User talk:NeilN

Emeraude Toubia content removal

Can 68.174.156.137 be banned from Wikipedia for continually removing source(s) from the Emeraude Toubia Wikipedia article without leaving an edit summary? Thank you. 12.180.133.18 (talk) 23:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

IP addresses aren't "banned" because they can be assigned to different users. However, I've blocked that IP for a week as they've had a final warning. If they come back after the block and exhibit the same behavior, please let me know. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I will let you know if they do it again. 12.180.133.18 (talk) 00:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Battle of Daraa City

The reverts are of the two anonymous IP editors. I explained in the edit summaries that per all sources in the main body of the article the rebel offensive ended with an operational failure since they did not achieve any of their stated gains (capture of the city). One of the two IPs insisted it was indecisive while providing NO sources to back up his claim which makes his edit OR (Original Research). The other IP reverted me without making any edit summary at all. Further indication of OR is that the IP made the edit (as he himself said) based on the pattern of a previous battle. At the very least the page should be protected on the basis of the IPs making unsourced edits. That I made no attempts at dispute resolution is incorrect since I tried talking to them via the edit summaries, which was replied with accusations of me celebrating too early. EkoGraf (talk) 00:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

EkoGraf, edit summaries aren't a substitute for talk page discussion to determine if any result can be determined which is not synthesis. Lay out your case on the talk page and see if the IPs join in and we'll take it from there. Please be mindful of WP:3RR. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I am. I've now added even a source in the result section. If they remove it again along with the source I think that would constitute vandalism. EkoGraf (talk) 01:26, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Problem with a book

Why does the bot keep creating dead links and incorrect codings? I keep reverting it back to how it should be, but it keeps changing it. (Click 'show' and you'll see).  — Calvin999 09:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Calvin999: No idea. The best person to ask is cyberpower678. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

No idea what's going on there. I'll have to take a look.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 23:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.  — Calvin999 08:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Sock?

Neil: In looking at the edit histories for Rob Portman and Ted Strickland it appears that User:Stevenhix may be logging out to make disruptive edits to these bios. I'd be interested to know whether you think that's a reasonable conclusion at this point, and whether any sort of warning would be appropriate? Thanks very much.CFredkin (talk) 17:04, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

CFredkin, what would help is if you could provide diffs of suspicious behavior. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

After pulling the diffs, I now suspect the IP and Stevenhix may be socks of Spongebob1944.

All of the following edits include no edit commentary. I believe the edits to Rob Portman could be construed as intended to reflect negatively on the candidate. I believe the edits to Ted Strickland could be construed as intended to reflect positively on the candidate. They are opposing candidates for Senate in 2016.

Rob Portman

From 6/26/2015:

edits by 2602:306:80a2:c930 to images

Stevenhix edit to image a few hours later

more edits by 2602:306:80a2:c930 to images 12 minutes later

From 6/30/2015:

edits by 2602:306:80a2:c930 adding some unsourced content

From 7/1/2015:

Stevenhix edit to remove sourced content

Ted Strickland

From 5/27/2015:

edit to image by Spongebob1944 (Currently on one-week block for disruptive editing)

From 6/8/2015:

Stevenhix adds endorsements

From 6/26/2015:

edits to images by 2602:306:80a2:c930

Stevenhix edit a few hours later

From 6/29/2015:

edits by 2602:306:80a2:c930

edits by Stevenhix

edits by Spongebob1944

From 7/1/2015:

edit by Stevenhix

edits by 2602:306:80a2:c930CFredkin (talk) 23:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Decided to go ahead and file a request for investigation. I guess the worst-case scenario is that another admin will tell me I'm crazy. Thanks. InvestigationCFredkin (talk) 04:58, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

CFredkin okay, thanks. I've been monitoring something for work so haven't had the time yet to give this the focus it needs. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Youssouf Mulumbu

Renew PC? --George Ho (talk) 20:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@George Ho: Unless there's an obvious need, I won't be preemptively renewing protection on any articles. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Just a big shout out to NeilN! You are doing great as an admin. I admire your thoroughness and attention to detail, and have learned a couple new things by watching your work! -- Diannaa (talk) 23:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Diannaa! Good to hear I'm on the right track. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Frank Kaminsky

Frank Kaminsky has been getting a lot of vandalism lately, please semi protect. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 23:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Editorofthewiki: The latest bout is by one editor who will be blocked if they continue. However there's been issues for the last few days so I've pending-protected for two weeks. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

FYI

[1] - General Ization ^Talk 00:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@General Ization: Thanks, blocked. It's always amusing when anonymous editors make completely incorrect assumptions. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about Dion Phaneuf

Hello Neil,

I'm truly sorry about my edit to the Dion Phaneuf page. I was told about a trade by what I believed was a reputable source, and then found out otherwise. I went back to correct my mistake but you had reverted it before I could. I'll be more careful next time.

192.171.34.141 (talk) 00:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Brian

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Not a reliable source?

Are you saying his tweets never happened? Or that they are forged? Jørgen88 (talk) 11:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Replied here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you / request for guidance

NeilN,

Thank you for your feedback regarding the Austen Riggs Center page. I am curious about which parts of the page you feel read like an advertisement (or, if you could highlight one example, to give me an idea of what needs to be corrected). I am interested in improving the page so that it conforms fully to the proper guidelines. Any further input or advice you have would be appreciated. Thank you very much.

Amb2377 (talk) 13:15, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Amb2377

@Amb2377: Examples:

• "A New York City internist who repaired to the bucolic countryside of Stockbridge..."
• "Unlike more theoretical approaches to treatment, Riggs tended to an earthy practicality."
• "A friend of Anna Freud’s and a star of the burgeoning world of American psychoanalysis..."
• "Within psychiatric circles, Austen Riggs stands out in two major respects."

--NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:39, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Request for guidance

Hi, I see you wrote in Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism on my request. That person keeps harassing me and is reverting all of my edits. He keeps vandalising everything I edit. Where do I report him? Thanks in advance. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Sabbatino, the proper venue is WP:ANI. You will have to provide links to diffs to back up your claims. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Take care. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Amy Cuddy

Hi Neil,

My author Amy Cuddy is having trouble with unauthorized changes to her Wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Cuddy

This paragraph is being inserted under Replication Efforts "On their datacolada blog, Simmons and Simonsohn (2015) [20] analysed all reports finding a significant effect of power posing. Based on the distribution of reported p-values, they concluded that "labs that run studies that worked wrote them up, labs that run studies that didn’t, didn’t" and "the simplest explanation is that all studied effects are zero".

This is not peer-reviewed research, but instead a blog. And should not be included, per the Wikipedia rules.

We've changed this section a number of times and it is continually being changed back. Can you help?

Thanks, Miriam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Accidentalsouthernbelle (talk • contribs) 15:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Accidentalsouthernbelle. The best place to ask about this is the reliable sources noticeboard. Give the context and the source and other editors will weigh in. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Earl King Jr.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Earl_King_Jr.

Since you have been involved in the past with some of this dispute, perhaps you would like to include your opinion. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 17:50, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Additional of Centennials to the Generation Z page

Hi, I saw that you deleted my entry to the Generation Z page - this was actually my first contribution so I am not sure what I did wrong... I added the term Centennials as another popular name referring to Gen Z, which seemed to be in line with the rest of the content on the page and I thought it was an important addition. Below are some links to recent articles that reference this. Can you explain what I did or didn't do? Thanks

This has been widely used in the media: below are some links to recent articles that reference this:

Emsparenti (talk) 18:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)emsparenti

References

Copied and replied. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply- I guess I thought that Centennials is much more widely used than iGeneration/iGen and the Pluralists, neither of which have gained any traction whatsoever. Centennials seemed like a good addition as it is popping up more and more by major news outlets.

--Emsparenti (talk) 18:15, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

List of Christian Denominations

You claim to have undone my corrections in the name of keeping the page neutral. I beg to differ. Stating that only some sects are as old or historically remarkable over the other is the biased position.

The deletion of the Mormon mythology is because the sect is categorically though still a sect under the umbrella of the Abrahamic Mythology, is in fact not a christian sect. It is in fact philosophically, contextually and tangibly different and there for needs its own page and should not be listed here. Anything else would in fact be incorrect and biased.

Thank you for looking into this if you need help understanding the important of the validity of this topic I can direct you to where you can get up to date. Msqared80 (talk) 21:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Msqared80, the fact that Mormons aren't Christians is your opinion and one contradicted by our Mormonism and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints articles. To remove them from the List of Christian denominations would first require you to get consensus to change those articles. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Kudos

You've had an epic first month as an Admin and put most of us to shame. Well done and thank you!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Jezebel's Ponyo, thank you! Still learning but it's been interesting! --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Anti-Iranian sentiment

Could you restore the long-standing version before IP/"MehrdadFR" edit-warring and 3RR violation? Thanks.--Averysoda (talk) 00:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Note that user Averysoda has been reported. Thanks. --MehrdadFR (talk) 01:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Averysoda No, sorry, per WP:WRONGVERSION. The talk page was completely unused. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Aron Rodríguez

can you please take a look at this article Aron Rodríguez , right now it doesn't have any references at all. and before I put the notice asking for deletion , the article had 3 rubbish articles , even one of them imdb :S , anyway the creator himself removed the references but removed the notice also. I tried to look for the player online but i really couldn't find anything even link him to supposedly newly club . so can you please take a look at it and decide what is appropriate , thank you :) Adnan (talk) 02:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Adnan, prod-blp is appropriate here. It cannot be removed unless at least one reliable source (i.e., not IMDB or wikis) is added. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:57, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you , so if the creator deleted the notice again I will put it again cool :) thank you for advice bud, have a good one! Adnan (talk) 03:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Adnan, I've left word on the creator's talk page not to do that and will keep an eye on the article. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:08, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you , you are really one of the very active hard working admins here man :)

Reporting repeat copyright violations

Hi, I had a quick question for you. I've looked around for a place to report users who repeatedly introduce copyrighted material onto Wikipedia after multiple warnings, and I'm not finding anything. Is there a noticeboard somewhere for that, or a general noticeboard for user reports that don't fall into categories such as vandalism, sockpuppetry, or username violations? Thanks for your help! ~ Rob^Talk 12:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Rob, it's WP:ANI. Make sure you provide diffs of the problematic behavior and enough info for editors to verify what you're saying but keep it concise and easy to read. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:30, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Kotsko

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Keri (talk) 15:57, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello :)

Happy fourth of July for you :) hope you enjoy the weekend ! Adnan (talk) 06:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Adnan, thanks. I'm not an American but will enjoy the weekend! --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks but one more thing

Sinebot's last contrib on my page still needs to be wiped. It's possible to see what that guy posted by checking that one. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Done. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Esperanza de Saráchaga

Hello Neil,

About the page Esperanza de Saráchaga you blocked and protected today, FactStraight and myself have been working on it from time to time in the recent past. The article was full with outlandish claims that were to good to be true. I've purged the article of most of them that were obviously false. A number of IP editors (one of which has requested this block) keep coming with sources that would establish these persons having all kinds of titles, but their sources stop short of actually establishing what they purport to say. Having become wary and extremely careful about claims from, what could be the authors of the original article, we look at all suggestions very carefully. Some can be acknowledged, most of them can't. And in those cases I have reverted, only to be reverted back or being confronted with a completely different source claiming something else that doesn't stand up to scrutiny either. In the mean time we're being accused of being liars with an agenda. Now I'm not particularly sensitive about that, but I wanted you to know my pov about this. I have the distinct feeling that these persons or person want these items to be in the article cost what cost for some reason. Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if some branch of this family is titled. If so, that should be easy to show with explicit sources that attest these claims. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

these contributors. Von Hebel and Facstraight are most probably sock puppeting and have a clear agenda. they do not read sources, do multiple reverts, violating the three revert rule, refuse to build consensus. Do not support thier argument or changes with fact or counter sources. This is not first FactStraigh has been accused of sock puppeting or aggressive behavior when he is proven incorrect. Von Hebel and FactStraight are lying to the Wikipedia community and should be banned. being IP editir is legal in Wikipedia and they assert that any IP edit is somehow less then they are. Wikipedia is built on the sources. The IP editors have out forward, as requested by the talk page, chapeter, verse, and translated. Not only do they not read the sources because thier allegation that sources do not say what the IP editors assert is always proved wrong when they are forced to engage in logical conversation on the talk page. These two never put forward a neutral view or suggest a middle ground for the text of the article. They immediately make multiple or materially relevant changes with no true explanation. "Pruning" is not a valid explanation of a change when complete sections are vandalized, rewritten, and legitimate sources are taken out with no explanation or technicalities which do not constitute deleting sources. 200.33.20.102 (talk) 17:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Neil,

For your reference. I have continued my search for more sources about the titles of Esperanza de Saráchaga and her family members, that are contested in the article. I now found authoritative sources (Gotha entries) that make very clear she didn't have any. I published those here [2] on the talkpage of the article. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 20:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

A2Z_Support Page Deletion

Dear NeilN, You are right about the tag put on my page by someone. As i am new to wikipedia so i didn't know the rule for placing there tag on it's position , so therefore i removed the tag. Although i have submitted my answer on the A2Z Support Talk page and also on the the author page who tagged my page for speedy deletion. A2Z Support , as it shows by name , it's website not for promotional purposes it's rather just like BBC etc. You should have first reviewed at least the references before deletion of page. It's very much unfair if anyone put's tag on one's page and the administrators delete the page. It's a kind request that please restore A2Z Support Page as i have done so much efforts for making this page. I will be thankful to you in this act of kindness

M. Asim Masoom Zubair (talk) 22:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Please answer me soon , i am soo much upset as i have done so much effort about 2 days for creating the Page !! M. Asim Masoom Zubair (talk) 23:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

M. Asim Masoom Zubair, Wikipedia is not the place to advertise your company. I have re-reviewed the content and it's obviously a blatant piece of advertising with no appropriate sources. Another editor has pointed you towards Wikipedia:Your first article. I strongly suggest you read it. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you that my page can be showing advertisement , that's just because i don't know the Wikipedia guidelines , but now i have read my first article and know about the standards of wikipedia. Secondly Dear i should have been giving atleast warning about my content as i was knew to wikipedia i did't know that. but i was just shot on the spot by the administration. atleast u should appreciate new authors as i have done so much hardwork on the wiki page. but what can i say , you are boss man and you are authority and u know better than me. & one more caption that it's not my company , i have just pick it up from google and i loved their publishing articles. so i start writting about them. It's my kind request atleast just give me 24 hours of time and restore my page , i promise the content will be different and according to wikipedia guidelines dear. or else i have to again do so much hardwork when doing it from start :( .. I hope dear you understand. I know you will Regards M. Asim Masoom Zubair , asimbwp@hotmail.com (talk) 01:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

M. Asim Masoom Zubair, uh-huh. "Key people Asif Malik (CEO), Qamar Qureshi , Asim Zubair, Rao Atif" Once again, stop using Wikipedia to advertise your company. There was nothing encyclopedic about the content so it will not be restored. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Lol ... wow you got a point though ,, but i am not in it's key people , i have just put in my name cuz i am still in the row for applying in that publishing website .. You can check the key people list in the website www.a2z-support.com/authors/ M. Asim Masoom Zubair , asimbwp@hotmail.com (talk) 01:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

It's not an advertisement , so what will you say about wiki page of BBC , Darussalam Publishers etc ?? what are they ? they have also a publishing setup. my point is just that i have done mistakes in content writting , i should be warned . you should give me atleast one chance to prove myself as i am also an article writter on free lancing websites. their is some point of respect when you are in the same field dear. give a chance to prove. M. Asim Masoom Zubair , asimbwp@hotmail.com (talk) 01:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

dear as you said there was nothing encyclopedic because my writing style looks like advertisement as i said i dnt know the rules . and therefore i came to you for appealing to atleast restore the page so i can make the content encyclopedic. then you can review it and decioun is yours !! M. Asim Masoom Zubair , asimbwp@hotmail.com (talk) 01:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

M. Asim Masoom Zubair, if you cannot tell the difference between the BBC article and your advertisement, I cannot help you. Darussalam Publishers might be a candidate for deletion. You are better off not writing about your company at all as you have a clear conflict of interest. Please stop posting repeated requests to restore here - I will not be doing so. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

what will you say about DreamHost wiki page , forget about bbc page that's too much to be given as reference , just see the dream host page and their are soo soo many wikipedia pages here present which i can show you than why me ??? , but the thing is that brother i know from which country aur native you are , i respected you and i have also seen how others talked to you above. you should atleast respect my point. i am very much disappointed by your harsh behave , you are king of wiki , i bow you yrr . dnt appreciate the new writters , hats off (Y) M. Asim Masoom Zubair , asimbwp@hotmail.com (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

God bless you !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asimbwp (talk • contribs) 01:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

M. Asim Masoom Zubair, you can appeal my decision at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Don't think you'll have much luck, though. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Problem user

User:2605:E000:6387:3F00:E557:8F13:8D1A:1CAF seems to be a vandal only account. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 23:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Editorofthewiki: Seems to have stopped now. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Further disruption has occurred

Re: your recommendation at the protection request log, further stalking has occurred, this time at articles that haven't been protected. Eighteen articles to be exact, and some of my edits they reverted are old. They don't ever seem to be deleting content willy nilly; they always revert specifically, leaving a trail. Some of these edits they're reverting are just small yet indisputable fixes to disambiguation pages and stuff like that.
I'm honestly not sure how to go from here. We can't just protect every last page, but the IP addresses are different each time. Do you have any advice? MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

MezzoMezzo, unfortunately if you revert, and the IP persists in their disruption and uses a wide range of IP addresses, there's little we can do but semi-protect their targets. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Alright...I guess the theory would be to wait for them to get bored with wasting their time, then? A spate of it occurred yesterday but all of it was reverted by a bot except a few instances. I'll keep watch and see what else happens, and might ask for advice from there. Thanks so much for your patience so far! MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:53, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Just a greeting

Hi THIEF23 (talk) 06:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Galileo affair

Hi, can you just check Galileo affair and tell me if there is anything wrong in the last five edits? An IP claims there is wild speculation. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Rsrikanth05, the IP seems to be objecting to the text describing a fringe theory. More details can be found on the talk page, in the Drastic effort section. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 11:21, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

okie. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Invention?

When I first listened to the 1735 article in Wikipedia the text says:

"Neil had invented the television when he became famous of inventing an bicycle"

Well, some editors have mentioned your name in the page and you are not really born in 1735 and I guess that you haven't invented anything or maybe you haven't been an inventor for a hour ago. The article doesn't mean some inventors are doing it. So it was removed yesterday when the article is semi-protected from editing. --182.191.184.126 (talk) 15:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC) The 182 anon.

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

But the 1735 article needs an help! --182.191.184.126 (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC) The 182 anon.

Still no idea. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - State of the Union ‖ 17:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

William Hurt

It seems the poster has ignored your warning and is once again reverting your edits without placing any sources to back up the rumors. 12:53, 5 July 2015

Lee Corso and Woody Paige

I'm just curious about something, after I saw you protected these two articles. Judging by the protection log, Lee Corso was protected indefinitely in 2012 (which, as an aside, shows how long this has been going on) so that only autoconfirmed editors could edit it, but Larrywalker33232 was able to edit it after only one prior edit. Similarly, Woody Paige was autoconfirm-only protected until June 2016, but Quimmypoles3333 was able to edit it with only prior edit. How was that possible? Also, would adding a long semi-protection be a good idea once the current short full protection expires be a good idea? (I'm pretty sure this guy is not going to go away that easily). Mr Potto (talk) 12:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Mr Potto, I deleted the sandboxes the vandal used to make the ten edits for each account. And yes, right before full protection expires I will turn it back to permanent semi-protection. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Aha, thanks. That's an interesting change of strategy by the troll. Mr Potto (talk) 13:24, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

IP at Mike Bingham

I commented at WP:ANI#Block evasion re: the legal threat - as the blocking admin, can you review? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Done. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Soham321

I tagged you on Dennis Brown's page initially and he has bowed out and recommended I contact you or another admin.

Soham321 has been a problematic editor for a while, editing very aggressively, taking people to ANI and then escalating it to ArbCom (unsuccessfully) over talk page comments, refusing to listen to talk page etiquette, and the like. He dropped a personal attack against an editor he has a disagreement with on the page Talk:Cārvāka, and I removed it and warned him. You can see his responses to this: User talk:Soham321#July 2015, where he notes that his comments were replaced by another editor. That other editor is Mohanbhan, who has taken his side on that page and I believe others like Adi Shankara. I should like to note here that I do not get on well at all with the user he is attacking; my only contributions to the talk page for Carvaka has been disagreements with her. This is not a content dispute: I have not argued one way or another in regards to his convictions. Ogress _smash! 18:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Ogress, I see that SpacemanSpiff has given them a final warning. I suggest we follow WP:ROPE and see if the warning is heeded. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Vote (X) for Change IPsock

See Special:Contributions/87.81.147.76. Thanks, JoeSperrazza (talk) 19:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

JoeSperrazza, it's probably best if you get another admin to make that determination as the IP and I have a history. If the findings are that it is indeed Vote (X) for Change please let me know. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:44, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

OK, will do. I'll open an SPI. It is a bit of a pain to do so, but it is quite obvious. Thanks! JoeSperrazza (talk) 19:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

See [3]. Thanks to User:Jc3s5h for filing the SPI, FPS for blocking. JoeSperrazza (talk) 01:26, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@JoeSperrazza: Thanks. Already hit ANI :) User_talk:NeilN#ANI. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:21, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

He's back: Special:Contributions/78.149.201.8 JoeSperrazza (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

JoeSperrazza, blocked. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:28, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Article protection sock again

India Pakistan stand off article requires a sock protection again involving the same user WCIWS [4] link. 2.218.42.208 (talk) 13:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Paris peace treaty

September 14 171 Paris Peace Treaty. For Louisiana. Why is there no information every piece of literature is based on opinions and educated guess. I worked in the History department of my college and it's so sad to see people destroying Louisiana history. France played a very significant role in the finding and developming Louisiana and new Orleans and one of the first colonial governors has not been credited for his accomplishments his name is Antoine Lamothe Cadillac and he owned thousand of acres in Louisiana and still own it yet no one recognizes that. Because his wife and children were Black back then that's what they did to black people but today 325 years later there is no excuse for that type of injustice to still be prevalent in this world today. It's one thing if Lamothes' family didn't have a clue about his existence then I could see people trying to keep that secreat but his famiy knew then what he owned and what he was for the crown and they know now that the local Government bodies of all these parishes stolen remapped and hidden with hopes that the Family never finds what's rightfully theirs On September,4th 2008. A 5 times great granddaughter was hired in the St John the Baptist pArish of Laplac e Louisiana where she uncovered the Family secreat . From their last name being changed from lamothe to Clement to the Land that they grew up on actually being 40000 acres and not 40 arpents Every part of literature is a lie as far as who he was . If the information comes from research Ers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.121.96 (talk) 16:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what article/edit you're referring to. Can you clarify? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Is it sockpuppetry

Hi NeilN, I had a question. If a user logs out of their account to make an edit, identical to one made with their own account [who made the edit first being secondary], is it considered sockpuppetry? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:27, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Rsrikanth05, yes it is per WP:SOCK: "The use of multiple Wikipedia user accounts for an improper purpose is called sock puppetry (often abbreviated in discussion as socking). Improper purposes include attempts to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, evade blocks or otherwise violate community standards and policies." If the logging out is done to avoid being blocked for violating WP:3RR then that is socking. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:42, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Aah, okay. Thank you. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 15:31, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

ANI

I don't think anyone alerted you, but you've been accused of evil-doing at ANI. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#NeilN says it would be grossly improper for him to take any action but does it anyway. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks NRP. I was headed over here to let N know about this and got diverted. MarnetteD|Talk 19:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Well the thread title has been changed to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Just another Hackney thread and it has been hatted so N can go back to editing and not have to deal with this :-) MarnetteD|Talk 19:36, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate and MarnetteD: Thanks. It's just Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vote (X) for Change deliberately misrepresenting what was said as usual. I wasn't going to determine that particular IP was evading a ban based on our history at Talk:Islamic calendar but blocking other block-evading IPs is a completely unremarkable action (and so will be any future blocks of this one). At least now I know who I was talking to in February [5] and who tried to disrupt my RFA. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for filling us in on the background of this N. MarnetteD|Talk 21:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I figured it was probably an IP troll who would get quickly hatted, but I didn't recognize who it was. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

John Paul Strain

Please clarify, I do not understand. Thanks John Art Reviewer Check (talk) 13:30, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Replied here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:33, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

decline of protection of Gajendra Chauhan

Hello Bhai ,how are you ? you told declined my request to protect Gajendra Chauhan page temporary as you find ip adresses edit in good faiths .can you go through them in brief ,Honi02 (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Honi02, take the last two. This toned down the language and was not vandalism and this added a wikilink and was not vandalism. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Neil, can you and your page-watchers, keep on this article? Subject is in the news and attracting a few POV driven editors of various hues. User:Wesley Mouse did a very good job writing a properly formatted, sourced, and neutral version that I am guessing no "side" will like much. I'll keep an eye too but since I made some (minor) edits a short while back, will leave the adminning to you. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 04:44, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Abecedare: thank you for the kind words. Got me all emotional and weepy reading this. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 10:12, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• Neil, I'm not sure if this is going to be of help; but I have pending changes user rights. Seeing as this article is under a lot of strange edits and blanking, I wonder if placing it under PC-1 will be beneficial? It will make IPs and registered users think twice, get bored with trying to make POV edits, and I'd be able to keep a stronger eye on the article. Do you think this could work? Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 11:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Wes Mouse, not quite yet. But I get immediately alerted (when I'm at the computer) if there are any changes to the article and will add protection if further disruption occurs. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 11:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Madhu Kishwar edits

Dear Neil, can you quiz this user about his/her COI with Madhu Kishwar? Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 16:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3, what makes you think they have a conflict of interest? If you have suspicions, and unless there's a good reason not to, you can engage the editor yourself with your findings and see what they say. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:08, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

The nature of the unsourced edits, and in particular the edit summary "Removed Birth Date on Request of Madhu Kishwar" indicate a close personal contact with the subject. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3, thanks. Added some notes to the editor's talk page. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:13, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Revert on the Islam page

Hi,

I added a "non-Denominational Muslims" sub-section, a wiki page already exists for everything I entered under this group. Yet, this section was removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Code16 (talk • contribs)

Hi Code16. Your additions need inline citations. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:34, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi NeilN, thanks, and understood. I've added inline citations. Please review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Code16 (talk • contribs)

@Code16: I've fixed some formatting issues but yes, it looks okay. By the way, don't forget to sign your posts by adding --~~~~ --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@NeilN: Sounds good =) thanks man Code16 (talk) 17:53, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks! Code16 (talk) 17:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Galileo affair blues

Hi Neil, I saw that you here declined to semi-protect Galileo affair because of what I presume is this talk page subheading. However, if you look at the entries, you'll see there is no real discussion or dispute - the page has been edited by a series of crazy IPs, and sometimes socks, for a long time, as I tried to explain here. There doesn't appear to be any content issue - half the time the IPs/socks are talking to themselves. It's not an emergency or anything, just a kind of a pain to have to keep reverting the IP edits. Let me know if this sounds way off base to you: maybe I'm missing an obvious talk page discussion or editing purpose behind the IP edits. -Darouet (talk) 23:27, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Abruptive editing at Chinna Jeeyar

Hello, can you help me with the procedure to block: User_talk:SpacemanSpiff who continue to abrupt the edits made to chinna jeeyar page with false information and claims our edits fall under objective prose but in fact this user edits are violating this policy of wikipedia. It is also against Wikipedia:Libel — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 17:01, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) FYI NeilN this Chinna Jeeyar Swamy is the article in question. There has been no discussion on the talk page regarding the situation and R also made a report about this at AIV which will be rejected. I haven't linked to it as it is possible that it will be removed by the time you see this. MarnetteD|Talk 17:06, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for looking in to it. But there is no discussion for any of those wrong edits at this page. How can you say it is a dispute. If it is dispute, where do you look for the facts. Chinna jeeyar is a well known person and writing against the facts is a clear case against our policies Wikipedia:Libel and Wikipedia:WikiHate. It is also against Wikipedia:NPOV. I do not understand the reason behind the rejection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 17:39, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@RamanujaDasa: SpacemanSpiff is an administrator, which means that he is a highly experienced editor that has earned the trust of the community. As a new editor, you would do well to read carefully whatever comments he has made, and follow the advice. Have you looked through the policy pages listed in the welcome message on your talk page? I am afraid you will not make much headway in editing Wikipedia if you do not read and understand the policies first. The page you are editing does not yet have enough reliable source that can be used to verify information. Your first task in improving the page is to find enough sources. Once you find the sources, you can summarise them in an encyclopedic way. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 18:03, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: Dear Kautilya. Thanks for your response. That was my afraid too. Being an administrator, one needs to know what is fact and what is not. If you look at his edits, you will know that is a pure case of WP:VANDAL, Wikipedia:Libel, Wikipedia:NPOV, Wikipedia:NPOV. Please educate me on what kind of advice been provided by SpacemanSpiff expect to those threatening words and hiding under wikipedia policy of WP:NPOV. Look at the official website at http://www.chinnajeeyar.guru. We are just repeating the same at wikipedia. whats' wrong in it? How is it against WP:NPOV. Infact the edits made by SpacemanSpiff are against WP:NPOV. What right they have to go against wikipedia's own policy of WP:Libel. Why are they continue to insist on making those false changes? Do you mean that this is called EXPERIENCE. Do I need to fight for truth in different fronts. Everytime I see different person responding to my query. It is becoming a laughing stock.

@RamanujaDasa: you have obviously not read the policy pages. Neither SpacemanSpiff or Sitush edits are vandalism. I will leave another couple links that I know you wont read. Wikipedia is not a place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and you currently look to be an editor who is WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia. WP:BOOMERANG is also worth reading. MarnetteD|Talk 18:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@RamanujaDasa: All the blue links that we put in our messages are links to Wikipedia policies. You are not reading them. If you are, then you are not digesting them. The Guru's web site is not a reliable source. Only third party sources can be reliable sources. Until you gather a sufficient number of reliable sources, you should not continue the discussion. All the best! - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I have placed some notes here: Talk:Chinna_Jeeyar_Swamy#Notes. RamanujaDasa, be aware I came close to blocking you for disruptive editing. If you are editing from the viewpoint that the subject is a "living legend" then your beliefs are getting in the way of your contributions here and I strongly suggest you stop editing this topic. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:53, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: I did read all the wikipedia policies. It is very sad to see the irresponsible comments here. What reliable source you are talking than an official web site of the Guru. Are you contradicting the life history of a person that has come from himself or you are trying to rewrite the history by your self belief and assertions. Who said chinna jeeyar is a self-styled guru. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of facts but not on some ones dis-belief . Pl refrain from continue making false assertions.

Dear NeilN, thanks for the response. Iam also very disappointed with your response. Is this called Wikipedia's impartiality? What disruptive editing of mine is making you to block me again. As mentioned, I didn't made those edits on the pretext of living legend comment. Living legend is my personal belief and I just learned that in wikipedia it is a bad word to use. But, the edits are just merely based on chinna jeeyar's office website of chinna jeeyar at http://www.chinnajeeyar.guru. I am sure wikipedia is not an encyclopedia to twists the truth and advertising agency for those who take advantage of its policy of WP:NPOV. I know you guys have power to block me, but I cant help commenting on wrong doings at wikipedia and getting bad name to its reputation.

RamanujaDasa, please read WP:BLPSELFPUB to understand why the subject's website is not an acceptable source. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:00, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Deal Neil, Thanks for the response. If that is the case, how about other sentences. How about modifications about chinna jeeyar as an HIndu Seer and also his followers call him his holiness. What sources are we referring here? We are talking about a person who became jeeyar before the internet age and for sure before wikipedia.So what source we need to confirm than a person himself. I understand about other people like me , an article page on wikipedia cannot be allowed based on a self page. If we need to argue based on WP:BLPSELFPUB , then it goes for every article of wikipedia. It is better not to have a page on wikipedia rather than have an insulting page and/or a page with wrong facts. Please guide a way to completely remove a page on chinna jeeyar. It is causing so much discomfort on the true followers of chinna jeeyar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 20:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

If there are no reliable sources for a subject, then there cannot be a Wikipedia page for it. It will be deleted. - Kautilya3 (talk) 20:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Ping Kautilya3 It is clear that you are not a reliable source to even comment on this page. So, please refrain from responding any more on this topic. Thanks.

RamanujaDasa, if the subject does not meet the notability guideline (People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject) then the article can be nominated for deletion. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear Neal. it is not the question of notability guideline, because if you google chinna jeeyar you will get all the sufficient secondary sources . We just want to take this page out, that has wrong fact-less information and an attitude continue to protect ill informed administrators and writers rather going on the truth facts. When I made a comment I was blocked with disruptive editing. But when the same was done by others they let go. It is a proof that you and another administrator made changes to this page , undoing the edits done by other administrators, without punishing them as it was done in my case. Sorry, If i am very blunt, but it is very sad to see an open source been abused. Thanks again for responding with patience.

I am afraid this statement shows that you have read none of the policies and guidelines that numerous editors have provided for you. You continue to exhibit WP:NOTHERE tendencies. If the article is causing discomfort please do not look at it. MarnetteD|Talk 20:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear MarnetteD. I read all the information and responding to it accordingly. WOW.. Do not look at it. That is a great solution. This is the most name calling I have never seen using wikipedia's terminology. Sad to see someone accusing a user with assumptions. But the truth prevails.

RamanujaDasa, the current version looks free of BLP and NPOV violations to me. You and the subject's followers will not be able to turn the article into an unsourced hagiography. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear Neil, I am forced to respond. I am really confused when you are referring to it as unsourced hagiography. Please don't take my writings out of context. Yes, I am a follower. It doesn't mean I don't have any right to speak about the truth. So the word "his followers called him "his holiness" also satisfies WP:NPOV.? Do I need to fight with thousand people to get the world " self-styled" removed. Why it is not done in the first place. and everyone is started calling with wikipedia policy names. It is blatant abuse of volunteering and open source. Any ways I will initiate the process of its deletion. Is there any speedy way? Do you need any official letter?

RamanujaDasa, "self-styled" is removed and this is an unsourced hagiography. I've told you how to nominate the article for deletion. If you want the present version deleted and replaced with your approved version - that will never happen. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Wow. Neil. You are talking like President of Wikipedia. Great attitude: THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. OBAMA IS fighting for democracy everywhere in the world and we see opposite in wikipedia. I understand that how reliable the information is on wikipedia with great people like you and others. I am done talking to everyone here. I see no point in talking and raising issues any more without a thought or a brain to receive the other side. Thanks for responding. BTW, I never said what you are alleged about replacing the article with an approved one. I am sure you don't believe even if the personality come and talk . Instead you believe in users like user:Wasell — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 22:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

User:NeilN isn't the president of wikipedia, but I assure you that he's right when he says this is an unsourced hagiography and completely unsuitable for wikipedia. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

LOL.. Another user or admin, coming in defence. No one knows whether both user ids belong to one. It is a trend which I mentioned before. Looks like you are the vice-president. There are million of articles that comes under that category and I am sure this is not the one. This attitude is gonna kill our wikipedia one day.

You're welcome to start an Wikipedia:Requests for comment on the topic. I have no doubt that User:NeilN and myself would be more than happy to abide by the outcome. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

user:NeilN, user:Abecedare Can one of guys help in stopping the nonsensical edits to this article. Seeing all this, this page is turning to a hate page rather an introduction page. I would like to surely put this page for deletion with all the non-sense going on. I am not sure how to do it. Could one of you guys help in putting this page for deletion? Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 08:29, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Hafiz Muhammad Saeed

Kindly semi-protect page Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, I have done request at RFPP since hours but no one replying. Militant of same name is killed today and some IPs wrongly keep on updating "death" of said terrorist. This is violation of WP:BLP. Same thing was happened in past when another militant of same name was killed. Human3015 knock knock • 20:46, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@Human3015: If admins are processing other requests but not commenting on yours that is an indication it's not a clear cut case, either in terms of disruption or level of activity. However given the edits that have occurred in the last hour, I have semied the article. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey

Dear Neil. I have to take your talk page off my watch list: You are a twat magnet, and not in a good way :D Thanks for your perseverance, good humour, and determination to do the right thing for the project. :) Keri (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Keri, I understand. Watching the talk pages of active admins can expose you to a lot of WP:NOTHERE editors. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:37, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

'Retired' user

Not sure if this qualifies under WP:NPA, but maybe. Plus their edit history both pre- and post-'retirement' seems problematic. Would perhaps a block of a day or two, or even a few hours, be advisable? Thanks. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 22:45, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@Ebyabe: I see they've removed the potentially objectionable material. In most of these cases it's best to ignore the venting if you can. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Yep, they seem to have toned things down. Let's hope it lasts, but considering their history, I don't hold out much hope. Still, thanks for looking and have a nice rest of the weekend.  :) --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 15:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

All I'm doing is I'm trying to apologize to you for what I said before, it keeps getting removed because you don't believe me, and did I get a reply from you "Don't worry it's ok, mistakes happen.", No!, please believe me. I really mean it, I'm sorry. FrozenFan2 (talk) 11:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@FrozenFan2: Ebyabe has removed your post twice from their talk page as is their prerogative. If they remove it again, do not restore it or you'll likely face a block. Just move on and focus on something else. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:07, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm just apologizing to him, doesn't anyone believe me. FrozenFan2 (talk) 12:08, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello N. Now mt talk page is that won't be left as is. I requested as far back as May tht FF2 not post there. Also in May I explained why children's names do not belong in the infobox unless they have achieved their own notability here Talk:Wayne Allwine#4 kids and 1 grandson editing issue. I repeated myself several times since then yet today this bit of edit warring is happening. Is their any kind of explanation that your can provide to FF2 as to why this has to stop? Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 21:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Oops I just noticed that it a wife being added to the infobox today. Sorry for the confusion. There is still no sourcing for her name though. MarnetteD|Talk 22:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: I see they've retired again. If they start up, let me know. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Sure thing. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 22:11, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't adding her there, another user put that there in the past, and I was adding it back, I wasn't actually adding her. Go ahead and ban me anyways, I don't even care at all, you guys have been really horrible too me. I've been trying to be nice you guys and what did I get, mean messages for the past three months. This is my last message after this, I'm closing my account after this. After all my hard work I've been putting in articles, They get removed for no reason. So go ahead and block me, I don't even give a crap at all. I've been trying to make the wiki a lot better with sources too, but I now I won't do that anymore now, you guy's stressed me out for the last time. I'm sorry, I've just had it, that's it. I'm leaving for real this time, and I will never come back anymore after this message, and I won't be replying to this message ether. I simply just don't not care FrozenFan2 (talk) 22:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

FF2 has unretired yet again. The edits since then have either added unsourced info [6], [7], or using unreliable sources like here [8]. All warnings on their talk page get removed and the same pattern of editin continues. I am just wondering what happens next. Any suggestions will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 00:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Just came across the fact that this IP 24.176.159.176 (talk · contribs) was making the same edits as FF2 to the The Land Before Time XIV: Journey of the Heart during one of the retirements. MarnetteD|Talk 00:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

MarnetteD, I don't think the IP is FF2 unless there's a good-hand/bad-hand situation happening. But I see as I was typing this that they've just been indeffed. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:06, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. Yep that just happened and I didn't even have time to get here to update you. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 04:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions?

Hi there - I've been handling the dispute over the Kashmir conflict that was at the dispute resolution noticeboard, and at the talk page. I've spotted some of the involved parties have been given the discretionary sanctions notice and I am asking if you can review the talk page discussion here, I feel I have been neutral and impartial here but explanation of Wikipedia policy and guidance has not been effectual, I believe there might be POV pushing going on here influenced by personal opinions held, but would appreciate a sanity check to ensure I'm not completely crazy here, and to ask if you feel other measures apart from protection could help break the back of this dispute. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 05:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Steven Zhang: I'm about to log off for the day but will take a look tomorrow. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 06:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I can give more context if you need it after reading the comments. I tend to prefer protection when hashing out a resolution seems possible, but in this instance I don't feel some of the editors can see objectively and hence why I'm asking someone uninvolved to assess the situation. Let me know if you need any more info. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 06:04, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

We might give them a couple more days, because I see some evidence of dialogue developing now, finally after all these days! - Kautilya3 (talk) 13:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Neil, have you had a chance to take a look at this yet? Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 22:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Steven Zhang: Two initial points. First, I believe the argument is centered around what belongs in the lead, correct? This article covers a timeframe of about 70 years so anything in the lead should describe events that have significant historical impact. You might want to ask editors to find sources that provide a historical overview of the conflict (instead of cherrypicking "news of the day" pieces) and see what they mention in the first few paragraphs. This suggestion is patterned on WP:MEDRS where we don't use individual studies but rather meta-studies which review and summarize the available literature. Second, I noticed that PR Newswire is used as a source. This type of reference should be treated as a WP:SPS as it is a press release, not a independently written news story, and should be used very sparingly. I see no reason why it should be used in this article. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:51, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Agree on both counts, which is why I've been citing undue weight for both proposed additions (the statememt by a member of the EU - a press release by them published in two other PR places), and the statement by Sayeed (widely disparaged by others in their parliament). However, I feel it's gotten to a stage where suggestions about the latter are falling on deaf ears, exclaiming that as the state's chief minister his opinion matters regardless of what other politicians/representatives say, regardless of the different ways I am explaining policy. This is why I'm here I guess, I feel some of them are putting their fingers in their ears and yelling so they don't hear what others are saying. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 00:04, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Steven Zhang: Solving India-Pakistan disputes - good luck to us :) I have posted a modified form of the above on the talk page. Need to keep the discussion focused on producing content strictly adhering to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:28, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Haha, tell me about it. Let's see how things go. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 00:30, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

edited Silverwood Theme Park Tremors Rollercoaster w/ true facts but was deleted?

Hi I'm 5 days old of using wikipedia and I edited Silverwood Theme Park on the Tremors Rollercoaster section addind how when you go under the gift shop it takes souvenir pictures of every seat and when you get off the coaster you can buy them in the gift shop. I also added that there was a veiwing window in the gift shop to watch people on the coaster go down under the gift shop. And here's why I know its true: my family buys golden season passes every year and a gold season pass pays for one person and lets 2 addional people or friends in for free. If I didn't go to silverwood every year I wouldn't know how many people can get in. And since I go there every year I am pretty familiar with the park. And if my family didn't go there every year I wouldn't have gone on tremors for the first time and pass out for what seemed to my dad 30 seconds including when it went down and under the gift shop to take a picture of every seat and when we were done we went to go look at the pictures of us kids that went on ( 5 to be exact) and she saw the picture of me and I was passed out she wasn't going to the pictures before and was just going to see them but she thought mine was just funny or PRICELESS is what she said exactly she bought mine only. So now every time we go to silverwood I get reminded on how I passed out on tremors just beacause of one stinking souvenir picture. I don't care I am still blocked from editing because it was stupid. and imature of me to goof around and vandalize other pages like change the Taliban flag to the cover of escorted (magazine) on their page and also to delete every word on the page deletion I did do wrong so wrong comes with a consequense or as my dad describes it BUY ONE AND GET THIS FREE. But do please add my editing to silverwood back on it was true. (oh and the administrater that took it off was gogo dodo) and if for some reason you cant add it please tell me why and if i need to do something first. thx colliand000

P.S. sorry for vandalizing those other pages and I hope that it at least made you laugh if so please tell me but I promise I wont do it again unless it is on my account page.

P.P.S. friends? Colliand000 (talk) 17:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Colliand000, the best person to ask why your edit was reverted is the editor who reverted - Gogo Dodo. It was probably because it was unencyclopedic and/or unsourced. I suspect your past vandalism didn't help either. You have to realize that there about a million places on the Internet where you can engage in silliness but Wikipedia isn't one of them. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:49, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok and how do you make it encyclopedic and/or sourced?

P.S. and thx and I'm sorry for the vandalism and hereby vow I will never, as long as I live, vandalize again.

Signed colliand000

Oh and why does my username appear red and not other peoples? Colliand000 (talk) 22:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Colliand000, please read our verifiability policy: "Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it." It goes on to discuss sources. Your username is red because you have not created a user page. Click here to do so. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:33, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FIIOB

Hello, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FIIOB was recently closed as Delete. The reason I'm writing is because Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FIIOB F.T was also recently closed by you as Merge to FIIOB. Sorry, I should have put them up to AFD as a group.

Should FIIOB F.T. be deleted now since the merge target is invalid? Doesn't seem that CSD/PROD/AFD is appropriate

Thank you --CutOffTies (talk) 23:54, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

CutOffTies, you sure you have the right person? Black Kite closed that discussion. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:57, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, meant to post this on BK's page! --CutOffTies (talk) 23:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Tajiks

Hi NeilN. Could you take off the full protection you placed on Tajiks? There is no dispute over content, it was simply a tendentious sock re-adding unreferenced OR. I removed the unreferenced material per WP:V, but he was intent on re-adding it. I already requested a sock puppet investigation as a result of new information at the ANI I raised. In the mean time, the ethnicity gallery, as is, is completely bogus and unreferenced and is in need of removal. Thanks. Elspamo4 (talk) 08:26, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Elspamo4. I prefer to wait until the CU is completed. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 10:54, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Question: Would removing unreferenced material from the article after page protection is expired be edit warring on my part? I was under the impression that unreferenced original reserach can and should be removed without forming a consensus of any sort. Two users on the talk page have suggested that I should obtain a consensus by RFC or else I am risking a block or topic-ban if I remove unreferenced material. Elspamo4 (talk) 00:11, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Elspamo4, oooh boy. Okay, let's break this down. WP:3RRNO lists all the revert exemptions and "removing unreferenced material" isn't one of them unless it's a BLP. However even that states, "Removal of libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced contentious material that violates the policy on biographies of living persons (BLP). What counts as exempt under BLP can be controversial." So you need some sort of consensus the material is contentious. A couple weeks ago an admin tried to remove an unsourced list of awards repeatedly and they were brought to WP:ANI and had their knuckles rapped for their ensuing actions. In fact, it's an Arbcom case right now: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kww and The Rambling Man. So my advice would be to put in a good faith effort to find sources for existing material, remove material if you cannot find any, but don't edit war if someone reverts your removal. Use the talk page to ask the reverter for sources and see what they say. I will be keeping an eye on the discussion. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:31, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply - appreciate you taking time to field my query. I understand 3RR and I wouldn't revert thrice in a 24-hour period unless it was obvious vandalism. As for the content itself, I don't think it specifically falls under BLP, but it pertains to the ethnicity of historic people which in itself is contentious, even more so with no sources on their pages saying they are Tajik. I am aware of the Rambling Man case, iirc it pertained to an involved admin blocking another admin while they were in the process of adding references to unreferenced material. As I said on the Tajiks talk page before my first removal of the unreferenced content, I tried to find book references for every single person I had removed, but I could not find any. I have been asking the reverters to provide references for more than a week now, and not a single reference has been provided nor have they ever attempted to provide one. Do you think I should ask (for at least the 6th time) the users to provide references confirming these historical peoples' ethnicities and wait for a period of time? Or open an RFC? I'm unsure what to do now and I find it tiresome getting accused of edit warring and POV. Elspamo4 (talk) 00:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Elspamo4, remove the material you feel is unreferenced. If you are reverted, specifically call on the reverter to provide references and see what they say. Depending on that, you could then try WP:DRN. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:05, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@NeilN: Okay. Thanks for the advice. Elspamo4 (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

I think it is legitimate Kassos talk

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Greek_alphabet&diff=668933742&oldid=668920214 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:7B8:2011:F201:0:0:7A9:ADAB (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Disappearance of Joanne Ratcliffe and Kirste Gordon

Can you help with Disappearance of Joanne Ratcliffe and Kirste Gordon? Putting their name into news.google.com gets a lot of results. Paul Austin (talk) 21:08, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Editing Article and contacting maintainers

NeilN,

I posted a newsworthy article on Hillary Clinton today. I indicated the source of the information, and made no claim as to its begin bogus or not. It's not clear how this is disruptive. Is what I posted incorrect? Is what I posted not cited?

I am having a very hard time figuring out how to contact Mandruss so I can discuss editing the page.

Would you be able to help and point me in the right direction? You had a "talk to me" link, Mandruss does not.

Thank you, David Paige David.paige (talk) 00:09, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @David.paige: The place to discuss this material you want to add is the article's talk page: Talk:Hillary Clinton. --MelanieN (talk) 00:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @David.paige: - The site allows customization of signatures, and many users show their talk page link in other ways. Some get very creative and many times don't include the word "talk". This is one of many things the Wikipedia community have cleverly devised to make things harder for new users. If you don't see (talk), you can find the link without a lot of trouble by hovering over other parts of the signature. In my case, it's the little telephone symbol following my username. Click that, and you go to my talk page. ―Mandruss ☎ 08:35, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Whoa ...

What happened here? —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 🖖 03:42, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@ATinySliver: It was either Joseph evading his block or someone else trying to stir up trouble. I've never come across Joseph using the kind of language I revdelled so I think it's the latter. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Fascinating. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 🖖 04:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

... and now it looks like PP may be needed. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 🖖 04:24, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@ATinySliver: Semied. Thanks for keeping an eye out. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

YW. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 🖖 04:29, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Eckankar

I had inserted some material into the page on Eckankar. This was fully sourced material; and the source i used was primarily a published work of David Christopher Lane who has done the most amount of academic work on Eckankar. There is an editor on this page Sarunfeldt who keeps removing my edits, and declares that i am indulging in vandalism. Discussions with him on the talk page of the main article have been futile. What is noteworthy is that Sarunfeldt has a clear conflict of interest as per his claim that he has been a member of Eckankar for forty years and is currently a member of the Eckankar clergy as per this diff: Diff1. Could you please look into this matter? Thank you. Soham321 (talk) 05:50, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

And i believe he is also guilty of violating 3RR on the Eckankar page. Soham321 (talk) 06:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Soham321. I've replied here. And please mind WP:3RR yourself (I see you've stopped at three reverts). --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Soham321 (talk) 15:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Michael Carbonaro

Hi, NeilN, and thank you for protecting Michael Carbonaro for what I see was supposed to be until July 13, 2016. I'm wondering if maybe there was a typo in the attempt to page-protect, since anon IPs have been back today making uncited claims that other editors besides me have been busy removing. If you could check to see why the protection didn't take hold, many of us would be much obliged, and we thank you again for your help.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Tenebrae, it's pending changes protected until July 2016. If the disruption becomes too frequent let me know and I'll add a semi. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, NeilN. We've had two anon-IP disruptions just today, and the article was temporarily semi-protected twice already this year to no avail. It really does need indefinite semi-protection, since evidently the subject himself and socks or meat-puppets have tried to make himself appear younger than he verifiably is according to The New York Times and Newsday. It's been going on for about a year now, I believe. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Tenebrae, the previous periods were for two weeks and one month so I'm not comfortable jumping straight to an indef. I've semied for six months after which pending changes will take over. I'll make a note to re-evaluate then. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Okey-doke. I know that will help. Thank you again for taking the time! --Tenebrae (talk) 21:55, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Rajiv Malhotra

Please take a look at the history of the Rajiv Malhotra page. Edit warring has been taking place on this page and now i see a newly registered editor (DharmoRakshati) making his first edit on this page where he begins with edit warring. The controversial section pertains to a recent controversy where it has been alleged that Malhotra is guilty of plagiarism. Please consider semi-protecting this page for some time.Soham321 (talk) 06:03, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Soham321, another admin has applied full protection. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:52, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Protection level of Cory in the House

Hi Neil, given the history of protection and vandalism, especially that the PC1 you applied hasn't slowed it down I think it's probably worth putting a long-term if not indef semi on it. Before I do it, I thought I might check with you. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Callanecc, indef semi applied. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:23, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Please improve the article Kasamh Se

I have submitted an edit request in the talk page of Kasamh Se having provided some reliable sources to improve upon the Awards Section of the article. Since you protected the article, then being a registered user, it's your very own responsibility to make constructive edits in the article to make it more concise. Is it that you are fond of doing only destructive edits? I have myself watched the award shows in which Kasamh Se was awarded many awards. The Indian soap opera has won about 25 awards which were enlisted in the previous edits but you reverted them claiming the cited sources to be unreliable. If you find the sources to be unreliable, why don't you find yourself reliable sources. If you don't have enough time, then leave the work on other editors who have time. But how could it be? You have simply protected the whole article making worthy editors unable to improve the article. It is quite unbearable that in many articles of Indian soap opera, the awards section do not have even a single reference and even then the award section have not been removed in those articles just like what you did in Kasamh Se. Why don't you concentrate on those articles? One such article is Kahiin to Hoga. Please unprotect the article Kasamh Se so that other editors can also make worthy contributions. If you can't do it, then please do respond to my edit request mentioned on the talk page of Kasamh Se. Vibha Ashan (talk) 10:08, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Vibha Ashan, the article was protected because IPs (I'm guessing those were yours?) were adding poorly sourced information to the article. You've also made some incorrect statements. I have not edited the article and if you want content added, it is your responsibility to provide proper sources. Also, I see that your edit request was answered by two other editors (one of them an admin) who told you why your sources were not reliable. Adding content sourced to blogs is not improving the article. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:47, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

More Need1521 socks

I noticed that you blocked a sock of Need1521 earlier. They've returned as the ips User:95.29.71.206 and User:95.29.143.120 and are now making unconstructive edits to the SPI and to the talk page of me and OneLittleMouse, another user who has contributed to the SPI. Valenciano (talk) 18:39, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Valenciano, socks blocked, SPI page protected. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Bella and the Bulldogs

What's the deal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FauXnetiX (talk • contribs) 00:40, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

FauXnetiX The deal is that you are edit warring on a BLP. You need to stop immediately and discuss using the article's talk page. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:44, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Then please head over there and moderate. I've provide sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FauXnetiX (talk • contribs) 00:49, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

FauXnetiX Thank you for opening a discussion. Now please wait for others to reply. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:51, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

And how long do I have to wait before I can re-edit the page? If the only response I get is a revert then the issue becomes that the person(s) don't want the page edited because they don't like the content rather than the content being incorrect.FauXnetiX (talk) 00:54, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

FauXnetiX, give other editors a couple days to reply. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:56, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Question about ANI archiving

Hi NeilN! Quick question. A bot archived three discussions on the ANI page See here, the one that I was involved in hadn't really resulted in a decision on the (imho) offending editor's behavior. Is that usual? Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Onel5969: The bot looks at the date of the last post in the section and if it's older than a certain number of days, decides the conversation is done and archives the section. You can undo the archiving if you really want (don't forget to undo the archive addition as well) and make a new post to that section. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:16, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

I just want to check that I am doing this right

Neil, I just want to make sure that I'm doing this right and not screwing things up. First of all, thanks for the latest round of protections. These vandals aren't going to achieve anything by being so petty, and the site will remain safe, but the temporary protection does help. I suppose that's part of the process.
Second of all, a few more unprotected articles just got hit again, by all new IP addresses: Madhhab (not protected), Quranic literalism, Sirat al-Jahim, Ben Sediq Abdelaziz, File:Ben Sediq Abdelaziz 1.jpg, Template:Sindhi Scholars and The first four Sunni Caliphs and the Sunnah. Either the loser and his/her friends are jumping from computer to computer all to make some kind of a point to me personally (it hasn't been made successfully, all I see is that they have no lives), or they have some means of switching IP addresses rapidly. Either way, they're slowly going around reverting changes I've made, even small ones like putting brackets around the title of a linked Wikipedia article.
My question is: there's no limit on how often I can go to the protection request board, is there? I have no problem doing this indefinitely if it means protecting the encyclopedia and you did say that was the best we can do, but I wanted to check once more that I'm following all the correct protocol. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:24, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi MezzoMezzo, there's no limit. I've protected the pages you listed above but please revert to the correct version. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:15, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

RAKESHmanu

Hey Neil. This editor, RAKESHmanu, has repeatedly been adding incorrectly licensed movie posters to Bollywood film articles. His entire talk page is filled with and deletion tags and repeated warnings, but he never responds to them and goes on with the same edits. Any suggestion on how to deal with him/her? --Krimuk|90 (talk) 13:11, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Krimuk90: Blocked until they start communicating. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for such a prompt response. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 13:22, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

FC Arsenal-Kyiv Kyiv and the dispute tag

Could I ask you to please place the dispute tag below the redirect, not above it? Placing it above makes the redirect non-functional and, worse, puts the page on the Short Pages report. I would normally fix this kind of thing myself, but I don't want to edit through an admin lock like that. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@TexasAndroid: Sorry, done. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

TY. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

St Edward's Church of England School protection

Good decision on the referenced page ! Thanks very much, PKT(alk) 15:51, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@PKT: You're welcome. Hope it helps. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:53, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Louis Belasco

Good block although he needs to be told if he uses the word cunt again he'll be blocked. Shall I do that? Doug Weller (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Doug Weller, I'm in the process of writing a note. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

apologies

Didn't mean that, finger slipped. WCM_email 20:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Wee Curry Monster: No worries, figured that. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:46, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Tajiks page protection

Hi! I've noticed that you just protected the page Tajiks, which, of course, I agree with. The page is undergoing a massive edit-war (you know that, that is the reason you protected). I have no relation to Tajiks or anything similar, but I came to know about this case as a sockpuppet investigation clerk while reviewing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Beh-nam. The case is basically this: there are two users: Scytsari (alleged sockpuppet in the said case) and Jeppiz who want to add to the infobox images of various persons for whom thay have no sources to prove they are/were Tajiks. I initiated a calmed-down argumented discussion on the talk page (Talk:Tajiks#Who should be included in the infobox and why) trying to resolve the case while the page was protected for the first time (by you). Scytsari took no part in the discussion and openly said that he doesn't want to take part [9]. All editors taking part in the discussion agreed that those images should be removed, except Jeppiz, but even he admitted he has no sources to prove those persons were Tajiks. After the page protection expired, Scytsari immediately re-added the images, while I tried to remove them. Now, you protected the page for the second time, but for the second time, you protected it in the "wrong" state (against the clear consensus, with unsourced images added). Now, I don't give a damn about Tajiks, but I just think that it is bad for Wikipedia to have one such article protected in the state that clearly violates WP:Verifiability and WP:consensus. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Come on Vanjagenije, as an experienced editor you should know about WP:WRONGVERSION and not to revert three times on an article that has just had full protection lifted. It would have been a lot easier if the SPI was resolved or if you had shown some patience and not reverted three times. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:05, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Whatever, I just thought that unverified content that we agreed on the talk page to remove should be removed. I guess I was wrong. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:11, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, NeilN. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- WV ● ✉ ✓ 23:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks

... for dealing with my impersonator so promptly. General Ization ^Talk 00:16, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for protecting Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. That saves us all a big headache. GAB (talk) 01:23, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

GAB, you're welcome. Good protection request. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:24, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Your ping

Hi, NeilN. Thanks for the input. Much appreciated. Now that I look at it, my report was a bit of a reach. Sorry. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:32, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Derp. I just now realized what you were referring to. In a nutshell, it was my bad. He made an revert here, and I didn't notice his edit summary until after I restored it back. I realized my mistake and left him a message. What I forgot to do was remove my AIV report. Thanks for catching that and I appreciate you for letting me know. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:43, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Airport vandal by Indonesian IP

Hello NeilN. Many thanks to you for blocking 202.62.16.77. Do you mind to investigate 111.95.145.6 due to his/her disruptive edits? I believe both IPs belong to the same person. Tafeax (talk) 04:34, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@Tafeax: Blocked by Glen. If the articles are disrupted again after protection expires, let me know. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:37, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

IP block

I wonder if you could kindly re-block User:37.16.140.91, who has been up their old tricks again. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:19, 19 July 2015 (UTC).

Rich, done. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:23, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

INKUBUS SUKKUBUS

Hi I am a member of Inkubus Sukkubus, and am requesting that the page be locked so that only registered users can make edits. The page has been under constant attack by what appears to be the same person, using different IP addresses, it had just been re-vandalized I cannot change it myself as I have been told that as a member of the band I am not allowed to. Thanks Vampiredivision (talk) 10:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vampiredivision. The page is under pending changes protection which means readers of the article will never see IP edits unless a registered editor approves them. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:52, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank YouVampiredivision (talk) 17:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much.......

....for protecting Wikipedia's long term abuse page of the New Order vandal. The only question left is...

WHAT WAS GOING ON BEFORE PROTECTION??

JG

Malmsimp (talk) 19:15, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

@Malmsimp: Looks like all the disruption was caught. [10] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:24, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Dead link

I'm working my way though trying to correct dead links, if I don't do it, why don't you do it rather than just keep sending messages and do something useful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luckyredandblack (talk • contribs) 20:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Luckyredandblack, replacing a dead link with a link to an escort agency is not useful. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:04, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you'd like to find another alternative working link or delete the dead link together (and do something useful)