This is Yoshi24517's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 7 days

Yoshi24517 is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives (index)

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Current Status: Very Busy
-Status updated as of Tuesday, May 14, 2024 at 08:29 UTC.

You've made six reverts in the span of a few hours at Jesse Cox (YouTuber). The edits that the editor(s) you're edit warring against are making are not vandalism by Wikipedia's definition, so you are not exempt from 3RR. I would suggest not reverting any more, and discussing it on the article's talk page. - Aoidh (talk) 05:41, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aoidh I’ve been done reverting, I went to the talk page afterwards and was talking on the talk page a little bit. I’m off to bed, but thanks for the reminder. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) 05:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No I understand and I'm not trying to come here accusing or anything I just wanted to make sure the content was resolved without anyone getting blocked for continuing to revert, that's all. Have a good night. :) - Aoidh (talk) 05:49, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aoidh Well I was going to discuss it some more, but then this happened. You were wrong, I thought nobody was getting blocked. :( Ruins my 8 year clean block record since my last block. I’m very mad about that, but hey, nothing you can do I guess. It’s all apart of editing WP. In the meantime, I will discuss it some more AFTER this stupid block is over. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) 12:36, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm glad to see you taking this in stride. I do wish more people would respond that way to short tempblocks. When your block ends, I've left a question at WP:AN/I#Edit warring over charges of plagiarism at Jesse Cox (YouTuber). -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 19:04, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Tamzin: I’m at work, so I have to use my mobile account, don’t worry, I’m being very careful to not edit anything besides my talk page. I can answer it here: What was the question again? Just so I have it here. Thanks! Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) 19:40, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, the question was

  could you please explain why you thought this was an appropriate situation in which to revert (at all, let alone past 3RR), and whether you think that decision is compatible with the judgment expected of a rollbacker?

  I'm aware that I phrased that in a somewhat pointed way, but it's not a "gotcha"; I'd like to know your explanation. Note that I'm administratively recused here, so you don't need to worry about me cowgirl-admin pulling your rb bit if I don't like your answer. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 19:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Tamzin: Absolutely, I can answer that. Keep in mind I do not do content creation or any of that stuff with BLP guidelines or any of that sort, so feel free to explain that to me. Also keep in mind, I’m all new to this explain yourself for actions thing, so don’t get too disappointed. It all started when I was using Huggle, minding my business, and then I come across the article, and I saw a bunch of reverted, unexplained deletion with the words “libelious”. I saw other editors reverting it as well, so I decided to revert it as well. Then it kept getting reverted and it kept going on and on, and well you get the idea. Then I saw other users and editors trying to get rid of it as well, so I suspected meatpuppeting was going on, and of course, we usually don’t like that, so I kept reverting. Then I found out about libel and BLP guidelines, and all that stuff, and I decided to use the talk page, and it all went downhill from there and got blocked.

  Now you’ve got me all really nervous now, that I’ll lose my RB bit. I don’t think it’ll go for one violation, but you never know. I just want to talk to you a bit on a personal level for a bit. Ever since I started editing WP, I wanted to become an admin. I try really hard to revert vandalism, because English is not my best subject, so that’s why I don’t do content creation, and only do copyedits, CHECKWIKI stuff, etc. If you can see why I’m really concerned about this, is because I was doing so well, and I feel this edit warring block set me back another like year or so. I don’t meed anybody to feel sorry for me, I just wanted to rant and vent a bit afterwards, I do apologize. I hope this sums it up for you. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) 20:00, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response, Yoshi. I've copied that over to AN/I. I'm also going to leave the following procedural notification here:

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place ((Ds/aware)) on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 20:30, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: Please don’t copy the 2nd paragraph over please thanks! Unless you think it needs to stay, then you can leave it. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) 20:52, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: Responding to you here, because this is the only spot I can right now, and I like to keep everything for me in one place. Frankly, I kind of have an understanding of why I lost the rollback right, but I would really like somebody to explain it to me a little bit better. I also don’t understand why I lost it after only one violation. I read WP:BLP, but I still kind of don’t get it. If you could please give me some clarification on that, thanks. It’s one of the many reasons why I don’t do content creation.

Regarding losing my rollback right, I’m tempted to not ask for it back. I guess reverting vandalism isn’t right for me, because trying to be helpful ends up leading to this. Thankfully, I have other areas I can work on, like CHECKWIKI, but that’s just how this whole situation feels to me. If I feel like I want to revert vandalism again in the future, then I’ll consider it. But until then, I’m done with reverting vandalism.

Would appreciate a response from you in regards to the first paragraph. Thank you for your time. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• You are welcome to ask for it back, as I said. I assume you have done lots of good things with it. Yes, only one violation--but I did not go looking for others. Thing is, this was a very serious one, and I am still a bit puzzled that you did not see what was so problematic about the edit. I explained this in the ANI thread as well--what we have here is an accusation of plagiarism by a person, based on that person's own website/twitter account. That's one-sided, it's not independently sourced, it's highly negative--in short, it is just about everything that the BLP warns us about. And you reinstated that no fewer than six times. Did you ever check to see what was in the edit? Did you look at the sources, and verify them? Because that is what it takes, and WP:ROLLBACK requires you to do that.

  Rollback is a great tool for fighting vandalism, but it only works to the encyclopedia's benefit if you first check whether something is vandalism or not. BTW I don't mind unblocking you if Cullen328 agrees, since the edit war is over, but I also need you to realize that you can't just revert six times without checking, and I think that you should do a better job explaining in those edit summaries what is actually going on. 3RR exemptions are well-defined, and thus everything over the third revert certainly needs a clear explanation. As for rollback--well, I hope you'll look at the policy again, and at the guidelines. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 22:10, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Drmies: Thank you for taking the time to reply, and your explanation does make a lot of sense to me, so I thank you for that. Regarding the block: I hadn’t thought about that, but I guess it doesn’t hurt to try, so I guess we can see if he is open to it. Regarding rollback, you have actually made me feel empowered to overcome my obstacles and try to get it back. However, I plan on waiting a bit before asking for it again, I feel like I would need to cool off for a bit before going back to it. There are other things I can do besides dealing with vandalism. But again, I appreciate you replying, and thank you for taking the time to reply. Your explanation makes a lot of sense, if I run into this situation again, I will make sure to double check. I will also go read up on WP:BLP, whatever the libel policy page is, and WP:ROLLBACK again, because I definitely need to. Apologies for any spelling errors, typing on mobile is very hard. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) 22:27, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Finally home again and back on my main account. Just a random thought, somebody who watches my page, could you remove the rollback userbox from my userpage? Thanks! Yoshi24517 ^Chat _Online 22:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  That being said, I'm just going to shovel an unblock request down below, but I'm going to personally put it on hold myself, because as you said, C328 needs to take a look at it. Yoshi24517 ^Chat _Online 23:15, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~)).

Cullen328 (talk) 06:26, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Yoshi24517 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

See comments above in the section above this section. Drmies has said he is open to an unblock if Cullen328 agrees. Yoshi24517 Chat Online 23:15, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Request accepted. Drmies (talk) 00:56, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, you have done a good job explaining things to Yoshi24517, and given the recent conversations, I have no objection to an unblock. Yoshi24517, rollback is a powerful tool that I have had for a very long time, but I very rarely use it myself. It is a blunt tool and I think that it is best to take the extra steps required for normal reverting, including adding an informative edit summary that shows that you are thinking things through before reverting. I only use rollback on glaringly obvious and disgusting vandalism that should not be on the encyclopedia for one extra second. That's my personal take, for what it's worth. Cullen328 (talk) 00:43, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328: Thank you for your response. I finally figured out how to make Huggle let me use a custom edit summary (the wonders of looking through the options page), so I will be using that a lot more often, especially if I have to go over 3RR on a page for any reason, if it is not obvious. Obviously, I won't be using Huggle until I get my rollback bit back, when I decide to reapply for it (though keep in mind I will reference this conversation when reapplying.), and I did read through WP:BLP and WP:ROLLBACK again, just to make sure I am up to date on what the policy is again. Thank you for your time Cullen. Yoshi24517 ^Chat _Online 00:54, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshi24517, you should never exceed 3RR unless it is super obvious to every experienced editor. There are many alternatives (like WP:AIV or WP:ANI) to exceeding 3RR, and I do not think I have ever exceeded 3RR in 13 years of editing. Cullen328 (talk) 01:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328: Thank you for the reply, that's not quite what I meant to say, sorry about that. What I meant to say, is that in the unlikely event, though I'm going to be super careful if I see something like this again. Thank you. Yoshi24517 ^Chat _Online 02:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]