User talk:Nyttend/Archive 50

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Talk page archives Current talk Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 Archive 28 • Archive 29 • Archive 30 Archive 31 • Archive 32 • Archive 33 Archive 34 • Archive 35 • Archive 36 Archive 37 • Archive 38 • Archive 39 Archive 40 • Archive 41 • Archive 42 Archive 43 • Archive 44 • Archive 45 Archive 46 • Archive 47 • Archive 48 Archive 49 • Archive 50 • Archive 51 Archive 52 • Archive 53 • Archive 54 Archive 55 • Archive 56 • Archive 57 (template link) (revert point)

You recently condensed the listings of

As I understand it from reading the original documents, one 5 acre parcel of the Davis Bridge Battlefield in Hardeman County was listed as a NHL in 1991 as part of the larger Siege and Battle of Corinth Sites. This 5 acre parcel was then combined with the additional acreage in Hardeman and McNairy counties in 1998 to become the Davis Bridge Battlefield NRHP site. So the entire Davis Bridge Battlefield is not a NHL, only the 5 acres, and Davis Bridge Battlefield doesn't extend into Alcorn County, MS, as is currently written. The Siege and Battle of Corinth Sites NRHP site originally extended into Hardeman County, but is it that now only the Siege and Battle of Corinth NHL extends there and not the NRHP site? This is a somewhat odd situation and was hoping you could clarify. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 03:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Please be careful reverting all of the address restrictions I have placed on articles over the years. You even reverted the closest such site to where I live to the coordinates I originally provided but later removed for the following reasons:

• The coordinates were incorrect because they where of a nearby spring and not the archaeological site named after the spring
• The site is on private property and not open to the public
• The site is still subject to ongoing research

Preventing waymarking enthusiasts from getting arrested for trespassing or discouraging others of more sinister motives from going where they have no business is hardly "mass censorship". My thinking on how to handle such sites over the years has evolved. If the public caretaker of the site openly publishes its location after research has concluded, then I have no objection to the coordinates being listed. I also have no objection to the location of these sites described in general, non-specific terms such as "3 mi. east of Podunk City" but with the address restriction still in place without evidence to the contrary. Many coordinates and specific locations I removed also seemed more like original research rather than proper contributions. What brought most of these sites on my radar was their throwing list articles in the maintenance category for lacking coordinates. My view is that a site listed as restricted with no coordinates should have that expressly stated to avoid the list article from being thrown into the category unless there are coordinates from a reputable source that has business disclosing the location in the first place.

As far as the "Address restricted.PNG" image goes, I really don't care. Concerns about it have been raised before, most recently in this discussion with no consensus reached. If a consensus develops to remove it, then I would be fine with having it deleted from Commons while having a bot removing it from all pages that link to it. Until such a consensus is reached, then I expect that list articles will reflect a lack of standardization in that regard (although most counties in New Mexico and Texas were consistently using the image uniformly).

Granted, especially early on before my understanding of the nature of these sites has changed, I admit I was somewhat overboard in removing locations and coordinates for many of these sites. My intentions, however, were the responsible protection and preservation of the national archeological heritage and never mass censorship. Furthermore, my edits were always in good faith and should not be categorized as "disruptive" or "vandalism". Really? You couldn't come up with more diplomatic language than that? Fortguy (talk) 10:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

You could apply your recent approach to the last hook in ITN too. Please be consistent. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

TRM, you would do well to understand that the spirit of things is for you to cut back on making critical and sarcastic remarks toward other editors. You have been told this many, many times. I cannot understand why you have reformed your behavior.

p

02:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

??? Resumed? Not reformed? EEng 01:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Nyttend, thank you for your thoughtful contributions to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hapa_Road_railway_station. While the result was no consensus, the back-and-forth exposed topics that deserve clarification in the essay Wikipedia:Notability_(Railway_lines_and_stations)#Stations or in the form of an RfC similar to [on secondary school notability]. Rhadow (talk) 12:29, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

I made numerous good changes and removals of bad sources, bad links, etc at John Hagee, and the user used an IP User:79.183.56.98 to remove the changes using the reasoning "unexplained massive removal of sourced content, discuss first. Then the user goes on to remove at least the same amount of content as I did, which by the way, the stuff I removed was unsourced, or poorly inserted, or duplicate information. I feel this user has a history of getting away with "defending" articles which have anything even remotely to do with Israel. I'm exhausted having to deal with this user so much, having autism and especially after they hounded me for no reason last year and attempted to get me blocked under false pretenses. I know you are quite busy but I would appreciate your support in this as you have seemed proactive and judicious in the past in your efforts to preserve policy-based editing and content. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 19:13, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

The IP was not mine - it actually made me edit conflict when it rolled back to a prior version in the middle of a chain of edits. I will note that the version R9tgokunks restored contains what seems to be

WP:BLP violations.Icewhiz (talk

) 19:53, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

@

WP:WIKIHOUNDING. I did not address you and this conversation is directed at Nyttend (talk · contribs). Your behavior is completely unacceptable and is harassment. You've already done this to me before, and you don't seem to have learned anything. - R9tgokunks ⭕

22:01, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Easy item first, IP-related rollback — since R9tgokunks reverted the IP a couple of hours after this discussion began, I think we can consider it a mistake that R9tgokunks left in whatever you're calling BLP violations, Icewhiz. Meanwhile, there's nothing wrong (per se) in reverting an IP that makes contentious edits in the area of Israel-Palestine (even if it's in an otherwise unrelated article), since IPs and new editors are banned from editing in the area. R9tgokunks, when you reverted this edit, you restored several kilobytes of stuff sourced to primary sources, including news reports, press releases, and items published by involved entities; the only solidly published matters, as far as I can see, are one book from Thomas Nelson Publishers and a tangential bit from a

WP:PUNISH. Conversely, I see no edits in this talk page's history by Icewhiz, and no indication from R9tgokunks or anyone else that this request had happened. Icewhiz, why did you come here? Nyttend (talk

) 23:58, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Hagee is indeed on my watchlist (and has been for a while, since I edited this previously). As for coming here - I run occasional checks (rather simple ones) on when I am mentioned in talk (amongst other reasons - to notice if a report is made against me without notifying me as is usually expected). In this particular instance I noticed a user making rather serious allegations towards me - and responded. R9tgokunks made a

WP:POINTy edit on Hagee, was claiming (there and here) that I was also an IP, and edit warring (an odd claim in this regard considering R9tgokunks's edits). Also claiming that I "hounded me for no reason last year and attempted to get me blocked under false pretenses" - when - the AE files against them in 2018 ended with "R9tgokunks is now fully aware of the editing restrictions existing in this area and is expected to edit accordingly. --NeilN " (after R9tgokunks was found to be in violation of ARBPIA 1RR, but possibly not aware).Icewhiz (talk

) 04:20, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

I will also note the false hounding claim - R9tgokunks makes an edit to an article on my watchlist - this being, our only interaction since May 2018 (other than noticeboarda and the like), and then goes around the project to various admins (NeilN is in my watchlist) and my talk page and makes hounding accusation? Icewhiz (talk) 04:30, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

1. Nice job burying the lede on everything. I was still working on the article. Unfortunately, I have a life that keeps me from constantly editing. Also, you once again reverted my nearly 100 valuable edits for no reason at

WP:OWNERSHIP

.

2. Nyttend, as I mentioned before, as well as at NeilN's talk, I was majorly wikihounded last year by Icewhiz when trying to quash a disruptive Israel-based IPs edits on other articles. He lied about it saying he had no interactions with me before the post to AN (and transfer to AE) and very clearly followed me around WP.(at least 4 mainspace articles and 3 noticeboards, as well as my talk page; all covered here) Icewhiz's answer still doesn't explain how he knew this post existed, the only option is that he looked at my contributions. I did not tag him. Based on his past behavior and other users complaining on his talk page about hounding, and others even filing reports about it, I'd say this is a major issue.

4. Here's the real juicy part. What Icewhiz says next is a lie: Icewhiz's statement: "Also claiming that I "hounded me for no reason last year and attempted to get me blocked under false pretenses" - when - the AE files against them in 2018 ended with "R9tgokunks is now fully aware of the editing restrictions existing in this area and is expected to edit accordingly. --NeilN " (after R9tgokunks was found to be in violation of ARBPIA 1RR, but possibly not aware)" He is attempting to make it seem like I was punished and totally in the wrong. Icewhiz made numerous warnings to me that were overkill and unwarranted because he wanted to defend the Israel-based IP's edits, which were all being reverted by me. He conveniently leaves out the part where NeilN says "Contrary to what Icewhiz seems to state, the second set of reverts on Ireland–Israel relations is not a 1RR incident even if R9tgokunks had been alerted. Their first two reverts were reverting an IP and are therefore exempt as they were (unknowingly) enforcing the General Prohibition." NeilN says right there that I didn't violate ARPBIA 1RR, yet in the above comment Icewhiz lies about it. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 08:13, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Nyttend - I suggest you read the 2018 AE close, R9tgokunks was nearly blocked for 48 hours (as some of the edits were a 1RR violation, others were exempt per the General prohibition since they involved an IP), but was let off with a "fully aware". As for the rather odd claims I was hounding R9tgokunks in 2018 - he brought that up in the AE as well. The quite simple truth is that I was responding to their NPOV/n post see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard/Archive 70#User:31.154.71.87 and Israel-related edits. - NPOV/n posts are meant to elicit response (and in this case, I was highly concerned that Haifa was wrongly described as being in the Palestinian territories (Haifa being in Israel, and PT being a post 1967 term that does not include Haifa) - one of the diffs in R9tgokunks NPOV/n report). I have NPON/n watchlisted. Other than that - I really haven't interacted with this user all that much.Icewhiz (talk) 08:34, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

1. Stop distracting from the point of my post and misleadingly summarizing everything. They weren't a 1RR violation. NeilN points that out: "Contrary to what Icewhiz seems to state, the second set of reverts on Ireland–Israel relations is not a 1RR incident even if R9tgokunks had been alerted. Their first two reverts were reverting an IP and are therefore exempt as they were (unknowingly) enforcing the General Prohibition."

2. I'm not the one who is focused on editing Israel articles every day of my life. I was reverting a disruptive IP. You still don't address why you lied in the above section. This is not acceptable behavior. You can't just go around punishing those who you *think* have an anti-Israel POV and trying to gaslight people about their intentions. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 08:52, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Now we're digging up a closed 2017 AN/I report? (at least accusations of "lying" has been partially tweaked out - though lots of accusations of "lie" in the walls of text about an old AE result). Lets quote NeilN in full ([1]) - "There are two sets of reverts presented. Contrary to what Icewhiz seems to state, the second set of reverts on Ireland–Israel relations is not a 1RR incident even if R9tgokunks had been alerted. Their first two reverts were reverting an IP and are therefore exempt as they were (unknowingly) enforcing the General Prohibition. The first set of reverts did violate ARBPIA3 but it's easy to see why that mistake was made, given the content. I also note that R9tgokunks did not re-revert after being reverted later the same day. I suggest this report will serve as a wake up call and R9tgokunks is now fully aware of how careful they have be when editing in this area, even with the absence of article/talk page notices. I recommend no block be levied but if one is still felt required by fellow admins that it be no more than 48 hours". Comments by EdJohnston and GoldenRing also noted the violation to Yigael Yadin (the first set of reverts).Icewhiz (talk) 09:34, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

An arbitrator has proposed a motion on an amendment request to which you are a party. It is being discussed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Crouch, Swale: motion.

For the Arbitration Committee, Bradv🍁 20:18, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Nyttend. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm}} template.- R9tgokunks ⭕

09:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Resolved by motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment:

For the Arbitration Committee, Bradv🍁 22:32, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Amendment request: Crouch, Swale clarification request

Hi, WP:Typo Team mentioned your name in proximity to database dumps. If you have one, could you run a search for me; if not, could you suggest somewhere I could ask? National Register of Historic Places lists are updated from a U.S. government website, which each week posts an announcement of newly designated sites. Some editors update our lists by copying over the government data, creating a new list entry with the right data, and deleting the copied data, but we all make mistakes and forget to remove the government data sometimes. If this happens, it can be days or weeks until it's removed, e.g. I just now removed some, which had been on this page for a week. Virtually all copied data will contain the word LISTED in all caps; I wondered if you could find all pages with "National Register of Historic Places" in the title and "LISTED" in the text? This is virtually impossible to do with Special:Search, since "listed" and/or "Listed" will appear in every National Register-related page, but LISTED is rare. Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 02:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

The database dumps are always a week or two out of date, but you can actually run a case-sensitive query like this on the live built-in search engine. You'll just need to use special syntax: insource:/LISTED/ intitle:"National Register of Historic Places"

I hope that helps, and thanks for your cleanup work! -- Beland (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Nyttend, You have been great about helping me fix my mistakes in the past and if time permits, I would like to have your help again. I have three graphics/files that I've uploaded numerous times to fix errors and/or add details. So I would like some of the previous versions deleted before someone decides to move them to Commons. Additionally, I have a file renaming request. Okay, here we go:

• I would like all previous versions of File:US sales of the Gen1 Honda Ridgeline.png deleted, keeping the current version as the only version
• I would like all except versions "20:11, 3 January 2019" and the current version ("12:52, 3 February 2019") deleted from File:US Honda Ridgeline Sales.png
• I would like all previous versions of File:Mid-size truck sales in the US 2005-2018.png deleted, keeping the current version as the only version, and I would like the file renamed to "File:Mid-size truck sales in the US and CA 2005-2018.png," because I added Canadian sales to the chart.

Thank you, in advance, for your help. –McChizzle (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Nyttend! Have a nice day. --McChizzle (talk) 21:49, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi sir, sorry I can't post on the noticeboard page as it was locked by the administrator.. I just wanted to say that Al Idrissi is regarded as the greatest historian of his era. He reported that Merinids originated from the area situated between Tiaret and Tlemcen… In fact Al Idrissi was the sole historian at that time that reported about berber history and customs. Regards 196.117.101.240 (talk) 04:45, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend. Would you mind revising your close at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 20#Wikipedia:How to edit a page/HowDoesOneEditaPage to change it from keep to speedy keep, please? Even though you added a thorough description next to it, a close is "keep" isn't strictly reflective of the result. Thanks. --Bsherr (talk) 23:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

In regard to your comments here [2], I obviously cannot see the previously deleted page but what makes it not a duplicate? I linked to the previous AfD at

Nyttend, I need help getting the name of a graphic I made and uploaded changed. The graphic I uploaded is currently named "File:US Army 319th Field Arty Reg Flash.svg" but I've learned it should be named "82nd Airborne Division Artillery Beret Flash.svg." Can you help me correct my mistake? --McChizzle (talk) 21:15, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --McChizzle (talk) 22:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

FYI, in case you are interested in conversation about renaming "Template:Infobox settlement", see Template_talk:Infobox_settlement#Better_name_for_the_template. I haven't voted or commented yet. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:17, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend, I've pared a lot of unsourced promotional dreck about non notable events and entities from this, and now notice that you attempted similar clean up a few months ago. More can be cut, and I can't see the rationale by which any of this was, or would be, restored. More eyes on this would be good. Thanks, 2601:188:180:1481:DC58:C3F7:4619:B4D9 (talk) 12:52, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

• And it looks like at least some of the questionable content added last year consisted of copyright violations. This could probably use rev/deletion, and I'm suggesting a reversion to the last decent version [3]. Cheers, 2601:188:180:1481:DC58:C3F7:4619:B4D9 (talk) 13:39, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Nyttend: The Emily Heller article page says that you were the most recent admin to delete that page. If you don't mind, I'd like to have the most recent revision of that page restored into my user space. I believe that she is notable enough to have an article, and I'd like to start with whatever existed most recently rather than starting from scratch. If there are portions that were copyvio or otherwise contrary to policy, you can of course leave those out. Thanks in advance if you can take the time to do this. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Please revert your drive-by change here. I can't unfortunately. There is plenty of country north of the treeline, but loss of high altitude pockets leads to permanent local loss. Did you even look at the sources? Johnbod (talk) 13:43, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Nyttend, I need help again. This time, I was helping a friend ("Dogs 2C") contribute their photos to Wikipedia and in doing so, I left a single character out of the filename, so OTRS will not approve it. In the release email I helped my friend write, it states "File:2017 Honda Ridgeline RTL-E Bed-with full-size spare-1.jpg" but I used File:2017 Honda Ridgeline RTL-E Bed-with full-size spare.jpg instead (no "-1" in the filename). Can you help me correct this error by renaming the file to "File:2017 Honda Ridgeline RTL-E Bed-with full-size spare-1.jpg" so I can get my friend's photo approved? --McChizzle (talk) 19:48, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Nyttend! The OTRS volunteers have accepted the change. "You're the man!" --McChizzle (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Figured it out. Disregard.

Cdhawkins5 (talk) 21:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC)