User talk:Susmuffin/Archive 1

Active discussions
Archive 1

June 2018

  Hello, I'm ZfJames. I noticed that you recently removed content from Byzantine Empire under the Komnenos dynasty without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. zfJames Please add {{ping|ZfJames}} to your reply (talk page, contribs) 22:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Overzealous tagging

You tagged User:Daask/sandbox/Benson-Henry Institute for Mind Body Medicine for CSD with G1, G11, and G13. While this is virtually an empty page and therefore inadvertent deletion is not a big deal, I don't believe any of these criteria apply in this case. Please be more careful in the future. Daask (talk) 20:25, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

WP:UAA reports on users with no edits

 Generally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI: "Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our responsibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. So we add the {{wait}} tag to the report, it goes to WP:UAA/HP for a week or more, and must then be reviewed again to see if the account has since become active before removing it. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:35, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

By the same token, generally it is not a good use of your time to be welcoming users with no edits. The community has repeatedly rejected the idea of any sort of automatic welcoming before a single edit is made. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:37, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Draft:La Mirada Punks

Hello Susmuffin. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:La Mirada Punks, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not promotional at all. The article makes it clear that the gang is a group of criminals. Thank you. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 05:29, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

User talk pages

Hello. I noticed you restored content to Dr.Koo's talk page with this edit. This is not generally done. Please take a few minutes to read WP:BLANKING and WP:Don't restore removed comments. As the user is blocked, I don't know if they'll undo your edit, or even see it. I'm going to leave it alone. It's up to you to decide if you want to revert yourself; I probably would, were I in the same position. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 12:45, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: User:Mohammad Aziz bin shafi ur rahman

Hello Susmuffin, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of User:Mohammad Aziz bin shafi ur rahman, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 14:09, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

ANI notice

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Political advocacy by Jamez42 / Susmuffin. The discussion is about the topic El Paraíso stampede. 2601:644:1:B7CB:D417:AECA:710A:207 (talk) 19:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Your signature

Please amend your custom signature so that is is clear who it belongs to, i.e. it should include your username. Thank you. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Susmuffin: I note you have edited plenty since DoRD left you this request. To clarify, this is per the username policy: A customised signature should make it easy to identify the username, to visit the user's talk-page, and preferably user page and are to identify you as a contributor. If your signature is unnecessarily confusing, editors may request that you change it; please note that signatures that link to, but do not display, the user's username (for example by signing with a nickname, as in User:Nickname or Nickname) can be confusing for editors (particularly newcomers). The actual username always appears in the page history, so using just the nickname on the relevant talk page can make your signed comments appear to be from a different person, which I think just about covers it. Many thanks, —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 18:21, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
I have resolved the issue. ―Susmuffin Talk 18:25, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
That's excellent news, many thanks. Happy editing / vandal kicking. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 18:31, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

  Hello. Your recent edit to National University of Distance Education appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Your edit did not provide references to reliable sources to establish notability and status as an academic associated with the university. It is often less work to create the article first, then add the name to the list. Gab4gab (talk) 00:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Napa Valley Unified School District

Hello Susmuffin. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Napa Valley Unified School District, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: School districts have near-inherent notability per WP:GEOLAND, and educational institutions are exempt from A7. Thank you. Mz7 (talk) 23:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

ANI

The removed comments at ANI can be seen as PA's and edit warring over inclusion of them may not be the best idea. Also the attitude is they express will do you no favours.Slatersteven (talk) 12:10, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

@Slatersteven: Is this comment directed at me, or User:Stefka Bulgaria?
Sorry yes.Slatersteven (talk) 12:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
"Nobody has ever helped their own cause in any way by participating at ANI. Even non-controversial edits have a way of getting people into trouble." power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018

  Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:46.189.28.247 has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tgeorgescu (talk) 06:16, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Susmuffin, you are invited to the Teahouse!

 

Hi Susmuffin! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk).

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Scientology

I tried one link, https://www.xenu.net/archive/books/bfm/bfm09.htm and it "refused to connect". It works as http://www.xenu.net/archive/books/bfm/bfm09.htm So rather than testing all of them, I undid the whole shebang. I see that user:KolbertBot paid the article a visit in June 2018, so I don't think many if any of the links should be made https. Please be more careful. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

  The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For reverting vandalism and rooting out block evasion. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 
Hi Susmuffin! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 07:28, Sunday, August 12, 2018 (UTC)

UAA reports on users with no edits

You speedily archived my message last time I posted here, which is generally taken as a sign that you read and understood it.[1] If that’s not the case please review it again, and maybe take another look at WP:UAAI as a decent number of your UAA reports get declined. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Susmuffin, did you have these same issues with your previous account(s)? Overzealous patrolling, minimal or no response to editors who raise concerns regarding your edits...that sort of thing? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I have not used a another account to patrol, if that is what you are asking. No, I do not have a sockpuppet. ―Susmuffin Talk 19:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
It's absolutely clear that this is not your first account, what I'm wondering is if you had the same problems with your previous accounts that ended up in a block (making this block evasion), or if this is veering towards a failed clean start.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:45, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I did have another account that was last used in 2009, when I was 11 years old. I was never blocked and never made use of the clean start option, if that existed then. Honestly, I barely remember that I even had the account in the first place. If it would help, I can give you a link to the account's userpage. ―Susmuffin Talk 20:18, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
In my 11+ years on this site, as an admin and checkuser, I have never seen a legitimate new account make this as their third edit, less than an hour after creating their account. Having an account as a child nearly ten years ago can't explain your edit history. Just saying.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I found it here. I simply wanted to see what he was talking about. ―Susmuffin Talk 21:05, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Interesting.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:10, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Question

What do you think about removing webcomics from arts in vital article list? Polandball is enaugh vital in your opinion? Dawid2009 (talk) 18:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

I would avoid making any large removals from the Level 5 list at this point, as it is far from being completed. Also, I would categorise webcomics as a form of art. ―Susmuffin Talk 02:20, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree that webcomics are form of art but we do not have listed Hetalia: Axis Powers which is much more vital webcomic than webcomics which are currently listed. I also mentioned Slender Man in disscussion due to fact that Crazy Frog and Slender Man clearly are more vital Internet phenomena than Polandball and at least on the same level what Hatsune Miku which is listed. We also need to remember that Deutch Wikipedia which has very rigorous deletionism for fictional creatures does not have articles about listed creatures such like Harry Potter (character), Darth Vader and has articles about Crazy Frog and Slender Man, so disscussion about including these creatures really would be valuable. Anyway if you still disagree that Slender Man and Crazy Frog can not be listed we can add other concept such like Pinocchio, Christmas elf, The Gingerbread Man but in this case creatures which are not described in German Wikipedia in my opinion also should be definietly removed
In my opinion we also should create new secion at social sciences about: Media franchises. Because we have currently various media franchises in diffrent places listed. At fictional characters Flash and Green Lantern do not fit to this section.
In my opionion we also should add to mythological creatures new section which would be titled: specific mythological creatures. And under this section subtitles: general (for creatures such like Wandering Jew currently listed at fiction and Tooth fairy currently listed at myths/religion), paranormal (for example for UFO which is not listed) ald cryptides (for Yeti, Big foot etc.)
I am also not sure Don Juan and Roland are fictional characters. There were some time ago disscussion about this type creatures. Anyway it seems to me that they are historical creatures near at the same level what Saint Nicholas and Blackbeard.
What do you think about my comments and ideas above? I hope you will replied. Cheers Dawid2009 (talk) 22:09, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

Weird Signatures

Hi , today you closed and ANI discussion as a non-admin closure , but the timestamp on your signature shows 23rd August. How did that happen ? Kpgjhpjm 12:21, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I copied and pasted a previous closure, and I must have forgotten to replace my old signature. ―Susmuffin Talk 17:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018

  Hello, I'm Peaceray. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you unlinked one or more redlinks from Giacomo Casanova. Often redlinks can be helpful, so we don't remove them just because they are red. They help improve Wikipedia by attracting editors to create needed articles.

In addition, clicking on the "What links here" special link (in the Wikipedia Toolbox at left) on a missing article shows how many—and which—articles depend on that article being created. This can help prioritize article creation. Redlinks are useful! Please, only remove a redlink if you are pretty sure that it is to a non-notable topic and not likely ever to be created. Thanks! Peaceray (talk) 05:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-39

15:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 October 2018

Tech News: 2018-40

17:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

FYI: Wikipedia:Teahouse#Suspect_in_vandalizing

That was not vandalism. Twinkle mistake, I guess. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-41

23:38, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-42

22:40, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-43

23:11, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 30

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018

  • Library Card translation
  • Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref spreads to the Southern Hemisphere and beyond
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 October 2018

Tech News: 2018-44

20:08, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-45

17:29, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-46

19:22, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-47

23:28, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

 Hello, Susmuffin. 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Harmless

Redirects in user space and draft space which are red links are totally harmless. Deleting them serves no useful purpose. Please find something more useful to do. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:58, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I understand. ―Susmuffin Talk 01:45, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-48

22:22, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 December 2018

Tech News: 2018-49

16:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-50

17:33, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-51

20:34, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 31

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018

  • OAWiki
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism

I simply edited a topic about crusades. Why you deleted this? Historyk55635 (talk) 10:52, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2018

Tech News: 2019-02

18:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-03