User talk:Fylindfotberserk/Archives/2021/February

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Arbitration

  • The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people, replacing the 1932 cutoff.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Doubt

Honoured, Fylindfotberserk I have noticed your many changes (edits) for MOS:DATEFORMAT. Would you please let me know regarding the same. Jubeboxer (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

What do you want to know? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:51, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Pings

Hi Fylindfotberserk - I didn't get your ping re ANI, because you added it after you had already signed and saved the post, as seen here. The ping and the signature must be added and saved in the same edit for them to work - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 10:53, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arjayay: My bad, thanks . I got a little irritated by those POV edits, so. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
As you know I reported him at WP:AIV at 13.00 yesterday - stating that repeatedly deleting cited, government, information "because it isn't true" isn't vandalism, doesn't make sense to me, but I'm not an admin - Arjayay (talk) 11:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
@Arjayay: Those were obvious vands. I provided a few more diffs here. Obviously I do not agree with Fuzheado's reply. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding vandal IPs

Hi Fylindfotberserk, please take a look at this Abhira tribe page, some IPs are consistently vandalising it. Thanks. HinduKshatrana (talk) 10:46, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@HinduKshatrana: Looks like sock of Pseudo Nihilist. Asked for protection [here] - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
@HinduKshatrana: It has been done . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks @Fylindfotberserk:, you're helpful as always. - HinduKshatrana (talk) 13:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Urdu

I know Urdu is additional language as mentioned in source but it isn't spoken or considered as additional language in Noida, Lucknow, Allahabad and many different cities of Uttar Pradesh, it is just addtional language of Uttar Pradesh as mentioned in source not of any particular language of city(if you have source then provide me instead of removing my edits). And also there is no need to mention additional language in wikipedia pages watching other wikipedia pages where there is only official language mentioned. So don't remove my edits. - Userid1438 (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
@Userid1438: How can you prove (source) that those are not considered additional official in all these cities when it is in the whole state? You are not going to decide what to keep in the longstanding version of the article. You better start a discussion at Talk:Noida as per WP:BRD. Do not edit war. I'm resorting to the STATUSQUO version. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mata Gujri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kartarpur.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Banerjee

The semi-protection period is short, but I applied a 1-year partial block to all of the IPs that the pest has used. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:58, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: Thank you sir . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hey there,

I can see you’ve been helping reverting the vandalism, and that’s good to hear, but I think you bit one of the newcomers. Please don’t bite the newcomers because they need to read the guidelines to help them edit constructively. When leaving warnings on talk pages, start from level 1 but if the vandalism gets even worse, you can give them level 2 and 3 warnings. You can give the vandals a level 4 warning if they vandalize again, but if the vandalism gets to level 4im, report the user to WP:VIP (vandalism in progress), where you can ask an administrator to help. They will block the vandal, and you can ignore from now on.

Thank you.

Regards,

KirkburnFandom (talk) 05:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Canvassing

Hi Fylindfotberserk, while I appreciate your contributions to many articles in the India topic area, I don't think it's a good idea to ping uninvolved editors to talk page discussions. For example, the edit at Special:Diff/1006146014 pinged me to Talk:Mahua Moitra, but I am unfamiliar with the subject matter and am not of much help there. The edit also pinged an indefinitely blocked editor (Walrus Ji).

Please take care to ensure that your talk page pings meet the canvassing guideline. Posting a notification to Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics is a more widely accepted way to get the attention of other editors to an article on an India-related subject. Thanks. — Newslinger talk 09:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Newslinger: Well my intention was to get opinions on the subject at hand. The users I pinged have shown interest in Indian politics related topics in the past and I believe they are unbiased. I pinged you because I saw you in quite a few discussions in the similar topic area before. And I didn't know that user got indeffed. I've seen many talk discussions go nowhere when only 2 parties are discussing. I hope you understand. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
No problem. I sent you this message because, in the past, I've noticed a number of newer editors sending similar types of pings for discussions in the India topic area, and I've sent them similar reminders. If these kinds of pings become normalized, India-related articles would become more vulnerable to brigading, and I don't think this would help consensus-building. Since you are a highly experienced editor, newer editors tend to emulate editors like you as they get accustomed to Wikipedia. It's important to set a good example so that these newer editors don't make the wrong decisions and end up disrupting, for example, an RfC or a high-profile AfD discussion. — Newslinger talk 12:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
@Newslinger: Agreed. What I've seen is that many times these one time users/IPs will get impatient and resort to edit warring if they do not get any reply and/or see a third opinion ASAP. That's why I thought of pinging all those users. And once (with a relatively experienced user) it took months in order to build a consensus since only two parties were commenting, 3PO, DRN, et al., ultimately had it with an RFC. In another case, the same thing happened because one one-time user had problems accepting the WP:COMMONNAME in the article. Since it was going nowhere, I had to ping some veteran users after 20 days, even after getting their consent, I waited a few more days to restore it. Anyway, I'll keep your advice in mind. Thanks . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Metro city

Here is the Government of India website [1] which says that " The number of metropolitan cities having million plus population has increased from 35 to 53 as per 2011 census.". And list of such cities are also provided in the sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijgupt (talk • contribs) 16:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
Great work in cleaning up all those articles. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 02:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

100K Edit Star

100K Edit Star
Congrats of your 100k edits! Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 02:59, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much Zakaria1978. I kind of wanted this . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Mehwish Hayat

The dob correction I made to that BLP was done in my capacity as a member of WP:OTRS. Please do not revert my corrections. I also explained in my edit summary why I reverted you. Atsme 💬 📧 10:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
A big thanks for handling the whole conversation in the wiki for Sirsa city with kindness and while showing your passion for editing. You're a WikiChamp! Amratjeet Singh Insan (talk) 12:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Amratjeet Singh Insan. I believe you need a proper welcoming . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Tip

Hey, so I saw the goings-on at Template:Infobox person. RexxS is correct that you should be opening discussions. I will often do this if I'm making reversion that's been problematic for a while, or deleting problematic content that could be controversial, even if I don't actually expect anyone to participate in discussion. Yeah, it's often a waste of my time, but we have to be demonstrating due diligence that we're following the principles of community editing, as well as setting an example for others. Anyway, this isn't a lecture, just a tip. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Well correct he is, but there seems to be a misunderstanding as can be seen here—if you had initially raised the issue at Talk:Jasmin Bhasin, I would have blocked Sushmibhaduri8 for disruptive editing. I don't know why he thought I went there (wrong venue) to get that user blocked, which is obviously not the case you know. And I certainly don't deserve to get bashed for not taking prior actions against a disruptive user. As for the matter itself, I agree that me (or any other editor) could have raised it, perhaps months before, in that particular talk page or WP:INB since it happens a lot. And I would have done that yesterday or today, if the Sushmibhaduri8 persisted and the page wasn't protected. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:41, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Just a token of appreciation for your contributions to Wikipedia. Vengeance 01 (talk) 12:30, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
👏 Chaipau (talk) 13:01, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Odd pattern, esp the DS notices

[2] Doug Weller talk 14:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Sir, now that you mention it. I have a hunch. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:27, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, very useful, I know someone who will be interested. Doug Weller talk 14:53, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: You are welcome sir . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:02, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Category:WWE 24/7 Champions has been nominated for deletion

Category:WWE 24/7 Champions has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 15:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Need an advice

Do you think, that my new article Bihar under Lalu Prasad Yadav is worth nomination for good article tag? Heba Aisha (talk) 08:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC) Heba Aisha (talk) 08:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

@Heba Aisha: The article looks well written. I believe you can nominate it for GA. I did a little bit of cleanup. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:12, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks a lot.Heba Aisha (talk) 09:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
I have reverted the addition on Jat Sikh as it was not complying with WP: HSC. The prime reason is that other caste will also bring sources written on another topic by non historian, non sociologists and non political scientist to claim Kshatriya status which will be problematic. I have dealt with the situation earlier in Rajput related articles when new editors brought books written on Indian army by a retired armyman who mentions Rajput as Kshatriya in one line. But that's not so according to scholars as that caste is a concoction of shudra, tribals and illegitimate progeny of many other caste as I have read during my M.A History course. So, to arrange every caste on a common parameter that should be removed. Heba Aisha (talk) 04:20, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Heba Aisha. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:08, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

It seems one of the vandal I dealt with in past have rejoined wiki to nominate my article Bihar under Lalu Prasad Yadav for delition. The account joined wiki just few hours ago, and given the technical route to deal with nomination, I am seeing many editors questioning the article on grounds which actually donot exists. Do you have any idea about the vandal and also can you tell how the article could be improved to retain it from delition.Even admin Rexx has said in comment that it is notable topic.Heba Aisha (talk) 16:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

For some reason I saw this AfD, and this user looked suspect. Do you know know who it might be? As far as the AfD is concerned, it seems it is still time to reach full consensus, I see equal number of people in keeping it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
I don't know as that account was created only to nominate my article for delition and has become stale as of now. I will try to save the article first then look into the issue of that account. Heba Aisha (talk) 02:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Heba Aisha One of those guys making accounts by twisting your user name (Sheba Aisha) perhaps? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:15, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
May be.Heba Aisha (talk) 11:24, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Brian Lee

Brian Lee
Brian Lee's Facebook profile proving his residence and spouse https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100035079174042 TheCenobite (talk) 15:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks TheCenobite. I saw that profile before, but it is not verified (blue starred), so can't say whether we should be using it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:46, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bihar under Lalu Prasad Yadav

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bihar under Lalu Prasad Yadav. Heba Aisha (talk) 21:12, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Request to join a discussion of Air bubble flights

You are invited/requested to join a discussion on talk page of User:LeoFrank, the link is attached as follows: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LeoFrank#Regarding_removal_of_BBI-KUL_Air_Asia_Flight Sayswalk (talk) 12:44, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Ram Nath Kovind

Agree with removal of the honorifics, however, state occasions and receptions by foreign leaders may well add "His Excellency". I rather think that Shri might be included as honorific, for the President of India website does use this. Your thoughts? --Whiteguru (talk) 06:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Whiteguru: Thanks for asking. This specific honorific is covered in this section of WP:NCIN. Note that the list is not exhaustive. This policy came after after extensive discussions at WP:INB, so we have a blanket ban on this in the infobox. Also it acts as a supplement of MOS:HONORIFICS for Indian specific cases. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
@Fylindfotberserk: Understand your rationale, now. Thanks for the links, very useful. --Whiteguru (talk) 09:14, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Images

Hey there, re: this, I don't think there's any clear consensus on what era an image should represent, i.e. the current era or an older era. Looking at some Featured Articles, I note Red Skelton, Rod Steiger, and Vivien Leigh all have heyday-era images. Marilyn Monroe has an image from 9 years prior to her death. Reese Witherspoon has one from 2014. And there are other article with images that are more recent. So, it may not be worth the effort to battle over that. I feel like I also saw some discussions at one of the drama boards (maybe WP:ANI) recently about this sort of thing and I guess people feel strongly, but there is no overall community consensus to apply here as far as I know. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Sir, the subject had a notable career as a politician and the infobox image was relevant to that as per my judgment. AS for people like him, I didn't have much of a problem when the user changed it, though I'd have preferred an 80s-90s image (last leg of his popularity), but the user should have discussed it in the talk page. I believe all the images in the examples you posted were put as per consensus. Besides, I was restoring the longstanding version (also here), changing which would require a discussion in the talk page IMO, not to mention, I found that image to be of low quality as well. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:50, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Sorry if my note came off as an admonishment--it wasn't intended to be. I was just trying to gently point out that there is no clear-cut rule on this. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
@Cyphoidbomb: Sir, You're my mentor. You can always advise me . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Srinagar

I wanted to know if a dictionary is not a reliable source ? I add made an edit regarding Srinagar for its kashmiri pronunciation to which I added the romanisation form and Ipa with reference to Kashir Dictionary written in Kashmiri language by the Jammu and Kashmir Academy of Arts Culture and Languages. But my edit was reverted by stating that Government organisations are not reliable sources. Do you have any idea ? Imranqazi90 (talk) 14:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Imranqazi90: There is a problem using dictionaries as source since we rely on reliable WP:SECONDARY sources, but the dictionaries can be either primary, secondary or tertiary sources, depending on who is using it, a linguist or us Wikipedians. By an large it pertains to WP:PSTS policy and thus needs to be chosen appropriately. You can go through this essay on challenges while using a dictionary as a source. IMO, it is always better to use WP:HISTRS compliant source(s) [much less hassle]. I came across a similar dilemma some years ago, forgetting in which article. Ultimately had to replace the dictionary source with a scholarly source. I see you have commented in Talk:Srinagar, nice. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:09, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot mate for the detailed explanation :) I will search if I find a secondary source regarding that.

Have a beautiful evening :) Imranqazi90 (talk) 16:36, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Imranqazi90: Same to you too . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Harvardian2226

I saw that you reverted edits by Harvardian2226 to Sridevi giving the edit summary:

Reverted 3 edits by Harvardian2226 (talk): Rv sock edits by User:President26, unsourced chnages, mismatch of infobox name and article title

Harvardian2226 is continuing to make bad edits. If you have evidence that he/she is a sock, please can you get him blocked or open an SPI to get him blocked.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:25, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Toddy1: It is obviously him, but the only thing common I found now is them using the this temp as well as some minor changes/removal of victorian era names. I would require something like this, 'big' template usage + Indic scripts. No action was taken on the last suspected sock, while the admins agreed upon, there wasn't much technical evidence. If you find something like this, do tell me. I'll of course keep an eye on them. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fylindfotberserk/Archives/2021/February&oldid=1045705351"