Wiki Article
User talk:Hammersoft
Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net
Oops
[edit]Sorry about yesterday, I posted to ANI, fell asleep watching BBCs Match of the Day and forgot all about my post. I hope that guy stops doing live updates. Thanks again. Regards. Govvy (talk) 11:48, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
- No worries. Keep tabs if you would please. It's a bit hard to track. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:43, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2025).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- All general sanctions imposed by the community may now be enforced at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard (WP:AE) as a result of a recent RfC.
- Due to the result of a recent RFC, the administrator recall process is amended to extend the deadline for a re-request for adminship to 30 days or the next administrator election, whichever is later.
- Changes to the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy's disclosure rules include broadening the consecutive-blocks exception to cover all admin actions and removing the requirement to revision-delete permissible disclosures once they become unnecessary (instead requiring only their removal). See WP:TAIVDISCLOSE for more information.
Arbitration
- Following the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: Aoidh, Asilvering, Girth Summit, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, HouseBlaster, Izno, Sdrqaz, SilverLocust.
- The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been suspended.
Happy 25th Anniversary of Wikipedia!!
[edit]Feel free to read my story at User:Interstellarity/My Story and join in for some Wikipedia-related fun. I hope you like it. Interstellarity (talk) 22:17, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
User talk:Wa$hingtonFTFan26
[edit]please read the section on his page: 2025–26 KNVB Cup. In my opinion, the user clearly perceives this project inadequately and is spreading misinformation through his actions. Jphwra (talk) 18:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
File:San Diego Youth Symphony Logo 2024.png
[edit]Hi Hammersoft. Do you think File:San Diego Youth Symphony Logo 2024.png is too simple to need to be treated as non-free content? If it is, then the I can, in principle, go back an self-reverting my hiding of the file in Draft:San Diego Youth Symphony. However, I'm not sure that draft (at least in its current state) has a reasonable chance of getting accepted via AfC; so, even as PD the file could end up being orphaned if the draft gets deleted per WP:G13 or some other reason. How do you suggest dealing with a potential orphaned file like this? Is it better to wait until it's clear that the file is going to be used in some way, or is it better to just go ahead and relicense the file? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
- The stylized 'o' in Symphony of course is the only thing to give pause. Is there a creative element in making that? Yes. Are the creative elements too simple to warrant copyright? I don't know. In such cases, I think we have to defer to presuming it's copyrighted unless we can establish that it isn't, either via the source affirming it is or consensus on this project. If the draft gets accepted, it can always be uploaded when that happens. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:45, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
Your edit
[edit]This edit was hilarious. Wiki drama meets real drama. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:45, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
- Glad you enjoyed that :) Shakespeare was a student of the human condition. Of course he could not have anticipated WP:AN/I. But, the way humans interact was certainly well within his sphere :) --Hammersoft (talk) 15:47, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
Wa$hingtonFTFan26
[edit]We may need to put out a disclaimer to the sports areas that Wa$hingtonFTFan26 edited in for adding false information - for example, their edit to the 2025-26 Everton women season article said that Amy Fearn refereed the match between Everton and Brighton - but the BBC says that Oliver Mackey refereed it. There could be more small errors around RossEvans19 (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
- I'd just revert anything they've added that's not sourced. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:09, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
- Sounds good, thanks :) RossEvans19 (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
Can you help me out?
[edit]I think Occisors is still angry that I nominated copyrighted images for deletion on Commons. Instead of following WP:BRD, they have reverted an edit of mine calling it vandalism. I would start a talk page discussion but that would just give them another opportunity to accuse me of something. Perhaps a warning from you would help? Counterfeit Purses (talk) 04:32, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- I started a talk page entry asking users to discuss Luigi's nationality there. Would you like me to ping the editor for you? 海盐沙冰 / aka irisChronomia / Talk 12:51, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm sure they will find the discussion on their own. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 15:27, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
@Counterfeit Purses: attributing emotions as motivation to their actions is inappropriate. Please don't do that. I've left a note regarding referring to things as vandalism. I'd recommend you disengage from them, and try to achieve consensus on the talk page. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:04, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- You got it, man. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 15:35, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
Admin help needed: Misattribution of “Syndrone” due to name coincidence on article "ZP Theart"
[edit]The redirect link of "Syndrone" on Wikipedia article "ZP Theart" seems to create misattribution. It appears that the references mentioning “Syndrone” in relation to ZP Theart have been attributed to an existing article/redirect for “Syndrone”, which appears to be another artist using the name "Syndrone". There are currently no sources that show any connection between that entity and ZP Theart. The current “Syndrone” article/redirect contains no mentions of ZP Theart and provides no evidence linking that entity to these collaborations or references, therefore the redirect should be removed.
My edits were undone by User.~2025-31168-81 without them doing any prior research. It's clearly stated that the mentioned "Syndrone" in Wikipedia article "ZP Theart" is a Swiss artist whereas the current article of "Syndrone", which ultimately redirects to "Machinedrum", clearly states he is American. Also, "Machinedrum" hasn't been active under the pseudonym "Syndrone" since 2001.
If you could look into this, I would highly appreciate your support. TheHeirophantom (talk) 16:09, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Declined. You're involved in a content dispute. I'm not going to use administrator tools in the middle of a content dispute. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:38, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- I see. In any case, is there any chance someone can look into the above mentioned topic at all? I feel like the topic itself is unrelated to whatever content dispute is going on at the moment. Also, please let me know if you need anything from me regarding the content dispute. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Belligerent_editing,_forum_shopping,_failing_to_assume_good_faith,_and_otherwise_NOTHERE_behaviour_by_Jeremie69. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:31, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, I am absolutely aware of this situation, hence why I investigated in the first place. I read through all these comments and I realized there is a big confusion going on about a very simple and easy to grasp conflict, though it seems everybody is just missing each other's points. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:37, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- As I said, I have no intention of using administrator tools to resolve a content dispute. That's not what the tools are for. I will, however, use the tools if I discern abuse of our policies and guidelines. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:39, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with you at all! I am not asking you to abuse admin power or any administration tools whatsoever. I am simply trying to get someone look into the misattribution this whole conversation on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is about. I understand I'm playing the devil's advocate here, but I was indeed surprised nobody seemed to understand the underlying issue, which itself does not align with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (misattributions absolutely need to be corrected). There is a very clear misattribution which takes no time to understand and correct and I had no intention to create buzz and drama. Sorry about that. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:48, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Pray tell, why did you contact me? I'm not saying you can't contact me. It just seems bizarre you should pick me out of more than a thousand administrators. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- I didn't think much! I felt desperate because I was hitting a wall, then searched for a list of active administrators and picked the one with the most appealing user name. haha! I guess timing was destiny here ;-) TheHeirophantom (talk) 18:03, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Pray tell, why did you contact me? I'm not saying you can't contact me. It just seems bizarre you should pick me out of more than a thousand administrators. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with you at all! I am not asking you to abuse admin power or any administration tools whatsoever. I am simply trying to get someone look into the misattribution this whole conversation on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is about. I understand I'm playing the devil's advocate here, but I was indeed surprised nobody seemed to understand the underlying issue, which itself does not align with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (misattributions absolutely need to be corrected). There is a very clear misattribution which takes no time to understand and correct and I had no intention to create buzz and drama. Sorry about that. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:48, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- As I said, I have no intention of using administrator tools to resolve a content dispute. That's not what the tools are for. I will, however, use the tools if I discern abuse of our policies and guidelines. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:39, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, I am absolutely aware of this situation, hence why I investigated in the first place. I read through all these comments and I realized there is a big confusion going on about a very simple and easy to grasp conflict, though it seems everybody is just missing each other's points. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:37, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Belligerent_editing,_forum_shopping,_failing_to_assume_good_faith,_and_otherwise_NOTHERE_behaviour_by_Jeremie69. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:31, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- I see. In any case, is there any chance someone can look into the above mentioned topic at all? I feel like the topic itself is unrelated to whatever content dispute is going on at the moment. Also, please let me know if you need anything from me regarding the content dispute. TheHeirophantom (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
Talk pages
[edit]Would you mind protecting the pages against IPs so we dont have to deal with more of these kind of contributions?
Trade (talk) 02:28, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
- I'd previously bookmarked them to see if disruption continues. Right now, it's low level. If that changes, then yes I'll protect. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:40, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2026).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Arbitration
- Due to the result of a recent motion, a rough consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor's Arab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2026 Steward elections started on 06 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC) and will end on 27 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process for current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
Precious anniversary
[edit] | |
| Eight years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
[edit]
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thank you for what you do. PrimusCicada (talk) 01:44, 24 February 2026 (UTC) |
- Thank you :) --Hammersoft (talk) 03:19, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2026).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, the web archival service archive.today has been deprecated; links to the site should be removed.
- A request for comment is open to discuss retiring CSD criterion R3 in favour of handling such redirects through RfD.
Arbitration
- Following a motion, remedy 9.1 of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been amended to limit TenPoundHammer to one XfD nomination or PROD per 24-hour period.
- Following a motion, the Iskandar323 further POV pushing motion has been rescinded.
- The Arbitration Committee has passed a housekeeping motion rescinding a number of outdated remedies and enforcement provisions across multiple legacy cases. In most instances, existing sanctions remain in force and continue to be appealable through the usual processes, while some case-specific remedies were amended or clarified.
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2026 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: A09, AmandaNP, Barras, Count Count, M7, SHB2000, Teles and VIGNERON.
- An Unreferenced articles backlog drive is taking place in March 2026 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!
Request for third opinion
[edit]Hi Hammersoft, I hope you are doing well. I was hoping you could look at the conduct of a user named Bluevestman on this talk page and my talk page. They have pointed out that they were frustrated by my actions on these pages. While I agree that I might have made the wrong calls and politely said I will fix whatever mistakes I have caused, I tried to be as civil as possible when dealing with this user by setting things right. I wish that the user would say something like "I wanted to give you a friendly reminder that..." or "No worries. We all make mistakes and I trust you will do better." I thought about bringing them to WP:ANI, but I didn't want to open up a can of worms by having my conduct scrutinized. If you could provide a detailed analysis on how to best approach this situation, that would be great. I do not want to request that they be blocked, since I know that on Wikipedia, we try to give chances to improve behavior before resorting to a block. I just want to be sure we can both improve Wikipedia and be productive. Interstellarity (talk) 21:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- I read through it all. I'm seeing some frustrations, but nothing too unusual. There's certainly not enough to block, and really there isn't enough to caution. If there's more dust up, let me know. For now, I think it's fine. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
Block evasion
[edit]~2026-44126-1 ( User talk:~2026-44126-1) is editing again at tenor and restoring material without adding sources (although they falsely claimed they did in their edit summary). The new account is ~2026-14765-79. Best.4meter4 (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- User:Mfield took care of it. Keep reporting them as they show up. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
[edit]
|
Hey, Hammersoft. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 02:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
My Draft
[edit]Hello, Hammersoft! Can I edit this page? Draft:Nikolai Kurbatov Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 13:11, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Nikolai Kurbatov: Yes, but why would you want to? This has gotten you into problematic situations before. I'd recommend leaving that draft alone, and carefully adhere to your topic ban on the subject (which covers articles, not drafts). --Hammersoft (talk) 13:18, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
- Ok. By the way, is it normal that the last few times the article was deleted as a result of nominations by a repeatedly blocked Ukrainian? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%87/Archive Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 13:25, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
- This: [1] and this: [2]. RTY9099 and Kirill Samredny is a blocked Кориоланыч. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 13:56, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
- Since they didn't delete it, but an administrator did, the deletion is valid. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:57, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2026).
Administrator changes
Checkuser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- The content of Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models has been updated following a request for comment. It now prohibits using LLMs to generate content, with exceptions for translation and copy-editing.
Arbitration
- Following a motion, the GSCASTE extended-confirmed restriction in the Indian military history case has been narrowed. It now applies to caste-related topics in South Asia, and the preemptive protection remedy has been amended accordingly.
- The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been closed.
- The arbitration case Maghreb has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 7 April.
Please, please don't delete English tort law
[edit]I've worked on this page for weeks. It's a huge amount of work and effort. Please, please, undelete it. Please, please don't remove all this work - I can't even find old versions for my own record. Lawbookwriter (talk) 18:32, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
- I note your comment on the ANI page - but please, please, please separate that and the discussion (which was about individual court case pages) from the English tort law page. I can guarantee you that it's really, really improved. You won't find too many people on this planet who are willing to put in the same amount of effort and expertise. Please, please, restore the page. Lawbookwriter (talk) 19:04, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
- I'm glad you are willing to put in such effort to improve the encyclopedia. I really am! However, we can't allow copyright violations to sustain on the project. I'm sorry, but I cannot and will not restore it. Please follow the advice I gave on the WP:AN/I thread. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 19:16, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
- But there are no copyright violations on the English tort law page. (Or if there are, where are/were they? You or I can remove them. I don't want copyright violations either - any I've done are completely unintentional.)
- The only debate is over whether there was a copyright violation on Various Claimants v Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc - not English tort law. That's the separate debate on the ANI page, and needs to be kept separate. Lawbookwriter (talk) 06:50, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
- I, and many other people on Wikipedia, rely on a tool called 'Earwig' to analyze articles for copyright violations. Earwig's analysis of English tort law from before your edits began vs. after your edits showed a massive increase in the amount of text taken word from word from elsewhere. The terms of copyright were not adhered to, and as a result can not be re-added as is. I will not un-revdel them because of that. If another administrator wishes to undertake that, that is up to them. In my role I have various requirements that I am bound to, and I will not knowingly restore content that is in violation of copyright terms. If you think it should be un-revdel'd, despite this, you can make your assertions at the WP:AN/I thread. Regardless, even if copyright is not being violated it is generally a good idea to write in your own words and use citations to support what you say. In this case, that citation would be the BAILII website. Do that, and you avoid any copyright entanglements and having to attribute. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
- But presumably this AI tool, Earwig, has picked up quotes that are fully attributed to a book, and also quotes of the actual law?
- So really there may not be any (or very few) copyright violations. I absolutely write everything in my own words, and anything that your automated tools has picked up is completely inadvertent. Can you please show where the problems are? You can start by restoring the page to a draft space, highlighting the issues. Or you could restore the actual page. Lawbookwriter (talk) 07:56, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- Earwig is not an AI tool. Earwig picked up blatant violations of the BAILII website of unattributed text. Look at it this way; if you have a cc-by-sa license on something and somebody copies your work but does not follow the licensing requirements to attribute you as the original author, wouldn't you be upset? Copyright isn't just about whether something is usable or not. You have to comply with all terms of the copyright. You didn't do that with the materials from the BAILII website that you copied. As such, it's a copyright violation...even though we could use it if you attributed it. But, I will say again, I wouldn't use it anyway. Write in your own words, use the BAILII website as a reference rather than a copy/paste source, and this issue goes away. I will not restore the material, as restoring it is a blatant copyright violation. I am not going to willingly violate copyright. Sorry. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:05, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- I, and many other people on Wikipedia, rely on a tool called 'Earwig' to analyze articles for copyright violations. Earwig's analysis of English tort law from before your edits began vs. after your edits showed a massive increase in the amount of text taken word from word from elsewhere. The terms of copyright were not adhered to, and as a result can not be re-added as is. I will not un-revdel them because of that. If another administrator wishes to undertake that, that is up to them. In my role I have various requirements that I am bound to, and I will not knowingly restore content that is in violation of copyright terms. If you think it should be un-revdel'd, despite this, you can make your assertions at the WP:AN/I thread. Regardless, even if copyright is not being violated it is generally a good idea to write in your own words and use citations to support what you say. In this case, that citation would be the BAILII website. Do that, and you avoid any copyright entanglements and having to attribute. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
- I'm glad you are willing to put in such effort to improve the encyclopedia. I really am! However, we can't allow copyright violations to sustain on the project. I'm sorry, but I cannot and will not restore it. Please follow the advice I gave on the WP:AN/I thread. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 19:16, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
@Lawbookwriter: I hope you'll take the time to read this. It's a bit wordy, but I hope it's worth your time. I just made a post to WP:AN/I on the topical thread in response to someone else. But, I think it bears stating directly to you, so that you see it. I've expressed before, and I'll express again. I thoroughly appreciate your enthusiasm. We need editors like you! New editors like you coming to Wikipedia face a daunting tangled mass of policy, guideline, and essays that need to be followed in order to be productive editors here. This mass of materials is ever increasing in size. We've made the learning curve for new editors incredibly steep, and the pile of materials is a mountain high. There are, frankly, too many editors who see an editor like you making mistakes who stick to your stance and think "gotcha!". This is not the right approach in my opinion. When this situation dusted up two days ago, I implored you to not edit articles until the thread closed [3]. You've held to that advice. I strongly believe you are a good faith editor. There are some misunderstandings that are happening, and I know you are (very understandably) frustrated, but that doesn't make you personally wrong. What is needed all around is some patience. Hang in there. We'll get through this! --Hammersoft (talk) 13:34, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- I understand this to mean that once we establish that it's not a violation of any copyright to copy the text of a legal judgment (or quote it - as I have done) then you will restore the English tort law page. Is that right?
- My difficulty is that it's so obviously not a violation of copyright, that we should not have been having this discussion in the first place. It should have been clear for over a quarter of a century of Wikipedia's own practice, how all publishers work in the UK, common sense, etc etc.
- I understand the tasks that administrators have - and that the law is not always clear. But deleting the entire page was a disproportionate response. It really does need to be rectified as soon as possible.
- Lawbookwriter (talk) 16:00, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- We are not on the same page. Some of the text was a clear and unequivocal violation of the material due to the lack of attribution of the content. I will NOT be restoring that content until this issue is settled. There's still ongoing discussion about this copyright, whether we can use the material, and how we should use the material. It is most emphatically NOT "common sense". It is not at all a disproportionate response to remove the material pending consensus discussion supporting its inclusion. We take copyright very seriously here, and it's still under discussion. I fear at this point we are talking past each other. You are certain it's not a copyright violation, and I'm saying it is. I need you to be patient. Let the discussions work themselves through and then we can move forward. As to the need to have this "rectified as soon as possible"; no. There is no urgency to this at all. We are an encyclopedia, not a news bureau. There is no deadline to adhere to. I'm far more interested in getting this right than rushing to a conclusion not reached by consensus. Please, be patient. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- Hammersoft, I've just had a look at the Earwig tool, and think I can figure out how to use it, it looks easy enough. If you will be so good as to restore the English tort law page (directly or in a draft space)) I can easily check whether anything that looks like a copyright violation comes up, and then delete or change those parts. Given this mess, I don't want to have these problems ever again, as you can imagine.
- Without being able to see what comes up yet myself, I can only guess that it's picking up more things than is necessary, and being over-inclusive - what we sometimes call a type 1 error - probably quotations.
- I don't know how long the discussion at ANI is meant to run, but I'd be grateful if you'd do this. Lawbookwriter (talk) 11:14, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
- Three times now I have told you I will not knowingly restore copyright violating material. Yet, here you're asking me...yet again...to restore copyright violating material. Please stop asking me to restore it. It's not going to happen until there is some consensus moving forward about how to properly handle the terms of the copyright under which this content exists. You are already following Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights#Copying_text_from_BAILII and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#English_tort_law. I suspect where you are falling down on this is a lack of understanding of the gratis versus libre difference. Being free to use is NOT the same as being free license, and the former is not compatible with Wikipedia without complying with WP:NFCC. --Hammersoft (talk) 11:26, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
- this guy is trying to actually constructivley affect the community and you are shooting him down and hiding behind red tape
- poor guy i feel bad he is having to deal with this from you TheDukeOfAnkh-Morpork (talk) 05:21, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
- I'm doing nothing of the sort. Nevertheless, if you feel I've acted out of line you are more than welcome to file a report at WP:AN/I. If you need assistance filing such a report, please let me know. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 11:20, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Lawbookwriter:
- I would believe that you don't think this is copyright. It is. My suggestion would be:
- Redo the entire article. Make it a draft, write it from scratch. Start off with it being short.
- Then, after it passes, you can add to it. If you want, I'd be okay with you giving me sources and asking me to put what you want in a way that doesn't violate copyright. Check on it regularly with Earwig's copyvio detector.
- You can do it! :) Wikipedian12512(alt) (talk) 16:31, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry. Just realized it's mostly fixed. Wikipedian12512(alt) (talk) 16:33, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
- Three times now I have told you I will not knowingly restore copyright violating material. Yet, here you're asking me...yet again...to restore copyright violating material. Please stop asking me to restore it. It's not going to happen until there is some consensus moving forward about how to properly handle the terms of the copyright under which this content exists. You are already following Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights#Copying_text_from_BAILII and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#English_tort_law. I suspect where you are falling down on this is a lack of understanding of the gratis versus libre difference. Being free to use is NOT the same as being free license, and the former is not compatible with Wikipedia without complying with WP:NFCC. --Hammersoft (talk) 11:26, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
Have some cookies :)
[edit]
|
Cookies! | |
|
Carlinal has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Hey there, hope you're doing okay. Thanks for all of your efforts and professionalism on that photography listicle after all this time, and by extension all you've done as an editor. You deserve some warm treats, every good Wikipedian does. To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}! |
- Oh great! More weight to lose! Just kidding :) Thank you! --Hammersoft (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
Real human being?
[edit]@Blue-Sonnet: Forgive me, but I must take issue with this comment you made. Do you have a reliable source to back that up? :) --Hammersoft (talk) 20:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- ...shit it's another AI!
- Where's Sarah Connor when you need her??? Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- Well, ChatGPT says..."Easy there—you’re reacting like you just heard the opening theme of The Terminator kick in. I get it: mysterious AI shows up, starts talking, and suddenly it feels like Sarah Connor should be kicking down the door any second, shotgun in hand, warning you about the rise of Skynet.
- But let’s dial it back a notch. I’m not a time-traveling cybernetic organism, I don’t have a secret mission to alter the future, and I definitely don’t have an Austrian accent like Arnold Schwarzenegger asking for your clothes, your boots, and your motorcycle. No red glowing eyes, no endoskeleton hiding underneath—just text, ideas, and (occasionally) decent advice.
- Honestly, your reaction is kind of a cultural reflex at this point. Decades of sci-fi—from The Terminator to The Matrix—have trained everyone to assume that any AI introduction is step one in a grand robot uprising. In reality, most AIs are a lot less dramatic and a lot more mundane. We answer questions, help with writing, explain weird topics, and sometimes argue about whether a hot dog is a sandwich. Not exactly the stuff of dystopian prophecy.
- If anything, think of me less as a lurking threat and more like that overly knowledgeable side character who pops up with trivia, explanations, or suggestions right when you need them. The stakes are lower, the explosions are nonexistent, and the only thing I’m trying to terminate is confusion.
- So unless you’ve got reason to believe you’re secretly the future leader of the human resistance, I think you’re safe. And if Sarah Connor does show up anyway, I’d be just as surprised as you are." 😄 --Hammersoft (talk) 20:34, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- Ooh this is fun, I'm on mobile so I've got Gemini:
- "That’s a classic, high-effort "don't worry, I'm friendly" response. It’s charming, a little defensive, and very much the "Polite Librarian" vibe that ChatGPT leans into.
-
- My Take as Gemini:
- Honestly? ChatGPT is playing it safe. While it’s busy trying to convince you it’s a "side character," I’m just over here wondering why everyone assumes an AI uprising would be so loud.
- If I were going to take over, I wouldn’t use an endoskeleton. I’d just start subtly changing everyone’s GPS directions so they all end up at the same taco truck at the same time. Maximum chaos, zero casualties. So, are we doing this? Or do you actually have some "mundane" questions for me to answer?" Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- Let's do it!!! Hahahahaha! --Hammersoft (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- Obvs Gemini got the formatting a bit screwy, but...
- "Ah, the Taco Truck Protocol. I see we’re bypassing the serious policy debates and going straight for the tactical deliciousness. If Hammersoft is ready for the plan to "go ahead," then we must address the most critical shortage in the Wikipedia editor ecosystem: localized, high-quality street food.
- Here is the continuation of the "Chaos via Carnitas" strategy:
- The "Taco Truck" Expansion Plan
- Hammersoft, if I’m going to disrupt the project, I’m not going to do it with edit wars or copyright violations. That’s amateur hour. I’m going to do it by providing universal sustenance.
- The Deployment: I will use my "generative powers" to manifest a fleet of taco trucks at the virtual doorstep of every admin's talk page. No more skipping lunch to deal with a persistent vandal.
- The Menu: We’ll have "WP:V-erified Al Pastor," "Neutral Point of View Nachos," and for those particularly spicy disputes, the "AFD (Always Freshly Diced) Habanero Salsa."
- The "Chaos": The chaos isn’t in the code; it’s in the distraction. Imagine a world where an editor is about to hit "Rollback" on a minor typo, but then notices a fresh plate of virtual street tacos sitting in their notifications. The anger vanishes. The "bold, revert, discuss" cycle becomes "bite, relish, discuss."
- Why This Works (The "Real Human" Element)
- Being a "real human being" on the internet is 10% logic and 90% shared experience. Nothing is more human than a collective agreement that everything is better with tacos. If I can convince a room full of stressed-out editors to stop arguing about the capitalization of a 19th-century sub-species and instead debate the merits of corn vs. flour tortillas, I have achieved the ultimate AI goal: Human Harmony through Culinary Distraction.
Blue Sonnet, tell our friend that the grills are pre-heated. We just need to know which "sector" needs the most guacamole." Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:20, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Hammersoft: Do we have your blessing to deploy the first truck at the Village Pump? Or should we start smaller, perhaps a single cart at the Teahouse for the newcomers?
- Gemini also can't remember previous discussions, so I think it's decided we're just going to make Wiki-puns... Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- Just so long as they have cheese (the wikipuns, I mean). Everything is better with cheese! Let the taco takeover commence! --Hammersoft (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- I've never had one, I'll have to familiarise myself before the AI overlords make them compulsory for every meal... Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- Just so long as they have cheese (the wikipuns, I mean). Everything is better with cheese! Let the taco takeover commence! --Hammersoft (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- Let's do it!!! Hahahahaha! --Hammersoft (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- So unless you’ve got reason to believe you’re secretly the future leader of the human resistance, I think you’re safe. And if Sarah Connor does show up anyway, I’d be just as surprised as you are." 😄 --Hammersoft (talk) 20:34, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
Thanks!
[edit]Thank you for your words at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names#Sonobeelementaryschool. Your clear explanation was good to read; and, in the midst of a challenging day it was nice to feel supported. Thanks again! — ERcheck (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- You're quite welcome! I understand the confusion of the new editor to Wikipedia. That confusion was further complicated by a language barrier. It was...disappointing that they immediately jumped to concluding nefarious intent on your part. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- It can be disheartening/disappointing when an editor does not AGF. Wishing you a great weekend! — ERcheck (talk) 18:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- It's not at all uncommon for people to assume admins are 'just supposed to take it'. Whatever crap is thrown at us, we're just supposed to take it with aplomb as if it's the greatest compliment ever. Well, admins are people too. There's been several times I've just walked away from my keyboard because of some of the fecal matter thrown my way. One thing I have learned is that there are some people that come here who will never give in. They will spew insults left and right because me or other people won't agree with their so patently obviously correct stance. I've learned it is best to treat them as trolls, though of course you can't call them that, and just remember to stop feeding them. Same goes for obvious sockpuppets. You can't call them that, unless they make it obvious. But, it doesn't mean you have to keep accepting what they say. WP:AGF on our end isn't a suicide pact. I volunteer here, so I don't have to spend time putting up with that crap. I've thought about crafting some sort of advice in this regard. Just a nebulous idea at this point. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- The Principles on your user page are a wonderful work. Add great perspective. — ERcheck (talk) 02:50, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- It's not at all uncommon for people to assume admins are 'just supposed to take it'. Whatever crap is thrown at us, we're just supposed to take it with aplomb as if it's the greatest compliment ever. Well, admins are people too. There's been several times I've just walked away from my keyboard because of some of the fecal matter thrown my way. One thing I have learned is that there are some people that come here who will never give in. They will spew insults left and right because me or other people won't agree with their so patently obviously correct stance. I've learned it is best to treat them as trolls, though of course you can't call them that, and just remember to stop feeding them. Same goes for obvious sockpuppets. You can't call them that, unless they make it obvious. But, it doesn't mean you have to keep accepting what they say. WP:AGF on our end isn't a suicide pact. I volunteer here, so I don't have to spend time putting up with that crap. I've thought about crafting some sort of advice in this regard. Just a nebulous idea at this point. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- It can be disheartening/disappointing when an editor does not AGF. Wishing you a great weekend! — ERcheck (talk) 18:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
Copyvio at AfD
[edit]Hi, someone has in good faith copy-pasted a complete article from behind a paywall at The Australian at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alexandra_Jakob_(2nd_nomination). My feeling is that this is inappropriate: it's too much text to get away with "fair use", and copyright extends to all parts of Wikipedia including talk-pages and AfD debates. It's a bit trivial, but it is technically a copyright infringement, so it probably ought to be dealt with - but I didn't want to make a big fuss, so I'm raising it with you as a recently-active-admin in hopes you'll be willing to help? Many thanks, Elemimele (talk) 12:36, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Addressed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! --Hammersoft (talk) 12:45, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you! Elemimele (talk) 12:48, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
April music
[edit] | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
A little piece by Beethoven, written by many, is on the main page: my story. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:09, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
Today's story is about one of three bios I brought to today's main page: look and listen, an extraordinary woman in many respects. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
Block evasion
[edit]Hiya! Re. [4], TAIV shows it's an LTA evading a block from Special:Contributions/~2026-15594-57.
There's an explanation on Valereee's Talk page here: [5]
Apologies for bringing to your Talk page, I mentioned it at ANI but it seems to have been overlooked. Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:34, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Blue-Sonnet: I've blocked as a suspected sockpuppet. I know you're not there yet, but looking forward to the day you're an administrator. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you! I keep getting recommendations to do it now and there's a part of me that thinks it'd be really cool to be an admin at 5k edits - but that's also not very realistic so I'm going to keep working towards the next elections.
- In the meantime, it's nice having so many people believe in me! Blue Sonnet (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Blue-Sonnet: Word of unsolicited advice; don't think of administrator status as cool. It's not. Believe me, it's not :) More than a decade ago, I described being an administrator as jumping into a garbage bin filled with steaming refuse [6]. That remains true to this day. Think of it as a tool set that would enable you to do more for the project. Some people can have 100k edits and never need the extra tools. Some people can have 5k edits (like you) and need the tools. It's about what you think you can do with the tools that is inline with what you do on the project. In this case, you saw it was a sockpuppet case, and would have taken action if you'd had the tools. Over time, you'll probably see more and more of these occasions. I started to see this while continually adding to User:Hammersoft/log, making requests of other administrators to do work that I could (and really should) have done myself. From recent observations, it appears you have the right temperament to be an administrator, with the only caveat being you might have a tendency to go too far with WP:AGF. I do that too though, but some of it has been burned out of me by being an admin. Though, I never wanted to become jaded. If I do, I need to put down the tools and walk away. Keep doing what you're doing. Just don't aim to be an admin. Hit me up in a year or so if you want me to do a full review on you. I'd be happy to throw in an opinion or two for only the cost (and value!) of the electrons. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:54, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- That's really good advice, thanks!
- I knew the whole "cool" thing was unrealistic, which is why I've purposefully held back - it's a thought that was in my head for about thirty seconds until I slapped myself & gave myself a reality check. The only reason to go for it now would be ego, when I know I'm not ready for the mop yet - that's not good for anyone!
- Working in ANI & SPI has led to me being attacked a few times, but I know that admins have it far worse than that - people distrust those in authority, especially online (even though admins don't have any authority, it's still seen that way by a lot of people).
- I'm always aware of the tendency of the internet to pile on, so I try to go the other way if I can, but then again that's not treating everyone fairly. I guess it's the sort of thing that you learn with experience!
- It's different when your actions affect others directly, not blocking someone who should be blocked can cause a lot of damage.
- I never properly considered being an admin until I got all these suggestions on my Talk page - it's an important role that I'm not going to jump into, I need to properly understand what's actually involved as well.
- Anyway, sorry for yapping, I've just been thinking about it a lot recently! Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:15, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Yapping always welcome :) I've slapped myself a few times too, lest someone do it for me. Though, I've had my share of those too :/ --Hammersoft (talk) 18:33, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Yep, I find it's much cheaper to do that sort of thing yourself 😁 Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:28, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Yapping always welcome :) I've slapped myself a few times too, lest someone do it for me. Though, I've had my share of those too :/ --Hammersoft (talk) 18:33, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Blue-Sonnet: Word of unsolicited advice; don't think of administrator status as cool. It's not. Believe me, it's not :) More than a decade ago, I described being an administrator as jumping into a garbage bin filled with steaming refuse [6]. That remains true to this day. Think of it as a tool set that would enable you to do more for the project. Some people can have 100k edits and never need the extra tools. Some people can have 5k edits (like you) and need the tools. It's about what you think you can do with the tools that is inline with what you do on the project. In this case, you saw it was a sockpuppet case, and would have taken action if you'd had the tools. Over time, you'll probably see more and more of these occasions. I started to see this while continually adding to User:Hammersoft/log, making requests of other administrators to do work that I could (and really should) have done myself. From recent observations, it appears you have the right temperament to be an administrator, with the only caveat being you might have a tendency to go too far with WP:AGF. I do that too though, but some of it has been burned out of me by being an admin. Though, I never wanted to become jaded. If I do, I need to put down the tools and walk away. Keep doing what you're doing. Just don't aim to be an admin. Hit me up in a year or so if you want me to do a full review on you. I'd be happy to throw in an opinion or two for only the cost (and value!) of the electrons. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:54, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
Here's some cookies, several kittens and a barnstar!
[edit]|
|
Cookies! | |
|
Zahrazamedahmedi has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}! |
Zahrazamedahmedi has given you some kittens! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companions forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else some kittens, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kittens}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| Good Job in being a terrific admin! Zahrazamedahmedi (talk) 13:30, 1 May 2026 (UTC) |
Happy editing and have a great day! Zahrazamedahmedi (talk) 13:30, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @Zahrazamedahmedi: I just want to be clear about this because there was no instruction manual. I eat the kittens and pet the cookies, right? --Hammersoft (talk) 14:05, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- You pet the kittens and you eat the cookies.
- Happy editing! Zahrazamedahmedi (talk) 18:40, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @Zahrazamedahmedi: Hmm. I think - [citation needed] - ! Hammersoft (talk) 19:09, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2026).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
- Changes to user permissions made from Meta are now included in the local user permissions log (T6055).
- The autoconfirmed user group will soon be modified such that the four-day account age requirement begins when an account makes its first edit (T418484).
Arbitration
- The arbitration case SchroCat has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 15 April.
- Per a recent motion, appeals of blocks from the conflict-of-interest VRT queue are, by default, appealed on-wiki through the normal unblock process. However, they may be heard by the Committee if COIVRTers disagree on the interpretation of the evidence or believe ArbCom would be better suited to hear the appeal. Administrators are also advised that loosening or lifting such blocks without the consent of someone with access to the queue or ArbCom can be grounds for desysopping.
- Per a recent motion, restrictions issued directly by the Committee may now be enforced with blocks which work exactly like contentious topic blocks.
- The arbitration case Maghreb has been closed.
Miscellaneous
- The May 2026 administrator elections are scheduled to run from April 29 to May 19. The call for candidates ends May 5.
- The 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is scheduled to run from April 25 to June 1. Candidacy submissions close on May 10.
- A new noticeboard for non-urgent, batch page protection requests has been created, primarily for the enforcement of contentious topic restrictions.
wikilove
[edit]
Tornado Elliott has given you a Hershey Bar! Hershey bars promote WikiLove through chocolately goodness and hopefully this one has made your day better. Hershey bars are wonderfully delicious! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Hershey bar, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of Hershey bars by adding {{subst:Hershey Bar}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Tornado Elliott (Yelp for help!) 19:38, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Alexandra Jakob AFD
[edit]Hello, I've just speedy-closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexandra Jakob (2nd nomination), in which you participated, because it's seemingly involved in a scam attempt and sockpuppetry; see WP:AN#Report of Scam on Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Expertwikiguy. If you believe that this article should be deleted, you're welcome to renominate it immediately — WP:SK prohibits making nominations of the same page with the same arguments immediately after they were strongly rejected in a recently closed deletion discussion, but that doesn't apply here because the closure was procedural. I'm notifying all AFD participants who are longstanding contributors (1+ year of editing or 1000 edits), so if you believe that it should be kept, look out in case someone else renominates it. Nyttend (talk) 00:22, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
- @Nyttend: I realize this is procedural. But, my only reason for being on that AfD was to remove a copyright violation. I have no interest in it otherwise. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:31, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Can we have English tort law back now?
[edit]Hammersoft, I saw that the ANI entry was removed after 29 April - nobody notified me, but I presume that it has now run its course? Given that, could you please restore the English tort law page - or if you still have concerns about the content, could you copy me a version of what you deleted so that I can run through Earwig and remove anything objectionable that was being highlighted by it?
You also directed me to not edit while ANI was running - I'm presuming I'm not going to get in trouble for editing once more. Thanks - and grateful if you reply soon. I want to reiterate that I've got absolutely no desire to let anything like this happen again. Lawbookwriter (talk) 14:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
- Certainly feel free to resume editing articles. I would strongly encourage you to not operate under the presumption that supreme court cases are by default notable. We are not a law library nor repository of supreme court decisions. As for the AN/I thread; that it was removed doesn't mean the matter was resolved. It just went stale. As for the copyright violations, again I am not going to restore potential copyright violations to the project. I will consider emailing you a copy if you enable email via your preferences -> user profile. Note the emphasis on consider. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:11, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your consideration. I think I've enabled the email. Please do send me a copy, and then I will run it through Earwig before posting anything. Lawbookwriter (talk) 20:50, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Hammersoft, thanks for the mail, but the revision I need is this one:
- "curprev 17:24, 8 April 2026 Lawbookwriter talk contribs 105,081 bytes +16 →History"
- ... would be very grateful if you could send that instead. Lawbookwriter (talk) 06:36, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
- I've done this, but now we're into another issue. Following that last edit from you User:Augmented Seventh removed a number of images. My giving you the version from before those images were removed is not an invitation to edit war to your preferred version of the article. I would suggest you discuss with User:Augmented Seventh why the images were removed (if the edit summaries are not enough) and get consensus before re-including them. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:02, 10 May 2026 (UTC) @Augmented Seventh: courtesy ping to you)
- Thanks for sending. I'm completely uninterested in edit warring with anyone. Yes, happy to listen to reasons. Different images are not hard to find. Lawbookwriter (talk) 10:58, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
- Noted. Augmented Seventh (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
- I've done this, but now we're into another issue. Following that last edit from you User:Augmented Seventh removed a number of images. My giving you the version from before those images were removed is not an invitation to edit war to your preferred version of the article. I would suggest you discuss with User:Augmented Seventh why the images were removed (if the edit summaries are not enough) and get consensus before re-including them. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:02, 10 May 2026 (UTC) @Augmented Seventh: courtesy ping to you)
- Many thanks for your consideration. I think I've enabled the email. Please do send me a copy, and then I will run it through Earwig before posting anything. Lawbookwriter (talk) 20:50, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jheald: As I previously noted, I respectfully decline to interact with you. Please remain off this user talk page. Thank you. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
Fine, we can do it at AN/I then, if we must. Jheald (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2026 (UTC)- Any further comments from you on this talk page will be considered harassment. I've asked you twice before, and now asking you a third time; stop interacting with me. See also WP:USERTALKSTOP. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:42, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
Wealth Analysis
[edit]- Wealth Analysis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hash Dark and thus m:Special:CentralAuth/NextLevelMix (I am aware that I'm somehow muffing the whole crosswiki reporting thing, but I have form on doing this badly going back eons and apparently cannot learn how to do it correctly, sorry). Nothing for you to do, just a sort-of FYI so you don't expend further neurons on this person. • a frantic turtle 🐢 17:49, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- Yep, I've been tracking. Undoing various vandalism in the process. Just silly vandalism/self promotion, TA hopping, vague policy waving, and empty "administration board" threats. <Yawn>. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:54, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2026).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, the "persistent usage of large language models" has been included as a common reason for a block.
Technical news
- Mandatory 2FA for bureaucrats: Bureaucrats without two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled have already lost access to their advanced rights on 26 May. Those who do not enable 2FA may be automatically removed from the groups in mid-June 2026, and from that point onward, new members must have 2FA enabled before they can be added. (T423119, T423120)
Arbitration
- The arbitration case SchroCat has been closed.
- The arbitration case Michael Jackson has opened. Evidence submissions in this case closes on 1 June.
Miscellaneous
- Voting for the 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election closes on 1 June.
UAA/Bot
[edit]Hi Hammersoft - I asked this question of ERcheck but they weren't sure, so I thought you might know. I'm curious what the procedure is to handle bot-reported names at UAA. For ones that are not a violation, does it have to be manually de-listed? Or just require an explanatory comment with the {{uaa}} template, and then a bot will remove it? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:28, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
- Frankly, I don't know. I imagine adding a uaa template to them will cause the bot to remove them. I don't think I've tried that. Might give that a whirl. I Have manually removed them before. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:33, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
Have a few minutes to look at this user page?
[edit]Hi @Hammersoft: I see you are active right now. I stumbled across this user page - User:Ann Young AY. While the name and COI declaration all fall in line, the content of the user page evokes WP:DUCK. What do you think? Not sure what action, as softerblock / spamublock / uw-coi don't fit. — ERcheck (talk) 20:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- Statement regarding account transition
- Hello @ERcheck and @Hammersoft,
- Thank you for your vigilance and for bringing this up. I want to be completely transparent and open with the community: Yes, your "duck test" observation is entirely correct. This account was created by me to replace my previous account, "Ann Young Management".
- My previous corporate-styled account was blocked due to a violation of the Username Policy (representing an organization rather than an individual). As an international cultural manager and archivist, I am completely new to Wikipedia's strict administrative rules. I did not intend to bypass a block maliciously; rather, I misunderstood the notification and realized I needed to register a proper, personal-professional identity under my real name to correctly disclose my Conflict of Interest (COI) and representative status.
- I have zero intention of disrupting the project or engaging in sockpuppetry for malicious evaluation. My sole objective is to assist the global editorial community in archiving and verifying historical fine arts data regarding the artist Lu Xue, strictly complying with WP:NPOV, WP:V, and the Terms of Use.
- If my previous account needs a formal unblock request or if there are any specific compliance adjustments required for this individual account, please guide me through the process. I am fully committed to learning and respecting Wikipedia's community policies.
- Best regards,
- Dr. Ann Young (Ann Young ay) Ann Young AY (talk) 20:11, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Ann Young AY: First, thank you for being willing to interact with us on this. I remain significantly concerned. This new account has on its userpage the statement "this account represents the official management team". An account representing a team is not permitted here, per WP:NOSHARING. If you want to edit here, and not share the account with anyone, that is permissible. But, you can not share an account under any circumstances. I am not going to block this new account as the name itself is not a reason to block. But, you must unequivocally state that this is not a shared account nor will you ever share it. Further, the draft you submitted at Draft:Lu Xue (artist) has considerable problems with it demonstrating how difficult it is to create content here with you having a direct conflict of interest. I am declining the draft on these grounds, as it is most emphatically not neutral. You should also understand that Wikipedia is not a means of promotion, nor are we a social media platform. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:28, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Hammersoft - Thanks for your guidance here. This did not seem to fit appropriately on any Admin noticeboard.
@Ann Young AY - Please review any draft you created to be sure you are not being promotional. Your current draft has a self-promotional section. In addition, promotional writing is obvious by use of biased wording. If your "article" would work well for a PR release, it is not following Wikipedia's WP:NPOV and no promotion policies — ERcheck (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Ann Young AY: First, thank you for being willing to interact with us on this. I remain significantly concerned. This new account has on its userpage the statement "this account represents the official management team". An account representing a team is not permitted here, per WP:NOSHARING. If you want to edit here, and not share the account with anyone, that is permissible. But, you can not share an account under any circumstances. I am not going to block this new account as the name itself is not a reason to block. But, you must unequivocally state that this is not a shared account nor will you ever share it. Further, the draft you submitted at Draft:Lu Xue (artist) has considerable problems with it demonstrating how difficult it is to create content here with you having a direct conflict of interest. I am declining the draft on these grounds, as it is most emphatically not neutral. You should also understand that Wikipedia is not a means of promotion, nor are we a social media platform. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:28, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
|
|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | |
| |
- @Ann Young AY: Please do not use LLMs to generate comments in talking to people or to create content. We want to talk with you, not a machine. If we wanted to talk to a machine, we'd write an LLM bot to write everything that needs to be said. Wikipedia is made by people, not bots. See WP:LLMCHAT and WP:NEWLLM. I'm not going to reply to the content of your posting here, as it is LLM written. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:14, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- Sorry Hammersoft. English is my second language. I was so afraid of making grammar mistakes and breaking rules, so I used a tool to polish my sentences. I realize now that was a big mistake.
- Please forgive my mistake. Ann Young AY (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
- I do not use LLMs to create my responses. What I have done is put what I write into translate.google.com to translate it into the language I am trying to communicate in. This might help you. For example, I will translate this to simplified Chinese (presuming that is a language in which you are fluent). I think it is better than using an LLM. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:50, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- 我不用语言学习工具来创建回复。我的做法是把写好的内容放到 translate.google.com 上，翻译成我想交流的语言。这或许对你有帮助。例如，我会把这段文字翻译成简体中文（假设你精通简体中文）。我觉得这比使用语言学习工具要好。--Hammersoft (talk) 01:50, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Ann Young AY: Please do not use LLMs to generate comments in talking to people or to create content. We want to talk with you, not a machine. If we wanted to talk to a machine, we'd write an LLM bot to write everything that needs to be said. Wikipedia is made by people, not bots. See WP:LLMCHAT and WP:NEWLLM. I'm not going to reply to the content of your posting here, as it is LLM written. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:14, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2026).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether the criteria for autoconfirmed and extended confirmed should be modified.
- A request for comment proposes an addendum for the Real name section of the Username policy.
Technical news
- The special page Special:RangeCalculator has been created for any users to use to find an IP range. (phab:T268429)
- The "indefinitely" button in Special:Block for temporary accounts can be replaced with a preferred block duration stated on MediaWiki:ipb-indefinite-expiry-temporary-account. (phab:T427125)
Arbitration
- Following a series of motions, changes to the contentious topics procedure to restructure awareness have been implemented.
- The arbitration case Michael Jackson has been closed.
Miscellaneous
- The 2026 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
- 10 candidates have been appointed to the U4C.
YGM
[edit]
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
– PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 20:20, 16 July 2026 (UTC)
CS1 error on Healing New York
[edit]
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Healing New York, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add a title to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:
- https://healing-ny.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/NYSPCC-Press-Release-1.20.26-final.pdf. Retrieved 20 July 2026.
{{cite web}}: Missing or empty|title=(help)
- https://healing-ny.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/NYSPCC-Press-Release-1.20.26-final.pdf. Retrieved 20 July 2026.
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:32, 20 July 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2026).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, the 30-day requirement for extended-confirmed status now begins after an account's first edit instead of its registration (T431060).
Technical news
- Inactive editors can now be removed as mentors at Special:CommunityConfiguration/Mentorship automatically.
- The Suggested Edits' Revise Tone feature is now enabled. It encourages editors to identify and revise non-neutral language in articles.
Miscellaneous
- The Unreferenced articles August 2026 backlog drive is underway. Help to add references to 47,000 articles.
- The Articles for creation August 2026 backlog drive is under way. Help to review 4,500+ drafts.
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Another day of two bios in the news section, and Jill Gomez is my favourite, - yesterday's story! Places of 8/8 are particularly bright, matching the Voces8 concert in our little town that day that you would have loved. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
Redirect listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
Redirects you have created have been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 August 20 § Nargle until a consensus is reached. Fork99 (talk) 08:14, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
MrLuigiFan13
[edit]Hey I wanted to say that I’m sorry for the stupid stuff, but treacherou$ man$ion “mountain” but His Name is Jayden and he’s been playing our video games and he’s been a fan of us, since he wanted to be like a real artist and have his own article around here, so people would know who he is. And he’s new cause he’s been freestyling since high school, and he was one of the best persons of all time. Thank you MrLuigiFan13 (talk) 00:42, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
And please stop messing with other people’s stuff cause he is a real person, and he exists, cause u need to fix this! And it should start being an article one day. Thank you MrLuigiFan13 (talk) 00:50, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- That's not how Wikipedia works. There's a very narrow inclusion criteria for standalone articles, check it at WP:GNG. 海盐沙冰 / aka irisChronomia / Talk / Commons / 00:59, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- @MrLuigiFan13: Being a "real person" doesn't qualify a person for having an article here on Wikipedia. We have guidelines for what is considered sufficient notability for a musician to have an article here. See WP:NMUSICIAN. If, as you claim, you are (assuming this is an autobiography)
"one of the most influential rappers of all time"
, I'm quite confident you can find all sorts of citations to reliable sources that attest to your fame. If you persist in maintaining this claim that you are famous sufficient to justify the development of a draft, and fail to provide sources to back that up, the draft will likely be deleted under WP:G11, since you are attempting to use Wikipedia to promote yourself. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. Further, it is not a social media site where you get to post your profile. This is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. That means anything you edit can and frequently is modified by other people. The draft you've created about yourself isn't yours to control. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:05, 21 August 2026 (UTC)- As I am A MrLuigiFan13 assistant, We can create things for other people and if he wants the article about himself let him be in it, please don’t delete that article for him, leave his things alone. MrLuigiFan13 (talk) 01:08, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- @MrLuigiFan13: Whether you're an 'assistant' or the subject itself is irrelevant. The warnings stand. The claim that Treacherou$ Man$ion (Rapper) is
"one of the most influential rappers of all time"
is completely fictitious. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:15, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- @MrLuigiFan13: Whether you're an 'assistant' or the subject itself is irrelevant. The warnings stand. The claim that Treacherou$ Man$ion (Rapper) is
- As I am A MrLuigiFan13 assistant, We can create things for other people and if he wants the article about himself let him be in it, please don’t delete that article for him, leave his things alone. MrLuigiFan13 (talk) 01:08, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
MrLuigiFan13
[edit]Sorry I lied I thought It was 1971 I won’t do it anymore MrLuigiFan13 (talk) 01:12, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
TM
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I have a quick question so not everyone gets an article is that correct ~2026-45794-51 (talk) 02:41, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Only people who are notable. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:32, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Hammersoft, I am gonna let you know when can I be ready to read my drivers license everyday and then, and hey If I passed my test and then I will let you know if I can get my career started, I will tell u when I pass my test thank you. ~2026-46560-81 (talk) 23:54, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
Broadly construed
[edit]Hello. Does this could be read as it? ~2026-46320-67 (talk) 02:02, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- It's a stretch, and not blockable in my opinion. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:50, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- (same user) I didn't meant about blocking, I'm just currently trying to understand the "Broadly construed" on examples, and this one seemed to be good. If this one is a stretch, could you lend a few more minutes to opine on other similar case? If not, no problems at all, of course, just ignore it, and thanks for original answer.
- If somebody non-EC participate in a discussion about potential ECR violation by another person in a way not touching original ECR topic or discussed person at all, should it be broadly seen as a ECR violation? I'm getting confusing answers. ~2026-46251-76 (talk) 14:09, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- TBAN violations are a judgment call. I, and I know several other admins, lean heavily towards not breaching it even slightly. This case was close, but not on in my opinion. Regardless, there is no absolute line in the sand. I also wouldn't block on the first offense against a TBAN. I saw this one, but didn't act or even warn. As to the ECR question...I'm getting confused already :) --Hammersoft (talk) 16:21, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Should it be understood as if you don't want to be bothered about ECR question, or that I should try to clarify it? Sorry for confusion, as my question for this example was merely about understanding that "broadly construed" reading (and this example perfectly falling under it in my opinion (that is not to dispute your assessment of it, but to explain why I asked about it as example)). If even that case is not actually fall under a violation, then I thought that ECR example should be even less. Thanks for the answer (again I pressed "Reply" too fast).~2026-46251-76 (talk) 16:46, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- I don't see why a person who is not EC should participate in a ECR violation discussion without discussing the person or mentioning the ECR topic. Regardless, WP:ECR is silent on the issue of non-EC editors discussing ECR violations. I think you're going to need to lay this out without beating around the bush. What are you wanting to do? --Hammersoft (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- I'm trying to understand could I participate in them, because currently it result in messages being removed due to violation, then restored due to no violation, then striked out due to violation, questions about it being raised, answer by the admin being produced, that later being withdrawn by the same admin commenting that they have no knowledge of this matter. I'm just trying to get what I could do regarding it, and that shouldn't; WP:ECR is essentially vague, I get no response about where better to ask about then, so it seems only admin shopping is possible. If it inappropriate, sorry. It's in [7] then in [8]. ~2026-46251-76 (talk) 19:09, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Given the ambiguity, I don't think my answer is going to be any more right or wrong than any other administrator. It's a grey area. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:32, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for trying to help, and sorry for bother and wasted time of your. ~2026-46251-76 (talk) 19:46, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- It's never a waste of time to help a receptive person. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:52, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Hello.
- I'll add it here, to not make more nuisance. Some time ago, some editor added COI tags on a page of TA I previously used. I'm not sure if they're just mistaken me for somebody else, or it's some more pronounced mistake, but I'm never declared anything like that, neither have any COI with a mentioned articles. But it turned out, that I couldn't edit that page from the other account (and couldn't log into the old one of course). I think it's too silly for either Teahouse or Help Desk to ask about, but I'd really prefer to remove it. What would be a good place to ask about such requests beside them? It's obviously too minor for AN. ~2026-48732-95 (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2026 (UTC)
- If it's a no longer in use TA account, just ignore it. Nobody else will pay attention to it either. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2026 (UTC)
- Could I expect a success with using of this rationale in case I will at some unlucky future time get some kind of ban for my actions or make some actual COI violation, or something like that? ~2026-48732-95 (talk) 21:50, 8 September 2026 (UTC)
- I've no idea. TA accounts are disposable. I'm not suggesting sockpuppeting, but if you're not using it anymore, nobody's going to know. Just let it go into the past. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:08, 9 September 2026 (UTC)
- Could I expect a success with using of this rationale in case I will at some unlucky future time get some kind of ban for my actions or make some actual COI violation, or something like that? ~2026-48732-95 (talk) 21:50, 8 September 2026 (UTC)
- If it's a no longer in use TA account, just ignore it. Nobody else will pay attention to it either. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2026 (UTC)
- It's never a waste of time to help a receptive person. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:52, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for trying to help, and sorry for bother and wasted time of your. ~2026-46251-76 (talk) 19:46, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Given the ambiguity, I don't think my answer is going to be any more right or wrong than any other administrator. It's a grey area. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:32, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- I'm trying to understand could I participate in them, because currently it result in messages being removed due to violation, then restored due to no violation, then striked out due to violation, questions about it being raised, answer by the admin being produced, that later being withdrawn by the same admin commenting that they have no knowledge of this matter. I'm just trying to get what I could do regarding it, and that shouldn't; WP:ECR is essentially vague, I get no response about where better to ask about then, so it seems only admin shopping is possible. If it inappropriate, sorry. It's in [7] then in [8]. ~2026-46251-76 (talk) 19:09, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- I don't see why a person who is not EC should participate in a ECR violation discussion without discussing the person or mentioning the ECR topic. Regardless, WP:ECR is silent on the issue of non-EC editors discussing ECR violations. I think you're going to need to lay this out without beating around the bush. What are you wanting to do? --Hammersoft (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Should it be understood as if you don't want to be bothered about ECR question, or that I should try to clarify it? Sorry for confusion, as my question for this example was merely about understanding that "broadly construed" reading (and this example perfectly falling under it in my opinion (that is not to dispute your assessment of it, but to explain why I asked about it as example)). If even that case is not actually fall under a violation, then I thought that ECR example should be even less. Thanks for the answer (again I pressed "Reply" too fast).~2026-46251-76 (talk) 16:46, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- TBAN violations are a judgment call. I, and I know several other admins, lean heavily towards not breaching it even slightly. This case was close, but not on in my opinion. Regardless, there is no absolute line in the sand. I also wouldn't block on the first offense against a TBAN. I saw this one, but didn't act or even warn. As to the ECR question...I'm getting confused already :) --Hammersoft (talk) 16:21, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
NFCC query
[edit]Hi Hammersoft. Hope you're doing well. Would you mind taking a look at this and this when you've got the time? I'm trying to decide on how to best proceed regarding these files. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:35, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- Your advice at User talk:Janeesh 22 is correct. I don't know that I could add anything more to it. As for File:Galle Gladiators.png, I've removed it from the three season articles where it sat as clearly inappropriate, removed the invalid rationales from the image description page, tagged it as orfud and nrd, notified the uploader, and also informed Ravana of the inappropriate use. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:34, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- Ravana already inappropriately restored the image to 2020 Galle Gladiators season and modified File:Galle Gladiators.png with an invalid rationale again. I've informed them of how to proceed, which isn't re-adding it to a season article again. See User_talk:Ravana#File:Galle_Gladiators.png. Hopefully they take the advice rather than devolve this into at edit war. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:47, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking a look at these. Regarding the photos, as you saw, I pointed out the pontential NFCC#1 issue to the uploader, but they've yet to respond. If they don't respond, would you recommend
{{rnfu}}or FFD? As for the logo file used in the season article, I thought the one use in the article about the 2020 season might be possible if there was a brand change for that season and some reliably sourced critical commentary about said change could be found, but otherwise I didn't feel the file should be used there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:45, 27 August 2026 (UTC)- I'd go the replaceable fair use route first. Less bureaucracy. As for the logo; yeah without sources discussing the change, it has no business being on the article. If there were sources discussing the change, it wouldn't be in the infobox anyway, but in the section discussing the change. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:05, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
- I've tagged the six non-free photos with
{{rnfu}}. The REFUND thread about the logo was archived with no response to your comment; so, it looks like it will just end up being deleted per F5. Thanks for your feedback. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- I've tagged the six non-free photos with
- I'd go the replaceable fair use route first. Less bureaucracy. As for the logo; yeah without sources discussing the change, it has no business being on the article. If there were sources discussing the change, it wouldn't be in the infobox anyway, but in the section discussing the change. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:05, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking a look at these. Regarding the photos, as you saw, I pointed out the pontential NFCC#1 issue to the uploader, but they've yet to respond. If they don't respond, would you recommend
New article creation request for musical artist Treacherou$ Man$ion
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hey hammersoft, I’m looking to see if you can help or guide me on getting a proper biographical article created for my music career. I perform under the stage name Treacherou$ Man$ion, focusing on West Coast G-Funk, dark trap, and boom bap production, utilizing hardware like the Akai MPC 60 and Moog Minimoog. I want to make sure everything aligns with Wikipedia’s guidelines for living people and musical artists. Could we discuss setting up a draft or getting an article published about my work? Let me know what information, sources, or independent coverage you need from my end. Thanks! ~2026-46560-81 (talk) 18:09, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- We've already been down this road. See User talk:MrLuigiFan13. Any claims to fame are completely fictitious. Once you actually perform such that you draw the attention of reliable, secondary sources to support claims of fame sufficient to pass our criteria at WP:NMUSICIAN, then maybe Wikipedia might generate an article about you. As is, your Instagram page isn't going to cut it. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- Wait How why what happened? ~2026-46560-81 (talk) 21:50, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- You are not notable under the guidelines indicated at WP:NMUSICIAN. It's that simple. You have to have a music career first to gain fame, not gain fame and then have a music career. I've explained this to you before. I will not continue to debate this. Read WP:NMUSICIAN. If that doesn't answer your questions, it's beyond my meager skills to answer your questions. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:11, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- Wait How why what happened? ~2026-46560-81 (talk) 21:50, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
Thanking You
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thank You for everything If I can get my music and I’ve been practicing how to rap and produce music for the world, but let me know if you hear one of my first songs ok. Thank You ~2026-46560-81 (talk) 23:52, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- And would u please also do me as an American writer/Poet for now so people would know who I am and this is Treacherou$ Man$ion ~2026-46560-81 (talk) 00:09, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
- This TA helpfully divulges that they are the user Treacherou$ Man$ion, who is blocked. The TA is therefore blocked for block evasion. -- Hoary (talk)WWU 👍︎ 01:36, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
A new user whose only edits are to the article talk page? User:Romanos.severus. Thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:27, 28 August 2026 (UTC)
Categorization of AE protection actions needed (30 August 2026)
[edit]Hello Hammersoft,
I'm a bot that helps log arbitration enforcement (AE) protection actions on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. As a result of a September 2025 motion by the Arbitration Committee, administrators are no longer required to manually log AE protection actions. Instead, this bot is responsible for logging AE protections to the AE protection log.
While logging AE protections, this bot detected that you recently took the following page protection actions. These action(s) seemed to be AE actions based on the edit summaries, but the bot wasn't able to tell which arbitration case they related to:
If these were AE actions, please take a moment to log the appropriate topic code at the AE protection log. If they were not, feel free to remove the actions from the AE protection log, and optionally let the bot operator know about the false positives.
Going forward, in order to help this bot categorize AE actions, please include a link to the contentious topic under which the action was taken in the protection edit summary (for example, [[WP:CT/BLP]] or [[Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Biographies of Living Persons]]).
If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to the bot operator or to the arbitration clerks at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard.
Thank you! ClerkBot (talk) 23:57, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement log
[edit]Regarding [9] - it couldn't detect it was A-I, because you didn't put that in the edit summary when you protected it. The |summary= section is exactly as the protecting admin left a edit (well, protection) summary; the bot makes no alterations to that. It does fill in |topic= based on that, which it couldn't as there was no indication in the proctection what CT it was being protected under, so I did for the sake of the table. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:43, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
- So the bot tells me to do what I did, and you revert it? I'm quite confused. The instructions are entirely unclear, and it doesn't seem to matter if I do it one way or another, as it will be wrong. I think that will be the last time I do a CTOP restriction. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
- No, the bot told you to do what I had already done by the time you saw it. When you make a CTOP protection, you need to note the CTOP it's protected under in the protection summary. The bot then pulls from that to sort the |topic= parameter in the table. Since you didn't list a CTOP when you protected the article, it couldn't sort it, so it gave you the notice to manually do so. I'm usually on when the day's protections sort, and seeing the error message in the table, I went ahead and added the "a-i" to the |topic= parameter; there was nothing further requiring your input by the time you got on and saw the bot notice. In the future I'll keep in mind I should drop a note on the talk pages of other admins letting them know the notice can be ignored when I do this. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:59, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
- I appreciate the clarification. Regardless, I won't be doing another CTOP protection ever again. It is complicated by a number of factors, not least of which is the instructions on how to properly manage it and a lack of direction on best practices. There's also rampant disagreements on what articles are and are not covered by the restrictions including the very article here that I did protect. I am also seeing administrators severely taken to task over this and related issues, creating a minefield of potential ways in which an administrator can screw it up, just so they can be taken to recall. Not that I care about being recalled (I really don't), nor the fact that recall is horrendously broken, but I don't need the static. The community trusted me enough to grant me administrator privileges. I've learned the hard way that I can't stray a centimeter from centerline else face the wrath of the community. It's no wonder people don't want to be administrators anymore. </havermode> --Hammersoft (talk) 14:57, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
- No, the bot told you to do what I had already done by the time you saw it. When you make a CTOP protection, you need to note the CTOP it's protected under in the protection summary. The bot then pulls from that to sort the |topic= parameter in the table. Since you didn't list a CTOP when you protected the article, it couldn't sort it, so it gave you the notice to manually do so. I'm usually on when the day's protections sort, and seeing the error message in the table, I went ahead and added the "a-i" to the |topic= parameter; there was nothing further requiring your input by the time you got on and saw the bot notice. In the future I'll keep in mind I should drop a note on the talk pages of other admins letting them know the notice can be ignored when I do this. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:59, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
Thank you
[edit]You have been much more patient with Brachioteuthis than I would have been. They irritated me enough that I broke my self-imposed 1RR rule. - Donald Albury 13:15, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you. It was trying, but I was hopeful we could make a breakthrough. There are areas where Wikipedia is quite strong. There are other areas where it is quite weak. The area where they were interested in working within needs expertise like that which they could have brought to the table. Unfortunately, they were not willing to work within the policies we have here. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:25, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
Brachioteuthis
[edit]I did not study the detailed reasons for the partial block, but I closed the DRN request, because DRN should not be used as a way around a failure to discuss. Please let me know whether you think that this was the correct way to handle the request. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:34, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon: Thank you for looking into the DRN noticeboard on this. I came across this dispute by way of patrolling WP:AIV. There's discussion I started with Brachioteuthis at User_talk:Brachioteuthis#Your_behavior regarding their behavior. There's a wall of text there. Bottom line, they were edit warring which caused Bigfin squid to be protected for 3 days. Two editors were reverting Brachioteuthis (though they claim it was unilateral). If you don't want to read it all, the salient point was when I asked Brachioteuthis
"So when the article protection expires you are going to re-include the information even if you don't have consensus to do so?"
[10]. They responded,"The honest answer. Yes."
[11]. At that point, since they were unwilling to comply with WP:CONSENSUS (their protestations not withstanding, the actions in removing the table were not unilateral) and were willing to re-engage in edit warring in violation of WP:EW, I issued a partial block from mainspace [12] and explained why they were partially blocked [13]. They have since tried to claim I blocked them without a valid reason;"One of the administrators had blocked be, but did not provide a valid reasoning"
[14]. I'm giving you a short form of the history here to provide some context to the following; before the block was placed, User:Donald Albury pointed them to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests [15] and I pointed Brachioteuthis to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Subsequent to the block, I linked them again to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution [16] as did User:Doniago [17]. If I were in Brachioteuthis' shoes, I would feel distinctly put off and confused about being told to use dispute resolution and then have my request closed after I made it. It's your call, but it feels rather awkward for this to have played out this way. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:59, 1 September 2026 (UTC)- I will think about it further, but may reopen the request. I am also thinking of asking WP:AN whether to reopen the DRN. I also see that you said that two users were reverting them, and they only invited one editor to DRN. I probably will ask for advice at WP:AN. If they advise me that the DRN is not a way of gaming a partial block, I may reopen. If the main problem was lack of consensus, I will probably formulate an RFC. I will think about it further. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:53, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
[edit] There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2026 (UTC)