HistoryofIran (talk | contribs) |
Bhaskarbhagawati (talk | contribs) reply Tag: 2017 wikitext editor |
||
Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
::::The current edits by B. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Varman_dynasty&type=revision&diff=1037561871&oldid=1037394742] started soon after the ANI thread was archived [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&type=revision&diff=1037522907&oldid=1037519824]. The same cat and mouse game as before. [[Cocking a snook]]? The last time we went the ANI->DR->RfC route, it took months to resolve the issue and I am yet to recover from that process. I encourage others to please take this up :-) [[User:Chaipau|Chaipau]] ([[User talk:Chaipau|talk]]) 20:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC) |
::::The current edits by B. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Varman_dynasty&type=revision&diff=1037561871&oldid=1037394742] started soon after the ANI thread was archived [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&type=revision&diff=1037522907&oldid=1037519824]. The same cat and mouse game as before. [[Cocking a snook]]? The last time we went the ANI->DR->RfC route, it took months to resolve the issue and I am yet to recover from that process. I encourage others to please take this up :-) [[User:Chaipau|Chaipau]] ([[User talk:Chaipau|talk]]) 20:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC) |
||
:::::I will be interested in any such process that is launched. [[User:Richard Keatinge|Richard Keatinge]] ([[User talk:Richard Keatinge|talk]]) 21:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC) |
:::::I will be interested in any such process that is launched. [[User:Richard Keatinge|Richard Keatinge]] ([[User talk:Richard Keatinge|talk]]) 21:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC) |
||
::::::Replying soon, thanks.[[User:Bhaskarbhagawati|<span style="color: gold">भास्कर् </span><span style="color: red">Bhagawati</span>]] [[User talk:Bhaskarbhagawati|<span style="color: ">संवाद</span>]] 00:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC) |
|||
== Progress on AN3 == |
== Progress on AN3 == |
Revision as of 00:54, 11 August 2021
It's me
HammerFilmFan (not logged in)
- Is it too much trouble to log in? :-). EdJohnston (talk) 01:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in my recent RFA
I appreciate your support and trust in my recent run for admin. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see making an error, or if you just need help. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 18:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Anti-Shia edits
Hi EdJohnston, long time no see. I don't know if this is the correct place, but there has recently been a surge of anti-Shia edits by several IPs [1] [2] [3][4] [5] They mainly engage in reducing the numbers of Shias in various regions, or outright delete information about them, whilst exaggerating the numbers of Sunni Muslims. All of them are from the exact same area in Uttar Pradesh, possibly the same person? --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have blocked Special:Contributions/2409:4063:231B:6E37:0:0:0:0/64 one week for anti-Shia edit warring on multiple articles. Let me know if the problem continues. EdJohnston (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hiya again. This IP's edits [6] are way too similiar to the ones above, especially his edit summaries (such as using the term 'rafida', which he uses as an insult [7] [8].) He is not from the same region, but pretty close. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Tabbouleh again
Hey, you locked Tabbouleh 1 year ago, but the same problems has now returned after. Can you lock it from IPs permanently? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- Semiprotected again. The typical revert is back and forth between Syria and Lebanon for the place of origin of this food. EdJohnston (talk) 17:05, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
/* Original title of this section was: Third opinion */
- Bhaskarbhagawati (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
I will like you to take a look at recent edits of "User:Bhaskarbhagawati" which exhibit (1) removal of reliable sources, (2) addition of non-contextual POV content which is either sourced to poor sources or not sourced at all, and (3) edit-warring with multiple editors. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- This was also at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1074#User:Bhaskarbhagawati - Bhauma dynasty and Varman dynasty. EdJohnston (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- I am not seeing any resolution and I have seen some rule about archived threads being closed to public comments. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- At present there are two choices. Find an admin who is prepared to do a topic ban from the domain of WP:ARBIPA based on the current evidence, or pursue WP:Dispute resolution and have enough patience to follow up if B. does not seem to be reading the sources properly. Opening an WP:RfC would require somebody to state one of the issues very clearly so that others could support or oppose. Perhaps you would be willing to do that. EdJohnston (talk) 19:17, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- The current edits by B. [9] started soon after the ANI thread was archived [10]. The same cat and mouse game as before. Cocking a snook? The last time we went the ANI->DR->RfC route, it took months to resolve the issue and I am yet to recover from that process. I encourage others to please take this up :-) Chaipau (talk) 20:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- I will be interested in any such process that is launched. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- Replying soon, thanks.भास्कर् Bhagawati संवाद 00:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- I will be interested in any such process that is launched. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- The current edits by B. [9] started soon after the ANI thread was archived [10]. The same cat and mouse game as before. Cocking a snook? The last time we went the ANI->DR->RfC route, it took months to resolve the issue and I am yet to recover from that process. I encourage others to please take this up :-) Chaipau (talk) 20:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- At present there are two choices. Find an admin who is prepared to do a topic ban from the domain of WP:ARBIPA based on the current evidence, or pursue WP:Dispute resolution and have enough patience to follow up if B. does not seem to be reading the sources properly. Opening an WP:RfC would require somebody to state one of the issues very clearly so that others could support or oppose. Perhaps you would be willing to do that. EdJohnston (talk) 19:17, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- I am not seeing any resolution and I have seen some rule about archived threads being closed to public comments. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Progress on AN3
Hi Ed,
After some time I revisited an old 3RR being
And I still see no result. Kingsif's latest accusations are in the link above, and my response is at the bottom of my own talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Erikdr
As next month I'll be visiting my friends in the island again and might have lots more plans for Wiki edits, it's important to get a final conclusion to the April 3RR. If for any next contribution I have to face IMHO disruptive and destructive behaviour of this fellow editor, then I simply cannot make these next contributions. "if you cannot understand why such edits are wrong, you should probably not be making any edits at all. There is no discussion to be had, no compromise to reach on bad edits." is sooo strongly against netiquette that it blows my mind.
If however (s)he finally learns to get into constructive/cooperative mode, we're talking... Hope to get a status update from you soon!
Erikdr (talk) 14:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Erikdr. Your 3RR report from April, 2021 contains no diffs. It is not up to the admins to investigate the issue for you, you should have prepared the complaint fully. I see there is a disagreement between you and User:Kingsif at
- a thread which opened on 26 March. There is even a mention of a DRN. I see an abortive DRN in which you did not follow up after April 6. It is now August 8 and it seems the dispute is still open. Although you might consider finishing the job by opening a proper DRN, doing an WP:RFC is potentially more fruitful. That would require you to state precisely (for example in one sentence) what change should be made to the article, and then collecting opinions pro and con. If you have never opened an RfC, you can ask any experienced editor for assistance. Keep in mind that this type of discussion will probably be stressful for all parties even if it is done correctly. EdJohnston (talk) 16:25, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- I changed the title of this thread from 'Progress on ANI' to 'Progress on AN3' because your prior complaint to admins was at WP:AN3. EdJohnston (talk) 16:27, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Spaniards article
There are currently open threads in Talk about different points of dispute (some already resolved). Could you take a look at those threads and the article?
Mainly, in case you want to leave some points to fix the new content to the Wikipedia rules. Even if they give me an indefinite block, I think it would be nice if at least the extra content of the article is well adjusted.
I am not writing to you to avoid a blockade, but to let you know that before they block me (if they do) and can't write.
A greeting. BaylanSP (talk) 17:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- As an administrator I don't have an opinion on these questions. EdJohnston (talk) 15:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protection For Hindu mythological wars article
- Hindu mythological wars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hello, I noticed that you placed the Hindu mythological wars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) article under Extended Confirmed Protection mid-July, citing repeated disruptive editing.
I think reducing the protection level to Semiprotection would be better, as the disruptive editing was mostly done by IPs.
The article really needs a lot of work done - it needs major reformatting and sourcing of information and it's lacking a lot of information about several Puranic wars. Placing it under such a high protection level when the article has so much space for improvement is really restrictive. So, could the protection level please be reduced to Semiprotection?
Aathish S | talk | contribs 15:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- This article has been protected many times in the past due to ongoing problems. In my opinion the EC protection is justified. You are already familiar with the process for requesting changes, as I can see at your last edit request, which was accepted. You also have the option of creating a draft in your sandbox. EdJohnston (talk) 15:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)