This is an archive of past discussions with User:Rybec. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Rybec! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! TheOriginalSoni (I'm a Teahouse host)
I removed the tags from the Montz article; despite the claim in one of the tags that a "contributor to the article may have a close connection with the subject", I see no problem existent within the article any longer. Excellent work! dci | TALK 03:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about that; it was a careless oversight on my part to think that you'd created it. Thanks again for your work, and please don't take my remarks the wrong way. dci | TALK 00:01, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Skateboarding
Hi, I saw some of your edits and requests of other editors and thought it might be worth inviting you to join WikiProject Skateboarding. WikiProjects are basically groups of editors with an interest in editing articles about a particular subject. Feel free to join, or to shoot me a message if you have any questions. Cheers, Stalwart11111:07, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of hoaxes
Hi Rybec. I'm glad you fixed this; I was just about to do so myself. The speedy deletion criterion for hoaxes (G3) applies only to articles that are hoaxes, not articles about hoaxes. Thus, if you run across an article about a non-existent micronation which explains that the micronation was a hoax created for fraudulent purposes, that's not something which needs deleting. On the other hand, if you find an article about a person you've never heard of which claims he has cured cancer, lived on the Moon for a week and been President of the United States for three successive terms, that's a hoax, and can be G3'd . Hope that helps clear the distinction up. Yunshui雲水09:35, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Question about blacklisted site 360cities.net
Hi. You've removed the link on the Mount Taranaki page linking to the 360cities site. Where is the wikipedia blacklist of sites?
Thanks peterl (talk) 11:32, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Peterl, looking for the same re Edradour Distillery I found it here [1], provided it's the \b360cities\.net\b line; wasn't able to find out who, when and why put it there though. --Thrissel (talk) 21:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
The discussion that led to the site being blacklisted is here. I asked about it here. If you think the site should not be blacklisted, MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#blog.360cities.net might be the best place to talk about it. If you'd like to talk about my edits, you're welcome to do so here on my talk page. However, I don't think they can be undone so long as the site is on the blacklist. —rybec00:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
I see. It's a pity, the pics are good - but not as good as to justify this kind of spam. Thanks for showing us the links. --Thrissel (talk) 17:20, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm sorry to inform you that I reverted your changes to Raising Taxes, including the move to Raising Steam. The tweet by Terry Pratchett only confirms a single thing: That the next DW book will be called Raising Steam. It does not say that it is the same one as Raising Taxes nor that Raising Taxes was the working title. Wikipedia has a strict rule that all content must be verifiable in reliable sources and there is no source that backs up your edits. Note that this does not mean that your changes weren't correct. But until a reliable source actually says those things you guessed with your edits, we cannot have them on Wikipedia. Regards SoWhy10:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the correction. The statement that Raising Taxes is a working title was in the article before I touched it [2]. —rybec11:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, but your change implied that Raising Taxes was the working title for Raising Steam while it is only the working title of "a possible third Moist von Lipwig novel", which - unless we have some sources saying otherwise - it still is. Regards SoWhy11:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
I acknowledge my error and I haven't touched the article since you reverted my changes. If there's anything else I can do, let me know. —rybec11:39, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
No worries, I just wanted to clarify what I meant with my first notification since it seemed a bit unclear. If you can find any sources that confirm your edits, that would be great since I, too, would love to see it clarified whether those are two separate projects or the same project under different names, so keep your eyes open. Happy editing and feel free to contact me if you need any assistance. Regards SoWhy11:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
I took your note to mean that there could be two different books, and that assuming otherwise is synthesis. Someone has added to the Discworld article a clarification from Pratchett that Raising Taxes and Raising Steam are (will be?) in fact two different books, [3], although when I looked at the tweet it said "But it's definitely not Raising Taxes..." which is different from the way he's quoted in the Wikipedia article: "Raising Steam is not Raising Taxes". —rybec12:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
1971 Bangladesh atrocities
You recently commented on a RM on the article 1971 Bangladesh atrocities. The discussion was closed and the article moved to the previous title by another editor per WP:RM/TR. A new RM has been initiated and can be found hereDarkness Shines (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Jeronimo Dominguez
Thank you for improving Jerónimo Domínguez. I considered using the Spanish-language form of his name as the article title myself, but since all but one of the references I found used the English-language version, I followed the established practice of using the English-language form if it was clearly the most common form of the name in the English-speaking world (see WP:Manual of style and related pages for details). Please consider undoing your page-move, or, if the most common English-language use of his name is the version with the Spanish-language accent marks, provide links to sources that use this form either as references, in an "External links" section, or on the article talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, saw your addition of the inline "disputed" template. Dorner was fired by the LAPD, he was honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve. I'm not sure there's debate about his military career, rather the use of specific language to describe it-- "ex-" vs "former". I can't find a reliable source that differentiates the two, and I don't see it mentioned at WP:MOS. Anyhow, if you don't object, I'd like to remove the template. Thx, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
I don't have an opinion about the dispute; I just noticed that other editors have been going back and forth about it. I was hoping they'd work it out on the talk page of the article rather than edit-warring. I'd be happy to remove the template if there's a better way to stimulate discussion. After you wrote to me, I looked at Wikipedia:Edit_warring and it does suggest adding "appropriate cleanup tags." I had noticed that the statement in dispute didn't have a reference; the tag I added asks for references. I've added a section to the article's talk page...are we okay? —rybec20:37, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Article Feedback deployment
Hey Rybec; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll change it in the copy I'm working with. —rybec
Hi Rybec,
I didn't knew that any user can create an article. I thought every article needed approval by admins. May I know what mistake I made in my previous move? Talking about this diffJK (talk) 06:21, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, anyone with an account can make articles. People who aren't logged in ("IP users") aren't allowed to. If you'd like to keep using Articles for Creation, it's fine. The mistake you made was in moving your article to the Wikipedia: space which is for articles about Wikipedia itself. Regular articles go in the article space (it's at the top of the list when you move stuff). I wasn't going to mention it because it's no big deal. —rybec06:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited DNA Patterns, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page OCR (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Orphaned non-free media (File:Cover of Striking Thoughts (2000 edition).jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Cover of Striking Thoughts (2000 edition).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
It's not your fault/mess, it's the rather the way China pages are constantly in flux on Wikipedia. When I originally asked for the template to be created over a month ago, the ROC template was a dedicated Republic of China template. In waiting for the AFC to be processed, last week, someone converted the ROC template to be Taiwan only, but it was still transcluded from the ROC template name, and used on non-Taiwan articles, so it was obvious the change had been made. If things still stood the way they did at the beginning of March, we'd have a China-set, PRC-set, ROC-set, and then the new Taiwan-set, which I think is reasonable (considering at the beginning of March, I was planning to submit AFC requests for some of the years that are redlinks and not part of the ROC period) -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 04:44, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for helping me learn about Wiki submissions.
Thank you for your numerous helpful contributions!
Hi Rybec. Much appreciation for all of your help on The Rocket Record Company article page. Also, thanks for the small disambiguation link atop the Rocket Records article page as well. I do not know whether you are interested or not, but a new article has to be written and submitted for Elton John's new company named Rocket Music if you have any time to do so. Your contributions have been very helpful, and you seem like someone who has a lot of knowledge in the record label/music industry area, especially as it pertains to Elton John and other major music artists like him. Thanks again for all of your numerous helpful contributions so far!
Congratulations, Rybec! You're receiving the AFC Barnstar because you reviewed 223 articles during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! Mdann52 (talk) 12:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Lewis Marnell image file
Hi Rybec, a copyeditor has found an approved image of Marnell himself and has asked me to try and remove the image so that he can upload it. I am unsure of how to do this, but thought it best to send you a message first anyway. What do you think?--Soulparadox (talk) 01:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
File:Lewis Marnell. (8437327867).jpg doesn't need to be deleted from Commons to make room for another photo; just choose a different name (the 8437327867 is a unique identifier from Flickr), then put the new name in the Lewis Marnell article. Links for uploading:
I am pretty sure that really is a record for the largest SPI case ever filed, yet one of the most concise, with properly provided links for everything. You have no idea how incredibly important and helpful that is, or perhaps you do, but it means a lot to a clerk. You finding all these accounts is a big deal. No, a HUGE deal. There is no way for me to say how utterly impressed I am of your hard work and professionalism in dealing with this. You raised the bar for everyone. We aren't done quite yet, but it is just a matter of filing the paperwork. It is 74 sock puppets, plus how many others that the CU shakes out, for a sock master I will announce later. Incredible job, friend. I might name my first born child after you. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER00:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Or, rather, it would have helped if there were a direct link back to the sockpuppetry investigation in the edit summary instead of the stock G5/banned user (with an invalid username link). —C.Fred (talk) 18:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) If you look at the [history of the Confio article] you can see that the initial revision was by User:Ostwarez. On Ostwarez' user page is the block notice with a link to the SPA; you may view the evidence there (much of it is hatnoted). The same should be true of all the other articles I'm tagging; if I've made a mistake, please let me know.
I didn't have a single link to provide because there are two suspected puppet-masters who are suspected of working together. Sorry if it wasn't clear. —rybec18:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
MooshiePorkFace has been blocked since 8 March 2012 and Morning277 has been blocked since 21 August 2012. If there's still a problem, or if I misunderstood your remarks, please let me know. —rybec19:08, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I meant that Ostwarez hadn't been blocked yet. I wasn't making the connection back from that user to the puppeteer. —C.Fred (talk) 19:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Ah. I guess the pop-up tool missed it, then. No worries. And now that I've seen the SSP case, I can see this is the exception where it does make sense to mass-tag a bunch of articles with G5. —C.Fred (talk) 19:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I'd do more, but I'm on an iPhone -- which explains why I left a "sick puppet" notice, since Autocorrect doesn't seem to know the term "sock puppet". --24.23.151.188 (talk) 07:59, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Rybec, a couple of days ago i removed the speedy deletion tag from the steve kuhn article placed by an IP editor. The IP editor kind of treated me like a jerk and/or idiot and wrote on my Talk page. I don't know if you two are the same person, but you just re-added the speedy tag. I believe I have substantially edited the article at this point, which should disqualify it from g5. I'm doing partially b/c I found the IP editor to be rude, but also b/c the article seems to be well-written, neutral, and encyclopedic. Thanks for reading. CitizenNeutral (talk) 06:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi again Rybec, I believe I substantially edited the Steve Kuhn article and removed your tag. I hope you don't mind that I did this. I hate spam too and I appreciate you doing whatever it is you're doing on that long thread that I don't quite understand, but I also don't think it makes sense to delete good content about notable stuff.CitizenNeutral (talk) 06:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
That article is now deleted, but here's the history from about 30 minutes before it was deleted:
history
(cur | prev) 18:32, 23 July 2013 Unforgettableid (talk | contribs) . . (4,741 bytes) (+12) . . (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G11). (TW)) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 07:46, 23 July 2013 CitizenNeutral (talk | contribs) . . (4,729 bytes) (-10) . . (as i have now substantially edited the article, i dont believe that g5 is relevant anymore. please be civil and address your concerns on the article talk page.) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 07:23, 23 July 2013 24.23.151.188 (talk) . . (4,739 bytes) (+10) . . (Wrong - G5 is G5, and shuffling around a few things doesn't change lack of notability, either) (undo)
(cur | prev) 06:50, 23 July 2013 CitizenNeutral (talk | contribs) . . (4,729 bytes) (+23) . . (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 06:48, 23 July 2013 CitizenNeutral (talk | contribs) . . (4,706 bytes) (+335) . . (adding a reference from Barron's) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 06:42, 23 July 2013 CitizenNeutral (talk | contribs) . . (4,371 bytes) (-14) . . (removing cum laude distinction to minimize promotionalism) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 06:33, 23 July 2013 CitizenNeutral (talk | contribs) . . (4,385 bytes) (-254) . . (removing promotionalism and non-important stuff such as his appearance on bloomberg) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 06:31, 23 July 2013 CitizenNeutral (talk | contribs) . . (4,639 bytes) (-192) . . (please see the talk page, an IP editor just asked me why i removed the tag two days ago. i have decided to attempt to substantially edit the article.) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 04:51, 23 July 2013 Rybec (talk | contribs) . . (4,831 bytes) (+21) . . (Undid revision 565139398 by CitizenNeutral (talk) only trivial changes since Davidweller83's version) (undo)
(cur | prev) 03:45, 21 July 2013 CitizenNeutral (talk | contribs) . . (4,810 bytes) (-21) . . (declining speedy, subject seems notable and article doesn't appear particularly promotional) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 01:00, 21 July 2013 24.23.151.188 (talk) . . (4,831 bytes) (+21) . . (G5 - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Morning277) (undo)
(cur | prev) 05:38, 17 July 2013 207.237.83.8 (talk) . . (4,810 bytes) (-105) . . (Cleaning up facts, checked quotes. Very well-known person, especially in NYC area.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 12:54, 14 July 2013 24.23.151.188 (talk) . . (4,915 bytes) (+103) . . (added prod tag) (undo)
(cur | prev) 15:32, 9 July 2013 GrahamHardy (talk | contribs) m . . (4,812 bytes) (+28) . . (+defsort) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 23:32, 7 June 2013 Tassedethe (talk | contribs) . . (4,784 bytes) (0) . . (removed Category:Living People; added Category:Living people using HotCat) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 22:43, 7 June 2013 Davidweller83 (talk | contribs) m . . (4,784 bytes) (0) . . (Davidweller83 moved page User:Davidweller83/sandbox to Steve Kuhn (Executive)) (undo | thank)
(cur | prev) 22:04, 7 June 2013 Davidweller83 (talk | contribs) . . (4,784 bytes) (-138) . . (undo | thank)
The edit summary you gave when you first removed the tag was "declining speedy, subject seems notable and article doesn't appear particularly promotional"; that remark doesn't correspond to the G5 criteria. The initial comment on your talk page by 24.23.151.188 seems intended to bring your attention to the discrepancy. You clearly have now familiarized yourself with the G5 criteria; thank you for that! About the possible lack of politeness to 24.23.151.188's remarks, I'm not the right person to discuss that with, because I'm involved. Perhaps the two of you can work it out, or there's WP:DR. —rybec20:22, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Awarded to Rybec for your extraordinary efforts to protect Wikipedia during the Morning 277 Sockpuppet investigation. The Whack-a-Mole Stuffed Tiger Prize usually goes only to sysops who tirelessly block returning sockpuppets at Carnival Wikipedia but your work on that case was so beyond-the-call that an exception is in order. DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER00:59, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
You cannot close NFCR's as no-census. It is a review of the non-free files on the page, it either is or isnt in compliance with policy. If you are unfamiliar with NFC please do not close the discussions. Werieth (talk) 23:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the note; I see in the instructions "If there is no consensus after a reasonable amount of time has passed, use the {{Non-free reviewed no consensus}} tag [...]" which is what I did. Are the instructions in error? —rybec23:16, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Its best to leave those closes to admins. Wasnt really an error, normal NFCR's just are not closed as no-consensus. Werieth (talk) 23:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Walton (company) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
[[File:Walton HighTech Industry.jpg|thumb|Walton Hi Tech Industry Factory in Chandra, Gazipur]
When the original article's been deleted, would you mind providing the original name of the article? The diffs don't do us much good, since viewing deleted content for admins doesn't use the standard diffs. --Rschen775406:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
I didn't know that. I'll take care to always include the name from now on. Many of those diffs are to User:Sublimeharmony/sandbox11, which was deleted by you. If you'd restore that file, it would simplify the investigation. Of course, it might simplify the work of the hired writers too, if they were stupid enough not to keep copies of their articles. I don't think they're that stupid. —rybec11:59, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
While deleted content doesn't use the standard diffs when admins view it, I don't see why a standard diff link still wouldn't point to the proper place in deleted space. I'll have to try that sometime.
Hm, you're right. Just before I deleted Global Fitness just now, I opened a page to a diff in that article (which follows the pattern of Morning277), and then reloaded the page after deleting it. I got an error message but also a link to view the deleted revisions. The revision ID isn't even there, just a time stamp. This seems like a bug in the Wiki software that should not be too hard to fix. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:26, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
@Rschen7754: The links, in most cases, are to User:Sublimeharmony/sandbox11. They will work if the file is restored: I posted them when it was still available, and they worked at that time. Rschen7754, are you willing to restore it? If it's not to be restored, I could add a title parameter to each link. I was working from an XML dump and didn't know about this problem.
@Amatulic: I tried to be careful not to include tip-offs that hadn't been mentioned in the SPI, and I e-mailed Dennis Brown when I created it (not sure whether he replied). I also tried to be careful not to make unfair accusations about the Morning277 folks. Anyway, please feel free to delete it.
Rschen7754, thank you, and have a good vacation! I had planned to bug you about it once you got back. —rybec00:06, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Morning277 and IPs
Hi Rybec (also @Kevin Gorman (talk·contribs), if you're listening). Do you think you could compile a tidy list of non-stale Morning277 IPs, and put them in the same section (with other user comments) where I made the large CU request? When I did my search for socks, I exclusively looked at accounts. If you could do this, I'll go through the IPs and add them to my checkuser request. Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 23:03, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I'll be a bit busy today, but I'll go ahead and add this to my todo list. There's already a bunch of IPs in the big CU request I made; if you'd like or it can somehow help, feel free to remove them from my CU request and add them to yours. They're all fresh. Kevin Gorman (talk) 23:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I haven't been taking private notes about IP addresses, just posting stuff as I find it. I'd be happy to extract IP addresses from the SPI or from some spammy articles I saved. I don't know how long it takes before they're considered stale. Would you want the ones from ranges that have already been blocked?
76.65.128.222 has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!
Hi! Hope you're doing great! Could you please check this article by User:Kainobi which was declined at AfC[4] but later created[5] by User:Sourov0000 looks suspicious to me as the editor has a history of creating promotional articles[6]. I'm not an experienced user and i may be completely wrong so i decided to request your views. Regards, --Iniciativass (talk) 10:55, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Dear, thank you for your mentioning. Well, to speak about the truth, I have created some articles about corporation which didn't meet Wikipedia's notability and I am well aware of it. But the articles that I have created about people have no promotional purpose. I have read through all the notability guidelines in the past few days and have understood everything. So, I will tell everyone to be not suspicious about my actions. Another thing, if you think an article may not meet Wikipedia's guideline, then you can add the tags by yourself. I hope Rybec will agree with me. Thanks everyone. Sourov0000 (talk) 13:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Greetings to both of you. @Sourov0000:, if you don't mind saying, were you aware of Kainobi's article? Does the Kainobi account belong to you? —rybec16:47, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
I reluctantly removed the A7, because it seems that the sources might be enough to demonstrate importance; it would need AfD (or maybe prod) DGG ( talk ) 23:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey Rybec - drop me an email when you get the chance please. I have some information that I'd like to share with you without posting it in a public forum. Thanks, Kevin Gorman (talk) 06:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry but my e-mail account hasn't been working. I should probably do something about that. —rybec06:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
They are just popping up right and left - see my recent block and deletion logs. I've modified Filter 575 so that it will hopefully catch more of them. Also, I'm not sure that checkuser is going to help all that much - my guess is that these are all bona fide separate accounts that have signed up with this sockmaster outside of Wikipedia. Some of them even seem to use their real names. Thanks for your help with what looks like a major problem. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
@NawlinWiki: I don't know how to write edit filters, but yesterday I added to the LTA page a list of Web sites that the Morning277 folks to cite (the ones with the search links were very strong indicators; the other sites, not so strong). Today I just noticed that they've begun removing those citations. A filter to log those edits (adding or removing) would turn up good evidence, if it could be done quickly. I also added to the LTA page a list of articles that were copied from the Sublimeharmony sandbox. A filter to log addition of those terms could be more effective than salting.
When I look at [7] it looks like I'm seeing every logged action. Am I doing something wrong, or is it not really 575 but another number? —rybec21:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
With the link I gave? Could it be because you're an admin and the log isn't public? I don't see your change in [8] either...like I said, I don't know much about edit filters. —rybec22:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Hm, you're right. I didn't notice that when I'm logged out, the list doesn't actually get filtered by Filter ID. When logged out I can filter by user or article title, but not by Filter ID. When logged in as an admin, the Filter ID setting works. This seems like a bug to me. I can't think of any reason why that capability should be disabled for anyone. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
@Amatulic:@NawlinWiki: Morning277 is now editing out cites to the sites I posted yesterday. Before they're all gone, I searched for the most indicative ones and posted the results at the talk page of the SPI.
Thank you for the note. I've saved a copy of the Boundary, Inc article. I don't want to make an SPI report just yet, but if you notice similar behaviour again I'd be interested in hearing about it. —rybec02:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't think they're working with Morning277, although they both did edit an article which was also edited by someone who I strongly believe has done work for Morning277. It may be that the client hired one writer, then the other. —rybec21:41, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
AJ Perez (blogger)
Comment: Thank you for the heads-up! A quick google search with keywords "Janine Tugonon" you could see all the worldwide press she has received. Now, for the subject himself, I believe that in the article itself, I have diligently put citations from credible 3rd party sources (following WP:NOTABILITY esp, WP:GNG) that will demonstrate that the subject has been covered by various, big, media outlets in the country, see [AJ Perez(blogger)]. Cited sources came from ABS-CBN, GMA Network, The Philippine Star, Davao Catholic Herald which are big and respected media conglomerates in the subject's country. Also, as I have cited above, the subject has a recorded 250,000 readers. Maybe small by North American standards, but already huge in the subject's country of origin, , see #2 of: WP:ENT. Thanks sir! Killerdork (talk • contribs) 22:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Where do I put the image or link for a review by administrators?
Hi, thanks for your assistance on the Wiki Help desk and I appreciate it very much. I understand this picture is in copyright so will have to get permission to be usable under the non-free copyright content, am I in the right place to get this resolved?
I have looked at [[14]] and it fits in with all 10 that are required, I like yourself do feel that this image will help the reader understand exactly what the German youth had to go through in understanding the differences between Germans and Jews.
Do I just save the image onto my desktop and then upload it as a File: and then ask if it is usable or just send the link as the title, I am all a little too confused.
You don't need anyone's permission to upload copyrighted images.
First save the photo on your computer, then use the link at the left-hand side of every Wikipedia page, "Upload file". In step 3, select "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use" and a form should appear. Be sure to fill in the name of the article. In the non-free use rationale, choose the last option, "This is some other kind of non-free work that I believe is legitimate Fair Use." There will appear yet another form, with "Which of these options describes this item best?" at the top. In that form, the author, who seems to be unknown, is the person who originally took the photograph in 1943, not the person who recently scanned it. This form is the one that asks why the file is important to the article.
If you bring this up for discussion at Non-free content review, it's likely to get a thorough looking-over. A consensus there would outweigh one editor's opinion on whether an image should be used or not. Usually articles are brought up there when someone thinks copyrighted material is being used improperly. I'd be happy to take a look before you do that.
Thanks for your assistance, I have uploaded it File:Biology_teaching_in_the_Third_Reich.jpg, where do I go now to see if it will be approved of?--Andrew Dorsons (talk) 17:02, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
What do you think about the patterns shown in Thom Reilly and IMA World Health? I haven't deleted either article because they do appear to be notable subjects with (some) legitimate sources, but in both, a new editor moved another new editor's sandbox draft to userspace. What do you think? NawlinWiki (talk) 01:35, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Here's an email I received from a Morning277 sock that was recently blocked (not by me). I have removed all identifying information, but the message is illuminating.
I was given a "job" to set up a Wikipedia account and edit a few lines. I was slightly suspicious, but couldn't quite put my finger on it, so I continued. Now, I see that the article has been blocked/deleted due to too many people editing, or whatever. I have not been paid, and assume I won't be.
I'm trying to get to the bottom of this for my own personal curiosity, and professionally as a fraud analyst.
Here's the short version:
I accepted a job at Elance for slight HTML editing. I was given snippets of jobs to do, and looking back, if I had seen the whole picture, I would have not taken the job.
I had to create a Wikipedia account [redacted]. Then, make some edits here and there. Finally, make it live and send back the page link [redacted].
I asked several times about what exactly the job was supposed to be other than basic editing, but received no reply. I need to inform Elance of the violations, but would appreciate it if you could help explain the reasons for the page being blocked.
Thankfully, I'm only out [paltry sum enough to pay for dinner redacted], but there's something else going on here that I'd like to resolve, if possible. The warning flag was when I was told not to mention Elance or work for hire.
The email didn't mention the name of the company. Given that they charge their clients hundreds of dollars for editing an article, they're ripping off their own paid editors. The accounts we're blocking are victims in their own way. I'll bet if you tried to email any of them, some would tell you their story. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Pneuron
hey rybec, i'm building a Pneuron article. i noticed you deleted it before, figured i'd let you know what's up. i'm in tech and Pneuron is definitely talked about in big data. lots of good sources out there on them. if you're interested, i'll be adding more to it. Major.comp (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for approaching me. Could you please read Amatulić's post just above yours, from 15:01 yesterday? I'm interested to know whether the other contributor's story is similar to yours (I'm not asking for any details). If it isn't, I'm curious about how you noticed my involvement with the earlier article Pneuron. —rybec20:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
No, I work for Mass High Tech and searched Pneuron to see if there was a Wiki page. Found that JohnCD deleted it from user morning277. Then searched morning277 out of curiosity and saw you heading up an investigation. I thought you'd contact me if I started up a new article. I'm sourcing today and posting the article for other users to help me out. Thanks. Major.comp (talk) 14:33, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
Morning277
Just in your opinion, would it be beneficial to have a /workshop or /sandbox page for people to compile reports for the day, with evidence?
And/or use that to further compile reports into large reports every few days? Because right now none of the checkusers want to even look at it it's so messy (not your fault). Thanks ~Charmlet-talk-14:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for taking an interest in that SPI. I seldom ask for check-user, but I'd like to make things easy for SPI clerks and administrators. I've made reports with numerous accounts in them, and those ones seemed to take disproportionately long to process. I think the small reports are easier because the checkuser template is right next to the evidence. —rybec21:59, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Smaller reports may be easier to organize, but it clutters the page with unnecessary headings and other templates. Five+ reports per day was a bit excessive (although I know it was needed). That's the only reason I brought it up. ~Charmlet-talk-00:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Rybec. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 22:54, 2 September 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
A few weeks ago, I spent a considerable amount of time cleaning up an article about Steve Kuhn, a hedge fund guy. Do you remember? After my work, the article was unfortunately deleted by an admin who doesn't appear to be active anymore for being "unambiguously promotional". I want to let you know that I'm creating a new draft of the article. I'll let you know when it's done, I'd like you to review it. CitizenNeutral (talk) 22:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Is there a master list of any other articles you've deleted? I'd like to see if any are notable enough to be saved and/or restored. I just saved the article on Dasein, which I edited as did another admin. The topic of the article also appears notable, given the sourcing in English and Portuguese. I really don't have any desire to be "at odds" with you, honestly, I'm just not sure it's helpful to delete articles on notable subjects, regardless of who created them. Please let me know where I can see the PR articles when you have a minute, so I can help clean any up. CitizenNeutral (talk) 23:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
After creating the article above, I noticed you added a similar g5 tag (like you did with Steve Kuhn) to the Dasein Executive Search page. If you look through the edit history, User:DragonflySixtyseven made (an admin) made what I believe are substantial edits to the article on June 23. I also just went through a rewrote the lead and cut some content from the article. Just thought I'd let you know.CitizenNeutral (talk) 22:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
DragonflySixtyseven did delete large swaths of promotional language from the article, but did not add anything to it. Whether that's substantial is debatable. About the Steve Kuhn article, the G5 request was made by 24.23.151.188, then you removed the tag with an edit summary that implied an incorrect understanding, and I restored the G5 request tag for that reason, not intending to hurt your feelings. Are you making these efforts because you're upset about my edit to the Steve Kuhn article in July? —rybec23:13, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
I felt upset that I put in a lot of time editing the previous version of Steve Kuhn's Wikipedia page, only to see the IP24 delighted when it was deleted. It's frustrating to waste time. That's why I rewrote the article. CitizenNeutral (talk) 23:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Here's the history of the earlier incarnation from just before it was deleted: User_talk:Rybec/Archive_1#Steve_Kuhn_.28Executive.29. Whether the IP editor's characterisation of your work as "shuffling around a few things" is well-founded, I don't know, but you can see that another editor came along and tagged it for G11 (advertising). That's why it was eventually deleted, not because of the G5 tag. Perhaps that will help you forgive us? —rybec23:41, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey, just saw this message, I don't mean to bombard your Talk page. You don't need to apologize, the Steve Kuhn page is live again, so I'm happy my work wasn't for naught :) I'm going to look through your edit history to see if there are any other deleted examples like Steve that are seemingly notable and could be rewritten and restored. Have a great day! CitizenNeutral (talk) 16:31, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, me again, I'm going to rewrite Nathan Finch Ballard, which you recently had deleted. A quick Google search brings up quite a few reliable sources. A little more in-depth research, brings up even more press coverage which, in my opinion, helps him reach the general notability hurdle. Please review the page when I'm done. Thanks! CitizenNeutral (talk) 16:42, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey Rybec. I notice that DQ has basically shut down the Morning277 case. I'm interested in continuing to pursue and deter his meatpuppets, so if there is no other place for it, you can feel free to make a subpage of my userpage with new cases. I'll periodically go through them, deleting all the pages and blocking all the accounts. I don't know who else is actively hunting his lackeys, but you can tell them to do the same thing if they are still up for it. Cheers. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the offer, and belated thanks for your hard work on this a few weeks back. As I tried to express at Wikipedia_talk:SPI I have misgivings about doing sock-puppet investigations in an unofficial place. —rybec06:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
I would not consider it really an investigation, but a place where you can point out suspect accounts, and I would investigate those accounts simply as part of my personal admin functions rather than as a part of SPI, which is why I suggested my own userspace. We could also use Morning277's long-term abuse report as a landing page for suspected meats. I understand if neither option entices you. Happy editing. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hemisphere Project, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FOIA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi Rybec: Just wanted to bring to your attention an article I recreated on David Gorodyansky, which was deleted as G5. I did some research Gorodyansky and he seems to be notable in the field of online privacy. Have a look when you have a moment. I also replied to your message on my Talk page regarding the tags. Thank you! CitizenNeutral (talk) 19:51, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dimitri Logothetis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Hudson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to AT&T may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
a 9/11-themed ad |publisher=The Globe and Mail |date=2013-09-11 |accessdate=2013-09-12}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Phone company AT&T apologises for September 11 'tribute' |date=2013-09-12|
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richmond, California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fontana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi user: rybec, I saw you reversed one of my changes to the Robert L. Johnson Wikipedia page. I tried my hand at copyediting and adding sources, sorry I removed the net worth. I'd like to keep copyediting and adding sources, could you watch my changes for mistakes? Also, is it necessary to create an account for more than one edit or can I copyedit without logging in? 74.193.11.216 (talk) 13:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointers. The article says "This article needs additional citations for verification" now. If I am able edit one article multiple times, I will try to copyedit the RLJ Companies: "This section requires expansion" suggestion first. 74.193.11.216 (talk) 17:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Please see here: BillFloat, Inc, Wayne Tamarelli, Chris Hobart. Please note that I found Tamarelli and BillFloat on the list from Simple on the long-term abuse report you filed. To my knowledge Tamarelli never had an article on the English Wikipedia. BillFloat Inc had a page that was deleted for not asserting significance, but upon some research the company has abundant press coverage and seems to be making some notable headway in the short-term loan space. Thanks! CitizenNeutral (talk) 18:45, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
New articles: Inflection (company), Centrify, Tom Kemp (entrepreneur), Pogoseat. I noticed you also went through a number of my contributions and added orphan tags. I reviewed the WP:Orphan criteria and found that an article needs one link to not be considered an orphan. On all of the new articles I created today, I added at least one link. On a handful of the articles you previously tagged, I went through and linked them when I could. I also noted your MOS suggestion on reference dates. I didn't realize Sept 19, 2013 was unacceptable, while Sep 19, 2013 is acceptable. Thanks for your help! CitizenNeutral (talk) 20:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
As a side note, is there a place to find ALL of the article with a specific tag? For example, I'd be interested in finding all the articles that have an advertisement tag and then working on fixing those articles. Thanks! CitizenNeutral (talk) 20:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I had to revert your move, since we have already the article Shukhov Tower about the tower in Moscow. I now capitalized the tower in the name, to avoid confusions in the future.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Unless that's its proper name, the lowercase form, as originally titled and as I wrote in my WP:RM request, would be correct. —rybec07:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Dear Madame/Sir,
Many thanks in advance for your attention and help. It has taken me quite a long time (due to heavy teaching and examining) to assess the significance of your last arguments concerning the suggested Wikipedia English entry for Mauro Baranzini that I have submitted in March this year, and that has not been accepted three times. It is difficult for me to evaluate your requests:
1. There is a short Italian version of the entry for Mauro Baranzini, which was done about 10-12 years ago, when rigorous editing was not yet in place; if you were to accept the present English one (much more complete and rigorous) you could delete the Italian one;
2. What do you precisely require to complete the English one? One biographic reference is to be found in the volume edited by A. Heertjie, The Makers of Modern Economics,publishe by E. Elgar, Alldershot(UK) and Brookefield (USA), 1995, pp. 1-28 (E. Elgar is an important economics publisher); and onother is the report of the Academy of the Lincei, 2009, for the economics prize given to him jointly with Andreu Mas-Colell (surely a well-known economist). There are others scattered in the Press in Canton Ticino, Switzerland, but surely less important than the two above.
3. I would be grateful if you could give me more specific hints at what to do in order to have it accepted by Wikipedia.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pneuron until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -- Whpq (talk) 17:10, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Rybec, the Banc de Binary article is under attack from Vandals. I added fresh material to clarify the page and it's been swamped by IPs, can you help. I'm new to wiki, or I would know how to stop them--HistorianofRecenttimes (talk) 11:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the note; it's not in my power to stop someone from editing. I've been keeping an eye on the article, and will ask an admin to intervene if it gets out of hand (and if one doesn't step in first). —rybec12:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget to sign your posts
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
The user Suburban_Express was criticized and blocked because some user(s) felt that it seemed to be shared username. Pursuant to the block, our posts to the reward board and bounty board were deleted. I have registered a new username that is specific to an individual and is therefore compliant with wikipedia rules, and re-posted our entries on the two boards. Suburban Express President (talk) 20:30, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the note; I saw your message on Smartse's talk page, but I didn't have anything to say in response. —rybec21:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Greetings Rybec, I am hoping you can figure out what is going on over at Redding, California where a string of anon. users keep adding way too much information to the local television and radio stations. It's usually done in a string of edits, the last one will be very minor, which if reviewing editor does not look at the history page, may look more minor than the cumulative edit. Earliest user of this type was 174.26.245.28 on August 16, the latest edit of this type by 64.134.233.92 where they again break the table and add extra information way beyond the scope of what's needed in a city article. Because they're anonymous editors, there's no way to contact them. I hope you can help me figure out just how much of that information "should" be on that page, and then I can keep page patrolling it because pretty much these type of people don't give up. I am asking you for help because of your sock puppet problems with "Morning277" and paid writers trying to insert things into Wiki. Perhaps this is not one of those, but I do not have enough experience to tell and I don't want to get into an edit war with an anon. editor! Thank you!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
There's a preference called "Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent." An extensive change followed by a minor one could mean that the editor didn't preview, or had an afterthought. I took a look but didn't see anything that was blatantly in bad faith. —rybec08:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. It's just weird that someone anonymous spends so much time making tiny changes to obscure radio stations in a tiny town in the middle of nowhere. Thank you for the expand watchlist suggestion! Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
alcohol-infused whipped cream, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
