User talk:Yunshui/Archive 45

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40 ← Archive 43 Archive 44 Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 → Archive 50

For you

Plum-blossom
Some Spring Plum-blossom for you. Take care of the dogs. Hafspajen (talk) 14:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Pretty, thanks Hafs. I hope you change your mind. Yunshui 雲水 14:10, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Not understanding an action

I don't understand why you did what you did with User:Paulkutty — you blocked the username, even though you didn't do anything to the page's creator, User:PaUl KuMaR (paulkutty). The shorter username has never made any edits, and the connection between the two is obvious, so the accounts aren't a violation of WP:ILLEGIT; unless PaUl hasn't been doing something wrong, why block his alternate account? And if he's been doing something wrong, why not block the main username, rather than just blocking the alternate? Nyttend (talk) 03:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll grant that my thinking behind that was somewhat convoluted, and the result was perhaps not what might have been expected. Basically, I identified an editor posting his personal information on multiple userpages in classic WP:NOTFACEBOOK style, and generating multiple accounts in order to do so. Since he'd gone as far as to register the Paulkutty account rather than just creating a page for a non-existent user (with, it would appear, the same modus operandi in mind), I figured blocking it was a quick and simple way of keeping him restricted to one account, with which I could then communicate - and hopefully, of getting his attention. I didn't block the main account becuase I was trying to be nice and encourage him to edit productively, however since literally all he has ever done on Wikipedia, both before and after my message to him, is post his personal profile, I'm not sure whether I shouldn't have blocked that account too, under WP:NOTHERE.
Either way, I have no intention of wasting any further time on the guy - if you want to undo my block, block the other account, or any combination of the two, you have my blessing to do so; I'm happy to trust your judgement on it. Yunshui 雲水 07:15, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
This all makes sense to me, and now that I understand, I agree with blocking one and not the other. It's just that you treated it as a sockpuppet situation, and I couldn't remember seeing a sockpuppet situation where the self-confessed sock was blocked and the master not. I may unblock and immediately reblock with a different rationale, lest the account owner be confused too. Nyttend (talk) 12:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Feel free, though I doubt it will make much difference; I suspect now that he's got "his" Wikipedia page up he'll never bother us again. Yunshui 雲水 12:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Create album

I do not bother with the greetings and the album under its Gngv single one of Wikipedia administrators create credible sources put the albums on resources.--5.232.45.64 (talk) 13:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Yunshui 雲水 13:46, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

shokofeha (song)javad ramezani--5.232.45.64 (talk) 13:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I realise that's the article you're discussing; I just don't understand what you're trying to say about it. Yunshui 雲水 13:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I spent three days with other users and cause them to speak in the debate and I prepared this article by 13 .krdym Please re-create another user account--5.232.45.64 (talk) 13:58, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't see any evidence that you've discussed this with other editors beyond posting the above message to a couple of people's talkpages. Articles about individual songs where the artist is not sufficiently notable for an article don't belong on Wikipedia. Yunshui 雲水 14:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)


Starters article panda123456789 can participate in the discussions of the user.--5.232.45.64 (talk) 14:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Panda123456789 has never edited a Wikipedia article or had a discussion with another user. The article was started by User:Japan123456789, who has also never entered into discussion with any other user. Yunshui 雲水 14:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

n the debate about the removal of this article described Japan123456789--5.232.45.64 (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Please stop adding new headers for every response, it make replying more of a chore. Again, I do not understand what you are saying - are you telling me I should debate the deletion of the article with the user who created it, that User:Japan123456789 has discussed this somewhere (he hasn't), that there was a description of User:Japan123456789 at the AFD discussion which you want to draw my attention to... It's clear that English isn't your first language, and that's perfectly fine, but unless you can express yourself in a way that I can understand, I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to help you. Yunshui 雲水 14:25, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Question about protocol

One of my detractors has been following my work pretty closely and trying to identify copyvios and/or close paraphrases in my writing. My question is this: am I allowed to do the same to them, or would that be seen as inappropriate? I identified some pretty serious issues in one of their FAs, but I don't want to edit that talk page and be accused of impropriety. What should I do? RO(talk) 21:55, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

If you avoid including copyvios in your work, that shouldn't be a problem, surely? As for retaliatory nit-picking, yes, that would be inappropriate, unless you've identified an unambiguous copyright violation. I really dislike the mindset that views other editors as "detractors", by the way: with the exception of a small handful of trolls and vandals we are all here to make the encyclopedia better, and this habit of personalising disputes and setting up other editors as the "opposition" is one of the most harmful habits on Wikipedia. If you've got a genuine problem with a piece of content, and if you would have noticed and acted on that problem regardless of the editor who added it, then by all means raise it as an issue. If you only found the problem because you were meticulously searching through a specific editor's contributions for ammunition against them, then you shoud consider whether you're engaged in improving Wikipedia or just point scoring against a perceived enemy. Yunshui 雲水 07:26, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
If you avoid including copyvios in your work, that shouldn't be a problem, surely? Nobody has yet confirmed that I've added anything close to a copyvio to any article, so it's not an established problem that requires the constant supervision. I really dislike the mindset that views other editors as "detractors" I'm 99% positive that they would self-identify as my detractor. If you've got a genuine problem with a piece of content, and if you would have noticed and acted on that problem regardless of the editor who added it, then by all means raise it as an issue. I saw the article on the main page and ran it through the copyvio and dupe detectors, and that's how I identified several examples of close paraphrasing and possible plagiarism. a perceived enemy, surely there are times when one editor is truly out to get the other, and it's not a AGF fail in those cases to be concerned, and that's how I feel about this particular person. RO(talk) 15:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
FTR, I have diffs of eight different editors advising them to leave me alone, and several go so far as to suggest that they are stalking me. RO(talk) 16:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Two wrongs do not make a right. You are being stalked to some degree, and they are "detractor" pretty much by self-admission, but it is best not to rise to it and certainly not to do something that might be perceived as retaliation. - Sitush (talk) 17:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I won't retaliate. I promise. All I want is for it to stop, so I can build content without the distraction of constant accusations and stalking. RO(talk) 18:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Sitush puts it better than I could. I'm not disagreeing that you have been targeted by other editors (or editor; I think we all know who we're talking about here), and that's to their shame, but you aren't going to clear the air by adopting similar tactics. Yunshui 雲水 19:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I totally agree, and I promise that I will not stoop to their level. Thanks for advising me on this issue, Yunshui and Sitush. RO(talk) 19:25, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks so much for the Barnstar! I haven't uploaded images for quite a while, but you've reminded me that I should make some more time to put more up. (Everything on my Flickr is Creative Commons BY-SA though, if there's anything you ever find useful!)  Helenabella (Talk)  00:48, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

It was well-deserved - and please do upload more of your excellent photographs! Yunshui 雲水 06:48, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Does This Mean Aaron La Lux Does not exist?

If Wiki is open-source, and is about people/places/ and/or things that exist, then why was my article deleted? Aaron La Lux is an author, and is published, and does exist. Please clarify, as this is truly dis-heartening on so many levels... It feels like the suppression of information which is the exact opposite of what I thought the internet was supposed to be. It honestly makes me want to stop donating to Wiki. Please just clarify. I read the links and I understand that Wiki is not for advertising and/or promotion. SO just tell me how people are supposed to know about people/places/things if no one can post about them in the first place?

Please Advise as I am new to this and you obviously have much more experience than me there.

Thanks!

AaronLA2012 (talk) 10:28, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@AaronLA2012:, I'm the original nominator for deletion of your book series article. I wanted to reach out and and say that I'm sorry you're dis-heartened. I understand why you would feel that way. However, Wikipedia has many guidelines regarding things like notability. Wikipedia is intended to be an encyclopedia, not a repository for every bit of information in the world. Take a look at this page which explains this more in-depth. Since Wikipedia guidelines take a bit of time to get the hang of, we generally don't recommend that a new editor start off by creating new articles. However, this is a great resource to learn about article writing. If I can help you at all, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. --Non-Dropframe talk 10:39, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for communicating so thoroughly and although it is indeed a feeling of bittersweet mixed emotions that you were the one to delete the article as well as the one to inform me as to the reasons, I suppose that it is one of the glorious things about the internet... One can shoot the arrow, and patch the wound in the same moment ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AaronLA2012 (talk • contribs) 10:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Non-dropframe has explained this pretty well above, but just to be clear: Wikipedia isn't about things/people/places that exist (we have many, many articles on things that emphatically don't exist). Wikipedia hosts articles about things that are notable, which is a very different concept. "Notability", here, means "the subject of significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent, third-party sources". Wikipedia is not the place to start telling the world about something; that's a job for other websites, newspapers, books and other media. If enough of those sources start talking about a topic, Wikipedia will subsequently report what they say about it, but to start with Wikipedia is to get the whole process arse-about-face.
One thing that hasn't apparently been mentioned so far is that, since it seems pretty clear that you're the same person as Aaron La Lux, you shouldn't be writing about yourself anyway, even if you are notable. We have clear conflict of interest and autobiographical guidelines, and they basically say, in a nutshell, "Don't write about yourself on Wikipedia." You would be best advised, if you believe that you or your books meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, to post at Requested articles in the hopes that someone who doesn't have a conflict of interest will create an article about you. Even if they do, though, you will have no more say over its content than any other editor. Yunshui 雲水 10:59, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2015

Still stunned but no longer annoyed

Thank you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

No need to be stunned; I'm just not as nice as you are! Yunshui 雲水 09:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Per my talk comments, I was stunned by his complaints about the removal of his copyvios. Your indef did not stun me, it was appropriate and alleviated my annoyance at the situation.  :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I long ago ceased to be surprised at the things people will vociferously complain about... You should try volunteering at OTRS; you'd be amazed... Yunshui 雲水 09:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Help on "Reference"

Many thanks for your answer. Basically I remember that as once a title is placed between square brackets the text is linked to a page on the W of the same language, and the shortened version of the 'other language' like 'en' for English, links it to that title in that language, but there is, I believe a semicolon, or colon included somewhere, to direct the link to the other language, something that I have not been able to figure out yet. Thanks again LouisBB (talk) 10:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi LouisBB. It basically works like this: suppose I want a link to the Japanese article about Sakakibara Kenkichi, whose name in Japanese is 榊原鍵吉. I would format my link something like this: [[ja:榊原鍵吉|Sakakibara Kenkichi]]. The ja: tells the software to look at ja-wiki (the Japanese Wikipedia), the 榊原鍵吉 gives it the article title, and Sakakibara Kenkichi tells it what to display. The result is this: Sakakibara Kenkichi (click to see where it goes). Hope that helps a bit more. Yunshui 雲水 10:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Forgot to mention: all the language codes can be found at List of Wikipedias. Yunshui 雲水 10:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks Yunshui! This explains it all. What I forgot was, that the language sign comes within the brackets. Sorry, if now "you have made a bat for your own back": now I shall be coming back, to bother you with my problems if I have any, because your explanation was too good. Kind regards, LouisBB (talk) 10:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
It's what I'm here for (that, and the occasional slice of cake). Feel free to pester me with any questions you have. Yunshui 雲水 10:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
well done

Superkid761 (talk) 11:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you and welcome back. Please be extremely careful using Igloo; it's fast and easy to make mistakes with. Yunshui 雲水 11:43, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Newbie question on PC1

I pending change protected Derek Kilmer here. So how did an IP manage to edit it here afterwards? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

IPs can still edit articles under PC, it's just that their edits don't appear in the live version of the article until they've been approved. If you look at the page history, you can see a highlighted box around the IPs edit, indicating that pending changes was applied (and "reviewed" by good ol' CluebotNG, who reverted it). Yunshui 雲水 14:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Given the article's recent history, I would strongly suggest upping the protection to semi, actually - anywhere that multiple IP edits have had to be supressed revdeleted is not a place you want IPs editing, even if their edits are scrutinised before being allowed into the encyclopedia proper. Put it this way: we consider those edits bad enough that we won't let ordinary editors see them, yet PC on the article makes them visible to regitered editors in the history until they get supressed revdeleted. Far better if they weren't made in the first place. Yunshui 雲水 14:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I went with PC because the article has not been edited much other than a flurry today. If the non-autoconfirmed edits had stretched over a day or two, I would have semi-protected. As it is, the article is still being vandalised anyway, so I'll up the protection. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The guy behind the IPs would appear to be User:Fullthrottle523, if you're interested; he's attacking a number of senatorial bios today. Yunshui 雲水 14:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Ono Ranzan

Harrias talk 00:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Yunshui. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Still stunned but no longer annoyed

Thank you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

No need to be stunned; I'm just not as nice as you are! Yunshui 雲水 09:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Per my talk comments, I was stunned by his complaints about the removal of his copyvios. Your indef did not stun me, it was appropriate and alleviated my annoyance at the situation.  :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I long ago ceased to be surprised at the things people will vociferously complain about... You should try volunteering at OTRS; you'd be amazed... Yunshui 雲水 09:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Help on "Reference"

Many thanks for your answer. Basically I remember that as once a title is placed between square brackets the text is linked to a page on the W of the same language, and the shortened version of the 'other language' like 'en' for English, links it to that title in that language, but there is, I believe a semicolon, or colon included somewhere, to direct the link to the other language, something that I have not been able to figure out yet. Thanks again LouisBB (talk) 10:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi LouisBB. It basically works like this: suppose I want a link to the Japanese article about Sakakibara Kenkichi, whose name in Japanese is 榊原鍵吉. I would format my link something like this: [[ja:榊原鍵吉|Sakakibara Kenkichi]]. The ja: tells the software to look at ja-wiki (the Japanese Wikipedia), the 榊原鍵吉 gives it the article title, and Sakakibara Kenkichi tells it what to display. The result is this: Sakakibara Kenkichi (click to see where it goes). Hope that helps a bit more. Yunshui 雲水 10:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Forgot to mention: all the language codes can be found at List of Wikipedias. Yunshui 雲水 10:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks Yunshui! This explains it all. What I forgot was, that the language sign comes within the brackets. Sorry, if now "you have made a bat for your own back": now I shall be coming back, to bother you with my problems if I have any, because your explanation was too good. Kind regards, LouisBB (talk) 10:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
It's what I'm here for (that, and the occasional slice of cake). Feel free to pester me with any questions you have. Yunshui 雲水 10:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
well done

Superkid761 (talk) 11:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you and welcome back. Please be extremely careful using Igloo; it's fast and easy to make mistakes with. Yunshui 雲水 11:43, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Newbie question on PC1

I pending change protected Derek Kilmer here. So how did an IP manage to edit it here afterwards? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

IPs can still edit articles under PC, it's just that their edits don't appear in the live version of the article until they've been approved. If you look at the page history, you can see a highlighted box around the IPs edit, indicating that pending changes was applied (and "reviewed" by good ol' CluebotNG, who reverted it). Yunshui 雲水 14:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Given the article's recent history, I would strongly suggest upping the protection to semi, actually - anywhere that multiple IP edits have had to be supressed revdeleted is not a place you want IPs editing, even if their edits are scrutinised before being allowed into the encyclopedia proper. Put it this way: we consider those edits bad enough that we won't let ordinary editors see them, yet PC on the article makes them visible to regitered editors in the history until they get supressed revdeleted. Far better if they weren't made in the first place. Yunshui 雲水 14:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I went with PC because the article has not been edited much other than a flurry today. If the non-autoconfirmed edits had stretched over a day or two, I would have semi-protected. As it is, the article is still being vandalised anyway, so I'll up the protection. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The guy behind the IPs would appear to be User:Fullthrottle523, if you're interested; he's attacking a number of senatorial bios today. Yunshui 雲水 14:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Ono Ranzan

Harrias talk 00:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Yunshui. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Joan Fontaine

hello Yunshui, you sent me a message regarding my changes to Joan Fontaine's page. She was my neighbor on Lower Walden rd. in Carmel highlands California. My reference is a primary reference. however I am sure there are many other places where the information can be found. Joan Fontaine did not live in Carmel, but rather lived and died in Carmel Highlands california on Lower Walden rd. Clayton.

Newbie question on history merges

I just speedy deleted the redirect Reshoring per WP:CSD#G6 because it was holding up an Articles for Creation submission with the same name. This article therefore now has 10 deleted edits. Would be appropriate to restore these via a history merge? As there is no overlap between any of the edits, it should be relatively straightforward. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:42, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The original was removed via an AFD, so there's no real need to restore the deleted edits. You could do so if you wanted to have a go at histmerging (there's no reason the original edits shouldn't be visible in the history), but I wouldn't say it was necessary. Yunshui 雲水 11:07, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

A compromise...

Hello, sorry to bother you, but I tried logging into User:Doughnuthead but the BASC application is preventing me from sending an email. It says my email was never authenticated, and as this is an account I set up back in 2009 I don't know where I can get the verification from. But as far as my unblock/ban goes, my compromise is you get the opinions of the main users I had run-ins with which led to my ban. Contact User:MuZemike, User:Boing! said Zebedee, User:Philosopher and User:thejadefalcon (I think the latter might be retired though). It's only fair that me getting back on the site is judged on the opinions of those I affected most- it's the moral thing I suppose. If you want details of what led to my ban, it is on a double account from 2012 called User:RedBullWarrior but be aware this is not behavior I intend to repeat.--89.243.205.141 (talk) 14:16, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:BASC: If you are unable to use the EmailUser system, you may e-mail us directly at arbcom-appeals-en@lists.wikimedia.org. Please stop posting on Wikipedia under your IP, you are not helping your case. Yunshui 雲水 14:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Adam Matthew account check-in

Hello Yunshui,

You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Adam Matthew through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:

  • Please make sure that you can still log in to your Adam Matthew account. If you are having trouble let me know.
  • Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
  • Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you, Wikipedia Library Adam Matthew account coordinator HazelAB (talk) 16:12, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2015

Email

Hello, Yunshui. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

— Yash! (Y) 13:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Yunshui/Admin

Did you use a tool to generate this? I am interested in having this for myself. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 13:49, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

No, it's just the {{adminstats}} template, for the most part. Help yourself: {{adminstats|Chrislk02}} will produce the same thing for you. Yunshui 雲水 13:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

New admin's question on revdel

Hi. I'd like to revdel this diff, simply because the editor posted their email address in it (it's redacted on later revisions). However, the revdel box brings up a big scary "FOR OVERSIGHTERS ONLY" heading above the appropriate option I want to select (which is personal information). I seem to recall ages ago I put in a request to oversight an email address on a help desk and it was declined. What's normal procedure here? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

You can still do the RevDel using the "personal information" reason, just make sure you request oversight (there's a link to do so at the top of WP:OVERSIGHT) afterwards. In this case, no need; I'll sort it for you. Yunshui 雲水 10:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
It's probably also worth noting that email addresses are at the lower end of what we will suppress. In this case, since it revealed her full name and place of work, suppression is appropriate, but if the address was something like yunshuiwiki@gmail.com (an anonymous pseudonym on a free mail server) then there's no need; redaction on its own would be sufficient, and possibly RevDel if the user requested it. Yunshui 雲水 10:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Request

Hi, since you are such an experienced user and admin, I wanted to know whether my AfD stats indicate that I have well understanding of various notability guidelines? I feel that I should try RfA in 1 or 2 years. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 14:13, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Used as a quick assessment tool, the stats do show that you've voted with consensus most of the time (a 90% match to the eventual outcome is, IIRC, better than my average when I ran for RFA). However, that's not necessarily a demonstration that you know the notability guidelines well; having taken a random sample of AFDs from the last year, it looks as though you tend to only !vote on AFDs where the emerging consensus is already fairly clear. In all the examples I checked (and I'll admit that I didn't check all of them, but my sample size was still around 30% of your total AFD contributions) you had added your !vote to a discussion where virtually every previous !voter had given the same verdict already. I didn't see any examples where there was substantial discussion, nor any examples where you were obligated to deliver extensive policy-based arguments or in-depth analysis of sources. It's not possible, therefore, to draw the conclusion that you know your way around the notability guidelines from your AFD stats; you might well know them inside out, but the AFD stats don't prove that. Yunshui 雲水 14:26, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
What should I do now? I never thought about it in this way.--Skr15081997 (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, you could start by pitching in to some more complex discussions - look for AFDs which are being debated, where the article might or might not be sufficiently notable. Do some work at AFC (Lord knows they need more reviewers!), where you'll need to make calls on whether new articles deserve to be in the encyclopedia or not (and what deletion process is appropriate, if they don't). Write some articles of your own showing that you can locate suitable sources to demonstrate a topic's notability, and milk them for all they're worth. Help out new users at the Teahouse or the helpdesk, where you can show you understand notability by explaining it to others. There's a lot you can do! Yunshui 雲水 14:39, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
What more fields should I work in? As far as content is concerned, I have 8 GAs and 1 FL to my credit and there would be FA(s) in the coming year.--Skr15081997 (talk) 14:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Your content creation is very good, actually, and would definitely stand you in good stead at an RFA. I'd recommend anything that gets you directly involved with other users - RFCs and dispute resolution are good for this. Try and avoid ANI... Yunshui 雲水 14:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I will follow your advice. Should I also get more involved with FLC and FA discussions? What more tips would you give me?--Skr15081997 (talk) 15:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
FA work shows that you know what makes for a truly top-notch article, so yeah, it couldn't hurt. The best tip I can offer is: be a good editor. You already are, of course; what I mean is that you don't need to set yourself the "goal" of adminship (trust me, it's not all shits and giggles... well, it's not all giggles, anyway). Just work to make Wikipedia better: that's what we're all here for, after all. Yunshui 雲水 17:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, when I saw that the coverage of Indian topics isn't even of satisfactory level I decided to start editing. Now I also work on several other topics as well. Thanks for all your suggestions. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 04:45, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

(stalking) I came here to ask Yunshui something else, but I'll just give you my 2c ... you are a good editor with over 10,000 article edits, a couple of GAs under your belt and a specialist on Indian culture, which is a big and emerging topic around here. That's probably good enough to tick the "content" part of RfA. By all means give FA a go, but don't do it just because you want to be an admin, do it because you want to make one of the best articles Wikipedia has ever produced. Like Yunshui, I think a lot of your AfD votes are of the "me too" variety, and I'd look again at the AfDs where you didn't match consensus, such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fitoor just to refresh your memory in how the discussion went. Have a look at something like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Michigan Men's Glee Club where I had to fight tooth and nail and retrospectively add about 30-40 reliable sources to stop that article being deleted. It's now a GA :-)

The biggest question I would ask is : what do you want to do with the tools? We do need more admins (Categories for Deletion and media copyrights are woefully understaffed), but we need them to be enthusiastic about the areas they want to work in. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I want to do the usual work; closing AfDs, Doing speedy deletions, technical moves and AIV. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 11:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
@Skr15081997: I had a spin through your deleted contributions (admins can see those) to see what sort of CSD work you've done. You seem to have an understanding of A7 and G12 speedies, so I don't think that's too much of a problem. A had a look through your talk page archives and didn't see any evidence of strong arguing or pot-stirring. I see you are Precious which is a really strong indicator that you do a lot of good for this place.
To be honest, in my view I think there's enough evidence to demonstrate that you could use the tools for AfD and CSD, and wouldn't jump straight into screaming matches on ANI - and that's probably good enough. There's no harm in you doing more AfD / NPP / AfC work in addition to your content work, and helping out at the Teahouse or the AFC Help Desk will improve your chances as well as making the environment nicer. I think with a few months clearly and obviously showing your ability to negotiate and diffuse tricky situations, you shouldn't have any problems with an RfA. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi after long time

Hello yunshui, after long time hope you are doing well. I fame face a problem here , it seems the edits just changes name and edits same spam page! how to counter this?

Not so much of a problem... page deleted, editor (and his sockpuppet) blocked. Nice to hear from you again, by the way. Yunshui 雲水 10:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks :) Shrikanthv (talk) 07:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

New sock of User:Gmkarve

Hi Yunshui, if you have time, could you take a quick look at Information About Gautam Karve (talk · contribs). Babitaarora (talk/contribs) 07:25, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

For a supposed communications expert, he's pretty rubbish at getting the message... Yunshui 雲水 07:53, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Question about blocking TPA for 86.174.163.210

Hi Yunshui,

I just would like to enquire with regard to your decision to blocking TPA (and restoring block notices) for 86.174.163.210 - as per WP:BLANKING and WP:DRC it appears that the user is entitled to remove block notices if he/she so wishes?

— Andrew Y talk 09:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Since they chose to continue their vandalism on their userpage, in exactly the same way as they had been doing on the article, I reverted them and removed their talkapge access. They are indeed entitled to remove block notices and messages - they are not, however, allowed to do so in the process of continuing their disruptive activity. Yunshui 雲水 09:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Fair point. Thanks for the clarification. — Andrew Y talk 09:49, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Huge IPs

You are a check user and administrator. Can you join this discussuion.--C E (talk) 13:40, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Not sure I have anything to add. IPv6s are long, yes. There's nothing we can do about that.
Personally, I find most IPs difficult to remember; if I need to do so for some reason, I memorise the first and last sections and ignore the rest - this also works for V6s. Yunshui 雲水 13:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2015

You made headlines...

It's not often that an admin gets into a national newspaper just for doing a page protection. It is currently the headline (that won't last, but hey). Congrats. Manning (talk) 02:35, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Fame at last. I'll have to send a copy to my dear old mother, she'll be so proud. Yunshui 雲水 08:20, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Praise to you for protection! - I miss the friend who protected a page in an edit war, was accused of admin abuse and blocked himself (short version), - memorial under construction, to be shown on the German Main page soon --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Precious again

harmonious acting
Thank you for quality articles for projects Japan, China and Korea, and catching facts about them, such as Gao Ming, for warning vandals and acting against them, for helping newbies and not-so-newbies harmoniously, for adopting and retaining users, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Two years ago, you were the 501st recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, and thank you for the peace bell, - I am ringing today ;)--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:40, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Smalljim

Did you check to see if they are coming from one range that could be blocked? Doug Weller (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

It didn't look like it to me, but I'm not an expert on rangeblocks; if you fancy taking another look, please do. Yunshui 雲水 13:03, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Posted to CU about this. Interesting. Doug Weller (talk) 14:12, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Probably another sock

You blocked Rucha karve as a sock account of Gmkarve. I think they created another account called About Gautam Karve. - Supdiop talk 06:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Supdiop. Blocked and tagged; I also ran a checkuser and picked off a couple more of his socks. It's about time we put a blacklisting in place, I think. Yunshui 雲水 07:40, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Wow! They are lot of socks. I'm Glad I informed you. - Supdiop talk 20:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

COI editing

Hi Yunshui, while using STiki I came across an editor who might have a COI with The Hollywood Reporter. They have asked for my help on my talk page. ([1]) They also haven't performed any controversial edits till now.([2]) I have asked them to provide sources for the changes they want me to make. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 03:19, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't see any issue with what they've been doing so far. If you suspect a COI, I would recommend you ask them to take a look the COI best practice guidelines, point them at the Edit request process, and remind them that the Terms of Use require that they disclose any paid editing that they do. Beyond that, I don't think this editor is likely to be problematic; they seem to be doing useful work. Yunshui 雲水 07:33, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Yo...

You might want to take a look at some of the other revdeled edits in GW's talk page history if you're not already, as far as oversight goes. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorted, cheers. Nice to hear from you, even under such circumstances! Yunshui 雲水 19:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Yup, I'm putzing around every now and then; not too much. Good to see you, too, though. I see you're living the ArbCom "high life": I'm sorry for your loss, as I was with Floq's before you. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:23, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, it's all gumdrops and rainbows, sitting on ArbCom. I'm not finding it to be an immensely depressing experience at all. Yunshui 雲水 21:15, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Removal of comments

Cavarrone, I'm sorry for that. I was operating from my smartphone (which is touchscreen) earlier and accidentally hit rollback. This kind of error is commonplace when viewing ones watch list from an iPhone. Obviously, I wasn't aware I had done this and if I was I would've self reverted immediately. Still, nice of you to assume good faith by leaving a pointy and hugely patronising edit summary, so thanks for that! CassiantoTalk 11:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I had no problem, Cassianto, I did inadvertent rollback before, - don't know if I noticed all, - nice to meet you ;) - What do you (all) think of my latest idea: a new listing of discographies as in BWV 165, TFA tomorrow? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:18, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Cassianto, was this another misclick? I would expect that you assume good faith, greet a new user and explain why you revert. This time, I did it for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Sometimes Gerda it's best not to say anything at all. The box was idiotic and looked atrocious. Would I be hounded as an incivil bastard for being honest; more than likely, yes. CassiantoTalk 12:32, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
I confess that I didn't even look at it. I looked at you reverting without the politeness of an explanation the work of an IP who took several editing steps to accomplish something. As I said before elsewhere: I don't "enforce" an ibox where I know it's not welcome, I don't even suggest one on the talk then anymore, but I speak up when such a thing happens: a newbie, a potential new editor being treated like this. - If the box looks ugly to you, you can hopefully explain it to that editor. The TFA today pictures teaching and learning, did you notice? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
I suspect the "newbie" doesn't really care about the politics surrounding infoboxes, but they may be confused as to why their edit(s) were reverted. I make you right on that point so I shall leave a note shortly. CassiantoTalk 12:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Surprised that you mention politics, while I only said explain why you find it ugly ;) - Another problem I see is that a new IP may not even know they have a talk page, - they may also not know that there is such a thing as article history. - I remember how irritated I was - being new . when things disappeared which I had created. I remember that almost six years later, - we should try whatever we can to make editing more pleasant than that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:02, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Yunshui, thank you for providing room for this amicable talk of alleged infobox warriors. I woke up thinking if you might be willing to host a subpage where such things could be discussed - neutral ground, such as "User:Yunshui/Infobox talk". I started something but am known as not neutral ;) - Cassianto: what do you think about an identibox for Le Mesurier after the model of Percy Grainger, for a compromise? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

While the idea of some sort of infobox neutral territory isn't a bad one, I think such a page would be better off in the project namespace rather than userspace - your QAI page would be a good starting point. Personally I'm trying to steer clear of infobox "wars" myself, since it's a topic that seems to make its way to ArbCom from time to time and (especially since I don't actually have a strong opinion on the subject) I would like to remain as neutral as possible. As such, I'd rather not host such a page in my own userspace. Yunshui 雲水 07:27, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Understand. Our project, also known as the cabal of the outcasts, is not the place (said both Nikkimaria and Snow Rise) ;) - Perhaps I will - later - talk to arbcom if it could be another subpage to the case itself, - would make for easy reference to the proposals of the workshop which I think were good - and so far sadly ignored. - I am clear of infobox wars in a strict sense, btw, haven't performed more than three reverts ever, and the one time I made a third revert, it was weeks later and reverted the revert of a box which had been stable for these weeks (Sparrow Mass, Easter 2013). - I proclaimed more than once that the infobox wars are a myth and best remembered as a farce, wondering how long it will take until that becomes more common knowledge. You probably know that I have a bet open that Richard Wagner will have an infobox by 2020 (from May 2013), - looking at Beethoven I would go to 2018. - Thank you for making arbcom outcomes better than random ;) - For the moment, I am not interest in the topic at all, busy preparing a feast, - but I think 10 years of alleged wars are enough, and they date from 2005 (pictured in the case workshop). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
ps: I think the discussion on Siegfried was literate, respectful, entertaining and short, - what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:40, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
@Cassianto, no rollback is a good solution to prevent unplanned reverts, right? How many on John Le Mesurier alone? - This was precious ;) - "An infobox is not needed here." - Sure. Nor is an image. Actually the whole article is "not needed". It's all a service to our readers. An infobox is a service to some readers, even if you don't see that.
@Yunshui: My memorial is now on the German Main page, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 June 2015

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
Thanks Yunshui. I can finally recover my account somehow just because you helped me out. :) PawanAhuja (talk) 16:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Glad I could help -= thanks for the star. Yunshui 雲水 19:04, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yunshui/Archive_45&oldid=1138991930"