Archives

Archive 1 (Aug 2006 - Feb 2007) Archive 2 (Feb 2007 - Oct 2007) Archive 3 (Oct 2007 - Dec 2007) Archive 4 (Dec 2007 - Mar 2008) Archive 5 (Mar 2008 - May 2008) Archive 6 (May 2008 - Aug 2008) Archive 7 (Aug 2008 - Apr 2009) Archive 8 (Apr 2009 - Mar 2010) Archive 9 (Mar 2010 - Apr 2011) Archive 10 (Apr 2011 - Nov 2011) Archive 11 (Nov 2011 - Aug 2012) Archive 12 (Aug 2012 - Mar 2013) Archive 13 (Mar 2013 - Nov 2014) Archive 14 (Jan 2015 - June 2016) Archive 15 (June 2016 - April 2017) Archive 16 (April 2017 - December 2017) Archive 17 (December 2017 - June 2018) Archive 18 (July 2018 - June 2019) Archive 19 (June 2019 - April 2020)

Hi! About your recent block of 213.159.44.212 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 85.206.22.56 (talk · contribs · WHOIS).

This appears to be a long-term vandal who won't be deterred by a short block, see [1] and 193.219.130.163 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). May I suggest a longer block? Sjö (talk) 10:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Sjö: OK, I've changed both blocks to a week. There likely isn't much point in blocking for longer than that if the vandal is switching IPs. Hut 8.5 11:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Hut 8.5, hope you are well. I saw you blocked ChrisJV08 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as a vandalism-only account. It looks like they added profanities on their talk page, which I reverted. Just wanted to put it on your radar. Thanks! -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @LuK3: thanks for that, I've revoked talk page access. Hut 8.5 17:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! I can see that Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback has a high backlog, so I wondered to ask if you could review my request. Thanks a lot. Juliette Han (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

user:24.142.75.11 is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 17:45, 14 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, hope you are well. I created the page Tu Jaane Na (song) and added all informations and references to it. Recently, you have moved article Tu Jaane Na (song) to Tu Jaane Na. As a result of that, my name has been removed as a page creator and it is replaced by another one. You can check. I created the page, so credit should be given to me, not to others. Empire AS (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Empire AS: the edit history is intact, the edits in which you created the current version are still visible to anyone who is interested. I have merely merged it with the history of earlier versions of this page so that interested parties can see the history and so any useful content from those versions can be reused if it's any use. I don't see any reason to delete those versions just to give you credit for something (in any case there's no particular title of "page creator" here). The current title is the correct one per Wikipedia's naming conventions and you should really have written your article at that title anyway. Hut 8.5 09:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, you're right. But I wanted to become an autopatroller on English Wikipedia and you know that it requires 25 new articles. Because, I didn't know that a page already exists in the form of redirect, I created article for becoming an autopatroller. But now, I would have to create some new article. That's all. Thanks Empire AS (talk) 12:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Empire AS: I wouldn't try to become an autopatroller just for the sake of becoming an autopatroller, that's not usually considered a good reason to get a user right. The autopatrolled right is given to trustworthy people who create lots of articles, if you don't create many articles then it isn't going to be much use to you anyway, and they won't hand it out just because you've created 25 articles. But if it counts I'm sure they'd count turning a redirect into an article as a creation and it does show up in your page creation log. Hut 8.5 14:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear, You have crossed over this page over a year ago Mohammad_Makhlouf. As a an editor, I went through it to update since recent new are occuring and noticed that a user has nominated it for deletion. I don't want to judge if it's an abuse. I leave you to review and assess. Thank YouRawad00 (talk) 14:11, 17 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm trying to figure out what is going on. This guy is the singer of a band; why Joh582 wants this deleted is a mystery to me, but I'm even more puzzled by Fastily deleting Solid (band), which a quick Google search suggests was a very, very notable band. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the ping, not sure how I missed that. I've kicked it over to AfD so the nominator has a chance to explain themselves. -FASTILY 01:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Drmies: & @Fastily: I didn't mean to stir such virtual commotion as I am still not familiar with how wikipedia works. I just thought that if author requests deletion that would be it. I was a die hard fan of the band, Solid, and the member and I thought the article deserved a neutral view point since I just felt like the articles were way too promotional. That was all. Joh582 02:49, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Joh582: we do frequently delete articles on the request of the person who wrote them. However this doesn't apply if other people have made nontrivial edits to the page, at which point it's no longer entirely your contributions. Deleting pages on request is only a courtesy, we reserve the right not to (you don't own your contributions). If the page has some promotional content then that can be cleaned up. Hut 8.5 06:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Contents are fine since they are just directly sourced from news articles, but the fact that I started the pages felt like promotional if that makes sense. How do we conclude this matter then now that Solid (band) page has been sent over to AfD? Do I retrieve the nomination since I understand that my deletion request is no longer eligible?How does it work? Joh582 (talk) 16:03, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Joh582: if you still want the page deleted then you can go to the AfD and argue that it should be deleted and try to get some other people to agree with you. If you don't want it deleted any more than we can close the AfD. Hut 8.5 17:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hut 8.5: Let's close the AfD. Let them live. Joh582 (talk) 17:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, I've closed it. Hut 8.5 17:28, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hut 8.5: Thank you for concluding this matter when you didn't have to be dragged into this. Only if Drmies directly asked me his/her/their question, your talk page could have been saved from all this. ;) Thanks again! Joh582 19:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5 I think Wikipedia:OCB needs to be moved to Odet-Cascadec-Bolloré (as OCB is already a disambiguation page ) because Wikipedia:OCB is an article. Also, Draft:Odet-Cascadec-Bolloré is also present that is a 100% copy of Wikipedia:OCB. To succeed all these the editor User:Ghiowd3 also using IP address User:37.166.181.19. The editing history Special:Contributions/37.166.181.19 creates suspicion. I am clueless what the editor wants to do. I think it may be a mistake. Please have a look. Thank you.

OK, I've deleted Wikipedia:OCB and Odet-Cascadec-Bolloré as they're copies of the draft version of redirects to it. Hut 8.5 07:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hut 8.5, Thank you for the help. ~ Amkgp ✉ 07:36, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hope that you will be fine. I'm here to ask 2 questions from you. 1st is I'm going to create an article named "List of most-viewed Atif Aslam's music videos on YouTube"(Atif is a singer). Can such an article be created? My 2nd question is that if I am granted the autopatroller or rollbacker or any other right, what if I don't use any right for 2 months. Would that right be taken away? Waiting for answer... Thank you Empire AS (talk) 06:45 31 May 2020 UTC

@Empire AS:

• I'd be surprised if a list like that was found to be acceptable. It's perfectly normal to have a list of songs by a musician but I think a list of music videos by one musician sorted by number of YouTube views is likely to be seen as trivia. Here are the only YouTube-related lists in Wikipedia. A good test you can apply is whether the topic has been covered in external sources, if it hasn't then you'll have a hard time arguing that Wikipedia should cover it as well.
• Some user rights do get taken away if you don't use them, e.g. adminship is removed if you're inactive for a year, but rollback and autopatrolled aren't amongst them and you should be able to keep those rights indefinitely as long as you can still be trusted with them. Again I'd advise against applying for user rights unless you actually have some sort of need or interest in those areas, applying for a user right just for the sake of having the user right is called hat collecting and is looked on negatively. If you aren't likely to use the right then there's probably not much reason to give it to you. I should also point out that creating articles which get deleted (as that YouTube list probably would be) will count against you if you apply for autopatrolled. Hut 8.5 08:55, 31 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your help. Empire AS (talk) 14:46 31 May 2020 Empire AS (talk) 09:46, 31 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for handling that batch of deletes from Suja Satish 77 / Satish Raman Nair. My apologies on the couple that I somehow totally missed they weren't the main editor, I was trying to filter those out and blew it on a couple. Appreciate your time on those! Ravensfire (talk) 19:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At the moment, AIV's backlogged, and it doesn't look like the situation will improve anytime soon. Can you block this user for repeatedly triggering the edit filter and vandalizing articles? Thanks. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 16:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Prahlad balaji: looks like I blocked them while you were writing that! Hut 8.5 16:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I see you deleted this page Paul Jesson (cyclist) back in March of 2018 due to copyright material. I was wondering whether there are any special procedures for me to follow to create this article or do I just start it like a normal article? Thanks Paulpat99 (talk) 22:32, 5 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Paulpat99: no, as a rule there isn't anything stopping you from rewriting a page which has been deleted before. Obviously if the rewritten version also qualifies for deletion for some reason then it can be deleted again, but the previous version doesn't make any difference to this. Hut 8.5 22:53, 5 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you please restore this version with AfD intact, since this is undergoing AfD is would be more fair to have the article intact. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 20:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Valoem: sorry, I don't think that would be appropriate. This was fully protected because of an edit war about whether it should be a redirect of an article. When that happens people are suppposed to discuss the dispute, as is happening at the AfD. Admins aren't supposed to carry on the edit war afterwards using admin tools. Anyone who wants to see the article can look at the history. Hut 8.5 21:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you please restore deleted page "Jackie Jocko" from October 17, 2019 (G12). It's not a copyright violation of SUNY Buffalo State College, Archives & Special Collections. I am an archivist at the institution and created the content specifically for posting to Wikipedia. My name is Hope Dunbar and I can be found on the institution's list of employees and can be emailed directly at dunbarhm@buffalostate.edu (talk) 11:17, 10 June 2020 (EST)

Thanks for your message. I read through the link you sent regarding copyright owners submitting their own work to Wikipedia and inserted the appropriate text into the collection page. The revision can be found at (Jackie Jocko Collection) under the biographical note. Let me know if you need any other information to restore the page. Hmdunbar (talk) 17:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. I've resubmitted and I appreciate your help. Hmdunbar (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, Hope that you would be fine and safe from COVID-19. I'm here to report 2 problems and seeking your help. First is, I'm not able to change my password. I've tried twice or thrice but it doesn't changes and remains the old one. Is it due to that I have no email address or any other reason? Second is, I uses visual editor to edit Wikipedia, but it loads very slower. Nearly a month ago, it was finely working. But now, it is time consuming to use visual editor. What has happened to it? Thank you. Waiting for your answer. Empire AS (talk) 18:38, 27 June 2020 UTC

• @Empire AS: sorry, I can't really help you with those. Whether you have an email address should have no effect on changing your password. Try the help desk or the technical Village Pump. Hut 8.5 13:45, 27 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you use visual editor then you would know wether it loads slower or finely. Thank you Empire AS (talk) 14:17, 27 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I don't use visual editor, and even if I did that wouldn't mean I knew why it was slow. Hut 8.5 14:23, 27 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your help. Empire AS (talk) 08:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, I'm here to seek your help. I want to create 2 pages on Wikipedia. 1st is "List of most-liked Facebook pages". But a page List of most-followed Facebook pages already exists, which contains most-followed pages alongwith their likes. Can I create such a page? 2nd question is that I want to create a page named "List of Bandbudh aur Budbak episodes", which would contain all episodes' titles and their short description of 3 or 4 lines. Page Bandbudh and Budbak exists in mainspace. Can I create this article too or not. Thank you. Empire AS (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: I'm not the arbiter of whether a page is acceptable or not, all I can do is give you my opinion. Other people may disagree.

• List of most-liked Facebook pages: probably acceptable assuming you can find external sources which discuss it, so news articles or something similar which discuss which Facebook pages have the most likes. If you can't then it's likely to be deleted. Try to take the entries from external sources instead of doing your own research.
• List of Bandbudh aur Budbak episodes: I've never heard of Bandbudh aur Budbak but lists of TV series episodes are often OK (Category:Lists of television series episodes). It might depend on how prominent the TV series is. If you write this then put all the plot summaries in your own words, don't copy them from somewhere else. Hut 8.5 13:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your help. Empire AS (talk) 13:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I created a category Category:Facebook-related lists and Category:Instagram-related lists and added aricles in these categories. But, some irrelevant articles are also added in this category not by anyone but automatically. I saw that articles, no one added these categories, but the articles are presen in these category. Please help. Empire AS (talk) 14:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: you added it to Template:Most popular social media accounts outside the <noinclude> tag, which means the category was included on every page which had the template on it. "noinclude" means "don't display this bit on any page this is transcluded on". I've fixed it. Hut 8.5 14:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. As I'm a new user, I didn't understand that problem. Thank you very much. Empire AS (talk) 16:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, There's a user on Wikipedia that removes major contents from articles without any good explanation. He has removed a lot of content from many articles. I think that he is sock puppet of another account. Thank you. Empire AS (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: they do seem to be providing reasons which if valid would be good reasons for removing materials from articles. I suggest you discuss it with them (WP:DR). Hut 8.5 16:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, @Hut 8.5, From where can I get complete guideline about Wikipedia and its editing including instructions for articles, redirects, categories, templates, drafts, copyrights and photos? Thank you. Empire AS (talk) 10:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: er, well there's no single place which will tell you all that.

• Actual rules about Wikipedia are known as policies and guidelines, you can find a complete list here. You absolutely do not need to know all of these (I'm not sure anybody knows them all) but if there's a specific area you're interested in then it's worth checking to see if there is one which is relevant.
• The five pillars are the most important principles. It is definitely worth reading these.
• There are also various help pages which give you advice or show you how to do things.
• For things like redirects, categories etc there are top level pages such as Wikipedia:Redirect which give you guidance and link to others. Similarly Help:Template, Wikipedia:Drafts, Wikipedia:Images etc.
• For articles the most important policies are WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV and WP:BLP - these are definitely worth reading. There is also the manual of style, which contains guidance about how to write and format articles. (It's huge and you don't need to read it all.)
• Copyright - there are several pages on this, the top level one is Wikipedia:Copyrights. See also Wikipedia:Copyright assistance for a directory of other copyright related pages.
• There is also the help desk if you have a specific question you'd like an answer to.

Hut 8.5 12:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for answering in explanation. Empire AS (talk) 12:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, you recently declined deletion of this page with the reason "being a princess is an assertion of significance, even if it's only titular". However, this person is not a princess according to the WP definition--she is not a male-line descendant of a sovereign of the Kingdom of Italy. The article doesn't even contain a source that ascribes the title erroneously (it doesn't have any sources at all); as it stands this is just an unreferenced BLP where the only claim for notability is having ancestors who belonged to a now-defunct noble family. I think it's especially problematic that it lists the full names of several children--surely this violates privacy guidelines, at least? Thank you, JoelleJay (talk) 06:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JoelleJay: from the definition of A7, which is what you tagged this for: The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The statement that she's a princess is a credible claim of significance, even if it isn't sourced and even if she isn't notable. (I suspect she's supposed to be in Category:Princesses of Savoy instead of Category:Italian princesses.) Speedy deletion is also supposed to apply in obvious or clear-cut cases, so if there's any doubt then speedy deletion isn't appropriate.

This doesn't mean the subject is notable and it doesn't mean the article can't be deleted. You can still nominate it for deletion using the WP:PROD, WP:BLPPROD or WP:AFD processes, and it may well be deleted if you do. It just means the page isn't going to be deleted on sight by an admin. PROD and AfD allow deletion rationales to be reviewed and examined by other editors and are better suited to notability questions. 07:05, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Hut!I have contacted deletion team and you just answered me thank you for that! Considering the Natali Thanou page that has been deleted I would love to send you many relevant links Can you help me with this process. I am new in this and I would really appreciate your help! Thanks a lot! LoveWins30 (talk) 17:56, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @LoveWins30: I suggest you contact the deleting admin, if you aren't satisfied with the response then you can go to WP:DRV. Bear in mind that you aren't likely to get anywhere unless you can show convincingly that the subject meets the notability guidelines, which was the reason for deletion. Hut 8.5 18:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have too many relevant links that i can send to you about notability of the “Natali Thanou”. Should i send it to you- cause from this point i dont know where to send the “notable “ links that proves so many of her career achievements, cover pages and her music. LoveWins30 (talk) 18:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @LoveWins30: again you need to contact the deleting administrator or use deletion review. And I'd suggest not going overboard with the links, if she does meet the general notability guideline it should be possible to show this with a small number of links, and if you post a large number then they won't all be read. Hut 8.5 18:40, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank u! The deleting administrator - i suppose is the person who finaly deleted the article, right? (Sorry if the question sounds silly- i am new here!) LoveWins30 (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And how do i contact him? On the small “talk” button- next to his name- the same as i did with you? (I guess yes 🙂) sorry again for bothering LoveWins30 (talk) 18:48, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, that's it. Hut 8.5 19:45, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, @Hut 8.5, I've a problem regarding my signature. This is my signature but I'm not able to change its colour. Empire AS ^Talk!. I've tried many times but to no avail. It remains old one. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:03, 3 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another thing is that I think that there are 3 accounts which are sock puppets of each other. I may tell you, if you want. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: I think that for colours you have to wrap the HTML with the wiki syntax rather than vice versa: Empire AS ^Talk!. If you want to report sockpuppetry try WP:SPI. Hut 8.5 11:53, 3 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your signature help. I'm not sure about sock puppets, I've doubts that they may be sock puppets and I've a little proof too. Thank you.Empire AS ^Talk! 12:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, in this article is a template that we need citation for the ages of the contestants. These ages are provided every time during interviews with the contestants in the episodes, like in the previous seasons. Can I delete that template then? If not, then I think it should be added in the previous seasons as well. --2A00:1028:96D4:5042:CA3:D121:B78D:D1AA (talk) 18:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, @Hut 8.5, I created a template named User alternative user page, which could tell the link and wiki name of where the user has another user page. But it is not working. Perhaps due to false parameters or any other reason. Can you please fix it.? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 06:18, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Empire AS: I know next to nothing about writing templates, try the help desk. Hut 8.5 09:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, @Hut 8.5, hope that you would be fine. I have a question that I have autopatrolled rights, but I don't see any option to 'mark the page as patrolled'. When I see edit history, I don't see any option of 'Mark as patrolled'. How can I mark a page as patrolled. I can't wait to patroll pages. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 03:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Empire AS: you don't seem to understand what autopatrolled is: it doesn't let you patrol pages. That's the new page reviewer right. Autopatrolled just means that when you create a page it's automatically marked as patrolled without someone else having to review it. Hut 8.5 06:33, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought that it would also help me in reviewing others' pages. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 06:36, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, I'm here to seek your help. I'm an now an autopatroller and I want to display the topicon of autopatrolled on my user page. But it doesn't displays. Can you help by editing my user page here? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 07:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: the "tl" prefix in front of a template is used when you want to link to a template without actually displaying it (as in "template link"). If you want to actually display the template then you should leave this out (or equivalently copy the syntax as it's displayed instead of the markup). Hut 8.5 12:04, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How can I enlarge its size? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 12:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You could try ((Autopatrolled topicon|width=50|height=50)). Or use the userbox instead. Hut 8.5 12:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 12:24, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, hope you are fine. I'm here to ask two questions from you. First is, I've uploaded some photos on commons, but they are deleted. See my commons user page here. The photos I upload, aren't my work, but are cover photos of songs, albums, films and photos of artists. I don't know why they are deleted. I know it's my mistake, but not know where I made mistake due to which the photos were deleted. Second question is, when a case is reported at sock puppet investigations, then there are options to request a checkuser or not. What's the difference between checkuser investigations and ordinary investigations? Thank you. Best wishes. Empire AS ^Talk! 14:09, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS:

• Commons expects that images which you upload are available under an appropriate licence under copyright law. This means they have to be in the public domain or available under a free licence. They won't accept an image unless you can show it falls under one of these. The vast, vast majority of images on the internet do not qualify, somebody has copyrighted them and they cannot be reused. Don't find a random image on the internet and upload it to Commons unless you know what you are doing and know its copyright status. Wikipedia also has strict limitations on which images can be used, we also only accept images which are in the public domain or are available under a free licence apart from a small number of situations.
• Checkuser is a highly restricted user right which allows you to see the IP address and other details of edits made by a logged in user. This means that checkusers can see non-public evidence that two different accounts belong to the same person (e.g. because they have the same IP address). In a checkuser sockpuppet investigation a checkuser will perform this type of check to see if the sockpuppet accounts belong to the same person and to see if that person has any more accounts. A non-checkuser investigation doesn't include this. Hut 8.5 17:09, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, Hut 8.5. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 21:13, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:33, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Hut 8.5 thank you for the feedback regarding the copyright violation of the Political Animal Lobby page. I contacted the organization to get their approval to use their material. Since I am new at editing Wikipedia I still don't fully understand how to go about things. I just wanted to know from you will the page still be deleted since I now have copyright permission. I will have to change it to fix the tone as well. But, I just wanted to know if there is a way to save the page from being totally deleted. Please let me know. Thank you again for your detailed feedback. It allowed me to learn more about how Wikipedia works. Kind regards and I hope you have a good day. Nikkidiscovers (talk) 09:36, 22 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Hut 8.5:, hoping you fine, I'm again here for your help. Recently, I created article List of Bandbudh Aur Budbak episodes, but there's a problem that the last episode's description lies under 'References' section. It should be above the references. Don't know how did it happen? Can you fix it? Second is that I want to use this script. But, I'm not sure about its security. It may also cause account compromising. How can I test its security? Thank you. Waiting for your reply. Best wishes. Empire AS ^Talk! 14:12, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: I think I've fixed it, I'm not sure what you were trying to do but the page wasn't using the episode list template in the way it was intended. It should be OK now. I might have erased some of the data but you should be able to readd it as a parameter of the episode list template.

As for a script you are ultimately going to have to either examine the source code or trust that the script isn't going to do any damage (which is very unlikely if it's widely used). I work with javascript professionally and in this case I can tell you that the script isn't going to compromise your account. It just looks to see if your URL matches "https://[language code].m." or "http://[language code].m." and if it does then it gets the URL for the desktop version (from the "Desktop" link at the bottom of the mobile page) and redirects you to the target of that link. Javascript pages on Wikipedia are heavily locked down, the only people who can edit that script are Þjarkur and interface administrators, which is a highly restricted user right only given to a small group of highly trusted people. Hut 8.5 17:07, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hut 8.5:, Thank you for fixing the issue. But the problem now is that how can I add 'Duration' or 'Episode length' to that article, as there's no parameter of 'Duration'?

That script isn't used by a lot of people, because if it was used, then there were questions on its talk page. My URL matches the above first. Should I create another JavaScript with any new title (like User:Empire AS/NewScripts.js) to avoid any problem. But would this also be protected like that original JavaScripts? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 03:09, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know about the template. Possibly you could ask at Template talk:Episode list. Possibly the duration isn't interesting to most readers or there's no point in including it because it's always about the same. I wouldn't bother creating your own javascript with that title, the only way that would help is if Þjarkur decided to try and hack your account retrospectively. The protection status I explained applies to all javascript pages. Hut 8.5 06:50, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Þjarkur isn't interface administrator, how can he/she edit my js. And if I created new js, then he should not be able to edit it, although I'm using his script. I didn't understand your statement of 'the only way that would help is if Þjarkur decided to try and hack your account retrospectively'. Can you explain? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:40, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Þjarkur can edit User:Þjarkur/NeverUseMobileVersion.js because it's in their userspace. If you add that javascript to your account then they could theoretically change it to do something else, in which case it would be executed on your account. Hut 8.5 12:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've found a solution. First, I'll create a js named "User:Empire AS/NoDesktop.js", will add that source code there and then paste the js with my name in my common.js. I think it's good. What do you think about it? Is it better to protect my account? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 13:38, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well you can do that if you like, but I think it's being excessively paranoid. You would also miss any updates to the original script. Hut 8.5 16:52, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kindly accept my speedily deletion. I created this page under my old username of DragoMynaa. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive320#TamilMirchi. TamilMirchi (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, @Hut 8.5:, again I'm here to seek help from you. Till now, you would have understand that everytime I come here means I need your help. First is, I've added duration to the article"List of Bandbudh Aur Budbak episodes" but I don't know how to add duration title there. Can you fix it? Second is that, I want to include this text in my article Pachtaoge "Originally, the song was sung by Atif Aslam but due to the ban on Pakistani artists, it was replaced by Arijit Singh. But later, Atif version was also released on public demand." I've no source for this except this one. However, the content is 100% true that I want to add but I'm unable to find further references. What should I do? Add it or not? Thank you. Tears. Empire AS ^Talk! 14:08, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Empire AS: I've fixed the title of your column. Regarding sourcing, information is only supposed to be included in Wikipedia if it is verifiable to a reliable published source. This means we shouldn't include information which is unverifiable, even if it is true. See Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. Hut 8.5 08:44, 9 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Hut 8.5, I understand. But is the source not enough to support my statement? However, I may prove the correctness of this statement by arguments. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 09:00, 9 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Well if it's a reliable source then it can be used to support the statement. I'm not familiar with this particular website but from a quick glance it doesn't seem to qualify, blogs are very rarely considered reliable sources. Hut 8.5 09:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Hut 8.5, Is there any way to discuss it with others where all users may give their opinions to keep or oppose this statement and source? Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 09:16, 9 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  If you want to ask about the reliability of that source you can post at WP:RS/N. Hut 8.5 09:17, 9 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, regarding your recent block, I think that the deletion of Notoriousthugs contributions might be necessary as they spammed images of lynching across several pages in an act of hate. Also please revoke talk page access. Thanks. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 18:15, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Nkon21: OK, done. Hut 8.5 18:21, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, I'm facing a problem. Nearly a month ago, I checked my stats on Xtools, then it showed 96% live edits and 4% deleted edits. Nearly, ten days ago, it was 95% live and 5% deleted. But now, it's 89% live and 11% deleted.😱 When I clicked on deleted edits, then that was limited to admins and others. I've turned on the 'edit revert' notifications since account creation and I'm not receiving any revert edit notification. But, the deleted edits level is increasing day by day. I'm really astonished. What's happening? It's not good at all as it will definitely decrease the trust level of other users on me. Tears. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:27, 15 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Empire AS: first of all nobody cares about your deleted edit percentage and it doesn't mean anything. Being involved in some tasks invariably gives you a large number of deleted edits e.g. nominating pages for deletion, or working on poor quality pages which have a higher chance of being deleted. If you care I have 7,325 deleted edits which is about 13% of my total. Deleted doesn't mean reverted, it refers to cases where administrators get rid of a page entirely (or at least hide it from public view). As an admin I can see your deleted edits and almost all of them are to user sandboxes which you subsequently asked to be deleted. The only exceptions are three edits to List of awards and nominations received by Atif Aslam which was deleted because you nominated it for deletion. Hut 8.5 17:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hut 8.5, 😨, Now I finally understood my mistake. It's good that deleted edits don't effect anything. The mistake that I was making is that "I don't move sandboxes to mainspace rather; I copy the all text from it and paste it into target article and request sandboxes deletion." Now, I'm realising that I was doing false. But when a sandbox is moved to mainspace, then deletion request will still cause increase in deleted edits or not after moving? Tears. Empire AS ^Talk! 02:43, 16 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What you're doing is not a mistake. It's absolutely fine to delete sandboxes when you don't need them any more, plenty of people do that. Again nobody here cares how many deleted edits you have. You seem to be extremely paranoid about what other people think of you, I suggest you dial that back a bit. Hut 8.5 09:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, now I'm going to forget that all. However, I've learnt something from it. Tears. Empire AS ^Talk! 11:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Hut, I saw that you'd posted recently on one of the copyright boards, so that's why I'm bothering you. I could use a second opinion--I'm not terribly knowledgeable about copyright stuff. That said, here, I redacted the full text of a suicide note on the basis that it was a potential copyright violation to print the whole thing. I would assume that the person who wrote the note would technically hold the copyright by default. (Similar to how a person who takes a photo is usually the copyright holder.) The editor who posted it restored it. Since I could potentially conceive of a fair use argument for criticism/educational purposes, I was hoping someone experienced in this area could give me a second opinion. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Cyphoidbomb: you did the right thing there, it is almost certainly copyrighted and if it isn't then the onus is on the editor who added it to show that. There is no fair use argument, for text quotations the fair use guidelines say Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea...Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited. This definitely isn't brief. I'll remove it again. Hut 8.5 19:48, 20 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I figured, but wanted to be sure I wasn't acting rash. I mean obviously he also deleted my comment, which wouldn't be cool per talk page norms. Thanks for the second opinion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, I'm here for an opinion. My username is 'Empire AS', you know. But I think many users think that it's name of any organization, company, state or any other project, and I'm not an individual. However, I also don't want to change my username. Would it cause any problem for me? Tears. Empire AS ^Talk! 04:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Empire AS: yes you can change your username, see Wikipedia:Changing username for instructions. No I don't think it will cause you any problems. I also suggest you stop signing every post with "tears", it makes it look like everythign you write is making you cry. Hut 8.5 06:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hut 8.5, I don't want to change my username at all, I was worried that whether it would cause problems like block or not but now it's fine to keep the username. Next to now, I wouldn't use the word 'tears'. However, here these words stand for tears of happiness as it has 2 types. Thanx. Empire AS ^Talk! 08:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Hut, this is kind of related to a discussion we had a few days ago about Sooraj Pancholi. Indian actor Sushant Singh Rajput died, and the early medical reports determined it to be by suicide by hanging. A large contingent of fans and conspiracy theorists believe in something more sinister, so the talks page related to this subject have been peppered with SPAs trying to do "justice for SSR" to either change the death cause to murder or "undetermined" or to have it deleted entirely What's the best approach, do you suppose with these? I tried page protection at Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput and Talk:Death of Sushant Singh Rajput. (PP has expired on one of the talk pages, but I'm not seeking renewal, since another editor feels that page protection might suppress legitimate edit requests.) Should editors be responding to these obvious socio-political "queries" or should they just be deleted?

And tangential to that this comment at Talk:Rhea Chakraborty starts off with an overview of the case, but then devolves to potentially defamatory claims that the article subject is a co-conspirator to what people think was a murder. Granted, that particular comment isn't as defamatory-laden as others have been, since the anon is claiming that Rajput's family thinks she is a co-conspirator. Should something like that be answered/ignored or deleted outright? I appreciate your opinion. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Cyphoidbomb: hmm. I'd suggest removing comments which make libellous accusations or which don't have something to do with improving the article (WP:NOTFORUM). Anything else can be answered. If there's a lot of them then it might be worth putting up a notice at the start of the page explaining why Wikipedia won't include this stuff, which is pretty common on talk pages on contentious topics. Page protection seems a little overkill unless there's a very high volume of these as it would shut new editors out of the article entirely. This stuff is a lot less damaging on talk pages than it would be in an article. Hut 8.5 12:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks much! Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:09, 1 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5, Can you tell me how to archive a talk page? I've read it, but here for some extra questions. As of now, I'm not archiving my talk page but for the future help. Thank you. Empire AS ^Talk! 07:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Empire AS: see Help:Archiving a talk page. There are a couple of bots which can do it for you automatically, it might be easiest to set one of those up. Hut 8.5 07:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Hut 8.5, I've read. But can a talk page be archived by simply moving it to archive? Empire AS ^Talk! 07:15, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  @Empire AS: you can do it that way but few people do these days, usually you people just copy the contents of the page to an archive page. Hut 8.5 07:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Hut 8.5, but why and how bot help is better than moving the page to the archive? Empire AS ^Talk! 07:28, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  The bot will do it for you automatically, if you set the bot up then you don't have to do anything else at all. Hut 8.5 07:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, my article was recently deleted due to the "Unambiguous article". A moderator, or article reviewer, then proceeded to write a recommendation message of what to do. The article was not written by a person with a conflict of interest. The article was written by me. A citizen of the same city, with knowledge of the school. I request the undeletion or copying and paste the whole article into my Talk Page so I re-submit the article. I am a student at another school, in the same city. The last time I ever visited the school was in 2016, and I did it once. You can ask me for evidence that I do not go to school. In addition, you can definitely look me up anywhere. Reminder: It is not disallowed to write an article about an organization in the same city as you, as long as you are not biased or affiliated, and I am not.

I am not the school; This is obvious, I am not the school, I am a person. I do not work for the school; I have never worked for this school, or for anyone for the matter. I have never had any projects with the school, paid or unpaid. I do not represent the school; I am 16 years old. I do not represent the school, have never represented the school and I have never represented anyone. I am not related or directly or indirectly affiliated to any faculty or school representative; I am not related as a friend or a family member of any faculty of the school. If I was, I would be a student at that school by now, but I never attended that school. In addition, my username does not imply that I am from that school. In fact, when I created this Wikipedia account in 2014 I did not know that the school existed. My name is my real-life name.

It was deleted under G11 and G12. The G12 reasoning is incorrect because the "copyright infringement" was related to the article having the sections Mission, Vision Statement, and Core Values. The sections were deleted, therefore there was no copyright infringement at the time of deletion

The article was not biased. I added sections such as Mission, Vision, Core Values, but then I deleted it and added "Activities". All information I added received its corresponding reference/source. All added information sections were inspired by existing articles such as The American School of London, Graded School/Associação Graduada (São Paulo), Pan American School of Porto Alegre and Pan American Christian Academy. All schools located in this country, with exception of The American School of London

I request you to un-do the page deletion or copy and paste the article so I can re-submit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThiagoWinters (talk • contribs) 16:56, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @ThiagoWinters: you'll need to talk to the admin who deleted the page. That wasn't me, it was User:Jimfbleak. Hut 8.5 17:32, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thanks for doing the copyvio check. Here's a question, since I do a little bit of NPP work, I come across apparent copyvios all the time. At one time, another editor had pointed me to a program, Carbon Dating, which allowed me to see when that other page had been created. But that is no longer available. I hate making work for other editors, is there a program you use to see when info was added on other sites? Taking this page as an example, you state that the site is filled with stuff copied from WP. How did you discern that?Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Onel5969: nothing very clever I'm afraid, I just used the navigation menu to find another page on the site about a different place, did a Google search for some of the text in that page and the first hit was a Wikipedia article. You can try the internet archive or another similar site to see what a page looked like at different points in the past, although its coverage is far from perfect. In some cases you can also look up the domain registration for the website, which does give you an earliest possible date for anything on it. Trying to find out this sort of thing isn't easy though. Hut 8.5 19:02, 1 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Hut 8.5. I noticed today that you deleted the page Marijuana Justice Act a few days ago and I was wondering if it could be restored. I noticed it as a redlink on the page Political positions of Kamala Harris; other pages that link to it are Political positions of Tulsi Gabbard, Political positions of Elizabeth Warren, Jared Polis, Cory Booker, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, and Removal of cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. So that is a decent amount of redlinks that have been created and I think it also helps demonstrate the significance of the page to some degree. Thanks for any help you can provide.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:26, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Jamesy0627144: the page wasn't deleted because of a perceived lack of significance or anything like that, it was deleted because the person who wrote it isn't allowed to edit Wikipedia. There is nothing stopping you or anybody else from writing an article about the subject though. Hut 8.5 07:34, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK. Then I'm just going to recreate the page as it previously existed for the most part, based on a version of the page that is saved at archive.org, since it seems accurately written. I thought it would be good to contact you first though, since there is a message at the blank page that says "If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below." It would make the task a little bit easier if you could restore it, and it would be nice to have the history intact, but if you can't do it then you can't do it... no problem.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 08:08, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jamesy0627144: please don't recreate the page based on copying and pasting the deleted version because that would infringe the copyright of the people who edited the deleted version (as they wouldn't be named in the edit history). Banned users frequently try to game the system by posting legitimate content to "prove" they can't be banned, tolerating their contributions only encourages this. I'm happy for you to write a new article at this title but it needs to be your content and not just the same as the deleted version. Hut 8.5 13:27, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd like to recreate the Kingston Stadium page. There's a warning there saying you previously deleted it for the reason, "G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page". Do you have any objection to my recreating it with the content at User:Pemilligan/sandbox/Kingston Stadium? -- Pemilligan (talk) 22:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Pemilligan: the only reason I deleted the previous version was because you asked for it to be deleted. Specifically you replaced the content with ((db-userreq)) with an edit summary of "Sorry, that was meant to be in my sandbox". I have no objection to it being recreated. Hut 8.5 07:39, 3 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow, I'd completely forgotten that. Thank you. -- Pemilligan (talk) 14:07, 3 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Gun debates in article space, as userify, in 2012. When you userified the page you left Wikipedia:Gun debates in article space as a redirect to User:Canoe1967/Gun debates in article space. The page remains in Category:Wikipedia essays identifying problems and/or solutions

It's my interpretation of our policies and guidelines that only essays in the wikipedia namespace belong in categories that begin with "wikipedia", and that all user essays should be in a set of parallel categories that begin user. So, that would put this essay in Category:User essays identifying problems and/or solutions

It's my interpretation of our policies and guidelines that user essays should not have a cross namespace link to the wikipedia namespace. I am not suggesting bad faith on the part of any of the authors, but there seem to be a couple of dozen user essays, that are cited with a redirected link from the wikipedia namespace, that are actively used and maintained. I think this is a mistake because policies and guidelines imply that wikipedia space essays are subjected to greater scrutiny and enjoy greater support than userspace essays, as per this example - a wikipedia space essay that was demoted to userspace. Further, it is a mistake for those essays that have never been in the wikipedia namespace, so the author gets to enjoy WP:OWNership, without their essay being subjected to the same level of scrutiny as a wikipedia space essay, yet enjoys having it as linkable as a wikipedia space essay.

It is my impression that most of the authors of userspace essays that were never in wikipedia namespace, but which enjoy cross namespace redirects from the wikipedia namespace, never thought through the unfair implications of these misleading links, because they had come across other instances of cross namespace links - like this one you left.

I've recently suggested, elsewhere, that the authors of actively maintained userspace essays that are cross namespace linked through wikipedia space redirections should actually bite the bullet and move their essays into the wikipedia namespace.

I've suggested that wikipedia space essays that get userified should no longer have a wikipedia space redirection. The issue that userification without redirection leave broken links can be dealt with by adding each userified essay to something like WP:Wikipedia essays demoted to userspace.

I'd be interested in your opinion, if you have given these issues any consideration. Thanks. Geo Swan (talk) 15:01, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Geo Swan: not something I've thought about before, or have a strong opinion on, but I'm not sure having a Wikipedia-space redirect is likely to mislead people into thinking the essay has any sort of widespread acceptance, because it's obvious to anyone who clicks on the link that it's not in Wikipedia-space. I suppose you could try nominating one of those redirects at RfD and see if anyone agrees with you. It does look like that page shouldn't really be in that category though, the description at Category:Wikipedia essays does say that it's for project-space essays only, and I assume this applies equally to subcategories with the same name. Hut 8.5 18:17, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TPA revoke might be necessary... User talk:185.69.144.238 (See the history for what I mean). Magitroopa (talk) 18:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sir you had deleted this page for copy-paste violations. Can I recreate this page? Next Time it won't be happen again.🇮🇳DRCNSINDIA (talk) 08:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for deleting page Something missing! Hayta= 23:31, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings,

As per Wikipedia's expected due process I have updated Talk:Women related laws in Pakistan/Temp building it from scratch with proper close paraphrasing. I suppose it would be acceptable at least as a stub.

Since updating of Talk:Women related laws in Pakistan/Temp we will not be depending on previous text of the article, I requesting to shift the text from Talk:Women related laws in Pakistan/Temp to Women related laws in Pakistan.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 02:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

dear User:Hut 8.5 ; please convey the message to User:RickinBaltimore for undeleting my draft Draft:Rakesh Kumar Sinha and resore it. should i talk to your founders and owners User:Jimbo_Wales and User:Larry_Sanger. User:RickinBaltimore is not available on his talk page and do it fast. my pages generally maintained by government of india, asia, world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockyrocks48 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, Hut 8.5! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:59, 26 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding ((subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings))

Empire AS ^Talk! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2024 and tomorrow will be 2025. Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive 2025. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding ((subst:New Year 2)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

Empire AS ^Talk! 13:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year!

Hut 8.5,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk🌴Help out at CCI!} 01:47, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages.

Per your advice, I have now allowed users to email me. Is there any further action necessary on my behalf? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliusbear007 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Hut 8.5! Hope you are well! You have recently deleted my page SuperAnnotate tagging it as an ambiguous advertising or promotion (G11). I am writing to kindly ask if you can reverse the deletion for me to improve the page.

I have reread the policy on Speedy Deletion

"Pages and media in all namespaces that satisfy certain criteria are speedy deletion candidates, which means that administrators can delete them immediately and without discussion. The criteria include, among others, test pages, vandalism and hoaxes, nonsense, blatant copyright violations, empty pages or ones lacking sufficient context, articles in defined areas that do not credibly assert the importance of the topic, and pages on topics already covered under another title. Administrators often leave short codes in the deletion summary instead of typing out a full reason, such as "A7" or "CSD A7" for articles that do not assert importance; "G1" for patent nonsense and so on. These codes are explained at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion."

I do believe the page did not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. No vandalism, no nonsense and word-by-word original text. However, I'm the rookie here so I need your help to perfect what can help a number of people interested to learn about SuperAnnotate. I have included references for all the information included in the article which if you tracked back, you would see were noteworthy. No internal references were included. Please, take into consideration that when a new software is released, not much is available about it in books or journals, and to provide information about how it works and who it is designed for, any contributor on the subject turns to the software creators and users. A lot of information describing the tool usually comes from the website the creators put together to raise awareness about it. If I were to exclude all the information I got from interviewing the users and the creators of SuperAnnotate, my Wiki page on it would be blank. I understand, once someone talks about a subject passionately, it comes out biased and ad-like, however, who would you hear about the subject from if not someone who knows how it works?

Please, tell me where you disagree with this and let's pinpoint what made my page on Superannotate so promotional that you were forced to delete it without having me improve it first. It is interesting considering the number of pages on a number of tools floating on wikipedia with more potential catching your attention yet still running strong. Not throwing anyone under the bus, just asking to have the same chance on improving the page.

Thanks in advance! Hope to hear from you soon! SAtrainsAI (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SAtrainsAI: first of all, if you are in any way affiliated with the company which makes this software, or if someone has paid you to write about it, then you need to read the advice on paid editing and conflicts of interest before making any further edits to this topic area. Making paid edits without disclosure is in violation of Wikipedia's terms of use.

As you can see from the deletion log I deleted the page under WP:CSD#G11, which means blatant advertising - not for lack of references, plagiarism or the other criteria you mentioned. The article read like a sales brochure, and almost every sentence was written so as to present the subject in a glowing, promotional light. Wikipedia is a neutral encyclopedia and our articles can't advertise the subject. Hut 8.5 18:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, In Shamsheer Vayalil article the age needs to be changed. He turned 44 on 11 Jan yet in the bio infobox 43 is shown. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.230.162.206 (talk) 12:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed, it looks like the old age was cached. Thanks Hut 8.5 17:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Digg,Skye. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 16#Digg,Skye until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:10, 16 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

False statement by Jingiby=

You happened to BLoCK ME just because I am correcting an article where information is proven to be outdated and its considered wrong by Bulgarian history circles and scholars - as per modern DNA test proving it wrong. Next time before you block someone - please learn the case better as Jingiby is false stating and my arguments were called by him unproven theory - when he has nothing to fight it agains. Also I have never offended him, was just quoting him in Bulgarian. So if you want to consider your self unbiased admin - please study better the case before you go and block

Vanya Ilcheva — Preceding undated comment added 12:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Hut 8.5, thanks for confirming the deletion of this page for me. It was based on an old version of the german article and I would like to retranslate based on the current german article. I have the problem though, that this page is still visible under my published translations, which is preventing me from starting a new translation. Are you able to help out with this?--Fliegende Katze (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Fliegende Katze: I'm not familiar with how the content translation tool works I'm afraid, try WP:HELPDESK or WP:VPT. If you don't want to use the tool you could just create Draft:Rowac with new contents. Hut 8.5 19:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hut 8.5: ok, yeah. I was wondering if that would be an option. I guess if I just copy the source code from the german article and paste it into the new article and translate it there step by step it should work. Correct? --Fliegende Katze (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Fliegende Katze: yes that would work, as long as you do the translation in draft space rather than article space and you give credit to the German original (see the instructions here for how to do this). Hut 8.5 08:31, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hut 8.5: Hello again, thank you for your tips on translation and giving credit. I finished translating the article and just put it up for review. If you have a chance please check it out here > Draft:Rowac --Fliegende Katze (talk) 22:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Trenton and Free Radical, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Natty. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 4 June 2008, you salted Barack Osama as a repeatedly recreated attack redirect to Barack Obama. However, a new viable target has emerged since then: a 2013 single listed on Fler discography#Singles. It should be recreated as a redirect to that page, probably fully protected to prevent restoration of the Obama attack. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @LaundryPizza03: OK I've done that. I'll leave it unprotected for now, I don't think it's as much of a target as a redirect as it was as a redlink and it might get less attention now than in 2008 anyway. Hut 8.5 17:39, 27 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Hut 8.5, answering your question here. It's the Pairaphrase page I'm requesting to be restored so I can make edits now that there are more neutral references/sources to add (see your question below). Would you be able to restore it? Thank you!

• @LanguageArts&Science: do you want Pairaphrase restored or User:LanguageArts&Science/sandbox? Hut 8.5 18:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @LanguageArts&Science: since that was deleted by a deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pairaphrase) I'm afraid I can't just restore it to article space as that would amount to overturning the discussion. I can restore it to draft space so you could work on it, however you won't be able to move it back to mainspace without substantial improvements. Is that OK? Hut 8.5 15:48, 30 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello admin, I noticed that you blocked User Mensturation Man. The account Frederick "Owned" Moss has exactly same contributions] and is likely a sock of the blocked account, you might want to block them. Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 19:04, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ashleyyoursmile: blocked, thanks. That account was created in 2016, either they've been planning this for a very long time or they're hacking old accounts. Hut 8.5 19:07, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks so much man, feel free to delete this, just wanted to ssay thanks! Deleteopedia (talk) 19:52, 2 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Just to inform you that Arturo Ungaro (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) that you recently blocked for 31 hours, is again active and making the same deletions on the United Airlines page, without any explanation - as previous. Perhaps a much longer block is warranted? Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 15:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @David J Johnson: I've partially blocked them from editing that page for the next week. I suspect they may not speak enough English to communicate with other people here. Hut 8.5 18:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for all your help. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 18:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@David J Johnson: This user may be engaged in sockpuppetry. I've started an inquiry at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arturo Ungaro. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for spotting and recording this. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 15:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you block this person?--Countryboy603 (talk) 23:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Countryboy603: not for one edit, no. I've warned them. If they keep doing it after warnings then you can report them to WP:AIV. See here for some advice. Hut 8.5 08:47, 5 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My article, "Alhaji Tijani massa" was deleted for copyright infringements. I have all rights to the content. Kindly undelete the article and I will remove the alleged copyright content. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuCasBash1r (talk • contribs) 23:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A recently blocked user had also left an unsigned racist comment at the top of World War II's talk page, should it be removed? Oqwert (talk) 13:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Oqwert: I've removed it. Hut 8.5 17:33, 8 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see it was you who deleted V Street (disambiguation) (and perhaps others in the series). Your deletion, ignoring my request at Talk page to discuss at ongoing AFD about Z Street, somewhat irked me, but whatever. The resolution seems to be to put in place redirects to Street or road name sections, instead. Now, anyhow, could you please provide me the content that was there? I would like to see if any of it can/should be incorprated elsewhere, especially at Street or road name#V Street. --Doncram (talk) 01:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Doncram: I have to disagree with your statement that this deletion was out of process [2]. It met WP:CSD#G14 because it was a page ending in (disambiguation) disambiguating at most one page (see also WP:D2D). The only entries were V Street (Washington, D.C.) (a redirect to Streets and highways of Washington, D.C., which doesn't mention a V Street) and "V Street, Sacramento, California" which wasn't a link. Redirecting this title to Street or road name wouldn't be appropriate either as that page is not a disambiguation page. The only appropriate contents of a page ending in "(disambiguation)" are a redirect to a disambiguation page or a disambiguation page disambiguating at least two articles. Hut 8.5 09:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello admin, sorry to bother you but I was reviewing Draft:Near Eastern Bioarchaeology at the AfC and noticed the the title of the page is incorrectly capitalised. Can you please move the Draft:Near Eastern Bioarchaeology to Draft:Near Eastern bioarchaeology? I am not a page mover so if I make this move it would leave behind a redirect, hence I'm making this request. Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 16:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Ashleyyoursmile: I've moved it. There isn't anything wrong with leaving a redirect as a the result of a page move, unless it's vandalism, misleading the reader or something like that. Hut 8.5 16:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Thank you very much. Ashleyyoursmile! 16:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• 2a02:c7f:8e0e:6800::/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log)

Hi, Hut 8.5. Thanks for blocking 2a02:c7f:8e0e:6800:342b:2fe4:e34d:a531. But it looks like they've been at it for a few days, from the /64. Might need a wider/longer block. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:10, 16 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Suffusion of Yellow: thanks, I've blocked the /64 as well. Hut 8.5 19:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unsure why the talk page didn't move when you reverted the undiscussed page move of Utqiagvik, Alaska. I've fixed it now. Best, —Nnadigoodluck███ 13:05, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for deleting my error as it was very embarrassing! Five years of doing this, and then I go and make the simplest of avoidable errors. Ta. The joy of all things (talk) 21:38, 16 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I would like to object to the deletion of this page. I will happily edit it and I was unaware of the issues you deleted the page for.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dana_Murray_(internet_skincare_expert)&action=edit&redlink=1

Danamurray1982 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:09, 21 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! I'm a professor and part of the WikiEdu project this semester (course page). You deleted a page written by one of my students, perhaps because they put it into the mainspace instead of as a sandbox or draft. Either way, it was deleted before I could see it, and perhaps before their peer could do peer editing. Will you un-delete the page so I can help them work on it? Mariko Kosaka should be notable, she is a web developer at Google who has done many high-profile conference talks, including one about the history of emoji that has been cited frequently in the media. (Weirdly, mostly German media-- see FrankfurterRundschau, SmartDroid, and Kronen Zeitung). Her leadership of the BrooklynJS meetup was noted on Technically, and she is an instructor at the School for Poetic Computation. AmeliaMN (talk) 19:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @AmeliaMN: I've restored the page to Draft:Mariko Kosaka. I've had to remove about half of the content because your student copied it from the subject's website in violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies (and, for that matter, applicable copyright laws). In any case the page is not suitable for mainspace, it wasn't written in an encyclopedic tone and it didn't cite any third party references. These issues will definitely need fixing before it goes back to mainspace. Being cited in the media usually doesn't make someone notable, see WP:BIO. We usually expect to see sources which cover the subject instead of just citing them. Hut 8.5 11:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This was uploaded by me and incorrectly copywrite tagged. Its my CEO's headshot and I am updating his Wikipedia Page. Can you undelete this? Is it possible to reupload with the correct tag? There is no conflict or issue with it being used, it was sent by his assistant.

Heya, I came across User:Apd9696/Redirect during the course of a page mover request, and noticed that you had deleted it via U1. Since the user didn't create the page, does it still qualify for U1 deletion? Genuinely curious, as I tend to not spend much time in that grouping of the CSD criteria. It certainly doesn't need to be undeleted (as the page that replaced it was later G6'd for a different page move), just wanted clarification for my own edification. Primefac (talk) 12:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC) (please ping on reply)Reply[reply]

@Primefac: U1 does apply even if the user didn't create the page, if someone else creates a page in your userspace then you can get it deleted under U1. That page didn't technically fall under U1 because it was moved from mainspace, but it would have qualified for G6 as a redirect deleted for a page move. I honestly can't remember why I deleted it under U1 rather than G6 but it doesn't really matter. Hut 8.5 18:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair enough, thanks for the explanation. Definitely easy to mis-click or not-replace the given reason from a db- template. Primefac (talk) 01:21, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Palantir. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 7#Palantir until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 162 etc. (talk) 20:59, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've requested speedy deletion of the page Draft:Ankit Mina and you declined, could you please explain this in a little more detail? What should be worth preserving about these two sentences that nobody has edited for almost half a year? And anyway, who should this Ankit Mina be? This guy here with his 40 followers? [3] Or if the name is misspelled, maybe this teenager on Instagram? [4]

I doubt, and quite strongly, that this person is relevant, but even if I should have overlooked something, even with purely hypothetical relevance, I am still firmly convinced that this beginning of an article will never be a real article and sooner or later the article will be deleted. I'm not an idiot who proposed this just for fun... -Killarnee (C•T•U) 18:57, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Killarnee: I never said that draft is any good. You tagged it for deletion under WP:CSD#G1, which is "Patent nonsense... This applies to pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history". (See Wikipedia:Patent nonsense.) This draft is clearly not patent nonsense, because it has meaningful text in it. I declined to speedily delete it because it isn't patent nonsense, not because it's a good draft or that it shows promise. We don't speedily delete drafts here on the grounds that the subject isn't notable, and certainly not as nonsense. Deleting a draft just because there isn't much text in it or because it isn't in a very good state would set a rather bad precedent, the main point of draft space is to allow people to improve poor quality articles.

If you want to get this draft deleted then I suggest you just wait a bit. If a draft hasn't been edited in six months then it can be speedily deleted under WP:CSD#G13. There isn't much point in trying to get poor drafts deleted through some other mechanism before this unless they're actively dangerous (e.g. copyright violations or libel). You can nominate the draft for deletion at WP:MFD, and it would almost certainly be deleted, but honestly it's not worth the effort. Hut 8.5 19:46, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Our opinion about nonsense seems to differ a bit, and "isn't much text" is a really great understatement. I'm only thinking of Wp:Snow, in draft ns there are good beginnings of articles, but you don't really have to accept every shit there. But what actually annoyed me wasn't that you didn't delete the page, but that you didn't even bother to leave a message on my tp. I find that someone who deletes such crap does not have to justify themself, but someone who does not delete something like that. But okay, then have fun deleting the page in a few weeks, when the 6 months have just passed...

Have a nice day, -Killarnee (C•T•U) 17:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whether it's nonsense is not a difference of opinion. G1 only applies to pages with no meaningful content. This draft has meaningful content - it says that the subject is an Indian cricketer who plays for the Nagour district of Rajasthan. If it was nonsense I would not have been able to tell that. Admins are only allowed to speedily delete pages which meet the criteria for speedy deletion, which are supposed to be interpreted narrowly, and you'll see that "crap" or "shit" are not listed. Hut 8.5 17:47, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Hut. Yesterday you DRVed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moscow Center for Consciousness Studies. Could you check whether the new Moscow Center for Consciousness Studies is substantially the same as the deleted version? It seems to have been created in a single edit which leads me to think it might be WP:G4. Thanks Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:41, 20 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Curb Safe Charmer: it looks like Sandstein's already deleted it. It was a bit different from the deleted version but it wasn't going in the right direction, I think the AfDed version was actually better. Hut 8.5 16:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Jtbobwaysf (talk) 12:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC) This Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Discussion_related_to_data_access_for_deleted_sandbox Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 12:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Regarding Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Discussion_related_to_data_access_for_deleted_sandbox

• 1. I did not assert your account deletion was improper, as I have read they violated socking rules, and I have no reason to dispute that.
• 2. I thought you might have seen the discussion we were having on my talk page as a user did mention you.
• 3. I request that you kindly send me the data so we can add it to a list of sources that a few editors think might be useful. It is my position that one or more users hosting a list of sources and collaborating at them for neutrality would assist in resolving the POV dispute over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19#Mainstream_vs_Minority (as well as related pages). I was attempting to start that work earlier prior to this discussion, and it appears that the user account you deleted was an early attempt at that as well (despite their presumed socking violation).

Thank you! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've replied at AN, but I'm not willing to send you the contents of that page which was added by a banned user, and you've already been provided with the tiny amount of content in that page which wasn't. Filing a thread at one of the big noticeboards is usually considered a pretty drastic step and it's usual to discuss things with the parties concerned before doing that. I didn't read the discussion on your talk page as it was very long, from a glance it didn't appear to concern me particularly, and nobody asked me to do anything or asked me a question in that thread. Hut 8.5 22:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5! I have recently joined the REFUND team and would like to ask you a question related to the recent request you closed, namely - this one. Could you please clarify, generally what do we have to look at before emailing the requested info to the user? This case as far as I understood has nothing controversial. But in what cases is it inappropriate to send the deleted content to the user who requests it? I understand the question is rather vague, but maybe you could point out some most obvious cases or the policies that talk about that. Thank you in advance! Best, Less Unless (talk) 13:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Less Unless: this is mostly left up to individual judgement, but the cases I'd be careful of are the ones where the content is actually harmful - things like copyright violations, BLP violations, or invasions of privacy. In those cases I'd make sure that the user has a legitimate reason for seeing the content. For example if a new editor wrote a page which was deleted as a copyright violation then I'd be prepared to email them the contents so they can rewrite it off-wiki. I have occasionally send copies of material deleted on BLP grounds to experienced non-admins so they can take part in a discussion at WP:DRV about the deletion. Sometimes people who can't get a deleted page restored get round that by getting a copy of the deleted material through email and then just reposting it, which is a problem because it destroys the edit history. The only relevant policy I'm aware of is this. Hut 8.5 15:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. You recently blocked 94.197.219.186 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) to prevent further vandalism and now this IP is doing it again. --Renat 20:35, 17 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @RenatUK: thanks, I've blocked them for longer. Hut 8.5 07:41, 18 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I saw you deleted Draft:Vikash Kalra after I'd tagged it for G6. Were you in agreement that the editor hadn't addressed the reasons that it was draftified? If so are you ok to move Vikash Kalra back to draft? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:15, 22 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Curb Safe Charmer: I believe that if someone objects to draftification of a mainspace page then usual practice is to move it back to mainspace and send it to AfD (WP:DRAFTIFY). That's why I didn't move it. Hut 8.5 07:50, 23 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for all your work revdeling all the copyvios! Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I've Done.) 18:54, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you like to have your baklava pistachio or walnut? Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Best regards. V. E. (talk) 18:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Am new to Wikipedia and still grappling with how to use it - how do I get in touch to discuss recent edits to the UK Music page - would you be the right person to talk to?

Thanks UKMusiceditor (talk) 14:17, 21 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @UKMusiceditor: if you mean the copyright problems then yes I can talk to you about that. You can also try the help desk. Hut 8.5 16:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Hamunaptra has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No demonstration of notability outside of the Mummy itself via significant secondary sourcing.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 17:56, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @David Fuchs: I've copied this to the editor who actually started the article, I'm just the first name in the edit history. Hut 8.5 18:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. Never seen that edge case before! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Hut 8.5, Thanks for the protection and repeated banning of the sock. However, there ae some discussions in RSN that it would be good to comment on. Can you undo the protection? If sock comes back protection can go up again Thanks!155.246.151.38 (talk) 22:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, which page are you talking about? WP:RS/N isn't protected, you should be able to participate there. Hut 8.5 07:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Would you be interested in joining a WikiProject SpaceX? If you are, can you please make a WikiProject proposal for it (I as an IP, can not make the proposal cause I would be stopped when trying to create the proposal page). @Hut 8.5: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.2.238.109 (talk • contribs)

@100.2.238.109: I'm not interested I'm afraid, but someone else has already created a proposal for you. Hut 8.5 16:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I know. @Hut 8.5:

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		Thank you for clearing out copyvios on Wikipedia and helping out at CCI. Your help with tackling copyvios is greatly appreciated! Keep up the great work :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:19, 28 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Capture of Kishangarh Fort - Check history. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @TrangaBellam: ah, it's not a copyvio - the text is from the previous version of that page. The web source I saw was written five years later and must have been copying Wikipedia. Hut 8.5 19:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Good catch! G4-able? TrangaBellam (talk) 19:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Well the text is very similar but the new version does have more references and the AfD is five years old. I wouldn't be comfortable deleting it under G4 but someone else might. Hut 8.5 19:20, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  I understand that.

  Fwiw, the main new reference is a case of circular referencing: see this and check Pg. 90 of the cited book. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Saddies: Attack!! has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable, tagged since May

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Yae4 (talk) 13:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Yae4: not sure why you're notifying me of this, all I did was process a request for the draft version to be restored at WP:REFUND after it was deleted for being stale. Hut 8.5 16:32, 3 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hut 8.5: See these instructions step 5, which does not define "significant contributors". So the last several non-bot editors who did something other than tag with criticism or speedy delete were notified. -- Yae4 (talk) 19:25, 3 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Yae4: those words aren't defined because they're just common English. "Significant contributors" means people who made significant edits to the page, which would be adding significant amounts of article text. Edits like [5], [6] or [7] are clearly not significant contributions. Next time can you be a bit more discriminating in your use of these notifications, if you just send them to everyone who's edited the article then they are likely to be perceived as disruptive spam. Hut 8.5 07:41, 4 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did not see your reply to me at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 31#8 nanometer until after the discussion closed, so I'll leave a comment here. The sources don't say that the Samsung 8 nm process is a version of the 10 nm process. They say that Samsung adapted their 10 nm machinery to make 8 nm chips. That doesn't make it a 10 nm process. In the early twentieth century, some bicycle manufacturers switched to making aircraft. That doesn't make aircraft a type of bicycle. In the UK during WW2 it was practically illegal to manufacture lipstick. Cosmetic factories were all ordered to adapt to making war materials (don't know what, perhaps machine guns). That doesn't make machine guns a type of lipstick. The target article has a banner maintenance template saying there is confusing/incorrect/inappropriate information on Samsung processes in the article. That means it is likely to be removed in the future making 10 nm process even less appropriate as a target. The correct target (in the absence of a full article) for all these half sizes is Die shrink#Half-shrink which actually explains what these are, and the redirects should be ((<n> nm process]]

I`ve created the pages about Getmantsev Dmytro and about Ioffe Yuliy, but after this I was blocked by user MER-C and I don't know for which reason. i have this warning on my page NewPoliachy: "This account is a suspected sockpuppet of Bodiadub (talk · contribs · logs) and has been blocked indefinitely."

I don't know who is bodiadub and why my account is blocking so i want to request your help in this issue. --New Polyarchy 2021 (talk) 15:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you want to appeal the block see Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Ping User:MER-C. Hut 8.5 16:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Hut 8.5!

Well I’m not happy with the decesion, but I understand it and agree with it. I didn't wanted to copyright any sources. I just found this case really interesting and due to this I edited the page. I thought that there were ver little information on Wikipedia page while it is a well known case.

I’m sorry if I caused any trouble, i wasn’t inteded to. Hopefully one day i will reedit and then i will use the informations fairly.

Best wishes: Máté

Ui: I contributied by using the informations from this public video: https://isaimini.co.in/3-killers-who-had-odd-inspirations-to-confess/ (First time I heard about Marie Robards was from this video)

I disagree with you. The newest version of mine could have easily passed any college paper. Not only had been countless synonyms introduced, the sentences structure had clearly been changed (long sentences broken down, proper attribution added several times), a bit of information added and one (actually important) detail omitted.
Sometimes machines are if not smarter than humans, then definitely more objective.
That's why I think you should have consulted the copyvio detection machine results before revdeleting these passages (6 sentences, that i made from 3 initial ones I think?).

Polska jest Najważniejsza (talk) 19:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Polska jest Najważniejsza: er, no. Your most recent version [8] is clearly still plagiarised from the same source, e.g.

You: Several lawyers with access to the 560-page report on the nuns have now shared parts of it with news outlets, including The Daily Beast. Source: Several lawyers with access to the 560-page report on the nuns have shared segments with news outlets, including The Daily Beast.

You: Particularly grizzly incidents includen abuse via gang bangs and sex orgies in which young boys were forced to participate in before being returned to the convent. Source: Among the worst instances of abuse were gang bangs and orgies the young boys were forced to participate in before being returned to the convent.

I could go on. Changing the occasional synonym is not enough to make it not a copyright violation, e.g. changing "segments" to "parts of it". You need to actually rewrite the text in your own words (see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing). I should also point out that the person reverting your edits here did so because they were flagged by an internal Wikipedia tool based on the Turnitin software widely used by colleges, so if you had submitted this as an assignment you likely would have been failed for plagiarism. Hut 8.5 19:15, 7 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not as assignment, but as paper.
But I'll let you decide, I am in no position to argue with Wikipedia functionaries with my 2 articles and meager ca. 100 edits. Close paraphrasing should be allowed in case of small segments of text: just 3 sentences, that I turned into 6 ones. You just cannot reasonably expect that important & valid information cannot be inserted, because it is impossible to re-invent events and create a new narrative from a tight, well-written, horrific prose. Stop being legalistic. If we adopted your view in the above post, Wikipedia could not exist, or could have NO detailed information at all.Polska jest Najważniejsza (talk) 19:24, 7 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is entirely possible for people to summarise sources without copying from them, it happens all the time in academia and journalism. Hut 8.5 19:54, 7 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there,

I hope you are well.

I wanted to get in touch as I am working on behalf of Cornerstone Barristers and they have instructed myself and my team to update their Wikipedia. The current information on there is very outdated and they would like it to reflect how the business operates now.

We went in to make these edits, which is all factually correct information, but we can see that yourself and DanCherek have reverted these changes back.

Please can I ask that you allow us to make these updates on behalf of Cornerstone Barristers themselves. They are not vandalising their own page, simply updating it.

I would really appreciate a response.

Thank you and kind regards, Devon, Head of Client Experience at Evoke Media — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evokemedia (talk • contribs) 08:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wishing Hut 8.5 a very 8.5 happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Hut 8.5.

The information I added on Death of Jeannette DePalma "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jeannette_DePalma" under aftermath was deleted because I did not quote the article. I had recently made several edits, but when I went to check they were deleted. I used " " for the quotes and cited them properly.

Why was it deleted again? Do you have any record of it? I didn't get a notification.

Thank you Hut,

I just want to update the information as it's new and has newspapers to cite it.

Rose Salzano — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoseSalzano (talk • contribs) 23:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Hut 8.5:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 21:17, 30 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Dear Hut 8.5,

Thank you for your message, and I apologize that the created webpage wasn't fully following/exercising all rules as specified in your message details.

I work at the office of the UN Technology Bank for Least Developed Countries. The content that has been used comes directly from our website (or portion of existing biographies) that we submitted for other UN agencies to be used along with the picture.

Thus, could you please connect me with someone on your end who has had previous experience reviewing web pages for UN entities? Do you have a designated focal point to whom I can reach out? I would appreciate any help you could offer in this matter to avoid using the content that exists on the webpage that we own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbuldys (talk • contribs) 19:57, 2 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your quick response. If you could please guide us on where and how to supplement proof of being representative of the organization, this would be very helpful. Currently, we are working on the "text" and we will use more "own words" from already existing sources that we also produced. Mbuldys (talk) 20:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will raise all concerns with a team and ensure we have prepared all requirements prior submitting the new webpage for the review. I will revert in case of any other questions. Thanks! Mbuldys (talk) 20:21, 2 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apologies if I come across as ignorant, I thought only commission reports, use of published federal agency statistics, currency, emblems, slogans, and semi-governmental organizations were considered to be copyrighted works in regards to the United States government at the federal, state, and municipal level. Bursalavoro (talk) 20:28, 2 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Ooh, that is lots of edits!! TylerMagee (talk) 20:13, 3 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As you are an undeletion regular, I wanted to check with you on how do we undelete pages that have had multiple deletions. Do we restore only those versions since the last delete? In the case of WP:Requests for undeletion#Vinesauce, it has been deleted 5 times in the past before the current deletion. And previous reasons include G7 and G11. Jay (talk) Jay (talk) 13:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Jay: I would say it depends on the reason for deletion. If there are two deleted versions and they were both deleted for reasons which qualify for restoration at REFUND (e.g. G13 or G7) then I would restore both. If one of them qualifies for restoration there and the other one doesn't (say it was deleted under G12 or G11) then I would only restore the one which qualifies. Hut 8.5 17:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Georges Painvin.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:34, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any chance you could give the offending editor a gentle wiki-slap so they get the message about copyvio and close paraphrasing from more than just me. This is clearly a well-meaning editor who just needs a gentle push in the right direction. Thanks in advance. 10mmsocket (talk) 19:39, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, I've left a note. Hut 8.5 20:06, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @[[9]] 👋

Regarding: [18 November 2021] Hut 8.5 [[10]] [[11]] restored page Microsoft Search (4 revisions) (restoring non-promotional redirect) (thank) [18 November 2021 Hut 8.5] [[12]] [[13]] deleted page Microsoft Search ([[14]]: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) (thank)

I created a dedicated page for 'Microsoft Search' which is different from 'Bing'.

• Microsoft Search is an workplace search product - it helps companies search for documents within the organization (only available for Microsoft 365 customers).
• Bing is a consumer search engine - it helps anyone search the web.

These are two completely different products.

Microsoft Search is integrated into Office, SharePoint, Outlook, Teams & even in Bing (Microsoft Search in Bing). I believe this caused the confusion - you will find more information in the link. I have consciously added neutral facts about 'Microsoft Search'. If you could point out the specific pieces that sound promotional - I can fix that & republish the page.

You can learn more about Microsoft Search here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftsearch/ You can learn more about Bing here: https://www.bing.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by TechOwl (talk • contribs) 22:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Newimpartial (talk) 12:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I took a long time to make a page which with my chronic illnesses was hard but I made sure I followed the rules. You deleted it under speedy deletion so I didn't even get time to contest it!

So many streamers have Wikipedia pages. I read the rules and I don't see the issue creating a page?

I get a LOT of people asking information about myself and this would give them the information and save me a LOT of physical pain typing the same things over. I gave references so I don't see what I did wrong and why it was deleted? The page is about a Twitch streamer and blogger. I get about 60 people a month asking me questions that was answered on the wiki page that was now deleted. The page gave information and was helpful to people. I gave the link to some people and they found it helpful. Now it is gone.

There are many Twitch streamers with Wikipedia pages and they aren't all the top streamers so I don't understand why it was removed?

My blog is popular and I am a streamer as well.

There was no claims that weren't verifiable and I added the references as the previous mod asked.

You did speedy deletion which when I read the information page says "Credible claim of significance" which doesn't seem to relate to my page at all? The examples are things such as someone claiming to be a president or something like that. I never made any claims that were significant like that! I said the facts that are also listed as a source. A chronically ill twitch streamer isn't a significant claim.

Can you let me know why this was deleted as I followed the rules.

I checked the reasons for speedy deletion and I can't see why my page was even eligible for speedy deletion?

I was given no time to appeal this as by the time I came back the page was gone that I spent ages on and that the previous mod was fine with.

Took me such a long time to make the page and a previous mod just wanted references. You did speedy deletion after I added references after the previous mod said I needed references so I added them, then went to sleep, woke up to speedy deletion and my page already gone that took me so long.

I just don't understand why I can't have the page for a chronically ill Twitch streamer and blogger when others do?

I can add more information which I did when the last mod asked but then you deleted it anyway.

Page was SirenHellVixen

Heather (talk) 12:58, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi! I recently made edits to the [Al Ali ] to reflect the designer's latest work and career progress. I work closely with the designer and was very careful to follow wikipedia's rules when posting the revision to the page. I don't believe there were any copyright violations in the text I added. (I am new on Wikipedia though so I could be mistaken)

Could you please have another look at it? Would it be possible to not delete the revision, so at least that way I can access it and correct any mistakes that may have been there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.74.38.228 (talk) 10:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hut 8.5 Hi, hope you are doing well. Any feedback on the above? 87.201.170.117 (talk) 06:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I replied here. Hut 8.5 07:24, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hut 8.5,

I've started to look over expiring drafts and deleting ones that appear to be an attempt at creating a social media profile like you'd see on Facebook. They aren't article drafts in any way shape or form, but they also aren't really "advertising". They appear to be the result of a very new editor not knowing what an encyclopedia is or what it is for.

The article title is always their name and they have information like their parent's names, their high school and what they want to do after their schooling. So, they have autobiographical information like you would have on a Linked In or Facebook profile but they are often the editor's only edit on Wikipedia. So, somewhere they got the idea that they should create a personal Wikipedia page. I've marked them both as "test edits" and "promotional". If there is even a hint of an actual draft of an article, I leave it to be deleted via G13. I sincerely doubt that any of these editors will return and make a request at WP:REFUND for the return of their draft but I wanted to mention doing this to the admins who regular patrol REFUND in case you come across this combination of deletion rationales. I wish we had a CSD rationale of "attempt at a social media profile page" but we don't so this is my temporary solution. If you have strong objections to this approach, let me know. They just don't seem like pages that should be restored as regular G13s because they aren't article drafts that will ever be moved to main space.

Thanks and I hope you have a great holiday season! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:59, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Liz: yeah I completely sympathise and I would support a CSD criterion for something like this if there was a way to stop it being used for deleting actual attempts to write encyclopedia articles. As a rule any requests at REFUND done under G11 or G2 will be referred to the deleting admin or deletion review anyway. Merry Christmas! Hut 8.5 09:38, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

01:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

A token of thanks Hi Hut 8.5! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, ((u|Sdkb)) talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

You possibly saw some rather odd comments on a certain, now blocked, IPs talk page (User talk:174.216.132.9). My aim there was to keep them busy out of article space whilst waiting for the inevitable block, no I hadn't gone entirely nuts, not more than usual anyway. Mako001 (C)  (T)  04:12, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Mako001: yes I saw that, I don't think it was a very good idea though. If you give that vandal attention/reaction like that it can be perceived as encouragement or reward, making it more likely that they will vandalise in the future. Impersonal warning messages don't do that. Hut 8.5 17:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Agreed. I had some theory that happily accepting their trophy as my own would negate any gratification from it, but I probably went a bit too far. However, I'll avoid doing that in the future, another editor made the same suggestion on my talk page a few hours ago. Mako001 (C)  (T)  00:16, 23 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I feel that the user will keep on putting Burppppppp or something similar on their talk page, also, thanks for blocking them. Zippybonzo (talk) 20:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Zippybonzo: yep, exactly right - already done it. Hut 8.5 20:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, Zippybonzo (talk) 20:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Zippybonzo: Wow - they switched to the Simple English Wikipedia and carried on. Hut 8.5 20:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you have Admin there? Zippybonzo (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No I don't, but I'm sure they'll get blocked if they carry on, it's a small wiki and they don't have many changes to check. Hut 8.5 20:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for blocking the Western film vandal on 107.77.233.229. They've now moved to 107.77.234.137 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), but only one offence so far. Certes (talk) 18:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Certes: OK, I've blocked that IP as well. Hut 8.5 19:15, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,

Just yesterday, a new Jonathan Jackson Foundation page was deleted soon after I added a logo to it and made a minor edit

I see the reasoning is that it may have been promotional and not encyclopedic.

I need help on this one as it's a legit Foundation doing community work in Nairobi, Kenya. This is the site; https://jonathanjacksonfoundation.org/

Can it be undeleted to allow a buildup on the content? Tipkorir (talk) 04:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)tipkorirReply[reply]

My apologies for making this abit unclear,

With the edit with Gordano school that I made(which you seem to have deleted), i did make note to say I was in the school and my head teacher was leaving (you can check ip to verify i am very close to the school).I would have understood if i had recieved some message (i did put a link in notes to prove i was correct)saying if there was something wrong in my notifications but that didnt seem the case.

Could you look into that please? Thanks

Potatosinger Potatosinger (talk) 21:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, would like to ask for your advice on the copyright status of company filings taken from UK Companies House. There's this draft, Draft:On the Stall City CIC which took quite a bit of from the company filing. Is the filing under Crown copyright rules (death+70 years) or OGL? Asking cuz the pdf itself has no indication, the reference with that links to the search result page indicates as Crown copyright, while the homepage of UK Companies House indicates OGL unless otherwise stated. – robertsky (talk) 09:12, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Robertsky: I think it's copyrighted. This page says that material produced by Companies House itself is available under OGL (which is why they have the OGL notice on their website), but that wouldn't apply to information submitted by the company for the public register. For that they seem to be saying that the copyright would typically be held by whoever wrote it. That link does reference a UK law which basically says that it's not copyright infringement if Companies House publishes it because there's a legal requirement for them to do that, but that wouldn't apply to Wikipedia or anyone else. Furthermore the burden of proof for showing that we can legally use something is on the person who wants to add it, and if there's any doubt then we shouldn't be.

In any case it's definitely not a good idea for us to have an article about a company which is drawn from material written by the company about itself, even if we legally can. Hut 8.5 17:53, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Noted. Thanks for the reply. I will clean up the draft accordingly. And yes, I agree with you on your last sentence. – robertsky (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello there, I just wanted to say thank you for helping out so quickly in getting the draft articles for the potential The Batman sequels restored. It means a lot to me, as I was in the process of updating them when they were deleted and never got around to it. I noticed the Draft talk:Untitled The Batman sequel was deleted when the article was, and was wondering if that could be restored as well, since Draft talk:Untitled third The Batman film still exists. Thanks, and have a good one! Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:32, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Trailblazer101: apologies, must have forgotten to do that. It's there now. Hut 8.5 08:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • No worries, and thank you! Trailblazer101 (talk) 13:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

I was going to title this "your recall criteria" or something similar, but I wanted to spare you a panic attack. I believe that the line "I will ask a steward to remove my administrative powers" (emphasis mine) is supposed to refer to a 'crat? I seem to recall reading somewhere that 'crats did not have the ability to remove the mop in the way back when, and I assume that this is just an artifact of those days. HouseBlaster^talk 01:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @HouseBlaster: yes, the ability to desysop people used to be restricted to stewards. I'll bear that in mind when I eventually get round to updating that page, I think it's rather out of date anyway. Hut 8.5 07:50, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey! I noticed that you performed the copyvio revdel I requested on WP:EFFPR. However, you missed some revisions that contained the copyrighted lyrics. Would it be alright if I linked them to you here? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:39, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Blaze Wolf: sorry about that - I think they're hidden now. If not post the diffs here and I'll take care of them. Hut 8.5 17:41, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  It's alright and you did get the rest of them. Thanks! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I noticed that the Credit One Bank was a very positive article despite a number of reliable sources indicating problems associated with the company. Based on a quick review of the edit history, I suspect the company has a PR firmm or PR firms scrub the article of negative information. Today, I edited the article citing high authority sources like the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News and the Better Business Bureau so the article more reliably reflects reality.

In the past, I caught a company's employee editing Wikipedia to remove negative information using the IP address (A fellow Wikipedian awarded a "The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar" in relation to this matter). So I know Wikipedia has to guard against this type of thing.

Please do what you can to prevent the article from being scrubbed of legitimate negative information concerning this company. Knox490 (talk) 19:02, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Knox490: I've added it to my watchlist but I doubt there's much else I can do. If there's a particular person who you think is whitewashing the article for the company you can report them at WP:ANI. Hut 8.5 19:31, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I appreciate your assistance in this matter. Knox490 (talk) 19:54, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your time and effort, especially with the Copyvio revdel requests. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 18:56, 23 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, Hut 8.5. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 18:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kent W. Colton is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent W. Colton (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:11, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @MrsSnoozyTurtle: I didn't actually create this article, or make significant edits to it - I just created a placeholder for someone else to override the title blacklist. I've notified the person who actually created the page for you. Hut 8.5 08:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I briefly looked at the article and the source shortly before you performed the revdel, and I think the copied material amounted to less than what was removed. I'd also like to check something regarding the original contributor's writing patterns. Would you mind emailing me the contents of the last version before the revdel? --Paul_012 (talk) 02:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Paul 012: sure, done. Hut 8.5 07:45, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, because you blocked Bear skello, I'm letting you know that I had an SPI case open on that account: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joseph A. Spadaro - in case you wish to comment. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nominated Caesar cipher for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 00:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, I just wanted to inform you that SussPerson appears to be inappropriately using their talkpage to continue their behavior that led to their block. Noah^Talk 18:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Hurricane Noah: thanks, I've disabled talk page access. Hut 8.5 19:02, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Hut 8.5! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]