User talk:Ymblanter

Following this finding of fact in the arbitration case (unrelated to me) I have stopped all administrator activity in the areas I edit — everything related to the countries of the former Soviet Union, to rail transport, and to the Olympics. I may occasionally make fully uncontrovercial actions, such as blocks for and protections against obvious vandalism and obvious BLP violations.

Archives: 2011; 2012; 2013; 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020

Bosco Sodi

Hi Ymblanter. Hope you're well. I wanted to make some changes to the Bosco Soid page but noticed that you have put it on semi-protected. Could you please lower the protection on the article? Thanks in advance.

Donguz Formation

Hi Ymblanter! Donguz Formation was recently created and could use a couple of edits so it doesn't get speedy deleted. Do you have time to look at some Russian sources? --Tobias1984 (talk) 07:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I will have a look, but this is clearly not speedy deletion material. Added to the watchlist just in case.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Japan

Hi Ymblanter, in case you want to help: The Historic Sites of Japan need to be converted to use {{NHS Japan header}} and {{NHS Japan row}}. For now only the national part. I did a couple as examples. Multichill (talk) 15:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello; Is it possible to do any conversion by ?bot? as seems to have been done for these Chinese ones? The format of the Japanese lists is intended to be internally similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I guess this is more a question to @Multichill: than to me, but I guess if it were he would do the conversion himself without asking me. Let us wait what he answers. If the conversion is not possible, I volunteer to do at least some of the manual conversion (one-two lists per day).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I tried converting with a bot, but didn't manage to do it without too much mess so I abandoned that. Multichill (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Cleaning up the Belarus geographical mess

I'm getting unstuck in trying to compile a table of terminology for the Belarus geographical naming conventions. There appears to be a flood of new articles and stubs recently and it appears that English Wikipedia is now leading the way with transliteration/transcription norms (which, as we know, simply isn't Wikipedia's role). As the contributors don't seem to know what to do other than follow the current directives, we're ending up with orphaned pages and broken links absolutely everywhere.

My thoughts are to follow the Belarusian government standards for the English speaking world (which DON'T involve the irritating version of what is essentially Latinka), i.e. as laid out per this map and other official sites. What's good enough for the Belarus government should be good enough for us.

You can check the sad beginnings in my sandbox. Any constructive input from sensible Wikipedians would be appreciated.

I've left this message on Ezhiki and TaalVerbeteraar's pages as well. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

The beginning seems reasonable, thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Kirghiz Soviet Socialist Republic

Greetings. Any chance you could proof/source improve my Russian translation of the history and expand it further?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Nikolay Antipov

Hi Ymblanter. Draft:Nikolay Antipov was on the verge of G13 deletion, but the man is obviously notable. It looks like a machine translation of ru:Антипов, Николай Кириллович. I have added a few English language book citations, would copy-editing be an easy task for you? Thanks, Sam Sailor 18:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding me, I will be slowly working on the draft.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Sam Sailor 18:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Global renamer

Would you consider applying? We could use another active Russian speaker. Something we’ve been working on is getting people not to handle as many requests from languages they aren’t familiar with and this has lead to a small backlog from some wikis. I know you aren’t active on ru.wikipedia now, but being able to read the requests on meta and figure out if it’s within policy would be incredibly helpful. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni:, do you have any idea how much time investmet this could be? I am operating close to the upper level limit of my abilities, and if it is enough to check some page once per day and react to pings, I could still do it, but continuously monitoring a page would probably be too much.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:06, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I think that’d be the most, and checking once every few days would even be helpful. It’s a volunteer project and getting more volunteers from different language groups is always a plus. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:37, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Contest

Hi. I was actually thinking of organising a contest to get my old stubs expanded. Basically what I did in the early days on here was to identify notable missing articles, simply identifying them and getting them up, thinking in the long term at what is best. The problem is that a lot are really off the anglospere radar and don't get expanded but really should have decent content even if short. The idea that I mass created copyvio articles amuses me, I doubt there's more than a few dozen out of 100,000. I might see if I can get a hotlist of stubs created and run a contest to see who can expand the most. Alternatively I can request deleting them all which would mostly be negative as most can be fleshed out..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

The list is at the CCI investigation page(s). No, I do not think you should delete them, and indeed most of them (I do not know whether most is 90%, 99% or 99.9999%) do not contain any copyvio. But having them expanded would be nice. For Russian districts, I am going through them anyway, and it still could take years, but if I am still alive I will do them. I sometimes write on more exotic topics, but for example Chinese stubs typically require some understanding of Chinese sources for their expansion, and attention could be brought to them it would be great.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:17, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

The task of building this encyclopedia is just so gigantic isn't it? I feel guilty in seeing so many short stubs but really should have been created with much more content but it was all done with the mindset of trying to make this encyclopedia have coverage of everywhere on the planet and really try to tackle systematic bias. I did a lot of good, a lot of them have been expanded but there's a worrying number untouched in ten years. Nobody is developing them. You know Czech and Turkish villages, German rivers etc, articles we should have but nobody is editing. We need something to get them improved. There's probablt a lot of African villages which should probably be redirected into a list, some of those villages in Burkina Faso and Benin etc are still unlikely to have anything online within the next ten years, though on a county or municipal level it seems to be gradually improving in some areas as they come online.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, this is an evergreen question what should be redirected and what should have separate articles. This is of course diffisult but I would say administrative divisions of levels 1-2-3 are probably fine, and reasonably big settlements (say above 10K) should be fine as well. For the rest, I would say we either have easily available sources or not. Once I tried to expand an article on a Czech village and could not find any information above the standard one which was already in the article. On the other hand, a Czech speaker would know what to search for and might be more successfull. African villages are probably hopeless for the time being unless there are very clear sources covering them. I created some time ago an article on a new province of Zambia (first level administrative division), English is an official language of Zambia, and it was still difficult to find any reasonable information.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

I mean look at Madjoari Department (not mine). Even the bigger province is a short stub Kompienga Province. If we can't even get that right it's useless worrying about hundreds of localities within them. If all we have is a population figure I think we should redirect them all into lists by district/province like a gazetteer until there is sufficient info. I'm more embarrassed at seeing how many stubs I created which are still empty than worrying at people finding vios!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

When I was writing about districts of Mozambique, it was easier for me that articles already existed, templates were there, and I just needed to add info from my sources. I suspect Burkina Faso is similar, and I speak French. Villages could be a completely different story whatsoever.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Ulaankhus

Hi, can you find anything on this in Russian or find a way to translate Mongolian, I tried to destub it but struggled with the web sources I found. Russian wiki has some decent info on it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:37, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I will have a look. --Ymblanter (talk) 13:47, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I found a source for the population at here 8010, looks like there's some other facts in there in the tables. I remember about 12 years back the sums were all half liners and there was no info on the web at all about them!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:02, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Cheers. It would make a massive difference to the encyclopedia wouldn't it if we could get every article on localities up to that sort of minimum quality. Most of the districts are still one liners.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, and this is what I am systematically doing with Russia (see e.g. Firovsky District as a random example). Concerning Ulaankhus, it also borders with China (and actually its borders with Russia and China are separated), but yesterday I could not figure out how to write this properly. The article I found also contains some information on the geography (mainly relief), I will see whether there is something useful to add to the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I was just looking at that, that narrow strip to the southwest, Xinjiang I think. You and Ezhiki have done a terrific job with Russia, it's massive!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

This is definitely Xinjiang, but to add it in the list, we need to know which Mongolian sums this border separates, and I could not figure this out yesterday. Thanks for compliments for Russia, Ezhiki is unfortunately inactive but I am still around. There is still plenty of work to do there.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Firovsky District is several times more than adequate, a lot of these stubs if they even had a paragraph of text like the lead it would make a big difference, something which actually looks like something you'd see in an encyclopedia, not a crappy online database. "Life is what you make it" they say, well "The encyclopedia is what you make it" rings true too! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

I added a translation from Russian wiki for Altai, Bayan-Ölgii but I couldn't access the sources. Can you see if you can source it. If not I've just remove it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

I think I tried to get the sources from the Russian wikipedia yesterday and one was off-line and another one was archived but not particularly reliable. I will have one more look in the evening.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

There is only one Russian source there, [1], which has quite a lot of info about the aimak (though the reliability is questionable, but it should be ok at the end), but very little specifically about the sum.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. I started Kikhchik, Russian wiki has two settlements of the same name, one a village which existed nearby long before that was set up. I think it would be best to have one article covering them both but you might disagree. Looking in Google Books the river seems the most notable. It's transwikied and if possible the source need checking and verifying. Won't keep bothering you as I know you're busy but you might want to look into it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:08, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Subdistricts of Afghanistan

Hi, can you find a list of subdistricts of Afghanistan? I can't seem to find any. Of course even the districts mostly need expanding and researching but it would still be good if there was a list somewhere.† Encyclopædius 14:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Mmm Kot-e Ashro looks like it is actually the town of Jalrez itself now. Falling Rain isn't reliable but is usually right on coordinates and looking on google maps it says it's Jalrez now. This source though says Kot used to be the district capital until taken by the Taliban. Odd. What do you think?† Encyclopædius 15:02, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Usually these things come out if the census, but then one of course needs to be able to read Pashto, and also I am not sure there was a census in the last 50 years. Any other statistical info would be good as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I can't find the coordinates for Zaiwalat either. It's an educated guess for now but not sure.† Encyclopædius 15:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Found it I think.† Encyclopædius 16:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I spent some time searching, I can not find the list of subdistricts. Will try again tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

This one says that the subdistricts were eliminated by Taliban in 1996 and are not in use anymore.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I want to edit Seventeen page

Hi Ymblanter, I would like to add information on Seventeen page about:

Seventeen's Japanese comeback in September 2020 with mini album 24H, source: https://www.seventeen-17.jp/statics/24h

24H's achievement to top Japan Oricon chart, the first non-Japanese international male artist to achieve a fourth-consecutive win on the weekly album chart, source: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20200915000374 and http://www.koreatimesus.com/seventeen-earns-fourth-consecutive-oricon-album-chart-win-with-24h/. The same album receives platinum certification from Japan Recording Industry association, source https://www.seventeen-17.jp/posts/information/cgrybe and https://www.riaj.or.jp/f/data/cert/gd.html

Seventeen Joshua and DK's collaboration with US based singer, PinkSweats, source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tamarherman/2020/09/24/pink-sweat--seventeen-discuss-coming-together-on-17-remix-in-age-of-corona/#263097005519h

Unfortunately you have the page protected. Can you help to change the protection or help make edits, so the page is more enriched?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BarbaraUkulele (talk • contribs) 10:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

There was significant disruption going on at the page, this is why I had to apply long-term protection. At this point, I am not willing to lift this protection, since I am afraid disruption will return. However, you are welcome to ask for an edit at Talk:Seventeen (South Korean band) by using {{edit semi-protected}}.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Kovanja

User Kovanja has been making edits of questionable POV in topics around Rus' and medieval Russian history for a while, in particularly adding questionable material emphasizing that Rus' and Russia are the same and challenging in particular Ukrainian claims to descent from Rus'/the Rurikids. Do you think any of his edits have reached the level of sanctionability?--Ermenrich (talk) 15:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Edits do not look good, but I think at this point it is best if I stay away from everything related to Russian-Ukrainian conflict topics.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:59, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Is there another admin active in the area you'd recommend me to try?--Ermenrich (talk) 16:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

No, and this is a problem. If you feel confident enough, you can make a AE case, then someone has to close it anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Ganei Tikva ECP

Hi, can you please remove ECP from Ganei Tikva? As I pointed out on the AN, if any ARBPIA rulings should apply, you can put an edit notice for that one sentence on the article, but you should not lock down an article that has nothing to do with the conflict. Huldra has been trying to insert conflict into Israeli place names when if any conflict area applies, it is just that "one sentence" in those villages. But under "anyone can edit" and partial ECP that we can do with the edit notice, we should not be applying full protection when it's not needed. Thanks. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 22:03, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry but in my opinion it is needed because we just had an instance of ARBPIA edit warring in which one of the sides was not extended confirmed. However, I will be happy to have a second opinion from uninvolvred administrator. Would you mind bringing this to AN?--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Block review

A user you blocked (and whom I reported to ANI, which led to said block) has had their block expire, and has immediately resumed edit warring at one of the relevant pages by reverting to their preferred version, after dropping a personal attack on the talkpage. Could you please take a look and determine whether the block should be reinstated and extended? Grandpallama (talk) 00:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I would prefer to wait longer. Whereas their behavior is indeed not exemplary, on South Korea they clearly get support of other users at the talk page, and blocking for one diff with borderline personal attacks for month would probably not be taken positively if someone drags me to AN for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look. Grandpallama (talk) 13:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

What is an LTA?

In one of your comments "One user is relatively new, one is an LTA" what is an LTA? LaceyUF (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I apologize, but (i) I am missing the context (ii) I would rather not discuss possible block evasion with a user who has 89 edits. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for reviewing transgenerational. The sections, although separated, have significant overlap and I could not think of a non-overlapping section head for them.

If you have changes to suggest, please let me know.

== Memdmarti (talk) 23:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. There are no so many items anyway, so the easiest would be to put all of them next to each other so that there are no sections--Ymblanter (talk) 05:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

How do I delete an account in Wikipedia? University Gee in Claude (talk) 09:37, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

It is not possible. One can rename an account.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

71.204.53.77

Can user:71.204.53.77 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 14:50, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 14:53, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Stub

Hi

Could you please put this article as an Australian Road Article stub

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giinagay_Way

Thanks,

Thent1234 (talk) 21:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

It already has the stub template.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with report

I'll send a message now to Arbitrators, if that's it? Mikola22 (talk) 08:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but I would expect them to come back to you and either ask for more information or to explain why they are not going to deal with the case.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. When something new happens, I'll let you know. Mikola22 (talk) 08:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I withdraw the report to arbitrator committee for false accusations against him because he admitted mistake. Thank you. Mikola22 (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

changing the name

Well, where is the place where I can change my name University Gee in Claude (talk) 15:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

meta:Steward requests/Username changes--Ymblanter (talk) 15:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank, the name has changed Jerry Kyoni (talk) 01:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 05:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Zubryckiy's activity

Dear Ymblanter, I would kindly ask you to draw your attention to the Zubryckiy's activity. He has renamed a number of articles on the history of art and culture in the Russian Empire. See: [1], [2] etc. He did it despite a number of sources contradicting his contribution. It seems to me that his activity does not have the purpose of making a valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Best regards, Ушкуйник (talk) 18:51, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I blocked them short-term on 17 October, and they never showed up after the expiration of the block.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Please Ушкуйник do this all the time; so I don't have to correct your errors (Kharkiv is the common English name for Kharkiv for at-least the last 20 years by the way, in fact Odessa seems to be the only city left in Ukraine were the Russian name of the city is the is the common English name). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

No, also Chernobyl, and Gurzuf went through a RM. Historical usage might be different though.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Well as long as the Inquirer Bandera does not go through a RM..... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:49, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh yes...--Ymblanter (talk) 20:54, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reviewing page Manipur State Constitution Act 1947 do give suggestion to further improve it as a notable wiki article.Thank youꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 08:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Sure. Now it is a one-line stube, I expect it can be extended to explain what the content of the act was, what was the historical backgroung, and what were the consequences, citing reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Ymblanter I have added some more info but user User:ChunnuBhai is repeatedly trying to add unrelated topic and removing quote from reference,kindly review this conflict too.ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 17:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I have added RfC template on the talk page to keep any discussion at one place. I have explained my edits.ChunnuBhai (talk) 17:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

Could you please specify the reason for you revert at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ymblanter&oldid=986272699? There truly was a mistake so I decided to get rid of it. --217.113.241.188 (talk) 21:48, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

You are not supposed to edit other users' responses.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

How is this editing a response when I removed a broken header. Isn't this considered editing other users' responses? --217.113.241.188 (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Just do not edit anything which is signed and which is not what you have written.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Category replacement

Since you protected the page Bahrain–Israel normalization agreement, please, replace category:Treaties of Israel with category:Peace treaties of Israel on it. Also, is autoconfirmed protection not enough? Maybe protection level can be lowered now? MBH (talk) 10:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done. The protection is arbitration enforcement per WP:ARBPIA, I am afraid there is very little I can do about it.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Case for edit warring or AE?

Hi Ymblanter, does this user look like they should first be reported for edit warring or just go straight to AE Natalia Bargel Lviv?--Ermenrich (talk) 12:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Let us see whether they do anything after warnings. If they resume, I can block myself.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:57, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Frequent disturb on wiki pages

Hi admin,does this userChunnuBhai and ChunnuBhai expect me or other editor to write concoted texts for articles, afterall some words from sources can't be ignored as it the sources that inspired me or other editor to contribute on wikipedia ,he reported every pages I contributed as copyright violation.He put copyright violation on pages Khagemba,Yaosang,Manipur State Constitution Act 1947,Loiyumbaetc Kindly help me in this matter,to me this seem like a personal attack by the said user violating WP:NPA or do correct my mistakes if I made thank youꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 05:01, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello , Luwanglinux, many of your edits are simple copy pastes from the sources I have mentioned. I have not added copyvio notice without reason. Please read WP:COPYVIO to have a better understanding.

I have not made any WP:NPA in any of my edits. Please point out , if any.ChunnuBhai (talk) 05:19, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

@ChunnuBhai and ChunnuBhai: your way of trying so hard to find fault on articles I contributed seems a personal attack to me.If that is not the case then thank you.ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (ꯆꯥ) 05:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Luwanglinux, Please read WP:WIAPA ChunnuBhai (talk) 05:50, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

CFDS processing error

It seems that you accidentally removed from Category:User apache when processing speedy renamings, because it's not in the batch you added to CFDW. Could you fix this? Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:37, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for noticing--Ymblanter (talk) 14:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

List of wars involving Russia

Hi, you protected List of wars involving Russia over the edit-war that was just two editors failing to see the obvious - one added the invalid file File:Flag of the Khanate of Khiva.svgg the other just removed the invalid file. Solution just remove the typo double g to get File:Flag of the Khanate of Khiva.svg - if you could fix all should be fine and probably no need for the protection. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:51, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Can you unlock the "2024 United States presidential election" namespace?

Hello Ymblanter, On the talk page of the 2024 United States presidential election draft, there is a strong consensus to move the 2024 page to the mainspace now that we know the winner of the 2020 presidential election. However, after a discussion in November 2018, you locked the "2024 United States presidential election" name until November 28, 2020. However, consensus exists to move the page now. In all past presidential elections, we typically would have the next election's page up by now. Would it be possible to unlock the name so the page can be moved? Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:50, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

I would like to see a formal closure, ideally by an administrator, who can then move the article. I unfortunately do not have time right now to review the discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:59, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war

Found this while wondering about closing WP:AE#Beshogur. I know almost nothing and don't want to learn about this area, but I'm wondering if this article should have 1RR. Ping me please if you reply. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 11:04, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: yes, I think it should have 1RR, clearly since there are a lot of Armenians (understandably) unhappy with the conditions of the truce we will see a lot of edit warring in the coming days.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Do you have time to add it? I'd have to search through a lot of stuff to find out the details of adding it, and don't have a lot of time. Doug Weller talk 11:52, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I can add it (possibly later today, I hae to teach in 20 minutes).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:54, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: I have set it up--Ymblanter (talk) 12:11, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Great. The AE can be closed now but if he continues to be a problem.... Doug Weller talk 15:42, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: The whole topic now is a big mess because the situation was stable for 30 years and now has suddenly changed. Even in the normal situation, most Armenians do not count Azerbaijanis (and Turks) as human beings, and most Azerbaijanis do not count Armenians and human beings, and now this even got worse.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:03, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what articles are affected, but at least they all need to be brought under DS and an attempt made to give alerts. I can add DS if you tell me which articles. Doug Weller talk 17:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Off the top of my head, all geographic articles pertaining to Nagorno-Karabakh. Shusha and the Republic of Artsakh are urgent, others I can do before or over the weekend.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Shusha had it, I've done Artsakh. Doug Weller talk 19:31, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Great, thanks a lot. I will try to do the others. I am sitting in the middle of an intensive teaching period, but should have a bit of time left.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:List_of_Nobel_laureates_by_country

Hi,

the IP is pushing recurrent edit-request's on a case that has been already raised and discussed earlier, I asked to stop and formulate only new edit requests which ignores Goodenough. This is already disruptive...the pp-semi you once set on the main page expires on 05:32, 17 July 2021, but it seems already the talk page needs similar conduct (the 11th (!), edit request I won't answer, maybe you should revert it). Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 19:21, 13 November 2020 (UTC))

I protected for a week--Ymblanter (talk) 19:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the review of Artem Novikov. Best wishes from Los Angeles,   // Timothy :: talk  11:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:01, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Another revert warrior

[2] Ghirla^-трёп- 18:40, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done, probably one of our banned friends.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Catherine de Zegher's Wikipedia page

I am affaird that your text on the Torporosky affair on the Zegher Wikipedia page exceeds all standards of encyclopedic formats. In addition, the case is listed including the suspension, and details of the legal matter are on a separate page. Please note that this lawsuit has not been finalized. It is unethical to "take sides" on a Wikipedia page in a lawsuit, debate, or controversy, as Wikipedia wants to have a strictly neutral stance. Your text insunifies that Ms. de Zegher is guilty, although there are no conclusions on this trial yet.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Curatorslog (talk • contribs)

Well, I happen to be a little bit familiar with Wikipedia standards. What I see that you, in one edit, completely rearranged the article, and all mentions of de Zeghe being suspended and fired magically disappeared, though they clearly belong to the article. Moreover, the reliable sources talking about her suspension, disappeared as well. I strongly suspect COI editing.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I have no interest at all, I am a simple editor and work with Wikipedia guidelines and the facts. I actually had the impression that you have a COI conflict of interest. The way you have focused on this page and topic transcends any interest in creating a balanced page. I am not saying that this case should not be mentioned (which I did by the way), but the full description of the person should still be objective and balanced. Can you explain to me why you focus so much on this one aspect of Ms de Zeghe's career and blow it up as this is the only thing this person has done in her career

Actually, I do not, you have probably seen that I have left intact all other sections of the article which talk about the rest of her career. However, understandably, in the last several years she got attention mainly due to the criminal case and the fact she was fired, and that it was related to forgery. We write Wikipedia based on reliable sources, and we give sufficient weight to the events which were more prominent in these sources. If you think I have a COI, you are welcome to open a topic at WP:COIN, I am really curious what arguments you have not to prove this (which you obviously can not) but at least to motivate this absurd proposition.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Generic IP distruption Government of National Unity (Hungary), Fascist Italy (1922–1943)

Hi,

please see the subject and respective talk pages. Now the IP are around the 7th revert each pages, starting to boomerang the policies I told him, repeating everywhere "you failed to make a case for your edit" despite everything has been demonstrated in the talk. Unfortunately I get since a time really unserious answers, at this time is already disruptive. I think it is very easy to understand what is a state article, and what is a government one...(KIENGIR (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2020 (UTC))

I configured pending changes for both articles--Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Protection reduction request

People with COI (such as User:Kalariwarrior and User:Kalari Poothara, they are practitioners, are they the same person?) are misusing the pending-changes protection of Kalari Payattu, they are tweaking, whitewashing and removing content as they wish without sourcing, also removal of sourced content. This is an encyclopedia, not a personal blog, but some are treating as such. Please remove the protection. 2409:4073:2E90:725B:588F:21B0:BEDB:7BB4 (talk) 08:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Sprry, but your message does not make sens to me. If there is disruption in the article, why should I reduce the protection? To give you an opportunity to edit-war in real time?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:06, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

As long as it is pending protected they are not going to participate in discussion, but misuse it. Currently this is propaganda article. BTW, I see no edit-warring going on there. Look at that article, mostly poorly sourced and half of the content is unsourced. 2409:4073:2087:C2C5:1DA2:976B:21B1:520B (talk) 10:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I am not going to be involved into the content dispute related to this article, and I do not find your argument convincing. You are welcome to request unprotection at WP:RFPP. If you are sure these people have COI they must be reported, prtobably at WP:ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:04, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Your Article

How on earth could you gain the right to have an article about yourself here on the English Wikipedia? --93.78.35.45 (talk) 10:22, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

May be because I am encyclopedically notable? I have not touched the article, let alone written it.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:25, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

What guidelines do you meet for this? --93.78.35.45 (talk) 10:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

You should ask people who have actually written the article. WP:NACADEMIC I guess.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:29, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Regarding edits to this section, you have deleted multiple revisions. Why would you do this? --93.78.35.45 (talk) 10:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Because I do not publicly reveal my real name in relation with my Wikipedia account. It is not on my user page--Ymblanter (talk) 10:33, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for blocking that crazy reverter! I couldn't keep up with the reverts! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 17:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:36, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Protection

Hi. Can you protect the article Ismail Kadare? An IP known for edit warring in SQwiki is vandalizing it. Thanks!--Udha (talk) 19:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

There is not enough disruptive activity as far as I am concerned.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

That IP just reverted me in that article after I posed this comment See here.--Udha (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry bu6t this looks like content dispute to me. Their arguments are not unreasonable. If they continue reverted they must be blocked at some point, but protecting the article is not really appropriate in this situation. Try to start a talk page discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Please do consider the user that asked for protection is a blocked user in sq.wiki along with other IP at his disposal due to continued editwarring and wikihounding along with WP:OWN, WP:I just don't like it, WP:Drama and then some. Please consider this before any of his requests. Peace --217.73.133.82 (talk) 20:08, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I am not going to study long discussions in a language I do not speak. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:09, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 reverts. As I pointed out earlier, that IP has caused edit warring in SQwiki for two years,( here) and it seems to behaving the same here.--Udha (talk) 20:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Now blocked for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 20:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Much appreciated.--Udha (talk) 20:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Babel

IMO, from a native English-speaker, you could raise your {{Babel}} rating to en-4. Narky Blert (talk) 22:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, but I prefer keeping a low profile. I would not like people saying than I am overselling, and it does not matter so much anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I do recommend you raising your level to 4. I do not tolerate false content. --93.78.29.3 (talk) 20:52, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, but I do not think this is any of your business. This is not content.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you are the same IP. Time for the block.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

AfD for deaths due to COVID-19 and related RfC

Hi. Thanks for commenting at the recent AfD for the above list. There is now an ongoing discussion around the best way to split the list, if any, if you wish to comment further. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:42, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:06, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Block Request

Can user:2a02:c7f:6c2d:f300:1cf:4c0b:94d8:bd93 and user:99.153.140.102 please be blocked asap. CLCStudent (talk) 22:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 22:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Have a look

Hi,

Why my changes to the article Kalarippayattu are not auto accepted even if I'm an extended confirmed user? Outlander^07@talk 16:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not know, your revert should have been indeed auto-accepted. Would you mind asking at WP:VP/T?--Ymblanter (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

O.K Thank you.Outlander^07@talk 17:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Proper name

It is recognized worldwide as the SandyGeorgia syndrome. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Is there a link somewhere I can use next time?--Ymblanter (talk) 20:42, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I will write it up as soon as I publish the MEDRS paper. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Good, looking forward to it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Recreate Our Wikipedia Page and Delete the Current Page

Dear Team,

We would like to recreate our Wikipedia page (Vellore Institute of Technology) in an innovative and professional manner and would request you to kindly delete the current page or assist us in identifying the admin of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vellore_Institute_of_Technology page as soon as possible Amuthukumar1988 (talk) 12:55, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

No, please use the Draft space or the talk page for this.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Please remove the below text in our Wikipedia page :

Gender discrimination has been a common issue raised in universities across India.[30] VIT allegedly use their restrictive rules and regressive practices to market to conservative parents of Southern India, particularly in their home state of Tamil Nadu and neighboring Andhra Pradesh. These practices include much more restrictive rules on women hostelers, moral policing, shaming by an all-round security force and special committees to look into moral paternalism.[31] The Hindu reported that often women would find themselves checked at hostel rooms and asked to stop talking on mobile phones and sleep or study. Over time, videos and articles have emerged online about the same. VIT officials, however, maintain that stricter female hostel rules are a necessary safety precaution given the rise in crimes against women.[32] VIT officials have stated that, while they agree that men and women must be treated equally, they have at times been faced by irate parents who have insisted on stricter codes of conduct.[31] VIT despite calling itself a progressive educational institution committed to excellence, still ensures strict gender segregation at official events and fests.[31]

In October 2013, two female students were suspended after they helped to organize an online opinion survey of female VIT students, focusing on issues of safety and inequality.[33] Commenting on the issue, VIT vice president Sekar Viswanathan said: "The students started a campaign based on the misplaced notion that the university discriminates against women, which is not true. They were taken home by their parents".[33]

In 2019, Indian news outlet The Print carried a story which alleged that the government was delaying according the Institute of Eminence status to VIT due to an alleged anti-Modi government stance by its Chancellor and an official Intelligence Bureau report alleging gender discrimination of students.[34]

Lack of freedom of speech VIT allegedly makes students sign an affidavit which prohibits them from speaking out against university management.[31] The university code of conduct prohibits any form of protest or action within premises or outside which may spoil repute of the institute and prohibits passing out information to any media group without prior permission of university officials.[35] In 2015, Indian stand-up comedian Papa CJ was banned from the campus for taking up issues related to gender discrimination and moral policing during his show at GraVITas. He put up a video about his ban on his Facebook page and tweeted about the same[36] describing his ban and a video recording of his show.

Amuthukumar1988 (talk) 17:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not see why I should remove sourced information. Please raise the issue at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

List of best selling books

Hello

Can I ask why you locked the best selling books article? this seems unfair as it privileges some editors over others.

Could you unlock it.

Happy to discuss

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.85.156 (talk) 10:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I have protected the page because there is too much disruption coming from non-autocinfirmed editors. I am not going to unprotect it. You can always register an account, in a few days and after a certain number of edits you will be able to edit this article.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Replies in own section

Hi, I feel like putting replies to others' comments in different sections here is confusing and would be hard to understand for the admins reviewing the report. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 09:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

You obviously need to indicate whom you are replying to, but this is the procedure which has been in place for many years, possibly from the very beginning (btw the same as for the arbitration cases).--Ymblanter (talk) 09:35, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 09:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Map of India

@Zoozaz1, ChunnuBhai, and Ymblanter:, I strongly believe that this user Kumarkk1203 on Talk:Bhutan–India relations#Omit the disputed area entirely is Aghore that Ymblanter blocked, [3]. Please take a look on the thread. --Walrus Ji (talk) 13:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done, I recently blocked another sock on Commons--Ymblanter (talk) 14:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

1k out of 75k survived???

Regarding the article History of the Jews in Latvia.

That figure does not seem reliable to me, when you compare it with the other data (censuses etc.) regarding the amount of Jews in Latvia. I don't know what you think of it... --Spafky (talk) 14:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not know, but there is a source in the article which says this. My reading of this number (consistent with other numbers) is that of 75 which stayed there under the German occupation only 1k survived - which does not seem improbable to me. In any case, we can not just remove sourced material, it requires some discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

You're right, but another source in the article says that there were 95k Jews in Latvia in 1939, when I do the math it still doesn't make sense to me. --Spafky (talk) 16:20, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I guess the difference, 18 = 95-77, are people who were forcibly resettled or voluntarily moved out in 1940 or evacuated in 1941. I personally knew someone who was born in Riga and survived the war by moving out of Latvia in 1940/41.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Fidesz

Hi,

persistent IP vandalism ([4]), ([5]), ([6]), ([7]), ([8]), edit warring notice previously here ([9]), still continued (please note that talk page discussion ongoing is about another issue especially, IP tried in one of the edit logs to dumb us) Thank you for your time! (KIENGIR (talk) 20:29, 14 December 2020 (UTC))

I protected for 2 weeks--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Miklós Horthy, Viktor Orbán, Russophilia

Hi,

a user unfortunately is ignoring or policies and does weird (?) things.

- first of all he does not stop edit-warring, despite discussion is ongoing in the talk the user failed to build consensus (already 7 reverts): ([10]), ([11]), ([12]), ([13]), ([14]), ([15]), ([16])

- in the other page, the user completely ignores discussion, and as previously do not understand that category is for other purposes, even it's mother page is linked in the other discussion, which he denies (5 reverts) ([17]), ([18]), ([19]), ([20]), ([21])

- Finally, at the third page the user is performing weird addition, already the third time campaign that Joachim von Ribbentrop would be Russophile, which is awesome, and the sources referred are really against (or see even my edit log about the wikitionary the user tried to use as a source)...([22])...edit warring notice here: ([23]). Thank you for your time!(KIENGIR (talk) 10:22, 16 December 2020 (UTC))

Blocked for 31h, this is a long-term problematic user.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

WikiCake!

Yulia Romero • Talk to me! has given you a WikiCake!

I am presenting you this WikiCake as a sign of appreciation for your updating of the raions of Ukraine. I noticed that all the "C"(-named)-Oblast are all updated Good work and I hope that you will keep up this good work! If you are looking for appropriate background music during updating Wikipedia articles of the raions of Ukraine, I suggest the song "Rayon" by alyona alyona ft. Fatbelly

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

• Thanks a lot. Actually, no, they are not yet fully updated - still Zastavna Raion to do, and also the raions of Chernihiv Oblast will later need to have the hromadas added, nut generally, yes, I reasonably expect to have the first passage finished by the end of the year.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

NNP in Transcarpathia

While translating some articles about nature conservation into Ukrainian I spotted Uzhanian National Nature Park article. I wonder, do you mind if I rename it to Uzhansky National Nature Park according to the name on the page of the Ukrainian Natural Resources Ministry [24]? Thanks, by the way, for all what you′ve done in Conservation. A lot of work! Mykola Swarnyk (talk) 20:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I am not particularly attached to the name, which I found in some template or a page full of redlinks, I do not remember now. The Ukrainian government really pretends that they spedk English while they actually do not (see for example this publication full of gems like "stlmt Dashava" or "city Chyhyryn"), so I would just ignore what they write in English. However, if you think Uzhansky is better than Uzhanian feel free to rename. Following WP:UKR in this case it probably should be Uzhanskyi.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

On the main entrance info board there is Uzhanskyi. So I′ll go with that. Thanks a lot. Mykola Swarnyk (talk) 02:58, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Good, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Thank you, also greetings to you and your family.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Vraagje...

Hallo meneer Ymblanter,

Mag ik eventjes vragen: Hoe kan ik een admin worden? Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:02, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Je moet zich voor WP:RFA vordragen en dan een week wachten. Dat is waarschijnlijk kanselos met minder dan 10 duizend edits te doen.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Dank u wel! :) Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Graag gedaan.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:45, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Need Input

Hello Ymblanter , I hope you are having a wonderful day. I need your input. This one user will not concede that Miklos Horthy and Fidesz are nationalists. He is basically using original research to justify his claims. I have. tried to look up sources for what he calls Hungarian Nationalism vs Hungarian Nationalism and I have found nothing. He is trying to segregate that category for far right and fascists, even though other categories under this umbrella are not held to that standard. If there were a far right group called Hungarian Nationalists than I can forgive it but there is no such group called that. National Conservatism is a form of nationalism, it even says so on its wikipedia page. It embraces both Conservatism and Nationalism. So by definition if you are a national conservative than you are a nationalist and a conservative. I am holding this category to the same standard as all other nationalist categories. Let us go south from Hungary for second and go to the category, Serbian nationalists. This category includes the Chetniks, the fascists, The Milosevic era politicians, the Serb Democratic Party (Bosnia and Herzegovina) which is a national Conservative party and Aleksandar Vučić who runs a conservative and populist government. Are these all the same? No. The Chetniks- The Chetniks were Royalists, however the Milosevic politicians were communists. You don't have to be a certain political orientation to be a nationalist. Or let us use Romania. There was Ion Antonescu, the fascist leader of Romania, and Nicolae Ceausescu the Communist leader of Romania, both were nationalist just had a different way of implementing it. However it would be inappropriate to NOT call either one a nationalist. Just because you are not a fascist or a far right winger, doesn't mean that you aren't a nationalist. There ar things like National Communism and left wing nationalism, I don't have to love them or support them, but I have to acknowledge that they are forms of nationalism because that is how they function, just like national conservatism. If categories similar to this one include figures that are both far right and far left and in between but in this category, they only allow far right, that simply is not fair and is biased. Wouldn't you agree? I also used sources to back my claim and here they are. They are all good and credible sources by wikipedia standards. Horthy and Orban were even listed under figures of nationalism before I even found that page. Horthy: Reuters: The Economist: BBC: Fidesz: The Economist: Reuters: It even says in the article right wing nationalist. It does not say "far right". However, is it right wing? Yes. Is it nationalist? yes. Foreignpolicy.com: The Guardian: BBC: WSJ: You have a great day. Thank you for your timeFenetrejones (talk) 16:36, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not think this is my business. If you can not agree, you probably need to try Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:41, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thank you regardless. Have a wonderful day!Fenetrejones (talk) 17:48, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

References

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Thanks, also greetings to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:51, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Problematic editor

Hi Ymblanter,

First off, happy holidays! Second, would you mind looking into this editor Noraskulk. He's been edit-warring about very questionable info he's been adding at Rurik dynasty and Slavicism and doesn't use talk pages.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, and also happy holidays to you. For the time being, they are still using talk pages, including their user talk page, so that there is some hope still.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't know, I find edit summaries like this as well as talk page use like this and this somewhat concerning. That and trying to pass off a ninth grade paper as an RS.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

They are absolutely concerning, and I have given them a Ds alert, but I do not think we are at the point yet when a block is needed.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

• Ermenrich, I'm sorry, what's wrong here? Noraskulk (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

  You might want to read WP:RS to get the answer.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:53, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

  Indeed. And consider how ridiculous your statement appears considering that Agricolae has been on Wikipedia since 2006 and you joined earlier this year.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Multi-article edit war

There seems to be a multi-article edit war going on between User:Vyaiskaya and User:Danloud, and there had been a report at WP:AN3. You left an ARBEE alert for one of the parties. Have you formed any impression of who is more likely to be right in this? EdJohnston (talk) 03:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. Vyaiskaia is a new user, and she claims the other two are reverting their edits for nothing calling them names. I looked at some of the reverts and could not find anything particularly bad about them; on the other hand, I have not looked through all the articles, and I would need to have done this to see whether the claims are at least partially true. I will try to take another look today.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:36, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Talk:List of Nobel laureates by country

Hi, the IP simply does not stop the disruptive edit requests, a more severe restriction would be needed than set last time. Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC))

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Question

Is National conservatism a variant of nationalism? Fenetrejones (talk) 18:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

No idea, one needs to look at reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I did that and the guy I am debating still refuse to concede.Fenetrejones (talk) 19:03, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Then you need to open an RfC or seek third-party mediation. Opening RfC is easier.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

How do I do that? Fenetrejones (talk) 19:15, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

WP:RFC, but make sure to formulate the question in an appropriate way, otherwise it will be very difficult to close--Ymblanter (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Would this be worth a report?

I am in an argument with a user. -His argument is based on original research which has no wikipedia article or credible sources to back it up

-Claims I am uncivil yet, he calls me problematic

-refuses to accept that I am citing my argument with Sources, and I mean sources like WSJ, NYT, The Economist ETC

-Called me an accuser and that he never said that yet, it can simply be disproved from a simple command f click.

-Claims that my citing of text is irrelevant, yet it is crucial in understanding the topic(s) at hand.

Fenetrejones (talk) 23:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I think you should stop this behavior, indeed more of us noticed the problems I referred (and yes, people can read and verify statements, and after more then 3-4 trials the result is a question of competence). However, what you did recently may very likely end up in a boomerang, per ([25]), ([26]), where you repeatedly referred me as a liar, although I asked you to remain civil earlier ([27]), but I am sorry you ignored it.

Ymblanter, I let on the user's talk this notice ([28]).(KIENGIR (talk) 01:59, 29 December 2020 (UTC))

@KIENGIR Simply I deleted that because that information was not needed but you did lie. Let us look at what you said "The traditional Hungarian nationalism is covering the far-right/extreme viewholders and their relevant theories, at any historical time, openly. It is not the same to be simply patriotic, or moderate nationalism." It is okay, nothing wrong with that, I literally used your quote for an argument. You said "Besides that, you as well address/insist allegations to me I never said." You are accusing me of making up quotes that you never said but a simple command f says otherwise so you lied. Just accept that you TOO messed up on something.Fenetrejones (talk) 02:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

You lied because You denied saying that and you did. Imagine this scenario, I said something offensive to you, you call me out on it and I deny saying it. However, You have easy proof on me saying the offensive comment, than you have proof that I was lying. Fenetrejones (talk) 02:31, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, as I said in the article's talk I won't play your games further not understanding or pretending not to understand is the worst you can do in our community, even here you are adressing misleading statements like "You are accusing me of making up quotes that you never said", although I never stated such, and anyway anyone may easily check how many times you stated like "you refuse to accept..." and other similar statements where you address things I never stated, and I won't explain the third time it was not about the literal quote, etc.

But because now again called me twice a liar (4 in total), despite the second warning, prepare for the consequences. (I will as well stop responding your messages here)(KIENGIR (talk) 02:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC))

Fun Fact did you say that I was false accusing you of saying something? Yes. Did I have the item and not make it up, yes. It is okay to be wrong sometimes. You said that you never wrote anything like that but I found otherwise.Fenetrejones (talk) 02:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Deceased Wikipedian

Hello, could you please fully protect the user page User:Aditya Kabir as per Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Deceased_users? Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 02:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Report on KIENGIR

This user is trying to cover up on his actions when I caught him red handed.

To quote him, "Look, you continously put words, examples to my mouth which I did not say, and since the beginning did not grab exacly what I said, but pushing your own considerations all around and presenting that it would be mine, with unnecessary repetitions and flooding the talk page disruptively. I won't explain it the nth time, may be read above."

I called him out saying that moderate nationalism is nationalism, using his quote in this paragraph All groups listed are diverse on the political spectrum a nationalist communist and a fascist may both be nationalist even if they are not allies. AND don't make any excuses, "The traditional Hungarian nationalism is covering the far-right/extreme viewholders and their relevant theories, at any historical time, openly. It is not the same to be simply patriotic, or moderate nationalism." Moderate nationalism IS still a form of nationalism. A moderate republican and a Radical Neo Nazi republican are both republicans. A stalinist socialist and a democratic socialists ARE both socialists even if the former is more extreme than the ladder. (The quote in the middle is his quote.)

I may have been a little unprofessional by saying nice try lying, the first time, but He insists that he did nothing wrong. "No, everything may be read above (including what I said and what I did not, among them what you erroneously claim to be said although I did not, etc. - it's not about the literal sentence in quotations marks, but I referred to others as I just explained), but this discussion is over because of the continuous lack of comprehension and competence from your behalf, which is apparently recurrent, I won't play such games." I did not play with his words, he just explained the difference between Hungarian Nationalism vs Hungarian Nationalism to Nigej. There was no change in his words. He was however, lying when he said that he did not say it and that he said it. I found it with a simple command F. He still acts like he never said it and that it never happened, which means he lied by every definition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Miklós_Horthy

His argument of Hungarian Nationalism vs Hungarian Nationalism is Original research. I have tried searching this topic and have not been able to find anything. Moderate nationalism is still nationalism.

I did research on National Conservatism and according to wikipedia, National Conservatism is a variant of Nationalism.

I also used many sources in saying that Horthy and Orban were Nationalists, including WSJ, The Economist, Reuters, the Guardian and many other credible sources. I may deserve a warning, but he does too.

He accused me of accusing him yet I caught him redhanded with a simple command F.

Fenetrejones (talk) 02:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Give me a warning, because I do deserve it, But give him one to for all I listed above.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:00, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

You should just stop, you will get blocked. However not able to interpret appropriately English sentences, either you do by pretence or not is the lack of WP:CIR. Above you said "You said that you never wrote anything like that but I found otherwise", although I was not speaking about the literal quote you presented here (and now you literally qoute as well where I reinforce I did not refer to your lireally qouted sentence), so you just contradicted yourself, etc., the rest is useless, everyone may carefully read the facts. With this I finished any further discussions with you on the subject.

Ymblanter, the user presented me a liar in this post, and started to troll my talk page ([29]), telling the same, it is (overall the 6th time), please end this, enough what is enough! Sorry for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 03:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC))

I am not trolling you, I am calling you out for accusing me. You want professional behavior sure, than apply it to yourself and not accuse other users of making accusations.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Let us see what you said "Look, you continously put words, examples to my mouth which I did not say," Yet the quote I used is from he, himself. Yet that is a quote from you. When I said that you were lying, I did not mean it as "You are liar" or any derogatory comment like, but that your claim was false and what is the most common way of saying that a person said false statements, the common phrase is that the person was lying. It does not inherently mean that the person is a liar, just that they stated false information at the time. If you thought I called you a liar, than I am sorry on that account, I was writing it that your statement was false.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

@User:Ymblanter, The first time I was called out by a user, it was you and I was doing what was essentially original research. This time I am the one in the two parties using sources for our argument. And they are credible sources. So nothing like Alex Jones or whatever else it may beFenetrejones (talk) 03:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

He also refuses to acknowledge when I mention his claims appear to be original research, he always dodges it and never gives me sources.Fenetrejones (talk) 03:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

And he claims I was trolling. Maybe he did not think he was being rude when he was accusing, but he came off as rude when he was accusing me. Also would a troll, admit at times that they were unprofessional?Fenetrejones (talk) 03:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

disclosure of off-WP coordination

Dear Ymblanter, today you stated that

 I just know there is off-wiki coordination. In 2010, I was an arbitrator in the Russian Wikipedia, and we had to consider a case about Azerbaijani off-wiki coordination similar to WP:EEML (and some of the current warriors were on the mailing list). We knew about its existence because someone infiltrated in the list and sent the content to us. 

Can you please disclose that list of pro-Azerbaijani "warriors" to other admins of English Wikipedia, so they, too, are aware of this history of coordinated action? Many thanks Armatura (talk) 13:46, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I do not need to "disclose" anything, he decision is publicly available: w:ru:Арбитраж:Азербайджанский список рассылки--Ymblanter (talk) 13:52, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks for the link. I think this is relevant to English wikipedia, too, as a lot of prominent pro-Azerbaijani editors active on English WP have been involved. May I ask what is the best way of making the admins of English wikipedia aware of this? Any particular noticeboard suitable for this type of alert? Regards, Armatura (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I would say either WP:ANI or WP:AN, probably AN is better.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Saini

The census of 1881 as shown on page 292 and 232 of the book linked below 'The Cyclopaedia of India and of Eastern and Southern Asia, Commercial, Industrial and Scientific by Edward Balfour, Jan 1885' ascertains that Sainis and Malis have always been documented as entirely separate tribes in census. Same with page 232.

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=yvNWAAAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA294

Why is it being ignored, please understand this is a sensitive topic for Saini community and we are being mistaken for other group which lives in different part of India Remove mali word with saini articles you can say that rajput mali started only in 1937 using saini surname how you can say all saini are malies only rajput mali using saini surname not all mali in other different @Ymblanter:

I am sorry but I thought I was very clear that you must understand Wikipedia policies before continuing further requests. Your requests are not actionable since they explicitly contradict to our policies.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Is this source is reliable @Ymblanter: Akhil bhartia kashtharia mahasabha Saini rajput mahasabha held conference news

https://www.dailypioneer.com/2018/state-editions/2018-07-05-210907.html

I do not know. Superficially, it looks like a reliable source. Please discuss this at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:10, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

They immediately removed my post without reading said i am banned from wikipedia @Ymblanter:

Indeed, if you are banned from Wikipedia you may not post anywhere.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

So wikipedia doesnot consider it reliable source as i am banned ,why i am banned because i dont know wikipedia i try to correct article that is related to my caste they have banned as i got angry when i saw. I felt sorry from everyone on wikipedia still no one listen and correct article. you make wronge use of your authority by publishing wrong information to whole world @Ymblanter:

Happy New Year, Ymblanter!

Happy New Year!

Ymblanter,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you, also happy new year to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks and welcome sir. . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:24, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year to you! Fenetrejones (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, also happy new year to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:46, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Vyaiskaya

It seems Vyaiskaya is back to reverting and edit-warring as soon as the protection expired. He's gotten into another edit dispute, same as before. At this point, it seems he's not here to build an encyclopedia, rather here push his own opinions, and revert who disagrees with him, without discussing on the talk page. Danloud (talk) 10:59, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Whereas it is right they are edit-warring it is also true that they tried to discuss at the article talk pages and have not got any response, as far as I can see.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:34, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Im not here to push any opinion, but Ive tried multiple times to talk in the talk pages. I recieve no reply. All of my edits follow what has been discussed in the talk pages. Im not trying to edit war with anyone, but a couple users have followed around every article Im on, big or small, rescinding every alteration, whether it's fixing grammar or anything else with no discussion. I am not the one constantly reverting. Furthermore, none of my points are particularly "opinionated", most of the changes have been trimming up the convoluted article formatting, bad grammar, and taking out political biased phrasing for neutral phrasing. If there is anything "wrong" with the updates (which have made the articles actually readable, something they weren't before) then *please,* discuss it. As it is stop following me around. Thank you. Vyaiskaya (talk) 17:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Vyaiskaya: It seems Noelcubit is also constantly reverting and edit-warring, but on the other hand, he's also telling you to wait, until you get consensus from the talk page, and your version gets approved, and until then the stable version should stay. But you are not the type of person to listen, as I said you're pushing your opinion, and not looking for a common ground. It seems Archives908 also agrees with Noelcubit. Why will I be following you? You're openly edit-warring, and getting away with it, which is my point. Danloud (talk) 18:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree with you Danloud. Personally, I do not agree or disagree with the edits, however the way Vyaiskaya is going about it is all wrong- and by far not constructive. Before the page was protected, user DxRxXxZx made practically identical edits to Vyaiskaya and edited just as aggressively; which leads me to believe that a degree of WP:SOCK may be involved here. For that reason, the last stable version of the article should remain as Noelcubit has tried to do. Thank you both for your diligence in this matter. Regards, Archives908 (talk) 19:36, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Update: Looks like Vyaiskaya is ignoring all our warnings, as it appears they have reinstated their edit yet again...Archives908 (talk) 19:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Archives908 You were right about the sockpuppet situation. It turns out Vyaiskaya indeed used DxRxXxZx as a sock. He has now been blocked. Noelcubit (talk) 22:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Vyaiskaya is currently back to restoring his edits on the same pages, he is now using an IP. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vyaiskaya/Archive. Noelcubit (talk) 18:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done, blocked for 72h--Ymblanter (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Romani people in Hungary

Hi,

a problematic user continously disregarding our policies. The user started to challenge the last stable version, which was set on ([30]) a few months ago, and with misleading edit logs get contrary the evidence in the talk page. 6 (!) reverts so far ([31]), ([32]), ([33]), ([34]), ([35]), ([36]),

edit warring notice here ([37]), which the user immediately blanked ([38])....

The user since the beggining were told in the talk page the contributions on some part only stands until their balanced, since their suffered from serious NPOV issues, my last edit was in spite this a rollback to a much earlier version, explained much earlier in the talk ([39]), ([40]), along with clarifying the erroneous interpretation about our policies (and not the first time), but the user blatantly ignores and pretends if the situation would be otherwise...after the last revert's misleading, boomerang edit log I had not other choice to ask your intervention...(KIENGIR (talk) 14:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC))

I am afraid I can not do anything here, it would require an in-depth analysis of all edits. You can try WP:DRN, though they have to agree to go there.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:33, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Well, I provided you the evidence and cutting edge info, at least easily you may see ([41]) this was the last stable point, standing for months, from which the user started edit-warring, so it is out of question to this the revision the page may be fairly reset per policy (and I will do it soon). The problem is the user still trying to fool me on the talk page and outlines a clear WP:CIR/WP:LISTEN issue, and unfortunately nowadays such users emerge more often to tyre the community and it is very disruptive and time consuming (the DRN would just fuel endless discussion of something is clear and still may be resolved in the framework of the talk). I explained even more then three times the user our policies, my duty ends here. Give yourself time then and please follow the events at least, until you may more depth analyze the issue. Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 16:55, 8 January 2021 (UTC))

However, they are adding sourced material. I can not just revert this material without studying it, and I do not currently have time to study it.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I certainly know you lack of time as I do, that's why I am sad when I run into a user that is pretending (?)/ playing (?) with others precious time and nerves. Actually if you check, the first 5 reverts, the user was removing sourced content, which were double reinforced in the talk by more users (only the last revert he/she appeared to restore anything, since then I rolled back further per talk/policy). So, in fact, the issue is the opposite, the user continously remove sourced content per WP:I just don't like it in fact (so in case of restoration 21:00 Dec 2 as shown above would add sources and would be the last stable).(KIENGIR (talk) 17:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC))

I fully protected for a week now, please try to find consensus at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:27, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I will work on that, you may see how much I struggle and since how long time, practically around 90% percent of the users addition we let and demanded a little c/e or amendment for consensus, I don't even get why the user wanted to start over...I wish both of us a year with less issues, Have a nice day!(KIENGIR (talk) 17:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC))

Hi Ymblanter. I will be attempting to reach consensus with Kiengir on the talk page in question, though I would strongly dispute some of his statements above. I was wondering if I could ask your advice as an admin regarding the meaning of "consensus". If three parties discuss and two agree, does this constitute a consensus? (Cards on table, I feel this has already occurred on this page, which is why I deleted a couple of sourced sentences). Also, what happens if we can't agree after a week? Sorry for mithering. Boynamedsue (talk) 17:58, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

This depends. I also do not see Tgr agreeing with either of you, though I see that you have declared him as such.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:30, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. The part I interpreted as agreement was "All that said, accepting for the sake of argument that Lakatos is a somewhat prominent Roma leader, why is his opinion relevant to the article?" That to me was a statement that Lakatos was probably not notable and if he was, his opinion wasn't relevant. Perhaps my interpretation is wrong, in terms of his overall point there was a degree of ambiguity.Boynamedsue (talk) 18:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Maryam Rajavi

Hi there, fellow editor. :) I noticed that you undid one of my edits after there was consultation and discussion reached via the talk page of the article under the second section entitled, "The MKO is a Terror Org." Can we please discuss? I reviewed all of the articles supplied by the unconfirmed IP address user and all of the headlines and body of reputable sources persistently refer to Maryam Rajavi as a terrorist. Further, "terrorist" is only a derogatory term in the non-academic sense. It actually has a technical definition that can apply to anyone without prejudice. Looking forward to a healthy discussion. DeweyDecimalLansky (talk) 19:50, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Maryam Rajavi is the article. My apologies. Looking forward to hearing why the term should not be included. DeweyDecimalLansky (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry but I have made my edits in my capacity of an uninvolved administrator. You need to achieve consensus with other editors of the article (who have rejected edits similar to yours in the past).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:54, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Karabakh issue

Hello Ymblanter, since you were accepted by both sides in a dispute related to the Karabakh issue, you might be able to help at WP:ANI#User:Armatura. ◅ Sebastian 13:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi. We had more recently this nice discussion, so I am afraid I could not be much of a help here.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:36, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, it's of course your prerogative to recuse yourself, but from that discussion, I see no need for it. That mix of strong polarization with occasional attempts by more experienced editors to calm others down, btw, reminds me of what we experienced here during the Sri Lanka civil war. ◅ Sebastian 14:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

There, user A reported user B, and I said there is not need to do anything. Now, B reported A for pretty much the same behavior, and I think it is better if someone else takes this. I have not follower the Sri Lanka civil war discussions, but in Armenis vs Azerbaijank there is a lot of groupthink involved.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hadrian

Hi, I was wondering why you removed the "Gay royalty" and "Gay writers" tags from this page. Hadrian is noteworthy because he was the first openly gay emperor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvint69 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

This information is not in the article and is not sourced. I opened a talk page discussion on 22 December, nothing happened.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Ymblanter, just wanted to thank you for your contribitions to the page Teofil Lapinsky. I had to create it in a hurry, so I couldn't do much. I'll try to add more info on the infobox as well (translating from Turkish). Signed, ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~^Contact 20:25, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Please do not forget to add sources you are translating from, even if they are in Turkish.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:28, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

"Pushkin is a Russian Empire writer"

Yaroslav, do you consider such edits helpful? What can be done? Ghirla^-трёп- 19:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

I restored the body. Concerning the categories, I would just drop it. It is not particularly helpful, but there are so many people around who feel strongly about categorization that it is easier to let them do whatever they want.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Stresses in Russian

Hello, Mike_Novikoff keeps removing stresses in Russian names. What is worse, he is referring to his essay as if it were an established rule or something. Read here. I believe this is a very dishonest behavior. Could you please do something about it? Thanks. Taurus Littrow (talk) 20:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

I assume the user has understood what I have written at his talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

I hope so. Thanks much. Taurus Littrow (talk) 20:45, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

No problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Romani people in Hungary (again)

Hi Ymblanter, we are still, slowly, discussing the changes on that page, although some some small progress has been made. I was wondering if you could give some feedback here. There has been a large scale deletion of sourced content on the page, which was never really explained. From the discussions going on, it appears that the reason for deletion was that Kiengir feels that the section title "Anti-Roma Sentiment" violated WP:NPOV (he didn't put it like that, but that is as close as I've got to understanding him). If the objection is the title of the section, is mass deletion of sourced content warranted? I would have thought that, even if the text is itself biased, the obligation would be to correct the bias rather than blanket delete. Boynamedsue (talk) 14:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Without looking at the article, I agree with the sentiment, but I do not understand much in the subject, and there is no reason I should get myself into the content of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:09, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough. Any suggestions for the best course of action? Boynamedsue (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Usually, to continue discussing at the talk page is the best. If the disagreement is clear and the positions of two sides are well-stated, one can try WP:DRN--Ymblanter (talk) 16:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Cheers, that's really useful. I'm trying to steer things towards a clear declaration of positions on those questions we can't find compromise on, so I'll continue in that vein. Boynamedsue (talk) 16:50, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Great, thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 16:51, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

@Boynamedsue:,

it's really not helpful to state such immediately refutable statements like as been a large scale deletion of sourced content on the page, which was never really explained, when on the contrary the talk page - as well - is full with explanations concerning that, repetitively, at first in last year September, afterwards when you opened this year a new section, 8 January again I explained twice the same day (and I could count even more), it is another thing you so hardly understand/ignore some things, as it happened yesterday, when you again opened a new section and conflated two different issues, and even you were explained what you conflated, but your direct answer again ignored it again and suggested that erroneus assumption you presented also here. You have to clearly specify from now on if something is not clear for you, even quote me if needed. Two points we already agreed, but still there is some left.(KIENGIR (talk) 04:02, 22 January 2021 (UTC))

Kiengir, could you please try and explain on the talk page exactly what your problem is with the content. When you are removing sourced content you have to explicitly state a reason. I have reposted the deleted text (2 paragraphs) for which I do not understand your reasons for deletion, if you look at it and tell me why the individual sourced statements shouldn't be in the article, I will then fully understand your position.Boynamedsue (talk) 08:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@Boynamedsue:,

It seems you again totally ignore what I have just said, even the premise/assertion of your first sentence is false, as well even the second, since I've been explicit as always. Based on your recurrently problematic comprehension, I will again use logical markers and highlights, and please do not conduct parallel discussions, especially because of the earlier mentioned reason, since you obviously should improve your focus and analytic skills.(KIENGIR (talk) 11:43, 22 January 2021 (UTC))

Help with Berezovo, Chukotka Autonomous Okrug

Sorry to bug you; when you have the time, could you look at the above article for me? It says it's a town, but the population is so small I assume it must be a village (but I don't want to change it without knowing for sure). The other thing is, the ru.wiki article (Берёзово) says it's abandoned with zero population. I can't verify one way or the other using the Russian census because I can't speak any. Could you sort me out when you have a minute? No rush. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:51, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Sure. It is certainly not an urban locality (in particular, not a town), and I have corrected this. Concerning the population, the ref is incorrect (it goes to the 2010 census), I will check alternative sources later today. Likely it is indeed abandoned, because it is not listed at Berezovo, and Ezhiki has always been very careful in compiling the lists. Thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate you having a look. Do you need me to do anything on it once you've checked, or will you take care of any changes that need to be made? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:26, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

I will take care of any changes, no problem. --Ymblanter (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Cheers, you're the best :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:38, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Kurds and Kurdistan case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 5, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 16:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

User stop editing (Jerry Kyoni) 3 months ago

Hello, I want to put a retired template on a user’s page. User stop editing Can you put the template instead of me. I cannot set it because a message appears stating that my editing has been stopped by an automatic filter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.206.178.170 (talk) 09:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

No, only a user him/herself may do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:51, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:24 de Diciembre (Panama Metro)#Requested move 24 January 2021

The Line 1 stations that you added are confusing. Perhaps that content should be inside a collapsible section? AlgaeGraphix (talk) 13:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

We can make it collapsible, no problem. My point is that in the unlikely event RfC gets closed as keep or as no consensus, these stations must be moved back. Thus, they must be listed as art of RfC.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Reminiscent

This reminds me of a mutual friend of ours. Not sure yet, but the acount does provide some strong signs straight off the bat (knows his way around and extremely keen on giving a more "European" outlook to Georgia). Thought I'd let you know. Pinging Chipmunkdavis as he's a "friend" of LTA Satt 2 too. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

No, I can not really say anything without a CU.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:17, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

More from Mike Novikoff

Hello, Mike Novikoff is now edit warring at Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian over a link to his essay. ([42], [43], [44]). That's very annoying, as pointed out by some users. Taurus Littrow (talk) 10:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

They have not edited it for three days, I assume they are waiting for the outcome of the WT:MOS discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:27, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Alternative rock

Can you page protect the Alternative rock page? An anonymous IP keeps vandalizing it and adding stuff like this [45] and this [46] Fruitloop11 (talk) 14:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I blocked the IP--Ymblanter (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Report question

Hello. In WP:ANI#User:Armatura report, I wanted to give an update, particularly on Armatura's recent one-way IBAN, however since only uninvolved editors are asked to comment, I think my comment would be taken in bad faith. I contacted Sebastian about what I should do and they replied that they have rescued themselves from the case and therefore can't help. Any ideas? Cheers. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 09:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I have recused myself as well, they mentioned that in the case.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Welp, I can't find anyone else to help. Do you know anyone who can? Also, does rescuing matter in this case since I'm not asking for any action, but guidance about how I could add information, if I even can? — CuriousGolden (T·C) 10:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I am afraid if it does not get acted on and gets archived, is to open an AE request and to link this material from the AE page.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:54, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks for help. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 10:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

RevDel request

Hello admin, sorry to bother you but can you please revdelete this edit? It contains contact information of someone, probably shouldn't be on a public forum. Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 11:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done, tnx--Ymblanter (talk) 11:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --Ashleyyoursmile! 11:54, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Hi Ymblanter. Just letting you know that this IP [47] whom we both had the honor of receiving those praising words is probably the same person as [48] who also got blocked for the same kind of personal attacks related to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi/the Shah. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The person clearly is in need of medical assistance, and there is probably not much I can do except for blocking on sight.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Jobbik

Hi,

([49]), ([50]), ([51]), ([52]), ([53]), warning here ([54]). Despite the talk page discussion has been opened soon a year ago (21:09, 30 May 2020), the user ignored my direct ple to engage there...Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 08:24, 29 January 2021 (UTC))

I blocked for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Ignored report at ANI

Hello, I've recently made this report on ANI, which hasn't been reviewed by any of the admins, could you please take a look at it? - Kevo327 (talk) 12:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

No, this is not something that can be reasonably treated at ANI. You should go to WP:AE.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:53, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Posp68 sock

Hi Ymblanter, there's an obvious sock of Posp68 back at Talk:Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia, OlaBirkebeiner:

1. Norwegian name: Posp68 and his IPs always geolocated to Norway - as does this IP that edited one of the new accounts comments [55] (this also follows Posp68's pattern of sometimes editing while logged out).
2. Continuation of Posp68's discussion insisting the expulsion was not genocide [56]
3. Grudge against me and KIENGIR, whom, despite having created the account 4 hours ago, he clearly knows [57]
4. The same IP above just returned to Posp68's other haunt Munich Agreement to reinsert text Posp68 had originally added [58]

Is this obvious enough for you to block them?--Ermenrich (talk) 14:03, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 14:43, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!--Ermenrich (talk) 14:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Here we go again

Hi Ymblanter, once again I have to face malicious deletions of info from users from the Ukrainian Wikipedia. This time they are removing important information from Vitalii Markiv's article. Could you help me understand how to behave?--Mhorg (talk) 01:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

WP:BLP would be a good start, also WP:COATRACK. This is a very sensitive situation. A soldier was prosecuted and EXONERATED (= ОПРАВДАН), and you cannot in good faith continue pushing his purported guilt (WP:POV). You also use the word "Ukrainian" with negative connotations in your edit summaries. That is not nice.--Aristophile (talk) 02:54, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

The part you removed does not claim his guilt, but the guilt of the UAF, of which Markiv is a member. You are clearly trying to show that the Ukrainian army is not involved in the murder in question. "Ukrainian" it is not a negative connotation, but it is important to specify that we are once again facing a disruptive attack on the English Wikipedia from Ukraine.--Mhorg (talk) 13:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Lute88 is not a user from Ukrainian Wikipedia, they are a long-term user here who has received multiple warnings for disruptive behavior in Ukraine-related area. The easiest is probably to get the to AE and to topic-ban from Ukraine. However, the link they are reverting does not work anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I meant that he was also a user of the Ukrainian Wikipedia. Forgive me, I'm not that experienced, what does "AE" stand for? And which link is not working?--Mhorg (talk) 15:27, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement. The link to Corriere della Sera does not work, at least not for me.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:54, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank, I'll try to figure it out how to solve this problem. I also replaced the source with one accessible without registration on "pressreader".--Mhorg (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

About Martiros Sarian s edit

Dear Ymblanter, thanks for your attenrion in Martiros Sarians edit. But I want to say somethink about the deleted part. I am Armenian and I did it because in Arnemian history we had not and have not this flag. This flag has nothing to do with Armenia, I asked about it armenian teachers. For more informafiaon you can read List of Armenian flags article. Can you delete this flags logo again? Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ASTGH NARINYAN (talk • contribs) 16:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

The flag is not in the article about Armenia or about Armenian flag, it is in the article about Sarian. I suspect the real issue is that the flag is similar to the LGBT flag.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

HK IP hopper

Hi Ymblanter, thanks for blocking 220.246.55.231 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I am wondering if you can tell if 203.218.129.244 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is perhaps the same person. They're the latest in a string of IPs that have been editing disruptively on MTR-related articles and they have a similar writing style (1, 2) as the person you have been blocking (3). One of the IPs Matthew_hk mentioned, 14.0.236.217 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), has made similarly odd/incorrect edits to HK railway articles as the IP hopper I have been reverting. They are also involved in the same kinds of content disputes as those mentioned by Matthew_hk (e.g. changing the Mandarin romanisation from Pinyin to another system, similar edit by blocked ip – not that I think that is necessarily an unconstructive edit, but it seems like further evidence they are the same person). Thanks. Citobun (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I am sure all these IPs are either the same person, or at least closely coordinating - but the pool is too big. I just blocked everybody who showed up at ANI after I have blocked the first one for unconstructive editing and personal attacks, but it is not a sustainable solution for me to block every HK IP who shows up for 31h. We need s structural solution, and this is what the ANI thread was about, but it unfortunately degenerated into a series of personal attacks by ip hoppers.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for helping. Sorry to bother you again but the same IP 203.218.129.244 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is back and stirring up utterly pointless conflict at the same articles as before. And threatening to report me, for what I am not sure considering I haven't edited the article since February 5. Citobun (talk) 14:30, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I already had a nice discussion with them today at their talk page. Let us wait until they do something blockable.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for page protection

Thank you for protecting Holodomor in modern politics. Is there any grounds for making it extended instead of semi? The IP edits on the page are by Stix1776. Thanks for the consideration and best wishes from Los Angeles,  // Timothy :: talk  11:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

No, we may not extended-protect pages which have not been previously semi-protected. Please also check my comments at ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks I replied there, please review what was done, this is a serious accusation against an editor that was fixing a copyright problem.  // Timothy :: talk  11:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Covid-in-Greece topic ban

Hi, Ymblanter. I see that you closed this ANI discussion with a topic ban for MadJack. Thank you. But did you give any thought to a general site ban, which three of the four commenters were calling for? It might be helpful if you included, in your closing comment, your reason for going with a topic ban rather than a general block. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

The reason is pretty obvious - this is a SPA who tries to push POV in the articles of Greek politicians. Concerning the site ban, generally we tend to give such editors a chance to edit other areas where their edits would be less problematic, but of course a community ban can be considered. I will now make it clear at ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the indefinite semi-protection on the Donald Trump Jr. article. I was going to request it, but a one-week block starting on January 30 stopped it. Regards,–Cupper52^Discuss! 11:26, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 11:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

User ignores topic ban

Hi! Please, could you do something with user Santamoly (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? This user was indef topic banned from anything related to Eastern Europe, but since then most of Santamoly's edits are related to Eastern Europe articles. I noticed that when I saw user's last edit - Santamoly added original research to Vladimir Putin article. Judging by his contributions the user just completely ignores the fact of broadly construed topic ban. He has been warned many times, but still continues to edit EA articles.--Renat (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done, pretty clear topic ban violations--Ymblanter (talk) 15:03, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Transylvanian Hound

Hi,

discussion in the talk (you don't need to read entirely, because my inquiry is mainly technical), resulted in no consensus, after an editor on contrary acted agains it ([59]) hence I restored status quo ([60]), and after twice. Two other editors reverted ([61]), ([62]), ([63]) three times... the problem of their argumentation - as you may see from the edit logs, but explained in the talk - they are totally ignoring our policies, not understanding what WP:CONSENSUS means, on the other hand we have more expert sources that are not unanimous. I address this of lack of experience of such issues (I don't stress on myself if they would cooperate on this), because "During a dispute discussion, until a consensus is established, you should not revert away from the status quo" is clear not just for admins, but experienced editors and I've as well experienced enough to learn that all participants opinion has to be taken into account, especially if multiple sources conflict and contradict infobox template implications (and I even did not reset to my preferred version, just roughly the status quo). Hence I kindly ask you to handle this professionaly, I think noone should be exempt our policies.(KIENGIR (talk) 10:16, 9 February 2021 (UTC))

I do not think I can do anything in this situation.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:05, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

However, am I correct regarding the deduction? I see it correct to restore it until our resolution processes in an appropriate way does not conclude otherwise.(KIENGIR (talk) 11:10, 9 February 2021 (UTC))

I do not see a formal no consensus close, and then you say there is no consensus, and your opponents (who are all good-faith editirs, not socks) say there is sufficient consensus. This can only be resolved by a formal close.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I see the point (about good faith, even if I would notice by one editor a lack of goof good faith, I have to follow WP:AAGF). However from my "opponents" two have declared before and after the events openly that "Decisions on Wikipedia are primarily made by consensus, you do not have consensus for the current arrangement" and after "There can be no consensus", hence I did - and even reinforced - the restoration to status quo ante was fair...If they openly declare of the state of no consensus (so that is not just something "I assume"), is the formal close necessary?(KIENGIR (talk) 12:01, 9 February 2021 (UTC))

I assume they mean there is no consensus for your version, not for their version.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:29, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Interestingly they claim both, and that is mutually contradictive, since when they said my version would not have consesus (first quote - I agree), they said the parameter will have to be changed (and I did it back to status quo). The second qoute has the same spirit, however, earlier they assumed consensus have been reached to their version, which was not the case. Thus their allegations, the policies quoted by them and their actions contradict each other...hence I raised my latest question.(KIENGIR (talk) 13:34, 9 February 2021 (UTC))

This probably needs to be discussed at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I tried, more times but ignorance and false pretentions I've got. So, in spite of the earlier mentioned, still the formal closure is needed? (and if yes, where from it should be requested?). Thank you.(KIENGIR (talk) 15:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC))

I would open an RfC and see what happens--Ymblanter (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Besides that, is there any other method? (sometimes I've met with "this discussion is closed, do not modify" tags with evaluation that was not a result of an RFC, but some other conduct (I just ask because the issue is better a technical/semantical one, which should be treated professionaly, and not necessarily by RFC, which may result contradictive to sources).

Sure, you can just ask someone (or post a request at one of the noticebards) to have a look and formally close, but people usually do not want to read long discussions and dig into conflicts if they are not involved - and may not do it if they are involved.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Does it need to be an admin, or may be an uninvolved editor as well? (yes, indeed, however it's not hard to see not having consensus, and what is the status quo, it's an everyday usual conduct by disputes we restore to the status quo, this does mean any user/admin would be involved and taking sides...as well I hate unnesessary lengthy discussions, but it's not my fault I had to explain more, but the other parties who refuse to hear...well I get you don't wish to involve, the same way I am sure implicitly you certainly know that I have right...since in this quantum space, if we make a measure, two parallel reality may not exist and all probability functions will collapse :-) )(KIENGIR (talk) 16:32, 9 February 2021 (UTC))

No, it does not have to be an admin, any (experienced) uninvolved editor would be good enough.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what to think

Ymblanter, sorry if I take some of your time. I am having a discussion [64] with two users which is getting surreal. With one of them there is certainly an harsh form of dialogue but it is ok, the other instead poses in a totally aggressive and almost unmotivated way, avoiding all my previous answers and taking up any opposite comment and reiterating it for no reason. When I get the 24h ban he\she came to my discussions page to insult me [65], now he\she comes to accuse me of Sockpuppetry [66], and the thing, which in my opinion is really suspicious, is that this user started to be active from 27 January 2021 [67], about 13 days and he\she knows all the rules of Wikipedia, knows how to report users, seems to know everything. Tell me if this is normal, if I am exaggerating. But in 5 years of activity on Wikipedia I have never seen anything like it. Thanks for all.--Mhorg (talk) 15:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I semi-protected the page for three months, no IPs can edit it, and future accusations in sockpuppetry will have no merit in any case. Concerning the content, the easiest would be to open an RfC (read WP:RfC for best practives). It should not be difficult to find reliable sources, at least in Russian, than Navalny advocated the expulsion of Georgians in 2008 calling tnem "rodents" (грызуны, a slur from грузины), it was then all over the place.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help and suggestions. Now I'm trying to understand the procedure for WP:RfC, you know, I'm just a 5 years user :). Concerning the sources, I even didn't use Russian one, because I know that this could raise suspects, and I don't want to pass as a the "Kremlin troll". I simply found 5 western RS that talk about Navalny and the Georgian war (the support for war, or the racial slurs): The Atlantic, South China Morning Post, Politico, RollingStone, Al Jazeera. These users are appealing to the "undue weight" and others, in my opinion, weak justifications. At this point it is difficult to give an answer, we are now at the level of personal opinions about what is important or not. I think that these informations, quite compromising, on any other article of a political figure, would have been promptly inserted. Here I understand that there is a question of political struggle. But that's okay, I hope other users join in the discussion, I'm exhausted (and a bit dejected).--Mhorg (talk) 16:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Finally. It was as I suspected, User:LauraWilliamson was a sockpuppet [68]. He\she was driving me crazy. Thank you again for your support.--Mhorg (talk) 18:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, it happens unfortunately--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I made my first WP:RfC: this one. Do you think it is ok? And should I ping the users involved? Or I just need to wait their response on the "Dispute resolution noticeboard"? Thank you--Mhorg (talk) 00:13, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

It is best to follow Robert McClenon, he has much more experience with DRN than I have.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Alexei Navalny vandalism

Hi, on the Alexei Navalny article you just semi-protected (thank you for that, by the way) those two new IP addresses with no real previous edit history - 220.253.99.152 and 120.16.121.41, are repeatedly reinstating disputed content that is currently being discussed on the talk page at talk:Alexei Navalny#Did he back the Russian war in Georgia or not?. I would revert it again, but I've done three reverts now and I don't want to edit war. I think the two IPs may also potentially be sockpuppets - considering they have popped up out of no where with no previous edit history to repeatedly reinstate a user named Mhorg's disputed content. I had a look at the two IPs geolocation and they are both similar. Mhorg has previously been reported by me and subsequently blocked for edit warring on the article - just a few days ago. LauraWilliamson (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

You mean, you are asking me to be a proxy for you to make a revert you are not eligible to make? Sorry, I do not see this as my role of an administrator of this project.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:33, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

No no I don't mean that, I was just looking for comment on the situation on that page as I think it looks suspicious. LauraWilliamson (talk) 15:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

LauraWilliamson is trying to proxy people to get there way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:My_very_best_wishes#Clear_vandalism_on_Alexei_Navalny_related_to_the_talk_discussion_you_contributed_to (Could you possibly revert back to the status quo again)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nicoljaus#Alexei_Navalny_-_users_keep_reinstating_content_that_is_being_discussed_on_talk I've reverted these suspicious new IP's 3 times now, but don't want to edit-war. Could you possibly revert back to the status quo again while it's still being discussed on talk? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 102.176.108.200 (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Already at ANI--Ymblanter (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

a new sock puppet of LauraWilliamson?

out of no were the user Beanom undoes Mhrogs edits the same way has the other sock did,

(Edit waring when other users disagree, undue content is still being debated on talk)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alexei_Navalny&diff=1006200363&oldid=1006193783

How would a new user know the terms (Edit waring and undue) they do not seem like a new user at all. I was going to try to tell Drmies but there page is locked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:1340:35F0:4DA5:B516:8646:4A06 (talk) 18:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Ymblanter. How would you feel about increasing the protection on Alexei Navalny to extended confirmed, due to the socking by newly-created accounts? EdJohnston (talk) 01:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I though about it yesterday, but there was only one confirmed sock. If there is another one, I think we should add extended confirmed protection to the article. (I did not have a chance to look at it in the last 8 hours because I was sleeping; may be we are ready for protection now).--Ymblanter (talk) 06:34, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Now had a look, we did not have any new socks. I would just way until the next one comes and then extended-confirmed protect the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Casting aspersions

Don’t bother accusing me of beating around the bush.[69] And “casting aspersions again” is literally casting aspersions.

If I wanted to go after you I’d just post your own offensive diffs.[70][71][72][73][74] I have better things to do. —Michael Z. 03:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Not sure what you want to say. So fat you are the only admi9nistrator on the project under discretionary sanctions, not me. Look, everything was fine, and it was a reasonable discussion, and then you went again implying I am trying to separate Ukraine from its history. No, I do not. What I care about is the accuracy of information. I have in fact for the last year been likely the editor with the largest number of edits in Ukrainian topics. Just stop commenting on my motivation which anyway you have no idea of and continue working on improving of encyclopedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for blocking

Hey there,

Thank you for blocking the IP address editor. I’ve reviewed their talk page and I have seen unkind remarks about our policies.

Thank you.

KirkburnFandom (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, sure. Unkind remarks against our users are more problematic though.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree with that. Extremely problematic. KirkburnFandom (talk) 09:14, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit war on the Alexei Navalny page

It looks like the page needs admin protection. Two users were trying to add information and another user is undoing it all the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alexei_Navalny&action=history46.55.213.35 (talk) 21:24, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I think some other admin should do this st this point, not me.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Battles of Krasnoi and Vyazma 1812

Hi: I wrote the original versions of the Krasnoi and Vyazma articles. I see that you have done a bit of editing there, and that you asked me to take responsibility for editing those articles myself. No problem; that I can do. However, a few people have edited those articles recently, and they've done so in ways that are not for the better (to say the least). When I try to undo these recent erroneous and low-quality edits, I am blocked by Wikipedia for some reason. The message I get is that "too many intermediate edits have taken place" (or something to that effect). Can you kindly tell me how to get around this Wikipedia block? I really want to restore both articles to their original form. Thanks - Kenmore (talk) 00:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Apparently, you can not do it technically, and this is also not advisable because you will in this way also eliminte good edits, including some technical edits. What you can do it to modify the text. You can get the text of every old version by going to the history, looking at that version and pretending you want to edit it.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hello. 5.44.170.9 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has returned after the 1-year block you issued late in 2019 expired. Hrodvarsson (talk) 00:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Sometimes I am really amazed with the persistence of people.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Please can you check

Talk:Iran under "content" section. Seems strange and I have been called a fraud, and accused to I have some my handlers and the other crazy stuff in general. Nubia86 (talk) 18:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Timetravel12: an adept of gay-Jewish conspiracy?--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

At first I thought to ignore but when I checked better I felt really uncomfortable. I can send you my location or anything, I am not connected with anything what that editor accused me and I felt regret I came to edit wikipedia when I checked better what he wrote to me. So for that I decided to alarm someone and I saw you in page edit history of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. I am sorry for taking your time and to be free to write like this on your talk page. And thank you. Nubia86 (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

No, please do not send me any private information. I think we are on the way to the indef block for the user (who is apparently the same as the IP).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Again, thank you, for giving me part of your time to check about my concerns. Nubia86 (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation and persistent vandalism

I have one more concern, but I feel uncomfortable to share, but it is persistent. I opened sockpuppet investigation, on couple of accounts and well, that accounts don't participate in discussion and I afraid to not just sockppupeting is an issue, seems just vandalism created accounts also. Couple of articles is totally vandalised, some I tried to fix. I haven't found any useful contributions, from all that accounts. I already bothered you today but if you can see if some can be done, one account keeps vandalizing articles. Here it is: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ShkoDevAct. Nubia86 (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but I do not have time to look at it now, and it is unlikely I can do it tomorrow. I guess one of the CU's will take action.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I know they have a lot of work, anyway, thank you again. Nubia86 (talk) 21:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Turkic languages

Hi,

disruptive IP, ignoring talk page, 10 reverts so far ([75]), edit warring notice here ([76]), did not work, more of us tried, please handle it. Thank You!
P.S. - I wish you health and remedy!(KIENGIR (talk) 19:17, 15 February 2021 (UTC))

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

FYI

[77]. This is an opinion, I do not insist. Perhaps it is a sock, I do not really know. I just do not think this is obvious, after looking at comments at their talk page. My very best wishes (talk) 18:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

They look to me like a sock, but even if they are not I do not see how they could be a good-faith user with their editing history. Good-faith users usually do not go on a spree of removing large pieces of material from highly visible articles, including a full restoration of an edit of a blocked sock. I do not see any need to unblock.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:45, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeh, apparently that was a sock, sorry. My very best wishes (talk) 01:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

At least they decided to be explicit and to to clear vandalism rather than continue edit-warring in political articles.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Administrator Query

Hi Administrator,

A page Draft:Shadab_Siddiqui was created by few people in 2018 then later admin salted the page now only administrator can create the page. I fixed the page and edited it more than two months ago but it is still not approved, so i thought only an admin could remove the salt then it will approved. the entity is passing the notability of WP:NMUSIC so can you remove the "protection" from this page so it can get approved?

Thanks --Static Hash (talk) 18:51, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

I can not review the article, and I am not willing to circumwent the AfC process in this case. It is best to ask someone familiar with Indian topics to review the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:54, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Policy question

Hi,

just a lighter question:

- exist such that a user bans another user posting comments on his/her talkpage, even pinging the given user, unless they would be required by policy? (I would assume banning would be tool of admins or at least higher level bureucrats)

- (the second question's validity may depend on the answer to the earlier, which I don't know yet) in case a user asks another one about the same, mentioned above, it has to be followed? (I mean not necessaily per wikietiquette, but by any policy?)

Thank you for clarifying!(KIENGIR (talk) 10:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC))

If user A does not want user B to post at their talk pages it is usually considered as "A banned B from their talk page" (even though no blocking tool is involved) and is followed by all parties, even if it creates some inconveniences (for example, automatic Twinkle notifications, or B reports A and can not notify them). I thought this is written at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines but I can not easily find it there; may be I am mistaken (on the policy; the practices are certainly what I have described).--Ymblanter (talk) 10:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I think I found it, WP:NOBAN, ...such requests should, within reason, be respected... (but mentions nothing on pinging). However, the guideline does not mention ar call it is a ban (only the WP shortcut), but as an ask. Thank you for help to investigate this. Have a nice day!(KIENGIR (talk) 12:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC))

Yes, I think this is it, indeed.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed decision posted at the open Kurds and Kurdistan case

In the open Kurds and Kurdistan arbitration case, the proposed decision has now been posted. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. You were notified as you made comments in the case request. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 16:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Complaint against user NedFausa

Hi Ymblanter. I am Cokeah, from India. The user named NedFausa had hurt Indian sentiments by editing the Sushant Singh Rajput Wikipedia page despite bans and blocks. A petition has been filed against Wikipedia to state the actor's death by suicide. If you are a real administrator or moderator, please edit the cause of death to murder because of many proofs gathered by the forensic agency CBI. Please look forward to this matter. Yours sincerely, Cokeah (talk) 07:49, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

We are not succeptible to external campaigns aimed at damaging Wikipedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Protection request

Hi Ymblanter. Thanks for ECPing Aung San Suu Kyi. Can you do the same for Win Myint? The same disruptive edits occurred there today, and both pages have been disrupted to a similar extent. It was under semi-protection, which just expired. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 09:14, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

This article is cleraly not ready for extended confirmed. In principle, it could be semi-protected, but a week long protection expired today, and we need to wait if there are disruptiove Ip edits. If there are edits from at least two Ips, or a lot of edits from one IP, please let me know or ask for protection at [[WP:RFPP].--Ymblanter (talk) 09:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

37.41.48.234

user:37.41.48.234 is posting lewd pics. CLCStudent (talk) 13:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan closed

An arbitration case regarding Kurds and Kurdistan has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.
• GPinkerton (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• GPinkerton (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Thepharoah17 (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• عمرو بن كلثوم (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Supreme Deliciousness (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Paradise Chronicle is warned to avoid casting aspersions and repeating similar uncollegial conduct in the future.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 14:32, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan closed

Non Stop Disruptive Edits

Thanks for the support, but i think he will not stop, just look here and also here the New created user will not stop doing the same thing (Pushing for a Turkish/Young Turks POV). Could you protect the page indef.Mr.User200 (talk) 00:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

We do not protect pages against a single user. If they return to continue the same edits, they will just get a longer block (possibly an indefinite one).--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

You know stuff

Hi, Ymblanter. I noticed that you made some edits on a page (Betsy Paluck) that I started a couple years ago. Thank you for those! When I looked you up, I read on your page that you are a physicist. I started another page a few years ago for physicist Manijeh Razeghi that I have always felt deserved better than my layperson's explanation of her work and its significance. Have you heard of her? Would you mind taking a look to see if her work piques your curiosity and if you could help explain it to the rest of the world? If so, great! No pressure either way. Thanks again for your Paluck edits! Best, SJTatsu (talk) 01:54, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi. She is kind of in my field, but I have never heard about her. 1000 papers means she is a manager. She likely does not have time to read them.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:45, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Problem user

Thanks for this response. That user is very abusive. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

No problem. I think this is the last we have seen from this account.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Satinder Sartaaj

Sir, this is regarding a caste POV pushing sock (User:Punjabier likely) making threats of legal action and being generally unpleasant. You protected the article on 1 January 2021, after it expired, they atrted adding unsourced stuff again here, on being reverted, they edit warred [78], making threats of legal action laced with personal casteist attacks in Punjabi. Today took a jab at Ravensfire (called their father stupid) [79] on being reverted. I believe the article requires protection. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sock

Hello Ymblanter,

I saw that you blocked the user Beanom and then unblocked the user to give them another chance on 17 February. That user claimed they had no relation to the blocked sock LauraWilliamson who was confirmed to be sock of Gordimalo. Now, another sock of the user called Caretaker John was blocked. Now, Beanom did not make any edits since 17 February when he was unblocked but strangely enough, as soon as Caretaker John was blocked, Beanom started editing again today and has restored some of Caretaker John's edits. They are continuing to restore the blocked sock's edits on pages they've never edited before. That seems very fishy, don't you think? Regards. Mellk (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but I will not go through this again.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

The user is very much just vandalizing articles now and blanking major articles like Brazil and Venezuela. Mellk (talk) 19:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to bother, the issue has been resolved, the user has been blocked. Mellk (talk) 19:53, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, we block-conflicted.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Revoke TPA

Hello. You recently blocked Adam Lietuva. Can you please remove their TPA? Thank you. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 22:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking Adam Lietuva

Thanks for finally blocking Adam Lietuva. I saw that you have hidden some of the revisions on his talk page. There were more similar "messages" by the editor – Special:Diff/1007931757, Special:Diff/1007932418, Special:Diff/1007932967, Special:Diff/1007935411. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I hope I now got all of their offensive edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:43, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

mea culpa!

Holy smokes! I did not realize the massive delete I made in the Template:ACArt discussion. Completely unintentional on my part. I meant to just vote. Thank you for reverting it. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:07, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

No problem, I do not blame you in any way. I actually added your vote to the discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Odegay 31

He's edit warring [80], this time not even an edit summary, much less talkpage participation. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. Khirurg (talk) 20:59, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 21:19, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated. It really wasn't looking good. Khirurg (talk) 22:00, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Really? @Starman2377:, may I please suggest that you really look at the edits before leaving automatic messages at talk pages.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

My mistake. It was pretty chactoic there and i thought you made a vandlism edit. I am sorry. Starman2377 (talk) 17:20, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

semi protection and sock

Thanks for the semi. He's moved onto other articles now: [81]. Volunteer Marek 17:17, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I blocked but this is a dynamic IP, they will likely show up again soon--Ymblanter (talk) 17:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Har Homa

You locked the page with misinformation in it. The linked articles I was removing were to an archived version of a NYT article. The relevant section was retracted and does not appear in the current version of the article because it was false. Also, Huldra was deceptively editing direct quotes from other articles. She may be allergic to the word "neighborhood", but that doesn't prevent Netanyahu from having said it in 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.110.42.125 (talk) 21:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this at the talk page--Ymblanter (talk) 21:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Auto-accept/autoconfirmed permissions

Hi Ymblanter, I saw that you changed the permissions on the GameStop page so that edits from new or unregistered users must have their changes reviewed before being published. As far as I can tell, a new user is one with an account for less than 4 days; an unregistered user is trivial. However, some users (such as me) are making posts which are under revision, even though the account is neither new or unregistered. Is there a different definition used for this permission change? Do any account settings need to be changed? Thanks! Sideriver84 (talk) 19:07, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

I never protected Gamestop, but I protected a lot of other articles. Presumably you mean Wikipedia:Pending changes protection. Indeed, it is not enough to be a confirned user to have edits automatically accepted in this case. I tried to figure out what are the requirements, and could not do it quickly, but I guess extended confirmed (30 days and 500 edits) would be in any case sufficient.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (Relevant article is GameStop short squeeze and these edits [82][83].) @Sideriver84: Hmm, because your account is autoconfirmed (more than 10 edits and 4 days old), you should be able to have your changes automatically accepted. However, lately it seems that a number of other users have experienced the same issue as you where your edits are being held back for review erroneously. See also the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Pending Changes again. I suspect this may be a bug in the software that runs Wikipedia. Mz7 (talk) 20:00, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I have noticed this before, I thought that the general allocation of permissions has changed.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Ymblanter: and @Mz7: Appreciate your looking into this. Hopefully the bug will be repaired soon. Sideriver84 (talk) 20:26, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Civility/NPA

Hi,

I am in a discussion, I get such an answer ([84]), which made me avoid answering until now, I don't feel this "Please don't be silly." remark appropriate. Please judge this, until I'll keep myself on hold. Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC))

Not an exemplary behavior but certainly not blockable at this point.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, depends which meaning of silly we would interpret, however may be borderline...should a warning to be given (by any means?), or I should continue discussion ignoring it completely?(KIENGIR (talk) 20:01, 15 March 2021 (UTC))

The easiest is probably ti remind in the discussion itself that this is not the best way to address Wikipedia users.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Louis XVII

Hi, and thanks for your help on Louis XVII. However, I noticed that the protection you put in is significantly shorter than the previous protection which expired only a short time ago. The previous protection was one year in length and the page has been consistently vandalized despite multiple protections for more than a year. Would you please take a closer look at the protection history and consider making it longer? Thanks. I am the Jet Liner (talk) 22:23, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

You are right, the page was moved last year, and the protection log was left at a redirect, so I was not aware of previous protections. Now I found the log and, based on it, protected the page indefinitely.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppet

Hello Ymblanter! I hope you are doing fine. Recently, I saw a newly created account disrupting Template:Largest cities of Russia. If you see the template's edit history, you will see the new account is not only vandalizing the template with random images, he most probably created another account. Danloud ^(talk) 09:33, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I protected the template; this is probably the only reasonable thing which can be done at this point.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Zack Snyder's Justice League

Hi. Thank you for adding a page semi-protection, yet there are users like Samoht99 who continue their disruptive editing. This user, for example, has been reverted multiple times by multiple editors (similar to Dwilliamphilip83's edits on WW84 article), yet they think that they are the only one who "reflect what the truth actually is" without any reliable source (they only spoke about Rotten Tomatoes score, which is irrelevant to their edits). Can we also topic ban this user? ภץאคгöร 13:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I do not see it as disruption, though of course both versions of the text are unsourced and probably should not be in the article. You should discuss this with the user at their talk page / talk page of the article, of nothing comes out it is either WP:ANI or WP:DRN. I do not have much time now, but I assume they have not been already topic-banned or so because if they were this is a different story.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:57, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thanks very much for handling my RPP at Abu Musa. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Kingdom of Kashmir

Hi Ymblanter. I see you are an Administrator who has been involved with editorial issues regarding Kashmir. I would like to create an article about the ancient Kingdom of Kashmir (6th-16th century, its art, architecture, diplomacy, coinage etc...) here's my start, but it was soon blanked by User:Fowler&fowler [85]. We are having a discussion at Talk:Kingdom of Kashmir but it's going nowhere. User:Fowler&fowler is not providing a single source to back up an overarching claim that "there never was a Kingdom of Kashmir" [86]. What should I do? Can you help? Best regards. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 12:47, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

I would say ask the Wikiproject.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:49, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Which Wikiproject would that be? Can you point me to the page? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 12:55, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

I guess Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics--Ymblanter (talk) 13:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

2020 Summer Olympics

You protected this article with Pending Changes exactly two months ago, on January 20, 2021. Could you please consider unprotecting it now? During the last month, the only actual vandalism edit attempt that I see in page history is a single IP edit from March 10. There were some other pending edits that were not accepted but, as far as I can tell, they were good faith edits. I don't think the article currently satisfies any of the Pending Changes protection criteria listed in the WP:PCPP policy (Persistent vandalism; Violations of the biographies of living persons policy; Copyright violations). Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 16:48, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:04, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Nsk92 (talk) 17:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Ukrainian language

Hi,

user has very uncivil remarks, ignoring the talk page, mass reverts, ([87]), ([88]), ([89]), ([90]), edit warring notice here ([91]), but also spread retaliatiory reverts several other pages ([92])...Please look on it, Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 17:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC))

Reverted whatever it was reasonable to revert and gave an alert and a warning. Let us see what they are going to do next. The editing pattern does not look good, blatant POV pushing and nothing of substance.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:10, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I agree. Seems a sleeping account/reincarnation of a sockmaster, like this ([93]).(KIENGIR (talk) 18:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC))

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Tnx--Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:24, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Tendentious - Zakarpattia Oblast, Hungarian–Czechoslovak War and so forth

The user with sometimes spurious edit logs, tendentiously performing continous reverts contrary the talk page discussions where he was told consensus should be built. His tone sometimes there are rude, and breached the 3RR at more instances:

([94]), ([95]), ([96]), ([97]) - contrary the prior discussion, which still ongoing, redux

([98]), ([99]), ([100]), ([101]),

Edit warring notice here ([102])...

Meanwhile composing this report, I noticed this ([103]), again a tendentious 3RR breach, no need to detail, may spread to other pages...Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 10:51, 24 March 2021 (UTC))

I would want to warn you that me and User:Norden1990 have agreed on a compromise for the page on the Hungarian–Czechoslovak War. User:KIENGIR overruled this and then went through my edit history, reverting everything he could. He's clearly claiming ownership over multiple pages now, trying to push his POV through brute force. Azure94 (talk) 10:55, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I fully protected the article and gave a user a Ds alert so that they are aware of the sanctions. Note however that this is likely one of my last administrative actions in the Eastern Europe area: If FOF3 of [Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS/Proposed decision|this]] passes, which looks very likely, I will immediately stop doing any administration in the area, in order to not find myself in a similar position later.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank You, I reviewed this FOF3, it seems complicated to grasp at first glance, however I consider any fair conducting admin has nothing to afraid of, of course all of as suffer sometimes injust abuses, shall be any of our status. The user put me a few personal attacks in talk pages, but I just gave a vocal warning to stop (I see here he tried to redefine the rules of consensus as well...). Now he copy-pasted my words as an answer to myself, and as I see he draw your attention another case where I was tried to dragged in in an unfair way to a loop, which was quicly debunked (and a possible offwiki coordination against me I revealed, some user's by mistake considered I sent them e-mails ([104]), I still wait to reveal who that was), the case the user drawn into your attention was censored with spurious edit logs ([105]), ([106]), ([107]), as I debunked this lame trial, of course it has been inconvenient to them. However, I understand you, in quantum-computing one-measure is enough to acess and oberve the facts, while in WP we need multiple layer's to arrive to that sometimes :) Btw., in the end the result will be the same diffs talk, who try to manipulate, will fail...Have a nice and calm day!(KIENGIR (talk) 11:37, 24 March 2021 (UTC))

Now I blocked them anyway--Ymblanter (talk) 11:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, the user made a long tp rant ([108]) just out of block, I gave a short answer, however the user did not stop with personal attacks like "you're simply pushing your biased nationalist POV (it's not a surprise to me that you're a self-identified Hungarian).". Please decide what to do, IMHO I think it's a bit above that would be simply handled by an NPA warning (practically a collective stigmatization of a nationality, near to a kind of racism, which is prohibited here), hence better wait for your opinion.(KIENGIR (talk) 03:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC))

The promised to take the issue to "higher places", the easiest is probably to let them do it and see what happens.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Nowhere did I "stigmatize a nationality" or acted "racist". All I did was point out that KIENGIR's biased edits can only be explainied by his nationalist POV. Azure94 (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, you are probably innocent, maybe I was citing another editor :).(KIENGIR (talk) 20:13, 26 March 2021 (UTC))

Aspersions & PA

Hi there, the user Dallavid has been casting aspersions & personal attacks in my talk page for a while now (here, here, here) even after I told them not to do so. What should the appropriate course of action be? Cheers. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 19:07, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

The user will not be able to edit your talk page for a week, and I gave them a fairly strong warning. Please note that for the reasons I explained in the topic above I will likely stop very soon using my admin tools in all topics related to the Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:15, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. It's a shame that you won't be doing any admin work in this area in the future as you were the only admin that generally knew about the political situation/history, but it's understandable as the topic is quite controversial and toxic. With El_C also not accepting any new requests, do you know any other admin that could handle reports like this? Cheers & good luck in your future editing. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 19:19, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

No, I am afraid you will have to go via usual avenues like AN, ANI, and AE.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Rauzaruku

Thanks for the block. Was fully prepared to do it myself but had to step out. Canterbury Tail talk 18:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. This is their fourth block, so we are probably preparing an exit strategy for them.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:32, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

And all for the same attitude problem. I don't think they get it and next one I'd just indef. Canterbury Tail talk 18:41, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Right.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Kiengir

I think you really need to reconsider your block of user:Azure94, and the way user:KIENGIR utilises you to enforce his POV in articles. The characterisation of KIENGIR's behaviour by Azure94 is entirely correct, if perhaps a little lacking in the full analysis of the "KIENGIR method". His deliberate provocation of, and eager participation in, edit wars and subsequent use of you to enforce status quo or sometimes false "status quo" edits is leading to you unwittingly becoming part of a pattern of disruptive editing that consumes many thousands of hours of productive editors' time annually. I can happily provide more detail on this, if required, but I don't want to wall of text you.

In the case of Azure94, he is entirely correct to say that a consensus of two users had been arrived at, which should have been allowed to stand by KIENGIR while the matter was discussed. KIENGIR was the initiator of the edit war in this case. Boynamedsue (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I checked that the behavior of Azure94 was not appropriate, they were edit-warring in many articles simultaneously. I never take admin actions of behalf of anybody, I am myself responsible for every of my administrative action. Concerning my future involvement, I expect the arbitration case which I mention above to be closed today (may be it is already closed), after which I will completely stop acting as administrator in the area.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Kiengir is also edit-warring in those pages, and appears to be the one who breached 3RR in two of them, yet no action was taken against him, despite him being by far the more experienced user. I think it is possibly better if you simply recuse yourself from any action based on appeals by KIENGIR, while I do not suggest any bias, your willingness to restore versions that KIENGIR wants in two party discussions and allow discussion to continue forms part of a well-developed strategy of WP:STONEWALL that attempts to force bias into articles through stamina and force of will. Your attitude of reverting to a status quo without reference to the content is not incorrect, but it is being used manipulatively and selectively by KIENGIR.Boynamedsue (talk) 08:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, as I mentioned, I will stop acting in the area as administrator, likely today. Concerning KIENGIR, well, if there are issues, it should be possible to get them at WP:AE. I do not think anybody attempted to do this in the last several years.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding, consideration and advice. All the best. Boynamedsue (talk) 09:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Boynamedsue:,

your misleading campaign is not just bad faith per se, but misleading administrators are not really advisable, as I told you WP is in incemental platform, bogus representations will be debunked. You have been explained and warned many of guidelines and policies, several times, and still you have a very hard understanding of them, recurrently denying to accept them, as the striking example is of this discussion lately as well ([109]), and contrary what you try to force, you are the one who is reverting even little copyedits, open long talk sections well we have to explain you near WP:SKYBLUE things, and you're stealing editors precious time, like now. The big WP:BOOMERANG you again try to insist a "false status quo", although as linked in the previous discussion, you don't know and don't accept what means status quo (consensus the same), and now you try to back a distruptive user with a nonsensical editing pattern, just because you think it a good retaliation I draw your attention the mistakes you do at several pages. No, I was not the initiator of the edit war, I opened the discussion, and no consensus was reached there, which is clear of any Wikipedian even sometimes less than 1000 mainspace edits, consequently, disruptive editing is far cry from my activity.

As well I did not breach 3RR (it seems again you cite a policy you don't understand). Now you pressure poor Ymblanter, a veteran administrator who possibly see through on multidiensional quantum spaces, as also earlier you did not understand why some administrative actions were taken in other pages. This is what consumes many of hours of precius editing time, your problem and reluctance of understand some basics, which would compulsory to edit here like now. Sooner or later you'll have to understand some editing basics, it will not be a solution to always avoid to face and recognize the mistakes you commit.(KIENGIR (talk) 13:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC))

Regarding Zangezur Moutains

Hey Ymblanter, I think our question about the translation order got answered. It seems like they also agree to put it in alphabetical order as "it's a common "neutral" way of ordering things". Should I proceed to re-edit based on alphabetical order?--ZaniGiovanni (talk) 11:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I would say leave a talk page message and edit the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for helping to sort things out. --ZaniGiovanni (talk) 11:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hungarian Romanian War

Re. the lock you have put on Hungarian–Romanian War, would it be possible for you to unblock it briefly? It was written in British English before the current kerfuffle, and I would like to change the spellings back. Boynamedsue (talk) 12:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I will likely not re-protect it.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks. Boynamedsue (talk) 12:47, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

GameStop short squeeze

Would you consider either dropping PC or semi-protecting? PC is currently bugged (see VPR/VPT), so a lot of extended-confirmed editors are causing the backlog to build up requiring changes to be accepted, when normally that wouldn't happen. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Upgraded to semi--Ymblanter (talk) 19:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Many Thanks

For putting a stop to the disruption after the one week has expired believe you me when I say the disruption would continue, but once again thanks for stepping in & doing the right thing. Celestina007 (talk) 22:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Fully protecting an article for more than a week if it not has been previously protected would not be really appropriate.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:43, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	This is to show my appreciation for stepping up to the challenge and putting a halt to the disruption previously ongoing at the Feminist Coalition article Celestina007 (talk) 22:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 06:43, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Your 3RR block re: Rent Control

I'm surprised to see this rather substantial block of the IP who is trying to promote and engage in informed discussion at NPOVN . I'd think 48 hours at most and a warning to the complainant to address the many concerns raised on talk and at NPOVN. SPECIFICO talk 17:08, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

The are fresh coming off a week long block. I checked that what they call, already after the block, "talk page consensus" is what they say something and everybody else objects, In my book, this is a two week long block.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I am also against this block of the IP and suggest to revert it.--Pedrote112 (talk) 06:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)