User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2013/October

There is so many things wrong with the anime matsuri page. Please let me fix it. Emotiongear Entertainment, Inc. for example...is not there anymore

Reference removal

Hello Sandstein,

I want to ask is someone can remove normal reference by just saying fake? Due I've noticed in here, perfect reference has been removed without constructive discussion https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Khojaly_Massacre&diff=575301927&oldid=575301252

--NovaSkola (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Long time no disturb

This question might be right up your alley, if you so feel inclined. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've replied there. Sandstein 20:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Reference Desk Barnstar
		For helping out and giving informed, succinct, and timely responses whenever I choose to pester you! ---Sluzzelin talk 20:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

October 2013

Hi sandstein

You have recently deleted something I worked very hard on. I dont even live in texas I am not getting paid. I am a handicapped person who just wanted to put the correct information on the anime matsuri page because there was false info there (such as guests that did not appear and missing musical guests).

I am writing to implore you to please put them back. I am a sufferer of lupus raynauds endomitriosis and osteoarthritis and writing is the only thing that makes me happy.

I am a active person in Anime and thats pretty much it. It makes me happy and I attend conventions when I can. Anime matsuri being a favorite.

So if there is anyway you can help me return my hard hours of work and research to what it was this morning please do.

- mia — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiaCarla (talk • contribs) 18:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent work

Hi I am hoping to receive your reply and your aid.

Because you have deleted hours of my work. One that was a labor of love. I am living in New York and I attend anime conventions for a hobby. I am home mostly due to illnesses that i suffer from. I do not get paid to write or attend conventions. I just like to go.

You have recently deleted my work on the ANime Matsuri page. I was correcting information on guests that did not show up, ones that did, their fashion show (which i go to because i dress lolita), and missing musical guests. I get my information from having attended or actually reading press releases and other webpress.

Again i do not get paid. I just wanted the page to look pretty. Is there anyway I can recieve your aid for any new edits to be kept. As they are accurate ones. ANd Its really saddening to see hours of work go away so quickly — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiaCarla (talk • contribs) 18:53, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MiaCarla. I'll reply on your talk page. Sandstein 09:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Can you remind me the proper place to report people who've violated AA2? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 00:53, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's WP:AE. Sandstein 09:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And it's okay for me to report others, right? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 03:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unless you are subject to restrictions such as a topic ban. Sandstein 14:09, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you said a couple months ago I could even with my current ban? Or is that ARCA? TheShadowCrow (talk) 02:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you are topic banned, you may not file AE requests related to the topic. Sandstein 06:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ismet11

Following these edits[1][2][3][4][5][6][7],could you inform User:Ismet11 of the restrictions per AA2? --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed, see the ANI thread about this. Sandstein 14:15, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet of User:Ismet11?

Would User:Bilge88[8][9] appear to be a sockpuppet of User:Ismet11 to you? Or am I hearing quacking noises because the Baltimore Ravens could not beat the lousy Green Bay Packers? --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. I can't edit much right now, I would recommend WP:SPI. Sandstein 06:21, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NovaSkola

Hi Sandstein. Please take a look at User_talk:EdJohnston#User:NovaSkola. --Երևանցի ^talk 16:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right... seems actionable, but please submit it to WP:AE if you think action should be taken, so that it can be looked at more thoroughly. Sandstein 18:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. --Երևանցի ^talk 20:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBPIA questions

Hey, Sandstein, I need some help sorting something out. First, in this section of the case, the clear vandalism item was struck (I assume that when it says "suppressed" underneath, that's all that means). Then in the last bullet point it says what the amendment was. Wouldn't it be easier if the suppressed point #1 was replaced with the amendment? Am I misreading this? Second, in the case of a registered account, the case says that a violation of 1RR can result in sanctions even without a warning. Yet, the warning template, {{Palestine-Israel enforcement}}, is much milder. The language of the template effectively says that except in "egregious" cases, there must always be a warning first. Shouldn't the template language be changed to match the reality?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that I can help you there, as I've not followed the drafting and application of these provisions. The only body who can authoritatively clarify them is the Arbitration Committee, at WP:ARCA. Sandstein 20:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, the Template:Palestine-Israel enforcement is old (2008) and it ought to be deprecated. For notifying an individual, Template:ArbCom-Alert is better. The more severe Template:uw-sanctions will also serve. Happy to discuss these matters on my talk page if you are interested. The 'warning' spoken of in the template you mention is the usual DS warning. I don't think it refers to enforcement of the 1RR. The 1RR restriction is an addition by the community post-ARBPIA. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yerevanci, previously topic banned editor due to arbitration enforcement discretionary sanction, falsifying sources

Hello Sandstein. You previously topic banned User:Yerevanci [10] [11]. I'm wondering if you can look at the Turkish people page. Several editors are falsifying sources (detailed explanation here: User_talk:Proudbolsahye#Falsification_of_Sources) Yerevanci is adding the same problematic material, despite my edit summaries that I warned 2 editors about source falsification. I am not against such content, when they are properly cited; however, I am against misrepresentation of sources.Cavann ^(talk) 21:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wilful source falsification can be grounds for sanctions, however care must be taken to distinguish such cases from good-faith misinterpretations or disagreements about source interpretation. If you think this is misconduct, the place to report it is WP:AE. Sandstein 13:01, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I tried my best to warn the editors and explain the problem this time. If it becomes a trend, it's harder to assume good faith, however. Cavann ^(talk) 23:21, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wtshymanski

Sigh. It's happening again. :( --Guy Macon (talk) 00:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't know (any more) what the problem is or how I can help. Sandstein 12:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection removed from Rupert Sheldrake

Hi, did you mean to cancel Barek's 10-day full protection? vzaak (talk) 09:28, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, that was inadvertent. @Barek:, is that a problem or is semi enough? Edit-warriors can also be warned and sanctioned per WP:AC/DS. Sandstein 12:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I won't restore full protection if you believe that semi-protection is sufficient.

The initial disruption was from an IP; but I still did full protection due to the subsequent reverts by registered users. They were engaging in talk page discussions, but simultaneously reverting each other in the article. So my intent had been to allow time for the talk discussion to make progress, potentially removing the protection early if consensus was reached one way or the other. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The edit-warring seems not to have resumed, so I'm not reapplying full protection right now, Can of course be reapplied if problems resume. Sandstein 08:52, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit counter

The edit counter link on your user page doesn't seem to be working. Lou Sander (talk) 17:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm

Want me to login to my admin account to make that comment instead? ES &L 09:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't know you had an admin account. Using that account to make comments in admin sections would probably be preferable. Sandstein 09:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One of the many reasons why its stupid to treat users comments differently. The comments from non admins are generally just as important and often more so than those from an admin. 138.162.8.57 (talk) 13:39, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or one could say that it is confusing for users to have differently-named admin and non-admin accounts. With regard to AE, the convention to separate admin and non-admin comments is because only admins can act on AE requests, and, in that limited sense, only their opinions are relevant. Sandstein 15:43, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that only admins can act on them but you are completely and utterly incorrect that only their opinions are relevant. That is absolutely incorrect. 138.162.8.57 (talk) 16:20, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Q

Hi, given your close at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive137#MarshalN20, I was wondering what you thought of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Problems at War of the Pacific and whether (a) action should be taken or (b) it's worth going to arbitration enforcement (again). Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:31, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sandstein, Ed is ignoring the context of the situation solely for the purpose of (again) seeing me get in trouble. I have neither contacted User:Darkness Shines through e-mail nor asked him to be my proxy. If my two sole commentaries in the Talk:War of the Pacific page are not exceptions to the "vandalism clause" of the WP:TBAN exceptions, which I understood as allowing me to help resolve matters concerning "obvious vandalism" (which, surely all of these edits constitute: [12], [13], and [14]), then all that needs to be done is to remove my comments in War of the Pacific's talk page.

That Ed is so engaged against me that he would rather simply see me blocked, rather than use his rationality to exercise his administrative powers in an appropriate manner given the context of the situation, is deeply concerning to me.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 14:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied there; in short, I recommend to take this to WP:AE if action appears required, which it may well be. The diffs cited above are certainly not obvious vandalism, but seem to reflect genuine content disagreements, even if the edits may be detrimental for some reason or other. Sandstein 19:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, Sandstein. That's roughly what I was thinking. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question on this, what AE does the article War of the Pacific fall under? I see nothing on the talk page? Darkness Shines (talk) 13:21, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's an editor-specific topic ban from Latin American history at issue. Sandstein 17:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So who do I complain to about the accusations of proxy editing? Darkness Shines (talk) 14:23, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am the one who has an AE problem, not the article; don't worry. That said, it puzzles me that both of you dear administrators (Sandstein and Ed) even "at a first glance" do not see vandalism in edits that include massive tagging, source content removal, and even the elimination of the little country-flag identifiers. Perhaps I should have just notified the problem at AN/I and done nothing more, but I honestly understood the TBAN "vandalism clause" as a valid justification to make a mere couple of comments (which could be considered one, given that it was back-to-back) concerning source removal (vandalism). Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 13:38, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Erim Turukku and Ismail I article

After subsequent discussions with this "editor", I have come to the conclusion this person will not accept any facts from these sources;Cambridge University Press, Andrew J. Newman, Rudi Mathee, Stuart Cary Welch, H.R. Roemer. Calling them, "not reliable".[15]

Also, this editor has falsified information from C.E. Bosworth's, The Ghaznavids:994-1040, page 134. I own said book and the supposed "quote"[16] does not exist on page 134 nor anywhere else in the book.

As such, I am asking that User:Erim Turukku be notified of the editing restrictions covering Armenia and Azerbaijan.

This editor also needs to be warned against copy & pasting another editor's source and simply writing whatever he/she wants(ie.source falsification).

I realize you might be busy right now, so no hurry. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:20, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have the time to look into this, but any user may issue a warning as far as I know. Sandstein 20:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

wp:ae comments

I've just noticed in the wp:ae about Cavann, that my response is needed, but given the fact that the statements should be shortened, I assume I have to wait for the trimming first. I guess it won't make sense to respond to allegations that will be possible shortened.Alexikoua (talk) 20:59, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for your sustained drive to require attribution for images when the author requests it. GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Machine-gun nest listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Machine-gun nest. Since you had some involvement with the Machine-gun nest redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). BDD (talk) 23:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]