RegentsPark
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Yo Ho Ho
Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.
November 2017
- Copied from my talk page where it was added by User:Fishnagles in appreciation of my removal of spam that they were adding to Charles Manson.
Hello, I'm Fishnagles. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia.
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
Protection level for four articles with either Faizabad or Allahabad in the name
At 15:15, 19 March 2020, you were kind enough to change the protection level for the article on Allahabad so that edits required users to be autoconfirmed or have confirmed access. Please could you apply a similar protection level to the following articles, which have been coming under IP attack over the past two months: changing "Faizabad" to "Ayodhya" and "Allahabad" to "Prayagraj".
Toddy1 (talk) 10:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Toddy1: Done. --regentspark (comment) 14:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello regentspark, why can't the name of Allahabad be replace with Prayagraj? Officially, it has been declared earlier. ItWiki97 (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @ItWiki97:. I believe that's because it is still Allahabad in common English usage. If you think not, you should gather evidence and start a move request--regentspark (comment) 14:04, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply @regentspark. I got it. But on the article page of #Allahabad. But I can't do the same. ItWiki97 (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- You need to use the article talk page (Talk:Allahabad). Making non-consensus changes to the article page could get you blocked.--regentspark (comment) 15:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Reversion of my edit requests.
Why my edit request are reverted I have demanded reposting of previous images along with the new one. Saichana (talk) 11:06, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Saichana: Which article are you referring to? Thanks. --regentspark (comment) 14:23, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Talk:Yadav. I just had a conflict with your edit, I was writing "@Saichana: ask the editor who reverted you. Don't make demands. Don't make multiple sections asking for things such as "J" (with a section heading "N", or "useful information". I'm also wondering why you think other people should make the huge amounts of edits you are asking for - how about doing some more editing yourself? "Doug Weller talk 14:26, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- See this earlier version[1] and Talk:Ghazipur. Doug Weller talk 14:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Talk:Yadav. I just had a conflict with your edit, I was writing "@Saichana: ask the editor who reverted you. Don't make demands. Don't make multiple sections asking for things such as "J" (with a section heading "N", or "useful information". I'm also wondering why you think other people should make the huge amounts of edits you are asking for - how about doing some more editing yourself? "Doug Weller talk 14:26, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, it's by mistake. Now, coming to the point I am referring to the demands made by me on article 'yadav' the deletion of previous images in the article by 'hindukshatrana' feel that article is unstrategic ie:showing image of CM in traditional occupation section and images of monuments in article of communities. Saichana (talk) 14:56, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- CIR? Doug Weller talk 17:41, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Definitely looks like a CIR. Since they've been blocked by Thryduulf, let's see what happens, if they come back.--regentspark (comment) 18:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Immediately they came they started disrupting talk pages again, so I reblocked them for 3 months. Given what happened last time I expect a swift loss of the ability to edit their talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 15:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- Definitely looks like a CIR. Since they've been blocked by Thryduulf, let's see what happens, if they come back.--regentspark (comment) 18:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- FWIW they were warned on their talk page about turning talk pages into directories, then proceeded to do exactly that after making another pointless edit at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests so I've blocked them for a week for disruptive editing. Thryduulf (talk) 18:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Demands
I have changed the words and lines of demands on "Bangalistan". Thanks. প্রসেনজিৎ পাল (talk) 06:43, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Bangalistan
I have provided all necessary references to create the article "Bangalistan". But it has been nominated for deletion.why? If proper references are there, then what's wrong in it? Please help...... Thanks প্রসেনজিৎ পাল (talk) 08:53, 18 April 2020 (UTC) Hi. You should explain on the afd page why you think the subject is notable enough to be retained. Looking at the AfD, it appears that the !voters think that the subject matter is similar to another article and can be merged there. If you disagree, you should give your reasons there. --regentspark (comment) 15:35, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Sock Puppetry on Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha Page
Hi regentspark,
I read what sock pupptry means. It happened when 1st link and its text was deleted. I saw it. Who used a double account to remove that? Is it legal to ask this?
While you're at it,also see if this person and the person who deleted that text is the same. User:YaRaabAlHind
- Hi Dinopce. Generally, when text added by one account is re-added by new accounts, there is a suspicion of sock puppetry. I'm not familiar enough with the article to figure out who is the sock master but it does seem like there is socking going on. I'd rather not speculate who is socking but leave it to editors on that page to file a WP:SPI if they (or you, YaRaabAlHind) have firm evidence of sock puppetry. --regentspark (comment) 15:58, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding. I've a qualm that User:YaRaabAlHind is Updated since your last visit. Now,I can be wrong. Is it not in your hands to verify the IP address of the people in that talk page with the above two users that I've mentioned? You can track mine too. I don't have any problem with that. Also,how much time will it take for you to match the IP address of these two users with the concerned discussion section in that page? If these two IP addresses will match anyone in that concerned discussion page,that person will be the sock master!
- Only checkusers are allowed to match accounts and they will do that only if you file a WP:SPI. You should gather evidence (diffs that show the similarity between two users), go to the SPI page, click on "How to open an investigation", and follow the instructions there. --regentspark (comment) 14:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- And if my inkling goes wrong somehow,then what? Will I be banned from Wikipedia? Dinopce (talk) 09:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- No. Though, if your case is frivolous, you could be cautioned or sanctioned. Though SPI cases are often inconclusive, most of the activity on this page is recent and, assuming your evidence is good, you should get a checkuser to look into it. (Just be sure that you haven't been socking as well!). --regentspark (comment) 15:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- And if my inkling goes wrong somehow,then what? Will I be banned from Wikipedia? Dinopce (talk) 09:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- Only checkusers are allowed to match accounts and they will do that only if you file a WP:SPI. You should gather evidence (diffs that show the similarity between two users), go to the SPI page, click on "How to open an investigation", and follow the instructions there. --regentspark (comment) 14:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding. I've a qualm that User:YaRaabAlHind is Updated since your last visit. Now,I can be wrong. Is it not in your hands to verify the IP address of the people in that talk page with the above two users that I've mentioned? You can track mine too. I don't have any problem with that. Also,how much time will it take for you to match the IP address of these two users with the concerned discussion section in that page? If these two IP addresses will match anyone in that concerned discussion page,that person will be the sock master!
- Hi Dinopce. Generally, when text added by one account is re-added by new accounts, there is a suspicion of sock puppetry. I'm not familiar enough with the article to figure out who is the sock master but it does seem like there is socking going on. I'd rather not speculate who is socking but leave it to editors on that page to file a WP:SPI if they (or you, YaRaabAlHind) have firm evidence of sock puppetry. --regentspark (comment) 15:58, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- The pages have undergone massive cleanup. I don't think that it was required! My idea was to use the lockdown to my advantage to nab this person. I've not been socking. I don't have any other account. I wouldn't have contacted you for this then. Some shops and offices have opened. It will be futile to lodge any complaints now. Dinopce (talk) 17:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Its you I should have moaned at. Like I said over at the SPI, there are too many POV pushers who get the wrong end of the stick about me. I almost think it was more the stupid AXZENT that pissed me off, I do not want to work to read bollocks.Slatersteven (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
RfC
Hope this message finds you well. In case you get time, please have a look at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_India/Indian_cuisine_personal_user_awards#Renaming_templates. I am looking for some suggestions there, before the cleanup (if needed). --Titodutta (talk) 08:45, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Citation in Tipu Sultan
It may be a misunderstanding about my edit which had undone by you, this ref name had defined already in another place. Could you please revert.--Irshadpp (talk) 11:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Irshadpp:Apologies. I see I messed up. Please do revert me or I'll fix it when I get the chance (RL issues).--regentspark (comment) 17:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
I understand, there were edit war in that page. There is chance for messed up. Anyhow I am unable to revert it, as there are further edits happened. Wish a good day--Irshadpp (talk) 22:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
- It looks like it got fixed in the ensuing back and forth so we're good. Thank you for the polite way in which you dealt with my error!--regentspark (comment) 22:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Kayastha page
Hi Regentspark,
Why was the protection level of the Kayastha page removed?
Is it so that more and more people can get the chance to contribute to the page after the cleanup or something like that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinopce (talk • contribs) 11:48, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Dinopce: Protection is usually temporary because we don't want to keep articles locked for ever. --regentspark (comment) 13:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not talking about the temporary protection that you did on that page after Sitush cleaned up that page.
- I'm talking about the protection of locking the page for 30 days,500 edits etc. Earlier,there was some protection over there! Now,it isn't! Anybody who doesn't even have an account can make changes to that page. It can lead to vandalism. Dinopce (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
- Pages are not protected in anticipation of vandalism or disruptive editing (see the protection policy). If you see any of those happening on the article, report it at WP:RFPP and an admin will take care of it. --regentspark (comment) 16:54, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
- The most commonly used types of protection are full protection, which means that a page can be modified only by administrators; and semi-protection, which means that a page can be modified only by users who are logged in and whose accounts have been confirmed (any account is automatically confirmed if it has existed for at least four days and has made at least ten edits).
- I was talking about the semi-protection!
- The page was semi-protected earlier,i.e before the clean-up. Now,it isn't! Anyone without an account can edit this page.
- It should atleast be semi-protected. Dinopce (talk) 04:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- I don't see any disruptive editing or vandalism from IPs or non-autoconfirmed users. Like I said, we don't protect pages in anticipation, but only after disruption. --regentspark (comment) 14:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- Ohk. I think after the cleanup by Sitush,that page is once again new and hence,until and unless further disruption takes place there,that page will not be locked.
- Understood! Dinopce (talk) 14:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)