User talk:Ymblanter/2018

According to Megadeth's own Facebook page they have sold over '38 million' records and thecpage doesn't reflect this, adding a figure which is completely unsubstantiated. It's a random figure and cleasrly incorrect, yet it still hasn't been changed. Wiki sites need to provide the best/correct information and the info. on the Megadeth page is incorrect; the page has been blocked from editing because that correct change was made, so what is going on? The correct info. is on Megadeth's own web page. MetalMilitia80 (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not involved with the article. If consensus has been established on the talk page, pls apply with

WP:RFPP for unprotection (or file a protected edit request).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Can I suggest that the Oakland Raiders article be semi-protected, as you have just done for Jon Gruden, for the exact same reason ? Thanks. Matilda Maniac (talk) 00:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=250&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=2A02%3A8108%3A4DC0%3A3B51%3A*&namespace=&tagfilter=&start=&end= And my posts at

Thanks for letting me know. My experience with them that they just replace Kurdish or Yezidi Kurdish with Yezidi, without ever discussing anything, and I usually just revert on the spot.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...semi-protection isn't working because the socks are actually autoconfirmed. I only bothered to check Secret pink drink, but the account was created in 2016, and has enough edits (albeit now-deleted). Does mean they'll eventually run out of socks, though, so semi-protection is still a good idea. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see indeed that they were created in 2016, but I thought they should have a number of edits before getting the status. The protection expires in 12 hours, and, if they are yet not tired then, they can use new socks, but I guess now we need a short break from them.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:51, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Blanter, did you mean to sysop-protect Kashmir conflict for a period of approx. 1 year?Winged Blades^Godric 03:26, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I do not remember, but I have restored the semi-protection now, we can see if the disruption resumes.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely perfect after your 2nd correction:) Winged Blades^Godric 11:54, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, The musicbot removed {{pp-semi}} from Kashmir conflict. I don't know why. In any case, the article was previously ec-protected. I would appreciate if you revert to this status. The topic is still hot and there are meatpuppets galore. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know this usually isn't the standard but I was wondering if you could take a second look at putting protection on

I checked the edits for the last three days, and I found a couple which might qualify as disruptive. This is currently a high-traffic page, and IMO protection is not justified. Sorry.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright thanks for double checking. TheDoctorWho (talk) 16:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think this category makes sense? Currently, there are only a handfull of articles in there, from the 2018 Olympics. Since most of Olympic sports are both for men and women, this would make about a half of sport-related articles fall into this category, making it useless to navigate. --Tone 09:45, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I created it because for 2014 Olympics, all (or almost all) articles on women's sport were in category Category:2014 in women's sport. I did not find them useful, but removing them was not really an option (though if they survive I will create categories for men's sports), and they were all landing in a generic category. I therefore decided to create a dedicated category for 2018 (and eventually expand it to all Olympics). I agree that it might need a more general discussion; pls go to CfD or start a discussion elsewhere if you feel like it.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let's use CfD for the discussion venue. I am sure there is a better way to categorize those :) --Tone 10:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I will continue adding the category for the 2018 olympic events (if the consensus is delete, it would be very easy for me to remove it), but will not create any similar categories until CfD has been concluded.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:22, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! I started the discussion here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 6. --Tone 10:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I tagged another one for deletion and will add my comments shortly.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:13, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tone:, @BrownHairedGirl:: let me make sure that we all understand the result in the same way. I see it like this: Category:Women's sport competitions at the 2018 Winter Olympics is moved to Category:Women's events at the 2018 Winter Olympics; Category:Women's sport competitions at the Olympic Games is moved to Category:Women's events at the Olympic Games; I create the intermediate category Category:Women's events at the Winter Olympics; the content of Category:Women's sport competitions at the 2018 Winter Olympics is split into categories such as Category:Women's alpine skiing at the 2018 Winter Olympics.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Something like that, yes. Try setting up one set of categories, such as for Alpine skiing, to see that it works. --Tone 18:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) That would be my understanding, tho personally I'd hold off the final stage until you have done the crude split by gender and see how many articles are involved. Maybe the final layer (Category:Women's alpine skiing at the 2018 Winter Olympics) might not be needed?

Either way, it's a simple enough AWB job. With an AWB script it could probably be semi-automated. If you do 2018, I can knock up a few scripts to create and populate categs for previous years. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

The 2018 events pages are not yet ready, but I created Category:Women's events at the 2014 Winter Olympics and added all relevant events there so that we can have a look. From what I see I guess that creating Category:Women's events in cross-country skiing at the 2014 Winter Olympics may be reasonable for biathlon (6 entries), cross-country skiing (6 entries), and speed skating (6 entries); likely reasonable for alpine skiing (5 entries), freestyle skiing (5 entries), and snowboarding (5 entries), and might be reasonable for short track speed skating (4 entries). It was already created before me for ice hockey. For other sports I would say they are not needed (though we likely need Category:Women's events in curling at the Winter Olympics). Thoughts about this?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to suggest that. It makes sense when there is more than one article in the category, such as in skiing, snowboarding, etc. Are there any other mixed events apart from ice skating? Ice hockey also has more than one article per gender as there are roosters and qualifications. So I would suggest to continue this way. Women's events at the 2014 Winter Olympics should be a parent category. --Tone 17:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. Yes, there are mixed events in alpine skiing, biathlon, luge, and curling unless I am missing smth.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please check if you like what I did at Category:Women's Alpine skiing events at the 2018 Winter Olympics, I believe this is how the category tree should look like. --Tone 17:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am in Japan this week with intermittent e-mail access, I will check it as soon as I can.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:13, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tone:, the category is perfect, thanks a lot. The only thing is that it probably use "alpine" non-capitalized, Category:Women's alpine skiing events at the 2018 Winter Olympics. English is not my mothertongue, but if you do not object, I will rename it.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it uses Alpine due to being named after the Alps. I would assume the same holds for Nordic. At least the article uses it in this manner. --Tone 08:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree for Nordic combined, but I am not so sure for Alpine skiing - the article uses it inconsistently. Do you know any lace better than WP:Village pump (miscellaneous) where we could get useful input?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Right, it is inconsistent. Ok, Village pump sounds like a good place to find answers :) --Tone 08:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks, I will try.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 57#English usage--Ymblanter (talk) 13:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tone:, the VP did not produce anything useful, but I found Category:Years in alpine skiing, which is full on non-capitalized categories. Should we go non-capitalized, and if someone makes a strong case, it can always be taken to the speedy renaming?--Ymblanter (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, why not. As you say, speedy renaming is always possible. I created cats for snowboarding and cross-country skiing in the meantime. But I guess automation will be required for a large-scale implementation. Let's do men's and mixed as well. --Tone 08:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have seen this, thanks a lot. Let us continue adding the categories, I created women's biathlon today. For 2018, not yet all pages are ready, I am busy with creation of them as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed the articles you are creating for individual events at the 2018 Winter Olympics are incorrectly referenced For ex. [1] everything you have sourced goes to the venues page of the official website. There is nothing to do with the schedule here. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:11, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you available for a User:Tobias Conradi intervention? User:85.180.42.86 is edit warring over three articlesTastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 17:10, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, I protected two articles, for Sokolnicheskaya line they might be correct, but I unfortunately have no time now to search for sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

i sources the whole section myself but thanks. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 17:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard that there were any specific plans to extend the line to Kommunarka, and I guess I would know. One needs to analyze sources carefully and see what was exactly announced. Typically, in Moscow they come up with all kind of crazy ideas where metro can go, and before a project exist they are typically worthless. I might be wrong on this particular one though.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you. It’s certainly not under construction but I figured an announcement by the city was at least definitive enough for “future plans”. Plans change but that’s why you try and source the stuff. And adjust as time goes on.[2] [3]

But I don’t want to litigate on your talk page. Thanks for the help. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 17:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, I was wondering if you could take a look at the Vladimir Bibikhin article, if you have the time. It has further reading, bibliography, monographs, translations, all in Russian. Thanks.scope_creep (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can have a look but possibly only next week. pls ping me if in the middle of next week I still not have touched it - it will likely mean I forgot. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter At Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy, did you intend in this edit[4] to put "Category:Church of England churches in Taunton Deane" etc in the commented-out header?

I presume that it was a v rare error in your great work processing speedies, but thought I should check. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

No, certainly not. Thanks for noticing.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for asking a fairly basic question here (because I was quite frustrated). For Wikidata, when I want to add cross-wiki links, I assume I just click "Edit links" > to Wikidata page > Click [edit] beside Wikipedia > add the language. But it never works for me (Cannot click "Publish"; I tried to input the language code at the bottom where it says "wiki" but nothing ever happens. In the end I just do it the manual way, but this is not supposed to be difficult, right? Apologies again for the rant. Cheers, Alex Shih (talk) 03:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, what you describe does not seem right. Could you please provide any examples (WD Q-item and what link you wanted to add? I am on mobile, so I might be unable to check it until my (Japanese) evening.--Ymblanter (talk) 03:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt response. For example, I was trying to add ja:コレカ to Coreca; The help link at WD says "add a site link by specifying a site and a page of that site", but I cannot get the "publish" link to turn blue no matter what I do. On a personal note, didn't know you are in Japan also. Alex Shih (talk) 03:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add, interestingly enough, when I do it from reverse (in this case, clicking "add link" from Japanese Wikipedia), it worked out fine (although the interface is equally as frustrating; asks me the language I want to add, but wouldn't respond to neither "English" nor "英語"; only responds after I pasted the full link, then the system detects "enwiki"). Alex Shih (talk) 03:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am only in Japan this week, flying back on Sunday. I will have a look as soon as I can connect my laptop to internet (either get the wireles working or get to the hotel in the evening). what you describe is very strange.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sir. Actually I finally got it working; looks like I just didn't click the down/up arrow for the dropdown menu to appear (naturally I only pressed enter). I feel like an idiot, but I think there should be an indicator somewhere about that. Anyway, thanks and sorry! Alex Shih (talk) 04:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, great that you got it working. Indeed, the usability of the Wikidata interface still can benefit from some improvements.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I'm very confused as to why you moved the two aforementioned articles. Are you a native English speaker? Nemetsky is properly translated as German in English. It is by the same token that there is an article on Jewish Autonomous Oblast and not Yevreyskaya Autonomous Oblast. -- Gokunks (Speak to me) 06:32, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not a native speaker. I believe this is irrelevant. We do not translate names, we follow the most recognized names. You might have noticed that all several thousands of Russian districts are named in a uniform way, such as Porkhovsky District, and the move like this is in no way technical and uncontroversial, it requires at least a RM (in which all districts would be included). Also pinging @Ezhiki:--Ymblanter (talk) 06:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, but I don't really have much to add to what you've already pointed out. Russian toponyms are seldom translated, they are normally transliterated. Some extremely well-known places would have a

commonly recognized English name (Moscow and Red Square immediately come to mind; and the names of the larger entities—such as republics, krais, oblasts—fall into this bucket as well), but neither of the two districts in question are "well-known", and at any rate, the practice of using a commonly recognized name is not the same as "translating" a toponym. One can occasionally find translated Russian toponyms used in literature, but those occurrences are not commonplace and often serve a purpose different from that of an encyclopedia. Unless one can conclusively demonstrate that a translated variant is indeed commonly used in English-language literature (in which case it would probably fall into the WP:COMMONNAME realm anyway), romanization remains the best standardization tool for names of obscure places, as coverage of such places in English is either minimal or altogether non-existent.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?

); January 12, 2018; 14:39 (UTC)

You have to stop messing with article content that has NEUTRAL REFERENCES. Untouchable, OK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.119.59 (talk) 13:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From an outsider's perspective, it looks to me like adminship is mostly a thankless task... so here is a cuddly kitten as a token of appreciation. :)

–FlyingAce^✈hello 15:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, what is your opinion in regards to Infobox and Wikidata, or can you point me to the direction where your thoughts have been expressed? Best, Alex Shih (talk) 19:02, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am personally using for example {{

Infobox Russian District}} which uses Wikidata for a number of entries, and this is very convenient, but IMO before we get expanding the Wikidata usage in templates, the problem of vandalism in Wikidata must be solved. Again IMO, for the time being Wikidata is understaffed (by far the biggest Wikimedia project in terms of the number of pages, and the community is nice but small), there is very little chance that most Wikipedia editors will ever edit Wikidata consciously (i.e. excluding automated edits), and the only solution now would be to replicate the Wikidata edits here by bots; the infoboxes are watched, and these edits would be swiftly dealt with. I seem to be in a minority; both Wikidata supporters and Wikidata opposers do not like this approach, and it was not even considered when RfC was planned.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Please either retract your blatant personal attack made here, or provide some good evidence of me "lying" in that section.

At the Arbcome case, which you filed against me and which failed miserably, you made a number of deliberately wrong statements about me; you retracted some and you refused to retract others. A lie is a deliberately wrong statement. You say about me "You are the one who refused to engage further with another experienced editor because you are an admin and they aren't". This is incorrect, and this is deliberate, hence this is a lie. I never said this. I said that (i) they consistently fail to understand what Wikidata is; (ii) they have way less experience that I have, both at Wikidata and Wikipedia, and they still are sure they understand everything better than I do (that whet they explicitly said). Now retract this.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can not retract anything, it is in the hatted section. You still can retract your lie.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I retracted my mistakes at the ArbCom case; there were no lies in what remained (the ones I retracted were not "deliberately" wrong, they were wrong, e.g. confusing something you said with something someone else said. Making "deliberately" wrong statements is morally wrong and something that can easily backfire anyway). I guess ArbCom would not have let such remaining lies pass by without discussion. Now, let's look at what you actually said. "Well, both communities felt confident enough to award me administrator privileges, something which I have not seen you to achieve with either of them. But, as I said, you are certainly entitled to have your opinion on the subject, even if it is completely uninformed and aggressive. This is ok with me. I am not even going to report you for a personal attacks. But I hope you will excuse me if I stop spending my time replying you." There is no lie in my statement. You clearly said "I'm an admin, you are not, so while you may have your own stupid opinion, I'm not going to reply to you any further". By the way, this time it is your statement which is the first to be hatted, which you seem to place particular value on...

Fram (talk) 09:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Your problem is that you read my statements and then decide I said smth I did not. After I protest, you must retract your statements. In this case, I did not say what you want to ascribe to me. First time, it might have been a mistake. After I said two times that you reading is wrong, it becomes a lie. I did not say "I'm an admin, you are not, so while you may have your own stupid opinion, I'm not going to reply to you any further". --Ymblanter (talk) 09:07, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, I quoted what you actually said above.

• "Well, both communities felt confident enough to award me administrator privileges, something which I have not seen you to achieve with either of them." = I'm an admin, you are not.
• "But, as I said, you are certainly entitled to have your opinion on the subject, even if it is completely uninformed and aggressive. This is ok with me." = you may have your own stupid opinion
• "I am not even going to report you for a personal attacks. But I hope you will excuse me if I stop spending my time replying you." = I'm not going to reply to you any further.

I see no reason to retract anything because you now claim that what you said was not what you said. Continuing to claim that I lie is making further personal attacks, which isn't very smart. By the way, asking for votes to be struck? Wow, there really are no limits to what you'ld do, are there?

Fram (talk) 09:13, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Good. Just to note that this is not the first time that you interpret what I said, and when I say your interpretation is wrong say you know better. Fine, you do not retract. I will remember that.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, scary! I can't help it if you can't understand your own statements, but I don't think my "interpretation" is all that farfetched or outlandish, a it is a one-on-one summary of your full statement. If you didn't mean to say that but meant something else, you should have written something else or added a clarification. But accusing people of lying when they simply read what you say and don't believe your "oh, I wrote X but I clearly meant Y, how date you claim that I said X" defense is not compatible with being an admin, which seems to be a big deal to you.

Fram (talk) 09:27, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Well, you are becoming really annoying. And, you know, this is still my talk page. Now get off.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I would love to see your and other ru-wp admins' comment on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NikitaSadkov

NikitaSadkov (talk) 09:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I am not a ru-wp admin, and in a few hours I will not be an en-wp admin either.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, please review

Thank you, but at this point I do not feel like applying anywhere. Every time recently I asked for help on this project, I regretted it afterwards. I would rather work for some time in the areas I do not need any help.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:39, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in regards to your message on the article talkpage, nobody has come forward to oppose or enter discussion on the changes, so I have reinserted the changed. Thanks. Claíomh Solais (talk) 21:53, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to express that I've always admired the work you do across Wikimedia projects. Please rest well on your deserved break from en.wp Alex Shih (talk) 07:18, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am not taking a break, but I am concentrating on writing articles rather than doing any maintenance.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:58, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice to hear that. It's good to take the badge off and focus on the pleasure of writing. Hope you don't mind me still coming for Wikidata questions from time to time. Best, Alex Shih (talk) 14:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. I will not try to convince the community anymore though.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, Looks like we’re a couple of dipshits [5] in his mind. In any case there are a couple of sources that state 90 meters from when the station opened. But nothing approaching 73. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 22:35, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I do not particularly care what she thinks about me.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Im here to ask you for some help. In fact, I'm asking the same thing to several other administrators about the same matter at hand. About four months ago, the article Goguryeo has been protected due to vandalism, disruptive editing, and edit warring. After a couple of weeks after the protection was broken, two new editors started to vandalize the same article. To introduce you to the situation: they edited out the statements to misrepresent the cited sources, multiple credited sources were entirely removed, and original research has been included to substitute the removal. The two editor(s) in question are: User:Zanhe and User:Koraskadi I have been reverting the article back to the last editorial completed by User:Failosopher since the breakout of the situation.

The content that has been subject to this event are these two qualities:

1- "Goguryeo (고구려; 高句麗; [ko.ɡu.ɾjʌ], 37 BCE–668 CE), also called Goryeo (고려; 高麗; [ko.ɾjʌ]), was a Korean kingdom[4][5][6]"

The two editors mentioned above are constantly removing the bolded word; which goes against these three supporting articles cited.

"Koguryo". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved October 15, 2013.

States that Goguryeo as one of the three Kingdoms of Korea

Byeon, Tae-seop (1999) 韓國史通論 (Outline of Korean history), 4th ed, Unknown Publisher, ISBN 89-445-9101-6.

Emphasizes Goguryeo as one of the most powerful Korean State that arose throughout history

"Complex of Koguryo Tombs". UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Retrieved 2013-10-24.

The current article simply talks about its geographical location. However, the article stated that Goguryeo was Korean when it was retrieved.

2- "Goguryeo has been described as an empire by many scholars", "Goguryeo was a powerful empire and one of the great powers in East Asia"

Phrases in relation to the bolded word are getting removed alongside their supporting citations. This is a completely clear example of vandalism.

신형식 (2003). 高句麗史. Ewha Womans University Press. p. 56. ISBN 9788973005284. Retrieved 12 September 2017.

이덕일; 박찬규 (2007). 고구려 는 천자 의 제국 이었다. 역사의아침. ISBN 9788995884973. Retrieved 12 September 2017.

Roberts, John Morris; Westad, Odd Arne. The History of the World. Oxford University Press. p. 443. ISBN 9780199936762. Retrieved 15 July 2016.

Gardner, Hall. Averting Global War: Regional Challenges, Overextension, and Options for American Strategy. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 158–159. ISBN 9780230608733. Retrieved 15 July 2016.

Laet, Sigfried J. de. History of Humanity: From the seventh to the sixteenth century. UNESCO. p. 1133. ISBN 9789231028137. Retrieved 10 October 2016.

Walker, Hugh Dyson. East Asia: A New History. AuthorHouse. pp. 6–7. ISBN 9781477265178. Retrieved 20 November 2016

All these sources explicitly describe Goguryeo as an empire or have been described to have developed into an empire. In fact, the main thesis of the first two articles is about Goguryeo being an Empire. The same sources also state that Goguryeo is Korean, but they were not cited for the quality mentioned above for the current editorial.

The editorial that I have been reverting back into was the protected version; which was constructed by a series of discussions and debates with various editors and administrators including us. Something has to be done about the vandalists or the article in question. For the greater good, I ask you for your help once again, but I will decrease the burden by asking many others. Thank you. Wandrative (talk) 17:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator, and, I am afraid, I will not be able to help this time.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See

Thank you, but this should probably go to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:20, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, I have just restored and moved to draft an article you deleted in 2014. We have an editor who asserts that the subject now meets the criteria he didn't meet in 2014 and who wants to improve the article. Hope that's OK with you. ϢereSpielChequers 13:50, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it is ok with me.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:52, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just fyi I'm on mobile and accidentally sausage-fingered the rollback button on one of your edits. I've self-reverted but just wanted to let you know it was unintentional. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:17, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, tnx for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For your service in an often thankless job. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:29, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have clearly done a lot of good work for the project for a long time. Something here does not make sense. Hope to see you fully participating again soon! Edison (talk) 02:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was very surprised to read the news in the Admin newsletter. I read the request on BN so I guess you have your reasons. I personally hope you'll ask for them back in the not too distant future. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:53, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Good call. I take mop-breaks from time to time, it restores equilibrium. I look forward to welcoming you back at the coalface when you feel ready. Guy (Help!) 10:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Come back to the corps soon! Alex Shih (talk) 10:35, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(+1)--~ Winged Blades^Godric 07:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all of you. I will see how things develop.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greeting Ymblanter. I recently did a quick check of several languages beside English, and the "born in Uruguay" contingent is being pushed out or back in most of them. The situation has improved nearly across the board since you chose to protect the English page for a year. I hope it's a knock-on effect! Thanks and regards Tapered (talk) 05:53, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to the board. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.149.167 (talk) 21:16, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I see that you have now been blocked for three months.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed your statement as a clerk action because it contained unevidenced accusations about another editor. If you have evidence, either post it there now or, if it is not suitable to be aired in public, email it to the committee. GoldenRing (talk) 09:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "unevidenced"? @Gatoclass: presented sufficient evidence, and it is perfectly up to me to agree with their conclusions. (And, well, when a case was filed about me and users were posting statements solely consisting of bad faith assumptions nobody hurried off to remove these statements - they are still on the page). However, I do not think I will spend more time on this. If the case gets accepted in part of Fram's behavior, I will present more evidence.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:57, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For completing over 100 reviews during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping out at New Page Patrol! There is still work to do to meet our long term goals, so I hope you will continue your great work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 03:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Worm Gear
		For maintaining a streak of at least 10 reviews per week during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog drive, you are awarded the worm gear. Thanks for your contributions and keep up the good work! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 03:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply ]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

your resignation from a couple of weeks ago. :-( Thanks for what you have done around the place. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:59, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also just saw and have unfortunately been less active recently, which is not to say I mightn't have missed that particular ANI discussion in any case. I have long held you to be one of the most consistent, competent and collegial of RfPP contributors, and for this reason trust your judgement extremely. I have not looked at the discussion or who contributed to it, and so feel at liberty to refer to the phrase "drag you to their level and beat you with experience", which I think often happens around here. I have no idea if it applies, but there is a definite lack of collegial behaviour at times, and there is a clear snowball effect if editors others feel are capable of a collegial standard resign because there is a lack of it. (I hope that sentence was readable.) At the same time, I wish to place no burden on your shoulders. Any contribution as significant as yours is something for us to be thankful for, and your path is yours to choose. But I hope we'll be seeing more of each other - here or wherever. Samsara 22:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am around, though I am not sure what I want to do with the flag.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the little article I put up tonight. Ellin Beltz (talk) 08:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I was actually surprised you are not autopatrolled and now nominated you for this flag.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I uhh... noticed your edit summary here... is everything okay? I mean, obviously I'm... you know... supposed to tell you that you shouldn't do that per Wikipedia's

User talk:PhilipTerryGraham#Lim Hyojun. Still no reaction, no apologies, nothing. Like if it is perfectly ok.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have included the sources in the Wikipedia page. I see you have an elementary level of Italian, so I think you can read them, right? --Emanuele676 (talk) 16:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can read Italian no problem, but I do not see your edit whoch includes new references. The references in the edit I reverted did not mention terrorism.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This --Emanuele676 (talk) 18:46, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did check the references before reverting.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You write "but I do not see your edit whoch includes new references" but in that edit I added new references --Emanuele676 (talk) 23:00, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You made two edits which were identical. I checked first of them, and two of the references did not mention terrorism, and the third one mentioned "possibly terrorism" as an opinion of an involved politician.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:41, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There must be a misunderstanding. Look better, the two edits are different, I've been saying it since yesterday. --Emanuele676 (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this one does the job assuming this is a reliable source (it is difficult to me to judge, but it looks like one).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:35, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, " attentato terroristico di matrice neofascista", but also, https://www.valigiablu.it/macerata-terrorismo "A Macerata è stato terrorismo e dobbiamo dirlo", https://www.agenziagiornalisticaopinione.it/lancio-dagenzia/liberi-uguali-del-trentino-macerata-atto-terrorismo-politico-matrice-fascista-categorica-condanna/ "LIBERI E UGUALI DEL TRENTINO * MACERATA: “ATTO DI TERRORISMO POLITICO E DI MATRICE FASCISTA, CATEGORICA CONDANNA”, https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2018/02/09/macerata-vauro-traini-attentato-in-stile-fascista-la-responsabilita-politica-e-trasversale-non-solo-di-salvini/4149096/ and https://ilmanifesto.it/terrore-a-macerata-caccia-al-nero-al-grido-di-viva-litalia/ "questo attentato terroristico in puro stile neofascista" and http://thevision.com/attualita/macerata-terrorismo/"PERCHÉ QUELLO DI MACERATA NON È L’ATTO DI UN FOLLE MA TERRORISMO" --Emanuele676 (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I edited this page to fix a comma splice and you reverted my edit to make it again a comma splice. Please don't do that. It's incorrect grammar and has no place on Wikipedia. Person man345 (talk) 09:53, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also I see that in fixing a comma splice I broke a link. I have fixed that error as well. My apologies for that error. Person man345 (talk) 09:55, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. I saw indeed that you have broken the link, and otherwise I did not understand what you wanted to do.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:01, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

it's about an article and an IP you blocked. I smell shenanigans. I've started an afd. Doug Weller talk 12:16, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller:, the Ip is certainly our Ezidi vandal friend, Gani zanyar I am less sure but quite possible.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the AfD as well, one editor created the original research I took to NORN, then we have IP edits, then another account yesterday and a third today, with the original editor still very active elsewhere but having walked away from his original edit. Doug Weller talk 12:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May be an SPI would be in order. I somehow recollect one of the Yezidi editors might have been there, but I would not know how to find it.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:36, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you undue Body-Head's edit on the Wagner Group here [6]? I'm at my 3 revert limit. His edit is going against both the source and what we agreed. The source says Sudan, not South Sudan, and per talk page compromise consensus there should be no linking. The last few days anonymous IP's and this rarely used editor account (possibly same person) have been constantly making this edit without an edit summary and ignoring my messages in the edit summary. Thanks in advance! EkoGraf (talk) 11:38, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting is not a proper way of doing it. There must be a discussion opened at the talk page, and if they do not participate one needs to seek administrative intervention.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried directing them to the talk page but received not one word of a reply. They have not even provided a reasoning for the change. EkoGraf (talk) 12:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then ANI is the next stop.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I guess their talk page first.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, you said that "English is not a nationality". FYI, Wikipedia:Nationality of people from the United Kingdom says that either English or British can be used as appropriate. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the page you refer to says "For sportspeople, their nationality is usually described by the national team that they qualify to represent ...", which makes British the only possible term to be used in the lede. After reverting, I realized that minutes before me a drive by IP changed British to English, explicitly against

WP:MOS--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Looks like it's been changed back to British anyway. Which I guess seems reasonable as he competes for Great Britain. But some sportspeople break that rule e.g. Andy Murray. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Murray probably needs to be changed to British. The only exception I can think of are sportspeople competing mainly for the teams of England, Scotland etc (foorball, rugby, and some other sports).--Ymblanter (talk) 15:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. We have a problematic template reflecting some nationalist bias:

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 08:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, sir. Slavic Studies buff (talk) 09:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been meaning to contact you since I got the newsletter. I dont think we communicated directly. But seeing your post/request for de-sysop at crat noticeboard was sad. I hope you still stay on wikipedia, and someday become a sysop again. See you around. —usernamekiran(talk) 03:46, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, so far I am around.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:10, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to this section of the ANI noticeboard, regarding TheOldJacobite's behavior. Thank you. BattleshipMan (talk) 19:56, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I can not recollect I could have any relation whatsoever to this incident.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:59, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the links on it and his contributions and you'll see how he has been behavior disruptively. BattleshipMan (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do not need support very often. I needed support on 18 January, I did not get any. I needed support today, I did not get any. This is not the place I wish to donate much of my time any more.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ymblanter. Just wanted to check in. I did not mean to be dismissive of your report at ANI, and I'm sorry if you felt that way. I was genuinely trying to be supportive and felt that your report should be taken seriously. But as you know, it's hard to do *anything* against a highly established "power user" such as Lugnuts, without a very strong case. I wish it wasn't so, and share your frustration.

It's clear that you feel antagonized and discredited on Wikipedia. I'm not entirely sure why that is, but I can relate. I've been there. I've been attacked and degraded by fellow administrators for incompetence even though I was sure that policy was objectively on my side. It didn't matter, because people don't want to listen when they're defending "power users". The rules are different when you go up against editors like...well, I won't name names, but you know. People are not going to listen to you by default, as they otherwise normally would; they're going to be protective by default, regardless of how "right" you are. I was not trying to be one of those people at ANI, I was just trying to be realistic. This doesn't mean we're powerless against these users, just that we have to play by that different set of rules, build a stronger case, or even just steer clear and bide our time sometimes.

I know it's really discouraging when you try to stand up to someone who you feel is committing an injustice, and you get burned yourself, for no other reason than that you're standing up to someone who's highly established. But it doesn't mean you should give up. You're allowed to move on. Forget about the drama you've become embroiled in recently. You're still a respected administrator and member of the community. Contrary to your own view, you still retain the community's confidence. You have not committed any offenses that have tarnished your reputation. AFAIK, you have not committed any offenses at all. Step back, for a few days, or a few weeks, or a few months, if that's what you need. Your desire to edit will return eventually. But whatever you do, don't let any of this petty shit destroy your confidence as an administrator, or as a member of the community. You have an open position as a community leader waiting for you. You should take it back. Take as much time as you need to cool off, then go ask for your mop back. You still have plenty to contribute and plenty of support.

Lastly, I don't know if you are experiencing issues IRL that are contributing to your stress on-wiki. Either way, I've been there too, and I wish you all the best in that regard.

Hope to continue seeing you around.

Best regards, Swarm ♠ 21:44, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I'm still willing to assist with the situation with Lugnuts. The diffs you've provided are still not okay and you were not in the wrong to make the report. You gave up the moral high ground by walking away, but that does not mean that you cannot pursue this again later. Come with more diffs, make your case again, and you will not be dismissed. It may be difficult to secure a block without a very strong case, but we will still try to help resolve the situation. Please free to contact me on or off-wiki at any time. Swarm ♠ 22:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and also Ad Orientem for support and advice. I feel however that the whole discussion misses the point. The goal of my life is not to get this user blocked. I could and probably still can spend several hours to retrieve a dozen of occasions they personally attacked me on. I could probably spend a couple of days and wading through their 800000 edits find more diffs showing how they attacked other users. However, this is not my priority. My time is expensive and has to be taken away from my job and my family, I do not have so much left, and I do not feel this would be a good investment of my time. If we go back to the case, this one was a perfectly valid good faith edit. Yes, I could have also checked categories. I probably could have also spent several days and considerably improved the article, since the sources are likely to be predominantly in Russian, which happens to be my mothertongue. But I did not, for a variety of reasons, and no policy mandates me to do this. (I would most likely remove the category if I noticed it, but I did not notice it). This was a bad faith assumption and a personal attack. May be it was a mild personal attack. By itself it would not be blockable. Well, in several months prior to this edit the user was dragged to ANI twice for personally attacking me, and got two pretty strongly worded warning. This makes it harassment. May be this is still not blockable, this is fine with me. However, it is definitely, absolutely not ok to leave such edit summaries as a response to a good faith edits. The user came to the ANI thread claiming they do not understand what it is about. Then, if they genuinely do not understand, someone should have taken the trouble to explain them what it was about. If the whole situation was not enough for the block, if a third warning was needed - fine with me. But someone should have gone to their talk page (or even ping them in the ANI thread) and say that this is not ok. Exactly zero users, included zero administrators, did this. Instead, there were two mainstream opinions: (i) I deserved this; (ii) I should be trouted for wasting the community time for such a minor offense. Well, this is actually the major thing. I do not see why I should continue getting such edit summaries as a response for good faith edits. I do not see why I should be subject of harassment, even if this is mild harassment. I did consider getting back and continuing editing the articles without touching Wikipedia name space at all - however, every time I recollect this episode I am not really willing to do it. May be after some time I will find a way to convince myself that I can still do smth useful without being attacked by a bunch of users whom I have no respect of, or that I can disregard these attacks - but clearly not for now.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:18, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care if the guy created 40,000 sports pages, every time he gets a chance he says the nastiest untrue BS about me he can. I'd put together diffs, but it would be a waste of time for he is untouchable. No Admin has the spine to put up with the abuse a block would likely generate. I feel your pain. Perhaps we need to assemble diffs of attacks against multiple users? Legacypac (talk) 00:33, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to get your input on something. The names of all the Moscow train stations have been bugging me for a while. Take

Was considering just doing a straight move, but wanted to get your thoughts as to whether this would be something to take to a move discussion or if this is non-controversial enough to just move. I’ll do the work. Just wanted an expert opinion. Thanks. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 10:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw you took yourself out of circulation. Sorry to hear. Good luck. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 11:39, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

... in follow-up to this now-closed AN/I thread, that while I can't speak for the community, I take you seriously, and I'm sorry you've retired. I don't know the details behind your decision to leave—I can barely stand to log in here anymore myself—but I do know that you have a long track record of strong work as an editor and admin, and you deserved better treatment than you received in that thread. I completely understand the need to unplug from this site, but I hope that you decide to return at some point. Take care. MastCell ^Talk 00:45, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I detailed the last episode in my above response. I do not think anything can be done about it, but for the time being my motivation to do anything useful in this project is fully suppressed by my aversion to personal attacks and harassment I was subject on a regular basis. Apparently, some users, including some administrators, just do not remember anymore why we are here.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:18, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand. Best wishes. MastCell ^Talk 20:41, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you reconsider, you are a strong editor/admin and have provided really good service to this project. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:22, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. At this point, it looks like I will return to active editing but not tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:27, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you back and thank you for reviewing Outline of Kyoto in less than four minutes. This is the fastest I've ever seen! Cote d'Azur (talk) 08:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(moved from the archive)

Hi Yaroslav! Why did you delete the entire image galleries in the articles about Gdov and Izborsk? I have read the WP:GALLERY rule that you cited and found no prohibition to insert galleries, especially within the articles dedicated to the noticeable historical sites.

An example of a gallery within English wiki is here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travem%C3%BCnde , is anything wrong here as well?

Brandmajor (talk) 15:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Brandmajor[reply]

WP:GALLERY says " However, the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images". I do not see how this exemption applies to Gdov, Izborsk, or, for this matter, Travemuende - I would say the gallery there is not appropriate either.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I admit the amount of images in the original galleries of Gdov and Izborsk were somewhat excessive and their content overlapped, what is not in line with Wiki policies, but wiping them away completely was another irrelevant extreme, IMO. Brandmajor (talk) 09:14, 13 March 2018 (UTC)Brandmajor[reply]

Well, if landmarks are noticeable they are probably encyclopedically notable, and articles can be written about them. It is enough to illustrate this aspect of the article by one or two photos, and I do not see why we need dozens of them. If the photos can not fit without creating a gallery they probably should not be there. Another option would be of course expanding the article (using

reliable sources), one can fit more photos into a longer article.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Brandmajor (talk) 11:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)Brandmajor[reply]

First, I do not think it is common practice, I have seen quite a few galleries removed per

Wikipedia:Village Pump (policy).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

You may look at a number of town-dedicated articles and learn that a certain share of them does have either a gallery or multiple images. This is practice. The main thing however are rules, they do not prohibit galleries and make and good example to follow that I quoted above. I will follow the rules when adding galleries to articles, and if they get wiped causing a conflict of edits, I will bring that up to arbitration. Yet still I believe in a reasonable compromise between contributors, even though having different opinions. Best regards, Brandmajor (talk) 06:49, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Brandmajor[reply]

I am sorry but your argument is

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Pls seek consensus of the community before making such drastic changes.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:59, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Yes, as I said above I do revert to a widely-accepted precedent of having galleries for towns, as this stuff "...exists according to consensus or Policies and guidelines" (as per

WP:BOLD but not reckless, so arranging a few pictures in a gallery line instead of column is not something drastic, disruptive or insulting that a contributor may be punished for. Regards, Brandmajor (talk) 15:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Brandmajor[reply

]

It is up to you of course if you want to start edit-warring. Some of your edits clearly demonstrate insufficient understanding of Wikipedia policies, which means you will just likely get blocked for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:25, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With all respect to your experience and contribution to the project, please

WP:POINT Brandmajor (talk) 11:08, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Brandmajor[reply

]

If you believe that I disrupted Wikipedia to illustrate the point you should open an ANI topic against me. This is a pretty serious accusation, and you can not just have it flying without having substantiated it. If the accusation is correct (and I obviously believe it is not) I should not be editing Wikipedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Haidamatske redirets to Arbuzynka, but Arbuzynka has nothing to do with this name. There is only one place with this name (uk:Гайдамацьке) and there's no article about it in English Wikipedia.--Dƶoxar (talk) 15:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please read Arbuzynka carefully. Haidamatske is the name under which it was founded.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:23, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I coudn't find any authoritative sources of this information (just couple of links on the web). Anyway looks like the name of the village was frequently changed and as for now there's only one Haidamatske in Ukraine. --Dƶoxar (talk) 15:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the article, since it is not at all obvious that the village is the principal meaning.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:52, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This what I found in "History of cities and villages of Ukrainian SSR" (V. 15, p. 122): Haidamatske, Moldavanske and Lytovske settlements on Arbuzynka river later merged into the single village of Harbuzynka (and this happened before 1812). So it's not correctly to say that Arbuzynka was founded as Haidamatske. But yes, this name was in use there in the late 18th century.--Dƶoxar (talk) 15:57, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arbuzynka has a reference to an encyclopedia, but you are of course welcome to improve the article adding other references and making the text more precise.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you have reverted back the edits to

To start with, it was I who created all these articles. I did not revert everything but I indeed reverted a couple of instances, for instance, where you removed a link. Concerning the image, it is an unfree image and can not be used in the articles (well, it can be used as a fair use, but I can not thing of a fair use rationale for this file which would cover all the metro articles).--Ymblanter (talk) 18:19, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can we use file like

talk) 02:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I believe it is above the TOO, and will be deleted from Commons at some point, but as soon it has not been deleted we can probably use it.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okkiess Y -

talk) 11:54, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Precious five years!

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:23, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, while editing

We need an article on this reform, but writing it (and even searching for literature) would be quite some work. In the meanwhile, I created a redirect to History of the administrative division of Russia.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте, а не могли бы вы снять защиту со статьи, там один из местных админов явно перестарался... --A.Savin (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Добрый день. Нет, у меня сейчас нет флага (я могу пойти его получить обратно, но пока не очень хочу это делать).--Ymblanter (talk) 13:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind the fact that wheel-warring is strongly discouraged... Primefac (talk) 13:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

I actually did not look at the article, just mentioned that I do not have an admin flag. Would it be helpful if I do?--Ymblanter (talk) 13:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, the issue has been resolved. Thanks for the offer though. Primefac (talk) 13:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:35, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Back in 2013, you deleted an article about Chris Nichols as the result of an AfD. Assuming this is about the columnist, I have several reliable third-party sources about him including a feature in

Sorry, you can disregard this. I see you handed in your bit back in January. I'll ask over at REFUND. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 02:52, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте.
У меня возник конфликт с одним участником в английской вики вокруг серии статей, посвящённых славянской мифологии. Проблема в том, что моя активность в англовики скорее символическая, поскольку я плохо знаю английский и ограничиваюсь мелкими правками. Я спросил на русской вики, кто бы мог мне помочь, и мне дали ссылку на вас. Если я не по адресу - прошу простить за беспокойство.
В общем, суть вот в чём - участник

Тогда я создал новый шаблон Славянская мифология и стал возвращать его обратно в статьи. Однако, я не уверен в безопасности своего шаблона, поскольку Экхардт стал перетаскивать некоторые разделы в свой шаблон (например, Славянские герои). Также, я смущён тем, что прежний шаблон явно сильно ангажирован в сторону неоязычества, поскольку новодел в нём приравнивается к оригиналу под красивым названием "Славянская религия".

Кроме того, я попытался отредактировать статью

Обращаюсь к Вам с просьбой обратить внимание на эту проблему. Всё же вики претендует на изложение проверенных, научных фактов, а не фантазий современных язычников. В англовики мало тех, кто мало-мальски разбирается в данной теме, поэтому с появлением более-менее подкованного, но ангажированного участника произошёл сильный крен в сторону неоязычества. Gardariki (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

К сожалению, в данный момент я вряд ли смогу Вам чем-либо помочь. Единственный способ как-то тут продвинуться - обсуждать каждую страницы отдельно (на её странице обсуждения).--Ymblanter (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you have rudely accused me of block evasion based on my number of edits, you must tell me where I can see how many edits a user has ;) wikitigresito (talk) 06:01, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have a gadget installed which shows the number of edits if one goes to a user page or a user talk page. (I have several gadgets, and I would not be able to see which one shows this information, it is probably easier to search). However, you can access the number of edits if you go to the user's contribution page and click below on "Edit count".--Ymblanter (talk) 06:20, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) This was indeed block evasion. I have blocked the account accordingly. Alex Shih (talk) 06:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tnx. As I argued, this behavior is not very common for users in good standing.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:30, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I meant

WP:SCRUTINY. Alex Shih (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

That's fine.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:40, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	please I want to edit a page and make some changes that i think is deleted now.the page was on momentum integral equation.Please tell me how can I republish article Kartika2607 (talk) 17:31, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The question is too general, I can not answer it without knowing what article it was and why it was deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:21, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Reviewer's Bronze Award
		For over 1000 new page reviews in the last year, thank you very much for your help at New Pages Patrol! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:15, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:33, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My answer to your question:

It is not likely that a reader enters Sulm (Germany) in the search box, if he or she is looking for something called Sulm that is not the German river. I even doubt that anyone looking for the river itself will enter the Sulm (Germany). Instead, I think that any reader would simply enter Sulm.

Thus, the page Sulm (Germany) is accessed always via Sulm and therefore does not need the hatnote. See also Template:Other_uses#When_not_to_use_this_template, which is more or less the same argument. I will therefore revert your reversion again in some days—except if you argue against me, of course.

--Cyfal (talk) 20:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that your explanation is correct. I believe the majority of users come to this page via search engines, and might profit from having a hatnote. (Well, this is actually why hatnotes exist). This is different from Paris, Virginia vs Paris, France.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think my explanation above more or less also holds for search engines: Entering Sulm in a search engine will presumably lead you to Sulm, not to Sulm (Germany). The reason why hatnotes exist is not so much for search engines, but instead for such cases were, e.g., the user is looking for the Peter Gabriel's album US and therefore enters us in the wikipedia search box.

Anyway, I will leave the article now as it is, after your revert i.e. with the hatnote, because the hatnote does no harm except for—in my opinion—a little astonishment why it is displayed.

--Cyfal (talk) 19:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks. For the record, Google search I used yesterday (Netherlands, English interface) brings me to Sulm (Germany) as the first hit if I search for Sulm.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Hi. Please reuptake your admin tools again, as soon as you possibly can. The entirety of the project will certainly benefit from it. Seriously though. Please. It's nothing but a waste to have you comment at ANI, without the ability to action these decisions. Please, don't abandon the governance from which this project benefits! Swarm ♠ 07:23, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I will likely need more time, though now I definitely feel better than in February.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:26, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have to echo Swarm's comment. Your close of the Jweiss11/BHG thread was sensible and well reasoned. Blackmane (talk) 13:55, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:33, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you revoked my change to remove the article on the Swedish sniper. I find the main focus of the article to be creditable, depicting a Swedish man fighting for Ukraine, I have one gripe about the piece. The discription that fighters such as Jews, Arabs, and Muslims are allowed in the regiment. I, for one can tell you this is not true. Azov has a tough stance on who it allows to join in its group. Though outside Europeans and Americans with European herritage are allowed, Jews and Arab are explicitly not allowed. To include this would not be portraying Azov in a truthful light and I hope that you look into it further and agree with me. Here is the article in question. Edit 1: Moved my entry down. I assume it is correct etiqute?

https://www.dailysignal.com/2015/08/10/meet-the-former-neo-nazi-spokesman-who-now-fights-for-freedom-in-ukraine/

- Thanks.

Barnyardo (talk) 07:39, 9 May 2018 (UTC)barnyardo[reply]

The correct way would be to open the discussion at the talk page. You might very well be right (though it would be nice to support your claim by reliable sources), but edit summaries is not the best mode to discuss the issue.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I had written about the past of uri and the demographics What is wrong in the information I had written Please tell Haiderhhabib (talk) 05:27, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was taken from elsewhere in the web and thus was a copyright violation. We can not publish copyright violations.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Privet Ymblanter. Do you know how I can delete a sandbox subpage? This one, for example? Thanks! - LouisAragon (talk) 16:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just add {{Db-g7}}--Ymblanter (talk) 16:56, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)  Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:59, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Ymblanter. 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) 01:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This might be another return of LTA Satt 2. A brand new account, he made all his edits on Georgia-related articles. All edits so far are typical of Satt 2 (desperate about making Georgia/Georgians "European", marginalizing other ethnicities/nationalities in favor of Georgians, etc.).[11]
You have many of Satt 2's articles on your watchlist, so I thought I should let you know. We should probably let him

Yeah, this is exactly what I mean.[12]-[13] - LouisAragon (talk) 17:47, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks indeed like a sock.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:52, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Opened the SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Satt 2, though 3RRN might be faster.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Worth keeping an eye on.[14] New account, matches the general behavior of the sockmaster to a certain good degree.; 1) Added information about a monastery in Greece, 2) changed "Northern Iran" to "northern edges of Iran", 3) changed "Empire of Trebizond" to "its allied Eastern Roman Empire", 4) changed "Christian East" to modern-day "European Southern Russia"). - LouisAragon (talk) 23:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, its definitely him.[15]-[16]. Here's the SPI.[17] - LouisAragon (talk) 23:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that when assigning categories one ought to use the most specific. For Teodora Enache, the more specific category is "Romanian jazz musicians", not "Female jazz singers". The latter category, moreover, is empty. Most female jazz singers are sorted by nationality. See [18]
Vmavanti (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we need to have both. She is both Romanian and female. It might be that we have enough articles to create Category:Romanian female jazz singers (honestly, I did not check), but as soon as this category has not yet been created she must be in both categories.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oranges Juicy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I told this user numerous times to stop harassing me on my talk, and yet he keeps ignoring it.[19]-[20]-[21]-[22]-[23] Even when another user reverted him,[24] he simply re-instated it again.[25]. He has a history of edit-warring on articles, and now he's edit-warring on my talk page. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I am not an admin, there is very little I can do. This sounds like an ANI topic.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:02, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - LouisAragon (talk) 19:04, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edits are not vandalism by Wikipedia rules - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism I supplement the articles with up-to-date information, according to the rule "edit boldly" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold I do not delete information in articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Алан10 (talk • contribs) 11:26, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you get four warnings from four different users within a day, this is a very strong signal that what you are doing is not ok.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am having a very CIVIL discussion at

I do have the right to remove disputable content per BRD, but I have NOT done so. NOW I have even merely hidden it in the interim in good faith for a discussion and not a war. It is not very

This is not good-faith eiting. Removing sourced material, and especially removing reliable sources as if they do not exist os vandalism. I opened an ANI topic and will formally notify you in a second.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:01, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have not been uncivil, I have accommodated and KEPT content, I have requested you to use the discussion page which you have not done, you accused me per NPA, not apoligized, not discussed and gone to the admins? Why cant you discuss and seek consensus.

I have maintained the content, kept the sources (hidden in the interim) yet you cannot seem to even bother to see seek consensus on disputed stuff. Only you have a right? No one else can dispute your hegemony?. Why the ego? Nothing is running away? Lihaas (talk) 06:03, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why I need to seek consensus with you that BBC is a reliable source - but let us discuss it in one place, which should be either a talk page of the article or ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The

discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here

.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Francois (talk) 17:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe other POV pushers left this alert on my talk page before, but your attitude is indeed clear. Thanks for letting us know.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you've been warned. Don't push 'your' (=US) POV any longer. I don't think I will lose more time continuing this discussion with you. Ciao. Francois (talk) 18:12, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For personal reasons I haven't been as active recently as I would like to be, so it took me a while to notice your deamdin request. I personally think you shouldn't have taken the "signs" so close to heart (not without a thread specifically dedicated to the subject of your behavior, at least), but for what it's worth, I wanted you to know that should you decide to go through an RfA again (whenever that might be), you'll have my full support. We all make mistakes (gods be my witness, I've made my share), but as the other person commented, if admins quit every time a mistake is made, or someone didn't like an admin's actions, we'd run out of admin awful quick. (I thought of sending you an email, but on second thought I want this comment to be public). Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 5, 2018; 19:18 (UTC)

Thank you, I will definitely have that in mind. For the time being, I am still unsure what I will do in the long run, and contacting with certain individuals still makes me physically sick. I am however around working on the articles without a mop.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:23, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. If you need anything, mop-wise or otherwise, please don't hesitate to ping/message/email. I may not be around much, but I do monitor my messages and can always spare a few minutes to show up to help.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 5, 2018; 19:28 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Much appreciated.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City_of_regional_significance_(Ukraine)&oldid=prev&diff=844943446

Return please new the name in other format. --Bohdan Bondar (talk) 07:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your kickback turns the English Wikipedia into Wikipedia with obsolete and ancient information. Your kickback breaks a neutrality. It is possible to write names from positions of separastist and from positions of authorities of Ukraine. - and it will be ideal Aglichane option have the right for full information And now information ONLY from positions of separatists. What does the English Wikipedia by absolutely unreliable source of information

Sorry, I am not going to respond to this rant. If you are back in a normal state of mind, and want to discuss the issue constructively, you are welcome. If you are here to say that the English Wikipedia is evil and shit - there are many other platforms for it.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:52, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And, well, yeaterday I gos pretty similar shit from the other side [26]. When you guys finally understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a propaganda sheet for Russian or Ukrainian governments.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:55, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"I had some pretty bad experiences with the closures of this user in the past." Whatever you may think of me, I hope you agree that's water under the bridge. I've learned from those experiences and think they made me a better editor. No hard feelings.  Paine  16:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is fine, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:18, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, really, thank you very much. The bigger my mistake, the more I learn from it, and I do consider what happened to be a huge mistake on my part. So I owe any lesson benefit from that experience to you for helping to set me straight. Again thank you, and best of everything to you and yours!  

^put'r there  19:28, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Sure, I am happy you learned from it. Continue your good work.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:38, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Arkady Babchenko

On 11 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Arkady Babchenko, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Russian journalist Arkady Babchenko and the Security Service of Ukraine faked Babchenko's murder in order to arrest assassins who were actually planning to kill him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Arkady Babchenko. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Arkady Babchenko), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (talk) 06:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection on

Template:NFLSecondaryColor

Hi. I saw that you had set the move protection level of

Template:NFLSecondaryColor to require administrator priveledges. Would you be willing to downgrade it to require template editor? Thanks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I am not admin and will not be able to help here. Sorry.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Review page

Hello, can you review this page please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Darbos ? (BLP sources) Thank you. Advim (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see why this person is notable. As fas as I am concerned the article should go to AfD.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Bordy

Hi Ymblanter, thank you for so promptly reviewing Maria Bordy...much appreciated! Jamesmcardle^(talk) 08:18, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks for creating. I am still unsure about her bio though, for example, did she return to Soviet Union or stayed in the US. I tried to search in English and could not find anything; may be I should try searching in Russian.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find a date of death for her nor any information after about 1980 (dates on her pictures in the UN archive). There is a CIA document circumstantially linking a person with her name to a 'communist spy'(the memo date is 1967, but reporting on McCarthy era investigations), but its hard to verify and since I am not sure if Bordy is still alive (she'd be 100), I hesitate to refer to it in the article. I neither speak nor read Russian and my attempts at searches via Google Translate yield nothing helpful. I see that you have Russian...if you have time, might you be able to do a search? Best regards, Jamesmcardle^(talk) 08:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to search nut could only find two relevant hits both mentioning her name in relation to the photograph. It confirms the spelling, but she still could change her name or whatever.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a name change will have put a spanner in the works! Is 'Bordy' a Russian name in the first place, I wonder? Thank you for trying...I'll keep at it. Cheers, Jamesmcardle^(talk) 08:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not a Russian name (and I had difficulties figuring out the reverse spelling), but it is likely a Jewish name anyway, and she also could have simplified the spelling while at the US.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that's helpful. I'll delve a bit more into the names connected with her in the CIA document which may shed some light.Jamesmcardle^(talk) 08:52, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let me know if you need any help with Russian translations or smth like this.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:54, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - I appreciate your offer and feel lucky that you were the reviewer of the article!--Jamesmcardle^(talk) 08:56, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My recent edit reverted?

Hi Ymblanter. Forgive me asking but my edit at 'Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation did not change and information, just arranged the words to reflect the title of the article. Why do you think the previous version - with the same words , information and meaning but not starting with the article title - was better? Birtig (talk) 20:07, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The texts in the Crimean articles, and particularly in the ledes, are a result of consensus which was difficult and painful to achieve. Even changing a single word can (and typically does) cause a lot of turbulence. It is therefore not sdvisable to change anythi ng in these ledes without discussing at talk pages first.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

re: that there is very little I can do about it

There is.. see

WP:RESYSOPS.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 20:19, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Well, I believe arbitrarily blocking users whom I suspect could be socks does not belong to the authority of an admin. (Though this one was obviously disruptive, but I was already involved with them when it became clear).--Ymblanter (talk) 20:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmadiyya Jabrayilov

Why would {{hoax}} apply? Sam Sailor 08:46, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the consensus of the discussion (at the talk page and at the AfD) was that this is a hoax made by the Azerbaijani propaganda. Opinions differ as to which extent this is a hoax (for example. whether a real person with this name existed, if he existed whether he participated in WWII etc), but the fact is that there are no non-Azerbaijani sources (or sources which are not derivative) about the person. AfD decided it might be notable because sources exist, but it is still a hoax, and I do not think anybody actually disputes this.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, forgot all about this until I saw your name a minute ago. I trust your judgement in the above matter. Sam Sailor 18:31, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bencemagyar

Hello Ymblanter, I saw your comment. Can you say more about how this editor could be evading a block? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:16, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston:, per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Satt 2 they are (likely) a sock of a blocked user.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:20, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Studiawschodnie has been blocked here, but is now also globally blocked (I do not know why).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:21, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead with a block of Bencemagyar and left my reasoning in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Satt 2. EdJohnston (talk) 16:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:21, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet author Hi. I was wondering if you could help me figure out something:

P. Perminov, “Tri epizoda iz istorii russko-arabskikh sviazei v XVIII veke. Epizod vtoroi: vziatie Beiruta,” Aziia i Afrika segodnia 8 (1987): 56–58

An editor told me here that the "P." most probably stands for Petr. Can you confirm this? It's been brought up at FAC and is probably the only thing left to deal with. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 22:45, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely this is this guy, and then he is Pyotr; however, I was not able fo find the article itself and check the affiliations etc.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LTA

I say let's leave their edit stand until they are blocked, they probably wouldn't like that :P - FlightTime (open channel) 15:51, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is LTA attacking me across all Wikimedia projects daily over a month; they managed to find a project where I have no admin flag. I do not particularly care about my talk page, but I think we must revert vandalism in the articles. I left a request for global lock some time ago; this is already the second account of this vandal today.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:54, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The username is a personal insult (to me) anyway; I hope you excuse me for changing the section title.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter, but it's his third account of the yesterday, second is Finka Konto (which not harassed you). M t | c 06:16, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is very much possible, I obviously only learn of their existence if they edit Russian Wikivoyage or if they edit my talk pages in any project.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

talk pages

A user is permitted to blank their talk pages, you should not reinstate material.Slatersteven (talk) 16:02, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They were introducing disruptive material (mainly sweared in Russian), and they are not allowed to have this anywhere. Having said that, I think I missed the target a couple of times.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lebyazhye District

Hello Update the title of the article.--Bohdan Bondar (talk) 10:08, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For completing over 100 reviews during the 2018 June Backlog Drive, please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping out at New Page Patrol and keep up the good work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 01:57, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:45, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yuri Anikeev

Good Day Please change the name of the article Iurii Anikieiev Arguments:

The decision of the sports court to destroy the disqualification for 2018 (radiosvoboda site) and sports list for 2013 worldcupdraughts.com official sports competition sites use Iurii Anikieiev

http://wmg13.sportresult.com/NH/en/-60/Participant/ParticipantInfo/8986ad13-1883-460d-85c6-b872fb5b638b http://archive.fmjd.org/wk2007/Programma/Graphs15-NL.htm https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1024345/ukraine-and-russia-share-draughts-titles-at-world-mind-games http://news.sportaccord.com/en/World-Draughts-Players-List-127.html?nc=24&e=S2VpclJhZG5lZGdlQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D Yuri Anikeev use only Internet forums and non-authoritative unofficial sites. Such sites for writing Wikipedia articles are not used. Yuri Anikeev only place in the wikidata--Bohdan Bondar (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pls file a

RM--Ymblanter (talk) 19:38, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Merger discussion for

Guards Tape

Guards Tape—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. TheImperios (talk) 19:35, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Donetsian Governorate

Hello! What's wrong? — Ιγκόρ (talk) 12:29, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, it needs to be discussed. Second, I do not see any arguments at all why it should be Donetsian and not Donets. We have Tver Governorate and not Tverian Governorate, for example. The sources do not mention this name either.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:31, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In your example the governorate was named after a city. In this case, it was named after a river/region. For example, there is a political entity called the Autonomous Dniestrian Territory. The word Donets is more appropriate when we are talking about the river. — Ιγκόρ (talk) 13:06, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you insist, you should open a requested move. I do not see how it is more appropriate. And half a year ago you obviously had a different opinion, when you yourself moved

Donetsk Governorate to Donets Governorate.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

That was an obvious mistake; the polity could not be named after Donetsk, because the city got its current name only in 1961. This case is more tricky. The word Donets is more appropriate for the geographical entities (e.g. Donets Ridge) entities while Donetsian is more appropriate for the political ones. — Ιγκόρ (talk) 23:34, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I still believe a RM is the most appropriate venue for this kind of discussions (I guess also Podolia Governorate should be involved).--Ymblanter (talk) 05:15, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Ymblanter". Thank you. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:18, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Onel5969. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Local Route 13 (South Korea), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. Misclick. My apologies. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:00, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it happens, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:01, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your request at

WP:BN

I have restored your tools.

Please read and re=read my comments and take them to heart. Wikipedia needs good administrators, and I very much hope that your future editing will prove you to be one. --

old fashioned! 07:45, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you. I have responded at the BN.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:49, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• For what it's worth, I think the decision to restore your admin bit was the right one. You asked for it to be removed at a time of obvious distress, and I think your thought that "I do not feel I have sufficient community support to remain administrator" was made in the heat of the moment and was not correct. I think you were just in a bit of a bad spell, which happens to us all, and I don't think there was any real danger of your losing the bit at the time. We learn from these things, and I welcome you back. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, this pretty much corresponds to what I think. There are still a couple of things which became unpleasant surprises for me and I still do not understand a reason why they happened, but I will need to reflect more before taking them up and asking for advise.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  If you ever want my thoughts on anything, you're very welcome to ask. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks, I will have this in mind.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Welcome back. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:35, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  And my apologies again for that outburst in February.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CSD

Your comment on the Admin Noticeboard confused me. "The first user commented, now we can not Csd it." That sounds more like the situation for a PROD, comments are no bar to adding or re-adding a SPEEDY nomination. Rmhermen (talk) 16:39, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rmhermen: What I meant that it is not nice to delete the nomination page when people already started commenting. I indeed found a different solution, since the user who converted the article to a redirect agreed to convert it back to the article and wait until the nomination is closed. It is probably not on the policies (I would need to check though) but I guess if a user in a good standing comments on a AfD nomination they would be disappointed if the nomination just gets deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:43, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Axxxion

Hello, Ymblanter. Recently,

Moskovskiy Komsomolets

. Can you restore the previous name based on the consensus?

There is clear evidence that the newspaper uses "Moskovskij Komsomolets" as its name for decades (2002 frontpage, 2010 frontpage, 2018 frontpage). In other words, it's quite a common name now (

Russian Rocky (talk) 22:08, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I am off to sleep now, will try to check tomorrow what is going on, but it would help if you could indicate where consensus has been established. I do not see anything at the talk page. If not, possibly opening a RM would be the best way.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:13, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note. I fail to see why a Latin script transliteration of their title printed on their front page (probably for distribution in Germany) proves that this is a common English-language name.Axxxion (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May I please suggest that we move the page back to the title which it had a couple of days ago and open a RM? Would it be acceptable for both of you? Note also that

Moskovsky Komsomolets (not that I am advocating using it, we need to research whether the English-languge reliable sources use one of the names consistently).--Ymblanter (talk) 05:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I agree with your suggestion, Ymblanter. Could you transfer or copy

Russian Rocky (talk) 18:55, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I would prefer not to do it myself, but you can easily do it as well. (I am almost on holidays, but will be happy to help if I can, do not expect a quick reaction though).--Ymblanter (talk) 18:59, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll try to do it myself today. It seems it would be hard to keep a conversation with Axxxion. (due to his behavior). --

Russian Rocky (talk) 19:10, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:11, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties of the Iraq War

The version of the article

talk) 17:58, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I will have a look and come back. Normally, this should not matter anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is 9 July, but I will post at the talk page now anyway. Let us continue there.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:05, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Return of access levels arbitration clarification request closed

The Return of access levels arbitration clarification request has been closed. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:57, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notification.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	You deserve this barnstar for your tireless contribution to improve Wikimedia projects (English Wikipedia, Wikidata. . .). -- Titodutta (talk) 22:08, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Knesset

The Knesset lock on article has been declined, but User:MelanieN, put a lock on it. - User:Social Studies Rules 18:08, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am fine with her decision. I hope you did not plan edit-warring in the next 12 hours.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:14, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That’s not nice, as a matter of fact, I wasn’t if your so interested. - User:Social Studies Rules 18:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then the protection does not affect you in any way. It takes more than 12 hours to reach consensus, in particular, because editors in all time zones must have a chance to participate. In the best case scenario, it will be several days.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What’s the point of me editing if I put a straw-poll? - User:Social Studies Rules 18:39, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly what I mean. Note btw this is not really a straw poll: What matters is not how many people voted but what is the strength of their arguments.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:40, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm TomCat4680. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, 2018 Toronto shooting, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

TomCat4680 (talk) 21:02, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why, but I am going to sleep now anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:06, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Knesset-continued

I have some proof that you will find satisfying, Isaac Herzog’s replacement was Robert Tiviaev, Number 57 said that’s his replacement, but I did a lot of researching today and found these articles which I would like you to read, [27] [28] [29], and I found out that Isaac Herzog left parliament of 23 July 2018, and he currently has no replacement, which means the seat is vacant for now and Tzipi Livni will be the next opposition leader then there will be a vote. - Social Studies Rules (talk) 03:45, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, but I do not at all want to be involved with the content of this article. All my efforts were to direct all of you towards an acceptable solution. I personally have no opinion on how the Knesset succession works.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you fully-protect the Knesset article again though – perhaps until 1 August when the seat succession will have been finalised and the talk page discussion has had time to work itself out? Cheers, Number 57 07:39, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think at this point it is best done by another administrator. Whereas I do not think I am involved with the article, other people can think otherwise, and I am currently not in a position to afford even making an impression that I am misusing my admin flag.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:44, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I've asked someone else. Cheers, Number 57 07:47, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting Detective Pikachu

I don't see a reason why this page is protected, especially after my post. I'm just wondering the reason why you decided to protect this page.

talk) 23:24, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

There was a request at

WP:RFPP citing excessive vandalism. I checked the page history and saw indeed four IP edits within 24h which are likely vandalism. This is not excessive, but I thought the page would still benefit from three days semi-protection. That I have done it after your edit is a pure coincidence.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:30, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Ah, ok. I was freaked out because I thought what I had done was considered vandalism. Thanks for the clarification

talk) 14:42, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

No, not at all. No problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:57, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Quacgz

Quacgz (talk · contribs)

This account belongs to the same user of the other accounts that you recently just blocked. Thanks. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:F903:E4A7:99A5:39D4 (talk) 06:55, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks for reporting--Ymblanter (talk) 06:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Mimi Mondal

Ymblanter, this is just a friendly reminder that you were going to proceed regarding this nomination sometime this past week. Please respond there as soon as possible. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:59, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset: I have seen that Mary Mark Ockerbloom has done everything better than I could have ever done it, and I do not think my intervention could improve anything at this stage. My apologies for the confusion.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I'd like to suggest that you say as much on the nomination page, so potential reviewers and other participants know not to expect anything further from you, and can work directly with Mary Mark Ockerbloom. It will help the nomination progress that much quicker. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:57, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 05:20, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resysop and ORCP I did not want to post this earlier for fear others might see it as canvassing or campaigning or, worse, that it may appear as such to you and give you reason to doubt my sincerity. Now it really does not matter and I want to make sure to say this before I likely take a long break to rest.

I said during the discussion about your resysop that Wikipedia did not need admins like you. I had some impressions from before you turned in your bit but I mostly based it on what I read at the Commons discussion. There you said something like 'I could close this discussion right now' in the middle of a dispute with other editors there and it left me with a very bad impression.

Later, at ORCP, someone was making unsupportable comments about me and you chose to step in and comment on my behalf. I was very surprised, grateful, but surprised because it was not consistent with the expectation I had formed from the Commons thread of how you would behave when you encountered someone you had good cause to resent.

I was wrong. Wikipedia does need administrators like you and I am sorry. Jbh ^Talk 03:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Indeed things sometimes happen to be inconsistent with our expectations.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:06, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy dance

Welcome back tot he mop and bucket brigade! Guy (Help!) 19:19, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been inactive, so a belated welcome back from me as well! Samsara 19:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you too.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:35, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting the control register article

Hi Ymblanter, you recently semi'ed the control register article. Unfortunately, the IP continues to insert its unsourced stuff into the article after the protection was over. Could you please extend the semi-protection? Thanks and happy holidays. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 20:59, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The article is still under pending changes, even after the semi-protection has expired, and pending changes should work just fine. Please let me know if there is large amount of vandalism during a short time, then protection will be warranted.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:18, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

I am glad you have your admin powers back.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:11, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, appreciated.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:20, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nina Sosnina

Correct under the standard of English wikipedia ukrainian russian speaking During the period of the Soviet occupation, they wrote in Russian Ivanovna Now we are writing Ivanivna in the article about the Kiev Governorate you have an error in the date. This girl is from my city, so Ukrainian sources are more accurate. In our town there was a museum of this girl. It was located in school number 1 named after Nina Sosnina. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7425881 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bohdan Bondar (talk • contribs) 11:02, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As soon as you are operating with the POV term "Soviet occupation of Ukraine" I am not going to provide any assistance.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:13, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio Mermaid Reef Marine Park

Hello, I noticed you removed content from Mermaid Reef Marine Park because of copyvio. The copy-pasted content you removed is CC BY 3.0, and to my understanding is compatible with Wikipedia. Regards,  NeoGeneric 💬  11:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeoGeneric: Why do you say it is CC-BY-SA? I think the site (which seems to be the official site of the park) I mentioned saya copyright. If it is free I will of course restore it.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:31, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The official site https://parksaustralia.gov.au/ does not have any CC-BY provisions. The content I have used from this site (facts like name, area, location, management, etc) I believe is fair use and is minimal. However, I copy/pasted conservation values from https://www.environment.gov.au/copyright-statement, the material on this website is © Commonwealth of Australia and CC-BY-3.0-AU (or 4.0, depends I think).  NeoGeneric 💬  11:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thank you, I will now restore the material.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:44, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!  NeoGeneric 💬  11:49, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. My apologies for the incident.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Crimea Bridge

Can you explain further why you want to include that silly comment about the Crimea Bridge? You've even noted that it's a "sensitive" topic, which implies that you are afraid of upsetting someone on the fringes. The article is about a bridge, and one should respect the nature of the article. It's mostly an engineering and structures topic. Please resist the urge to be timorous and frightened. It's only a bridge. It's not a political movement. Santamoly (talk) 07:29, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the bridge connects Russia and Ukraine which should be reflected in the lede. I do not see how this is not important. If you do not like how this is formulated, it can be discussed further, but dismissing the whole thing seems to me completely off the mark.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:04, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and if you want to find people upset by this I am sure Wikipedia:WikiProject Ukraine has plenty of those.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you looking for people "upset by this"? Ukrainians will always be upset about something, so can we move forward instead of being dragged into these interminable Ukrainian side-issues? It's a bridge, a competent engineering exercise, spanning an international shipping channel. Just because Ukrainians are unable to build bridges is not a reason to include their inevitable kvetching about other people who do know how to build bridges. This stuff is embarrassing, and only degrades Wikipedia. Santamoly (talk) 08:45, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me that you have an extreme POV view and should not edit Ukraine-related articles. If you continue, I am going to seek for a topic ban.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's bad enough that WP now accepts bullying and original research, but what's really regrettable is people like yourself who support this sort of clueless debasement of Wikipedia. Your statement above is simply an outrageous insult to academic discourse. Encouraging opinionated eccentrics to determine the level of discussion in any academic field is a suicidal policy for Wikipedia. As an example, Ymblanter, look what you've done to the simple, objective, discussion of a bridge. Santamoly (talk) 21:54, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously think that your opinion is so biased that you should stay away from this area.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion really has nothing to do with the bridge. My opinion is focused on the clumsy debasement of Wikipedia that is happening before our eyes. The bridge was just one example of how Wikipedia is becoming yet another source of "fake information". And that is truly unfortunate. Santamoly (talk) 05:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously tend to agree with User:Santamoly on this clumsy debasement of Wikipedia that is happening before our eyes. For five months now, I try to understand the Novichok thing, and the more I try, the more I'm frustrated that logics is discarded as garbage in favor of the UK government view which is sanctified... Unfortunately, there is some link between the two subjects. Wakari07 (talk) 10:28, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please unprotect Kofi Annan

• There was not that much vandalism. (I saw only 1 IP, User:154.160.3.127 with 2 minor vandal edits)
• 31 hours have (almost) gone by.
• Page is still in need of edits.
• I'll be watching too.

Thank you. Wakari07 (talk) 14:50, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 14:52, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again :-) Wakari07 (talk) 14:55, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Mimi Mondal

On 21 August 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mimi Mondal, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mimi Mondal is the first writer from India to be nominated for a Hugo Award? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mimi Mondal. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mimi Mondal), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you!

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent work patrolling new pages. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 04:03, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editor from Rajasthan

Thanks for blocking 2409:4052:912:5091:6914:CFD8:C9A7:A50A (from Rajasthan) after he/she made posts on my talk page and Escape Orbit's talk page. I believe that the following are all the same person.

• Nishkarsh1 edit to The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008 film)
• 2405:205:158F:14D5:8024:11A9:1794:2CF3 IP editor from from Rajasthan edit to The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008 film) reverting to version by Nishkarsh1
• 2405:205:1302:8BA1:1CD1:8C9:6D8A:A2DC IP editor from from Rajasthan edit to User talk:Nishkarsh1
• 2409:4052:912:5091:6914:CFD8:C9A7:A50A IP editor from from Rajasthan, edits to User talk:Toddy1 ‎and User talk:Escape Orbit. The reason for his/her post to User talk:Escape Orbit was because Escape Orbit had reverted an edit by 2405:205:1302:8BA1:1CD1:8C9:6D8A:A2DC to User talk:Nishkarsh1

-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look, but I am not a CU and I can only block if there are obvious violations from every IP.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:29, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update for your information. Drmies has blocked some of his/her IP socks, but not Nishkarsh1. The ten edits Nishkarsh1 did on 18th August were probably just to establish the ID. The real objective is revealed by talk page comments on MTV Roadies (season 15): Revision history.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked indef.--Ymblanter (talk) 01:56, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:53, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please supplement one of your closings

Hi, Thanks for closing

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

That was a technical closure, I just hatted the topic which already was decided. I would say go ahead and add the link to the archive outside the closure.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:18, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, will do.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:24, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Motion picture content rating system

Why you semi-protect this page? Because of this, I can't write that ALL Russia ratings is prohibitive. 77.37.176.212 (talk) 04:09, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I protected it because there was constant disruptive editing mostly related to Philippines. You can open a protected edit request at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sheraton Centre Toronto Hotel

I'm not clear why you undid my revision. I was improving the page by moving a sentence about the hotel's history to the end of the paragraph about history, instead of where it is now, at the end of the paragraph describing the hotel's physical facilities. I also removed a description of one random convention that was held at the hotel among thousands over the years, since it has no historical significance. Jamesluckard (talk) 09:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What it was there was the info that the hotel has conference facilities. I gave an example of a notable organization which had a convention there, and this info was reliably sourced. I am fine with finding another source (for example for a different conference), but I am definitely not fine with just removing sourced info because you believe it has no significance.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there a requirement though that events should have historical significance to be listed? The hotel has certainly hosted thousands of conventions in its almost fifty years in operation, I'm not sure what makes this particular convention worth noting. Did something important happen at this convention? If so, that should be added to the description, I would think.Jamesluckard (talk) 09:37, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I do not particularly care about this particular convention, but it reliably sources the statement that the hotel has a large conference facility which you now removed (and I reinstated). If you can source it differently, using secondary reliable sources, I would be fine with that.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:40, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused, almost every hotel has conference facilities, there's no need to mention a particular convention to prove this, we could source this by simply linking to the hotel's website, which has a page describing the facilities and showing a diagram of the ballrooms.Jamesluckard (talk) 09:42, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but the facilities of this one seem to be really big as it is able to host a national convention (presumably 1000+ people). A typical hotel conference room is for 200-300 participants at most.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I found two links that show the hotel has 171,716 sq ft of total event space, the most of any hotel in Toronto, it looks like. How about we use these?

http://www.cvent.com/rfp/toronto-on-event-venues-69e3564238ea41b6989efbbbc111ee78.aspx https://www.marriott.com/hotels/event-planning/business-meeting/yyztc-sheraton-centre-toronto-hotel/ Jamesluckard (talk) 09:57, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks, we could use those.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! And you're okay if I delete the mention of that one random convention?Jamesluckard (talk) 10:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, as soon as we keep the point about large conference facilities.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning moving the material around, it is ok, it was just all in one edit.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IP User you blocked starting up again

Hi, the IP User you blocked for a week,

Britain's Got Talent (series 8) - they're doing the same thing as before, in that they are changing information to something that a provided citation proves to be false (mainly, they change the resulting position of two acts in a semi-final following a public vote). GUtt01 (talk) 21:24, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 21:42, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cyrillization of Georgian

I had that on my to-do list and although I can't quite remember why it was there, I certainly recall there was something to do with the very dubious content, although I thought I had removed the worst bits (but I might be mistaken). Still, I'm a bit surprised to see the article go by G3, especially given that it was kept (rightly or wrongly) at AfD a few months ago. – Uanfala (talk) 13:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Uanfala: yes, but now the claim was it is a hoax (which was not brought up during the AfD0, and the creator was blocked in the meanwhile as a sock. If you want, I can restore it as a draft.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:44, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Silver Award

		The New Page Reviewer's Silver Award
		Thanks for all the work you do reviewing new articles. Keep up the good work. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:05, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know...

...a Yamla (talk | contribs)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HotelFurbyFan1 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what you want.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:55, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do You Know How Many Character Pages Are Protected Indefinitely?

Dear Ymblanter.

I'd like to ask you a question: How many fictional character pages on this site got protected indefinitely?

Example: Beast from both Disney adaptations of Beauty and the Beast (Belle is the titular Beauty) has his page locked up indefinitely like a few months ago but Belle doesn't have hers unless if the amount of vandals were high enough.

Recently Murdoc Niccals of the Gorillaz now has his page SP'd indefinitely.

And please answer me back as soon as possible.

Best wishes,

67.81.163.178 (talk) 13:20, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:35, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian general election, 2018

You semi-protected this article because IPs were removing Lula. I think we can unprotect the page, since Lula is now officially ineligible. 187.26.75.78 (talk) 15:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am fine with lifting the protection, but please reach consensus on the talk page first that the protection is no longer needed, and then let me know (or apply to

WP:RFPP).--Ymblanter (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

OK, I will put my request in

WP:RFUP. 187.26.75.78 (talk) 16:41, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

User talk:221.145.211.23

Hi - looks like you added the protection notice rather than a block notice to the IPs talk page :) I'd fix it myself but I am rather involved there. Black Kite (talk) 10:48, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Black Kite:, thanks for letting me know, I corrected it. It does not happen too often, but it has a tendency to happen if I did not get enough coffee in the morning.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:52, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Any suggestions? Tobias Conradi made an appearance again.

Back to attacks at [[30]]

TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 16:05, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to be blocked on sight. I am busy now, but I will have a look later.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tks. Would you be opposed to some kind of page protection on

Kozhukhovskaya line, once you get freed up? Seems to be his current mission. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 16:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done, two IPs blocked, page protected for a week.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:24, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, as always. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 20:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI [31] TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 11:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:14, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Problem editor

When you get time, please could you have a look at 2601:191:8402:5F89:382E:DAF2:7B8B:A018 (talk). He/she seems to be an editor from New Hampshire with an extreme Ukrainian nationalist POV. He/she previously edited as 2601:191:8402:5F89:C830:D0B8:1B3E:584D (talk). He/she particularly likes the words: pathetic Ukrainophobic dogwhistle.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 31h, and somebody would probably need to revert their recent edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He/she has returned as 2601:191:8402:5f89:e01a:9a7c:a2a2:e499 and carried on edit-warring.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:48, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, for a week--Ymblanter (talk) 19:54, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He/she is back as 2601:191:8402:5F89:BD1A:C885:DD2:AFA3 and at it again, claiming that people who disagree with his/her edits are "pathetic Ukrainophobic dogwhistles" or writing "Ukrainophobic propaganda version pushed by Russian trolls".-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:30, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now blocked for a month--Ymblanter (talk) 06:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now he/she has hopped IP Special:Contributions/2601:191:8402:5F89:4CC5:3844:40BD:7338.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:41, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked that one as well, but I do not know how to block an IP range, if they reappear you would probably have to ask one of the admins who can range-block.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:44, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He/she has reappeared as 2601:191:8402:5f89:113e:b7a:7402:e67e -- Toddy1 (talk) 13:55, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now blocked for two weeks, clear block evasion in addition to vandalism and disruptive editing--Ymblanter (talk) 14:01, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article about Kirghiz SSR

Hello, I've noticed that you edited this article in order to reduce the size of infobox. I think I found a better solution and I used it for this article, it now looks much better in mobile browser, hopefully you (or anyone else) don't mind that.Omgwtfbbqsomethingrandom (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, this is definitely a better solution.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:46, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of monuments in Mustang, Nepal

Hi - I ended up on this page from the wikimonuments 2018 posts. I've already added some photos, but find that some of the listings/ monument headings are unclear- spellings, duplications, and there are no village names/ locations which would help to clarify. I saw you were an early editor, so wondering do you know where the original list came from? Are the refs NP-MS-#? refs to anything external? So I can see if I can pin down the village?

Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nima t100 (talk • contribs)

No, I do not know, but you may want to ask @Biplab Anand:--Ymblanter (talk) 07:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK,thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nima t100 (talk • contribs) 04:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove Marko Kolanovic

Hi I got receive messages from you about a delete Marko Kolanovic I created before nand got deleted from username, and so I decided recreate new page and start all over again, I think this article should not be delete. StarWarsGlenny (talk) 07:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@StarWarsGlenny:, you should explain at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marko Kolanovic why you think the page should not be deleted. It will be another using closing the discussion there, not me.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can I remove deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarWarsGlenny (talk • contribs) 07:18, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, you can not. If the outcome of the discussion is to keep the article, the closer will remove the template.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel overshoot?

Hi! Thank you so much for dealing with revdeletion at Fortuny Museum – I do realise that I am creating extra work for others by making so many of these requests. In this particular case I think you may have overshot by one revision – this one did not need to be hidden, I think. I couldn't be less bothered about it, but thought you should know. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I restored the visibility. It looks like I have made the same mistake in several articles today, thanks for pointing it out.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:45, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was just about to say that the same had happened at Bass Reeves. The way the software handles version numbers is profoundly confusing to me – "prev", "next" etc – and the diff tool I often use does not always produce the right result. Links in the copyvio-revdel-request template do seem to work consistently. Thanks for fixing ... More regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:55, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 21:58, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missed category for speedy

Hello Ymblanter.

It seems you missed one category move that I had submitted for discussion. You removed 4 categories from /Speedy here, but added only 3 to /Working here. The one missing is Category:Hornbostel-Sachs -> Category:Hornbostel–Sachs. Could you fix that please?

Regards

HandsomeFella (talk) 15:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HandsomeFella:, corrected now, thanks for letting me know. My apologies.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:11, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

O. J. Simpson murder case

Thanks for protecting the article. Would you consider reverting this edit by the IP, the last before you protected? I'm at 3RR. General Ization ^Talk 17:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted to the stable version. If they finally decide to go to the talk page, pls engage there.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Halton (district)

Hi, you deleted

WP:CFDW – but prematurely, because it is not yet empty. Please would you complete the work? – Fayenatic London 09:21, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done, thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:30, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prayers in the Catholic Church

Did you arrange for

WP:CfD? StAnselm (talk) 05:36, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@

WP:CFD. The proposal was there about a week after the amendment request, and since there were no objections to that one, I processed it. My apologies for the inconvenience.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

OK, thanks. I started a CfD discussion. Frankly, I think the speedy category renaming is way overused - it's only for such obvious entries that nobody would need to refer to the discussion - and so there is no archive! I had to link to a diff. StAnselm (talk) 09:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the 1RR imposition on

Tell me all about it. 19:59, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Sure, no problem. As far as I am concerned, it is also better than an indefinite full protection. Let us hope that it is going to work.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:01, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have high hopes. 1990'sguy edit warred twice, and other than that, there was no real problem other than editor exhaustion. Of course, there's little we can do about the latter without becoming a rationalwiki clone.

Tell me all about it. 14:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I am not involved with this article, and I did not go into much details, but my understanding is that from time to time one edit can explode the whole community (which is not uncommon for certain topics). I hope with 1RR the detonation effect at least will be less pronounced.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Minsk metro stations names

Hey, Ymblanter, I thought this might be of interest for you. Someone has renamed all stations of the Minsk metro to their Polish names, in opposition to the Wikipedia's guideline for romanization of Belarusian names (Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Cyrillic)#Belarusian). I tried to rename one of them in accordance with the guideline but couldn't since that was the page's original name now retained as a redirect. Is there any point in pursuing this further or am I misinterpreting the guidelines? Openlydialectic (talk) 21:38, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that person renamed a large number of articles all pertaining to geographic places of Belarus, and I don't think any of those edits have been reverted. Openlydialectic (talk) 21:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This can be mass-reverted as clear violation of consensus (if of course the names are still there, and the stations have not been renamed).--Ymblanter (talk) 05:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He renamed all the articles about statios too. Can those edits be mass-reverted somehow? Openlydialectic (talk) 06:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed, I meant renaming the stations back (not to the Russian names though, they have all been renamed twice). No, it has to be done manually.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then what should be done with them? I can't manually rename them because the articles with proper names already exist as redirects. And these names aren't Russian, read: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Cyrillic)#Belarusian Openlydialectic (talk) 07:41, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If the redirects have not been edited, you should be able to move back to these names. If they have been edited by humans, indeed, an administrator (and this could be me) should intervene at some stage.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't move them. Can you? You are an admin. Openlydialectic (talk) 09:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will have a look when I have time--Ymblanter (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for semi-protecting ResetEra

It was the first time I submitted a page for semi-protection, so I'm glad I did it correctly.

And thank you for fixing it. The page had internet search results describing ResetEra as a hate group. --Tagus 06:03, 19 September 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagus (talk • contribs)

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me

I talk about Sukhothai, not Lavo kingdom. Sukhothai in the period vassal states of Khmer empire, not about Sukhothai kingdom in after that. But so thank you...Have a good day !Đông Minh (talk) 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But then it should be a different link. The original link was to a disambig. May be you could even start a stab on the Sukhotai State, if you have literature at hand.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:15, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category redirects

Hi, I noticed that you deleted the redirect at Category:Murder-suicide in television after it was renamed with a dash. Please note that we do keep category redirects from ASCII to diacritics (etc), as people are highly liable to re-use the versions of names that can be typed using a standard keyboard.

Thanks for your work here – hope this helps! – Fayenatic London 11:49, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks. I also keep redirects for football team players; are there more broad categories I should know about?--Ymblanter (talk) 11:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any other published guidelines, but I leave redirects at names that I think editors might try to use again, and which will help editors to find the current name, e.g. Roman Catholic → Catholic, Bolton → Metropolitan Borough of Bolton. Also alternative spellings, especially organisations/organizations.

One of my criteria is whether it will be helpful for editors using WP:HotCat, which autofills depending on the what has been typed so far. So for e.g. Category:People from the Metropolitan Borough of Bolton editors are going to try "People from Bolton", so I would keep "People from Bolton (district)" or "People from Bolton (borough)" – but not both, because one of those would be sufficient.

Also, I'd keep a redirect if there are a lot of incoming links from talk pages/ CFD pages etc, to help people trace the precedent discussions.

Hmm, would it be worth writing this up as a draft guidance page? – Fayenatic London 08:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this is very helpful. Yes, I think writing a guidance page would help a lot, though I understand of course it can take a lot of time.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt. I've started this at Wikipedia:Category redirects that should be kept. – Fayenatic London 11:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:43, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kazakh famine

I think you mis--understood the edit you reversed. I think the editor was saying "between 38 and 60" -- not from one percent value to the other, which I think is what you were thinking of. In that case, starting with the lower number makes sense in normal English. If you concur, then change accordingly. Best would be to check the source, of course.Kdammers (talk) 18:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think they did not change the numbers, only interchanged the order, this is why I hope they should correspond to the source (I can check it later). If you can formulate it in the way it makes sense (because reduction from 38 to 60 does not), please do it, I will be more than happy.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN3

See this entry. Since you recently did the semiprotection you may have an opinion. Maybe

WP:DR is the next step. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 13:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks, I will have a look now.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of rural localities in Bashkortostan

Hey I'm working, sorry, I just overwrote a bunch of your edits because I'm in the middle of list sorting and would've lost a bunch of what I was doing. Please let me finish. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for the intervention, please finish, I will fix later if anything still needs to be fixed at that stage.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All good, I just didn't want us to be tripping over each other :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:34, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question - how would one go about verifying Kataeva as a valid Russian place-name? The article was created from a redirect in 2016 and has been unsourced ever since, and doesn't give a district name or much other info. The relevant Russian wiki articles (ru:Катаева and ru:Катаев) are disambigs about last names and aren't much help. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:40, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely it is a hoax, and I reverted it back to a redirect. If it is a selo, it should be in OKATO and in Yandex Maps, and none of them knows it. It could have been Katyevo, but such a rural locality does not exist in Bashkortostan either. It is either an outright hoax, or (unlikely) a former settlement, or smth else (for example, it could have been Novokatayevo, which does exist). Anyway, one user now creates articles on all Russian rural localities, using the census sources (this is how you have so many starting with Ab and Av, and also quite a lot in Adygea), I hope at some point he creates all of them.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:58, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thank you for looking at that! I've seen that guy's work I think, lots of them are turning up in the August/September 2018 orphan categories. I'm working my way through all orphaned rural localities right now because they're easy to get rid of, but after I'm done the current crop I'm not likely to get back around to them or make any more lists. This Petscan query may be of some future use to you (or him) in locating and linking those new articles. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This is not my immediate activity, but I am of course interested in having the rural localities lists in a decent state.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

City of Kiev on the Desna

Desna River. It is located on confluence of Dnieper and Desna to be more precise. One of the Kiev's administrative city raions is named after the river as well. Desna flows within the Kiev's city limits. That fact is also mentioned in the article. The river is the sixth longest river in Ukraine. Why are you reverting my edit? What do you mean by saying Kiev on Dnieper and Chernigov on Desna? Have you even visited Kiev to say things like that? Or at least read the city's geographic description? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Well, I did visit Kiev, and I also looked at the map. The confluence of Desna is opposite to Vyshgorod, and is in Kiev Oblast, not in Kiev. For example, the Google maps are pretty clear on this. However, this is not a matter of life and death to me, I will not revert it any further.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for handling Mariowashere. Just as an FYI, that is User:Jenulot. You can tell because of the changing text on my talk page, complaining on Jimbo talk about how admins are bad in incoherent English, and also the overlap with Oshwah. I've tagged it, but wanted to let you know in case you run into him in the future. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:55, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive Editing on America's Got Talent

An IP User or two, has committed three disruptive edits towards America's Got Talent, within three hours of each other - I believe it is the same person. Any chance of giving the article some Semi-Protection, as a matter of caution, in case this continues? GUtt01 (talk) 08:16, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, protected for a week.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:20, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Hello, Ymblanter. 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.

Knightrises10 (talk) 12:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Revision of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Light Wiki

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

The revision was undid because of copyright violations. I am an employee of the institutes press office responsible for the wiki site and the content of the webpages. The text passage (about the "Marquardt Division") I copied from the website was written by an institutes employee so there shouldn't be a copyright violation.

If this passage still cannot be used, would it be possible to display all the other changes I made, like updating the "Research Groups"-section?

Thank you very much.

Sincerely, J. Wagenbrenner — Preceding

talk • contribs) 08:47, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Yes, indeed, and the website says the text is under copyright which is not compatible with our license. If you want to relicense this part of the text you would need to contact

WP:OTRS. Concerning the other chenges, I will have a look now, that should be possible--Ymblanter (talk) 09:05, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done, and also written a couple of lines about the theory division.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:11, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Political Status of Crimea

I am willing to talk about how to format the page. Should we discuss the topic here or on the main page's talk page or on my talk page? If you say main page I will start the discussion there and we can go from there.~~fenetrejones (talk) 2:44, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

It obviously should be the talk page Note that the IP who removed Serbia was not me, I do not know who it was, but they clearly brought up the same arguments as I did.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:41, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I am about to put it on the talk page.~~fenetrejones (talk) 15:42, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have added the section, let us discuss from there.~~fenetrejones (talk) 15:42, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at

talk) 09:25, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for acknowledged your part of fault concerning the warnings. My English are not as good as they should have been and I didnt explained properly my argument. Clearly, I share much burden for the misunderstanding. As for the Reverts, I am more than sure that you acted in good faith. Actually, when I was reverting for the last time, I was thinking "this is not going to look good on history log, but it is not a violation of 3 RR or the reverting policy, I used talk page so many times and asked for third opinion". I thought that if an admin sets his eyes on the history log, (s)he will ask me what's going on before blocking me and I will explain. Anyways, I am going to insert the wikilove flowchart as it is in your User page, to mine user page so I ll know better. Wikilove must be the trick. Cheers

talk) 20:02, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Great. Actually, 3RR is a way of edit-warring where chances are that blocks can be given without prior warnings, and in your case you never broke 3RR but (in my view) edit-warred. I would suggest adding a ref to the ANI thread on your talk page to the block topic, so that you can always retrieve it if the block comes into a discussion. (I do not quite understand the WikiLove part - I do not think I have anything WikiLove related on my user page, but this is tangential).--Ymblanter (talk) 20:08, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You ve got a flowchart in your User page. There, Wikilove showers have a pivotal role.

talk) 20:14, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Oh, I see.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:22, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hello Y. The WarnerMedia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) article that you protected has shown up in the Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. I think it is because you added a PC template when the article is fully protected instead. When you have a moment if you could change the template that would be appreciated. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 18:27, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I inserted a wrong template. Now corrected. My apologies and thanks for noticing that.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No apologies needed Y. Things like this happen. Many thanks for the quick fix. Enjoy the rest of your weekend :-) MarnetteD|Talk 18:41, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Avianca Flight 011

I'm pretty sure the answer is yes, but did you see my apology on the Avianca Flight 011 talk page (and the draft, which I'm okay with you editing)? I just felt the need to double-check. Tigerdude9 (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sure, I have seen that, thanks. At this point, Isaidnoway is working on the article, so may be you could coordinate with them. I am not planning to make any major changes, I just happened to have this article on my watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:06, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to put a message on Isaidnoway's talk page but I then saw that he was "semi-retired" and that I need to email him instead. What is his email address? Tigerdude9 (talk) 17:55, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They might have wikimail enabled, I did not check. But they edited the article today.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:57, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya

Hello, could you let me know why this has been removed? Things such as names of the university, its images, references have been removed without citing any valid reason. Also, the person is using socks and making the same edits: Muhandes, Capitals00 and others are all his own accounts, he's the one behind the infamous Vrghs Jacob. In the past, I've got several of his accounts blocked. He's not an Israeli, but an Indian. He's not a PhD, he's not even a graduate. He studies at

GNLU and have a look at that article, totally promotional. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.88.137.203 (talk) 13:40, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

My apologoes, but I did not look at the content, I only checked there is no vandalism and there are no serious violations reinserted. You should raise the consent questions at the talk page of the article, and suspicions about sockpuppetry at

WP:SPI.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:43, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you! There was a long discussion on the Talk page,he couldn't argue convincing and left. Later, he used another of his multiple accounts to remove the content. Also, since you're an admin I'd like to suggest that mobile and /or email validation should be made mandatory for new editor creation. Also, all existing IDs should be required to provide email / mobile to continue using Wiki. This will keep the socks at bay.

Since, it is semi-protected, I cannot make changes to it, could add the changes or someone else, I'd be happy to assist in any manner posibble. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.88.137.203 (talk) 13:52, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can not help. You can leave a edit-protected request.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:53, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.88.137.203 (talk) 13:55, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:58, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone will discuss on the talk page since no one seems to be having a problem except the sock.Could you remove the protection so that I can edit it myself, it was till 4th Oct anyway. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.88.137.203 (talk) 14:44, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter: this IP is Wikiexplorer13 evading blocks. -★- PlyrStar93 _{→Message me. ←} 17:32, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely indeed. Anyway, I do not unilaterally remove protections at socks' requests.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Keep up the good work. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:47, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Kathleen Weiß

Hi Ymblanter, Kathleen Weiß page was part of a mass deletion of user Sander.v.Ginkel created pages. It was first moved to Draft:Kathleen Weiß and while a draft its contents were worked on including references. Another user (MFriedman, who turned out to be another account of Sander.v.Ginkel, the user targeted with mass deletion) moved the draft back to the mainspace before the page returned to a draft form and later finally being deleted. At the time of deletion the page had been expanded, could you please check if the page can be undeleted (as a draft or in the mainspace) based on its latest revision contents prior to the deletion? Could you advice what is needed to have the page undeleted? Thanks and regards 94.208.106.53 (talk) 13:11, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I undeleted the article and moved it to Draft:Kathleen Weiß. It must be checked whether all the material (literally every word, since with SvG it is not always the case) is supported by reliable sources, and then it can be submitted for the move to the main space.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:36, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion was throwing of several babies with the bathwater. Last version by SvG contained three sentences and a single reference; the article was heavily edited by

No such user (talk) 14:03, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

No problem with me, I am sorry, I am in a hurry now and can not check the article properly.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:05, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

No such user: Indeed 94.208.110.76 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is my old IP address, I worked on few of the babies thrown with the bathwater (articles created by SvG) and is good to see something which required so much time and effort back at the mainspace. Thank you both for helping, regards 94.208.106.53 (talk) 14:51, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Andrew Rannells

There have been reverts lately; would this justify extending PC-protection? George Ho (talk) 20:38, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 01:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Michael

Hey, just wanted to let you know that we are having trouble with

Send me a message! 10:03, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I have seen it at RFPP, but I believe it is time another administrator should have a look. I am generally not a fan of extended confirmed protection for vandalism and prefer blocks.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:11, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright... however, we have had a wide range of issues... Copyright Vio., poor grammar, unsourced content, dead links, and test/disruptive edits. Just hope someone looks at it soon.

Send me a message! 10:21, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Articles about hurricanes that are notable storms (such as this one) should not be extended confirmed protected. These questions aren't too severe, and that article is not a

protection policy and you will know more. 61.244.97.142 (talk) 10:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Mail

Hello, Ymblanter. 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.

- LouisAragon (talk) 15:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I am behind the Great Chinese Firewall, I will unlikely see it begore Monday.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Usman Dar

Hello, you locked this page and the reason was sockpuppetry? Only I removed that violation material on that page, who was the second whats sockpuppetry? Did you explore Talk:Usman Dar? that user is continuously adding contentious material to that blp regarding his degree issue. All his concern is to filling that blp with that degree issue and he explains it like Dar is done some crime. Is not its violation of BLP? I guess you have to see this too [32], please remove that material its clear partiality that you locked that page and Senior users has authority to do anything with that blp and defaming that person. If you have any question regarding that degree issue I will answer you. Please investigate that case 119.160.119.4 (talk) 15:36, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did investigate the case, and my conclusion was that you were removing material which was reliably source. Please go to the talk page and argue you case based on our policies.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:49, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking from Kiev page move

Did Nychypir (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I don't know who the user is but the user definitely not trolling, you should have given a warning instead of indef blocking the user.

talk) 06:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I do not mind unblocking (and then somebody else will have to deal with them later), but why do you think it is a user in good standing. They registered just to leave a comment in a heated discussion, and the comment is inflammatory and noot to the point. They clearly knew what they were doing. We had plenty of such users in the pastt, both from Russian and Ukrainian sides, and they are usually blocked indef on sight. Any reason why this one should be treated differently?--Ymblanter (talk) 06:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The user only make one edit. Notice that

talk) 08:11, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for your feedback. Let me take it to AN to evaluate the block.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:18, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Please evaluate the block of Did Nychypor--Ymblanter (talk) 08:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Vandalism

Send me a message! 10:07, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done for a month, though I believe you are panicking - there was only one vandal edit and one good-faith edit which was deemed inappropriate and reverted.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:17, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for realizing your mistake! Balkywrest (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and my apologies again.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:31, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 22

Hi, I think Wikipedia hiccuped or something with the date, as I submitted my protection request at 02:49, 22 October 2018 (UTC) not the 15th and signed it with the quad tilde. Thank you for you assistance on that request. Hopefully this signature will say the 22nd! Zinnober9 (talk) 19:13, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, it was a valid request anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:14, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please help/check at Ung County

Hi,

a bit of time ago I asked your help maybe you could know/be able to retrieve Rusyn names of former Hungarian Counties. Then you said you cannot help. Recently I noticed a new editor adding Rusyn names to some Transcarpathian cities. I asked him/her in his/her talk page to make the proper supplement on the same page where only one fragment is known. It was made by him/her, and after I asked him/her to make the same in other counties where Rusyns lived.

However, it was suspicious that why the "Komitat" was removed, and I put to google translator the given addition ([33]), and "horrible zoo" came out...I have to utmost good faith, but I cannot read or verify cyrillic alphabet, and google translator I could only choose Ukrainian as translate from...

So I don't know if I was fooled or not, but I assume you may check and read at least if the given addition has any connection to "Ung County" or not...Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 00:09, 23 October 2018 (UTC))[reply]

I do not know, but the Rusyn Wikipedia also says Ужанська жупа, and it does not strike me as smth weird (Уж is a part of the name of Uzhhorod which is Ungwar in Hungarian, and жупа is presumably from Župa).--Ymblanter (talk) 05:31, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You, and thanks to you, I became to know which is Rusyn Wikipedia...then it seems I can trust the newbie editor.(KIENGIR (talk) 10:02, 23 October 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:04, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

Can you please explain the reason behind your upgrading edit-semi-protection to extended-confirmed as over here.I don't see the need for ECP.∯WBG^converse 19:47, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Well, it says move warring - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 19:52, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did not upgrade it, I only added move protection as there was move warring earlier that day. Extended-confirmed protection was configured by Swarm in August for three months.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:54, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help

Здравствуйте, уважаемый Ярослав! Я обращаюсь к Вам, поскольку мне известно, что Вы на должном уровне знаете как русский, так и английский. Если Вас не затруднит, просьба создать на английском коротенькую статью (как русская версия примерно) про политика, учёного, изобретателя, бизнесмена и так далее, через интервики. Сам я такое не смогу, мягко говоря. Надеюсь, Вы не против. Спасибо! - 95.29.129.84 (talk) 22:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Нет, к сожалению, совершенно не относится к моим интересам.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:41, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Весьма жаль, Ярослав. Не думал я, что личный интерес способен стать помехой (Вы за пару минут можете создать статью (опыт огромный), тем более ничтожную по размеру). Но если так, просьба посоветовать мне человека, который возьмётся. Ай пи пусть Вас не смущает: провайдер тот же самый, а ай пи динамический. - 128.73.62.153 (talk) 16:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

  Честно говоря, я не знаю. Проще, наверное, в русской Википедии кого-то найти.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:07, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• У нас сплошной эгоизм. Я надеялся, что Вы свободны от этого, прочитав про Вас статью в Википедии. Именно статью (не личная страница). - 95.29.73.26 (talk) 15:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks

		The Admin's Barnstar
		I don't know if anyone else is thanking you for the hard work you're putting in while the rest of us joke around about that IP posting porn, but seriously: Thank you so much. You're getting shit done, and that doesn't go unnoticed. Tell me all about it. 16:11, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply ]

Sure, thanks for thanking me.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:12, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another article by Панн

I see the AN/I section has been archived; rather than unarchive it, bringing this to you here. Runawayangel left me a message on my talk page to look at Sergey Morozov (politican), which was created last month by Панн. This looks like an adequate stub at first glance, but everything except the name in the infobox is about Alexander Zhilkin. On the same day he created the article, Панн added to the latter's article that he had left office on 26 September, which corresponds to what the Russian article on Zhilkin says, but I am unable to check whether he was in fact succeeded by Morozov, or whether any of the references are in fact about Morozov; the text isn't. I don't have the reading ability in Russian. Clearly the article text is wrong. (Also, I have to get ready for work!) Панн's work may have to be retroactively checked and articles like this deleted; hence I have pinged him here. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:17, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have speedy deleted the Morozov article as G3 as it was just copypasted from Zhilkin article (other speedy criteria apply as well, for example, as a copyright violation). The Zhilkin article is sourced, but not all sources are good and not all mention him, I wil try to clean it up in the course of the day--Ymblanter (talk) 08:21, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I thought it seemed like an exact copy including the refs but wasn't sure whether there were Zhilkin edits I should also be concerned about; apparently I was right to be suspicious. Thanks are due to Runawayangel also. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:34, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And Runawayangel also found Lyudmila Porgina, created by Панн on October 27 after your clear message on October 23 about machine translations. It appears to have been created as a machine translation of ru:Поргина, Людмила Андреевна; I was about to tag it as a rough translation and report it at Pages Needing Translation, and I see you have neatened it up a little bit—I count 4 of us. But it may be time to drop the hammer on the editor, or alternatively reopen the case at AN/I, so I'll hold off on the tagging and reporting till this evening my time in case you want to stub it instead. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:36, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think they need to be blocked but I also do not think I should be the blocking admin given the history of my communication with him. This means we need a new ANI thread. I am about to go to bed, and I will appreciate if you can start it, otherwise I will try to do it tomorrow (I am going to be pretty busy in the coming weeks but just finding a couple of diffs should be feasible for me).--Ymblanter (talk) 21:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but in terms of bed, me too;I now have to get ready for work, so it'll have to wait till I get back. If you haven't posted to AN/I by then I'll start writing it up. Thanks for your help. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:26, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion/Working

Pls stop adding car categories to bot task list (renaming them) until discussion is alive , thanks -->Typ932 ^T·C 09:09, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Typ932: I am not quite sure what you mean. I added those which were not opposed for 48h, and not added those which were opposed. (Unless I am missing smth, I am done with all of them). If you think I have processed an opposed category, pls let me know, I will see what I can do.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:12, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

pls stop editing or renaming anything to related to cars or automobiles for a while , until the discussion is over, thank you -->Typ932 ^T·C 13:24, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you actually read my response? Care to indicate what discussion you are talking about? Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_October_26 this one or this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Automobiles#Cars_not_automobiles -->Typ932 ^T·C 16:32, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is great. You do realize that I am not a mindreader, and I can not know of a discussion unless it is on my watchlist (none of these are) or somebody tells me about its existence (nobody did before today), right? My workflow for the categories is described here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy. If a category is nominated, we wait for 48h, check that the rationale is valid, and thet nobody opposed, and then move the category for discussion. Many of the automobile categories were nominated last week, all of them before 26 October, when the discussion you mention started, and nobody opposed speedy moves of most of them. These have been moved. Some were opposed, and, whereas usually we keep them longer to make sure that was not a misunderstanding, today I moved all of the remaining categories to the corresponding section, so that these have not been processed before the discussion on Category:Cars has been completed. If the outcome of the discussion is such that it gets moved back, the subcats will also have to be moved back, via the same speedy page.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:42, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Raghavendra Thirtha.

Hello Ymblanter Since it's many edit requests to remove word died. Without knowing the background of the culture and the terms ,it's hard to comment on anything. Before surpassing small things and naming it as bullshit, consider and understand the facts about it.

Thank you.

Rhalasur113 (talk) 09:24, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to say, but this is not going to happen. We are not a Hindu (or, for that matter, Christian or Jewish or Muslim) encyclopedia. If you want this information to be added to the articles you need to start your own project.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samadhi Rhalasur113 (talk) 09:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am aware of this concept.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:30, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another page from Wikipedia. Died is different word from Samadhi. Rhalasur113 (talk) 09:30, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, but the guy died. He was alive and now he is dead. We do have articles on people with dog's heads, because someone believed that they exist, but we do not write in Arctic that it is populated by people with dog's heads.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Kalaya Thasmai Namaha". Have a great day. Rhalasur113 (talk) 09:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IP you blocked recently

I've blocked the whole range, it's all him. Doug Weller talk 11:57, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for checking.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Michael D. Higgins

Can you extend the protection that you placed on this article until after his inauguration on 11 November? Perhaps until the 13th. ww2censor (talk) 10:51, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:17, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vitaly Savelyev page

Hi! Could I ask you to move the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitaly_Savelyev because of incorrect spelling. The name should be Vitaly Saveliev. This spelling is long-standing writing of Vitaly as Aeroflot CEO and would be recognised easier. Thank you in advance!Chimera love (talk) 07:13, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not how we work. The name is currently spelt according to our romanization rules,

move request on the talk page of the article and prove that in English-language reliable sources he is much more often referred to as Saveliev and not Savelyev. In this case, it will be established that his most common name in English is Saveliev. If there is no most common name in English, we just use romanization rules. I am sorry to say, but the opinion of the subject of the article and also how he is spelled in the passport is irrelevant, only how third-party English sources call him.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:28, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I understand. Thank you so much for your prompt reply. Chimera love (talk) 06:11, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article protection request

The article Richard Wright (author) needs protection it keeps getting vandalized.Catfurball (talk) 19:25, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:15, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Attention needed

Dear sir, if you can, please watch and help to protect the following article: List of wars involving Russia. It has recently been attacked by a militant nationalist vandal (see: [34]) who removed/rewrote entire sections, claiming that medieval Rus' "was Ukraine, not Russia" (which is ridiculously absurd), and it is not once that clearly disruptive edits have been made there and left for many hours, days or weeks. The administration and common Wikipedians alike seem to have very little interest in that page, unfortunately, and I believe that we need at least one administrator to watch it; as well as that you are undoubtedly one the best candidates, given your professionalism. Thank you. 180.14.135.235 (talk) 06:24, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, the level op disruption is not sufficient for protection. I added the article to the watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:30, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

disruptive editing/semi protection.

Hi Ymblanter. Hope you're well. I requested indefinite semi protection on Benson Taylor as the page is constantly having content removed for no reason by IP addresses only to be undone by editors. If you check back through the history you will see this. The reason you gave was the protection had expired on this page, but no protection was ever on there. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orchestralnut (talk • contribs) 12:07, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Orchestralnut:, yes, you are right, the page was never protected, and an IP added today a protection template (which was then removed by bot). I will protect the article now.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:11, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for doing so, Ymblanter. Do you not believe the page needs protecting indefinitely due to the amount of disruptive editing here? On review on the history page it's constant. Thank you. --2A02:C7D:46CD:7E00:909F:B9D4:C4EE:7D6A (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The page has never been protected before, and an indefinite protection is usually not a good starting point.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

there are some others as well... endless, including https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeritaSatu - appreciate your recognising the problem JarrahTree

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 10:38, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kateryna Handziuk

Hi there. About this. Can we somehow get

User:Zararah/Kateryna Handziuk into the mainspace? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:01, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Ping: User:Zararah

Link: User talk:Zararah#Speedy deletion nomination of Kateryna Handziuk

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It currently 90% copyright violations. I can remove it and move a stub to the main space, but the creator asked to have the references. May be I can just get the references to the talk page. I will look at it now.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done as a two-line stub.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, my friend. I'm very happy to see it in the mainspace. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your quick action paid off. Cheers, :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes I feel like a motherless Child

You say my edit was a copyright violation? Can you explain what I 'plagiarised'? I did adapt content from the Richie Havens article elsewhere on Wikipedia is that plagiarised? I found the interview the quote is from - using a quote from an interview is not copyright violation? Is there a conspiracy to cover up the most famous performance of the song? Please explain, I want to understand what is going on. Stub Mandrel (talk) 14:27, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I search for one of the sentences (not quotes) you added I get here as the first hit. Btw even if you copy text from another Wikipedia article, and this is not your own text, you need to attribute it.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Constant vandalism!

@

James Springer White has been vandalized at least three times that I've counted now this is crazy, stupid vandals. Can you put protection on this article.Catfurball (talk) 22:03, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done, though this is a borderline case IMO.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:06, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you for protecting James Springer White, from those naughty vandals.

Catfurball (talk) 22:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scholastique Mukasonga

Hi! I'm a bit confused by the revert here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scholastique_Mukasonga&oldid=prev&diff=868302558 - Arent the refs supposed to have article URLs? WhisperToMe (talk) 09:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The watchlist was loading too slow, and instead of clicking on smth else my click was interpreted as a rollback. I noticed this and immediately reverted with the comment "misclicked". Unfortunately this happens on a regular basis, there is very little we can do to completely exclude such accidents.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see! Anyways, happy editing! WhisperToMe (talk) 11:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tnx.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:40, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

................ Hello Ymblanter - I write regarding Quilla Constance page citations as I notice you've applied page protection for this article. I've just found new links online for many of the existing broken links (see below). I've done some work on this page previously and as a result, I've recently been accused of having COI. I'm therefore wondering if another editor can step in and help update broken links on this page? I've listed link replacements below. If you can assist, that will be a great. Here's the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilla_Constance. You can also refer to the talk page for Quilla Constance to see the thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Quilla_Constance Thanks, Phil

Link 1: https://archive.ica.art/whats-on/symposium-dis-identifications

Link 2: Page 4 of TW Magazine: https://www.sjc.ox.ac.uk/documents/388/1413-St_Johns-TW_mag-2016_10W1.pdf - a full page article about Quilla Constance exhibition, as reviewed in The Oxford Times, and her involvement in celebrating female students at St Johns.

Link 3: (scroll down) https://wearefierce.org/?s=Eva+meyer-Keller

Link 4: http://gotlottery.uk/eastern/bedford/bedford/?s=name&page=5 (the 6th, 7th and 8th listing down says Jennifer Allen was awarded £14,500 and £14,550 three times from Arts Council England. I expect there will be other official records of this available in public funding records and via Arts Council website.

Link 5:Equity Magazine Page 6: https://issuu.com/martinebrown/docs/equity_magazine_spring_2012 - there's quite a large article on Quilla Constance winning a case. I also found this article in Londonist which supports the statement about Equity - https://londonist.com/2011/06/in-pictures-quilla-contance-protest-performance-outside-punk-soho, and this: http://archive.westendextra.com/news/2011/jun/equity-called-over-punk-double-booking-quilla-constance-stage-street-protest-over-gig-

Link 6: If you scroll down and click on 'Artists' you will see what looks to be the official list of artists with work in David Roberts Collection. Jennifer Allen is listed towards the top. http://davidrobertsartfoundation.com/collecting/

Link 7: I currently can't find a new link for Quilla Constance Freud Museum online, but I did find this article about Quilla Constance which discusses her work and the Electra Complex. Perhaps this could be cited elsewhere on the page? https://theoxfordculturereview.com/2016/04/15/review-qc/ and I've found this review of Quilla Constance work in The Oxford Mail -https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/leisure/artandbooks/art/14394631.Performance_artist_Quilla_Constance_challenges_taboo_at_St_John___s_College__Oxford/ - and The Freud Museum piece might be archived in print, off line. I will search for this at some point when I have time. Thanks, P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:89DC:D1C:FC7F:B43B (talk) 16:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please post this at the talk page of the article, I am sure interested editors will either pick this up or get involved into the discussion why the additions are not appropriate. I have no opinion myself, and I have no particular interest to the subject of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:57, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Question

I just discovered my "Watchlist" and found that you made some deletions. From that, I cannot find the area showing what the deletions were. Further, the policy "RD3" was given as a reason, but the link to that "redirects" to RD2, which covers a lot of information, so at this point I have no idea 1) What I did, 2) What was deleted, 3) Why it was deleted, in order to 4) avoid doing it again. Any information you could provide would be appreciated.Tym Whittier (talk) 22:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I looked around some more and think that because I am "watching" the tea house page, I get notifications for everything, whether it involves me or not. True?Tym Whittier (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Tym Whittier, if you add the Teahouse (or any other page) to your watchlist, then you will get a notification on that list whenever the page is edited. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:20, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not exactly sure about the context, but I might have revision-deleted (essentially, hidden) some disruptive edits from the Teahouse page a few days ago, and these deletions probably made it to the watchlist. These deletions had to do with a long-term vandal, and Tym Whittier certainly did not do anything related to this situation.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:47, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Constant vandalism!

@Ymblanter: The article Prince (musician) has been vandalized at least four times that I now of this year. Can you put protection on his article.Catfurball (talk) 16:25, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done for 2 weeks--Ymblanter (talk) 16:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thanks for putting protection on Prince (musician), stupid vandals.

Catfurball (talk) 17:38, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:42, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Image and mention of the Badasvlad game

Ymblanter, thanks for your input. I noticed you removed the mention of the Badasvlad game citing unreliable source. The game has its own dedicated website and it is available on iTunes, Google and Amazon Appstores in both English and Russian versions. It has youtube and text descriptions along with game pages on Facebook, Twitter, VK and Instagram. The game name, description and appearances speak for itself. Could you shed some light on your rationale? ThanksTimelan (talk) 18:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to read

WP:RS.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Cholera epidemic in Lexington, KY

Would you be opposed to moving this back to the student's userspace so they can work on this? This definitely isn't ready to be a live article by any stretch and I think that the student may have been confused, thinking that they had to move their notes live. I'm going to give them some advice on how to work this into a proper article. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:52, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As soon as it is not in the main space I am fine. The article is absolutely not ready for the main space and should not have been moved out of the draft.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I whole heartedly agree and left the student a long message about this. Since you have the AfD open, would you be willing to move the page? I can move it myself, if you'd be willing to tag the AfD for deletion since no one has participated yet. I just don't want to overstep any boundaries as far as the AfD goes since it's one of my students. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:14, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

   Done I move the article to the draft:

  Draft:Cholera epidemic in Lexington, KY, and withdrew the nomination, which now must be closed by an uninvolved user.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Thank you! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:54, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:06, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

212.112.122.132, misplaced block request

212.112.122.132 (talk · contribs) has posted a block request in Russian several times the past few days to Talk:Обсуждение участника:212.112.122.132, from what I can gather in regards to edits made by IP 91.122.197.13 on the Russian Wikipedia. Could you guide them in the right direction? Sam Sailor 22:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, though apparently they are not interested in unblock, they want to have someone else blocked.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was what I wrote. They have not been blocked (at least not here) themself, so I don't know where "unblcok" enters the picture. Anyway, thanks for your assistance. I trust you G8 the talk page. Sam Sailor 22:26, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let us keep it for some time, I so far do not see any potential for abuse.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maratha Empire

Somebody is constantly adding a blatantly false Map of the Maratha Empire which is a user generated Map . How do I stop it from being constantly edited and protect the page from being changed ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subratadass (talk • contribs) 05:12, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please start discussion at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ministry of Defence of Kazakhstan representative

Could I ask you to talk to Красницкий Максим Анатольевич? His edit summaries on Nurlan Yermekbayev invoke the Kazakh Ministry of Defence (I asked for clarification on his user talk and he said that was what he meant by "MOD" and "mod"), and his edit request now that the article has been fully protected states that he is an official representative of the ministry. There is another editor with a Cyrillic user name, Храмулин Владимир Валерьевич, active at the same article and others, but I have not evaluated their editing, and I believe the self-identified official representative needs to be informed of our policies. There are messages in Russian on his talk page already, but I do not see any engaging his statements that the ministry should control the page. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:07, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I responded there in Russian, though in my experience unfortunately they will have difficulties understanding our policies. This "officially approved" stuff is everywhere, they often think that if they want this, the whole world must immediately comply.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:13, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:15, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Добрый день! Я официальный представитель пресс-службы Министерства обороны Республики Казахстан. В случае необходимости готовы официально подтвердить указанного пользователя как официально публикующего от имени Министерства обороны Республики Казахстан. Официальное письмо будет направлено через Департамент международного сотрудничества на Ваш адрес. Напишите пожалуйста адрес куда необходимо будет направить официальное письмо. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Красницкий Максим Анатольевич (talk • contribs) 08:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Добрый день. Видите ли, это не имеет никакого значения, как я там и написал. Совершенно неважно, кто пишет статью, будь это хоть сам министр обороны. Важно, чтобы статья удовлетворяла нашим правилам. В данном скучае, как я понимаю, возникли проблемы с проверяемостью (

WP:BLP). Всё это надо обсуждать на стравице обсуждения статьи.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:30, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Я прочитал ваши правки. Но там мало информации о биографии и в Ваших правках отсутствую ссылки на статьи которые подтверждают ваши правки. Хочу уточнить почему наши правки где хронологический описывается биография министра обороны Республики Казахстан не удовлетворяют Вашим требованиям. Я согласен Вы правили в Параграфе "Образование" названия учебных заведений и указали ссылки. Пусть будет параграф "Образование" по Вашему. Но информацию параграфе "Биография" прошу оставить нашу версию. Мы должны придти к общему знаменателю. Спасибо за Ваше понимание. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Красницкий Максим Анатольевич (talk • contribs) 10:50, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Это какое-то недоразумение. Я вообще не правил эту статью. Пожалуйста, попробуйте обсудить это на странице обсуждения статьи.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:53, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection of Sofia Airport

Hi, can you please unprotect or reduce the protection of this page because the user who asked for the protection of the page has vandalised the page and added unsourced information, removed sourced information and hasn't followed the guidelines of

WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, the page has been reverted to out date information, the page is not up to date and needs to be updated to the correct information as its all incorrect. If not can you please revert the users edits so it is back to date the last up to date edit was this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sofia_Airport&diff=869187473&oldid=869186841

Thanks. CBG17 (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please reach consensus at the talk page that protection is no longer needed.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:52, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21st Century Fox

Thanks for protecting 21st Century Fox Pepper Gaming (talk) 10:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:30, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

jj

		The Special Barnstar
		message talk) 10:50, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply ]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:53, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ymblanter. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Capital T

Hello Ymblanter, i recommend you revert to the real name of the singer Capital T from Abdallah Belgounche to Trim Ademi. Regards, AceDouble (talk) 13:45, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 14:52, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection of 2024 United States presidential election

You protected United States presidential election, 2024 after it was deleted, salted until after the 2020 election. Per a referendum at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(government_and_legislation)#Proposed_change_to_election/referendum_naming_format, that would have a new name at 2024 United States presidential election – could you protect this page until then as well? Thanks! Reywas92^Talk 00:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quba District (Azerbaijan)

Здравствуйте. Пишу на русском, так как английский мой не так хорош. Вы откатили правку и при этом приписали что это фальсификация. Мне интересно на чем основываетесь вы, делая такое заявление? Информацию о фальсификациях распространяют либо армянские, либо другие такого же порядка источники. Вы полагаете это нормально? Ведь абсурд это полный. Azeri 73 (talk) 05:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Вы поменяли численность населения, не приведя новый сточник, и в двух пятизначных числах поменяли первые две цифры, оставив три последние. Так не бывает. --Ymblanter (talk) 06:21, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Возможно был невнимателен, но в таблице и на данный момент есть явно ошибочные данные. Сверху пишется 2009 год, а данные проставлены из 1999 года. Вот линки http://pop-stat.mashke.org/azerbaijan-ethnic2009.htm, https://www.stat.gov.az/map/az/07_3/ если не возражаете впишу данные из них. Azeri 73 (talk) 07:24, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Нет, не возражаю, конечно, но, пожалуйста, придерживайтесь источников. Если есть более старые, но более точные данные (например, перепись), лучше их оставить.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:53, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• • Там один и тот же источник, pop-stat.mashke.org. Разница только в годах. Это данные официальной переписи. Я сверю все внимательно и поправлю что не так.

Azeri 73 (talk) 12:29, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Social Liberal Party (Brazil)

Hi Ymblanter. Would you mind taking a look at Special:diff/Kokhba/870685325 since you were the admin who protected the article. It appears to be a deliberate attempt to mislead and possibly EVADE by intentionally impersonating another editor. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TruthShallSetYouFree11 tried to do the same and is most likely the same person. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for stepping in here. My guess is they'll probably be back. This is obviously not a newbie since they immediately tried to remove not only this post but also the one added to User talk:SMcCandlish. Is there a way to protect an article talk page? -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:24, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) @Marchjuly: I blocked all four accounts indef (two which you found and two which reverted your edits here). It would be good to open an SPI but unfortunately I do not have time for this right now.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:26, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One can protect the article talk page, but I guess we are not yet ready for that, one should only protect talk pages if things become really bad. Please let me know if smth like edit-warring starts there, or socks start posting every two minutes.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understand about the PP. I started an SPI for these four accounts, but there might be more as well. Trying to impersonate another editor by using their signature is a bit obvious though so I'm assuming this person is clever enough to realize that diffs don't lie and has just probably has decided to just

WP:TROLL for a bit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I have seen this, thanks. Indeed, reverting edits at a talk page of an administrator is not the best tactics to keep an account for longer than an hour.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

No this is not vandalism. I didn't remove valid information from the article, I only update the name. If we compare the old version and the new one, in the current legal status my edition is correct. You are free to add the information about the old name. Ales sandro (talk) 18:44, 26 November 2018 (UTC) Ales sandro (talk) 18:46, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of correct information from an article is vandalism. You have been already blocked several times exactly for this, and if I see it once again, I will block you long-term. As I said, if you do not understand this, you

lack the competence to edit Wikipedia. Btw this edit does not convince me in your competence either.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I didn't remove the information about the old name of the raion, I only update the name. The reasons for blocking me were different - my editions should include not current names but names in a historical context (articles described historical events). And I agree, it was uncorrect. But this edition did not include data in a historical context but current data. This one was a mistake, I fixed it after a few seconds. Ales sandro (talk) 19:27, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You did remove it. The information was there before your edit and was not there after your edit.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:29, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Hungary (1920–1946)

Hi,

I'd like to ask what is to be done, I did not met a case like before.

An IP is recurrently - sometimes in weeks reappearing - altering the infobox of the page, in the past months more of us restored it (basically the ip wishes to change the map of Hungary from the 1942 version to the reduced borders before the revisions of 1937, but because it became to apparent, now its tactic is to alter all the infobox hoping noone will notice).

This time I initiated a discussion in the talk page to find out what the IP really wants with good faith, in return the IP reverted and blanked my edit [35]...shortly he again continued in the main page, again with the same misleading content [36], what the IP has written in the edit log, well my jaws fell down...

Could you handle this case? (I don't think any warnings from me would change anything, or even the whole case would deserve a noticeboard...)

Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 12:57, 27 November 2018 (UTC))[reply]

I protected the page for a week and restored your edit at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as you can see [37], [38], again the same is performed, only the IP address changed...talk page again ignored...would you revert it and again do the necessary? (I don't know if the IP will do this permamently after the protection expires, what would be the best solution? In the worst case continous blocking?)

Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 11:34, 8 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Now protected for three weeks.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:38, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it seems there are recently tendentious IP's...[39], [40], reverted twice my opened subject in the talk regerading the persistent disruptive editing on the article....could you protect the same way the talk page, or this issue would have more weight? (and please after check also the Nikola Subic Zrinski article, the other IP returned and again twice reverted the content...however formally I will provide diffs on that section. Thank You and sorry for your time.(KIENGIR (talk) 21:44, 8 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

I blocked the IP for block evasion, but at this point I do not want to protect the talk page. If they continue disruption from a different IP, bring them to

WP:RFPP.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:52, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Sure, Thanks!(KIENGIR (talk) 22:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Please unprotect Bernardo Bertolucci

The war is over. There was no war. All inputs are welcome on the page. Wakari07 (talk) 00:22, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There was indeed no war, there was vandalism which started right after he died. I unprotected, if vandalism resumes pls report at

WP:RFPP.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:31, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you for your time. Wakari07 (talk) 06:56, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:57, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of active separatist movements in Europe

Thanks for editing this! It is actually upside down xD South Ossetia wants to join North Ossetia (Russia). Greetings! --

talk) 18:53, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Sure, I am aware of this.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:56, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

!!!

Re: your ???

WikiMedia does not recognize the language name Crimean Tatar:

{{#language:crh|en}} → Crimean Tatar

According the ISO 639-2 and -3 custodians, Crimean Tatar and Crimean Turkish are synonymous; both custodians giving Crimean Tatar preference (if that is preference and not just alpha sorting of the two names).

cs1|2 validates language names against the list of languages that MediaWiki acknowledges. Because MediaWiki does not acknowledge Crimean Tatar, using |langauge=Crimean Tatar places the article in Category:CS1 maint: Unrecognized language. This is not the only language name that MediaWiki doesn't like so I'll modify Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration to accommodate Crimean Tatar at the next module suite update.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you. Our article is Crimean Tatar language, and it would be of course better to stay consistent.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nikola Šubić Zrinski

Hi,

an IP just violated 3RR on the page mentioned in the subject but the thing is one of his revert is under the IP "93.136.104.148", while the other three is "93.138.121.134"...thus I don't know what kind of success would it have at WP:AN3, since a counter-argument could be that they are not the same, however if you check the recent happenings - I even moved to the talk page but got no answer there just "lessons" in the edit logs - I am sure the same person is behind it...what is the best to be done?

Thank you for your advice...(KIENGIR (talk) 12:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

 Done, I protected the article for three days.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I referred in the other section, after the protection expired the IP returned and already twice removed the same sourced content [41], [42], would please again revert and act? Thank You for your time!(KIENGIR (talk) 21:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Blocked the IP and protected the article for two weeks.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should the page be restored to before the final IP edits/removals? Sorry having a hard time following the diffs and telling if the info should be restored. Best,

ping me. 22:40, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

To be honest, I did not look at that (I see that the diffs are not obvious vandalism, therefore making a decision whether or not to restore them would make me involved), but any confirmed user can edit the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rockallnight5

You have blocked this editor for using multiple accounts in articles Birds in the Trap Sing McKnight, Kiss Land and Passion, Pain & Demon Slayin'. It look like he/she still doing that here. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 21:23, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I made a mistake. I forgot to log in when I thought I did, and that's why that happened. See the revision history for that article. Rockallnight5 (talk) 05:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rockallnight5: I take your word this time, just don't let it happen again. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 08:39, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This editor is still being disruptive, I have removed the recording dates off the articles All-Amerikkkan Badass and Yung Rich Nation, because the sources do not support these recording dates. The editor restored the edits by reverting my edits [43] [44], keep in mind this editor have already been warned by other editors today for adding unsourced content. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:30, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked them for a week.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This editor is still bring disruptive [45] [46]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 21:54, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid at this point I can not do anything with them, they need to be taken to ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:08, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From an OTRS ticket....

A group of students, as a part of English coursework at a Russian university, have been tasked with translating Draft:Paronite from the Russian counterpart. It seems that they are not much proficient in English and furthermore, the entire group of students might be using a single account. Can you please look into the issue? Regards, ∯WBG^converse 08:02, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid there is very little I can do. There is an account which only edited the draft (not even their talk page), and nobody else edited it except for this account and the AfC reviewers. If we knew for sure this is the group of students, and who is the coordinator, we could talk to the coordinator, but as it is now I am afraid we should just leave them trying to improve the draft.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:08, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Niklola Šubić Zrinski

Please restore the last edit , KINEGIR writes falsehoods i reported him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiolio (talk • contribs) 23:34, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. Please discuss at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DC Extended Universe

Please MOVE the page "DC Extended Universe" to "Worlds of DC" as in that page DCEU is removed from everywhere and Worlds of DC is originally named as OFFICIAL term. Please remove Semi-Protection for a moment and correct the above request and then again Semi-Protect it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanket Panja (talk • contribs)

No. Please go to the talk page of this article and open a move request.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:54, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An opinion please

Just randomly picking you as the latest admin to appear on my watchlist...

Yesterday I saw an accidental new page by CrazyMinecart88 and tackled them about their lack of genuine contributions to the wiki and received the reply that they'd "work on it". Today the work on userboxes and userpage decoration continues unabated.

I'm wobbling between the views that it's just an overenthusiastic kid who started off with some trivial vandalism and is now harmlessly^* amusing their self with userboxes, and the fear that they're soon to become extendedconfirmed without any real understanding of what the wiki's about;

WP:U5 all their playthings

.

Could you offer a second opinion, please.

^*Harmlessly, except for the unsolicited offers of userboxes on other users' talk pages.

-- Cabayi (talk) 12:26, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think what they are doing at this point is harmless but completely useless. Your guess is probably right. One can take them to ANI but this might escalate and result in a block. You can try to talk to one of the Teahouse hosts who might want to talk to the user, this is probably the most efficient way to proceed.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:33, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Following the trail of pinging the first admin on the page... User:Dodger67 - could you help out please?

Apologies to Ymblanter for continuing here, but it seems preferable to smearing it across the wiki. Cabayi (talk) 13:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the "useless but harmless", perhaps some prompting/coaching might help to find what topics the user is interested in and then some guidance into an aproriate direction. NOTHERE is really meant for curbing harmful activities. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:44, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a little puzzle will stir some curiosity about what's beyond their userboxes? Cabayi (talk) 13:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy CfD

Why do the categories have to be tagged? I thought the bot used the working page rather than the category tags? Cheers, Number 57 20:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The categories have to be tagged because if somebody only follows one or a few categories they would have a chance to see that they are nominated for speedy renaming and will have a chance to participate in the discussion. In the usual situation, if there are no objections, I or other administrators move the requests here, and the bot moves them automatically (it does not care at that point whether the categories are tagged or not, it is the responsibility of the admin to check whether they are tagged). But in your cases, the bot will not understand a link to the list anyway, and we need another solution (which will probably involve talking directly to one of the bot owners). Eventually we also check the backlinks manually. Then we can also ask the bot owner to tag the categories first, and handle them after two days assuming there have been no objections. Other regulars at CfD, as I suggested, might have better solutions.

What do you mean " the bot will not understand a link to the list". The intention was to post the list of moves to the working page when it was time to be processed. Number 57 20:53, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You mean. all 8000 to this page: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working? Yes, in this case the bot will process them. (It will be a nightmare to check the backlinks, but this is our problem). Then we only need to find an operator to tag the pages.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:02, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting this - I was planning on feeding them through the working page so no-one else had to. Happy to take over. Cheers, Number 57 21:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. It will likely take a couple of months, and there will be enough work for both of us, and for other users as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:33, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, do you know why Cydebot deletes some category redirects and not others? Number 57 21:45, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not know, though I noticed this quite some time ago. I also noticed that deleted categories do not have any significant backlinks, but also there are some other categories without backlinks which do not get deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:56, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I realised already - we'll have to do them in batches of categories that are related; for instance, Category:Abkhazian presidential election, 2014 couldn't be emptied by the bot because Category:Candidates in the 2014 Abkhazian presidential election uses a template ({{Candidates for President of Abkhazia category}}) to categorise itself (I've fixed this set). The US state elections by year may have to be done in one go even though it's a very large batch, as they use {{Category U.S. State elections by year}}; this is why there are some very strange things happening with Category:2000 Alabama elections and the like. I've worked out the correction needed in the sandbox, but don't want to post it to the template until the batch has been moved, as otherwise it messes with the non-moved ones. I'll try and get this lot sorted tomorrow. Cheers, Number 57 00:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I get it correctly (I did not yet look at the cats), the batch will not be removed before an administrator (me, or another admin working at CfD) checks the backlinks, which probably will include the template, and fixes them. We also have to be careful to keep Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working of a tractable size, since it is also used for a lot of other things, and it is probably goot to wait until the previous batch has been removed from there (and sometimes we have backlogs) before posting the next one. Well, things are sometimes disappointingly slow, but at least we will do the job and will not negatively affect other people's jobs.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:32, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now I looked at the Alabama categories, and, indeed, the template needs to be fixed but I do not know how to fix it.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:48, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, I've prepared the correction to the template, but if it's made now, all the other state election categories that haven't been moved will have the same problem - hence why they probably should all be moved at the same time, even though it's a huge batch. Perhaps a solution would be that once Cydebot has moved the categories, instead of remaining on the Working page, I move them to User:Number 57/Election categories to be checked and then do the checking from that page rather than bung up the working page for weeks. Number 57 08:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now I also see that old categories can be deleted, so I am going to eventually remove them from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working (they can be moved to the dedicated page if you wish). Another option would be to have two templates, an old one and a modified one, and replace the old one in the processed categories? This is considerably more work, but we at least avoid some categories to stay for weeks with a wrong template.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough: The page in my userspace would not be for ones ready for deletion, but for ones that Cydebot had finished but still needed to be checked. The idea was to put all the state categories on the working page for Cydebot to process quickly (ie today), then move them to the other page when it had finished. This would mean we wouldn't have to wait weeks to finish the task, or have the complexity of another template, and also avoids filling up the working page for weeks. Number 57 08:40, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I got it, my point is that checking was much easier than I though - the problem is not with the backlinks as I expected, but with the renamed categories. Let us do as you suggest with all the US categories, moving them first for processing and then for a dedicated page, so that I can go and look at what needs can be deleted. (I am on a very tight schedule till Tuesday but generally will be around time to time).--Ymblanter (talk) 08:44, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great :) I'll sort it in an hour or two hopefully, then move them to the userspace. Number 57 08:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of Airbnb

I know that obviously the section

WP:ARBPIA restrictions; but is the whole page really "reasonably" construed (which is stricter than broadly construed) to be related to the conflict? Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

OTOH looking at that edit history the protection does seem warranted at-least until the issue dies down. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:11, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we do not have a section protection so that I had no choice (except of course passing it to another admin - I just saw it on RFPP). I am not happy with the situation myself, but I do not see how we can solve it without going to ArbCom or splitting the article (and then I doubt that the West Bank incident is worth of a separate article).--Ymblanter (talk) 17:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since not all ECP protection has to be through the automatic ArbCom restrictions, maybe you can protect it ECP for 3-6 months? By then hopefully the dispute will die down, and that is better than protecting it indefinitely. Or you can see if semi-protection staves off most of the disruption and edit warring. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:26, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is arbitration enforcement and has been logged as such (and the request was to protect the article because of ARBPIA). I am not sure I can now so easily remove or lower the protection. I do not think we have a mechanism of lowering ARBPIA protections.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what I'm saying is that: the ARBPIA protections only automatically apply to pages that are "reasonably construed" to be related to the conflict. If you agree with me that the Airbnb page is not reasonably construed, (though it may be broadly construed to be related to the conflict) then we are free to apply whatever protection for whatever length as is appropriate. Am I making any sense? :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:36, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right, I checked the decision again, and it says "reasonably construed", not "broadly construed". Indeed, we can try to lower protection in 6 months to semi and see what happens. I will most certainly forget about it in 6 month and will appreciate a ping if possible.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:45, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks; I put a reminder in my calendar :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Time zone change in Volgograd Oblast

Hi Ymblanter, would you mind taking a look at Template talk:RussiaTimeZone#Template-protected edit request on 13 December 2018? Thanks, Cobblet (talk) 10:07, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, please check.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Can I request a Semi-protect at

Guatemala City Airport please because IPs keep disruptively keep editing it and not using the edit summary or sources Breakroute (talk) 16:16, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 22:45, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Breakroute (talk) 08:23, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, it looks like you added the protection template but didn't actually protect the page (see the logs here). Airplaneman ✈ 20:45, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, indeed it looks like I screwed up. I was traveling and only had five minutes in the morning, using a mobile device. Anyway, now protected for three weeks (exactly what I planned to do in the morning).--Ymblanter (talk) 20:49, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Editing, especially admin tasks, are tricky on mobile. Airplaneman ✈ 21:03, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, this was not the first time things happened, and then for the whole day, until I returned home, I had no time and no internet access, meaning no chance to check anything.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:10, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now I know the problem why the BOT kept reverting my edits you and I didn't do it properly. Anyway thanks for being so helpful, users like you make Wikipedia a better place. Breakroute (talk) 21:38, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

page protection

Hi Ymblanter, Greetings to you. From my observation, the PP tag would be removed by bot upon the expiration date. I noticed a user removing 3 pp tag, just wondering is this the right/ok practice. - see [47], [48], and [49]. Kindly advise.

talk) 11:56, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

As soon as protection has indeed expired I do not see any problems with these edits (though the best practice is indeed to leave to a bot whatever can be done by a bot).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, Ok. Good to know. Thank you for your quick response. Cheers.

talk) 20:10, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:12, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for reading all my messages and doing what they say. Breakroute (talk) 21:34, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:48, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aida Hanemayer (Lisenkova)

Hello, dear Yaroslav. I write articles in wikipedia very rarely. It's a shame if this article is deleted. I believe this artist deserves to be featured on Wikipedia. My English is not very good. I hope that more experienced participants will finalize the article. I added links to authoritative sources, which indicate her paintings in the Pushkin Museum, museums of Volgograd and Odessa. There are so many videos, but I understand that this is not an authoritative source. With respect, Олег Черкасский (talk) 19:40, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At his point, this is not me who decides. If sources are good and prove notability, normally there should not be a problem to keep the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• • Article removed, very offensively. In the Russian version approvedОлег Черкасский (talk) 08:33, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GiantSnowman. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GiantSnowman/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 31, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GiantSnowman/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Bradv🍁 21:42, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tnx.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:43, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Katherine Maher

Hey Ymblanter, I wasn't sure if you meant your own user talk page or the article talk page so forgive me, but you raised a interesting concern with my expansion of the alt text. Have you seen

MOS:ALT so that no knowledge is lost. Certainly the information isn't critical but that's kind of the point in my opinion. TheAwesomeHwyh (talk) 19:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I should also note that its not just the blind / visually impaired community that benefits from this, people in low-bandwidth situations can opt to turn of images and replace them with alt text. TheAwesomeHwyh (talk) 19:49, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please start discussion at the talk page of the article. To me your arguments look absolutely ridiculous, but may be this is just me.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:57, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion started here. TheAwesomeHwyh (talk) 20:10, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Canot Delete

Why delete Valaiyars page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkalaiarasan86 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All explanations are on the AfD page.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Merry

		Happy Christmas!
		Hello Ymblanter, Early in A Child's Christmas in Wales the young Dylan and his friend Jim Prothero witness smoke pouring from Jim's home. After the conflagration has been extinguished Dylan writes that Nobody could have had a noisier Christmas Eve. And when the firemen turned off the hose and were standing in the wet, smoky room, Jim's Aunt, Miss. Prothero, came downstairs and peered in at them. Jim and I waited, very quietly, to hear what she would say to them. She said the right thing, always. She looked at the three tall firemen in their shining helmets, standing among the smoke and cinders and dissolving snowballs, and she said, "Would you like anything to read?" My thanks to you for your efforts to keep the 'pedia readable in case the firemen chose one of our articles :-) Best wishes to you and yours and happy editing in 2019. MarnetteD|Talk 23:04, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and also best wishes to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Urmary

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard

to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on

section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify

their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

here. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 20:20, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

This is bullshit.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please give protection to the Mangalore article from frequent vandalisms

I would like to bring to your notice that you had protected the Mangalore article from vandalism during Sept-Oct 2018.
Even now, there are frequent insertions of Tulu administrative language and Tulunadu regions into the Mangalore article. This was the same reason, as to why it was earlier protected (Sept-Oct).
I request you to give protection to the Mangalore article again ASAP.
2401:4900:3693:4BC0:50D0:2C58:F69E:AC94 (talk) 09:27, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done for 6 months.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:36, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year 2019!
	Hi Ymblanter! Thank you for all the hard work and effort you put into Wikipedia. God bless! Onel5969 TT me 14:36, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, also best wishes to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:01, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep a watch on Yudirai account. He is the person vandalizing Mangalore related articles with poor Tulu content

I request you to please keep a watch on this user account Yudisthir Shivaprasad Rai Yudirai(talk).
He is the same person who is repeatedly vandalizing

Tulunadu

content, using multiple accounts.
Yesterday, the Mangalore article got protected from IP edits due to his Tulu related vandalisms.
On 18th July 2018, the Tulu Nadu received page protection from his IP related vandalism. But, since Yudirai(talk) user is autoconfirmed, he again vandalized that article the very next day.
He has also vandalized the Bunt (community) article as well. The user account Bunt56(talk) is a sock-puppet of Yudirai(talk).
He could certainly vandalize the Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada articles once again.
223.186.240.27 (talk) 09:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The account did not edit since October. If you suspect sockpuppetry please open a

WP:SPI.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:19, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing

List of observatory codes (000–499)

, Ymblanter.

Onel5969 has gone over this page again and marked it as unpatrolled. Their note is:

Hey there. This editor is splitting a bunch of articles, without providing the proper attribution back to the article they are splitting from. Just wanted to give you a head's up.

Please contact Onel5969 for any further query.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:57, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, attribution is indeed needed. I will provide one now.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:03, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I worked with that editor a bit this morning, I think they get it now. Had to go back over about 40 articles they had split without attribution. Think I got most of them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:24, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal Greetings

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Ymblanter, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, talk) 07:10, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply ] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thsnk you, also best wishes to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up

After the block you performed, you may want to consider also revoking TP access at User talk:Nyah Grotusque, as per edits there. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I want to consider it, but they have posted a formal unblock request, and, even though this is clearly nonsense, I am afraid we need another administrator to reject it and to revoke talk page access.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Favonian just revoked it and email. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and even before I finished writing the previous reply. Good.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's the usual LTA, whose antics resulted in ANI being protected earlier today. Gagging is called for. Favonian (talk) 12:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hello Ymblanter: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Thank you, and also happy holidays to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you so much for all your work keeping RFPP under control during this past week when so many “regulars” are away from their computers. I hope whatever holidays you celebrate were enjoyable, and the new year will be a good one for you! MelanieN (talk) 23:56, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Melanie. Happy holidays to you as well, and thanks for working at RFPP.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rm talk page access

Hey, Would you like to remove the talk page access to the IP talk page and extend the block because of this disprtive unblock request containing the chicken nugget image, which you don't mind doing (talk page stalker). Sheldybett (talk) 04:42, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I added this to my watchlist, will react if they continue disruption.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rafale deal controversy

Do you believe that full protection was justified when only one editor was edit warring against 5 editors?

• An edit from 23 December by Accesscrawl, reverted by DBigXray.[50]
• 23 December revert of MBlazeLightning by DBigXray.
• 23 December same like above.
• 24 December revert of an IP by DBigXray.
• 25 December revert of NavjotSR by DBigXray.
• 28 December revert by DBigXray to his preferred version.
• 28 December DBigXray reverted me.

Already warned for edit warring on 24 December. He made 3 reverts after getting a warning and has reverted 5 different editors then ran to ask protection of his preferred version.[51] I don't think a page protection was warranted at this stage when only one editor is edit warring everybody. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 12:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe this is just one editor who edits disruptively please make an ANI case against them. But please not in the same manner as the last one, since otherwise nobody is going to react on it. Concerning full protection, edit-warring was happening in parallel with the discussion at the talk page. This is not really acceptable. Please conclude the discussion first and come to consensus. I checked that the version on which I protected, the WP:WRONGVERSION, does not contain vandalism or BLP violation. If I missed them, please let me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:49, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It should be obvious that this group of editor above, are more interested in litigation at ANI and edit warring instead of improving the page or else my pings for joining the talk page discussions would not have been ignored. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:53, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RPP

I know RPP is the place for this kind of thing but I wasn't sure what to do with multiple pages that need protecting. Help:Introduction has some pages that are semi-protected but some pages that are not and they keep getting vandalised. Thank you for your time. Whispering^(t) 16:57, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have protected some, but there are too many of them, I am not able to protect all of them in one go. I can finish it later, but if there are some which require urgent protection (say vandalized today) I can urgently protect them.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:06, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should I throw it up on

WP:ANI then? Whispering^(t) 18:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Probably AN. It will likely be faster than waiting for me.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:13, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Persian miniature

Hi, 3 days wasn't long enough it seems! Johnbod (talk) 20:57, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, for 2 weeks--Ymblanter (talk) 21:03, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Johnbod (talk) 00:04, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:19, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changing Czech Republic to Czechia.

Per this edit, what should the reaction be? I reverted it first, then undid my edit due to my unsure thinking. The links don't need to be changed, they were fine as is, and this is a controversial edit, I feel, per the current consensus on changing Czech Republic to Czechia, being that it should be automatically reverted. This user is aware of this, and has been involved in discussuons on this, yet did not use an edit summary, and marked the edit as minor. I'm confused on what the thinking is on edits like these and how to proceed. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 04:44, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, they just corrected the references - both indeed point out to Czechia, for whatever reason. I remember however that we had an LTA which was changing the Czech Republic to Czechia everywhere. I did not check the edits of this user, and I do not have time for this research now, but I see that they only have less than 100 edits - if most of them are disruptive, this would be a clear ANI case.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:30, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protection templates

Hi, as soon as the protection template was taken off, the IP-hopping editor is back on Finnic peoples and Balts. This has now happened the second or third time. Would it be possible to add a permanent protection template? Thanks. Blomsterhagens (talk) 01:06, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Both have been protected by Scott Burley for three months while I was sleeping--Ymblanter (talk) 09:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ymblanter/2018&oldid=1142676604"