User talk:Star Mississippi

Star Mississippi is busy and is going to be on Wikipedia in off-and-on doses, and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This is Star Mississippi's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19Auto-archiving period: 45 days

Hi, I was just reading some of the material at Draft talk: Lewis Josselyn and I noted your comment "That's not going anywhere, unfortunately as there's no teeth at COI/N." I follow the discussions at COIN quite regularly and it seems to be a common thing that no matter how obvious the COI, UPE or disruption, all that seems to result is the occasional block for e.g. username violations.

I've tried to circumvent some of the issues by occasionally requesting increased page protection, which often does the trick for SPA IP activity.

So, my question is, should some COIN topics actually have been started at ANI (or redirected to ANI) where admins are more likely to dispense blocks for PROMO, topic bans etc? Is it basically a vain hope to anticipate such measures being dispensed at COIN?

Any clarification on this point would be very gratefully received. Axad12 (talk) 07:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Axad12. This is my POV as an editor, definitely not site policy or admin guidance.

COI/N can be helpful for guidance toward new editors or those trying to make sense of how we guide conflicted editors. In that sense it functions like one of the help desks. So you could raise it if you found it on an article with a new editor who isn't sure how to edit or would like some broad guidance or even who is making problematic edits but willing to stop once they're made aware. But with Greg who has been to COI/N and ANI on multiple occasions, or other editors who want to edit their company/family/etc. it isn't going to be enough if they're not willing to play well with others. Greg is not going to change because he has been doing the same thing over and over for the last decade or more which is unfortunately why we're at ANI for a site ban. COI/N seems best suited for guidance. As for whether it should be at AN or ANI, I'm not sure. I'd say grab a passing admin for blatant disruption (and happen to be that person if you see I'm online) and for protracted conduct issues, take it to AIV or ANI. Note: I'm not sure where DRN falls within this spectrum as I'm not active there. Is that helpful? Star Mississippi 12:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's very helpful indeed. Thank you.

I had been reluctant to approach admins directly on cases because I thought it might be seen as canvassing, especially if I had already been involved in a discussion. But I will do so from now on with genuinely disruptive cases who don't give up after being brought to COIN.

Most users who get taken to COIN, I think, didn't realise they were doing anything wrong (seeing Wikipedia as an extension of social media). This seems to be evident from the 'above ground' usernames they often adopt. As soon as they realise they're operating outside of policy they tend to fade away and the issue disappears. Or they declare the COI and work within the policy.

And yes, indeed, not COIN for Greg. It was just that your 'no teeth' comment struck a chord with me due to how things often work at COIN. The Greg side of it was coincidental...

Thanks again for your wisdom and your time, very much appreciated. Axad12 (talk) 12:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Axad12:, Regardless of one's experience level, I believe COI/N can be very useful in sometimes discovering further COI. The regular there are really good at digging things up. Graywalls (talk) 20:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star, if you can please keep an eye out for WP:BLUDGEONING by the article's creator at WP:Articles for deletion/Afsheen (musician). They have have left numerous requests for various editors to review the draft, which was declined several times, along with other messages to those that declined it including 23 edits to SafariScribe's TP alone. After @Timtrent declined it again with extensive reasoning, they immediately resubmitted it so TT accepted it then nom'd it. S0091 (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I anticipate bludgeoning, S0091, and am minded to watch and wait. YMMV, of course. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, thus my request to keep an eye out. It might end up ok or be excessive to the point it is inhibiting healthy discussion. S0091 (talk) 19:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 @Timtrent apologies for the delay and thanks for flagging, I was offline. I have p-blocked the creator. I'm not sure that will solve the issue, but I'm not sure the edits are full block worthy unless they escalate again. If they do, please ping an active admin as my on wiki time is still scattered. Star Mississippi 01:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This editor shows challenging behaviour when things go against them, as you can see any the three warnable personal attacks. With luck and a following wind your p-block of them will bear fruit. They cannot complain (too much) about it because they have made their case for retention, and your block was made with that logic in mind 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:24, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

well that didn't end well. I'm not going to expand the block,but perhaps the reviewing admin will since they've moved their bludgeoning to the Talk. I Star Mississippi 12:45, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No apology necessary. When I left the message TT had just opened the AfD and did not think you would be back online until today or tomorrow but also did not think the bludgeoning would be that severe that quickly. At any rate, I'd prefer they bludgeon their own talk page rather than other editor's tps or the AfD so the p-block is serving its purpose. S0091 (talk) 14:03, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't read the 20 edits to Safari's Talk but clearly should have before wading into the mess on the article Talk as it clarified it significantly. No action needed on the pings to you & @Timtrent, @S0091 was just acknowledging that you both were among those trying to help then help themselves. Alas they don't seem interested Star Mississippi 02:08, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sending you an email. S0091 (talk) 17:52, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you think a discussion at ANI should be closed because it is "going absolutely nowhere helpful", that would encompass a great many discussions. I'm all for it, but then my tolerance of protracted ANI discussions is very low. Still, how about we make it a new rule?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:31, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was a complete and total IAR, but it really needs to be one. Parts of the community is tired of EEng's behavior, parts think it's hysterical, parts think it's problematic and needs addressing in some manner. Neither 1 nor 3 were going to be accomplished in that thread. I don't think there's a a clear process, but someone should be able to bring about a complaint and have it discussed without it turning into a circus. And I feel you, especially in the summer heat. Is it AN:Fix the Problem or AN:Entertainment? Star Mississippi 00:45, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel you, especially in the summer heat – Better cut that out before you're #METOOed. EEng 03:08, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng if I can give you a piece of advice, just take a break from ANtics. It may be that the conduct won't lead to a block (and I ' m not saying you should or shouldn't be, you're a productive content editor) but I think it's pretty clear the community doesn't find the reopens nearly as entertaining as you do. Not admin advice, just a fellow editor. Star Mississippi 18:32, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's good advice of course, and I'll follow it. To be clear, however, I did not open that subthread for entertainment. I really wanted to see where people fell on the are-we-adults spectrum. EEng 18:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does your username mean you live in Mississippi? I live in northwest Washington, and we're having a refreshingly unusual cool August.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Someone left you a message about a keep vote on the talkpage of Murder of Otávio Jordão da Silva that needs to be to added to it's AFD. Davidgoodheart (talk) 00:37, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davidgoodheart, I left a note for the closer so they see that vote and take it into account. There's nothing new on the article Talk? Thanks though! Star Mississippi 00:40, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Star Mississippi,

When you get an opportunity I wondered if you might have a look at the following COIN thread [1] (and the tagged-on counter-thread started by the subject of the initial post).

It looks to me as though the history shows that there is some pretty transparent UPE going on, probably originating from a single individual operating from the close vicinity of the company headquarters, repeatedly arguing along similar lines under different accounts after promotional material was deleted. The activity started with an account which used the same name as the company itself, and then everything else flows from there.

If you could take some action or let me know your thoughts then it would be much appreciated. Axad12 (talk) 13:30, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just skimmed it as my on wiki time is limited. There's a new queue for paid/COI editing, which you can reach via paid-en-wpwikipedia.org. But I think an SPI may be helpful in tandem. Apologies that I can't dig into this right now Star Mississippi 14:40, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, probably best if we discuss further at some point in the future when you have more time. I don't see the issue as particularly urgent, maybe towards the end of the month? In the meantime I'll ask for someone to start an SPI. Best wishes, Axad12 (talk) 15:39, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remind me in early September please if I forget. I just partially blocked the main account from the article as a stopgap. Star Mississippi 16:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think maybe you reverted Talk:Jason Itzler by mistake? My edit included four reliable sources: Miami New Times / CBS News / New York Post / Miami Herald.

Also no claims were made other than why don't we cite these sources and this situation - I didn't even interpret them or what to include. JotsBank (talk) 03:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! No, it wasn't by mistake. Please explain how you found this article in your first day of editing. Thanks! Star Mississippi 12:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found it by hearing the name and googling it, isn't that how biographies are generally encountered? Is it common to revert talk page additions which cite newspapers? JotsBank (talk) 17:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When it's a new account where the article has been undergoing recent disruption leading to protection, yes. You didn't just google and decide to edit his article. Please log into your primary account and, if necessary, request an unblock. Star Mississippi 12:16, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star Mississippi,

I created the infobox for Jason Itzler's wikipedia page not too long ago.

I saw that you locked it due to vandals targeting the page (which was a good decision, considering the individual's recent activities).

Would you be open to restoring the infobox? I feel as if it adds more visual substance and accessibility to the page, let me know if this could be possible. It would be more helpful for the newer traffic to the page as it's currently formatted (somewhat) poorly.

Thank you in advance, Robert Francis Clarke (Robertclarke32) Robertclarke32 (talk) 23:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, apologies for the delay as I have been and am still mostly offline. You're welcome to reinstate the infobox. Star Mississippi 02:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Since my account is not Extended Confirmed, I don’t have access to reinstate it as the article is protected against vandalism. Robertclarke32 (talk) 21:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please then follow the steps at WP:Edit requests on the talk page and someone will be by to assess and implement the requested edit. Star Mississippi 13:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hello @Star Mississippi

"Could you please take a look at this draft Jordan Ward (musician)? It was previously declined due to some promotional language, which has since been removed. The writing has been revised, and I'd appreciate it if you could review the draft again."

Thanks Afro 📢Talk! 09:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Afrowriter, I'm not Star Mississippi but what I will say is your draft is no more important than the other 2,500 other drafts that are waiting for review. You resubmitted it a couple weeks ago and as the submission notice states it may take up to four months so be patient. S0091 (talk) 19:34, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok @S0091 thanks i have no issue with waiting Afro 📢Talk! 06:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Afrowriter and thanks @S0091 for stepping in while I was offline. Afrowriter, I unfortunately don't have the on wiki time to look into this but will do so when I'm back if no one else has. Star Mississippi 02:12, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like @SafariScribe stepped in. Please let me know if more action is needed.Thanks all! Star Mississippi 13:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Star Mississippi. 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 {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Rejoy²⁰⁰³(talk) 07:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Rejoy2003. Apologies for the delay as I have been and am still mostly offline. I can't look into this right now but will do so next week or sooner if I'm able. Star Mississippi 02:12, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Did you mean to block this user instead of someone else? It looks like they were removing BLP-violating content. Spicy (talk) 19:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Major mea culpa. Thanks so much for flagging @Spicy and I'm not even sure what happened. Will also leave a longer note on their Talk. Thanks and apologies again. Star Mississippi 19:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Star Mississippi. 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 {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Netherzone (talk) 18:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved, no need to reply. Enjoy the weekend! Netherzone (talk) 12:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star Mississippi, I noticed that you are a member of WP:Theatre and have worked on several art museum articles. I would appreciate your opinion on the article draft that I created for Carl Thoma, an art collector and businessman. Because of my COI, I do not want to publish the article myself; if you agree that it has potential, would you mind helping to have it ready for main space? Thank you very much! JBarTB (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies@JBarTB I missed this. I'll try to look at this in the next week if no one else has. Star Mississippi 01:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star Mississippi, thanks for your response! If you have the time to look at the draft, it is still in my user space! Thank you! JBarTB (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, just a reminder that the Carl Thoma draft is still in my user space if you have some time to take a look at it! Thank you! JBarTB (talk) 16:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is very odd AusLondonder (talk) 08:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All sorted now. AusLondonder (talk) 08:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and apologies for the delay @AusLondonder. I have made a friend in an LTA when I was AfD patrolling this weekend. They'll burn themselves out eventually. Thanks so much for flagging. Star Mississippi 01:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, some people have too much time on their hands for their own good! AusLondonder (talk) 02:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and belated now thanks to @Yamla, for this. When @AusLondonder flagged it, I thought it was the usual IP shenanigans. I really wish BCD would find a new hobby. Star Mississippi 12:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question: can an article at AfD be moved back to draft by the creator while the AfD is still active? This happened at this AfD for Prue Bishop Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prue Bishop before it was closed. See here: Draft:Prue Bishop. I tried reverting it by undoing the move that was made, but it did not change it back to the original main space title, so I don't think I did the process correctly. Could you please have a look at it? Thanks in advance! Netherzone (talk) 15:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All taken care of now. I'm curious, tho, if I run into this situation again in the future, what is the best way to resolve it. In this case, simply undoing the move did not change the name of the article, nor remove the error template. What is the proper procedure...doing a second move back to main space? Netherzone (talk) 23:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for again being MIA.

I ran into this issue this weekend when the LTA AusLondoner referenced above was moving things all over. I think the correct sequence is for you to tag the mainspace redirect for G6 and when an admin sees it, then move the draft back. When you tag it, there's a way to signal to the admin that there's a page needing moved and we can do it simultaneously. I see that in AfC but not sure if it would work here (@DoubleGrazing, @Timtrent do you know?) BUt you're correct, it shouldn't have been moved even if it's a tacit acceptance of I acknowledge it's not ready. I wish there were a way to move protect all discussions at AfD because really there's no reason for anyone to move an article while it's at AfD. Is that helpful? Star Mississippi 01:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certainly no expert, but AFAIK that special flavour of G6, {{Db-afc-move}}, is only for AfC acceptances, and won't even come up in Twinkle's CSD dialog box outside the Draft: space. But another G6, {{Db-move}}, should be okay; likewise, {{Db-r2}}. Whichever variant you (us mere mortals, that is) use, involves a wait for one of our lovely admins to come along to do the deed, so it's not like one Db works quicker or smoother than the others.

@Netherzone: I don't think I've ever managed to successfully undo a move (by clicking 'undo' as one would with a normal edit, that is), either, so I don't even try that any more. I don't know if it's not even meant to work, or I'm just not doing it right. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same. The undo shows, but it doesn't actually work even with extra admin buttons. Thanks all as always! Star Mississippi 12:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. NO special template, and it would probably be too many mental backflips if it were there.

I r=tried to undo a move once. Got myself into no end of cycle of bother. Even being a page mover didn't really help much. I think the redirect had history, and thus I was prevented 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone! I'll make a note of this if it's encountered in the future. And especially thanks because the question heading is written in word salad, and it was still understood, and you kind folks answered anyways. In the future, I will try to remember to proofread! Ha ha! Netherzone (talk) 13:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections | Updates & Schedule
Administrator elections are in the WMF Trust & Safety SecurePoll calendar and are all set to proceed. We plan to use the following schedule: Oct 8 – Oct 14: Candidate sign-up Oct 22 – Oct 24: Discussion phase Oct 25 – Oct 31: SecurePoll voting phase If you have any questions, concerns, or thoughts before we get started, please post at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections. If you are interested in helping out, please post at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections § Ways to help. There are many redlinked subpages that can be created.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star Mississippi,

Please consider changing Superblue (art gallery) title to "Superblue (Art)."

From vocabulary research, I've found galleries are within installations at an art company. The primary distinction from galleries to art companies is the selling of art pieces - Galleries must sell art pieces to be considered as such.

Superblue rotates installations featuring galleries displaying themed art pieces from the artists. They also do not sell the art they display.

The correct categorization here would either best fit under "Art" or "Art Company," not gallery.

Many thanks,

Swampcowboy (talk) 14:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Swampcowboy. I'm not sure your distinction applies here or in general. Galleries can sell, but don't always. For example China Institute or the National Gallery of Art. Please allow the discussion you opened on the Talk page to reach a consensus. I'll leave a pointer to this discussion therem but all discussions about articles should take place on the talk page. Star Mississippi 18:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wrote this and when intending to upload as a new article found that an earlier effort was declined for copyright violation. User:PeterEasthope/sandbox Is it less objectionable or acceptable? Thx, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 21:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! There is no issue compared with the one @Primefac deleted as a copyright nor the version that was deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S6 (software). I'm not super familiar with software notability. If you are, and feel it's notable, feel free to move it to mainspace, otherwise I'd reccomend AfC @PeterEasthope Star Mississippi 23:54, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star, thank you for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksi Ojala. I was wondering if you could hear me out to change the closing comment from no consensus to keep? The reason is that there were no strong delete views (only two "weak delete") ever since @Ljleppan found the highest quality sources. On the other hand there were 3 keep views (plus one weak keep) in that time. I think the closing comment might be important to establish precedent should someone nominate the article again. Thanks, --Habst (talk) 13:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Habst. Thanks for flagging. I'm happy to review and reasses if my POV changes and/or fleshing out close, but I can't look at this for a couple of hours as I'm about to go offline. If you prefer sooner resolution, I have no objection to DRV. Let me know your thoughts and happy to proceed however you wish. Star Mississippi 14:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I've re-reviewed this and unfortunately I still land with a N/C. As I said before, I'll support a DRV if you think I've closed this wrong but can't see another outcome. Let me know your thoughts? Star Mississippi 21:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Star, thanks for reviewing. I am new to DRV so not sure if I can articulate a case there well, and ultimately it seems like a long process that will admittedly have no material effect except for precedent in this case. I'll let you know if my opinion changes or I have more time, though. --Habst (talk) 22:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do let me know if you change your mind. Happy to weigh in there.

I think what will help with precedent is getting the interview issue settled. It has come up more and more often and I think it's unsettled. My personal (editor, not admin) POV is that if X media outlet chooses to interview someone, there's something there. This is different of course to John Q Public being interviewed as a witness, bystander, etc. Athletes fall somewhere in the middle. Is Ojala (or anyone in comparable position) being interviewed as a matter of post match interviews, or is it more substantive?. Until that's solved, it's messy Star Mississippi 23:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Star, Can you help this editor in a proper AFD on my article Ada-George Road which was accepted. I have given him some word of advice on his talk page but I see he has taken Wikipedia as a war zone. All I see is frustration about his article but I believe with time he or she will understand because I was once there years ago but not in the sense of fighting back by nominating there article. Like I mean those years I argue with people who seem to be right instead of learning from them. Not anymore. Gabriel (……?) 16:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Gabriel601. I see you left them a note on their Talk. If that doesn't move forward productively, you might want to bring more eyes to the situation. I unfortunately do not have the on wiki time to moderate this, which was why I wasn't able to participate in the ANI. Pinging @Timtrent who participated in the AfD so there's no canvas issue for their thoughts. Star Mississippi 21:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't even assessed the article I'm afraid. I just can't see a deletion rationale, nor a policy based argument to delete. I think it needs a procedural close with no action taken. I almost did a non admin closure on it saying so, but felt other eyes were required. Thank you for the ping Star Mississippi. I wonder if Reading Beans has a comment on the AfD itself as presented, ignoring the fact that they accepted the AfC draft.

I see no obstacle to a rationale based future AfD (at which I will !vote, and likely to retain it), but this one is pointless in my view. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your insight, as always, @Timtrent. I think it's a tit for tat, but unaware of background between Cfaso2000 and @Gabriel601 prior to the last couple of weeks. I see a poor nom but not a SK one like the editor at ANI I was cleaning up after.But no objection to someone else doing so as that's opinion not rule. Star Mississippi 02:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ping Timtrent. FWIW, I think that the nomination was made in bad faith and should be closed SK. Having accepted the article, I think that would make me involved, otherwise I’d have close it myself with my prejudice to a renomination. I honestly think that the background between Cfaso2000 and Gabriel are now generating more heat than light at this time. Best, Reading Beans 04:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closed, as a procedural speedy keep, with no prejudice against an immediate nomination with a policy based rationale. Probably, this is an IAR closure. Obviously this is a non admin closure.

@Star Mississippi I think that satisfies your "poor nom but not a SK one"

@Reading Beans I think I am not involved because I have simply repeated my comment there (and expanded it a little), and I think that satisfies your "should be closed SK"

@Gabriel601 If they will not walk away from you, you should walk away from them. Ideally both of you should walk away from each other. However, do not walk twelve paces, turn and fire. No-one wishes to become tainted by a grudge fight, whoever started it. I choose not to determine that currently. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have also left a similar mildly worded but serious warning on the other editor's user talk page 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Etienne Uzac. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. scope_creep^Talk 10:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Star Mississippi,

When you have the opportunity I wondered if you might take a look at a couple of COIN threads and take any action you think may be necessary. Alternatively, if no action is necessary I’d genuinely be very grateful for input on that. There's no particular hurry incidentally, just whenever you should have the time…

Thread 1: [2]. User EastThermopolis is either involved in UPE or they are some kind of dyed-in-the-wool promo editor. Perhaps 12 or more editors have found issue with their larger edits over a long period of time (for details see thread), but they have a sideline in large numbers of very similar minor edits which obscure the broader pattern on their contribution history. Their larger edits are almost always reverted, part deleted, or brought to COIN, etc. Also, user Lullaby09! is an obvious in-house UPE account.

Thread 2: [3]. This thread relates to the widespread COI editing of Indian Army unit articles that came to light at ANI earlier this year. The three accounts originally raised in this thread were blocked. I located a further 10, but there seems to have been no appetite to dispense the same sanctions.

As I say, any input would be gratefully received. Axad12 (talk) 10:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot about these until a COI thread came up at ANI. On it now and apologies for the delay. Star Mississippi 14:21, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Johannes Maximilian was:

I find the tone quite unsuitable for a Wikipedia article; e.g., "[Alibi's] strove for inclusivity and served as a destination among the queer community in a red state" is a very strong opinion that is not supported by the cited sources, i.e., it's a failed verification. To explain what I mean, let's have a look at footnote 2 and compare the cited source with the draft:

• The draft claims that Alibi's "strove for inclusivity", while the source reads "Krystal and Tiffany (owners of Alibi's) made a big point about the bar being inclusive." → The source represents the bar owners' opinion which is not what I would deem independent. A correct representation of the source would be: According to Tastingtable, the owners of Alibi's "made a big point about the bar being inclusive". • The draft claims that Alibi's "served as a destination (…) in a red state." The source cites Ann Harris – a co-owner of a different lesbian bar in Oklahoma – who briefly mentions the term "red state". The source, however, doesn't discuss that in great detail with any connection to this draft's topic. → Again, the source merely (re)presents an intellectually non-independent individual's opinion rather than its own. • The draft claims that Alibi's was "the city's most diverse neighborhood bar." The source describes that Oklahoma City grows in population, and that this growing poluation is diverse ("an influx of (…) increasingly diverse (…) residents") which the source attributes to Tulsa Remote: "Tulsa Remote (…) [incentivizes] a wave of new residents from a diverse range of backgrounds." → The source doesn't make the claim that Alibi's was the "most diverse" bar in its neighbourhood.

Frankly, I also find such a claim very difficult to support because diversity cannot be easily measured; I know that I'm making a point here but consider these questions: Which is the world's most lesbian-friendly city? Who is the most influential queer individual of our time? Where is America's most diverse gay bar? I hope you get the point, these questions cannot be answered with a mathematically true or false answer. Wikipedia can only represent opinions on these questions, and in order to comply with WP:NPOV, an ideal article on Wikipedia should represent all major opinions on a matter. To call a spade a spade, I reckon that the draft represents a very niche point of view which may well be aligned with your own (in Wikipedia terms: This could be WP:OR). This is avoided when closely citing all major sources. As a side effect, this practice of closely citing all major sources also contributes significantly to the demonstration of notability – that is because it doesn't only introduce major sources to an article, but also, it shows what the sources have to discuss. The demonstration of the latter is key for notability demonstration.

Best, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 21:48, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Alibi's and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 21:48, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good @Johannes Maximilian as I knew it was thin, which is why I put it through AfC vs. creating it. It's closed so this will die a G13 unless I G7 it. Haven't decided if I'll look for better sourcing. While I disagree with your perception of OR, that's neither here nor there. I'd suggest you not use the phrase call a spade in AFC review as it can be unintentionally offensive. Star Mississippi 01:54, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning! I don't mean to be offensive; maybe, the WP:♠ essay needs amending? Honestly, I hope you don't interpret this as me putting forward allegations, but please understand that – as I have described in last night's comment – that making a conclusion such as "Alibi's is the city's most diverse neighborhood bar", which is not stated by the cited source, but instead based on an analysis of that source, is included in the definition of WP:OR. I also found it very important to demonstrate how that OR works – the source describes the city's residents as diverse, it doesn't make that claim about the bar; by interpreting the source and presuming that, if the residents are diverse, and if they go the bar, the bar must become diverse too, the OR is made. However, the bar doesn't inherit the "diversity property" from its guests. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 08:41, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know you didn't and don't want to know, which is why I flagged it @Johannes Maximilian. Your English is 1000% better than any of my second languages, but changing language and idioms are tricky even in one's native language. And yes, the essay probably also needs updating so others don't fall into that issue unknowingly.

I totally respect your decision to decline and am not second guessing that. At one point I wanted to create articles for the Lesbian Bar Project but independent of this assessment, I realized it wasn't going to be possible for all of them to meet N:ORG. As it's unlikely a closed bar will generate more coverage, this one will fall off and that's absolutely fine.

It may be subjective since it's quoting the owner but the source in its own voice says "Alibis, in Oklahoma City, calls itself “OKC’s most diverse neighborhood bar.” (Angela Jones)" That's what doesn't make it OR or my interpretation of the source. That's where I disagree on your assessment as OR. But all editors-especially both of us who have seen lots of drafts over our tenures, will disagree and that's OK. I know it's not the sole or even primary reason you declined. Star Mississippi 17:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for understanding! I know, it can be difficult when you realise that the subject or topic you want to write an article about isn't well covered by any good sources. That experience can be quite frustrating; I've been there before. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 17:43, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, all good. It's why I use AFC when I'm not sure. Extra eyes/opinion are never a bad thing. Have a great day! Star Mississippi 17:48, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your approach is honourable. The day has come to an end, but I trust your remaining sunday will be as sunny as mine. Best, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 17:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ism at it at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard‎ now. Slatersteven (talk) 15:25, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for flagging. Just took care of it. Star Mississippi 15:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even remember which LTA this is. If you or @JoJo Anthrax want to do SPI paperwork, I have not. Just easier than whack a sock that was happening at FTN. Star Mississippi 16:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Star Mississippi,

You just closed an AFD on Women in the Bangladesh Army and a new one opened up again today. It's the third AFD! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just semi'ed it which will hopefully help. @Nthep, since you blocked Yunus MIAH, any idea on the master so I can file? Thanks @Liz for flagging as always. Star Mississippi 13:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

never mind, found it. It's Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/জঙ্গলবাসী/Archive. I'll go do some paperwork. Star Mississippi 13:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Star Mississippi, sorry to bother, but would you mind taking a look at this user's behavior pertaining to Darnell Edge and its talk page? The user has been paid by the article subject and initially wrote about 90% of the article. After they were asked about COI, they declared the paid status, and have since been instructed to not directly make sourcing or content changes, yet completely ignored that with a major content addition in the face of talk page objections about the sourcing. They seem to be bypassing consensus and proper editorial process. I'm thinking a page block from the article may be necessary as a minimum stopgap measure. Any assistance would help, thanks. Left guide (talk) 23:04, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks so much for flagging @Left guide. Looking into this right now Star Mississippi 23:54, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There seems to be a misunderstanding and I apologize for the trouble. I am completely new to the Wikipedia content creation process as this is my first time creating one. I’m really proud of the work I’ve done on this page but have struggled to comply with the various requirements as it is a bit confusing. I did initially request changes prior to including them back on the page, but I thought if I just updated the sources then it would be okay. But I apologize for The misunderstanding and mistakes. Will I still be able to request information be at least added to the page, and another admin will have to input them if approved? Will I be blocked forever? And will I be able to create other wiki pages in the future now that I know all of the different requirements and regulations? Thank you in advance for your help. InfinitiBowie97 (talk) 00:13, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @InfinitiBowie97. Indefinite doesn't mean forever, but you'll have to show a good history of your edit requests meeting all policies and guidelines before someone will consider allowing you access to edit directly. While you have made the disclosures (thank you!), it's good practice not to edit an article where you have a WP:COI directly even if you're allowed. Article creation is hard. I recommend making edits to learn more about the project before you decide to start trying to write more articles. You are only blocked from that one article, so you're allowed to edit anywhere else. Just be mindful of what you've learned so far. Star Mississippi 00:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the insight @Star Mississippi! Okay understood. As I did disclose that I am a paid editor for this page and its creation, it is important that I can still add new information. So if I am to remain blocked on the page for direct edit access, should I continue to request through you and the talk page? InfinitiBowie97 (talk) 00:49, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the instructions on WP:Edit requests and propose them on the Talk. I will not be overseeing any inclusion as I don't edit in sports articles but editors watching or patrolling requests will respond. Happy to answer any other questions though @InfinitiBowie97 Star Mississippi 00:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and quack a doodle doo! A duck has flown in and landed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Menotti Lerro (2nd nomination). Netherzone (talk) 00:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the giggle @Netherzone. Blocked and semi'ed to avoid future friends. Do you know if there's an SPI open? Star Mississippi 00:45, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Yeah, I believe it's Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gingeksace. Left guide (talk) 00:52, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and thanks @Left guide for the template cleanup. Semi'ing is easier than whack a sock, but I hate the template syntax. Star Mississippi 00:50, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Just pointing out that the nominator of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bondage tape (2nd nomination) suggested an WP:ATD of redirecting to List of BDSM equipment and I think this is fair in order to preserve the history. Was there a reason this wasn't done, and if not, could you possibly restore the article so it can be done? ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  19:23, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I read that as something @Piotrus would have been OK with, not that they preferred it which is why I didn't close it as such. But since we're treating this as a contested PROD, I've done so. If someone feels it's not a good solution it can be sorted out down the line at RfD. Thanks for flagging @GhostOfDanGurney Star Mississippi 00:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, I do prefer preserving history of articles as best practice in such cases. Thanks, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You closed this discussion as delete, but it doesn't look like you deleted any of the pages.

If you were using a script to close this nomination, it's possible that it got confused by the "and subpages" links I included in the list of nominated pages. When you do close this nomination, please make sure that those subpages are all deleted as well. Omphalographer (talk) 19:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for flagging and apologies for my error/not checking @Omphalographer. Thanks too to @Explicit who took care of this while I was offline. Star Mississippi 00:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, would you please clarify your comment on my note at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aina Asif (2nd nomination)? Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know what I mean, but since you'd like me to clarify: WP:DTTR. Voters disagree, that doesn't mean they're doing it wrong or need to be told about ATA. It comes across really disingenuous, which I know you don't mean. Star Mississippi 22:15, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply but I REALLY do not know what you mean and honestly, I am not pleased by the fact that you assert that I do. Why would I waste my time asking you, if I did understand?.ATA? Mentioning ATA, is that it???? PLEASE..... look at the page history...who mentioned ATA in the first place? Not me..... I don't mind, and it was certainly done in good faith, I am sure, but I think I should at least be allowed to comment. I am really puzzled by your comment, to tell you the truth. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AND DTTR? I had missed that part. I did not template any regular. Where? When? Who?.... What are you talking about? I never template anyone, even the most blatantly vandal IPs!! Are you sure you are talking about me at that AFD? There must be some misunderstanding or something I missed because I have no idea of what you're talking about. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:31, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You said, The essay WP:ATA is indeed rather interesting to read...Can also apply to certain delete !votes, btw,

Comes across as expecting editors aren't familiar with it, when we all (including you) are veterans. It's the same logic as DTTR. You don't mean it, but it's how it comes across. This is not about whether the article is kept or not, it's far too early to tell, but I don't think you want to come across talking to other editors that way. Star Mississippi 02:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying but again .....I am just commenting on what is obviously a comment on my vote, citing ATA (and erroneously, on top of that); that is why I felt I had to explain what ATA says and not. Indeed, I am seriously just indicating that ATA does not apply to "WP:XXX because YYY"-type !votes but only to "WP:XXX"-type !votes! Why did I do it? Because that is what is clearly stated by another user (who happens to !vote in a "WP:XXX'-fashion on top of it, in their !vote, which is ironic). Now, if you prefer explaining that yourself as admin/relister (as nominator, in fact), feel free to strike out that comment of mine and make the clarification about what the essay really says yourself, the way you think best, if you think that's more appropriate. I honestly won't mind. But I still don't understand why you focus on my mention on ATA. When I quote essays (I rarely quote essays) or guidelines erroneously, if someone corrects me, I stand corrected. Thank you all the same. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I started a draft on this fellow a while back and would be happy to have some help with it. (Also posted this on Mississippi Wikiproject talk page). I hipe all is well. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @FloridaArmy. I'll try to get to this in the coming days and week. You know I love educators, so thanks for flagging. Star Mississippi 02:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Virtute et armis FloridaArmy (talk) 02:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
1,014		Bangladesh Air Force (talk)	Add sources
14		Dežo Ursiny (talk)	Add sources
65		Travel website (talk)	Add sources
24		John Kinzie (talk)	Add sources
82		Ilyushin Il-12 (talk)	Add sources
34		Accidents and incidents involving the An-12 family (talk)	Add sources
314		Curfew (talk)	Cleanup
7		Bruce Weigl (talk)	Cleanup
130		Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad (talk)	Cleanup
314		Pokémon Adventures (talk)	Expand
376		Bangladesh quota reform movement (talk)	Expand
573		Viz Media (talk)	Expand
309		Student exchange program (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
162		Pokémon episodes removed from rotation (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
94		Comparison of video player software (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
44		Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (talk)	Merge
29		Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Corporation Limited (talk)	Merge
94		Tyrannosaurinae (talk)	Merge
191		2020 United States Senate election in Michigan (talk)	Wikify
116		Japan Game Awards (talk)	Wikify
18		Nehru Centre (talk)	Wikify
2		Ilgar Musayev (talk)	Orphan
46		Nnamdi Nwizu (talk)	Orphan
5		Columbia Indoor Pool (talk)	Orphan
76		Nazmul Hassan (talk)	Stub
50		Jubo League (talk)	Stub
8		Nepal Police F.C. (talk)	Stub
518		Bangladesh protests (2022–2024) (talk)	Stub
29		Student politics of Bangladesh (talk)	Stub
374		Sarjis Alam (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]