Jump to content

User talk:Ymblanter

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cmo910 (talk | contribs) at 15:28, 19 March 2017 (Chimamanda Adichie). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

If you leave a message here, I will answer it here. So check back later.
If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. I will watch your page and reply as soon as I can.


Archives: 2011; 2012; 2013; 2014, 2015, 2016

Hi Ymblanter! Donguz Formation was recently created and could use a couple of edits so it doesn't get speedy deleted. Do you have time to look at some Russian sources? --Tobias1984 (talk) 07:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look, but this is clearly not speedy deletion material. Added to the watchlist just in case.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ярослав, вы не заглянете туда, если найдется время? Там Ленинградартист просто развернул деятельность, а мне не верят. Очень по вам скучаю :(( --Shakko (talk) 19:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Обязательно, но, наверное, уже завтра: только что вернулся из Польши, три дня был без интернета вообще.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Canada lists

// There are a number of problems with the Canadian historic places lists. They include:

  • provincial lists are too long (some are over 1,000 entries) and need to be split
  • lists are not sorted, and are not sortable even by municipality, due to the way the address was dumped
  • don't use {{coord}}, so can't use {{GeoGroup}} for mapping
  • references numbers (into the CRHP) are sometimes inaccurate, and need to be verified
  • the same place may be multiply designated (federal/provincial/municipal, sometimes multiple federal)
  • there are missing entries due to the way the data was retrieved

I have no easy ideas on how to address the last point, so am focusing on the other items. What I'm doing is a multi-step process:

  1. Fill out the municipality field in the {{HPC row}} templates and deleted the municipality (and redundant "Canada") from the address field (if no municipality is given, try going to the referenced CRHP entry to figure it out)
  2. Sort entries by municipality and count entries to figure out how to split the list. This is generally along the lines of counties or their equivalent (some Canadian counties have been supplanted by regional municipalities, see the Nova Scotia list for examples); you'll have to figure out which counties places are in
  3. Split the big list; I've not been explicitly seeking consensus, but if the history indicates it might be needed, best check for it. The remaining steps are then done to each sublist.
  4. Validate that the id numbers actually link to the proper CRHP listing. If they don't, find the right one by searching the CRHP (every listing I've seen with a wrong id was listed under a different one)
  5. Merge duplicated listings where possible (it isn't if there is more than one federal designation, for example, but provincial and municipal listings can be merged into those)
  6. Sort the list by primary alpha words (see the Nova Scotia or PEI lists for examples)
  7. Change references to {{HPC row}} to {{HPC rowt}}, which uses {{coord}}. This requires changing "lat" and "lon" to "latd" and "longd", and changing the sign on the longitude. (IMHO the last is lame, but the template was already in use on several lists before I took this on)
  8. Make sure municipality names are linked (I usually do this in conjunction with one of the other passes, and don't worry about redlinks)
  9. If the name field contains pipe links, add "namea" field containing just the name, otherwise the coordinate field gets screwed up
  10. Add {{GeoGroup}} and a locator map to the top of the list

I have done this for Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI (almost done), and am starting in on New Brunswick. Others have previously done work on the Canadian territory lists (Yukon, Northwest, Nunavut, all fairly modest in length), and those for British Columbia and Saskatchewan. This leaves Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec to do, where some splitting has been done, but little else.

Things this work does not do fix:

  • making the list sortable by address, which would require adding sort keys to the municipality field so that the listings get sorted properly within municipality (see {{sort}})
  • making the list properly sortable by name (I tried putting sort keys in the name field, and it caused problems with the coordinates)

Did I mention this is tedious work? Thanks for helping! Magic♪piano 20:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanations. I will have a look at Alberta tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:56, 22 August 20/13 (UTC)

Japan

Hi Ymblanter, in case you want to help: The Historic Sites of Japan need to be converted to use {{NHS Japan header}} and {{NHS Japan row}}. For now only the national part. I did a couple as examples. Multichill (talk) 15:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello; Is it possible to do any conversion by ?bot? as seems to have been done for these Chinese ones? The format of the Japanese lists is intended to be internally similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this is more a question to @Multichill: than to me, but I guess if it were he would do the conversion himself without asking me. Let us wait what he answers. If the conversion is not possible, I volunteer to do at least some of the manual conversion (one-two lists per day).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I tried converting with a bot, but didn't manage to do it without too much mess so I abandoned that. Multichill (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Cleaning up the Belarus geographical mess

I'm getting unstuck in trying to compile a table of terminology for the Belarus geographical naming conventions. There appears to be a flood of new articles and stubs recently and it appears that English Wikipedia is now leading the way with transliteration/transcription norms (which, as we know, simply isn't Wikipedia's role). As the contributors don't seem to know what to do other than follow the current directives, we're ending up with orphaned pages and broken links absolutely everywhere.

My thoughts are to follow the Belarusian government standards for the English speaking world (which DON'T involve the irritating version of what is essentially Latinka), i.e. as laid out per this map and other official sites. What's good enough for the Belarus government should be good enough for us.

You can check the sad beginnings in my sandbox. Any constructive input from sensible Wikipedians would be appreciated.

I've left this message on Ezhiki and TaalVerbeteraar's pages as well. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The beginning seems reasonable, thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Any chance you could proof/source improve my Russian translation of the history and expand it further?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dnipro-Arena

But the city was officially renamed on May 19, 2016 following law of decommunization. And this name is now widely used. RMN120501 (talk) 20:03, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion took place at Talk:Dnipropetrovsk, and the decision was taken not to move.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:07, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article Creation Help

Hi,

I am trying to create an article on a Canadian rugby player by the name of Charity Williams, however only administrators are able to create the article at this point. I have a draft saved here [1]. Can you please move this to the article status please? Thanks! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:33, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 05:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thanks! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:24, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An apology

Having calmed down.... I just realised that my behaviour to you on my talkpage today and regarding to the whole Kirovohrad be renamed and moved to Kropyvnytskyi discussion of today was rude. I am sorry about this and apologise for it. I do not really have an excuse other then me having had a Blue Monday today (and it is Thursday today!).
Fortunatly I do like the New Order song "Blue Monday" . — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:06, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, good that we managed to resolve it.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:16, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Writing week Cultural Heritage

Dear Ymblanter, I have send you an email. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 18:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 10:18, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might want to revoke Spshu's talk page access

Based on this and this, he is simply refusing to let go of the situation that lead up to his block. I am not sure if this qualifies as inappropriate use of a user talk page, though. ElectricBurst(Electron firings)(Zaps) 20:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So far they are not do anything which goes counter to the policies. It is obviously a problem that they do not understand why they were blocked, but it simply means that soon they are going to blocked for a longer duration.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think that his next block should be indefinite, because the current block log as it stands does not inspire confidence. ElectricBurst(Electron firings)(Zaps) 21:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The blocking administrator will decide on the duration of the block.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BLA

Hey sir, the 'citation needed' tag was wrongly added to the text that the sock IP was trying to remove as the text was sourced from the ref already present at the end of the paragraph [2]. I have also added another ref [3]. I hope it is alright? Thanks.—TripWire ︢ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︡ ︢ ︡  ʞlɐʇ 20:30, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am personally fine and have no interest in the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:31, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou.—TripWire ︢ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︡ ︢ ︡  ʞlɐʇ 20:34, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mixed up your ""keep vs. delete" rationale reasonings here on the close. Could you re-revierw your closing statement? MSJapan (talk) 15:52, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed, I screwed it up. Corrected now, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Block on "Sibling" expired.

FYI: Block on Sibling expired a couple days ago. Anonymous user immediately started up again with disruptive edits. Cloudswrest (talk) 02:14, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 05:54, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you semi-protect the page and revert MariaJaydHicky confirmed sock IP 2a02:c7f:de18:a800:c9dc:22c6:8966:6e8d contribution. Destiny Leo (talk) 07:42, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, protected, not goint to revert as I do not want to be involved with the content of the article. You can revert it yourself.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:45, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jamala

Jamala states herself that she believes in god and has mentioned her practicing Ramadan several times on her official Instagram account. She is a practicing Muslim.

This has been discussed at the talk page and rejected. Please start a new discussion and wait until it concludes if you want to add this into into the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lisove, Kirovohrad Oblast

A little explanation about my edit on Lisove, Kirovohrad Oblast: based on how the article was written I thought that the urban-type settlement was de-facto a suburb of the city of Kropyvnytskyi. Now I realise it is far from that.... Thanks for the help! — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:46, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, this is my fault, I screwed up last year when I for whatever reason replaced Vynnitsia Oblast with Kirovohrad, not Kirovohrad Oblast. Nothing wrong from your side.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Filter 782

I added a note at Wikipedia:Edit_filter_noticeboard#Special:AbuseFilter.2F782, please feel free to add any comments. — xaosflux Talk 20:49, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Filter Close

Hi there,

I just wanted to comment on your closing rationale over at the AN Translation tool edit filter thread. You said that "Articles are being created in great number". I feel that this is at best an exaggeration. 11 pages a day is not a great number, and any admin can spend 30 minutes a day to keep up with this problem. This isn't to say it's not a problem, but rather that it's not an urgent one. I am requesting that you reword that section of your close, and hold off on implementing the edit filter for 24-48 hours to give the language team time to respond. I think that your close is broadly correct, and won't push the issue further than this, but I hope that you will consider my points.

Cheers, Tazerdadog (talk) 20:54, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can reword the closure (adding some number rather than great number), but I do not want to postpone the filter. It triggered 25 hits today (I guess 15 non-testing or so), which is still a big number given that the articles are not amenable to speedy deletion and need to be dealt with manually via PNT. This is clearly a temporary fix, and my closure leaves all options open to revert it, for example, if WMF comes with a good suggestion. However, if you not feel happy with my close, as I said in the rationale, just undo my close. (In this case, obviously, I will not be the person to reclose it).--Ymblanter (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded the closure, going to sleep now, feel free to take action without me if needed.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That more or less satisfies my concern- I still wish you would hold off, but I can definitely understand your argument. I was assuming that admins were going to use IAR deletion rather than using PNT. However, this is an acceptable temporary solution for me. Thank you for the bold closure. Tazerdadog (talk) 21:09, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Christopher Holcroft page

I notice you have deleted the Wikipedia page on Christopher Holcroft.

What will be needed for the page to be undeleted please?

7Lawrence 02:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7Lawrence (talkcontribs)

It did not survive the deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Holcroft. It can not be undeleted. If you want, I can restore it in your user space or in the draft space. For the article to be moved to the main namespace, it should satisfy our motability criteria.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:30, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter,

Please restore the page on Christopher Holcroft to my user space as per above.

In relation to notability, the books mentioned in the article have been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the books themselves. This is borne out in the various references. This includes published works in newspaper articles and independent reviews. No media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book have been used to write the page. The three books written for teenagers have made a significant contribution to a notable or significant movement ie Scouts in Australia. No other books on teenage Venturer Scouts have been written and published in Australia, about Scouts in Australia by an Australian. His other two books are instructional on the afterlife through fictional adventure. The books' author is historically significant as he has been both a Journalist and Military Public Affairs Officer in the service of his country at home and abroad and for the United Nations. He brought this experience to the fore in his books through adventure. 7Lawrence 01:17, 2 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7Lawrence (talkcontribs)

User:7Lawrence/Christopher Holcroft. You do not need to convinve me of the notability, I merely summarized the discussion. If you work on the article and will want to move it to the article space, it will likely be another discussion, where these arguments could be in order.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:45, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any independent reviews amongst the article's references, 7Lawrence, and none were provided in 15 days of deletion discussion. Unless sources are added that demonstrate significant coverage of Holcroft in independent, reliable sources, then I will have to request speedy deletion of the version in your userspace, per WP:U5. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:49, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi YMBlanter and Cordless Larry,

Please check out User:7Lawrence/Christopher Holcroft and note I have added independent, external, reliable review sources to the page. I believe the page should be restored because of the following:

In relation to notability, the books mentioned in the article have been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the books themselves. This is borne out in the various references. This includes published works in newspaper articles and independent reviews.

No media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book have been used to write the page.

The three books written for teenagers have made a significant contribution to a notable or significant movement ie Scouts in Australia. No other books on teenage Venturer Scouts have been written and published in Australia, about Scouts in Australia by an Australian. His other two books are instructional on the afterlife through fictional adventure.

The books' author is historically significant as he has been both a Journalist and Military Public Affairs Officer in the service of his country at home and abroad and for the United Nations. He brought this experience to the fore in his books through adventure.

Many thanks for your consideration. 7Lawrence 02:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7Lawrence (talkcontribs)

I hope I was clear that I am not going to be involved with the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:31, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - thank you.7Lawrence 05:16, 3 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7Lawrence (talkcontribs)

Over to you Cordless Larry.7Lawrence 05:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7Lawrence (talkcontribs)

Let's continue this discussion at User talk:7Lawrence, so that Ymblanter is not disturbed further. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:27, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfD closed as keep

Hello. Just wanted to let you know that I have closed GGZ AfD as keep. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 16:06, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

Hi Ymblanter,

Would it be possible for me to know who was the main contributor/article creator of this deleted page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Joshua_Aston

Uncletomwood (talk) 16:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ST9385--Ymblanter (talk) 16:49, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Holcroft

Probably not a rush, but would you mind salting that article space? MSJapan (talk) 00:34, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why? It has never been recreated.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:24, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:7Lawrence/Christopher Holcroft

Hi Ymblanter. I am assuming that you undeleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Holcroft and userfied it to User:7Lawrence/Christopher Holcroft so that it could continued to be worked on by 7Lawrence. The userpage was just tagged for speedy per WP:G4 by 142.105.159.60 which does not seem correct based upon what G4 says: "It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies, and content that has been moved to user space or converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy)." Can the speedy tag be removed here? FWIW, I had this on my watchlist because of some EL clean up I did before the article was AFD'd. If is to be deleted again so be it, but it appears that 7Lawrence has been trying to improve it. So, maybe it should be taken to MfD instead by 142.105.159.60. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New drafts in the user space are not up to speedy deletion under this criterion, and the speedy was quite correctly rejected by Huon--Ymblanter (talk) 05:23, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply and clarification. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:14, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't made sense

Hi The revert of my edit doesn't made sense because in english encyclopedia, we read with english word but we could use parenthesis to write with cyrillic words. --Panam2014 (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but for me what you write does not make sense, I can not parse it. The Verkhovna Rada is not an authority in the usage of English, period. The Ukrainian name of the city was changed. The English name (or Russian, or Swahili for that purpose) was not changed by the Rada.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:38, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I just wrote the Rada changed the name in Ukrainian language. --Panam2014 (talk) 21:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

South Dakota Senate Election

Hi. I'm Kurt Evans, a former U.S. Senate candidate from South Dakota. I know very little about Wikipedia protocol, and I'd appreciate it if you'd contact me at Kurt.Evans@live.com so we can correspond by email. Among other things, I'd like to discuss the actions of users "ALPolitico" and "Dane2007" pertaining to this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Dakota,_2016

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.248.92 (talk) 18:28, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, but I never discuss such things in private. In addition, I am not a US citizen and understand little of the political issues. You are welcome to raise the points you want at the talk page of the article, I am sure they will be somehow followed up.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:40, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know what the nature of the issues is, but of they are confidential and can not be discussed openly, I believe contacting the Arbitration committee could be a good way to proceed.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.246.80 (talk) 19:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This is Kurt Evans again. Do you even look at an article's edit history or "Talk" page before you approve requests for semi-protection? Would you mind stopping by the "Talk" page here and helping me understand your perspective? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Dakota,_2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.248.75 (talk) 08:00, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, no. My role is not to impose any perspective (in fact, I do not have any), but to stop edit-warring.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you stop edit-warring by preventing "ALPolitico" from editing this article? Do I have to file a defamation lawsuit against Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.248.75 (talk) 08:24, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I had to block you for legat threats, WP:LEGAL. You can retract your threats and request an unblock at your talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make a legal threat. I asked a question. This article is about me. Do you understand? Wikipedia is spreading lies about me. Do I have to file a defamation lawsuit to get those lies corrected? Yes or no. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.255.198 (talk) 08:51, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All your IPs will be blocked on the spot from now on. You need to retract the legal threat first and get unblocked. Then, contact the WMF, as suggested above, not me.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make a legal threat. I asked a question. I don't have a talk page. I don't know what a WMF is. I don't know how Wikipedia works, and I need someone who does know how it works to help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.248.120 (talk) 09:11, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

meta:legal--Ymblanter (talk) 09:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You say you're sure someone will follow up if I raise my points on the article's talk page, but no one does unless I contact them directly, and I don't know how to find anyone in a good position to help me. You say your role isn't to impose any perspective, but your talk page is full of evidence that you're imposing your perspective all the time, and you've obviously imposed it on me. You give wide-ranging assistance to others here but almost none to me. You falsely accuse me of legal "threats" when I'm actually seeking a way to AVOID legal action. Then you insist on blocking multiple IPs (which my service provider will likely reassign to people who have nothing to do with this) unless I violate both my conscience and my religion with a false confession to the supposed legal threats I've never made. Your actions toward me are not right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.53.227.205 (talk) 05:50, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again. I understand NOTHING in the US elections. NOTHING. You have got issues with another user. Instead of discussing with them, you started edit-warring. Twice. Any time I see an edit-warring, I protect the page from editing. Period. But you need to discuss with the same user, not with me.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:23, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Another" user? As I've already said, I'm not a Wikipedia user. I'm the Kurt Evans *NAMED IN THE ARTICLE*. You don't need to understand U.S. elections. If you'd take five minutes to look at the article's edit history and talk page as I'd suggested above, you could see that I've carefully explained each of my edits, and "ALPolitico" was the one who started (two months ago!) repeatedly undoing my edits with no explanations. I've also attempted to discuss these issues in great detail on the article's talk page (I gave you the link above), and "ALPolitico" is the one refusing to discuss them further. If you won't even look at the situation, can you at least refer me to someone who will? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.252.30 (talk) 21:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By "another user" I mean ALPolitico, you were edit-warring with them.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:01, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a regular Wikipedia user and don't know how "edit-warring" is technically defined here, but as I've clearly and repeatedly explained both in the article's edit history and on its talk page, my revisions have been intended to correct misleading, false and possibly defamatory information. "ALPolitico" has given only the vaguest of reasons for his edits (when he's given reasons at all), and it appears he's engaged in a months-long effort to portray me in the worst possible light, even to the point of using Wikipedia to spread patently untrue information about me. I'm obviously extremely disappointed by your insistence that I involve the Wikimedia legal team in this matter, but it seems I have no other choice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.254.52 (talk) 20:11, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Svetlana Gerasimenko

I saw you removed my entry on Svetlana Gerasimenko's page. I did not know how to add a section, and thought that was pretty neat trivia. Do you think it is ok to put on that page, and if so, any advice on adding the appropriate section? Gezellig (talk) 01:08, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Handling trivia. I do not think it is important enough to be in the article (not mentioned by any reliable sources), and, additionally, it represents original reserch.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you closed the discussion as delete, but deleted Indiana Fire Academy instead of 2016–2017 Indiana Fire Academy season. I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indiana Fire Academy as delete and that you already deleted the article since it was going that way anyways. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 11:41, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It is strange, may be it was a redirect at the moment? In any case, the two articles have gone to where they belong.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:44, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake

Hoax is another The Quest, look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Quest&oldid=99461989 "The Quest is a series of twelve epic high fantasy/adventure novels by English author Rufus Fairfax. The first of the books is 'Volume I: Dantàrin's Quest', which as of 2006 has sold 27 million copies worldwide." You deleted unrelated new content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.4.99.44 (talk) 09:38, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was wrong indeed, thank you for pointing this out.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm totally new to editing Wikipedia, but I'm an employee of Evine who is making changes requested by our marketing department. How can I make the requested changes and have them stay? Every time I make changes, they are reverted by something or someone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rle10dre (talkcontribs) 14:05, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are two issues. First, as an employee of a company, you are strongly discouraged to edit the article since you have a conflict of interest. The best way to proceed is to suggest the changes at the talk page of the article. (Also not that we do not need to accept the edits suggested by the marketing department - we have our own policies, and the edits must conform to these policies). Second, it was a particular problem on top of this, which I hoped I have solved. You tried to cut-and-paste the content of EVINE Live to EVINE, because, as you said, the company rebranded. This is fine, but for changing the name of the article we have the move instrument. Cut-and-paste moves do not preserve the editing history, which is not acceptable for us. Therefore I reverted your changes and then myself moved EVINE Live to EVINE. If this is different from what you wanted to do, please let me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The changes I'm trying to make are as follows

  1. New logo (uploaded file already, Evine logo.jpg)
  2. Changed Key People to Bob Rosenblatt (CEO) Source
  3. Title of company should be changed to proper case (Evine - same source as above)
  4. Moved EVINE Live logo to below ShopHQ logo with caption "EVINE Live logo from 2015 to 2016"
  5. Redirected the other "What links here" sites to Evine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rle10dre (talkcontribs) 14:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
These changes are uncontrovercial, I will make them within a couple of days.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:05, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rle10dre (talkcontribs) 15:06, 22 August 2016 (UTC) Thanks for making those changes. Could you remove Russell Nuce from the Key People area? Also, this item seems to have been skipped[reply]

  1. Moved EVINE Live logo to below ShopHQ logo with caption "EVINE Live logo from 2015 to 2016"

Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.17.26.137 (talk) 20:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, still need to correct the incoming links. These are however uncontroversial, and you can start correcting them yourself.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:22, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for closing the AfD for Daniel Romanovsky. Hopefully people can now get on with more important things. Kitfoxxe (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New user making mass title changes to Belarusian regions

Hi, Ymblanter. I've just been trying to roll back these undiscussed changes, but have been re-reverted. Judging from their response on their talk page, I don't think that the user is WP:HERE. I'm not much in the mood for dealing with any more POV-rage at the moment. Could I impose on you for some assistance? Thanks. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They have been already blocked, now we need to roll all this contribution back.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:21, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why you changed the ancestries??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.105.112.71 (talk) 02:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did not.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abkhazia RfC

Hi Ymblanter, please take a look at this when you're able to. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:19, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look. Can not guarantee I have anything to say there.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:55, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Its because a random IP hopped in and closed the RFC all of a sudden, and removed the entire infobox from the article. When I reverted the IP, presenting a clear rationale, I was reverted by another completely new account, and after that, once again by the "IP". - LouisAragon (talk) 01:15, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see that Favonian has taken care of this in the best possible manner.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, indeed, just saw it. - LouisAragon (talk) 03:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: New Page Reviewer user right

A discussion is taking place to request that New Page Patrollers be suitably experienced for patrolling new pages. Your comments at New pages patrol/RfC for patroller right are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

The NPP backlog now stands at 13,158 total unreviewed pages.

Just to recap:

  • 13 July 2016: 7,000
  • 1 August 2016: 9,000
  • 7 August 2016: 10,472
  • 16 August 2016: 11,500
  • 28 August 2016: 13,158

You naturally don't have to feel obliged, but if there's anything you can do it would be most appreciated. I've spent 40 hours on it this week but it's only a drop in the ocean.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing it every day now, but unfortunately the backlog does not get shorter.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:13, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Musahiban

Thanks. With a 2nd IP they added the following to the article:==Roxy the Dog==The Dog== The [[Mossad]] is watching you. Stop removing information. ==Roxy the Dog== Typical. As I said, he thinks his family has a special relationship with Israel. I'm wondering if he's a bit deranged. Doug Weller talk 08:25, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Damn. Missed the fact that that IP posted a minute after another IP posted a similar threat.[4]. Doug Weller talk 08:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moving

Thanks for sorting out the Mutara III Rudahigwa move I messed up; I didn't realise it took more than just swapping the pages. I'll read up on it. Bromley86 (talk) 10:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please do, otherwise the result is qualified as copyright violation. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:16, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter, this appears to be Jonathan Yip. I just blocked User:НкСаԌч, editing from the same IP address. Drmies (talk) 03:07, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. It was clear this is a sock, but I was not exactly sure which sock it was, and they provided me with other reasons to block them anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I caught on to it after I saw an AIV report from someone who apparently did recognize it. I don't think they added it to the SPI, but I don't know what the purpose of that would be anyway. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes, filters can be installed or rangeblocks made, but this one was too obvious.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:56, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ymblanter! You said:"The name of the city in English, by our consensus, is Dnipropetrovsk." Tell me, why Kirovohrad has renamed to Kropyvnytskyi? What is "consensus" and who reached it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Welikoiwanenko (talkcontribs) 09:08, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kirovohrad was renamed since nobody objected. For Dnipripetrovsk/Dnipro, pls consult Talk:Dnipropetrovsk.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:07, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Larks and funerals

Hi, Ymblanter, thank you for your kind comments about Horch, horch, die Lerch' and for taking the time to review my article. I also would like to apologise for my irrational comments yesterday in Beethoven's funeral, I was tired and emotional, as they say. I really should read WP:Etiquette every week. Having had another look at my rough notes made about 9 months ago (which looked much better as a formatted .rtf file), I see that I have committed my first copyvio. I wasn't intending to include the entire copyright stuff by Peter Bassano, but was intending to reference it in my usual way. If I blank the offending stuff, may I have my draft article back, please? (Unless there is also some other patent nonsense which I haven't identified.) >MinorProphet (talk) 13:56, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. The best is to starts a draft in your userspace, make sure there is no copyvio, that it is actually an encyclopedic article (the yesterday's version was looking more like a notebook with randomly picked up quotes), and then to move it to the article space.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am a bit hesitant about the draft since it contains copyvio. I will see later today what I can do.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aargh, I'm so sorry, I thought I was making a draft article on my own user subpage, but I managed to create it in mainspace instead, and have only just realised. I'll start all over again.

I'm not sure whether every single new article has to be checked, but I don't think that Edward Steinkopff has been officially reviewed, and I wonder if you could would cast a swift gaze over it. >MinorProphet (talk) 20:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, just reviewed it. It could benefit from some more editing, but it is definitely fine in the article space.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. What sort of edits you were proposing?

You may want to look at some of good and featured articles and see what the difference is.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:57, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Diannaa. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Way Down We Go, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:27, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Citation Barnstar
Thanks for cleaning up the Terminus (poem) stub I restored. I intended to come back to it and add a quick citation, but got busy and wasn't able to do so. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 16:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vedic Mathematics revert

Hi, you reverted an edit by JamesTGlover. Another user named Jamestglover has previously edited the same article. I'm unsure of how to approach the issue. Could you please look into this? Thanks. (I honestly can't believe that Wikipedia usernames are case sensitive!)--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 18:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see any problem with this, they are not (yet) edit-warring and avoiding 3RR or doing smth inappropriate.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Renault marque

File:Renault logo 2015.svg Redirect disabled
"Renault S.A." page is an article about RENAULT MARQUE! Matvei Gromov (talk) 08:02, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No. The article about RENAULT MARQUE should be RENAULT MARQUE, not Renault S.A.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:08, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your close of this AFD is plainly defective. You stated that "there is a split on whether her only award is notable, and hence whether she passes PORNBIO". That misstates the applicable guideline. PORNBIO requires that a qualifying award be well-known and significant, a higher standard than merely notable. PORNBIO was changed by consensus in this regard in 2012. If there is no consensus that the award passes a low bar, there really is no case that it passes the actual higher bar in the guideline.
The delete !votes in this discussion were substantially more numerous, better argued, and better grounded in policy and guidelines. The keep !votes, to the extent they had any grouding, pretty uniformly rested on the argument that meeting any part of PORNBIO "automatically" guaranteed the subject an article. This contradicts express language in WP:BIO, which PORNBIO is part of, saying that technically passing an SNG "does not guarantee that a subject should be included". !Votes which contradict the governing guideline should be discounted, especially when they are in the clear minority. Finally, the keep !~voters made only trivial attempts, at best, to rebut the argument that, as a BLP without adequate reliable sourcing, the article should be deleted. BLP policy overrides a marginal pass of a dubious SNG. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 December 26, which presents essentially the same issues, and the community strongly endorsed deletion, as well as the similar, quite recent, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristina Rose.
Finally, you posted to the article's talk page that the AFD had closed as keep. This is plain error. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 12:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will correct the article talk page now, thanks, but, for the rest, I guess you know where WP:DRV is.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:14, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

Thanks for 30-500 protecting the Gaza–Israel conflict article, but it looks like that article pertains to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and should have its protection extended indefinitely per WP:ARBPIA3! A User (contribs) 12:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

yes, you are right, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No prob! A User (contribs) 12:17, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I flagged several more pages for protection for the same reason! WP:RPP A User (contribs) 12:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Belmond

Hi there,

When I looked at what links to Belmond Eagle Island Lodge post-deletion I saw that there's quite a list of individual Belmond properties at Belmond (company). Figured before bothering to click through them I'd check with you to see if you already gave them a look. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I actually did not, I found the article in the list of new pages to be patrolled. Feel free to nominate them as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:41, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Karla Lane

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Karla Lane. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Tnx--Ymblanter (talk) 12:57, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Ivanov returning to his usual ways

After this case [5] that considered this editor's hounding, insults and bullying behavior he was required to undergo mentoring as an alternative to the proposed indefinite ban. However, now that his period of enforced mentoring has ended, he seems to be reverting to the same bad behavior. He has been restoring content I deleted from my talkpage, see [6] and [7] and has also been making harassment posts in other threads, see [8]. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid at this point I am too much involved with this case. I would block them for edit-warring at your talk page, but I believe it is better to start an ANI thread.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I got the impression from that last ANI case that this editor was on his final final final warning about harassing people on their talk pages. BTW, this harassment was out of the blue, I have had no recent disputes or indeed any interactions with this editor. The last time was well over a year ago when he was advocating minimizing any mention of massacres during the Muslim invasions of India - I think this new harassment was because he noticed that I was wanting to clarify in the Wahhabi sack of Karbala article that the Wahhabis did not consider its Shia Muslim inhabitants to be Muslims (which is a sourced opinion). Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

Hi Could you protect Nigmatilla Yuldashev, President of Uzbekistan and List of leaders of Uzbekistan ? Regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 09:31, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look now, but please discuss the issue at the talk page. If you do not, you are likely to be blocked for edit-warring once protection expires.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The conflict is about the presidential term of Nigmatilla Yuldashev and an user refused the sources. --Panam2014 (talk) 10:12, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You were edit-warring against multiple users.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And, as it looks, you clearly overstepped WP:3RR in one of the articles, and I blocked your account for 24 hours.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:24, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This user has provided no source for his claims, except for one self-published website. Unsourced claims can be reverted at will, so this doesn't seem like a legitimate content dispute to me. Everyking (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not vandalism and not a BLP violation, therefore edit-warring is not acceptable.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's very pious of you, but I was under the impression that uncited claims could be reverted at will. Has that changed? In any case, how do you suggest we move forward here? I have provided reliable sources and the other side has not. They ignore me when I ask for sources and just refer back to the same self-published website. It seems like quite an impasse, unless we just enforce our requirement for reliable sources. Everyking (talk) 01:44, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Form what I see, you have several users on every side, and the side opposite to you cited the Guardian (no idea how relevant it is to this case, but it is definitely better than a self-published website). I have no intention to mediate the dispute, but most of the dispute participants are reasonable users; please continue discussing and follow the WP:Dispute resolution if the talk page discussion fails.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:04, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are three sources : [9], rulers, [10]. Your affirmartion is a lie. And rulers is reliable. --Panam2014 (talk) 10:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ISIL territorial claims

Hi A pov pusher with ip edited the page without consensus. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no time to be involved in this business right now. Sorry for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:28, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mikhail Tarkhanov

Hi, Yaroslav. If you're not very busy at the moment, may I ask you to sort out the problem with Mikhail Tarkhanov which I tried somewhat unsuccessfully to turn into the disambiguation page? Thanks/sorry for, etc. --Evermore2 (talk) 19:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the disambig template and will be happy to do anything else if you think this is not sufficient.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:10, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, actually, for Mikhail Tarkhanov's talk page still leads to Talk:Mikhail Tarkhanov (painter), so could we here have - I don't know, perhaps a redirect removed and a disambig template added, please? (thanks again) -- Evermore2 (talk) 20:20, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted the talk page redirect, will search tomorrow for an approppriate template - this is not smth I know off the top of my head.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
thats's what I had in mind. Thanks again, and I think, that will be all. -- Evermore2 (talk) 20:27, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:32, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to extend full protection on this article for another week (as part of discretionary sanctions) if that's okay with you. Discussion has grown somewhat bitter at WP:RSN and I think any changes should be done through edit requests after getting consensus. --NeilN talk to me 18:25, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, no problem from my side.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dendrobium

Thanks for cleaning up the copy-paste move at Dendrobium validicolle. We have the same situation at Diplocaulobium utile/Dendrobium utile, could you please do the honors there as well? Cheers! -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 15:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, I tagged the said article for speedy deletion but since the speedy deletion log is quite slow, it has not been deleted yet. I kindly request you to do me a favour and delete so that I can rename the article Maliha Lodhi over here. Also needs to be deleted Nadeem Farooq Paracha. --Saqib (talk) 14:57, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 15:24, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BLP

Thank you for changing the protection level to TE, however it's still on Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items and is still not accessible to template editors. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid this is beyond my technical abilities. If there is a simple action I can take I would be happy to do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ymblanter! Could you restore the pages of SM City Calamba, SM City Santa Rosa, SM City Novaliches, and SM City Masinag? Why did you delete those? Those pages were important to us Filipino people. Because it says there that you deleted those pages. Please restore them as soon as possible. Thanks! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanzzzzz07 (talkcontribs) 01:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hanzzzzz07, they were deleted as the result of the deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robinsons Place Dasmariñas (2nd nomination)--Ymblanter (talk) 07:40, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for your work on Gwangjong_of_Goryeo. The edit warring was out of control.
MadraRuaG (talk) 15:07, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have the idea that the name: Mount Signal is better than El Centinela, for an article in english about the summit

I have a basic knowledge of english, I can read it much better than write it. I don't Know if l'm capable to express or explain the matter or subject with all the necessary details. So I gonna write it in spanish, hoping that you can understand me.

Soy nativo de Mexicali, Baja California. Toda la vida he visto ese cerro al oeste de la ciudad, El cerro del Centinela o simplemente el Centinela, de hecho yo fui el creador de la wiki en español para el cerro. Entrando en materia, creo que las wikis o artículos de wikipedia deben preservar la tradición de su idioma y los nombres propios son parte de esa tradición. No se trata de traducir el nombre, o anglificarlo si puede ser correcta la expresión, sino que existe un nombre diferente en inglés para ese mismo cerro o montaña, porque como lo expreso en la wiki en español, ese cerro es un simbolo de la región y al ser esta una región fronteriza convergen elementos de una cultura y otra. En California existe una localidad pequeña llamada Mount Signal y tiene su wiki donde dice que se llama precisamente así por la montaña, luego otro articulo de un artista plástico, cuyo nombre es Allan McCollum, hizo una de las páginas que yo cito en mi artículo en español pues el ha coleccionado más de cien imágenes de la montaña a la cual llama: Mount Signal, no El Centinela. Resumiendo los norteamericanos o Estadounidenses crearon el nombre Mount Signal para ese rasgo de su entorno y yo digo que debemos respetar eso, aunque la montaña no esté en su territorio. Tengo más razones, si quieren, luego se las expongo.Verdelunar (talk) 00:17, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Y actualizando o abonando un poco más al tema, Estado Unidos quitó a Mexico más de la mitad de su territorio en 1848 y en aquellos años los limites de la Alta California quedaban al sur de esa montaña, de no haberse modificado dichos límites las montaña oficialmente se denominaría Mount Signal, pero más aun muchos nombres como por ejemplo San Diego y Los Ángeles siguieron usandose de aquel lado de la frontera, pero esto es debido al uso y la costumbre es decir que existe una cultura que lo llama de esa forma. Más aun el monte Everest tiene su wiki bajo ese nombre en casi todos los idiomas occidentales pero en la wiki china es Chomolungma, es decir otro mombre diferente y es tan valido uno como otro, porque existe un uso y una costumbre qyue el punto que quiero ponderar. Muchas gracias por la atención y el esfuerzo. Verdelunar (talk) 05:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is important is how the mountain is called in the English literature. And in any case, if you want to move the page, you should move it using the corresponding button, and not cut-and-paste it from one article to another one.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If I try to move with the proper fuction, the system won´t allow me because there´s an article call it Mount Signal already. I´m only trying to make it easier. The alternative is delete the article Mount Signal and then create it again by moving the article El Centinela (Baja California, Mexico) with its aproppiate name in english: Mount Signal. I hope you understand me.

Verdelunar (talk) 23:42, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you start a requested move.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:18, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kidarites

Regarding recent edits on Kidarites, I did not edit-war with you, nor am the one who should go to the talk page to discuss it, yet the IP socks (by User:PavelStaykov) whose WP:SYNTH, WP:FRINGE and WP:OR edits are related with the activity on the article like Yuezhi, Huns, Bulgars and so on (you're probably not informed about the investigation case). Don't misunderstand me, I will revert the information once again because the edits are against WP:NPOV, and now am working on the article editing with additional citation from reliable sources and proper reference style.--Crovata (talk) 18:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only that I cannot make a revert nor edit the article because you made a full protection. Great.--Crovata (talk) 18:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have zero interest in this article, I protected it because there was a request at WP:RFPP, and I have no intention of editing it. I see in the edit history that the edit you reverted was previously reinstated by users in good standing. Please start discussing at the talk page of the article and ping me or any other administrator if consensus has been reached.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can't do something without understanding the situation. If someone with "good standing" reinstated the edit, you have "zero interest", while both missed the point and did not understand what is going on... I will edit it after expiration, I don't have time for useless discussion with the same sock-puppets.--Crovata (talk) 21:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
May be you should get out of the trench. Edit-warring is not a valid dispute resolution avenue.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:04, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No comment.--Crovata (talk) 21:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is the source of the name? Xx236 (talk) 12:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean?--Ymblanter (talk) 13:01, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
All sources are in Russian. Where do Slawharad comes from?Xx236 (talk) 13:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A short answer is it is coming from the map. A longer answer is that some time ago, Iryna Harpy, me, and, I believe, Ezhiki (I might be wrong though) tried to standratize names of Belarusian localities, since they are named completely randomly - some are transliterated from Russian, some are transliterated from Belarusian, which has two incompatible spellings and in addition a latinized form. It is difficult for me now to find out where we started the discussion, but if I come across the place I will add a reference. I think the outcome was that there is no consensus. Belarusians really can not agree on a single transliteration, and the common English names only exist for the biggest cities (and even then, some users try to write Miensk rather than Minsk claiming this is the proper English name). In Belatus, there is a law which requires transliteration from Belarusian names (this is why this article is called Slawharad and not Slavgorod, Belarus). We do not need to follow this law but some users think we do. On top of this, often people with little experience in English Wikipedia (some of them being socks, and some of them being speakers of other languages) often pop up and randomly rename articles to their preferred transliterations. I gave up and I am only able to follow a small subset of article which I myself started or where I added significant portions of content. However, if someone can proceed and arrive to some consensus (I do not particularly care what would be names of all localities which have no common English name, but it is definitely desirable to have a single transliteration), this would be a significant step forward.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If I remember correctly, some user (I don't remember the name, unfortunately) a while ago indeed insisted that Wikipedia should follow the Belarusian government system for transliteration. I remember pitching in (along with Iryna) and trying to find any other interested Belarusian users to shed light on this. We found no one, and the local consensus at the time was to follow the BGN/PCGN romanization of Belarusian conventions (as they are developed specifically with the convenience of Anglophones in mind) instead of switching to the government system (which has a completely different purpose). Applying those conventions to "Слаўгарад" produces "Slawharad", which is also the spelling any BGN/PCGN-compliant map of Belarus will show (my Geographica atlas ISBN 1-74166-036-X, for example, shows precisely that). Hope this helps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 20, 2016; 14:15 (UTC)
Thanks, this is indeed very useful. May be we should indeed follow up and check the names at least for districts and district centers (renaming raions to districts at the same time, I believe we had consensus for that).--Ymblanter (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I recollect the lengthy discussion, but I can't remember the details: someone called something like Dalekop? Given that the Belarusian government and raions don't follow their own national geographical transliteration system, where COMMMONNAME doesn't apply, BGN/PCGN transliteration remained the consensus method for transliteration. I don't recall where we got to on nomenclature for governmental hierarchy, but the user's preference for 'rayon' was rejected outright as sounding like synthetic fibre, and English language equivalent was (almost) universally approved. The use of Łacinka and the Belarus 'official' system has created havoc with links being broken, orphaned articles, etc. I've tried to repair these when I come across them, but it's an endless battle. I'll add the clean-up to my to do list. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:47, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:46, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not happy with the "w", which seems to be Polish, should be probably replaced by "v" in English. Xx236 (talk) 05:56, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
BGN/PCGN romanization of Belarusian says w.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:58, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt very much. Maybe Swavharad?Xx236 (talk) 06:08, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what you doubt. I provided a direct link, you can check.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:36, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, I have taken the Russian name.Xx236 (talk) 06:58, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Syllabification

Do you know how to split "Claudia" into syllables, using spaces between syllables? 139.193.145.23 (talk) 06:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cla-u-di-a?--Ymblanter (talk) 06:49, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the article, but for the time being it does not have a single reliable source. Would it be possible to add reliable sources in Telugu language, not necessarily online sources such as books or old newspapers? Thanks again.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have some Telugu books on Movies written by popular authors. I will find some references there and update in the article. --Ravichandra (talk) 08:37, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:57, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Ymblanter. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

NPP & AfC

A dedicated venue for combined discussion about NPP & AfC where a work group is also proposed has been created. See: Wikipedia:The future of NPP and AfC --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:16, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of Félix Pérez (baseball)

Hello, in 2015 Félix Pérez (baseball) was deleted via AfD because he was not notable. He is now notable per WP:BASE/N, as he played in Japan's top baseball league in 2016 ([11]). Would you be able to undelete the article, because it is easier than having to rewrite it? Thanks. 72.230.184.142 (talk) 01:47, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can do it, but would you be able to edit is to show his notability in a reasonably short time (say within a day) after undeletion?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I can do that, thanks. 72.230.184.142 (talk) 20:12, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The SPA is back on this article again. I'd appreciate if you could re-protect it for a short time. Thanks. Lugnuts Precious bodily fluids 10:39, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protected for a month. What this sock tries to add is actually correct, they just do not care to find a good source.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I'm not a sock - my IP changes automatically, and my original block has already expired.
Secondly, what does a "good source" stand for? How is a good source defined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.29.102.252 (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Lugnuts Precious bodily fluids 10:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a sock, actually

My IP changes automatically and my original block on my previous account expired long ago. The only reason I was blocked then was because I wasn't aware it was possible to complain to admins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.29.102.252 (talk) 10:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly normal on Wikipedia to include sections describing an artist's political view on Wikipedia. De Niro and Springsteen have whole sections dedicated to their political views! So why does this user insist on removing this referenced fact on the artist's political stand from the article? Maybe he finds it uncomfortable that Russian artists support Crimea's accession to Russia, but that's not a valid reason to remove a referenced piece of information.

I am personally fine with the addition itself, but please find a reliable source (which should not be difficult) and propose it at the talk page of the article (as a edit request).--Ymblanter (talk) 10:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is a full interview with the actor: [12] - what's wrong with that?
Here's another link, where he compares the accession of Crimea to Russia to the victory day over the Nazis: [13]
And here's another link! [14]
There are plenty of links out there! It's obvious why this guy reverts me, clearly he's doing it to promote his own political view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.29.102.252 (talk) 10:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
First, he does not. Second, none of your sources are reliable; the interview is a primary source and can not be used as the only one. Please, read WP:RS. Third, you should not be discussing this with me, but add it as a requested edit at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes he does, why else would he do it?
What else is needed besides an interview? How can an interview not be a main source? The artist states his view explicitly. How is that not enough?
Well, I have no choice but discuss it with you as you have semi-protected the article and by that allowed the troll to revert it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.29.102.252 (talk) 11:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I do not feel like I should continue since you clearly are unwilling to follow Wikipedia policies. You are not welcome at my talk page anymore.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC for page patroller qualifications

Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:59, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:26, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting issues

Hello Ymblanter, Their is an issue going on. I don"t really understand this User ‎Citobun, He/she is accusing me a COI when am not engage with COI on wikipedia, i have explained to him/her on its [talk page] but still don"t understand me yet. Due to this issue He/she decided to nominate all my article which i have created AFD. To be sincere this is not right according to wikipedia Harassment. I explained my self in a good manners to Him/her but still not comfortable. I believe what Him/her did was not proper on wikipedia. That is not the right way to nominate an article for AFD. He/she decided to frustrate me with that. He/she talks to me, to prove my self about the Images uploaded, i understand Wikipedia says About Uploading Images to an article. This is what i have to say, I hope you understand me, Thanks.--Jamzy4 (talk) 10:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jamzy4, I do not quite understand you, but indeed the three articles you created were nominated for deletion. The discussion will last at least a week, and the best thing you can do is to read WP:N (I guess WP:NMUSIC is the relevant part) and then go to the nomination page and explain why you think these articles should not be deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:28, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Ymblanter:, it is obvious Jamzy4 (an editor with less than 4 months experience) has taken the whole issue of COI in bad faith. Citobun noticed every article created by Jamzy4 contained promotional, typographic error and COI infos before he nominated the said articles for deletion. I think Jamzy4 is having some sort of revenge on Citobun by nominating some of his (Citobun) articles for deletion, including two articles created by me. He even copy-pasted this thread which he had created on the userpage here. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 22:27, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Already handled while I was sleeping.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:10, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

10,000 Asia Challenge

Hi, I wondered if you or Ezhiki would be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge? The idea is to showcase the work being done on wikipedia across the continent, and inspire more people to create and work on countries which might not usually get much attention and then possibly running some contests to bring in new editors. I know it's very existence will definitely make me more likely to contribute more on Russia and other countries. Could be a way to highlight work needing doing for Russian and draw in new editors! Or start a 1000 Challenge for Russia feeding into it or something? Not sure, but if interested add your name to the participants and I'll consider setting something up later in the month.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:47, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find anything on Kara-Balta River? Sourcing is poor in English.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:41, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kara-Balta should not be a problem. For the Asian Challenge, I would need to have a look, thanks for alerting me.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:50, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit requests

Hi, can you please take a look at these two edit requests [15]. Thanks! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:38, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to, but (i) it clearly goes beyond my technical abilitys; (ii) this is a pretty major change, so I would in any case give some time for discussion, possibly open an RfC, invite Wikiprojects etc.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:35, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. What about the first request? That is just writing where the 2018 Olympics will be ... Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 13:02, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, but I do not see any other unanswered requests.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:43, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, could you change the name of the article to Plaça de Catalunya? --Ghirla-трёп- 06:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 07:33, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for semi-protecting the page! Unfortunately MarcelS789, who has only contributed to this page and WB21, immediately reverted it back and removed all of the well-cited critical portions. I suggested pending edits level 2 on the request for protection page but I'm new to Wikipedia and still learning my way around, so if there's a different type of protection I should request instead please let me know! Fin3999Fin3999 08:59, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We do not apply PC2, and the problem apparently can not be solved by page protection. This is a content dispute.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok understood, posted to WP:COI. Thanks for explaining, as I said I am new and trying to understand. --Fin3999 09:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fin3999 (talkcontribs) [reply]

Notice of Biographies of living persons noticeboard discussion

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Michael Gastauer.The discussion is about the topic Michael Gastauer. Thank you. Murph9000 (talk) 13:09, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:43, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 12 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 13 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1998 Franklin Templeton Tennis Classic - we've now lost history and content

There were two articles: 1998 Franklin Templeton Tennis Classic and 1998 Tennis Channel Open. They each had their own histories which are now lost with your move. I specifically cut and pasted to maintain the histories. It started as "1998 Franklin Templeton Tennis Classic" which was then incorrectly redirected to "1998 Tennis Channel Open" where it stayed for a long while, gaining it's own history. Did you merge the histories of the two articles, or is one now lost forever? I simply shifted the content and redirect. Also, now the content is back to the wrong content and has to be fixed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:49, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1998 Franklin Templeton Tennis Classic before the move had smth like five edits, but I definitely can restore them and revert to your last version of that article. If both articles refer to the same tournament, I do not see any sense to keep two separate histories.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:54, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No problem... I fixed the content. In the past I had been told it was against copyright status (or something like that) to remove history other than just one or two edits. It looked like there was substantial content to me, so that's why I simply swapped the redirect and article. If it's ok with you to lose the editing history it's ok with me. The original authors simply lose their creation credit. But that's why I did it rather than the normal move procedure. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:03, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think it was substantial, but I will merge the histories, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:14, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 08:16, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for helping with the issue. Much appreciated. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:17, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question about WP:NCGN

Hi Ymblanter, I have a question regarding the implentation of this WP. Does the rule (order of languages listed in the lede) also count for historical entities, and specifically administrative provinces of former empires, whose soil later became part of independant nations? E.g. on the Tiflis Governorate; should Georgian be listed ahead of Russian simply because the letter "G" shows up earlier in the alphabet than the letter "R" or "O"? This "alphabetic rule" is what NCGN, as far as I can see, stands for, but it seems to be solely meant for geographical locations/cities/towns, and waters, and not for historically administrative provinces/territories, hence my question. Thanks much in advance - LouisAragon (talk) 16:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I read it, the policy is universal, but I do not have much experience applying it, so that it would be safer to ask at the appropriate Village Pump.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Grabbed you at random off the recent changes list. Would you mind looking at the edit history of Atlanta United FC and the user talk pages involved (including mine) and acting as you judge appropriate? I'm not WP:INVOLVED beyond an administrative capacity, but better to hand this off and kill any "controversy" before it even starts. You'll see what I mean on my talk page. ~ Rob13Talk 07:11, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think you've made the wrong decision there, Ymblanter. Full protection is best used to allow participants on each side time to discuss their differences and reach a consensus. There really is no consensus to be reached in terms of our commitment to accessibility. In this case you just have one person edit-warring against multiple others simply to impose a style that is contrary to our policies and guidelines. A reading of WP:FPP also indicates that the version protected should be the current one - "except where the current version contains content that clearly violates content policies". The choice of colours clearly breaches Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility #Color. I'd like to strongly suggest that you unprotect Atlanta United FC as soon as possible and allow the violations of accessibility to be corrected. The overwhelming consensus at AN3 is that Jamesmiko was in the wrong and can be dealt with by blocks if he re-engages. --RexxS (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry but I disagree. The user has some (at least superficially reasonable) arguments, and the arguments should be discussed at the talk page, not in the edit summaries. If the talk page discussion has reached consensus before the protection expires please ping me, I will unprotect the page. But I strongly disagree with unprotecting the page just because multiple users decided to edit-war, and there happen to be more users on one side.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:55, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As you wish. I'll take your decision for review. The user has no arguments that carry any weight against our commitment to accessibility, and it is clear that the current version does not meet the exception stated at WP:FULL. --RexxS (talk) 19:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not forget to mention at the review that nobody cared to start the talk page discussion before I protected the page.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:01, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can point that out yourself at ANI. I've given you chapter and verse here of how and why you should modify your decision, and you've declined to accept my suggestion. This exchange will be linked to. --RexxS (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, I believe we do have consensus on the talk page, Ymblanter. We have four editors agreeing that the new version with accessibility issues is problematic, and only one editor (who hasn't shown up to that particular discussion) was arguing for the change. Consensus is not unanimous, and it's rather clear that the arguments made for a version without accessibility issues are strong given MOS:CONTRAST and WMF:Non discrimination policy, which codifies that accessibility issues are not subject to community consensus (see the note at the top of that page). I'm not sure if you looked at the talk page discussion prior to your response here, but would you mind taking a look now? The ANI thread seems a bit much when we can solve this reasonably. ~ Rob13Talk 21:19, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see that it was solved already by Floquenbeam while I was sleeping.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:48, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mozambique

You can colour in the right district on that and upload a locator File:Mozambique districts.png !♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:30, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this is indeed the plan, right now the map is just a placeholder.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, thanks for your edits on Mozambique, particularly on the article on the district of Homoine. I have one question though: you wrote that one of the two "Postos Administrativos", in which the district is divided, is called Sede. This is what the source (district profile) says in the relevant heading, but in Portuguese "Sede" just means Seat, Headquarters, Capital. If you follow that rule and you edit other districts, you might end up with hundreds of Sedes in Mozambique. I believe that the name of the PA should be "Homoine" (as shown in most tables of the profile) or Homoine-Sede, as is customary in many government sources. Anyway, this is a suggestion, and I will use your maps in the Portuguese language articles (unless you put them there, of course). Thank again for work! Teixant (talk) 08:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this is indeed what the source says, but we should probably denote it as Vila de Homoine (the biggest locality there). I will correct it and will take note for the future articles. I am indeed planning to go through the district articles for the time being.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, now that you are upgrading the articles on the province of Gaza, you should know that recently the government decided to create 3 new districts in the province: Mapai, Limpopo and Changoene (http://clubofmozambique.com/news/mozambique-has-three-new-districts-mapai-limpopo-and-chongoene-renamo-votes-against/). Another article states that the seats will be "...Conjoene, Nuvunguene e Mapai, que vão ser as sedes dos distritos de Chongoene, Limpopo e Mapai, respectivamente." As you can imagine, there is not enough information about them yet, but there will be next year after the Population Census (if there is no war...) Teixant (talk) 22:33, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. We probably should wait till there is at least confirmation they have been created. To have the census results would be certainly great.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, they have been officially created by the Law no. 3/2016 of 6 May 2006. The title of this law, published in the Official Gazette (Boletim da República) no. 054, 1st Series of 06 May 2016, page a, is Creates in the Province of Gaza the districts of Chonguene, Limpopo and Mapai (Cria na Província de Gaza os distritos de Chongoene, Limpopo e Mapai). The law was issued by Parliament (Assembleia da Reública) on 11 April 2016 and was in force 15 days later (http://www.inm.gov.mz/?q=pt-pt/br-n%C2%BA-54-de-06052016-boletim-da-rep%C3%BAblica-i-serie). But I think that we do not have to worry about articles on them right now...thanks for the work. Teixant (talk) 14:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if they factually exist, they should have articles, and probably someone would need to redraw the map (though I am not qualified). But I would not know where to take info about these districts. The districts which existed in 2005 at least have government-sponsored leaflets, and the new ones have nothing. I think I am going to continue for the time being, and then may be sources will become available.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:00, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request to unprotect

Hi there.

I'd like to request to unprotect a page that you have protected earlier, James O'Keefe.

  • The disruptive edits consisted of repeatedly removing a minor phrase and did not add any significantly unhelpful content.
  • The subject is currently a major news story, so expanding the article is critical today and in the next few days.

Thanks! --Anthony Ivanoff (talk) 15:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To me, the phrase actually constitutes BLP violation. Do you have any reasons to believe that new and IP editors would contribute constructively rather than edit-war after unprotection? The protection log of this article is pretty impressive.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can I interest you in this (after the Destubathon ends) or a 1000 Challenge for Russia? Or Mozambique ;-)?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look, but this is unlikely, I am doing Russia anyway all the time.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yup I know, but it's intended to really try to start to turn the tide towards quality and motivating people to improve existing articles, so the good uns you regularly do for Russia would be welcome on that later on!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:56, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Holodomor

A see, you have made a full protection for this article, but you forgot to revert a pre-war, stable version. Please return it. Thank you. Geohem (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just protected it at a random version. If there is consensus at the talk page (where the discussion did nit even start), and if there is consensus about these categories, I will unprotect the article. Since we are talking about categories, not about unsourced text etc, I do not expect any harm in three days either way.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You protect on unconsensus version, please return stable version. All changes to stable version must reflect the consensus. Geohem (talk) 15:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WRONGVERSION--Ymblanter (talk) 15:52, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have informed you. Will you return correct version? Geohem (talk) 06:26, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a correct version. This is a version you think is correct. No, I will not revert myself (at least if the consensus has not been established before the expiration of the protection).--Ymblanter (talk) 06:35, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Abbottonian. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, You're the Reason (Victoria Justice song), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Abbottonian (talk) 13:58, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is up to you of course, but as the article is at AfD anyway and satisfies all requirements this is likely just a loss of time.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:01, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

United States presidential election, 2016

Could you take a look at this edit request to United States presidential election, 2016? The current version does not reflect an established consensus because a user unilaterally edited it just before the protection. The requested change has not otherwise been the subject of any edits since an RfC on it closed on October 20, and is not the reason the page was protected. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 03:28, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added the page to my watchlist. Out of three requested edits, I implemented one; the first one does not seem to have consensus but for the time being I leave it stand and see what other users say. The third one, about the infobox, seems fine, but I am inclined to wait a bit longer before implementing it, at least 24h so that everybody had a chance to participate.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:41, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. Recommend that Johnson be moved to the second row with Stein, in order to narrow the infobox & create a balance in appearance. GoodDay (talk) 18:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see that currently there are two competing edit requests. One of them should gain consensus first.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:56, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Waiting 24 hours is not a bad idea, but we do already have consensus on this. We had a lengthy RfC which closed less than two weeks ago supporting having Castle and McMullin in the infobox, and since then literally (I did check) no one has even tried to remove them until the one user who happened to do so just before protection before they could be reverted. The placement of Johnson will be irrelevant once Castle and McMullin are restored. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 19:41, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, another administrator just made the change. Thanks for looking into it. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 19:46, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Preesidential Elections 2016

How could you reject so quickly the edit request?

You didn't even read the consensus that is being disrespected. If you don´t have the time don´t cancel a request before getting really involved. The article is being unfair if you had devoted at least 5 minutes you will see. Is not me saying it, is the whole talk page supports what I am saying, just because 5 guys have been doing changes and convincing some admins does not mean it is right, that was the opportunity to show that they had no arguments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarinetcousin (talkcontribs) 17:27, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please get consensus first, and only then start bombarding administrators by edit requests.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:29, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Btw :if a "really involved" administrator takes an edit request, they can be desysopped.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have noticed a pattern in a few editors that have advocated for Rocky. I said before I understand the passion behind the election but some of the repeated insistence has perked on my radar. Im not alone in my thoughts. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:47, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well ¨knowledgekid¨ your radar is as bad as what add to any discussion, leave the Sherlock Holmes thinking and start being fair with your posts. What I said is the truth, if not point where I was wrong. Clarinetcousin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarinetcousin (talkcontribs) 20:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Longer semi?

Hello Ymblanter. What would you think of a longer protection for Stepan Bandera? The last time I did it, it was for three months. Pages like this one are under discretionary sanctions for abundant historical reasons. In my opinion, when dealing with this type of article we should be less worried about imposing too much protection. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:46, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, definitely a good idea. Will reprotect now.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For dealing with the mess I made with CitationCleanerBot! Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 22:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm PRehse. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Azerbaijan at the 2015 IJF World Masters, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Peter Rehse (talk) 21:43, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will not even spend my time on it, but the page perfectly satisfies all the requirements.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:51, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you semi-protect the page to persistent genre warring? 115.164.86.6 (talk) 15:26, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I currently do not see any edit-warring.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ezidiki

Just realised you'd redirected this earlier. I discovered Êzdiki, created by an editor of Ezidiki, and redirected it to Ezidiki, then tried to fix a bit of a mess I found. Not to happy about this editor[16]. I've blocked an IP, 92.210.92.154 (talk · contribs), who may be one of the several editors in this group of articles. Doug Weller talk 16:32, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect this is a long-time abuse, see e.g. the history of Aslan Usoyan, but since this would be difficult to check, redirect and long-term protection seems to be the best solution.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:35, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just the IP or some of the editors? I can see the point of a redirect but it really should be redirect and merge, as some mention of Ezidiki seems reasonable. Doug Weller talk 16:40, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I though they were both, but I do not know, I am even not sure that the editors of Êzdiki is just one person. Redirect and merge seems fine as well, but keeping an article which in the first line says that Êzdiki is just another name for Northern Kurdish does not make sense to me.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Now I had time to check the references and came to a conclusion it is a hoax, references do not mention Ezidiki, and at least in one case a quotation was deliberately falsified (in the quotation from Iranica, Kurmanji was replaced with Ezidiki). Given that the user yesterday posted a hoax map to another article, I blocked them indef for vandalism and redirected the srticle. @Doug Weller:, if you still find there anything useful, you are obviously welcome to transfer it to Northern Kurdish. If you need my help (I am not an expert in the field), please let me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Opened an SPI here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ezidishingali--Ymblanter (talk) 17:43, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well that was interesting. My spidey senses seem to have been working. I'm not going to protect, leaving it as an unprotected redirect should help show any future socks. Doug Weller talk 19:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, a good catch.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you so much! :) This has been going on since October; you'd think they would have moved on by now and do something more productive with their lives, but I guess not. Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:12, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:13, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I must stop letting myself get sidetracked. Sherfedîn is Sheikh Sharaf ad-Din ibn al-Hasan[17][18] - or to be exact, there's an historical person and the Yazidi version. And the source gives in the Sheikh article spells it "Sharaf al-Din", not "ad-Din". I think he's also called "Sharaf al-Din Muhammad". I keep blocking IPs. Doug Weller talk 12:52, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I merged it with the target and redirected.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Ymblanter.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review needs your help

Hi Ymblanter,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons

Good day! Please unlock me on Wikimedia Commons here посиланняhttps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Shmanʹkivtsi_-_Chortkiv I promise you that this will never happen again ever! I'm asking you! I will be grateful!--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 08:37, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What will never happen again?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please!--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 13:16, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I asked a question, would you please answer it?--Ymblanter (talk) 13:37, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have already said that will never happen again--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WHAT exactly will never happen again?--Ymblanter (talk) 13:52, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What won? Not to repeat the ones that I will not upload someone else's photos without--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 14:02, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Which photos are you are planning to upload?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Only your (what I did), I will not.--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 14:14, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize, but I can not understand the machine translation you dump here, and I do not speak Ukrainian. I suggest that you wait for two weeks until your block expires.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:15, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just unlock me! And know the Ukrainian language? --Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 14:18, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please rabbanite me!--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 14:25, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ymblanter. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vehicle registration plates

Hi, Ymblanter. I see that last year you raised – at Talk:Vehicle_registration_plate#Country-specific_subsections – the question of the organization of the Vehicle registration plate article, but, sadly, no-one responded.

I've returned to this concern – at Talk:Vehicle_registration_plate#A_failed_attempt_to_be_all-encompassing – and thought you might care to take a look. (Apologies: I failed to spot your earlier contribution before making my submission to the Talk page!) -- Picapica (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:31, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notification

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding the editing conflicts at the South Dakota Senate election 2016 article.. The thread is Disruptive editing and BLP accusations with United States Senate election in South Dakota, 2016. Thank you.

Thanks for notification.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:31, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer - RfC

Hi Ymblanter. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:51, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, somehow I missed this one.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:22, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ymblanter, "sure, it is not, and it was filmed at the Dovzhenko Studio" Do you have any proof?--Odessa forever (talk) 22:50, 26 November 2016 (UTC) [1]--Odessa forever (talk) 22:50, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We can insert VUFKU, I have no problem with that. The article on Odessa Film Studio says that the studio was founded in 2005, and until serious cleanup has been done, for example, it is split into two, or at least written more clearly and with reliable sources, I will definitely oppose adding Odessa Film Studio to the infobox.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:00, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ymblanter. Thank you for your answer. Please look at the infobox: Website http://odessafilm.com.ua. Select "English" http://en.odessafilm.com.ua/ and then select "Hystory" http://en.odessafilm.com.ua/pdf/History.pdf. Hystory: "In 1922 (not 2005) was "film sektion" reorganized into the Odessa film studio of All Ukrainian photo film government (AGPFG)". Is it enough?--Odessa forever (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, I do not understand what you want to say.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:30, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Dear Ymblanter,

I'd like to say that the article on Odessa Film Studio contains information about the history of the studio:

«Founded 2005 (originally in 1919

«History

It was founded on May 23, 1919».

"In 1922 (not 2005) was "film sektion" reorganized into the Odessa film studio of All Ukrainian photo film government (AGPFG)".

Official website of the Odessa Film Studio (Please look at the infobox: Website http://odessafilm.com.ua "Hystory" http://en.odessafilm.com.ua/pdf/History.pdf) contains the same dates:

- «On May 23,1919 by order of the Education Board was nationalized the film and photographic apparatus of all private studios. This date was the day of birth of the first in the country state film studio».

- In 1922 was "film sektion" reorganized into the Odessa film studio of All Ukrainian photo film government (AGPFG)».

- «In 2005 was Odessa film studio reorganized to Close Joint Stock Company (the government owns the majority of shares)».

In addition, http://en.odessafilm.com.ua/pdf/welcom.pdf:

Dear friends! Welcome by our apdated website „Odessa film studio“. The famous film studio, and beloved by people in many parts of our country, as well as far beyond outsides during its long term history has created a large quantity of popular movies, which are by right considered for a long time as the authentic masterpieces of national cinema.

Today seek the collective of studio to renaissance of lapsed glory based on beautiful traditions and continuity of generations.

Chairman of the Odessa Film Studio Andrei Vadimovich Zverev

Its seems to me that Official website of the Odessa Film Studio is reliable source. Thank you in advanve for your answer.--Odessa forever (talk) 21:19, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not disputing this. My point is that currently the article on Odessa Film Studio contains controversial info, not presented in the best manner, and that article should be fixed first. Currently, referring to Odessa Film Studio in [[Zvenigora] would be misleading.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Thanks by the note, thanks by help me, see you next time.--Marrovi (talk) 18:10, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since you are pretty close to getting globally blocked for disruptive editing, I am not sure when the next time would really be.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This article is well (Eduardo Montagner Anguiano), I understand all, also you can to understand all, I'm sorry, I'm not native speaker.--Marrovi (talk) 19:01, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
To be precise, your language abilities are not at the level sufficient to contribute to the English Wikipedia. I appreciate your willingness to help, but unfortunately you create too much disruption which needs to be fixed by other people in their free time.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

K.E.

Hi Ymblanter,

An IP identifying as Kurt Evans as returned. Is the IP allowed to contribute to the ANI or should it be blocked under the same terms as a normal user avoiding a block?

Thanks. -- Dane2007 talk 19:34, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would say they should be blocked for legal threats and block evasion but this is useless since they use every IP only once.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is a range block appropriate? I can't tell if it would have a broader impact or not? Ultimately it seems he's going back to alluding to legal action and refusing to get the point. -- Dane2007 talk 19:57, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The advise I got from the legal was to send him back to the legal. Range block might be appropriate (I do not know how to impose rangeblocks), but a person imposing such a block must be well aware that they potentially face legal action in the US.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:00, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Thank you for your help! I appreciate the input, it's such a strange situation. -- Dane2007 talk 20:01, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Snowfall in Saudi Arabia

Hi, I suggested to the page creator of Snowfall in Saudi Arabia that he retitle it more in line with typical articles about weather events here & include the year. It looks like when you directed it some sort of weird loop with the redirects was created. He was trying to move it to Saudi Arabian snowstorm 2016 as the new title, but that now redirects to his article at the original title Snowfall in Saudi Arabia. The talk pages have the redirects exactly backwards, see the talk page Talk:Saudi Arabian snowstorm 2016. I am not sure how to untangle to redirect mess now, can we resolve this with the 2016 title ^ get all the pages in sync again? Thanks! JamesG5 (talk) 08:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am perfectly fine any title, just move all the content there, and bot will fix double redirects. I do not believe history merge is needed at this point (none of the articles was longer than a line), but if you believe it is needed just let me know, I can merge histories.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Gadget Flow

Six months ago, you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gadget Flow as move back to draft, and also indicated that you were going to salt The Gadget Flow. The article was moved, but it was not salted. Now the article has been re-created, even though the draft still exists. Technically this new article is eligible for G4, but it is actually in pretty good shape. As the admin who closed the previous discussion, can you take a look? Bradv 16:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would say it this is a different version it is not eligible for G4. It might be merged with a draft, if needed.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I do not remember why I did not salt it at the time.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll put a tag on the talk page about the previous AfD and leave it alone. Thanks. Bradv 18:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Corbett Report

In researching for citations I stumbled upon the fact that you once started an article for The Corbett Report last year. It was deleted and I don't know what it said. I have been working on Draft:James Corbett (journalist) and would be grateful for any assistance or contributions. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 12:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I can not be much of a help here. I never started an article about the report, I only moved it once and closed the deletion discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Corbett Report. I know nothing about the report itself.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks anyway. The article was deleted. Is there an archive that I can see of it? I'd like to know what not to do. Perhaps you might take a look at the new draft and offer suggestions. Don't worry if you can't. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 13:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I can temporarily restore the deleted article to your user space.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:44, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be grateful. Perhaps there's something useful there. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
User:JasonCarswell/The Corbett Report. It is not supposed to hang there forever, please let me know when it is ready to be deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:18, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I'm done. I even looked through the history. There was some good stuff in there. Not a lot but it was helpful. Please feel free to let me know what you think of Draft:James Corbett (journalist) if you feel like it. Merging them kind of made a mess I intend to clean up. Thanks again. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 22:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Do you want me to merge the histories?--Ymblanter (talk) 22:11, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons

Why have you blocked me for Wikimedia? You know Russian?--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 15:31, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you were blocked for copyright violations, the block expires, next day you upload copyright violations.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:44, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't done anything all photos that I uploaded my pictures.--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 15:46, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Still, they are copyright violations because the building is not free.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:49, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And what kind of building the Church, caplis?--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 15:52, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, this is not English, I do not understand it.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know the English language--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 15:55, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry for you.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What languages do you know?--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 15:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here you need to communicate in English anyway. Try posting an unblock request on Commons using {{unblock}}.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
А вы русский язык знаете?--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 16:05, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please unlock me!--Shmanʹkivtsi - Chortkiv (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am going to unblock you since you clearly demonstrated that you do not understand the copyright policy. You can try to convince another administrator by posting the unblock request on your talk page as I indicated above.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

undo of last edits

Доброго времени суток, утоните пожалуйста why you undo my last edits. (Желательно по русски т.к. тогда мне будет проще вас понять.) Заранее спасибо за ответ. С уважением, 0x0F (talk) 15:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because you were editing against consensus. Additionally, you mentioned smth about the "proper" or "official" Russian name - there is no such name since the Ukrainian government is not an authority in Russian since Russian has no status in the Ukraine.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This name uses in any English maps. 0x0F (talk) 15:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is irrelevant (and also incorrect). In any case, this is an argument you should be making at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I understand of about the talk page of the article. But that maps is 100% correct anyway... 0x0F (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
First, there are different maps. Second, what we use is WP:COMMONNAME which is not necessarily the same as what we have on the maps.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Give me links about consensus of other air crash, please. 0x0F (talk) 15:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Check the talk page, this was discussed many times.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I will see it later, thanx! 0x0F (talk) 17:13, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only 2 days left...

Hello Ymblanter,

Community wishlist poll

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

  • Improve the tools for reviewing new pages: Vote here.
  • Reduce the reviewer workload : Vote here

For NPP: Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:25, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will try to find time for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Collect your prize

Hi, please carefully read the instructions at the bottom of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon for collecting your prize. I will need you to send me an email, your wiki name, what I owe you and your preference for currency in dollars or pounds/country of residence.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:42, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sent an e-mail, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:04, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Confirm on the Destubathon talk page that you have it like the others♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:28, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter! Recently I noticed you made some edits to MH17 article as administrator. Some editors there are trolling me and deleting everything I am trying to add (WP:BOLD) saying it is Russian propaganda. Could you explain me why that well sourceed sattelite image Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17#Should this image be added to the article? and web link Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17#Almaz Antey presentation on YouTube [19] cannot be added while there is section about intercepted by Ukranian authorities phone call with very detailed description in the article?--Александр Мотин (talk) 21:11, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because the image you want to add there is a fake. As simple as that. Whether the description of a phone call should stay in the article should be discussed at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TRUTH?--Александр Мотин (talk) 21:15, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RS?--Ymblanter (talk) 21:16, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[20]--Александр Мотин (talk) 21:20, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Look, we both know that you want to add this piece of Russian propaganda to the article. Accidentally, the majority of the editors do not want to see this piece there. If you want to convince them, you need to have strong arguments why it should be there, and, as far as I am concerned, so far you did not present any.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:23, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is Almaz-Antey presentation [21] (the only producer of Buk missile system) also Russian propaganda?--Александр Мотин (talk) 21:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Then it is very strange that article is not called Putin's missile [22]. OK I got you anyway. --Александр Мотин (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
Thanks, and Merry Christmas to you as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

А посмотри, пожалуйста, при случае: этот файл действительно до сих пор нельзя перенести на Commons? Как я понимаю, экстерьер здания уже не под запретом, а вот с интерьером я не знаю. -- Ludvig14 (talk) 10:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Вроде как вполне architectural work, сейчас перенесу--Ymblanter (talk) 10:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Спасибо! -- Ludvig14 (talk) 11:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Недолго от там продержался. -- Ludvig14 (talk) 17:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Написал ему, если отреагирует как обычно, открою запрос на десисоп. Этот придурок уже меня давно достал.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Файл восстановили, десисопом займусь сегодня попозже.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:00, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Жаль, что эта славная лестница привела к таким последствиям. Я видела оставшийся шаблон на быстрое удаление, но решила, что ты лучше понимаешь, что делаешь, и не рискнула исправлять. -- Ludvig14 (talk) 09:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Да нет, меня вообще всё это время не было. Я сначала не заметил, а потом обнаружил, что файл уже удалён.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Прости, пожалуйста, что все так получилось, мы теперь с этой лестницей будем вечно виноватыми. У тебя флаг администратора commons хоть остался, нам же без него никак нельзя? -- Ludvig14 (talk) 18:28, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Остался, я пока не планирую снимать.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:33, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Merry

Season's Greetings, Ymblanter!
At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD|Talk 19:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
[reply]
Thanks, also happy holidays to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quviahugvik

Adapted from {{Season's Greetings}}
Thanks, and also happy holidays to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:58, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Ho Ho

Thank you, also happy holidays to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:25, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hi

About Nevada Film Society page deletion, I know it was discuss before, one of the points is about Judy Thorburn. There's a link I found, not necessary help to save the page back but wish you can take a look about it. Thank you and Merry Christmas....

Link: http://www.nevadafilmcriticssociety.org/index.php/society-members — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ila1519 (talkcontribs) 07:39, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and also merry Christmas to you. Ila1519, could you please remind me what exactly the article was? I can not find it (the precice article Nevada Film Society never existed), and I d not remember me deleting it, it might have been just a technical deletion.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:30, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Ymblanter. He may have been referring to the Las Vegas Film Critics Society, one of three previously deleted articles he recreated earlier this week over the course of one or two days, specifically to flout WP:FILM consensus that movie articles not list awards of non-notable organizations, defined as those without Wikipedia articles. It was a way WP:FILM editors, over months-long discussion, found to relieve the severe bloat of minor awards from "award mill" organizations that received virtually no press for the organizations themselves. All three articles almost immediately went under deletion review, and in the meantime, he and at least one other editor, possibly a meat-puppet, went around inserting these minor awards into as many articles as they could. This seems WP:DISRUPTIVE, and now his admin-shopping rather than addressing the issues at the deletion reviews seems equally so.
I understand it's the holidays and I apologize for adding to your plate now rather than later. I felt that that editor's post here needed perspective. Happy holidays to you and yours, --Tenebrae (talk) 07:54, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and also happy holidays to you. I think we should follow established procedures. If it was discussed at WP:FILM I think it is best to continue discussing there, especially since I have no outstanding knowledge about the subject.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:04, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas Ymblanter!!
Hi Ymblanter, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!

   –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 15:29, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, also merry Christmas to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:36, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome and thank you :) –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 15:44, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Христос рождается!

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Очень важно. Ярослав, готов ли ты сегодня подтвердить тезис:

предположим, что сообщество вдруг решит принять правило о том, что следует считать белое чёрным, проведёт обсуждение правил, и проголосует. Итог такого обсуждения правил, при всём том, может быть подведён единственным возможным образом, независимо от количества высказанных мнений и их убедительности: такое правило не может быть принято, так как его принятие противоречит фундаментальным принципам Википедии. Yaroslav Blanter 13:08, 8 мая 2011.

Совместимы ли с ним утверждения (да/нет):

теоретически возможно, что в правилах будет «2x2=3», если в этом состоит текущий консенсус сообщества. Если Вы хотите это изменить, Вы должны не приводить аргументы, что это чему-то противоречит (чьей-то философии), но объяснить, почему данный пункт правил, с Вашей точки зрения, будет мешать целям энциклопедии. Vlsergey 21:57, 4 января 2012

2.12 АК ещё раз обращает внимание участника на то, что в правилах Википедии могут быть ошибки и/или неточности, в том числе там могут содержаться и ошибочные утверждения в стиле «2+2=3». Biathlon 12:18, 27 декабря 2012

Спасибо. Yuriy Dzyаdyk (tc) as Iurius Ghost, 11:07, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Да, я, в общем, до сих пор согласен. Мнение господина Владимиров я комментировать не буду. Второе мнение взято из арбитражного решения, я не буду сейчас разбираться с этим решением. Мне кажется, уйдя и русской Википедии, я избавил себя от необходимости трактовать то, что там написано.
Большое спасибо, я очень рад это слышать, именно в этот день. — Yuriy Dzyаdyk (tc), 11:57, 25 December 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Corvette semi-protection

Ymblanter, you setup a semi-protection for the Corvette leaf spring article but it appears the "Amazon Technologies" IP editor is still active at the article.[[23]][[24]]. For several reasons I believe we are dealing a sock of user:HughD. The "self published source" argument has been rejected by two editors and our IP hasn't made it to the talk page. Do you have suggestions for dealing with this issue? Thanks! Springee (talk) 06:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I actually configured pending changes rather than semi-protected. Pending changes reviewers can accept or reject such changes.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:10, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, the problem is that the IP editor is tagging material that the group finds acceptable but because the changes aren't obvious vandalism uninvolved reviews rubber stamp them. Given the IP editor seeks to know how Wikipedia works if I'm wrong they can log in to make the same changes as well as adding talk page comments justifying why they are rejecting the reverts of other editors. Thanks again. Springee (talk) 15:02, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If they log in they can only edit the page after they become autoconfirmed, which takes some time. Given the vandalism is not obvious indeed I am hesitant to semi-protect.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:11, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Given the sock nature of the edits I don't think we will see a log in. I understand the hesitation. Regrettably I think this is careful harassment rather than obvious vandalism. I've voiced concerns with the admin who blocked HughD. If we continue to see IP's tag without regard to the objections of logged in editors I would ask that you please raise the level of protection to auto-confirmed only. This IP clearly knows the ropes. If they have an account that isn't HughD they can always log in and edit that way vs using an Amazon proxy service. Thanks again and sorry to pester you. Springee (talk) 19:33, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You do not need to ask me, just post a WP:RFPP request.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:35, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:32.211.63.156

Recently you blocked User:32.211.63.156 for one week due to disruptive editing. It looks like they are back to the same exact edits of removing a logo, adding repeated links and adding overlinks. Thank you for your time, Aspects (talk) 23:14, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I do not have time now; will try to look into this tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:26, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you now, the IP editor is making the edits again and within the past hour User:Wcquidditch reverted them, left a warning, [25] and was reverted by the IP editor on three articles. Aspects (talk) 20:32, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, blocked for a month--Ymblanter (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish royalty edit warring

Hi, Ymblanter. I need your help, advice, guidance, whatever. On 29 November, I made edits such as this one. They were all explained, with links to relevant guidelines. On 31 December (today), Marbe166 reverted them with no explanation. I reverted the unexplained reversions and started a discussion on Talk:Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland. BabbaQ (who was very active on 29, 30 and 31 December but did not oppose the change) comes along, like last month, and reverts with no explanation. Neither user pays any attention to the talk page, but BabbaQ did not miss the opportunity to report me for vandalism after this one revert.

This is a matter of basic WP guidelines, the Manual of Style for biographies, not to mention encyclopedias in general and common sense. To define "Prince Carl Philip of Sweden" as "a Swedish prince" is insane, akin to defining Barack Obama as an Obama. It is bad enough for such edits to be dismissed on a whim; for a hostile editor to take advantage of that to malign me is rather sickening. Surtsicna (talk) 17:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolutely fine. Wait for a couple of days whether there are responses on the talk page. Possibly refer to this discussion from other talk pages. Nobody is going to die if the article stays on the wrong version for a couple of days.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:58, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And what do I do after a couple of days? Surtsicna (talk) 18:22, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on the replies. If there are no replies, write at the talk page that you are going to revert, and revert.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Surtsicnais currently edit warring on several articles. Just a heads up. It is not a matter of if he is wrong or not concerning the edits. It is Surtsicnas inability to have a discussion about the matters that concerns me. It was not until these latest days that he finally started discussions on the matters. To do edit warring every time something does not go your own way is hardly the best way to improve Wikipedia. But good that Surtsicna contacted you to get some advice on how to handle the situations that keeps on happening. RegardsBabbaQ (talk) 18:29, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, last time I blocked them for edit-warring, and I am really happy they have learned from the block and started the proper process.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:32, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see the same progress you. Good! regards--BabbaQ (talk) 18:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is my activity on Wikipedia that bothers you, BabbaQ, and I am searching through my talk page archives trying to figure out why, i.e. when it is that I stepped on your toe. Otherwise you would not be so keen to revert my edits without actually disagreeing with them, as you just said, nor would you report me with no warning (though mandatory); you only disagree with me personally and that is deeply disturbing. Surtsicna (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question about NPP

Hi Ymblanter. Just a quick question regarding NPP that I can't find an answer to on the help pages. A user created University of Western Ontario, Canada, which I turned into a redirect to the existing University of Western Ontario article. I then marked the former as patrolled. Was that the correct thing to do - should redirects be marked? Cordless Larry (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can not mark a redirect as patrolled. Only if a redirect would be turned into smth else, it will show up at NPP. There is nothing wrong in marking this version as patrolled, since if smth happens it will show up at NPP again. On the other hand, it is generally not the best practice of marking non-eligible pages as patrolled. Thanks for helping.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:44, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. I won't do that again. You say that one cannot mark a redirect as patrolled, but it is technically possible, isn't it, because that's what I did? Cordless Larry (talk) 18:55, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I did not express myself correctly. You can not mark a redirect as patrolled via the NPP interface. If this is what you did than I fundamentally misunderstand the NPP mechanism. As I said, there is nothing wrong in marking NPP as patrolled but indeed it is better not to do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No worries - that makes sense now. I marked it from the page, University of Western Ontario, Canada. Thanks for your help. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Ymblanter!

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you, and also happy New Year to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:06, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Ymblanter!

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you, and also happy New Year to you--Ymblanter (talk) 13:57, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Turkic empires

Hi dear! I can not change "Turkic Empire". In the article are many wrongs. For example Safavid Empire add to Turko-Iranian part but before it was in Turk countries and dynasties part and this is right — Preceding unsigned comment added by AzizaTuran (talkcontribs) 20:47, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss your proposed changes with other editors at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Premi O Premi

Thank you. Am I correct in reading it that you only salted the title against re-creation by non-autoconfirmed users, so that a real article can be written when the film is really released? Robert McClenon (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this was the idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Parinay Fuke

What exactly violence in Parinay Fuke page!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashishmer (talkcontribs)

@Ashishmer:, you copied there text from an external website, and we can not accept that. Please have a look at Wikipedia:Copyright violations.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you semi-protect the page to persistent genre warring. Destiny Leo (talk) 08:01, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like multiple users including autoconfirmed ones are involved. I can fully protect the article for three days and send you guys to the talk page to discuss, but I would really prefer that a talk page discussion occurred without page protection.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:04, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this comments but I have founded a older articles:

fact number 1: a old article about Cochlear implant has edited in 2012 at wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cochlear_implant&diff=prev&oldid=526254369  Edwtie (talk) e 20:18, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user stole this article from this article into infogalatic I have found this:

https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Cochlear_implant&action=history . This user have created this article in janaury 2016. Edwtie (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edwtie (talk) 20:45, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying text without attribution, even from one Wikipedia article to another one, is copyright violation. For the rest, please keep the discussion at WP:3RRN where it belongs.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what do you means? This article of cochlear implant was already on Wikipedia. I have found some articles from another user have deleted because it miss sources. but The article is OK but it need sources. it has founded from literatery, books and websites. I have rewritten a part of article. but it need more time. Edwtie (talk) 22:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, if you add a text which you did not write (even if the text appeared earlier on Wikipedia), it should be attributed. We usually do not do it when a text was removed and then immediately returned, since then it is obvious from the edit history, but this is not the case we are discussing.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:33, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Добрый день! Не совсем понимаю. Часть текста сократили, что посчитали не имеет для источников. Удалили, - я не восстанавливаю. Постараюсь больши ничего не писать, если считают исформацию не достоверной. Спасибо, что сказали ещё раз, но похоже, что кто-то ждёт, что я буду бороться или опровергать. Я уже понимаю, что доказывать или бороться здесь бессмысленно. Вот если бы где-то напечатали и я взял оттутда, - это доказательство. А так как присутствуют свои воспоминания, то в чём крутился и находишь подтверждения сопутствующие событиям - это не доказательство. Понятно, что лучше не писать об этом. Спасибо за разъяснение. Грищук ЮН (talk) 11:57, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Нет, никто не ждёт, что Вы будете бороться или опровергать. Ждут только, чтобы текст был написан по источниками - чтобы написанное можно было проверить. Источники могут быть на каком угодно языке, но должны удовлетворять нашим требованиям авторитетности.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:02, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Но Вы же не опровергаете тот факт, что в фильме Pirates of 20th Century было использовано имя сухогруза "Нежин", оба судна (реальный Нежин и пароход использующий имя Нежин в фильме были построены на одной и той же верфи в ГДР). Я доказал, что парход "Нежин" преводился на английский как NEGIN до 1974 (фотографию документа, Советско-Американского Акта, я выставил, но её удалили, а текст доказательства оставили), в 1974 году ввели согласованные правила перевода имён судов и членов экипажа (см. статью SS Nezhin). В фильме "Полосатый рейс" (Striped Trip) пароход носит имя O. НЕГИН, а тогда по английски Negin читалось двояко: Нежин или Негин (О-негин). Кстати, реальный пароход Нежин никогда не был в описанном в фильме рейсе, но я знаю с чем это связано. Этот пароход не был на Дальнем Востоке даже, согласно фильма он работал там. Грищук ЮН (talk) 22:24, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Кстати, по той же причине другой пароход ДЖУРМА, здесь тоже Ж, числится в Википедии как SS Dzhurma, а должен числиться как SS Djurma и на фото на борту написано DJURMA. Этот пароход сдан на слом в 1974 году и не носил никогда имя DZHURMA, так как новые английские написания судов и имён начались с 1974 года. А пароход Нежин после 1974 года стали называть NEZHIN, а до 1974 года он был NEGIN. А фильм Пираты XX века снимали в 1979 году, когда новые написания судов установились. Грищук ЮН (talk) 22:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Я вообще ничего не опровергаю, у меня нет никаких специальных знаний по этому вопросу. Я бы предложил следующую схему действий, на примере SS Djurma. Вы находите внешние источники, удовлетворяющие правилу WP:RS, которые говорят, что корабль назывался Djurma. Если есть прямой источник, что он всегда так нзаывался и не был переименован, вставляете в статью со ссылкой на источник. Если нет, точно так же вставляете в статью, плюс рядом даёте сноску, что до 1974 года названия были по другой схеме, не той, которая используется сейчас. Используете максимально эффективно поле описания правки. Если Вас откатывают, объясняете на странице обсуждения примерно так, как Вы мне сейчас написали. --Ymblanter (talk) 06:47, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brandmeenn

This user is constantly vandalizing articles and not providing sources and I keep on removing it and he keeps adding it back if you could take a look at this user that would be great MatthewTardiff 23:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC) MatthewTardiff 23:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewTardiff (talkcontribs)

I know nothing about the subject, and the only way for me to determine whose editing is disruptive is to look at the sources. I see that for instance here you guys revert each other without providing sources. We can not take any action (except for blocking both of you for edit-warring) before sources have been added to the disputed articles.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. On behalf of other regular registered editors who maintain the above page and were deeply troubled by the annual onslaught of IP misinformation being added, thank you for issuing the protection. Best wishes. Ref (chew)(do) 08:45, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, feel free to re-request protection if disruption continues after protection expires.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think these pages are usually protected for the entire year, so I'd suggest you extend the protection until January 2018 to avoid having to redo it every month. --Marbe166 (talk) 09:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The longer protection is usually the case - I'm afraid our deaths pages will always attract vandalizm, given how easy it is for the malcontents to perpetuate trolling of notable persons by claiming they are dead through the article above. Ref (chew)(do) 09:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The previous years were split by months (for example, there is no page at Deaths in 2017, and Deaths in January 2017 has never been protected). I am not sure whether there was any decision to move to the entire year pages, but if it gets split back we would need to re-protect anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:16, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if I fully understood what you mean, but the Deaths in YYYY is the main deaths page that is linked from the Wikipedia title page. These pages are generally always protected and contain the deaths of the current month and links to the pages of deaths in the previous months. So in the beginning of February the deaths in January will be moved to the page Deaths in January 2017 (the redirect will be removed) and it will be linked from the Deaths in 2017 page. --Marbe166 (talk) 09:55, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see, it makes sense. I will reprotect it now for a year.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My personal thanks for that too. Ref (chew)(do) 21:05, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Polo Morín

Hello there, I just notice you protected the article Polo Morín and I found this ticket at OTRS regarding Polo Morín's sexuality. The customer of the ticket claiming that Morín only said "I am proud to be who I am" and he never confirmed that he was openly homosexual as stated in the article. The sources are in the Spanish language which I can not read so can you please check if the sources confirm what is written in the article. Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 09:09, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I my es-1 helps me, these [26][27] two references (#2 and #3 in the article) say that the guy is romantically involved with another man and thus revealed his sexual orientation, but it is safer to ask a native Spanish speaker.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:14, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help Ymblanter, Pinging Alan I think he can help. Cheers – GSS (talk|c|em) 10:30, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grave personal attack, edit warring, and IP socking

Hello Ymblanter,

Apart from user "Lashalakerbaia" violating WP:WAR, WP:BRD, WP:SOCK and...a couple more WP's with virtually every edit he has made so far, the user has now also made quite a nasty personal attack towards me. "F.u.ck wikipedia on this site are st.upi.d moderatores. Fu.ck your mo.ther!". I just discovered it yesterday. If it wasn't for the socking (cross-Wiki, with the same IP) and edit-warring, I would've probably just ignored the personal attack, but yeah, that's clearly not the case. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:49, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've written down all IP socking evidence right here. I can't bring it to SPI, because they don't link accounts with IP's. The evidence nevertheless is so ridiculously huge, that any admin should be able to draw a conclusion from it in the blink of an eye, I believe. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 15:49, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 15:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Polo Morin Biography

- His character's name on el bien amado is Jordi the bff of Alexis (see it yourself here: https://www.facebook.com/ElBienamadoTv/photos/a.1161339623931075.1073741828.1140718732659831/1290336831031353/?type=3&comment_id=1290477811017255&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R0%22%7D)

-Before doing the casting for that telenovela he filmed "Escuela Para Seductores"which is set to premiere in NOVEMBER 2017 (INFO HERE: http://www.radioformula.com.mx/notas.asp?Idn=624624&idFC=2016)

and last thing.. Sobre Tus Huellas is set to premiere this year they are in post production (editing it) (info: https://www.facebook.com/SobreTusHuellas/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KarMarBar12 (talkcontribs) 23:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

oh and he was born on NOVEMBRE 3 1990 NOT 1993

you better check his bio because it says "Later in 2014, I debuted in the cinema in the film Fragmented directed by Douglas Elford which took place in Mexico in November of 2013" so it should be HE DEBUTED not I DEBUTED.

We have WP:V and WP:BLP, and all content you add to the article, especially if this content is contested, must be sourced. So far you failed to source it. Note that I am not an editor of this article.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:16, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From a constitutional point of view, however, Nikita S. Khrushchev broke the Constitution of the Russian Federation (RSFSR), which committed the territorial integrity of the fatherland. The process has never been properly investigated. Documents from the archives opened in 1992 also showed that the decision was also illegal in other respects. Neither had the Supreme Soviet in Moscow voted on the subject, nor the one in Kiev, but, what was inadmissible, only their presidencies. Almost half of the members of these committees were missing, which must be understood as a demonstrative vote against this arbitrary decision and meant, that they were not formally legitimized. Protest also came from the First Secretary of the Communist Party in Crimea, Pavel Titov, who had been cited to Moscow to receive the notification of the change of ownership. He was then removed and replaced by Ukrainian Dmytro Polianski.    The external occasion for this generous "gift" of Moscow to Kiev was the 300th anniversary of the Treaty of Peresyaslav. [1]

Please explain what is wrong. Have you better sources?Truth,2 (talk) 10:49, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is just not a reliable soursce. This is what is wrong. And I an sure you know this.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
N. Asarow worked (before as politician) as a teacher at a university. So I suppose he knows the usual academic style. Especially this facts are very clear. Perhaps somebody tries to find another source. That would be very fine.
The mentioned facts show far more detailed knowledge than for example the quoted digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/119638. It has no information what happened before this Meeting of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet. And reflects the official communistic - and propagandistic - view of the time.
In my opinion it would be necessary to get a link of the Meeting of the Supreme Soviet in Moscow and in Kiew. But there is nothing.Truth,2 (talk) 12:19, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you find a source which is not reliable written by a person who is clearly biased and lacks necessary knowledge. You were told this by at least three users. It is at this point not our responsibitilty to find sources which refute Azarov, but your responsibility to demonstrate that this point is widely recognized by international community.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:23, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Asarow, Die Wahrheit über den Staatsstreich, Berlin 2015 ISBN: 3360013018 language = German

Enough

with reverts on Putin... (3rr and all that) Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Those are clear BLP violations, but the next one I will report rather than revert. The account does not seem to be WP:NOTTHERE, so we have to deal with it.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:27, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Btw this is not 3RR, they add different blogs as sources, not the same one.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:29, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Curation of redirects up for discussion

Hi! You left a message about Elongata, a redirect I marked as reviewed. I thought that once a redirect is listed at WP:RFD there is no need for page curation, since the RFD process "takes over". What is the consensus on Wikipedia about this? Sjö (talk) 08:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is likely a technical error, my apologies. Answered in more details at your talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Joanna Zastróżna requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Alexf(talk) 11:53, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexf:, I am seriously disappointed that you have no better things to do at Wikipedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:55, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Because I see an article about BLP with only one line and one reference that does not seem to assert notability? You know the rules as well as anybody. You could be working in it in a subpage instead of mainspace, but you know that too, so why the comment? -- 12:00, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Because what you have done does not help building encyclopedia in any way. You could have looked at who created the article, check that I have 90K contributions (well, less than you, but still a reasonably good number), created 500+ articles and not a single one was ever deleted. I created that in a coffee break, now you force me to take time off my job to add material, and even now I run a risk that an idiot would delete it, and I would have to go to DRV etc. Ant it takes 10 seconds to run search and check she is notable. There are enough clear-cut cases to nominate for speedy deletion.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:05, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Please note that you have been reported on administrator's noticeboard.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Жовтневе багаття (talkcontribs)

New Page Patrol Backlog

Please note that WT:NPP is now exclusively for discussions about the tutorial. All general discussion about New Page Patroling/Reviewing takes place at WT:NPR to where I am shortly moving the thread along with my reply. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:46, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this is what I was looking for but did not find.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:09, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
On another note regarding NPR, we've been adding newly promoted NPRs to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter list. If you use the script User:MusikAnimal/userRightsManager when granting the right it will do this automatically. You may also find the script to be a time saver in general when working at WP:PERM :) Best MusikAnimal talk 22:10, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will have a look tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirateSchwede66K6kaEaldgythFerretCyberpower678Mz7PrimefacDodger67
BriangottsJeremyABU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Persistent SPA warring and disruption

Hi Ymblanter, as you're a patrolling admin on these type of pages, I'd like to give a heads up about this pretty nuisansical level of disruption. This "new" user has been blocked three times so far (two per AE sanctions, directly by Doug), ever since his first edit about 1,5 months ago. The only thing he's especially seeminly interested in, is to change words in front of sourced content on the Armenia page, and to add irrelevant political sources to push a POV (the POV constitutes a mere one thing; namely that Armenia would "supposedly" be European in geography, which is utter baloney, and which none of the sources state). Numerous talk page comments were placed, and he has ignored all of them ever since, and yet, evern after having been blocked three times so far for the same thing, he's still continuing to war about it. Yesterday he reinstated the same bogus in front of already sourced material once again, after having been reverted.[28]

In my opinion, so far, he's pretty much clearly not not here to build this encyclopaedia, and rather only to push in an self-interpreted agenda at all costs. If anyone were to revert him again per WP:WAR, WP:TENDENTIOUS, WP:VER, WP:POV, WP:BRD (whatever WP, as a matter of fact), he'd only log in anyways to reinstate the same thing; that's the sole WP:SPA purpose here, unfortunately. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:41, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, looks like a clear-cut case.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:44, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 1 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the contribution!

I saw you did some revisions and patrolled Modesto (surname), thanks for the contribution! Lmcasablanca (talk) 02:16, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:31, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protection on 'NATO bombing of Yugoslavia'

Hello, you recently 'semi'd' the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia article in response to two IP's repeatedly making the same edit without concensus. Perhaps I misunderstood the 'semi' status, but one of the IP's has continued to repeat the edit, and also removed your protection note twice in the last hour. Please name me if replying here, thanks. Pincrete (talk) 13:40, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

the protection just expired, I now reprotected it--Ymblanter (talk) 17:47, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another not here editor

Thanks for dealing with Соєва_корівка. Special:Contributions/EricLewan seems very similar.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:57, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am on a pretty bad internet but will have a look later. It would be great if someone warns them if it has not yet been done.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ung County

Hi,

regarding the subject an editor wanted to add the Rusyn name in the infobox (Комітат ... (Rusyn)), but unfortunately he don't know it properly....since I did not find any Wikiproject for Rusyns, it seems you are Russian and Russians are the most close to Rusyns, maybe you could know or access the proper Rusyn name...If you manage, please correct the current incomplete addition.

Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 23:30, 8 February 2017 (UTC))[reply]

No, unfortunately I do not know the language and can not help. Sorry.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 75.175.96.6 (talk) 09:20, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

content reverted, article: Muhammad

With regards to the proceeding content:

Abū al-Qāsim Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib ibn Hāshim; source: Muhammad Encyclopedia Britannica Retrieved 2017-02-15

It is quite obvious by even a cursory glance at the beginning of the source of the applicableness of the Britannica content. Having read at the head of your talk page, you will be busy until the 27th, I will re-add the material in 1 or 2 days (or whenever I'm available) should you not respond. In any case, I can't see there is any objection possible to inclusion. If you would like to explain the reason you thought revertion was necessary, please tell, as I'm intrigued to know your reasoning and thinking on the decision you made. 1a16 (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss at Talk:Muhammad first, if you can not see whether there are any objections.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, that would be unnecessary and superfluous, to the much more easy solution of you opening the Britannica link to find the reason for inclusion patently. There isn't anything to discuss. 1a16 (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Muhammad > Muhammad, in full, Abū al-Qāsim Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib ibn Hāshim (born 570, Mecca, Arabia... 1a16 (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If there are objections to your edits there is always material to discuss. If you are not willing to discuss you are on a straight road to a block. You may ask yourself first why in this article, which is very high profile and exists almost since the very beginning, nobody before you added this material to the lede.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:09, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

added under the title > Childhood and early life. 1a16 (talk) 21:10, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:32.211.63.156 again

I apologize for bringing this up again, but this editor is back to their disruptive editing after their month-long block. After I left a message about their repeated links, they actually changed their behavior and are no longer adding them. Unfortunately, they are still removing the logo from WTIC-FM without edit summaries or talk page discussion. I started another discussion at User talk:32.211.63.156#Image deletion that if they continued to remove the image, they could be blocked, but they just did it again for the third time back from their block (technically fifth, but they self-reverted two times.) Thank you for your help, Aspects (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 21:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Engaged?

I refer to your revert of my edit 766916748 on Vsevolozhsk and suggestion that I have engaged in edit-warring. Two notable characteristics to your activity are (1) you commenced the conflict by reverting and reverted a second time without providing any reason at all except that you thought it "edit-warring"; (2) you have been discourteous in failing to respond at all to the substantive points raised. Your initial revert simply came with the one-word explanation "standard" without addressing the edit summary provided. The epithet "edit-warring" should be reserved for disputes in which a constructive argument has either never begun or has been supplanted by purely argumentative edits for editing's sake, i.e. akin to what you have done here. Your failure to engage on substance is unhelpful and unconstructive. I have acquiesced in your request to engage here, so over to you, on substance this time. sirlanz 23:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look, you might have noticed that all (several thousands) articles on Russian (and also Ukrainian etc) localities use this format. The format is a result of certain consensus of editors who contributed to these article over the past 15 years, including myself. You tried to change one article out of ten thousands, citing some reasons. This is fine, but this is not the point. You need not just to give your opinion, but to demonstrate that the consensus changed. This can only be done by discussing things, and per WP:BRD you should not have reverted me even if you think you have excellent reasons to think that the current setup of the lede contradicts some policies.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:39, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request semi protection for America's Next Top Model (cycle 23)

I propose to semi protect this article in order to prevent further vandalism. WP:RFP Vivid17 (talk) 09:52, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, 3 months--Ymblanter (talk) 14:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Souled Out (1997)

Well, it seems you have stuck to an opinion that the Souled Out (1997) article is the copyright infringement of a website article. I needed some time to expand and improve the article for the betterment of Wikipedia readers but all of my time and hardwork which I spent on that article has been wasted. I needed a little time to improve that article but you deleted it immediately. Kindly give me some time to create and improve that article and remove all the data which is "copyright infringement" according to you.--Mark Linton (talk) 08:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark Linton:, where does the text come from?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter:, I used the website 411mania as a reference for that article and mentioned the website in that article. There will be several more websites used for reference with the passage of time as the article will be expanded and increased.--Mark Linton (talk) 08:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Mark Linton:, but the materials at 411mania are protected by copyright and can not be copied verbatim to Wikipedia. This is copyright violation.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:50, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter:, You can check 411mania and my created Wikipedia article. I have not copied the article word by word. I have just used the reference for material. I have written the article in my own words and provided the website for reference. Material is not copied from 411mania. It is not copied word by word. You may check it. This is not the first time I have created a separate pay-per-view article on Wikipedia. I have been doing so with wrestling pay-per-view events since 2007 and 2008 and there was no issue at that time. My procedure of article creation and editing was the same at that time as is now. I do not copy copyrighted material from other websites. I just use them for references.--Mark Linton (talk) 08:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Mark Linton: I checked the first version (which I deleted), and it was verbatim copied from elsewhere. I will chack later the current one, but we can not afford even copyvio which was rewritten, these versions (if they exist) must be revision-deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:58, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: This is not copied from anywhere. This is my own article. Just check my talk page where you will see appreciation from admins on creating separate articles like The Great American Bash (2007) and No Way Out (2006). I have been doing this thing for a decade. I will never violate the policies of a website, which I have been using for the past decade.--Mark Linton (talk) 09
01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
@Mark Linton: This is not possible. I believe tha you have not copied it from elsewhere, but then you copied it from another Wikipedia article. If this is the case, it should have been attributed in the edit summary of the first edit, like I advised on your talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:51, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Linton, here's the problem: When you copy from one Wikipedia article to another, you need to provide attribution to the original contributors. Attribution is required under the terms of our Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license. Here's how to provide attribution: when moving or copying from one Wikipedia article to another, you need to say in your edit summary at the destination article where you got the content. Here's a sample edit summary: "Attribution: content in this article was moved here from Souled Out on February 27, 2017. Please see the history of that page for attribution." The only time you don't need to do this when moving or copying content is if you are the sole author of the material. Even then, I would recommend doing it, because these edits are appearing on a bot report as being copyright violation. Technically such moves are a copyright violation and a violation of the terms of our CC-by-SA license if attribution is not provided. There's more information on this topic at Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. Please read this information carefully before moving or copying any further material from one location to another on this wiki. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable "user"

User named "ReneAjax". Definetely not a new user, introducing numerous unsourced edits,[29] self-formulated deducations,[30][31] removing sourced content,[32] as well as making blunt personal attacks ("Fucking idiotic shits added by Turkocentric mutts") even though the "account" has only been registered since 22 February 2017. Profile information is quite troll-ish as well.[33]. Thought I'd let you know. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:41, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but as far as I am concerned they are not yet at the level of a block per WP:NOTTHERE.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. An eye should definetely be kept on it though, as he's clearly deliberately playing with fire. - LouisAragon (talk) 00:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Don't disregard NPOV pls. Read the preface of v.1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poggio Bracciolini (talkcontribs) 10:43, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. This is why I reverted your edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:44, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
He's calling himself a newbie now despite editing as a SPA for what, a decade? I've asked if he has a COI. He certainly has a pov. Doug Weller talk 11:03, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
May be we should take them to ANI after all.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:10, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should. Both his accounts (see [34] go back to 2005, and there's long discussions on both the main articles where he participates, worth looking at them but I don't have time today. Doug Weller talk 13:05, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you semi-protect the page to persistent edit warring. 183.171.182.145 (talk) 13:37, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, it seems like there is only one editor causing disruption.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I noticed that you put a semi protection on Matt Khalil, he has officially been signed by carolina, here is an official statment from the carolina panthers http://www.panthers.com/news/article-2/Panthers-sign-Matt-Kalil/7477547d-b90f-4420-8368-3614645fc72f Thanks (--NHL49--) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NHL49 (talkcontribs) 01:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@NHL49:, please report this at the talk page of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Университеты и колледжы России

Начал обсуждение уместности двух категорий не-естественого формата про университеты и колледжы Молдавии и Румынии. Так как в России приблизительно такая же ситуациая, может стоит обсудить сразу и категорию Universities and colleges in Russia, что скажете? --XXN, 16:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Можно добавить Россию, не вижу проблем.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What I can do?

Excuse, for asking, but I don't know, what to do. I made udate https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2016%E2%80%9317_Premier_League&diff=769798053&oldid=769797403. It wasn't "live udate" and source is here: https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/goals, but it was reverted https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2016%E2%80%9317_Premier_League&diff=769819300&oldid=769798053 with accusation of vandalism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Noel_baran#March_2017. I don't know, what's it means--Noel baran (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

уупс, теперь обратил внимание, что можно на русском--Noel baran (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest to open a topic about the edit you want to make at the talk page of the article, pinging the user who reverted your edit.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but another user made the same editions as me, and User:Qed237 not reverted.--Noel baran (talk) 04:03, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know, you possibly need to ask User:Qed237. It could very well even be accidental.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:49, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have told Noel baran earlier at his talkpage in User talk:Noel baran#Timestamp and infobox section that the bottom of the infobox must be updated and I have even done it twice. After his most recent edit it said All statistics correct as of 27 February 2017 and neither Harry Kane or Romelu Lukaku had 19 goals at that time. The fact that he had been told about it and still makes these bad partial infobox updates is not good and after giving him several chances I felt I had to give him a warning. Normally I would have updated the rest of the infobox myself, including the timestamp, but unfortunately I did not have the time at that point. Also note that you can not just update top goalscorer and the timestamp, because then the rest of the infobox will be outdated and incorrct, so the entire infobox should be updated at once (after sources has been updated). Qed237 (talk) 11:00, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Protection on Peter Navarro

You recently applied full protection for a week to Peter Navarro. If it affects your decision: editor Snooganssnoogans (who I've had many disagreements with on this article) was making good improvements when protection was applied; I don't know whether (s)he planned to continue. The edits resolved the contentious sentence which triggered the edit-war along with other issues identified in discussion. James J. Lambden (talk) 21:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There were several users edit-warring; if they reach consensus at the talk page that the protection is no longer needed I can of course remove it.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:44, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Ukrainian Nationalist SPA

Please could you take a look at the activities of Special:Contributions/Hotcacao, an SPA created on 9 March 2017, which exists mainly for the purpose of changing: Kiev to Kyiv, Odessa to Odesa, and Dnipropetrovsk to Dnipro. I would not be in the least surprised if the account were operated by the same person who edited Special:Contributions/Жовтневе_багаття.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:33, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Left them the last warning.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Indefblocked, this is clearly them.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He/she is also using this IP Special:Contributions/202.155.216.30.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:57, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked the IP, but the whole contribution still needs to be reverted.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help

Ярослав, прошу Вас помочь в защите статьи о битве на Куликовом поле, где украинский вандал JalaJala (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) пытается переписать историю со ссылкой на "Страну Моксель" украинского мостостроителя Белинского, "доказывающего", что никакой России не существовало, а была "страна Моксель", часть Орды, называет Россию "Московией" и т.п. Вандал приводит "факты", которые не разделяются никем в исторической науке, и вставляет ссылки на более чем сомнительные источники. 46.148.19.26 (talk) 14:53, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Answering a page protection request). Пока нет необходимости, единственная правка участника была откачена с комментарием "вандализм".--Ymblanter (talk) 15:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attention needed

Greetings, Mr. Blanter. I guess your help is needed to protect the following problematic article: Battle of Konotop, which seems to be of great interest to vandals. Despite a significant number of scholarly sources cited on that page, some biased Ukrainian users try to change estimates in the infobox related to the Russian army, which are supported by references to works by modern historians, with inflated and outdated numbers from Ukrainian websites that have been proven wrong in the body of the article and criticized in the most recent publications on this subject. Although modern scholars have made a great job of estimating the size of the Russian army and the number of casualties it suffered, vandals still try to put their own estimates right before the references to the works of these authors and fool the reader. I'll be glad if you add that page to your watchlist and help to protect it from aggressive POV-pushing. SlavonicStudies (talk) 22:52, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 22:55, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, sir, for your attention to the issue (I believe, however, that the article will have to be protected for a longer period, given the importance of the subject to users with a nationalist bias). SlavonicStudies (talk) 23:06, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chimamanda Adichie

Hi, user ymblanter, take the time to review cited references. Firstly, I am personally close to Chimamanda. Secondly, as you are native to russian and kazakhstan (sp.) I am native to Nigeria-America. Thirdly, follow the already existing biography in her content - she went to school in the US (requiring j1 visa), continued on to her Masters, and a fellowship (requires LEGAL residency, in turn a Green Card). I live in MD. Her husband is a Nigerian-American doctor who runs an active practice in MD. She has a child and by (https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-naturalization/naturalization-spouses-us-citizens) she becomes a US citizen. How is this confusing for you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmo910 (talkcontribs) 15:09, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cmo910:, this is not how Wikipedia works. If she is a naturalized US citizen, fine, this information must be added to the article (and, for example, it would require modifications in the lede). However, this information can only be added if it is supported by reliable sources - something you so far failed to present. --Ymblanter (talk) 15:22, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter http://billmoyers.com/2014/12/16/nigerian-author-chimananda-ngozi-adichie-identity/ (Second Paragraph) (also see the video included by the Aspen Institute )

"As it turns out, Adichie’s story is as interesting as her character’s. Like Ifemelu, Adichie emigrated from Nigeria to the United States, where she discovered the color of her skin “came with baggage and with all of these assumptions.” At a recent event hosted by the Aspen Institute in Washington, DC, Adichie talked about her own experience of coming to identify as “black” in America