This is an archive of past discussions with User:Kingboyk. 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.
You previously warned this user that further copyvios would result in a block; I've given them a final warning for stripping trophy images from the Society Awards site and applying them to television awards article when the site has a clear "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED" disclaimer on all of their pages. Nate•(chatter)00:56, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for the advice about how to deal with the way my contribution to the John Mew page was treated. That is exactly what I plan to do. I have family staying for the next week, so will come back to wikipedia then. I am not especially passionate about the subject of the page, but I am passionate about the right to have contributions that meet wikipedia criteria remain on a page. I think there is something fishy about the deletions, because I had good primary and secondary sources, some sentences can be backed up by information in more than one place and you don't see every sentence on other pages footnoted with proof for this reason. Acirsa Acirsa (talk) 13:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Acirsa - I hope you enjoy your week off and come back refreshed. Thank you for writing to me, it's nice to hear that my words were of some use to you. --kingboyk (talk) 13:41, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I did. Kids back at school now. Any chance you can remind me where I find the page of suggested projects to work on? I know that sounds like a really silly question, but I can't remember what it was called or where to find it. I am not the most tech savvy! Acirsa (talk) 15:21, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
@Acirsa: Welcome back and apologies for the delay in replying. It rather depends what sort of work you'd like to get stuck into, but I just had a poke around: Template:Dashboard lists all sorts of things needing attention. From there I went to Wikipedia:Backlog. The latter looks like a great place to find articles which need copyediting, fact checking/adding references, more minor cleanup, and various other things. I'm sure if you click through from either of those pages you'll soon find something . Hope that helps! --kingboyk (talk) 14:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Michael Burtov
Hi,
Looking for deleted page on - Michael Burtov.
log shows your were the deleter on record but your activity log does not show this action and or reasons.
Please can you provide more info / ref / help
Thanks d\so much
06:15, 22 July 2019 Kingboyk talk contribs deleted page Talk:Michael Burtov (G8: Talk page of a deleted page) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comhunicate (talk • contribs)
Steve Hi, My brother lives in Nailsworth maybe we can connect next time I visit him?
Looking for deleted page on - Michael Burtov.
log shows your were the deleter on record but your activity log does not show this action and or reasons.
Please can you provide more info / ref / help
Thanks d\so much
Michael - aka Comhunicate.
06:15, 22 July 2019 Kingboyk talk contribs deleted page Talk:Michael Burtov (G8: Talk page of a deleted page) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comhunicate (talk • contribs)
Hello there Michael... let's see, is the deleted content at Michael Burtov or Draft:Michael Burtov... ok, there are deleted edits at the former. However, it's not a simple WP:REFUND situation. I'm going to have to retrace my steps and possibly make some enquiries so you won't get an immediate answer I'm afraid.
This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a page created by a banned or blocked user (Jkmarold55 – SPI confirmed suspected) in violation of the user's ban or block, with no substantial edits by others. See CSD G5.
If this article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with the given reason for deletion, you can click the button below and leave a message explaining why you believe it should not be deleted. You can also visit the talk page to check if you have received a response to your message.
Note that once tagged with this notice, this article may be deleted at any time if it unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if an explanation posted to the talk page is found to be insufficient.
This criterion doesn't apply to templates which are transcluded by other pages, unless these transclusions were all done by the banned user in question.
This page was last edited by GSS (contribs | logs) at 04:49, 22 July 2019 (UTC) (6 seconds ago) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comhunicate (talk • contribs)
Michael, thank you the information and the disclosure.
Here's a condensed version of the article's history:
It was first created on 12 February 2013 by User:Voidz who was blocked later that year as part of a sockpuppet ring. The case details are here.
That version of the article was deleted on 18 March 2013 following this deletion discussion
A new version was published on 3 June 2019 by User:Ryzensai who was subsequently blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Jkmarold55, whose story is documented here. I should note that there were accusations made there not just of sockpuppetry but of using sockpuppets in order to hide/advance paid editing
The article was tagged for deletion on 22 July 2019 under Criteria for speedy deletion - G5. The rules state "This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others." There were edits by others but they were not, in my opinion, substantial. For the deletion to be valid, it is also a requirement that "the edit or page must have been made while the user was actually banned or blocked." Jkmarold55 has been blocked since 11 April 2017, and the new article was created this year, so, again, I believe this requirement has been met.
In conclusion, therefore, it appears to me that the article was correctly deleted, and I don't feel at liberty to undelete it without community approval. Your next port of call, should you wish to pursue undeletion, is Wikipedia:Deletion review. However, you should only use that forum per it's stated purpose - my summary being if you believe that I have not followed the correct procedures or if significant new information has come to light since the deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page.
One last word about your own editing. All of your contributions here are about or advocating for Mr Burtov; this gives the impression that yours is a single purpose account and some admins might construe that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. I'm going to leave you a templated message on your talk page about conflicts of interest. Please read the information given and try to understand that we, the Wikipedia volunteers, are trying to build a free encyclopedia and not a business directory. You will also need to follow the instructions and declare on your user page any personal or professional affiliations you have which might influence your editing on Wikipedia. Thank you. --kingboyk (talk) 19:33, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Kingboyk. Just a courtesy note to let you know I've unblocked this user - he seems to now be aware of the issues around his edits and won't repeat them, and the username has been changed. If you have any concerns, please ping me. All the best, Yunshui雲水07:43, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Man, seems to be my day for undoing your stuff, sorry... on checking through the Cossette, Inc. article, I kinda felt it didn't quite meet the criteria for proposed deletion. On the fence, to be honest, but if it's going to be deleted, I think a proper AFD discussion would be the best way to do so, particularly given the number of SPA accounts that have passed through over the years (once it goes out via AFD, it's much harder to recreate the page thanks to G4 - so if it needs to be deleted, it can stay deleted). I've thus removed the PROD tag, and will take a look at the page to see if it can be cleaned up at all. Apologies for pissing in your cornflakes twice in one day! Yunshui雲水16:38, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
No no that's quite alright Yunshui. If I block a user, I'm more than happy to see them welcomed back if they will be constructive; and as for removing a Prod, well, that's how the system works :) So, no need to apologise but I appreciate it anyway :) Thanks! --kingboyk (talk) 16:43, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
While I've got your ear Yunshui, are you active in/up to speed with WP:SPI? I raised a case which appears to be going nowhere and I'm not sure if I'm supposed to wait it out or be proactive and if the latter, what I am supposed to do. Are you able to advise? (Don't worry ahout replying if you're busy!) --kingboyk (talk) 16:52, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
I've just dusted my hands off after pruning the Cossette article; point me at the SPI and I'll take a look. Yunshui雲水16:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
No harm in going over it again, though... At the end of the day, I didn't do much; one block handed down and a few notes on the other accounts. I've left a note for a clerk to close it off, which should see it taken care of. Yunshui雲水17:18, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
And now I'm much obliged, so I guess we're even :) Thanks very much - it's been a pleasure doing business with you. --kingboyk (talk) 17:20, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
I posted a message on their talk page with the uw-username template (and my reasoning). Do you think I did okay? Or is there something I should have done differently/added? Clovermoss (talk) 23:34, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi! First of all, I just read my messages back and: I must cut down on my usage of "of course" :)
Give me a moment and I'll check your edit...
By the way, just in case you weren't aware: referencing a username with a link causes them to receive a notification. --kingboyk (talk) 23:43, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Okay. Well, if they're reading this, the reason I was asking for advice here is because I don't want to scare away new editors who want to help and when I'm unsure about my own actions, I like to ask for advice. Clovermoss (talk) 23:46, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: You did fine. However, I'm going to send you an email. I don't need any reply, it's purely informational. Thanks for your diligence and efforts. --kingboyk (talk) 23:48, 30 August 2019 (UTC) (edit conflict)≥
[I have a script installed which strikes out the usernames of blocked users, and whilst scanning my talk page I noticed that this user is now struck out].
Hi, I've read all the messages, thanks for letting me know. My wiki break is for school right now, as that's where I'm focusing most of my attention. Grade 12 has been interesting so far, but also very demanding of my time. Clovermoss (talk) 00:57, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice, which I will try to act on, although I am finding it very difficult to work with Wikipedia - even discovering how to respond to you has just taken 15 minutes. (And I hope I have now got it right.)
Another reviewer has suggested that I should declare a COI on two other entries, and I am happy to do so but I can't find out how to do this. The COI entry is so long and complicated that it failed to get its explanation through to me! Somehow all the guidance I read seems to assume that I am already an expert, which clearly I am not! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodhew (talk • contribs) 20:58, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
@Goodhew: Thank you for your message. I'm glad to hear the advice was warmly received, and I hope it proves useful. There is certainly a lot to take in.
On learning about Wikipedia:
Without any hint of irony, I'm now going to give you another link - Wikipedia:Five pillars. This details the most important principles of Wikipedia, with links to more detailed info. An understanding of the five pillars will get you a long way, and you can pick up the rest as you go along.
I notice with shame that nobody has left you a welcome message. I've now done just that.
On getting help, in situ if necessary:
Please see the welcome message I have left on your talk page. If you get really stuck, just edit your own talk page to ask a question - add {{Help me}} to your talk page, along with your question, and press save. Somebody will then along be shortly to help you. It would be quite alright, for example, to explain that you don't understand how to leave a message for another user and to ask for instructions. (Except: You do now know, as you did it right).
On managing conflicts of interest:
Actually, it was me who left you that message as well.
As you're having difficulties, what I've done is add the disclosure to your user page on your behalf. Please look at your user page HERE and verify. Then just confirm to me by replying to me here that the declaration is correct. Confirmation would be best but if I don't hear from you I'll assume your previous message to me was confirmation.
I don't think you need to worry too much further about the conflict of interest guidelines for now. Other users will be able to see your declaration and will advise you if there are any problems.
My question about the nature of your account
There's one other thing. Is your account for one individual (Gwen? Peter?) or do you share it?
Thanks for your VERY helpful reply, and for revealing that you live near Hereford. I am a volunteer helping to set up this new engineering institution, so my conflict of interest is just that - interest. I draw no money from the project! I am keen to help them because I think the initiative is very worthwhile and this is one thing I can do to help.
I will absorb your comments more fully later in the day, but meanwhile a quick question/comment. You (or someone) suggested that local papers were not a good reference, but that The Times or The Telegraph would be more acceptable. There have been articles in both Times & Telegraph about NMiTE but the problem is that they contain lots of errors! If I cite them I propound these misconceptions. [I should add that I am an academic of 55 years standing - now in my 70s. I have published literally hundreds of highly-referenced articles and half a dozen books, so I am quite familiar with the idea of referencing and citation - and therefore cautious about weak references.]
Finally for the moment, my wife Gwen does not have her own account so anything relating to either of us (or the Waverton Good Read Award, which she runs) is done by me. I did not set up the WGRA entry, but I do edit it occasionally when, for example, there is a new winner.
Enough for now - thank you again. I will work on the draft again later. Peter
(just remembered the tildes, but don't understand why they are needed since the system seems to know who I am anyway Goodhew (talk) 08:49, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
@Goodhew: Thanks for the information regarding your account. That's all perfectly in order. If your wife decides to edit Wikipedia too, please set up a new account for her as accounts are not to be shared.
I can't really help with regards to inaccuracies in the public record. At Wikipedia, we consider what the "reliable" sources to say to be the truth. Ultimately, you have to record what the sources say and if you can't do that, perhaps it is better to leave the draft alone and let somebody who is not connected write it. As a veteran academic you know way more about these things than me - I am just a lowly software developer - so I shall have to leave you to wrestle with that yourself . Don't forget that the Articles for Creation help desk is also available to you. --kingboyk (talk) 20:51, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your help and encouragement. I will continue the struggle. [But I still push back against the idea that The Times is a better factual record than The Hereford Times. That's just snobbery, I suspect. I'm now searching for a better record than either of them!] Goodhew (talk) 07:51, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
@Goodhew: You're very welcome. I didn't mean to suggest you can't or shouldn't reference a reputable local newspaper ("Local sources are considered to be reliable sources if they meet Wikipedia's guidelines for being reliable sources. They are valid in establishing notability if they provide in-depth, non-routine, non-trivial coverage of the subject.").
My remark was about relying solely on local newspapers (and a secondary source) for references. This is a topic that is likely to be in time, if not already, of national and indeed international significance and it seemed odd to me that no national sources of international repute were cited (this includes organs such as The Times and The Daily Telegraph, whether or not you or I personally appreciate these newspapers); furthermore, substantial coverage in national and/or international publications and other media is a far stronger indicator of notability than local coverage only. Finally, one has be careful not to "cherrypick" only the sources which align with one's own view.
If I edit my (rejected) draft to improve it, and press "Publish" does this "submit" it? If not how does one "submit"? Originally I clearly failed to submit and a kind editor did it for me later (which means I don't know what s/he did).
Currently all I want to do is make some improving edits and not yet submit it again, but I don't understand the difference between "publish" and "submit".
Goodhew (talk) 10:51, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Underneath the rejection message there is a "Resubmit" button. Press that to resubmit. You may also have to press Save - I'm not 100% sure. I think it should be clear whether that second step is necessary or not - if the editor opens up, you'll need to save; if it doesn't and the text on the page changes then it's a single click operation. (I became an admin before the Articles for Creation process was introduced, so I've never actually used it!). --kingboyk (talk) 20:55, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello mr. administrator,
You blocked for 24 hours for "edit warring".
But Kindly observe that I did not "edit war".
Please / kindly provide me of the list of all edit where I "edit warred" which you blocked me for.
Now, The only "revert" I made was this one with a proper "edit summary" : https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Ramesh_Pokhriyal&diff=prev&oldid=913202928 and after a discussion with the other editor on his talk page. Was this single edit sufficient to block me ? BTW: Other editors have up[held that edit of mine and removed the content from that article.
Thanks. Have nice day.
Benarasibabu (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Your contributions can be seen here, and here is our policy on edit warring. Your block was very short and is over now. In future please discuss changes you wish to make on the relevant talk pages if you meet resistance or if you anticipate that they will be controversial. --kingboyk (talk) 21:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Draft of page for NMiTE
Steve - thanks for all your help. Could I ask a further favour? I have now modified the draft considerably. I have tried to adopt a purely factual tone and have added several more references. Would you take a quick look and give your opinion whether it is now likely to be acceptable? (I know that you cannot promise, but I would value your view.)
Goodhew (talk) 07:50, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
@Goodhew: I've been busy, Peter - apologies. I've had a quick read of the new draft (with the emphasis on quick) and it looks a lot better in terms of tone and the number and quality of references. I'm not qualified to say whether it would be accepted in that state, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. Well done!
A couple of issues I spotted:
1) What is "student-centred" and how is that ethos any different from other educational institutions? (Either remove, or elaborate with reference to secondary reliable sources on this point)
2) Your citations are not formatted per our usual style. Either ask for the reviewer or somebody at the help desk to assist you with that, or come back to me and when I'm less busy I'll format them for you. I personally would not consider this a fair reason to reject an article but I don't know how strict they are. (I'm not actually an AfC reviewer, I'm a Wikipedia admin who just happened to see your post at the help desk when I was visiting AfC on other business :))
Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.
A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.
Thee might kindly wish to release this XD-related scroll of segmented installments from the dungeon for nearly nine years by the vassal named Bearcat. It is almost a decennary ago and it cannot stay like that any further. He is still slaying dragons though.
Sent it to the protection fief to have it free and unfortunately fellow vassal Favonian banished it back to the dungeon. Send it back there if disruption resumes.
Update: after a reply posted here from said user, I figured out how to open an SPI investigation, because I realized that it was better to address that there than a post on a talk page. You can see the archived discussion here: [1]. Clovermoss (talk) 21:33, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
I received a message recently saying you have removed our citation from the Skip (container) page. We have actually put some work into the information we have supplied on this page - previously it have the wrong information regarding the names and capacity of the skips.
Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.
Technical news
As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.
