User talk:Avraham/Archive 58

1

10

20

30

40

50

←

55

56

57

58

59

60

SvG clean-up (2)

• The decision at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive941#User:Fram, triggered by a complaint against user:Fram on 6 December 2016, was closed after a massive debate on 22 December 2016. It was decided that:

1. A list of SvG's 16,000-odd BLPs should be created and advertised,
2. One week notice would then be given for review and recovery of good articles,
3. Those that were left would be deleted

• A discussion on details of the approach began at User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up on 30 December 2016‎.
• A few editors, user:Aymatth2, User:Lugnuts, user:Tazerdadog and user:XyZAn, informally agreed on 6 January 2017 to a milder approach where the articles would all be moved to draft space with no redirects, then 90 days would be given for review and clean up before deletion of the remainder.
• The approach is documented at User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up/Guidelines, including a (recently added) fall-back approach if the revised approach were abused.
• User:MusikAnimal volunteered to configure and run a bot for the move to draft space. This was filed for approval at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MusikBot 10 on 9 January 2017, a trial was approved and run on 13 January 2017. Results looked o.k.
• As of 18 January 2017 no approval has been given to run the bot on all 16,000 articles. The process seems to have stalled.

There is some urgency to remove BLP violations from mainspace. The "legalities" of the revised approach are unclear. Should we just wipe out all the SvG stubs now, as agreed, using D-batch with User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up/BLP mainspace as input? Aymatth2 (talk) 00:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I really don't want 16k articles in the draft space (submitted or no). Ding 'em all, and sort out REFUNDs later. Primefac (talk) 00:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

It is indeed a rather frustrating process. I have AfD'ed a few but as a result I got SvG on my back, claiming here and there that I was not following WP:BEFORE (to my opinion one of the most silly and misused guidelines). Clearly, SvG wanted me to clean up his own mess. And a load of other suddenly appeared to vote for keep. Very frustrating and due to that I am now temporary on the back seat. The Banner talk 10:30, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Oppose nuking them all. The Bot Approval has been given another trial for 250 edits. Once that's done, and everything is OK, then the rest can be moved to draft space. 90 days from that, anything not rescued will be deleted in any case. Seeing as there are a few volunteers who want to help to try and fix some of these articles, then it's a bit premature to start deleting them all because the bot approval is taking a bit longer than expected. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 11:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh on a side note, I've just noticed this discussion is taking place in yet another place. Can we try to keep all of this in one place instead of a bit here and a bit there? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 11:27, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Lugnuts, I must have misread the conversation. I thought they were going to the draft space and just sitting. If anything left after 90 is deleted (either semi- or fully-automatic) then I'm more okay with the idea (especially since it does provide a way for non-admins interested in the issue to assist). Primefac (talk) 12:45, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

@Primefac: - no worries. Originally it was everything was given a 7-day turnaround to check. This wasn't deemed "fair"/reasonable, etc, so the compromise was move everything to draft, with the 90-day grace period. There are some good articles out there. However, there are some really bad ones. I'm going to rescue as many Olympian and cyclist biographies in those 90 days as possible. I estimate about 10,000 (out of 16,000) of them will be deleted due to lack of interest in the subject areas. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 13:05, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Lugnuts, a Wikilawyer would say that the idea that there is no deadline, since Wikipedia is a work in progress does not apply to biographies of living persons. "Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times." I am hoping user:Avraham will comment on how long we can leave these articles in mainspace, knowing that many contain errors. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Well without being rude, who is Avraham, and why is it their decision (over an already agreed on consensus to move them to draft for 90 days)? Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 14:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

@Lugnuts:, user:Avraham is the bureaucrat who closed Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive941#User:Fram, which started this process. The closing decision reflected consensus among many editors in a very visible debate, and arguably has more weight than the later agreement between four editors at User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up#Hang on a second. Anyway, we need some deadline to get this junk out of mainspace. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:21, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Although this user doesn't seem to be very active. So we go with what one person said in closing a thread, over the hard work of four editors? Anyway, it seems the lag is now with the bot group, after we've agreed how to handle this. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 14:41, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

As the closer of the discussion, he is responsible for speaking for the results of the discussion that involved dozens of editors at the administrator's noticeboard. What he says has more weight than simply his own voice. Tazerdadog (talk) 02:05, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

And he's pretty much disappeared since closing it! That's the frustrating part. Someone who's had zero contributions to the post-cleanup discussions, who has vanished. But the real problem is this bot approval group who seem to be sat on their elbows and doing fuck all, dragging this out, making it easier for someone to say "Ahh, to hell with it, delete them all". Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 08:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Avraham, if you have any concerns or comments for the bot work, please drop by Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/MusikBot_10. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 14:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, and no concerns with your approval, Xaos. -- Avi (talk) 15:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

SvG articles

Hello Avi. I'd like to review some of SvG's articles (water polo and volleyball mainly), add some sources and move them to main space. I'd like to ask you, how can I move them again to main space? Is there a tool that helps you with that? If not, what should I do, what is the process? I'll be waiting for your reply, thank you for your time man. Gtrbolivar (talk) 02:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up/Guidelines should get you started. Please let us know if you have questions not addressed there. Tazerdadog (talk) 03:02, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

What Tazer said. It's a big job, we have some gracious volunteers overseeing the process, so it makes the most sense to coordinate with them. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 17:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

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

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

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

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

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.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Noted. -- Avi (talk) 14:58, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

An IP Address that is Engaged in Persistent Vandalism

User:Avraham, shalom. There is a contributor here on Wikipedia, 92.83.117.186 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) who, as of 31 January 2017, and especially 1 February 2017, has persistently been engaged in vandalism on WP articles, choosing to randomly change the places of birth and death of various WP subjects. His IP address should be blocked. Some of his most-recent acts of vandalism have been on the following WP pages: Yihya Qafih, Pierre Brice, and Gheorghe Negrea.Davidbena (talk) 18:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

The IP is already blocked. -- Avi (talk) 02:26, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Persistent Vandalism

User:Avraham, if you were to look at the edit history of Contributor, User:92.83.117.186, you will see that he is almost always involved in vandalism, and having people revert his destructive edits. Can you please stop him?Davidbena (talk) 23:21, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

See above. -- Avi (talk) 02:26, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Bureaucrat discussion - GoldenRing

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GoldenRing/Bureaucrat chat

I would be grateful for your input in the above discussion. Many thanks, WJBscribe (talk) 12:15, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

@WJBscribe: Sorry, was out of country on wikibreak. -- Avi (talk) 16:38, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Precious five years!

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you very much! You made me take a stroll down memory lane. Wow, it has been 5 years since PumpkinSky, 8.25 years since Rlevse, and almost 10 years from Phaedriel. We're all getting old 8-). -- Avi (talk) 13:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm thinking of a reminder of the 10 years ;) - 30 April was the first. One of those reminded said that it was mostly good years, and I said yes. I miss Phadriel, but enjoy PumpkinSky-Rlevse helping on the commons. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:35, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

You will appreciate this

this--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Indeed I did! -- Avi (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Verification templates has been nominated for discussion

Category:Verification templates, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. -- Avi (talk) 15:36, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Question

• Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Lute88
• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lute88

Hi Avi, I'm trying to understand the consequences of what happened back in 2009 with the two accounts. I don't see any blocks despite the finding, and it's puzzling. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't keep records of the checks I do, and that was a long time ago. If anything, it was the RuWiki checkusers who made determinations. The 2009 blocks on EnWiki were lifted shortly after being placed. -- Avi (talk) 19:51, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't expect you to remember stuff that happened eight years ago. I have trouble remembering what I did last week. However, unless I'm missing something, neither account was blocked for socking, so they couldn't very well be lifted. This is not a curiosity question. If I weren't aware of the history, the sock would now be indefinitely blocked and the master sanctioned to a lesser degree, all this based on a check I ran today. So if there was some later determination that the two accounts were separate people ("related" as one of them says), I don't want to take any action. To be separate people, though, they would have to live together AND use the same OS and browser. Finally, they sure seem to share a huge number of the same interests for two people who are only "related". See this. If there's somewhere else I should take this rather than pestering you (sorry), that's fine, but I don't know where.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome

Ten years!

(as announced above) ... the sixteenth! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Avi (talk) 14:11, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Article Review For Kobi Arad

Dear Avraham,

Shalom.

My name is Lawrence Elango. I need your help regarding an article I'm currently editing, entitled 'Kobi Arad.'

I live in Cameroon, and ran into Kobi's music as a jazz and modern music lover.

It seems the article has been sock-puppet-ed in the past, and has been hunted ever since by various administrators. I would need your help in supporting this case amidst the past- biased community.

I have drafted a new, brief version, which is not commercial. The new draft's references have been claimed by the reviewer yesterday to be non-objective. At the moment, the reviewer, Chris (two-year editor) is criticizing the article, while Anachronist, a senior editor, is supporting the article.

I have taken into consideration the reviewer's remarks regarding the references' reliability, and removed sources which are community articles.

Instead here are the the main reliable sources:

- Ynet.com - Full feature article (Israel's largest Newspaper, used google translate). - allmusic.com - discography + review - NYU Library - Proof of Publishing - World Catalogue - Proof of Publishing - Forward Magazine - (One of the largest Jewish News Source) - Times of Israel (Jewish news prominent source) - Chabad of North Brooklyn - Independent Blog Post by one of the world's largest organizations. - Global Music Award - Proof of winning silver medal

Considering the changes in references' reliability, please intervene, and assist in considering my revision favorably, The draft page is here at https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Kobi_Arad

Thank you,

Lawrence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Choclawrence (talk • contribs) 11:37, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Be that as it may, the article as posted in the draft space does not seem to meet WP:MUSICBIO. -- Avi (talk) 14:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Tendentious editing

User:Avraham, I have strong reason to believe that Wiki editor, User:Huldra has been involved in WP:Gaming the system (cunningly averting Wikipedia policies), as well as in infringing WP:Tendentious. Please look at her recent edits on Husan, Khirbat Umm Burj, Urif, among other edits. Is there anything that we can do to stop her disruptive editing?Davidbena (talk) 19:44, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Clarification: On 26 December 2016, WP:ARCA ratified a new amendment affecting all articles broadly construed with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, making all newly deleted content subject to consensus before it can be restored. But, as you can see by my edit made on 16 June 2017, where the word "illegal" was deleted (see edit), since it did not apply to settlements around Husan, User:Huldra followed in suit by deleting valid content, (see edit), that is to say, deleting content that was pertinent to the section and where we treated on Husan's current status following the Oslo Accords, knowing that she can hardly be held accountable in Palestinian-Israeli related articles after the ratification of the new amendment, although, in actuality, what she did is considered WP:Gaming the system. What disciplinary measures can be taken against this phenomenon, to assure that we maintain a continued basis of cordial collaborative editing, and without an editor abusing the system?Davidbena (talk) 17:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Davidbena you know what, I’m quite proud of the work I have done on Husan and Urif. Look through the history of those articles: before I started on them, there was virtually zero history. Now hundreds of years of Palestinian history has been documented. I’m not finished (actually, I have hardly started) on Khirbat Umm Burj, but I promise you; given half a chance I will expand that article, too. Huldra (talk) 20:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

No one questions your hard work, but we cannot be indifferent about your tendentious editing, and, especially, how recently you have been gaming the system.Davidbena (talk) 23:51, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Anyway, I have just learned that the need to gain consensus before restoring a deleted edit has been removed. So, my concerns were unfounded. See Modification.Davidbena (talk) 01:56, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Kutaisi State Historical Archive

just a heads up in case it's on your watchlist since you deleted (expired PROD). I'm only restoring to merge/redirect it. Not sure what's worth saving, but didn't think you'd have issue with this. Ping me if you do and I'll revert. Thanks StarM 15:49, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 19:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Edward Said.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Edward Said.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Deleted; thank you. -- Avi (talk) 01:38, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss the soon to built, Interaction Timeline

Hi Checkusers and Checkuser clerks,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building the Interaction Timeline feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you use similar tools such as the Editor Interaction Analyser and User compare report during sockpuppet investigations.

You can leave comments on the on wiki discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 19:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Thanks. -- Avi (talk) 19:56, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Avraham. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:29, 16 November 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Sir Joseph ^(talk) 19:29, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Answered. -- Avi (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Request to view CreditMantri.com

Hi Avraham. I would like to view the content that was deleted for the page CreditMantri.com. I wish to improve the same with neutral content and newer links since the subject has been covered in detail in the last one year. Request you to grant access so that I can attempt on making the appropriate improvements. BigPa (talk) 08:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Arvind Kejriwal

Can you please supress this abusive edit by IP on biography of a chief minister? --Xzinger (talk) 05:57, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Avraham. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Voted, thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:15, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Request for WP:IPBE

Hi, I will be travelling on a train tommorrow, for which the internet access is a colocation web host. I'd appreciate being able to edit Wikipedia while travelling on railways. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 05:48, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Please follow the directions at Wikipedia:IP block exemption#Requesting and granting_exemption. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 18:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Looking for help updating some BLPs

Hey Avraham, I'm looking for some help updating articles for Craig B. Thompson, José Baselga, and Joan Massagué Solé, who are all executives at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. The articles' overall quality was a little lacking, so I've been working on adding content and supporting it with better references, particularly in the biographical and scientific contributions sections. I saw you're a member of WP:BIOGRAPHY and I was hoping you could review my proposed changes. I've posted on their respective talk pages, as well as the WP:ACADEMICS talk page, but I've been having trouble getting any kind of feedback from anyone. I've got their respective sandboxes here: Thompson, Baselga, Massagué. If you've got the time to take a look, even at just one of the articles, I'd greatly appreciate it.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 04:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice; I do not think I have the time at this point, though. Sorry. -- Avi (talk) 17:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Kevin Lilliana

Dear Avraham, three editors at Wikipedia Indonesia have repeatedly edited and provided factual information about the article including references on Kevin Lilliana, but user:Richie Campbell has been performing vandalism by deleting information without discussion on the Talk page. Wikipedia works by consensus, if there is controversy about an edit it should be taken to the Talk page (WP:BRD). Three editors, being WP:BOLD have opposed these edits and looked for my help. I'm sure you understand that repeated removal of the same content, against consensus, is WP:EDIT WARRING and can get him blocked. Please advise and help them, as I don't have privileges to block at this moment. But I'm willing to help if necessary. Thank you Steinpal (talk • 12:04, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Unfortunately, I'm not around that much right now. Have you tried asking for help at WP:ANI or one of the links at WP:DRR? Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 21:59, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ASPPA logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ASPPA logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Noted and updated. -- Avi (talk) 14:46, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SOASeal.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SOASeal.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Noted and corrected. -- Avi (talk) 05:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Happy Adminship

Wishing Avraham a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Kpgjhpjm 15:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 06:25, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Can u pls help me

Sir can u pls review this and help me to publish this article http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Bahujan_Samaj_Party_Madhya_Pradesh_Unit# Gauravsingh14 (talk) 21:39, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Being that you have been editing despite a block and the article is not of obvious notability, it wouldn't be prudent at this time. Sorry. -- Avi (talk) 01:08, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Changing username

Hi. Could you help me please with changing. [1] Thanks. --Getgotgotten (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

I would strongly advise against this change to avoid scrutiny until and unless User:Norvikk has declared why he needs alternative accounts.--BushelCandle (talk) 17:39, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Noted and agreed. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 01:11, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Sadly, Getgotgotten turned out to be a sockpuppet of User:Norvikk confirmed by checkuser and both accounts are indefinitely blocked at the time I write this. (Sorry for my delayed response but I have over 1000 pages on my watchlist, may with high edit rates and I missed your original response!) --BushelCandle (talk) 15:36, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jbhunley/Bureaucrat chat

Hello fellow bureaucrats, in regards to a current RfA that has met its time, I would like your assistance in judging the community consensus presented in the discussion at Jbhunley's RfA. Your input would be most welcome at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jbhunley/Bureaucrat chat. Best regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:37, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Noted for archiving. -- Avi (talk) 17:06, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Reliability of a Hebrew Source

User:Avraham, Wikipedia is in dire need of your service. A question was raised on the Talk-Page of Talk:Operation Ha-Har#Heally Gross (author) about the reliability of these two sources, written by the Israeli author Heally Gross [Heb. היאלי גרוס]:.

• Adullam: `veshavu banim ligevulam`, Jerusalem 2014 (Hebrew) [Hebrew title: עדולם: ושבו בנים לגבולם].
• Adamah Ahuvah, Jerusalem 2013 (Hebrew) [Hebrew title: אדמה אהובה].

The books are available in most Israeli libraries. The reason for this inquiry is because of an editor's concern that they may not be reliable sources. I submitted a request at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for their confirmation, but since it is doubtful if they would have access to books published in Hebrew in Israel. Perhaps you can allay all fears by either arguing for or against these books used as sources, based on your knowledge of them.Davidbena (talk) 04:10, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

If they can be easily obtained, they shjould be OK, but we do prefer English-language sources if we can get them. See WP:V and WP:NONENG. -- Avi (talk) 17:07, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Avraham. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 03:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Avraham. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 03:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RexxS/Bureaucrat chat

I've opened a bureaucrat chat for a current RfA. Your input would be most appreciated at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RexxS/Bureaucrat chat. Best regards, Maxim_(talk) 22:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Noted. -- Avi (talk) 04:25, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Avi (talk) 00:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm just the messenger ;) - Have a good crat chat. Simple me thought that when editor A says "I don't like the candidate", and editor B says "Oppose per A", two votes should be discounted, or is that too simple? - I remember my first support in a RfA, for 28bytes. Did you know that I didn't oppose any. The worst I do is ignore. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

April

... with thanks from QAI

Thank you for expressing my thoughts much better than I possibly could! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't wait any longer

I'd have liked your further comments, but I saw a clear consensus from rather a lot of Crat participation and it really was time to act. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for closing. — Avi (talk) 12:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:53, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Noted. -- Avi (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2019 (UTC)