User talk:Ymblanter/2023

Happy New Year!

Ymblanter,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, also happy New Year to you. Ymblanter (talk) 20:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award
		For over 360 article reviews during 2022. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:21, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

I see the issue was taken care of while I was sleeping. Ymblanter (talk) 06:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] - GizzyCatBella🍁 11:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this why I blocked them. Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nazran conflict: Revision history Ymblanter Здравствуйте уважаемый администратор, обратите внимание в статье Назрановский конфликт участник WikiEditor1234567123 откатывает правку другого участника с АИ источника потому что она его просто не устраивает. WikiEditor1234567123 сам создал статью по нарративным источникам рассказам одного старика Казбека Далгату. Источник который добавлен участником ‎ Simba16 описан историком Грабовским Н. Ф. Сборник сведений о кавказских горцах Вып. 9 (Issue 9. Tiflis. 1876. p. 11). Можете защитить статью от его правок или применить административные действия, я ему и раньше объяснял на страницах обсуждения разных статей но он не понимает Товболатов (talk) 00:55, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2004 Nazran raid: Revision history здесь также он участвовал в войне. Напоминает участников отсюда Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dzurdzuketi/Archive --Товболатов (talk) 01:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I am not going to get involved into this now. If you are sure this is a sock, file a SPI request, but be sure to justify it. If not, probably dispute resolution noticeboard might be an appropriate venue. Ymblanter (talk) 09:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо за ответ, да он заблокирован в русской за вандализм бессрочно WikiEditor1234567123. Хорошего вам дня. --Товболатов (talk) 11:38, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have semi-protected

I thought about this, but this is the first protection, I have not seen any disruption by confirmed users, and we are not required to ec protect pages in this situation. I did not add it to the watchlist, but if disruption by confirmed users starts I will be happy to ec protect. Ymblanter (talk) 18:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the clarification. Mellk (talk) 18:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Br0therH00dLinez (talk) 04:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification, a user with 14 edits. Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have openend an ANI a few days ago, and no admin seems to want to have a look at it. Therefore, could you review this ANI case of mine? Thanks in advance. Veverve (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Ymblanter (talk) 10:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please protect the article on 2023 in Philippine television. This article will be the strongly persistent semi-protected article against vandalism for longest term to make.

Thank you.

User:Jon2guevarra Jon2guevarra (talk) 00:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From what I see, the disruption is only coming from one IP. We do not protect articles against one IP. If they continue they should be blocked. Ymblanter (talk) 06:44, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to [2] Doug Weller talk 17:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I always copy them from the page of the template, currently Template:Contentious topics/alert, and this is what I also did this time. I guess if the template is not up to date, the ArbCom should deal with this. Ymblanter (talk) 17:49, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, they have also changed the procedure. Thanks, I will use the new one now. Ymblanter (talk) 17:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Takes a while to catch up I was using Twinkle before with a script, that was much easier. There’s a talk page discussion on the page with the aware templates that might interest you. Don’t try using them with the visual editor! Doug Weller talk 21:20, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. No, I am not using visual editor. Ymblanter (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Didn’t think you were. I was accidentally ant it added nowiki! Doug Weller talk 21:26, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually the reason I am not using it, difficult to edit templates. Ymblanter (talk) 21:31, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You really should point that out publicly. Being hard to use discourages editors from using them. Doug Weller talk 09:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Congrats on being a very active new page patroller this month. If you want to hang out with other new page patrollers, consider joining us on the NPP Discord. Discord is text chat/chat room/instant message software that can be really fun. If not no worries. Thanks and see you around :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In November you blocked 2600:4040:9CE7:E700:10D0:334C:E36:4086 for 6 months. The editor responded by posting this contemptuous talk page post, and then proceeded to evade the block using other IP addresses in the range 2600:4040:9CE7:E700::/64, and has continued to do so, having so far made 75 edits while evading your block, as you can see at Special:Contributions/2600:4040:9CE7:E700:0:0:0:0/64. I have now blocked the /64 range, but I thought it might be worth mentioning that there is scarcely ever any point in blocking a single IPv6 address, because almost always the blocked editor can just move on to other addresses in the same range. In the vast majority of cases it is necessary to block at least the /64 range in order to have any effect at all. JBW (talk) 15:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks. Now I indeed usually block the /64 range, not sure why I only blocked this one. Ymblanter (talk) 00:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ymblanter,

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/Armenia-Azerbaijan 3. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Armenia-Azerbaijan 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 10, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Armenia-Azerbaijan 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I do not feel I have anything more to contribute. I do not think the case is needed. Ymblanter (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed an editor who seems biased to delete large amounts of information from the article Su Yiming[3] probably because he doesn't like significant relevant information mentioning that Max Parrot had indeed made a major mistake that was missed by the judges. And many media and experts were stating that Su Yiming really should had won gold but was cheated. I am not sure that such massive deletions is okay. And also you made this edit a week ago asking for a source to be provided for the page (Snowboarding at the 2022 Winter Olympics – Men's slopestyle).[4] The problem is that the source that was given, is [5] But if you actually had read the article, that source does not back the information that was being added to the article at all. So it's really unsourced original research where he or she didn't properly provide a source. I believe you may had missed that and prob should be made aware as you appear to be an experienced expert in these matters. And thought you'll know best how to handle. Thanks. 49.180.154.133 (talk) 15:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I am clearly involved with the article and can not take administrative actions related to it. When the pieces were removed, I restored them, but then the editor brought some more material trying to defend their POV. I guess you need to start with the talk page of the article. Ymblanter (talk) 23:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I just thought you should know for the sake of factual correctness. I was just giving a heads up that this editor was now adding in unsourced disinformation. He claimed that Max Parrot landed all 3 jumps (flawlessly). That's obviously factually Misleading since nobody denies he had made a major mistake by failing to grab his board on one of his jumps. But more importantly, nobody claimed that Su made enough mistakes to take him off the podium. I really don't want to get into an edit war over a trivial article where one editor seems biased against Su so I informed him (to provide a source), but he hasn't responded after a week. And even though you are an admin, I think you are still able to correct the article if it contains wrong and unsourced statements. Since because nobody else seems to correct it or respond to Talk, I recently just boldly did that now anyways and gave my reasoning.[6] Lastly it should go without saying that my IP address changes but am the same OP who created this thread. :)49.181.129.208 (talk) 04:34, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you clean up my dabs using a script/AWB or did you do it manually? Asking becauze I don't know how to do it via AWB or a script? If you knew how that would be great. Qwerty284651 (talk) 12:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did it manually. I was patrolling new articles and saw one which had several dabs which were straightforward to correct, so that I corrected them. Ymblanter (talk) 12:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know of a tool/gadget, that speeds up dab fixing? Qwerty284651 (talk) 12:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am using the tool which shows dabs, but I do not know how to fix them non-manually. Ymblanter (talk) 12:58, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A patroller-only tool? Qwerty284651 (talk) 13:01, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is a script, I believe this one. Ymblanter (talk) 13:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I'm not seeing an RM on

Sorry but I'm gonna put this back. Volunteer Marek 00:51, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have

Talk:False accusations of genocide in Donbas#Requested move 25 July 2022 which was closed as not moved. You need to move the article back and start a new RM.--Ymblanter (talk) 01:03, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I see it now. I didn't notice it because it looked like you were referring to an ongoing RM> Still. Why are we letting non-autoconfirmed accounts do this and then end up with all kinds of messes on our hands that need to be continuously cleaned up? Volunteer Marek 01:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is too cluttered. I will see now whether I can protect the article (but I am not going to protect the talk page). Ymblanter (talk) 01:12, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that I myself protected the article on 13 October, we should be fine now. Ymblanter (talk) 01:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		Just wanted to thank you for your efforts over at NPP. It's a truly thankless job, so, well, thank you.Onel5969 TT me 15:03, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter, Hello, how are you? you can make an article without a redirect. I couldn't figure it out. Vieta (dish) Товболатов (talk) 13:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC) A a few articles not checked if you can take a look at the time.--Товболатов (talk) 13:33, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what your question is. The article is there, seems to be notable and in a reasonable good shape (categories still needed though). Ymblanter (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ymblanter,

Three parties have been added to the Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 arbitration case. The evidence phase has been extended and will close on February 21, 2023.

Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Armenia-Azerbaijan 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 21, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Armenia-Azerbaijan 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I simply don't understand how you induce from my use of quotation marks that I think that the "ombudsman does not exist, and the Donetsk People's Republic does not exist"[8]. And so I can't follow your conclusion that the question I raised is rendered moot. I also have to add that I didn't like the word "kindergarten", since I left that institution more than half a century ago. Rsk6400 (talk) 17:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I am afraid I can not help you at this point. May be try yourself adding to your sentences quotation marks and see how it looks like: adding to your "sentences" "quotation marks" for "example". Ymblanter (talk) 17:38, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at

Thanks, GeneralNotability (talk) 20:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, why did you revert my edit on Little Jack Horner article and you even protected it? There was no disruptive vandalism, just a case of a user confusing one for another, people who come to edit an article for the first time cannot be considered disruptive vandals. Jack Horner is the main antagonist, not a major antagonist in Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. 151.36.154.191 (talk) 11:31, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please raise this question at the talk page of the article and achieve

consensus. Ymblanter (talk) 11:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, colleague! I would like to know why do you support an unconstructive contributor of the Wikipedia project. Tatar latin version not needed citations and source like tatar cyrillic. If you will continue to do this without arguments I will be forced to attract the attention of the entire community. I'm sure there's no place for participants who support ideological deletion of information. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 21:46, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it does need citations. You can try to attract attention of the whole community, which then have a chance to see an organized group of users pushing their hobby and trying to sell it as a real alphabet currently in use. Ymblanter (talk) 21:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today there is an official rule for transliteration of the Tatar language from Cyrillic to Latin. There is a whole article in the Tatar Wikipedia, where you can get acquainted with both sources, books, and the rule itself. I gave the link to the participant last year, but he did not respond. The participant does not have any knowledge of the rules of the Tatar language, and it is not clear referring to what he is waging a furious war on this topic. Earlier, he referred to the standards of the English Wikipedia that the Tatar Latin alphabet is prohibited here, but he did not provide any evidence of this. the user, pushing his edits, is very much engaged in forgery. and after specific questions, he will talk about another topic. When we use the international phonetic alphabet, we do not ask for AI for every word, because we know the rules of transliteration, and the ratio of sounds in the language with the letters of the alphabet of the language

But why haven't you installed similar templates to other transcriptions? Do you really think that tatar latin alphabet is a just hobby? I have already offered you to read an article about that. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 21:58, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has no official status anywhere for the last 90 years. I believe we have already discussed this. Most of the users insisting on inserting it anywhere are already blocked on multiple Wikimedia projects as long-term abuse. Ymblanter (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today there is an official rule for transliteration of the Tatar language from Cyrillic to Latin. There is a whole article in the Tatar Wikipedia, where you can get acquainted with both sources, books, and the rule itself. I gave the link to the user RedBull1984 last year, but he did not respond. The RedBull1984 does not have any knowledge of the rules of the Tatar language, and it is not clear referring to what he is waging a furious war on this topic. Earlier, he referred to the standards of the English Wikipedia that the Tatar Latin alphabet is prohibited here, but he did not provide any evidence of this. the user, pushing his edits, is very much engaged in forgery. and after specific questions, he will talk about another topic. When we use the international phonetic alphabet, we do not ask for AI for every word, because we know the rules of transliteration, and the ratio of sounds in the language with the letters of the alphabet of the language--

talk) 06:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Today

This is not what our article says. Ymblanter (talk) 06:22, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

what do you mean?

talk) 08:38, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Again, the language has no official status. Zero. You claim it is being used by some people outside Russia. Fine. Look at what is the status of Romanian Cyrillic and whether it is used in our articles such as Chișinău. Ymblanter (talk) 08:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have brought you a photo that proves the use of the Latin alphabet in state institutions of Tatarstan. There are also sources that some Tatars use the Latin alphabet, including the Tatars of Poland, where Tatar is one of the regional official languages.

talk) 08:54, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I think I provided already all necessary arguments. You and a buunch of your wiki-friends decided to make your personal hobby more significant and add Tatar Latin to all Tatar-related articles of the English Wikipedia. You already tried that elsewhere, the result was mostly blocks and reverts. All arguments why it is not appropriate have been already provided. If you think I am wrong you can take the issue to

WP:ANI. Ymblanter (talk) 09:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I think your answer violates the rules of ethical behavior in Wikipedia. Will you be able to show where we tried to do this and where they were provided or blocked? or is it from the words of an opponent who came up with everything in his fantasies? It is a pity that you were exposed to his ideological influence. Both in the Russian VP and here, he clearly has an anti-Tatar attitude, and phrases: "it's time for Tatars to understand that you won't breathe enough before you die," "I don't need your Latin alphabet," etc. In the meantime, I'm waiting for you to link to our warnings, blocking in other projects that we supposedly have.

talk) 10:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

No, I am pretty sure I blocked and warned some users myself on one of the projects I am administrator, but I can not easily find this now. Anyway, first thing you need to demonstrate that there is consensus on this project to include Tatar Latin to the articles. Ymblanter (talk) 11:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте. Подскажите пожалуйста как подать заявку на блокировку двух участников, которые находятся в коллективном сговоре по продвижению татарской латиницы. Просто никогда до этого ещё не подавал заявку на блокировку администраторам. Другого выхода не вижу. Вступать в диалог с человеком, который выдумывает, что его назвали «слепым националистом» - нет смысла. Эта война правок не прекратится со стороны их объединённого коллектива.

Я не против татарской латиницы! Но я не знаю, как и абсолютное большинство англоязычного сообщества Википедии, как правильно пишется название городов Татарии на татарской латинице. Поэтому и запрашиваю АВТОРИТЕТНЫЙ источник информации подтверждающий, что написанное на латинице правда. В ответ только война правок и ложь про какого то «слепого националиста». Их нелепые аргументы про то, что «возьмите книгу и изучите татарскую латиницу сами» очень глупы. Это всё равно, что я внесу правку о росте футболиста без источника информации и скажу «ну возьмите линейку и сами измерьте его рост». До этого уже была война правок из за татарской латиницы, она продолжается вновь. Нужны меры…

Благодарю за внимание. RedBull1984 (talk) 13:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI Ymblanter (talk) 13:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Хороший пример с футболистом, если у нас есть АИ на его рост в см, то вы зная это легко сможете перевести см, как в метры, так и в дюймы, для примера, не так ли? Или вы будете запрашивать АИ ссылаясь на то, что не умеете переводить в см в дюймы? То, что вы не хотите учить правила - это ваши нехотелки. А вот вы уже нарушаете правила этичного поведения, обвиняя в сговоре, при этом ни на какой диалог не идете. Одна лишь война правок.

talk) 15:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Based on the banner at the top of this page, I'm not sure if this is something you are unwilling to do, but if it doesn't fall into that category, could you please look at the article and the AfD and decide if the article should be deleted as a hoax? I won't go into the whole history, but it was tagged as a hoax, and I declined it, being uncomfortable making the determination that the hoax was obvious. The Russian sources of course didn't help. In any event, your linguistic abilities seem suited to the task. Easiest thing is to snow close the AfD if you agree it's a hoax, but all of this is up to you. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look later today. Despite the banner, I am still interested in Russian topics and have a bit of a knowledge. Ymblanter (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, clearly a hoax. Ymblanter (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Ymblanter (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You have put a semi protected function into Sydney United page. Can you please lower this security as there are some untrue facts that need to be rectified. Thanks Gemist10 (talk) 08:43, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, I exactly protected it to avoid this happening. Please propose your change at the talk page. Ymblanter (talk) 08:45, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It’s the removal of the untrue facts revolving around the huge segments of wording that’s been back and forth deleted. It’s based on untrue media making unproven allegations, and the history comments are being made up on untrue items. Being this is a family club, it’s quite hurtful that third party comments and facts are being used to bring this club down not to mention being adjusted by people who have no idea about the club and not even in the same country Gemist10 (talk) 08:52, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please propose your change at the talk page of the article. Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I previously have hence why I had to create the account. can you please lift the security you have implanted? It’s a lively updated sports team page. Your ban doesn’t allow player updates. Plus it’s a little unfair that you can place this security when you don’t know the club. Please please reduce the security Gemist10 (talk) 09:40, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please propose your change at the talk page of the article. Ymblanter (talk) 09:49, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the talk page. Can you please lower the security??? It’s extremely unfair that this has been put in place on a team you don’t know? Please. Gemist10 (talk) 09:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Enough is enough. You are not welcome to post on this page anymore. Ymblanter (talk) 10:15, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye on special:Contributions/179.52.223.99. This IP keeps reverting edits related to Funimation. Thank you. -174.91.109.231 (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as an active New Page Patroller, I wanted to make sure you were aware of an upcoming Wikimedia Foundation project to improve the PageTriage extension. We recently published results of user interviews, and have some findings that we would value patrollers' opinions on. If you haven't yet, please consider adding the project page to your watchlist to stay up to date with our progress! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Quito Metro has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

List of Quito Metro stations is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted

.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Quito Metro stations until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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

Bearcat (talk) 21:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the protection of Casimir Pulaski, this is a persistent problem, every few weeks a new account makes the same edit (see also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Disciple4lif). I recommend protecting it for a year and seeing if they(?) gave up by then. A few days protection may not even be noticed, given the current intervals of editing. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page has never been previously protected. I have now extended to a month and added it to my watchlist, so that I can react if smth happens. Ymblanter (talk) 13:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Hope this will help. It has been popping up on my watchlist with this stuff for months of not year+ now... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, we will see what happens. Ymblanter (talk) 06:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you consider protecting this page again, please? The disruptive IP editors jumped straight back in within 24 hours of your previous protection lapsing. One has been blocked, but there are others. Regards, MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Talk page Stalker) I put in a request for you at RPP , hopefully an admin will protect it again. Happy Editing! -I Followed The Username Policy (talk) 00:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was indeed already done while I was sleeping. Ymblanter (talk) 06:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ymblanter,

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/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 04, 2023, which is when the first evidence phase closes. Submitted evidence will be summarized by Arbitrators and Clerks at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence/Summary. Owing to the summary style, editors are encouraged to submit evidence in small chunks sooner rather than more complete evidence later.

Details about the summary page, the two phases of evidence, a timeline and other answers to frequently asked questions can be found at the case's FAQ page.

For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ymblanter, I asked in the administrators' page for an admin to provide me with the content of this deleted page - draft, because I'd like to create the page again, adding reliable sources and links. Admin Deepfriedokra suggested that I asked the content from you specifically beacuse you are the deleting admin. So I'd be grateful if you provided me with the content of the page in question. Thank you very much. Lynxavier (talk) 10:13, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not much, but the text is now at User:Lynxavier/Gustavo Bonatto. If you want to write the article based on this draft, it is ok; otherwise pls mark it for deletion once you do not need it anymore. Ymblanter (talk) 11:23, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ymblanter, I appreciate it. Lynxavier (talk) 11:33, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created the page so I don't need it anymore. Can you delete it User:Lynxavier/Gustavo Bonatto? Or should I choose speedy deletion? Thanks again for your help and your quick response. Lynxavier (talk) 12:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem, I have deleted the page. Ymblanter (talk) 12:25, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. Lynxavier (talk) 12:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I saw that you protected many important articles about the Russo-Ukrainian War. Should then

Thanks. I protected the first one; the second one is currently edited by a user who is less than 50 edits from being ec confirmed, and nobody seems to have any objections. I think the protection right now will probably make more harm than good.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:53, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Ymblanter! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:42, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Ymblanter (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to nominate Vladlen Tatarsky for DYK. What do you think? BorgQueen (talk) 11:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously do not object, but I will not do it myself since I would need to review another submission, and this task is best left to native speakers. Ymblanter (talk) 11:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'm happy to do that. BorgQueen (talk) 11:44, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 11:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm just leaving a message as I forgot to elaborate further in my edit summary and I understand you were the one who reverted my prior edits.

I see, indeed, whereas not strictly followed, I checked now a few articles and the given name indeed goes before the pseudonym, so it can be reinstated. Ymblanter (talk) 20:34, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

However, I do not understand why you put Russian and Ukrainian names in a note. This is absolutely not an established practice. Ymblanter (talk) 20:36, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I realized after the fact that it was less common than I thought it was. I was using Volodymyr Zelenskyy just for comparison while retooling the lead, and on that article the different spellings and pronunciations are in a note, so in the moment I assumed that was standard. I later realized it wasn't, but left it for the sake of keeping the lead more concise. But if you feel that it should be in the prose rather than a note then I'm indifferent either way. Estar8806 (talk) 00:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am definitely used to see it in the prose. I will amend this part today. Ymblanter (talk) 05:15, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 April 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Vladlen Tatarsky, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 05:58, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Bigshlomo (talk) 14:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On

killed by a bomb hidden in a bust of himself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vladlen Tatarsky. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Vladlen Tatarsky), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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

.

Aoidh (talk) 00:03, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Ymblanter (talk) 05:17, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In 2016, you template-protected this template. It has only 545 transclusions, so that seems a bit excessive. Would you mind reducing it to ECP? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:08, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think there is any policy which would justify ecp. I can reduce to semi, but I am not sure whether this would be a good move. Ymblanter (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 184#Should we use ECP on templates?. The reason I'm asking is that a requested the module it uses be template-protected to match the template, and the responding admin decided ECP is better (Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2023/04#Module:NBA team standings) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks, I reduced it to ecp. Ymblanter (talk) 16:52, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please increase the protection level of this page? 103.81.213.168 continues to make disruptive/original research edits that are erroneously being accepted. Thank you. - Ram1751 (talk) 00:27, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was a week ago, and it is only one IP, so I would better not. However, if you warn them, specifically mentioning the page and what they do wrong, and they continue, I can partial-block them from the page. Ymblanter (talk) 05:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today I tried to retrieve a new password (haven't used Wiki edit in a long time) and found that my IP was blocked. Since I live in the Philippines and have no fix IP but just get one assigned from my provider, this has nothing to do with me. Please help me solving this.

The IP address or range 136.158.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪Ymblanter‬ for the following reason(s):

Vandalism

This block will expire on 15:00, 24 September 2023. InfinityNik (talk) 06:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was a lot of vandalism coming from this IP address, so I think it is best if you keep contributing as a registered user. Ymblanter (talk) 06:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I live in Asia. I don't know who had this IP before me. We have changing IPs when we have brownouts for example InfinityNik (talk) 15:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you didn’t subst: the template. I thought the anonymous user added it [the template] themselves, but didn’t realize they were blocked. I had restored the previous revision with the unblock request but then got reverted with them saying for me not to revert them again. I apologize for reverting that. Tropicalkitty (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I never substitute the template, a bot will come and do the job. The IP is not in a position to touch the template because it was me and not them who put it. (They may remove it though, but then they may not post an unblock request). Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And now Ponyo revoke the talk page access. Not that I am surprised. Ymblanter (talk) 17:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I always block this particular time suck with talk page access revoked from the get go or they'll just keep clamouring for attention.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for handling this. Tropicalkitty (talk) 18:02, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, a good idea. Ymblanter (talk) 18:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I started a SPI for Jafaz and I think it is obvious those IPs belong to him. The last sock I have found from him was blocked on uk.wiki and globally locked in late April (details here). This sock was created the day after the previous sock was blocked. It looks like he is now using IPs instead. Do you think I would be safe to just revert those IPs? Mellk (talk) 05:09, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see much sense to revert edits which are not obviously disruptive. On one hand of course we give a serial POV pusher and abuser a free pass, on the other hand, a risk of a false positive becomes too big IMO. Ymblanter (talk) 05:41, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I will wait for the outcome of the SPI first before any mass-reverting. Mellk (talk) 05:43, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Хотел бы узнать: практикуется ли в анвики ручная выдача этого флага опытным участникам других разделов, не проходящим по критериям, аналогично флагам подтверждённого и автоподтверждённого? Если да, я бы запросил его получение, мне кажется я достаточно опытный участник (80к правок в рувики с 2010, 1,5М правок ботов, флаг бота в десяти разделах, включая Викисклад). Я бы хотел внести некоторые мелкие правки в статью о мятеже, а она экстендед-заблокирована. MBH (talk) 08:54, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Флаг можно выдать вручную, но только по запросу тут: Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Extended confirmed. Это займёт какое-то время, если дело срочное, можно оставить запрос через {{Edit extended-protected}} на странице обсуждения. Ymblanter (talk) 10:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article has had many negative changes, your revert is also a not an improvement from its original text before the edit by WikiAd0023 in Jan 2023. I tried to improve the text as per accounts and true definitions not on the basis of say say and here here. Schools in India provide books with accounts to this part of their history, your vandalism wont change the truth for them or me. I will not consider donating to Wikipedia unless you go through the text and from 1st of Jan 2023 and correct the texts removed and altered by anon and abusive people. I have clearly tried to make an effort where as you did not even include a sentence from my edit. IsTruthSweet (talk) 12:08, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You tried and failed miserably. Sorry for you. You should have read our policies first. Ymblanter (talk) 12:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From you reply I guess your not a professional and manner individual, only leading to an assumption that you are a “dude” of this part of the internet if not the old furniture of Wikipedia metaphorical at the very least. It’s not that I wish to get personal with you but contributors who make an honest effort for improvement should be treated with respect at very least, unlike you who hasn’t even contributed a single word to the article. From looking at your previous talks and contributions I only see worthless changes mostly to the annoyance to the contributors. I don’t think users on Wikipedia need your “welcome to Wikipedia” Message on their front page especially when you just made an annoying revert or removable of their contribution. IsTruthSweet (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tbh I am not interested in your opinion. Ymblanter (talk) 14:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to ECP this talk page based on the previous sock puppetry allegation raised here, here and here. and the protection history and ongoing discussion related to this merger? TheWikiholic (talk) 20:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not think we can ECP a talk page. May be in a case of massive ongoing sockpuppetry with confirmed account, which does not seem to be happening here. We even try to semi-protect talk page for a shortest possible period. Ymblanter (talk) 20:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, what are the chances of semi-protecting the page for a short period, till the ongoing move discussion is over? TheWikiholic (talk) 05:18, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest is to see whether there is a flow on non-confirmed users to the discussion and then ask at

WP:RFPP. If there is ongoing disruption, we usually react quickly. Ymblanter (talk) 05:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

[9] The assassinated politician cats should not have been moved; the parent category may have changed to 'Politicians in X', but changing 'Assassinated X politicians' to 'Politicians assassinated in X' to match introduces a completely different meaning. Kingsif (talk) 23:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think at this point you should just take them to a full CfD, this is the best venue to solve such issues. Ymblanter (talk) 07:01, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Protection expired at André Onana, unsourced changes are back. Could you please reinstate protection? Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 09:16, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ymblanter (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 11:25, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem Ymblanter (talk) 11:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, you salted the above page in February, do you think a redirect to Syed Fardeen (Indian singer) would be possible? Nobody (talk) 11:10, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let us wait until the page gets reviewed (before that, we are risking a speedy deletion), and afterwards I can make a redirect. Ymblanter (talk) 17:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you help me with this question? [10]. Хоббит (talk) 05:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It probably should go to AfD, this would be the best way to discuss such issues. Ymblanter (talk) 13:31, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I nominated, but someone deleted template, I already made 2 reverts. Хоббит (talk) 14:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look, removing an AfD temlate is unacceptable. Ymblanter (talk) 14:04, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, I had the template removed because at the time of its publishing there was no AfD request filed. Since now it is filed, I won't make any further removals of the template. I looked at the article and its subject is clearly not a hoax; for any further information look at the AfD discussion. Janeknichell (talk) 14:09, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The song is anonymous. How does that fit in the copyright picture?--Aristophile (talk) 19:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine: For works published anonymously or under a pseudonym, copyright expires 70 years after the work was released. Ymblanter (talk) 19:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The part I changed was due to being non neutral wording. Even if content is sourced, its wording can be misleading or biased. Thanks for your comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordi2023 (talk • contribs) 06:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it seems you have me on your sights ;)

The paragraph is astutely false. Francoist treatment of Catalan was negative. If you want sources here you have:

https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronologia_de_la_repressi%C3%B3_del_catal%C3%A0 (google translate)

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

https://theconversation.com/the-rebirth-of-catalan-how-a-once-banned-language-is-thriving-47587

https://www.brusselstimes.com/171278/catalonias-struggle-to-defend-its-language

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/22/catalan-language-survived

https://americansforcatalonia.wordpress.com/2016/09/19/francos-suppression-of-the-catalan-language-in-1939/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326566354_Prohibition_Tolerance_Co-option_Cultural_Appropriation_and_Francoism_in_Catalonia_1939-75

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

https://useless-catalanfacts.tumblr.com/post/150069441318/prohibitions-of-the-catalan-language-throughout

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/franco-s-facism-couldn-t-kill-catalan-peig-s-prose-couldn-t-save-irish-1.2120126

Isolately highlighting an anecdotic improvement out of context has a clear intention. Like saying (ad hitlerum, I know) that by 1945 Himmler was willing to negotiate with the allies a settlement to bring peace to Europe. I am sur you understand the point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordi2023 (talk • contribs) 06:22, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On both occasions, you removed sourced text, and on this occasion, you replaced it by your own unsourced opinion. This is at variance with our policies, in particular,

WP:RGW because it perfectly describes your Wikipedia activity. Ymblanter (talk) 08:01, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 01:16, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The user has been subject to arbitration enforcement sanction which already expired. Other than that I promised not to discuss this user with the exception of possible arbitration case opened against him, so unfortunately I am not going to answer the questions. Ymblanter (talk) 03:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, if you intended to include peer-to-peer discussions in that promise, no problem.

Are there any other experienced users I could ask about this?

The more I search, the more absurdity I find.

I’m preparing to take a wikibreak because of college, but if I had the time…

Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 20:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but if I continue this discussion I may run into serious trouble. Ymblanter (talk) 00:39, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can see, the articles on settlements in Ukraine always use "city" over "town" for gorod/misto regardless of the population, but for those in Belarus and Russia, we use both "town" and "city" for gorod (depending on if the population is greater or less than 100,000). Is there a reason for this difference, do you know? Thanks. Mellk (talk) 15:07, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. Some genius some time ago tried to denote all urban-type settlements in Ukraine as towns which is incorrect. Consequently, the only solution was not to use towns for Ukraine. For Russia and Belarus, we never encountered such problem, and are still using cities for big localities with the city status and town for small ones. Ymblanter (talk) 20:26, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so that's why. Thanks for the explanation. Mellk (talk) 20:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy some stroops for your tireless contributions to Wikipedia! Thank you! Top5a (talk) 23:19, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you--Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for informing me about this wikipedia rule. The content in

It might be removed, but since the content is reliably sourced, and the issue is not its validity but whether it should be in the article, the best course of action is to open a talk page discussion. Ymblanter (talk) 16:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Lightbloom (talk) 16:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Ymblanter (talk) 16:42, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Would you kindly restore Draft:Maratha reservation agitation? It is a notable topic, I was working on it, but I stopped it, and it got deleted after six months of inactivity. It got traction again in the news, and I would like to work on it. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:05, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Ymblanter (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, it is very much appreciated. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Ymblanter (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like that IP that added the copyvio to Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 is back. The user is IP hopping, so it might be a good idea to semi-protect the article. - ZLEA _T\^C 00:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, started with 2 weeks. Ymblanter (talk) 05:24, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

further to your msg how this Dovbush (disambiguation) is about war? And please answer me the question: are films shot in Hollywood Californian or American? the Ukraine SSR was only part of CCCP, now because of war, there is new true that Ukraine SSR was independence country, and there was no Soviet Union? Why this edition was reverted? Its really a detail, but its 1984 Newspeak and Wikipedian Ministry of Truth, this propaganda is too much for me i proposed a consensus to call it Soviet Ukrainian, but in nature it was just Soviet Mlacroixxx (talk) 19:29, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessarily about a war, it is about a conflict. And if you do not stop I will block your account since you have been sufficiently warned. Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is about a conflict? I been warned because I edit according to true that film produced in 1959 in Soviet Union was Soviet? Please tell me are movies produced in California are American or Californian? Should we edit all of the Hollywood movies pages? This page didnt even exist on enwiki and because I wrote the fact in there I been warned, wikiMinitrue at it best Mlacroixxx (talk) 19:44, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My point is not that you are right or wrong, my point is that you may not make this edit. Ymblanter (talk) 19:47, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is anything now about Ukraine, Soviet, Russia is one way newspeak

minitrue version. Maybe it was artistically a bad movie so it should be Russian then, if movie was good it should be Ukrainian? Its really absurd, and we taking about movie about mountaineer from 18th century Poland. Movie, mountaineer, where is UKRUconflict in this? And shouldn't @Altenmann also be warned for performing an edition war? So now Ukrainian SSR was a independence country? But as i checked Chernobyl disaster happened in "Ukrainian SSR, Soviet Union" and how about Reichskommissariat Ukraine? Was it independent Ukrainian country? Once again movie, that dont have even a page and its about guy who lived in Poland 4 centuries ago and you saying I am editing something about war, I am the bad guy. And this is what wikipedia is about when you see error that obvious like (1959 in Soviet is not Soviet) you edit it, or just 2+2=5? Mlacroixxx (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

If you want to discuss this, you should be discussing it at the talk page of the article, not on my user talk page. I, for one, am not interested in discussing it, but some other users might be. Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I put my voice in discussion there, pls join if you want. The question that we are discussing here is why I am being prosecuted and witch hunt for writing that 2+2 is 4 (that Soviet Union produced Soviet things)? Mlacroixxx (talk) 21:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I provided the reference to

WP:RUSUKR, which should be enough, and I am not interested in discussing the content in this case. Ymblanter (talk) 21:13, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Exactly as i told you, it is nothing about a war and your reference and accusations were unnecessary Mlacroixxx (talk) 21:34, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not get an impression you were listening to me. Ymblanter (talk) 05:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't quite figured out the "dividing line" process at

So here's a barnstar for your efforts : ) - jc37 16:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!

		The Categorisation Barnstar
		For helping out at WT:CFD/W - jc37 16:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply ]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:39, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I was curious as to why a statement from Michigan State University wasn't a reliable source for them attempting to fire their own coach? User:KENGRIFFEY24FAN KENGRIFFEY24FAN (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter is not a reliable source and is best avoided (though can be used in some situations from verified accounts). I would suggest that you discuss changes on the talk page first, especially in view of enhanced disruption IP activity which prompted me to semi-protect the article. Ymblanter (talk) 05:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have been solved in the meanwhile. Ymblanter (talk) 06:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, I hope you're well.

Sorry, I didn't spot this in time, and not even sure if you're the correct person to ask, but this speedy move of numerous football national football team pages that you initiated was premature - the discussion on the article themselves is still open at Talk:Afghanistan_national_football_team#Requested move 23 September 2023 and the balance of consensus in the discussion so far seems to be very much against a mass renaming from "X national football team" to "X men's national football team". Please could you revert the category moves until the discussion is closed? Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:02, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see, the closure was contested, and I should have checked that before moving. Could we please wait until the discussion gets closed? Tagging and listing these categories is really a lot of work, and I would prefer to exclude the possibility that I do it twice. If the discussion gets closed as oppose, I will tag them and list them for moving back. Would this be ok with you? Ymblanter (talk) 10:10, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that will be fine, thank you.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:15, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I moved them with this diff, which will help me to find them back. Ymblanter (talk) 10:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen the outcome, will start working on the move tomorrow. Ymblanter (talk) 22:07, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru: The move back was opposed [11] and there is unfortunately very little I can do. They should now go to CFD, and the argument that they should not have been moved is not going to be sufficient. Ymblanter (talk) 20:50, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter: what? The initial move was flagged as controversial, so they must be moved back to their longterm titles. The CFD can take place from there if necessary. You assured me that this reversion would go ahead as soon as the RM was closed, and nobody is allowed to oppose it. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 21:03, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if I get dragged to ArbCom for acting against consensus pls do not forget to make a statement supporting me. Ymblanter (talk) 21:13, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, well I certainly hope it won't come to that! But to be sure, I'll use every one of my available characters at the case in your defence. I will admit that I don't know the conventions for category moves as I do for article moves, but over at

WP:RM/TR there is a fairly strict BRD rule in place for page moves, and far from being considered disruptive, reverting a controversial move is expected if it turns out to be Contested. Cheers and thanks for handling the heavy lifting here and your hard work on the project in general.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Was checking up on the speedy renames I proposed recently, and saw that you removed the one for

It is listed at Cfd/manual, so someone (me or any other admin) will sometimes do it. I already looked at the template and could not immediately figure out how to modify it to account for the category move, but I might give it another try. Ymblanter (talk) 17:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last edit reverted as

What you did was obviously NOT the revert of the last edit (and not of the IP edit). Please in the future get your story correct before accusing the others. Ymblanter (talk) 02:54, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Ymblanter. As a Russian-speaking experienced user, could you please check out this deletion request "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maida of Aukh" and give your insight on the topic? Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 14:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Superficially it looks like you are right, more detailed study would require a lot of time. The article seems to be on its way to deletion, may be this study is not even needed. Ymblanter (talk) 14:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tiõrv! Is there any possible you could help out some more with the IP address editor 45.234.19.145/45.234.19.172/45.234.19.146 (and likely others) and revert the rest of their edits too? Also I have no clue how to revert all the random edits on the Skolt Sámi to get rid of all the Cyrillic additions since there have been reverts in between, so I would greatly appreciate it if you could help with that one too. Would it be possible to protect that article as well? I have no idea why they are so obsessed with adding in Cyrillic versions of Skolt words to articles here and I hope they stop. Thanks! - Yupik (talk) 01:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is an LTA, I will see what I can do. Ymblanter (talk) 05:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Skolt Sámi looks good to me for the time being. Ymblanter (talk) 05:28, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! If you don't mind helping me keep an eye on this, I'd be grateful. :) -Yupik (talk) 14:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They made the changes again now. Mellk (talk) 05:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Blocked for a week, reverted all the edits, added the page to the watchlist. Ymblanter (talk) 07:03, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! While going through the history on some of the articles, I ran into the IP address 200.129.129.112 who was making the same edits. They don't seem to have changed anything for a couple of weeks now, but we should probably keep a watch on their edits too. I've reverted all their vandalism for now. - Yupik (talk) 16:45, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we probably need to add a few pages on the watchlist. Ymblanter (talk) 16:49, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Open Library links are also endorsed by Wikipedia:Offline sources and Wikipedia:Book sources.  —Michael Z. 02:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you are citing a correct article? I do not see any reverts in the recent history, it is not on my watchlist, and I do not think I edited it recently. I can not recollect that I reverted your edits recently in any other article. I genuinely do not understand the context of your comment. Ymblanter (talk) 05:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, you are talking about this edit. Thanks, I will have a look at the pages you mention above. Ymblanter (talk) 05:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]