! (and sorry again) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Winchester

I saw you're massage, please enlight me on how it's not constructive, if there is other loads and speed of a cartridge why deny that information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.40.52.236 (talk) 01:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I reverted you because you removed all text from the page in this edit. Please don't do that again. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:20, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mark!

I'm fairly new to Misplaced Pages so forgive me if I'm making an obvious mistake, but as for my page on "The Osceola County School for the Arts, Alumni", why would a source be needed? Please answer this as soon as possible, thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mallets97 (talk • contribs) 01:32, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, per our WP:V policy, we like all information to have a source. It helps prevent hoaxes and misinformation. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Roscelese‎

Thanks for being on top of that crap on Roscelese‎'s user page.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 02:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

My pleasure, we try to nip that kind of thing in the bud. Let me know if they come back. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:33, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Got another one, if you're around. If you think temporarily semiprotecting my talkpage is a good idea, I won't oppose it; I find it unlikely that anonymous IPs have anything to say to me. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, got it. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:01, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Nooo..... (Orange Herald Warhead.jpg)

We've been through this before. Commons don't believe the UK license is good enough. It got loaded over there before, then they deleted it, and it was gone entirely until I undeleted/dug it up here. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Undelete/File:Orange_Herald_warhead.jpg...

Please undelete it here. I want it on Commons, too, but it won't stick there, and I don't want the articles to break when they delete it again. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 04:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored it, and added a {{keeplocal}} tag so this doesn't happen again. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 04:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

thanks again!

Good God, they're really riled up tonight...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

No prob, glad to help stop the nonsense. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:00, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Borislava Botusharova

Hi, a few months ago I made an article about the Bulgarian tennis player Borislava Botusharova, but it got deleted by you, because the player didn't pass the notability guidelines for tennis players. This week she is in the national team for the 2014 Fed Cup Europe/Africa Zone matches and today she made her debut for the Bulgarian team.

I understand that now she is considered notable according to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Tennis/Article_guidelines#Notability, so is it possible for you to undelete that article, so I don't have to write it again. Here's a link for the delete discussion - Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Borislava Botusharova in case that's helpful for the article to be found. Thanks! Kr1s71an (talk) 10:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mark! In support of the original author, I can confirm that Borislava Botusharova made her debut for the Bulgaria Fed Cup team today, which deems her notable by WP:Tennis standards. It would be very kind of you to reinstate the article so the user above doesn't have to write it again. Jared Preston (talk) 13:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I'm willing to undelete it, but I'd like to see a source confirming that she played for that team first. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the author of the article. I see that the official website haven't updated their results yet - http://www.fedcup.com/en/draws-results/tie/details.aspx?tieId=100021406, but you can see the result in the official Hungarian website of the Europe/Africa matches in Budapest - http://www.huntennis.hu/fedcup2014/eredmenyek/?article_hid=14454 (Aliaksandra Sasnovich- Borislava Botusharova 61 63). Kr1s71an (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored it, make sure you add a citation to the article though. Let me know if you need anything else. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

User talk:JT657

Please revoke talk page access, and in the future just make the first block with talk page access revoked the troll has shown a pattern to abuse it. Werieth (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok,  Done Mark Arsten (talk) 17:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Nelson Thomas Potter Jr.

Hi Mark, I created a new article and I made a bit of a mistake with the history. I created it in a draft and then moved it into article space, but I had created at least one other article in that draft page, so now it has the history of that article. Can the irrelevant history be removed or should it be deleted and I then create it again without the baggage history? Thanks for your help in advance. I am One of Many (talk) 20:36, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

• I fixed it by moving it back into my user space and then recreating over the redirect! I am One of Many (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, let me know if you need any of the history moved. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:48, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm ok with it now. It has the silly mistake at first, but it doesn't have any unwanted history in it. I am One of Many (talk) 22:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Users/IPs involved in the Sonic Boom (2014 video game) mess have moved to Gone Home

Thanks for protecting Sonic Boom (2014 video game). However, now that the page is protected, they've moved to Gone Home, so it looks like that one needs protection as well, now. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, got it, sorry if I edit conflicted you there though. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Happens. You removed one useful edit, which I've moved back in manually. Everything else did indeed have to go. Better to edit conflict me than risk having vandalism still in, so I fully understand. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 21:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Next target: Phil Fish (video game developer). 31 January edit seems to be last good version. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 21:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks like this is the thread: http://boards.4chan.org/v/res/230679451. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:00, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it. Want some help in listing the IPs and accounts involved? There's a fair bunch, and some of the IPs reverting stuff out got hit with "possible vandalism"-tags to their edits because of removing information. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Next target seems to be Sonic Boom (TV series). Also might be worth keeping an eye on this and this, as both were mentioned on said thread. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

And there's also a smaller group on this one Shadow the Hedgehog. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, where is the good version for Sonic Boom (TV series)? Mark Arsten (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

this one. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Not sure why they think I care if they vandalize it, not like it's that hard to revert when you -know- where the good version is located. Nonetheless, thanks for the protect. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

No prob, well, I found the new thread: http://boards.4chan.org/v/res/230689827. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I have to log off for a couple of minutes to do the dishes, but will be back soon. You never replied if you'd like help in getting that list of IPs and accounts involved, by the way. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

A list of the accounts would be helpful, yes. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Registered accounts found so far, most already blocked, one or two pages left to check:

User:Icedude7 User:Johndavis999999900999999 User:MutatedSeabass1337 User:Epicanonwin User:SpliffDonk Want the IPs as well? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, if it's not too much trouble, it might be good to have a list. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:13, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Considering that I was checking them to see which ones are still active and vandalizing atm anyway, I may as well note them down, no? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, and this here may need a revdel. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

• Special:Contributions/108.86.8.181
• Special:Contributions/131.91.7.2
• Special:Contributions/147.143.157.225
• Special:Contributions/162.226.156.36
• Special:Contributions/174.2.185.171
• Special:Contributions/187.121.72.194

• Special:Contributions/200.53.246.43
• Special:Contributions/209.163.200.66
• Special:Contributions/209.252.173.208
• Special:Contributions/209.2.234.239
• Special:Contributions/24.202.114.91
• Special:Contributions/24.255.46.107

• Special:Contributions/50.135.89.196
• Special:Contributions/50.162.102.79

• Special:Contributions/65.190.91.20
• Special:Contributions/67.233.169.64
• Special:Contributions/69.250.130.180

• Special:Contributions/74.196.210.221
• Special:Contributions/74.70.174.242
• Special:Contributions/75.180.24.123
• Special:Contributions/76.121.141.40

• Special:Contributions/80.217.32.143
• Special:Contributions/84.48.237.90
• Special:Contributions/85.181.213.65
• Special:Contributions/86.170.17.178
• Special:Contributions/89.0.114.45
• Special:Contributions/89.138.75.47

• Special:Contributions/94.213.38.221
• Special:Contributions/99.125.93.163

are the IPs involved in Sonic Boom (2014 video game). I'll probably encounter a few more through checking the other pages, but that should be the majority of them. Some are already blocked. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

And the second edit (most recent one) of this one may need a revdel, even though they do not seem to have been on the raid's side. Special:Contributions/74.89.59.37 also looks to not have been on "their" side, but it might still need a warning or revdel. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Remaining bunch:

On Gone Home

• Special:Contributions/91.180.138.251
• Special:Contributions/198.7.245.80
• Special:Contributions/81.61.216.226
• Special:Contributions/76.4.56.17
• Special:Contributions/46.72.163.249

On Pacman

• Special:Contributions/216.124.226.162

On Phil Fish (video game developer)

• Special:Contributions/89.241.210.178
• Special:Contributions/82.3.235.35

On Shadow the Hedgehog No one new.

On my userpage Both blocked, IP already listed somewhere around here.

On Knuckles the Echidna

• Special:Contributions/85.218.165.113

On Terraria

• Special:Contributions/86.155.58.23

On Fez (video game)

• Special:Contributions/69.117.34.226

On Shadow the Hedgehog (video game)

• Special:Contributions/68.225.210.132
• Special:Contributions/121.219.73.159
• Special:Contributions/72.129.184.211

On Halo 4

• Special:Contributions/96.233.75.132
• Special:Contributions/68.73.153.165

On DmC: Devil May Cry

• Special:Contributions/108.41.140.216
• Special:Contributions/94.194.78.97
• Special:Contributions/71.77.56.58

Also checked Hyperdimension Neptunia (video game) (not hit) and Sonic Boom (Kiss album) (one case, already listed above). Any pages I forgot to check? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I think I got all of them, thanks. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Might have missed one or two, of course (especially if I missed an article here or there that was just hit by a small bunch of them), but that should be at the very least the great majority of them. In any case, you're very welcome. You're undoubtedly busy enough without having to track down 48 IP-addresses across a good dozen pages. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	My god your mop must be dirty after that shitstorm. Thanks for your help czar ♔ 22:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, /v/ gave me a lot of work today! Mark Arsten (talk) 01:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

User:DigDeep4Truth was banned indefinitely for anti-Semitism.

Shouldn't all of his edits be rev-deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.169.20.2 (talk) 04:17, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

There's nothing in policy that says so.

Incidentally, as far as I can work out from their talk page, they are indefinitely blocked, which is not quite the same as a WP:BAN. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the WP:CFRD is somewhat strict about what we can and can't remove. I haven't read through all DD4T's contribs, but it might be possible for blatant anti-Semitic comments to be deleted under the "grossly offensive" or "purely disruptive" criteria. Feel free to let me know if there's anything specific that needs attention. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:36, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

List of video games notable for negative reception

There have been reverts lately. Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 05:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, done. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Ghassanid Page Protection

Hello, I have noticed that you have placed the protected status on the page Ghassanids. I am not sure if you have done this in response to my request or a request from another user, but regardless, I'd like to thank you for it. I am unsure of exactly how protection status works, but is it possible for admins like yourself to edit the page? The reason is I think user Lazyfoxx' edits blatantly lack NPOV, he editted out the fact that they were Arabs - a fact stated by virtually all sources - and placed a claim that they were Hellenised - which is in no way supported by the sources cited (wrongful use of sources). I disagree that his version is the most stable or accurate. So is it possible for you to review the discussion and edit the article accordingly, or do we have to wait until after the protection status expires? Thanks. SaSH172 (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Lazyfoxx also removed sourced material in the edit just prior to the article becoming protected - it is the part which states they wree Arabs and cited source 1 and source 2. Now the article simply says "...were a group of descended from Azd tribes." It should have said "group of Arabs descended from the Azd tribes." Like I said, the part that they were Arabs was sourced and thus should not have been deleted without discussion. Please review the changed in the article history to see what I mean. SaSH172 (talk) 16:58, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I am generally hesitant to revert to a specific version after protecting an article unless a consensus has formed around that version. Do you think a consensus has been reached yet? Mark Arsten (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. To be honest, I don't think a consensus has been reached yet. The edit war is just between myself and Lazyfoxx. It is just that his last edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ghassanids&diff=594455549&oldid=594296444 removed sourced content and seems to be pushing for an agenda (removing all mention of Arabs). The opening sentence also doesn't make much sense as a result "a group of descended from." I just think it will be better for the article to reinsert the sourced section, which will make it read as "a group of Arabs descended from". This will just involve adding the word "Arabs," backed by source 1. Thanks again. SaSH172 (talk) 21:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

After further review, I am okay with Nabuchadnessar's suggestion to put "a group of Arabs descended from" in the lead, it may be redundant but it aids user readability. This does not entail reverting, but instead adding the word Arabs in the lead. Lazyfoxx (talk) 02:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, just make an edit request on the talk page. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you both. Glad we are getting somewhere in the article. I have created the request. Thanks again. SaSH172 (talk) 03:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

New to Wiki

Dear Mark, User Demiurge1000 recommended I email you about my teahouse question here unfortunately although did read that it is possible before signing up, I have not worked out how to email through Misplaced Pages yet. I understand you are very busy, and being new to all this I have much to learn about how things work on Misplaced Pages, so if you can recommend someone else to "hold my hand" or walk me through the right steps (point me to any policy pages to look through) on what to do in such cases I would appreciate it. Perhaps it is nothing, but on the other hand, perhaps I have discovered something worth making into a project (which is something I have been looking for) on Misplaced Pages. Many thanks. F.Tromble (talk) 18:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, it can be difficult, for sure. There are a few things you can do. You should generally try to get input from a variety of interested editors. A good way is to ask for help on the talk page of a relevant wiki project. Other good places to get help are WP:3O, a talk page WP:RFC, or WP:DRN. Let me know if you have any more questions. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the tips! It seems I already managed to get a few irate editors stalking me although my intention was only to challenge editors to maintain NPOV and produce reliable sources in places where politics seems to be a motivating factor. I hope I won't be ganged up on but will be able to establish a good reputation for myself on Misplaced Pages in time and make some friends :) F.Tromble (talk) 23:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

That isn't stalking or irateness, F.Tromble - you should review WP:HOUNDING before saying such things about other editors. You have only been editing for two weeks and have already fallen into conflict with four established editors, lightly edit warring in one instance, and have forum shopped ever since. Following your edits is reasonable in order to ensure that things don't get out of hand. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:41, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Mark, could I use your drama Llama sign on my own talk page please? Any instruction on how to "forum shop" (is this the appropriate term?) correctly would also be appreciated. Is there a definition of an edit war edit war that would also be helpful to know why Mezzo thinks my interaction with him here should be classified as an edit war. Cheers. F.Tromble (talk) 10:08, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not really sure I understand here, but the technical definition of an edit war is here. Many Wikipedians voluntarily chose to hold themselves to the "WP:BRD" best practice, I strongly recommend doing so. "Forum shopping" is generally frowned upon, but the correct ways to find the right forum to discuss an issue are listed at WP:DR. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

User:F.Tromble, I didn't accused you of edit warring at Template_talk:Sunni_Islam - that clearly wasn't my intent. This is the second case now of you clearly misrepresenting the comments of other editors. This isn't clever on your part, it's rude.

Mr. Arsten, sorry for replying here on your talk page but I want to ensure that the conversation is in the correct place. This user is new but is already behaving in a somewhat uncivil fashion. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Mark. I will try my best to familiarize myself with the wiki conventions. There are a lot of them so it is difficult for a "newbie" like me lol. I only introduced to the teahouse so far and that is where Demiurge recommended I contact you. Best wishes! Mezzo, since before you started posting about me here there and everywhere, our only interaction was here how about returning there. I have left a reconciliatory message there for you which I hope you will appreciate. F.Tromble (talk) 10:17, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Magog the Ogre (t • c) 20:30, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to leave a quick note to thank you for the amount and quality of work that you do. So, thank you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for what you do as well. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

same sock again

https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Shedslams is another sock of User:Mangoeater1000, spamming various articles with same nonsenses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.165.172.48 (talk) 03:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, got him. Thanks for the note. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Page protection

I know I sent you a thanks for semi-protecting my User page, but I still wanted to say thank you. Much appreciated. —Josh3580_talk/hist 06:21, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

John Calvin's view of Scripture -- Edit Warring/Page protection

Dear Mark Asten, Could you please block St Anselm from reinserting original research in this page? He admits on the talk page that it is original research, but wishes to leave it up anyway. I'd appreciate it if you could take a look. Thanks! Mg3942 (talk) 09:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I have certainly not admitted that it's original research, and I your comments here and at Talk:Orthodox Presbyterian Church make me think you misunderstand the concept. (I freely admit that the article relies a bit too much on primary sources, but that simply means the article needs more material added, not that material should be deleted.) StAnselm (talk) 10:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I haven't been following this situation very closely, I'll try to look into it later tonight or tomorrow though. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, primary sources can be ok within reason, but you don't want to depend on them. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Assistance required at Latin Europe

Hi. There's an ongoing dispute at Latin Europe (a disambiguation page, as the term has multiple uses) over whether Romance-speaking Europe should be included. Numerous sources have been provided which show Latin Europe referring to a region with an almost identical definition to that provided at Romance-Speaking Europe. However, the opposing editor is consistently reverting, claiming that they are 'not the same'. I previously explained that the best solution would be to include Romance-speaking Europe on the disambiguation page, with that article explaining the various definitions for both terms (since they're almost identical, and definitely not worthy of separate articles), rather then removing it entirely. They have now piped the link to Romance-speaking Europe, which is not permitted per MOS. I'm contacting you directly as I don't think this is a huge issue, and hopefully wont take too much time to clear up. Myself and Afro-Eurasian are both pretty frustrated at the editor, and I have behaved aggressively towards the them, as I don't believe they are acting in good faith, but rather simply being disruptive, and unwilling to accept they are wrong. Regards, Rob (talk | contribs) 17:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I haven't been following this very closely, I'll try to look into it later. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Coronationstreetfan16

Hi, you blocked User:Coronationstreetfan16 a couple of hours ago and I believe they have returned already as User:Cdogg1000. They've edited the same pages and even continued a discussion involving CSF16 on another user's archived talk page. Would you be able to take a look or should I reopen the SPI? – JuneGloom Talk 21:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I reported the sockpuppet editor. This "new" account went to the trouble to tell me off . I noticed the account came into action when I opened the SPI last night. So it was preparation to continue after the other account was blocked. Obviously the same disgruntled editor.Rain the 1 21:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Might be a good idea to reopen Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Drwho16 just so we have the paperwork in place. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Done, thank you. – JuneGloom Talk 15:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Adminship nominations

Do you think any of the editors I've asked to let me nominate them for adminship recently are ready for the extra tools?--Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 00:46, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure, who have you asked? Mark Arsten (talk) 00:58, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

VQuakr, NJRobbie, LukeNo94, and Tassedethe--Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 01:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, the only one I'm familiar with is Luke. He seems pretty competent so I'd say he'd probably have a shot, unless he has some major flaws I don't know about. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:06, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Luke said outright he's too volatile.--Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 01:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

That's too bad, I think he'd probably do a decent job. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

User Admirenepal

Hello, Mark Arsten. Thank you for your help with the SPI of Admirenepal/Manzilnfl. I hope that this edit I just made is not inappropriate. I was confused, since the Admirenepal user page said that the user was blocked indefinitely. (He was apparently blocked for 12 hours.) If my edit was inappropriate, feel free to reverse it. Thanks again, Cnilep (talk) 03:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

No worries, that looks fine to me. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:58, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Human Development Index

Hi Mark. You declined semi-protection on the above named article in the beginning of January. Can you take another look. Both myself and Iryna Harpy have been reverting. -- Somedifferentstuff (talk) 20:45, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've protected it. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:47, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Mark. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Question

There's been a bit of re-occurring vandalism to the Hope Solo article in the last few days. Might you be able to take a look and advise if there is anything that can be done? Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 22:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, added protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

William H. Poteat

I hope this is how to reach you properly. I'm trying to add the final edits to the article William H. Poteat, but I'm getting messages that I'm vandalizing my article. What am I doing? Do I need to wait a while before completing the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvpwiki (talk • contribs) 01:04, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I accidentally sent you a warning a minute or to ago and then reverted myself when I saw my mistake, you can disregard that. You're free to continue to continue editing the page, but please work on the uppercase version of the article. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Request

Please you don't have to keep the newest Simpsons season protected again. That stated vandalism was caused by my "sock-puppet" accounts and no one else, I learned my lesson and won't argue under an alias again. Please unlock it.--CastellanetaFan (talk) 04:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't know, it looks like there might have been more people causing problems. I can take another look at it later though. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think unprotection would be a very good idea here. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Please reconsider....--CastellanetaFan (talk) 21:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Request

Hey, Mark. If you have the time, would you mind protecting my user page so that only I can edit its content? GabeMc 02:07, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I can protect your userpage, did you want semi or full protection? Mark Arsten (talk) 03:30, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Which do you recommend? Can I edit it with full protection? GabeMc 18:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, if it's semi-protected you can still directly edit it, but so can most other people. If it's full protected you can't directly edit it, but you can do a trick with the code like on User:EuroCarGT so an unprotected subpage is transcluded onto your protected userpage. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Let me think about that some more.

• On another note, would you please adjust the first edit summary of Jimi Hendrix: Canadian drug charges and trial to reflect that the content had been split-off Jimi Hendrix? Thanks. GabeMc 19:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, I can't really edit an edit summary, but I think just adding a null edit that explains the situation should be enough. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:15, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, well I guess I assumed that if you can delete/hide them you could also edit them. That's surprising; maybe that's something that should be changed. GabeMc 16:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of my Richard Busemyer article

Mark,
I've been involved with Misplaced Pages for quite a number of years now, but getting older I'm less inclined to do much editing, although I've been using the various Wikipedias and their Wiktionairies (English, German, Netherlands, Plattdeutsch, and other Germanic languages. I had occasion today to take issue with an article in the English Misplaced Pages ("German Dialects") which I considered to be basically an unreferenced article full of unsubstantiated personal points of view, and I took to inserting tags throughout.
When I logged into Misplaced Pages to start my editing session on the article I was flagged with a "message waiting" alert which, as it turned out, related to a deletion request for an article (Richard Bussmeyer) that I had originated back when I was doing research on the U.S. Federal Labor Standards Act regarding the federal and state minimum wage statutes, minimum wage exceptions for tipped employees, the "tip wage credit" afforded to employers of tipped employees, and the U.S. practice of 'tipping'. And it was through developing and writing a rather extensive and complex article for Misplaced Pages that I came to know about Richard Bussmeyer and his anti-tipping crusade. And it was in through that article that I met with Bussmeyer's (deceased) family members, who graciously gave me family papers and other research material that helped me write my Misplaced Pages article. I published that article, which included data and statistics on the various minimum wage practices in all U.S. states and possessions of employers who employed tipped employees. The statistical complexities of the article overwhelmed me, and a few months after I uploaded it to Misplaced Pages, I asked that it be withdrawn. However, I had also written an article about Bussemyer, since he was a leader in the U.S. of the "anti-tipping" movement, a movement in which he wasn't alone in the U.S. That article, and a Wiktionary entry I wrote defining the term "tip wage credit" used in our Fair Labor Standards Act are all that remain of my many, many, months of research and writing about minimum wage statutes and the various tip wage credits granted in the various states.
Since I had been doing many other things (like recovering from a heart attack and resultant emergency triple by-pass surgery) I hadn't/haven't been accessing my Talk page on Misplaced Pages, so I was unaware that my Bussemyer article had been put up for deletion, and had been subsequently deleted for Bussemyer "not being an important person". Which I certainly dispute.
So, my question to you now is, how do I go about appealing the decision to delete my article? I've 'read' the appeal procedure, but being that I'm approaching 80 years of age the words don't register as well as they used to. Any advice or help you can give me will certainly be appreciated. I hate to think of all those months of work researching and writing going down the drain. Thanks. K. Kellogg-Smith (talk) 06:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

It might be possible to have the article undeleted, yes. The problem was that it lacked evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources, see WP:GNG and WP:RS for details. Basically, what we'd need to see to restore the article is evidence that books, magazines, or newspapers have published detailed coverage of him. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

One of the major political issues/controversies in the United States today is our federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a Great Depression-era Act enacted by our Congress in 1938 which not only eliminated the evils of child labor, but also established what in those days was considered a fair and livable minimum wage. Busemeyer was an ardent, prolific writer of the "Letters to the Editor" sections of both his hometown (Cincinatti, Ohio) and his away-from-home city in Tampa, Florida. His principal goal was the elimination of the aristocratic practice (which we inherited from the English, of course) of 'tipping' servants, underlings, and other so-called 'inferior' classes of workers. Employers of 'tipped' employees under our FLSA statute are allowed to pay only half the otherwise mandatory minimum wage, the employees theoretically making up the other half on their own, out of the tips they receive.

Busemeyer's "crusade" was that all employees should receive the full FLSA-required minimum wage, regardless of the value of the tips they receive. His point? That all workers should receive a livable minimum wage. And since 75% of all restaurant and food service workers are women -- a great many of them single mothers -- a livable minimum wage is vitally important to them. And with this in mind the point Busemeyer made during his lifetime, and as an employer himself, that all workers should be paid a minimum wage upon which they can decently live. That was his purpose in establishing W.A.N.T. To get tipped employees to appeal to their employers to pay them a living wage so they wouldn't have to rely on the variable of 'tips' to supplement their daily wages.

So Busemeyer was a whole lot more than just "a nice man" as you -- far removed from our culture, our laws, and our President and his Democratic party's drive to insure that all U.S. workers, no matter their class or status in life -- receive a livable wage. In other words, Busemeyer wanted everyone he preached to through his own work and his W.A.N.T organization to help tipped employees receive "a fair day's pay for a fair day's work". And so he was clearly and definitely an American ahead of his time.

I have been a Misplaced Pages editor, contributor, and even a one-time administrator (for the tpi.Misplaced Pages and wiktionary)for many years now; accordingly I went to great lengths to write a good bio about Busemeyer and his work to help tipped employees receive a livable minimum wage from their employers -- which suddenly becoming a very contemporary idea in America today. Yes, Richard Busemeyer was definitely an American ahead of his time. And so I deeply resent some off-the-wall users declaring that my bio article isn't "suitable" for Misplaced Pages simply because in their head Busemeyer isn't a known celebrity or otherwise a "notable". No, there hasn't been any books (that I know of) about or in which Busemeyer and his work have been described. Neither has there been magazines (again, that I know of) featuring Busemeyer and his work. But there are Ohio and Florida newspaper articles about him and his work. K. Kellogg-Smith (talk) 16:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, your best bet to get this restored would be to find newspaper articles about him and cite them in a draft version of the article to demonstrate his notability. I've moved the deleted version of the article to your userspace so you can work on it, it's at User:K. Kellogg-Smith/Richard A. Busemeyer now. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Fairfield High School (Fairfield, Ohio)

Hello, Mark. I thought I should let you know that I have removed the semi-protection you placed on Fairfield High School (Fairfield, Ohio), as I think an IP range block is a much better way of dealing with the problem. The only disruptive editing in the last two months has been from two very closely related IP addresses, which both turn out to be from the same university, so it is easy to block the disruptive editor without preventing other IP or unconfirmed editors from editing. Also, there has been no constructive editing from a range covering those two IP addresses over that period, so there is very unlikely to be any collateral damage. Please let me know if you think I am wrong. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

No, that's fine if a rangeblock works, I overlooked the idea of a rangeblock for some reason when I was looking at it. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

More 089baby socks

Hello Mark. After about a month of inactivity, he's back. It seems semi-protecting some of his favourite articles really helped. Thank you for that. Anyways, ‎Kimlayuth (talk · contribs) has created new versions of Um Vichet and Thierry Bin (under different titles to get around salting). Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, you probably want to reopen the SPI just so we have the paperwork in place. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:AN/I - Proposed ban - FanforClarl

Hiya, well, it pains me to say it, because I never wanted to give this kid extra negative attention, but I am proposing a community ban of sockjobber FanforClarl. Details at Misplaced Pages:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents#Ban proposal - FanforClarl. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:06, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, sounds like a good idea to me. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Post not in good faith on 69.17.128.254's talk page regarding you

Hello, I want to inform you that on the anonymous editor's talk page there is a post, about you , that is not in good faith. As a courtesy post, I didn't change it and decided to send it to you for your handling, being that it's solely about you and somewhat of a personal attack. Best of luck to you! ChaseAm (talk) 19:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, not a big deal. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:13, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Nottingham Thieves

I think deleting this page was a mistake; it was a pretty detailed page that someone had obviously spent a lot of time on; and plenty of amateur baseball teams have wiki pages and satisfy GNG:

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/Southampton_Mustangs_Baseball_Club see: https://en.wikipedia.org/London_Mets see: https://en.wikipedia.org/Croydon_Pirates see: https://en.wikipedia.org/Durham_Bishops_Baseball_Team see: https://en.wikipedia.org/Richmond_Flames and many others.

Can you reinstate, because deleting this was a serious error of judgement.

Thanks Py0alb (talk) 22:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

As it was deleted via WP:PROD it can be undeleted upon request, yes. You'll have to re-add links to the article on relevant pages though. Note though that it could still be nominated for deletion in the future. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, your professionalism is much appreciated. Py0alb (talk) 10:34, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Bethany Hamilton

My edit was updating Bethany Hamilton's personnel life.Ny Friend In hawaii lives a couple blocks down fom her so I know what I am talking about

I reverted your edit because you removed the picture of her from the article. You're free to update the article, but please leave the picture there unless you have a good reason for removing it. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Mass Daily Collegian

Hey Mark, I was wondering if you would be able to undelete The Massachusetts Daily Collegian page (or at least turn it into a redirect, which it should be anyways), as I was never notified of its PROD, and I would like to improve it beyond what was there (i.e. cite it being the largest college daily in New England]]. Also, I just created a disambiguation page before I noticed that you moved the Penn State one, so feel free to undelete that if you decide not to undelete the above page. Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored the article. I'll let User:RHaworth know as well. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:08, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Anon IP you blocked in the past is back

See User_talk:164.116.47.180#February_2014 Mattnad (talk) 20:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've blocked him. You can report cases like this to WP:AIV in the future though. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Serbian elections

Hi, Mark! Sorry for bothering, but there is a problem which maybe you can help to resolve. There is an user (ElectPartei) who change election results on articles about Serbian elections with his wrong, unsourced data. First he did it on Serbian parliamentary election, 2014, and now he's doing that on some other articles - look at his contributions . I definitely don't want to see this escalating into an edit war, so I hope you'll be able to help to put an end to this. Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 20:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, I haven't looked in much detail, but you might want to report him to WP:AN3 if he's edit warring. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:04, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

It seems he's edit warring, he's very persistent and I think he'll continue the next time when he log in... I really don't have too much experience with reporting, so would you be willing to help with that? --Sundostund (talk) 00:09, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, if you have WP:Twinkle installed, you can do it somewhat automatically. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:11, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't have Twinkle, and I thought it would be better if someone with more experience do the reporting stuff. I'm really concentrated on editing here, and I really rarely go to ANI, AN3 and such places. --Sundostund (talk) 00:17, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Anyway, I hope you'll be able to somehow help here. I try to avoid edit wars as much as I can, and I'm pretty sure this guy will continue as usual when he's back... --Sundostund (talk) 01:05, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Problems with Template:Infobox military installation...

Mark,

Back in October, you protected the Template:Infobox military installation page, preventing most editors from editing it, including myself. The template is playing up, and is affecting quite a wide range of articles. I've left a message on the page, but as the protecting administrator, could you drop by and take a look? Many thanks, Hchc2009 (talk) 08:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Which section do you want me to comment on? Also, you might qualify for template editor as well. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

It's since been fixed by someone with the right user privileges. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:33, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Mufaddal Saifuddin

Hi Mark, could you consider giving Mufaddal Saifuddin full protection? There appears to be a nasty succession dispute going on in India right now, and there has been extensive edit warring to promote Saifuddin as the rightful Da'i al-Mutlaq. I've already got too many reverts to do it. (1, 2, if you need more context) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:02, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

• Never mind, protected by Callanecc until the 20th. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, unlike me Callanecc doesn't sleep :) Mark Arsten (talk) 16:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

• I figured you were sleeping :p But you never know... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:05, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I stayed up late enough to watch some of the first Olympic events live, but then I had to turn in. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

• No worries. At least you're getting the Olympics. Me? I woke up to find Kelud decided to spew ash all the way over here. That kinda puts the Wiki-squabbles into perspective... what if I were one of the people in Kediri? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:55, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Wow, all we have here is a ton of snow. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

• And a heck of a lot of it, I'm hearing. Of course, some wise-crackers decided to post pictures of the ash with the caption "Winter wonderland". Sigh. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Wow, beautiful picture. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit-warring on templates

Per WP:BRD and consolidated discussion here, can you please watch contribs list and edits to multiple animal breed navboxes that this user is edit-warring about? There is no consensus for the changes he is proposing, and IMHO he is editing against consensus. In particular, please consider protection of (preferably my or Justlettersandnumbers - whichever one of us has the most recent edit) the most "stable" and consensus versions of Template:Horse breeds of Italy and Template:Horse breeds of France and Template:Horse breeds of Germany would be welcomed. In particular, protection of the larger version of Template:National members of the International Federation for Equestrian Sports is particularly needed, as WP:NOTRED indicates that redlinks are acceptable where the Navbox requires a complete set, as there, where all member nations are included, but most have yet to have articles. Montanabw 20:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've commented there. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Replacing a redirect with an article

Hey, Mark. I wanted to write a couple of articles that are currently redirects. Do they need to be deleted before, or can I just change the code as I did at "I Don't Live Today"? GabeMc 21:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

You can just replace them like you did at I Don't Live Today. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:55, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Mark. GabeMc 22:09, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

OpenSXCE disappeared - how to resurrect it

Hey Mark, I read a surprising comment about OpenSXCE "software (linux distribution) article of unclear notability, lacking independent references".

OpenSXCE was never a Linux distribution. I suspect I may have contributed to the wikipedia article in the past, at some level, and I was getting ready to re-contribute to the article again (since a new release was pending) - when I found OpenSXCE deleted.

OpenSXCE is not Linux based, but is based upon forked Open Sourced Solaris source code released by Sun Microsystems, but re-closed by Oracle. Linux and OpenSXCE have disjoint licensing criteria, meaning the kernel software is illegal to mix. The OpenSXCE's roots are pre-Linux, with decades of history. There was a rename & rebranding from MarTux to OpenSXCE, which may have caused some confusion.

Notability: There was a variety of OpenSolaris splinter distributions, one splinter is the basis of one of Gartner Magic Quadrant for cloud providers. OpenSXCE is the only current Open Source splinter that runs under SPARC architecture. SPARC architecture is a unique open CPU architecture supported by multiple vendors, currently the fastest CPU architecture on the market today, running the fastest non-clustered machines in the market today, and recently powered the fastest super-computer in the world for nearly 12 months running. OpenSXCE marks one of 3 currently supported OS's (Oracle Solaris, Fujitsu Linux, open source OpenSXCE) which runs under SPARC systems. OpenSXCE is the only Open Source OS today, running under this Open Architecture, which is not supported a by commercial vendor. OpenSXCE releases had been reviewed by multiple technical web sites in the past.

I have been in the computing profession for over a quarter century, an expert in some areas, a novice in others. While I do not contribute to this Open Source project, I am very aware of it's unique value in Open Source, open CPU Architectures and High-End systems. I don't have a lot of spare time, but make some when something notable appears. I am not an expert in Misplaced Pages markup, but have contributed for some time. I really don't have the time to be re-creating articles of significance, but it is significant enough that I am willing to re-create this page.

What is the process to resurrected the old page, or would I need to re-create a new page? DavidHalko (talk) 23:50, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, basically, what we need is evidence that this has received coverage by media sources. See WP:GNG for details. Reviews of it would be helpful as long as they're in what's considered reliable sources, see WP:RS for details. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Urgent

Could you please have a look at this → - thank you. --IIIraute (talk) 02:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

...that was fast - thank you! --IIIraute (talk) 02:23, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem, let me know if there are any more issues. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Michael Jackson's health and appearance article

Mark, would it be okay if you semi-protected this article...indefinitely? For a long time now, it's been subject to sockpuppets having their inappropriate way at the article. See, for example, what I stated at User talk:Historyhorror#Alternate/sock account (permanent link to that). The article being accessible to IPs, editing-wise, has continually enabled editors to log out and WP:Disrupt as IPs without tying the IPs to their registered Misplaced Pages account(s). WP:Pending changes will not help in this case. Flyer22 (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, well, I'll start out with three months of semi-protection and then we can work from there. I don't like to jump right to indef except in rare cases. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, good sir. I already clearly ticked off an IP with the WP:Semi-protection; see this on my talk page. Off to reply. Flyer22 (talk) 21:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	{} Yintan3 (talk) 16:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Kudos

Just want to say: I see your name a lot when it comes to blocking vandals and protecting pages, and I wanted to thank you for your diligence, your availability and for just being there for the responsible editors. Thank you, Mark! --Tenebrae (talk) 00:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

You're very welcome! Mark Arsten (talk) 00:49, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

2011 Turkish sports corruption scandal article

Hi, you have given semi-protection to this article on the grounds that there were lots of vandalisms about it but did you know that those vandalisms started when LardoBalsamico's first request was denied on the grounds that both me and him were autoconfirmed users and also there weren't enouh vandalisms to fully protect it? Is it just a coincidince or have I delved into conspricay theories too much these days? :) Before his request denied yes there were some attacks to the article but no such writings as (No1 can judge Fenerbahce!...etc). All jokes aside, Iknow it is not fully protected yet but after 1 week who says there won't be anymore attacks? If the article stays this way it will definetly lack a neutral point of view. I made my case to the dispute resolution board yesterday after those attacks and my case was denied because I have alrady appiled to neutural point of view noticeboard as well. I wrote my case there in a summarized way which will help you understand my situation:

This article lacks a neutral point of view, I have already made my cae to the neutral point of view noticeboard (https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) 10 days ago but today, things became really frustrating for me. Some IP adressed users are attacking the article using my edits, I know it is not the right way to do things but the reason for that is they finally found a voice in wikipedia. You can see all the reasons for my edits from one of the inolved users talk page;(https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:LardoBalsamico#2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) which really sumarizes my siutation. I can understand the users attacking but don't accept their ways. As you can see from here (https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:93.115.94.149#About_2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) I have did the best I can to calm the situation.

Hope you can see where I am coming from, thanks for your time and understanding.Rivaner (talk) 08:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, I suppose anything is possible. Let me know how the situation progresses. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:19, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

chia pet

unprotect chia pet — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.80.58 (talk) 10:40, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Given the unusually persistent trolling there, I don't think that's such a great idea. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Editing history

Hi Mark. The San Diego groupie wannabe is at it again. Maybe a semi-protection of the archive is in order. Should we block the IPs on sight, or do you prefer a different approach? Favonian (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've semi-protected the archives of my talk page. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:DENY

Does WP:DENY allow you to revert any and all edits made by confirmed socks? GabeMc 00:54, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, basically. WP:EVADE spells it out exactly, but the long-and-short of it is that you're allowed to roll back contributions made in defiance of a block. If an editor in good standing wants to re-add the blocked user's changes though they're free to do so if the changes in question are unproblematic. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Also, one never has to revert the edits of a sock. There was one particularly tricky sockmaster who used to create good hand and bad hand sock accounts, so he'd vandalize with one sock and revert the vandalism with another, then make it clear that the reverting account was a sock. Then people would mass rollback the edits of that sock, inadvertently restoring the vandalism from one of his other accounts. He seems to have taken the past month off though. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Interesting. Now I assume you are talking about confirmed socks, right? I can't just revert a suspected sock, can I? GabeMc 01:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, there are a number of cases where sockpuppetry is blatant enough that we can block and roll back without checkuser confirmation. However, in cases where one party suspects sockpuppetry but others are unconvinced, rolling back contribs can be very controversial. In fact, there's currently an Arbcom case request that was sparked by this kind of thing. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, If you have a minute

Can you take a look at ]. The time posted and contributions today paint a convincing tale. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:12, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try to take a look at it soon. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Request to userfy the page

Hello, I'm a student and I have a problem. About one month ago, I created a page named Mackinac Financial Corporation, but it had been deleted because the company does not assert notability. But this company is my homework and my teacher requires me to create this company. I know you are very busy as an admin, but would you please userfy the page? I can also learn from it. Thank you! ReganChai(ReganChai) 01:58, 16 February (UTC)

Ok, I've userfied it to User:ReganChai/Mackinac Financial Corporation. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:06, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! And I have found the page BBCN Bancorp and Annapolis Bancorp had been deleted for the same reason. Could you please help me userfy the pages? Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReganChai (talk • contribs) 09:19, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I have given the user some advice on my talk page. T DGG ( talk ) 21:51, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

@ReganChai: The other two were deleted via WP:PROD, so they can be restored to mainspace upon request. But they could still be deleted again. Would you like me to userfy them or just restore them outright? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:46, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		This is for all of the hard work you do, especially deleting files and protecting pages! Your work is much appreciated! Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 02:31, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome, glad to help. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for locking the UFC Fight Night page tonight. It was getting crazy. Udar55 (talk) 03:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:05, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

A moment

Liezl van Zyl does not exist. Please remove the athlete page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stolarzz (talk • contribs) 04:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

You can propose the article for deletion using the steps outlined at WP:PROD if you feel that it should be deleted. Mark Arsten (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

More IPs

Hi Mark. Regarding the Orthodox Presbyterian Church article problems and WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mg3942/Archive. I didn't find out about the investigation until it was closed. I had some notes and observations, that may yet be helpful.

• In this chunk of edit history near the bottom, I was IP 172.129.34.141 then, and I reverted numerous CN-tag bombing runs all at once, and was reverted by IP 207.207.28.212 about 44 minutes later, and User:Denisarona reverted that IP, and back and forth for awhile and then IP 64.9.130.175 took over with 4 reverts before an admin semi-protected the page for 3 days. My edit summary referenced the talk page hidden {{anchor}} #cite-this. Note that IP 64.9.130.175, back in 24 July 2012, made an edit, and the IP signature was changed to User:ApoGnosis a previous sockpuppet Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/Maxviwe/Archive. Also, before my edit that nuked the excess CNs, I had an edit conflict with IP 207.207.28.212's 14:12 2 February 2014 edit in the Doctrine section, which was followed by a minor correction by User:Denisarona, so I allowed that edit to remain with my edit. Later on during talk page discussions, when I offered to remove that unsourced IP addition, surprise! User:Mg3942 defended it]. Strange.
• Note that Mg3942's first edit was on the talk page of the admin that semi-protected the article for 3 days, which kept that newly formed account from editing it. One IP 209.99.2.229 talk page edit was refactored by User:Mg3942, taking ownership of the signature, but was followed by a self-revert back to the IP signature. After a 10:44 3 February edit, Mg3942 apparently logged out to become 209.99.2.229 two minutes later, blanking a section that included an IP 207.207.28.170 edit that responded to a couple of December edits. I reverted it. I was also the editor that put welcome messages on those two user's talk pages. Since Mg3942 has been blocked, among the IP users still editing the article was IP 209.99.57.226 which is in the same range as the IP number Mg3942 signed for. The one thing all these IP numbers (except mine) apparently have in common is Yhc Corporation.
• With all the page locks, I have been unable to participate further, and now my time's up – I have to move on to other things. With the talk page locked, the {{edit semi-protected}} didn't work, since the lock did not allow an edit window to type the request. (Duh) The claims that older sections or paragraphs of the article are unreferenced is bogus. Most of the material in the page was added before there was a strict requirement for inline citations, and is based on General References, (still allowed as a reference system) which are in the mis-named "Further reading" section, which needs to be renamed Bibliography.
• That's it. Thank you for your time and consideration of these things. ...172.162.77.52 (talk) 07:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I protected the page since I was reasonably sure he had been editing via IPs as well. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your level1 message to IP address 82.15.15.5

I noticed your reversion of vandalism on Tamar.com here and the edit summary of this user who has a long history of vandalism and disruption (on my watchlist). Due to DavidLeighEllis's recent message to the talk page of 82.15.15.5 "Welcome remove mistaken warnings" you probably wouldn't have known it should have been a level-4 or block due to 2013 warnings which have been blanked by the user, and the 2014 warnings masked by DavidLeighEllis.

It's probably easier for you to read the message I sent to the talk page of DavidLeighEllis. Thanks,--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 14:19, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the note. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:01, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Deleted image of government-issued document

I saw at File:New Jersey Dry Town Listing.pdf that you deleted the page with an edit summary stating "File deleted: F5: Orphaned non-free use Misplaced Pages files". However, Special:WhatLinksHere/File:New_Jersey_Dry_Town_Listing.pdf shows that there are dozens of articles making use of the file. I'm not sure why this cycle of deletions and restorations is necessary, but the file provided by the State of New Jersey does provide a clear purpose in supporting the details regarding these municipalities. Is there anything that can be done to prevent further deletions of this image? Alansohn (talk) 15:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, here's the issue: is this a free image or is it fair use/copyrighted? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I understand the issue, but I have no idea of the status of the image; The image is not available and any details of its provenance have been deleted. From what I recall from when I saw it, it was a copy of a faxed document from the State of New Jersey listing municipalities that don't allow the sale of alcohol in their boundaries. As a copy of a copy of an official document, I'm not sure what the potential copyright issue would be, if any, but the one thing I'm certain about is that the edit summary from the most recent deletion stated that the image was orphaned, and there were about 40 documents referencing the file at that time. Even after adjusting the references to take the link away, WP:F5 still does not apply as it isn't an orphaned image, as can readily be verified at Special:WhatLinksHere/File:New_Jersey_Dry_Town_Listing.pdf. I would like to request undeletion of the file and I will be happy to reinsert into the 37 articles where it would most appropriately document the current dry status of these places using an official government document. Alansohn (talk) 16:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I believe the standard practice when citing copyrighted documents isn't to upload them like that. Generally when citing copyrighted documents we link to them when we can or just provide citation information. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:42, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I know about standard practice. Nothing would make me happier to be able to point to a document with a date, title, source and (most of all) an html link. But I don't have that and right now the information is simply unverifiable from any current source. I have been through the web sites of the State of New Jersey on dozens of occasions and I've found absolutely nothing. Another editor obtained the document and the image uploaded is a copy of this document. I'm not sure what the issue is nor do I believe there is an issue, but I do know for sure that a deletion under WP:F5 is completely unjustifiable as it still isn't an orphaned image. Next time I bump into Governor Christie I will ask for his assistance on providing a public document to support the details of the state's dry municipalities, but right now he seems preoccupied with other issues. I will continue to search for an alternative source but until then I respectfully request that the image be undeleted as WP:F5 simply does not apply here. Alansohn (talk) 04:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually, I think the information can be sourced from other documents. Here is one reliable source that lists the dry towns of New Jersey. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:34, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Not only have I seen the source you mention, but I've added it to about 35 articles to supplement the source you deleted. The problem is that it's about seven years old and has rather clearly become obsolete based on subsequent events. Neither Moorestown, New Jersey nor Stratford, New Jersey are dry, two examples off the top of my head of places listed in the article that are dead wrong as of today, and with some more time I could spot the other errors. The source provided by the State of New Jersey is both the official source and the most current list, providing details regarding the most recent dry status of each place along with relevant additional information not available in the article. Again, your deletion is based on a claim that is factually incorrect and does not meet the standards established for WP:F5. What needs to be done to deal with the issue once and for all? Alansohn (talk) 05:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, I'll check over the NFCC rules again tomorrow. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Nature Physics

What are you talking about? This is the first time I visit the Nature Physics page. All other people here are not interested in physics at all! Are you trying to do something bad to internet? J — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.89.90.161 (talk) 20:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow you here. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Care Bears vandal returns

Mark, I'm currently undoing the last of the recent edits by the variable IP, now 174.91.9.135, who has visited a number of the usual pages to insert untrue information. If you could do your usual block of him at this account, that would be great. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Care Bears vandal? LOL, that got a chuckle out of me. People will vandalize anything, won't they? Flyer22 (talk) 21:25, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, this place attracts all types :) Mark Arsten (talk) 21:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

This guy's pretty persistent, too. Been making these edits for over two months now. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:07, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Helix Fossil

Please undelete helix fossil article immediately

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Use HELIX FOSSIL ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

I feel like I'm missing some kind of joke here.... Mark Arsten (talk) 00:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Why would you silence the talk page. Misplaced Pages is a democracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1:C180:A0F:3487:E73A:D7E9:A118 (talk) 00:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Might want to check your source on that one. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hey you nerd undelete helix fossil — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1:C180:A0F:3487:E73A:D7E9:A118 (talk) 01:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

It's a gaming marathon where over 80k people attempt to play the same game of pokemon, one of the things that keeps happening is "Use Helix Fossil" and for some reason somebody made a wikipedia article on it, since you removed it, they are posting on your talk page. Be prepared for more spam. 99.224.122.144 (talk) 01:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, Ok, thanks for the explanation. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually, everyone (80k people) attempts to control a one-game of Pokemon using the Twitch.tv streaming service, you can see it here: http://www.twitch.tv/twitchplayspokemon, but I rather be more vigilent on the Pokemon articles and such. The 'jokes' has spreaded a bit too far... 72.50.69.161 (talk) 01:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Interesting, I'll check it out. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mark (forgive me if I'm using the talk system incorrectly). Could I ask why you've removed the Helix Fossil article? Pop culture references have regularly been approved on Misplaced Pages - indeed, there is a category for Internet memes - and the article was approved by another staff member shortly after creation. Helixfossilcurator (talk) 01:18, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I deleted it because it didn't make a credible claim of real-world significance. Merely being a video-game reference used by people online isn't enough to justify an article. See Misplaced Pages:Notability for more details. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:21, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mark, I don't use the Misplaced Pages system so I cry your pardon for any mistakes I make in my attempt to respond to this post. I request that you undo your deletion the Helix Fossil page. It is not vandalism (as you stated when you took it down). It is an attempt to describe an emerging religion. The page might need a lot of editing to accurately describe the beliefs of the thousands of people who already subscribe to this religion (source: Facebook group page "Praise the Helix Fossil"). Your opinion of the validity of this religion or the lack of competent articulation on the part of its followers does not mean you have the authority to deny them a Misplaced Pages page on one of the main components of their pantheon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.125.41.87 (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure it's a real religion? It seems more like a joke/hoax to me, which is why I deleted the articles in question. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Tightly wound helixes cannot receive His Noodly Appendage. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I suppose not... Well, I've redirected them all to Twitch Plays Pokémon for now. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Quick page deletion

Hey Mark. Could you delete Talk:Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D./Archive 2 please? I recently set up archiving for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., and forgot to change the counter from where I copied the code, so the first pass went to archive 2 instead of 1. I manually moved the content over to 1 and changed the counter, and this won't be needed yet, and just want to make sure it won't mess the bot up. If it has to stay that's fine, but just felt it wasn't really needed. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem, that was easy enough :) Mark Arsten (talk) 05:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

User talk:88.104.19.233

Oops--haha, I thought I had blocked them, which tells you that I need to check my blood sugar. I just, ahem, well, sort of unblocked them, since they're engaged in civil conversation and all, and I thought I'd to them a friendly turn by undoing what I though was my own block. Which it wasn't, of course. So, I totally undid your block (which was about to run out...) without asking you, and I'm blathering on cause I'm mildly embarrassed. Sorry Mark--feel free to trout me or whatever, or reblock the IP if you like. Drmies (talk) 03:31, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem with the unblock, it seems like he's lost his desire to continue the edit war so that's fine. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:51, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm still puzzled about how this very, very elementary thing escaped me. later, Drmies (talk) 17:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

The Amazing Race 24

I'm not sure if a month's protection is the best idea. The season does begin this Sunday and editors like to update it live (or they did when I was living in the US).—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 05:23, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

What do you suggest for a protection duration? My worry is that we'll be in the same situation again if we shorten it too much. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Well I'm pretty sure that the issue with the sockpuppets is going to end now that he's run out of IPs tethered to his phone to harass from and he's resorted to a residential connection. A month just seems too much. Maybe 2 weeks is enough.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 06:23, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've shortened it to two weeks. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

SPI case: Folgertat

Hi Mark Arsten, I see that you're an SPI Clerk, so could you take a look at Folgertat's case? The case is the second oldest case and it was opened on 10 February. I think you Clerks missed the case because CheckUser DoRD edited the case, but it was only to revert vandalism. Thank you! starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 09:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, it might be helpful to add some diffs to the SPI and explain in more detail why you think the accounts are being controlled by the same person, rather than being individuals who had the same topic watchlisted etc. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I posted my elaboration in the case itself. I didn't analyse diffs though, but I still believe I have a compelling argument based on the situation. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 12:46, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Long term rolling back of Feylis article / Copyright Infringement / Possible Sockpuppetry

I am relatively new, I do not know exactly were to report this, because it is a mixed bag? I hope you can help or refer it elsewhere (you have dealth with the problematic Article before).

Possible sockpuppetry: User 5.237.128.179 (today, Feb 18th, 2014 at 09:55) may be sockpuppet of User علی ساکی لرستانی (see: Feylis article history). Reason: the edit made by the IP is identical to the edits usually made by the arab User (rolling back) whom IMHO is the real culprit).

Arab User: Persistent rolling back article changes to a version he prefers. Does however not seek the Talk Page of Feyli very often to motivate his choice and to actually wait for a while and seek consensus, which there obviously is not (given the fact that HE gets rolled back too, but by different users). ArabUser just keeps on rolling back to his favourite version, already since at least October 23rd 2013 (!). Checking his User page it seems that hardly anyone actually warned him even though the Feyli article page has been protected for a short while after October 2013 (by you). His contribs show an unhealthy obsession for this single WP article.

His original contribution seems to be the October 23rd version, time 12:30 which was rolled back to since then many times, containing copyrighted material just copy/pasted from the Encyclopedia Iranica, that is, http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/feyli--2 . This page clearly says it owns the copyright, and since I do not see any license on the wiki page of Feyli, I presume this is infringement (so this copyrighted material is on WP on and off since (at least) October 23, 2013.

I have rolled back using my IP (not my account name, you never know) Feyli today (18th Feb) at 13:28. Therefore, I have not listed the Article at the copyright problem page, because it looks like a clear cut case of copy/pasting from an external copyright protected source. I am more worried about another rollback again by ArabUser or a sockpuppet today or tomorrow. I left a note at the Talk Page, and at ArabUser's TalkPage regarding the copyright.

Summary: Continuous rolling back of Feyli article version that may not only be politically motivated but contains material that is copyrighted elsewhere (not a WP mirror methinks), over and over since at least October, perhaps also using sockpuppets for his/her purposes. Please block user and/or IPs and/or protect Feyli WP Page for a while, if applicable in your opinion.

PS content background: The main issue seems to be, the anthropological question whether or not the Feyli people are Kurdish or not. ArabUser insists they are Lurs (= apparently not Kurdish), and will not accept an article version were they are referred to as Kurds. To me, from a bit of googling, it seems that “Feyli Kurds” really do exist (6 million wil do) and is quite a normal term for these people, at least in the English language and this is an English language WP. Even if the world is wrong and ArabUser is correct, he still should write something in the article as “However, according to ABC the Feyli are not Kurds but Lurs” + citation(s). Now that would (perhaps) improve the article, but not this continuous rolling back. Thanks! 2003:4B:2F61:A523:4CD4:4487:965D:F0C0 (talk) 14:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Added at 14:34 And yes, it's rolled back already again! This time by 5.237.145.121 at 14:07, perhaps another sockpuppet .... 2003:4B:2F23:5A60:60E5:3652:E198:BE28 (talk) 14:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, sorry for the late response, I haven't gotten to look into this in much detail yet. It seems like the edit warring is continuing, so I've protected the article for now to stop it. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi well yeah sorry for elaborating a bit too much perhaps. Anyway, the most important thing for now is that the copyrighted materials are not in the current article anymore, and we will see how it develops after the cooling off period in the next few days. Cheers. Poepkop (talk) 19:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Hello Mark, I wonder if I can ask for your advice/action? I have reverted some unsourced information on the American Airlines page twice, whilst asking for IP editor(s?) to give sources/references. Each time my revision has been reverted to the unsourced information without explanation. I will not get into a edit war, but what appears to be the same anonymous editor in giving no reasons/sources for their actions. Regards, David David J Johnson (talk) 14:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm maybe if you post on the article's talk page more people interested in the topic will get involved? That way it isn't just you and the IP over and over again. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, regards, David J Johnson (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Another IP continues to add information without any sources as per WP:VERIFY. Requested protection on that article and left messages at their talk page. Rzxz1980 (talk) 16:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, looks like it's been protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Joelle O'Reilly-Hyland

You speedied Joelle O'Reilly-Hyland G5, but I can't find an SPI for this. You might be interested in Joelle O'Reilly-Hyland GIVES, and Joelle Wyser-Pratte to which it links (piped as Joelle O'Reilly-Hyland). Thanks, Ruby Murray 14:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

The SPI was Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Aviation geek and the creator was Mister321 (talk · contribs). That was an odd case though, if memory serves. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

-TheGeneralUser (talk) 17:55, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Got it and replied. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I've replied. -TheGeneralUser (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for edit warring?

Is the block reason for this editor correct? The reason why I'm asking is that I thought I was reverting vandalism by undoing his repeated breakage of the template and don't want to be breaking WP:3RR if he starts up again. --NeilN 20:34, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

No, I guess my block rationale wasn't correct. I've fixed it now. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:43, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything. And if anyone hasn't told you lately, your efforts at AIV and RFPP are appreciated. --NeilN 20:47, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome, glad to help. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

We are ACTUALLY talking about an editor

who is rolling about in verbal filth like "fucking" and clear shortages for "for fuck's sake" here. He is extremely abusive, and all he says is "Not Censored". And those who who respond, like me, in a much less explicit way to him, get warnings from you, rather than that you fulfill your responsibility, and take a thorough check of how this user constantly edit wars, is abusive towards others, frightening others away with his coarse, uncouth language etc. That's the real shame here.Arildnordby (talk) 21:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

• Not the same thing. If you think that "for fuck's sake" equates to what you said, you need a lesson in cussing. Drmies (talk) 21:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Obviously, too many administrators on Misplaced Pages have too soft a spot for a consistently abusive editor, with MANY justified complaints against him. He gets off, all the time, nobody bothering to check his history of abuse.Arildnordby (talk) 21:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you think that, since the editor in question has been blocked several times recently. But anyway, if you find another editor's behavior "uncouth", there are much better ways to deal with it than slinging insults back at him. I'm not the type to give out civility blocks, but there are 1400 other admins here and I can't guarantee that none of them will block you if you do that again. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Since the admins overmild 24-hour blocks never works on this user, you might try a month blocking, for a change? And then indefinite if he doesn't behave? But oh, no, even with multiple blocks against him evidenced will the admin team ever try something harsher.. (and no, that particular insult I gave was a wholly specified one, against an editor who actually deserved it, on basis of his history, and persistent refusal to learn anything from previous complaints. And it won't happen again from me, not even against him. But, I can't vouch for other editors deeply frustrated over the manifest bias and protection policy the admin team shows against some editors, who abuse their position, time after time again.Arildnordby (talk) 21:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

If there are problems with Ryulong's editing, incivility is not the biggest one. You know what's tiresome? This eternal nonsense about "the admin team" as if we're all the same. We're not. "Soft"? You try walking this line between blocking and not-blocking: whatever one decides it's wrong, in a "behavioral" case like this. Build a better case, without yammering and without disgusting insults. Try an RfC/U. Play by the rules, or don't complain about someone who you say doesn't. End of rant: carry on, Mark! Drmies (talk) 23:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Blah-blah, look at the users HISTORY fhs!! (and I am an atheist) He is consistently abusive, and in an "anarchic" setting like Misplaced Pages, it is enough that two of the admi team oppose scrutiny, the other 1398 don't care a bit, anywaysArildnordby (talk) 23:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Just because only two admins have directly responded to you regarding your complaint does not mean that many more haven't reviewed the situation and found your evidence for misconduct requiring a block lacking. If you are not getting the response you are expecting it's likely that your expectations are out-of-line with current admin policy or practice. The RFC/U suggested by Drmies is a good place to start if you plan on pursuing sanctions - flinging accusations and busting out ALL CAPS won't bring you any relief. --Jezebel'sPonyo 23:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

So, 1397 don't carem rather than 1398?= Who cares about your cozy littly coven protecting your own? Ryolung is a consistently abusive editor; that's why various admins have blocked him several times. Time to step up from silly, provedly ineffective 24-hour bans?Arildnordby (talk) 23:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, my Official Cabal carrier pigeon just arrived with the super secret encoded instructions to go to Mark Arsten's talk page to expressly deny your request to block an editor for an extended period despite the lack of concrete evidence to do so. (If you think this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the accusations your have been making). It's not a conspiracy that admins have not jumped into action based on your demands that we do so. Present your evidence in a relevant venue and prove an ongoing level of disruption requiring a long block that does not fly in the face of WP:PUNISH. You will not receive your pound of flesh today.--Jezebel'sPonyo 00:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. And if anyone wants to put these admins to work, saying "blah-blah" to their carefully calibrated, beautifully crafted, and diplomatically balanced comments is not the way to go. Drmies (talk) 02:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

File:OneDrive logo.svg

Thanks for the note, Mark. I'm not really a party to any issue about this file, except through curiosity. The only point of my comment on the file's talk page was that when (presumably) someone wants to use that image I guess they won't know that one was already uploaded, and will either do without it or have to upload a new one. Anyway, I know almost nothing about how we handle image files, so it was interesting to take a peek at this part of the wikiworld. --Rich Janis (talk) 05:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, images can be pretty complicated, especially when you get into the non-free criteria. Unfortunately, copyrighted images can only survive outside of articles for one week, so to speak. We run into this problem with AFC and drafts sometimes, really no good way around it though, I guess. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mark. Now it would be a good time to restore it. We can finally put it to use. Please signal me when it is done. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I hope I am not giving you too much trouble but we also need an administrator move SkyDrive over to its redirect OneDrive. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I can do that if you want, are you sure it's uncontroversial though? Just asking since I recall there being a dispute about when to move the article. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

You recall right. And it was I who filed that certain case. Yes. It is uncontroversial at this point per Talk:SkyDrive and the sources that I supplied in the article. We are experiencing a bit of vandalism in this regard (Example) but it is hard to call it "a dispute". Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Alright, I've moved the article and undeleted the picture for you. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

User block

My you please consider a block for User:Jake "JJR" Rivera. Recently extremely uncivil, and has been adding disruptive content to DJ Earworm recently after being told multiple times he needs sources for it (see his talk). Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I gave him a warning for now. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:34, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep you posted if he continues the disruption, or further uncivil outbursts. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 19 February 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change image to something else such as an open ocean WilliamSouth (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It's Mark's choice, and he can put whatever image he wants with his userpage (as long as it's rule-compliant...). Epicgenius (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Please don't feed the troll . Look at his recent contribs. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:51, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@Rsrikanth05: Oh. Sorry about that, didn't know. But he's indef blocked now, so no more worries. Epicgenius (talk) 18:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I guessed he's a Sock. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:53, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Or a sockmaster. Epicgenius (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

AfD

Can you please review Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of Italian geniuses (2nd nomination) for a WP:SNOWBALL closure? BlueSalix (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, done. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! BlueSalix (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

More 089baby socks

I've got another one for you, Kakalara (talk · contribs). His five edits so far are all creations, three of which are articles also created by the last sock. That being said, he seems to be using IP's now to for all edits not requiring a registered account (hence the creations only account). I know I've talked about a range block before, but it seems far more in order now, than it did three months ago. Unfortunately, I can't figure out how to properly request. Can you enlighten me? Thanks in advance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! A gift from fellow Wikipedians.

You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. We last contacted you on 2/10/2014. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 07:02, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Helix Fossil

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Misplaced Pages, introducing inappropriate pages, such as The Helix Fossil, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The page has been nominated for deletion, in accordance with Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion.

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 "Click here to 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 removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. ZigSaw 08:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Disregard that, I suck cocks. I didn't see that your version was just a redirect. Removed the CSD and reverted to that instead. It's been hit a few times since your creation, though, might want to consider a semi. ZigSaw 08:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I've done that myself a few times in the past. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)