User talk:Ohnoitsjamie/archive36

User talk:49.150.58.202

Hi, you recently blocked User:49.150.58.202 for disruptive editing - thank you! Unfortunately, the user continues to misuse their talk page. Is it possible to revoke an IP's talk page access? Would you consider doing so for this IP? Many thanks, Railfan23 (talk) 02:20, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey again. User:49.150.58.202 is up to their old tricks again on their talk page despite the 6-month block you gave them. Could you revoke their talk page access again? Many thanks, Railfan23 (talk) 01:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

IP 78.87.248.22

You recently blocked this user for 72 hours. You may want to extend the block as the same user has been making the same disruptive edits under several IP addresses (see here for another example). Rikster2 (talk) 21:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the warning! I shall surely abide by that. Noahonimisi (talk) 17:02, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

User:49.150.58.202

Hi Jamie, you kindly blocked User:49.150.58.202 for 1 week recently. They are the IP trying to create an article on their talk page despite frequent requests that they not do so. The block just expired, and I'm afraid they're right back at it: [1]. Any chance you could take a look? Many thanks, Railfan23 (talk) 02:41, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hi Jamie. You blocked TheCrown15 here yesterday for disruptive edits however I see they are making similar edits using an IP address today. I could take this to SPI but I thought perhaps as the blocking admin you may be interested. If you look at the articles they edit and the edits they make it would seem to me they are highly likely connected. As far as I can tell TheCrown15 is most likely a sock of another blocked master account (User:BushidoBrown). Are you open to looking into this or would you prefer I take it to SPI? If you are I'm happy to show you some diffs. Robvanvee 15:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Jamie. Same guy, same edits. Here you see the very recently created MYDTCC.EDU making the exact same edit TheCown15 (who you indeffed for block evasion in August) disruptively made then. The other article this "new" user has edited was a favourite of The Crown15, Murder Inc Records which also stinks of block evasion. I see you indeffed TheCrown15 back then for block evasion but I can't see a link to who the master sock was. Could you look into this if you are able please. Thanks. Robvanvee 14:33, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Indeffed as WP:DUCK sock. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:43, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Much appreciate your prompt response Jamie! Robvanvee 14:46, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

49.150.58.202

user:49.150.58.202 is still editing her talkpage, and I see you intended to take it away. CLCStudent (talk) 01:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Sam

I noticed that you hid a username in this page's history. I kindly suggest hiding edit summaries as well, because the username also appears in several of them, so it's not really hidden at all. Deli nk (talk) 01:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Re your cmt at AIV

Hi! just in regards to your comment, yes not vandalism, but unconstructive nonetheless -- at least from where I was standing (no edit summary, at the start of the article, a link about a museum of the suburb (?), and repeated attempts despite the warnings). Surpassing the final warning, of course I was going to report to AIV... Kind regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 15:08, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Looks like a competence issue; user is new to Wikipedia, kind of stumbling through it. That said, a block is appropriate if the user continues to bungle things up and doesn't respond to talk page feedback. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:25, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Okay no worries, that's fair enough! —MelbourneStar☆^talk 15:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Help pls

Can either you or Koavf please inform Hoof Hearted (WikiIndex) that I can't create an account there nor even post to their talk page as an IP? I'm getting this error still. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:01, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Wait, nevermind. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Talk page

Can you revoke talk access - Special:AbuseLog/24660095. Home Lander (talk) 22:12, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

...for the school range block. Much appreciated. Cheers, 2601:188:180:1481:DC2D:52EC:4C74:EA5E (talk) 18:32, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Artificial hair integrations report at WP:AIV

Hey, sorry for this mis-report on WP:AIV. It was an IP-hopping spammer and I had indeed not warned that IP. Thanks also for the block on them later. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 00:09, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah, got it. I've rangeblocked 'em, and will blacklist if they persist. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:49, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Stop deleting factual information just based on your personal opinion. Ask for a consensus.

Consider this your last warning for WP:COI edits. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:33, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

You have twice deleted something which is factually correct. I'd expect more than one person's opinion before deleting something, or calling it useless. How many other editors did you consult to determine if those lists were "useless"? At Rice, the list came from a student committee (FYI: I was not a participant in any way). Only about 20 students were included in the list the year I was included. I don't remember how many at SDSU were included.

Phil Konstantin (talk) 07:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

"Factually correct" doesn't mean that it belongs in an encyclopedia. Cleaning up an article doesn't require "consensus" unless there are disagreements from other "neutral" editors. Per WP:COI, you should not be editing your own article (unless it's to remove blatant vandalism or unsourced assertions), but you're welcome to bring up concerns and suggestions on the talk page. The article needs plenty more pruning to remove trivia that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia (GPAs, etc). Feel free to file an WP:RFC on the talk page for the article if you want input on that. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:57, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

---

For what it is worth, I did not add those comments about being included in Who's Who in two different Universities 20 years apart, or almost nothing else in the article. Some of that material came from biographies of me which appeared online at various TV stations, and book publisher's websites. I did correct one flatly inaccurate but uncontroversial line, some time ago. Years ago, one editor told me I needed to add what computers I helped run at NASA. Since they told me I should add it, I did. Then another editor said I shouldn't be the one adding things. A few editors claim I have not done enough worthy things to merit an article. That's their opinions, and they are welcome to it. Other editors have felt the article was appropriate. Recently, one of the anti-inclusion editors added quite a few (Citation Needed) markers on the article. Since I am not allowed to add things to the article about me, I provided quite a few sources or citations in the Talk section. I also notified the editor who added the Citations Needed markers of the citation I placed in the Talk section. That editor did not reply, or update the page. Since then, six months later, those citations have not been added to the article. Many of the corrections I have suggested in the Talk section over the years remain there, unaltered. While my life will not end if the article is deleted, I admit it is nice to have it. So, when people complain about my lack of meritorious qualifications, and factual material is deleted, it makes me wonder if this is just a ploy by those anti-inclusion editors. If you delete the accomplishments or things which have happened in my life, then it is easier to justify deleting the article. No offense is intended toward you. Phil Konstantin (talk) 19:26, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Removing triva is not "anti-inclusion." You will be hard pressed to find any other biographical articles that mention a subject's high school GPA and what clubs they were in. Your concerns with the article belong on the article's talk page. If you want other opinions regarding what the article and and shouldn't include, please create an WP:RFC, though it's probably make sense to wait a week for the result of the newly filed AfD. Regarding your comments about trying to address the "citation needed" tags, websites created or maintained by you (americanindian.net) do not ualify as reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:08, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

BDW, ANI, and other three letter acronyms

If he does resume upon return, I suggest going immediately to ANI as a continued instance, rather than trying to engage. Should you choose to do so, please feel free to link to this message and cast all blame upon me for your failure to attempt to resolve yourself. I have seen repeatedly that direct efforts have no positive effect. KillerChihuahua 18:14, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Sound advice. I appreciate your efforts in trying to resolve the situation. It's unfortunate that an editor with a history of mostly constructive edits is choosing this hill to die on. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:23, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

We all have bad days. Hopefully this was just that, and nothing more. KillerChihuahua 00:07, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Tnypr

Hi Jamie. You blocked them a few weeks back (their 2nd) for the very thing they seem hellbent on doing again: adding unsourced or even incorrect information to articles. Please could you cast an eye. Robvanvee 19:44, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Done. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:36, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

As always, much appreciated! Robvanvee 05:35, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

AfD withdrawn

Hi, in this AfD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Svante_Thunberg in which you voted an hour ago, the person who nominated the article on my behalf (because I don't have an account) choose to withdrew the nomination because, I don't know, a spat? I told him to consider to abstain from voting and he reacted by withdrawing the nomination. Could you possibly re-open it? I don't think he should be able to withdraw a vote that was actually initiated by somebody else (i.e. me). I can ask somebody else to open a new separate vote again (like I did the first time at Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion as IP are instructed to ) but a couple of people had already voted, so it seems a little like a waste of everybody's time.110.165.186.42 (talk) 15:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

I think it would be better for you to file the AfD yourself. Is something preventing you from doing that? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:29, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

"IP users" are not allowed to finish AfD nominations on they're own but are directed (in WP:AFDHOWTO) to complete step 1 and then ask for help with finishing steps 1 & 2. Somebody else already set up a new AfD though, but thanks for replying (and voting).　110.165.186.42 (talk) 03:24, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Suspicious account

Hi Jamie. Tonight while going through the user creation log, I found this[2] editor who's username translates to "The most beautiful thing in the world is to be banned infinite" in Italian. Sounds like a sleeper to keep an eye on. Lupin VII (talk) 05:41, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Nothing on the edit filter; wait and see. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 06:03, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

2A02:C7F:7E20:C400:CD3F:2766:F419:ACE2 Vandal

Thanks for blocking this vandal! Just be on the watch out in case he uses proxies to get over his block. Luigitehplumber (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I checked the /64 range for that IP, didn't see anything else recently that was obviously the same editor. You can ping me directly if they resume. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:50, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Blocked "Juice Bucket YouTube" user from editing

Hi Ohnoitsjamie, you have blocked me from editing for 8 days. The reason you have mentioned is I am using Wikipedia for promotion or advertising. Firstly when I was creating the account I have tried using my name wiki told that username already exists and I tried Juice Bucket wiki again told username already exists. So I tried Juice Bucket YouTube and it accepted, promoting my channel was not at all my intention. I am new to this so if you can guide me how to change my username I am happy to change it (since you thought I am doing it for promoting my channel, in future someone else also might think that way). Secondly I have not included any of my channel links or video links in any Wikipedia page so could you please let me know on what basis I was banned. Also please let me know if you have any further questions or information needed on this issue.

Hope everyone will get justice. Juice Bucket YouTube (talk) 06:24, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't see anything in the blocked for your account, or in the last 500 blocks I issued, so I'm not sure which block you are talking about. I don't remember every blocking anyone for 8 days; that's an odd # of days for a block. Was the block you're talking about on a different account or on an IP address? In any case, if you'd like to change your username, please see the instructions/policies here. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:07, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Sir, there is a source that indicates that Hugh Jackman was about to have a cameo in Spider-Man 2! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.160.87.206 (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

So then provide that source! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:49, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

CIR

It appears our CIR pal you just blocked has several more accounts in the mix. [3][4]Praxidicae (talk) 18:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh and this too Praxidicae (talk) 18:23, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Got 'em, thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:24, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm filing a request at SRG now...they've got a bad cause of the CIR xwiki ;) and there's about 6 more accounts. Yikes. Praxidicae (talk) 18:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Hfaiovena4t

Thanks for blocking Hfaiovena4t for 3 days, but he admitted in this edit that he is Piotr Grochowski, and as Piotr Grochowski was indefinitely blocked, he should be indef'd as well, especially as he is clearly not here to improve Wikipedia. BabelStone (talk) 21:56, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Done, tagged. Thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:08, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

I checked the log and he's actually still blocked only for three days, I think? In any case thanks, I think we're well shot of him, his edits were taking up way too much of my time to deal with. Blythwood (talk) 22:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

UTRS Admins list

Seems like your not on the UTRS admins email list. Can you indicate to me which email I should add to our list? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 08:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Cheers!

A tall, cold one for you! Thanks for your speedy handling of my nuisance IP. --Dr.Margi ✉ 21:25, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy to help, cheers! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:53, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Crown Oil Ltd

Hoi Ohnoitsjamie - I requested the page Crown Oil Ltd be undeleted, so a quick thank you for undeleting it. My aim was to get it to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and I've added references as well as additional content. Hopefully this brings it up to standard, but I'm happy to listen to any feedback if not. PanaMarkides (talk) 16:01, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

A user using abusive language

Please take a look at this edit and other edits by the concerned user. Thanks.—Jakichandan (talk) 22:40, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

David Brown (British musician)

Hi, Ohnoitsjamie. Remember me? The one who put additional citations on the ASMR article? By the way, can you improve the David Brown (British musician) article? I think it has a problem with its sources, which is YouTube videos.

User:Emotioness Expression 5:48 pm (UTC)

I don't have a lot of time for article improvement at the moment, but I did find one additional source that meets WP:RS. It's not entirely focused on Brown, but features him prominently. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:02, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you for helping me with COI info and general stuff on my wiki page. I've updated some citations and have a better understanding of communication here. Thanks! AlchemistsLead (talk) 20:36, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

xwiki harassment

Hi. If the twit is editing in places where it is hard(er) to clean up, then ping me, I have an expanse of xwiki rights and possibly can assist in removal. — billinghurst sDrewth

Yes, that would be much appreciated. I think I saw pings for sources, news, and books, though I haven't looked. Are you able to semi-protect my talk pages across the board? As I'm not currently active in any projects other than en, commons, and occasionally meta for spam blacklisting, there isn't a good reason for non-autoconfirmed users to be editing my talk pages on those projects. Thanks again, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:28, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Clarifying...

When I mentioned the comment, I meant your reply to the one who reported the IP that you range blocked, where you mentioned you range blocked the IP, I had been confused on wether the bot forgot to remove it or not. James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 17:40, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:49, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

What was that?

Hi! Just wondering what that thing you deleted from my user talk page was? I'd never seen something like it before. Cinnamingirl (talk) 02:52, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

An IP user was canvassing a seemingly random list of users to shorten an article. They were blocked after ignoring a few warnings. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:56, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

A message

I am sorry for vandalising people I am Gun23man but I am sorry and I quit Wikipedia. Thank you TimePortal99 (talk) 07:08, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Copy this message and send it to Yamla coz it’s protected TimePortal99 (talk) 07:09, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waterman–Smith Building

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waterman–Smith Building. BigDwiki (talk) 17:27, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Matthew Stafford vandalism

Have you ever e-mailed schools to report vandalism by its students using the IP address Whois data? Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:05, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Not in awhile. I contacted a university once because I was hesitant to block their range, wanted to give them a chance to take care of the problem themselves. It's not unusual to block school IPs for a year or more. If a new school IP hits Matthew Stafford, let me know and I'll block this range. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I already blocked the /26 since multiple IPs from the range were involved originally. Was asking about contacting the e-mails on the whois because the kids posted their Snapchat handles, which would make it very easy for the school to figure out who was behind it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:29, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

My apologies

I have chosen to Wikipedia:DISENGAGE from the E-Cig and Tobacco area and QuackGuru in general and would like to apologize for wasting your time on the COIN board Mfernflower (talk)

It sounds like you are frustrated; in such cases, disengagement (temporary or permanent) is often the best course of action. It sounds like a contentious issue, but COIN wasn't the right venue for it. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:02, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

an help for Draft:Nabiha Akkari

hello, I'm writing to you from far away Calabria, I'm writing to greet you and know how you are. in addition to this, if you could help me with the improvement of this article or draft, I tried to improve it but I don't know where to put it by myself. in any case, if you can help me just and not more than 10 minutes of your precious time, I'll give you the courtesy with some articles in Italian and Sicilian. sure of a certain answer of yours and waiting to hear from you, I wish you a good day and a happy weekend. with regard--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 04:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I am asking little help

I know I shoud not have brought that to AIV. But that user is harassing me at my talk page, what should I do. The user is false accusing me and suggesting me what i should do with my time or not. Please help me out. Dey subrata (talk) 21:21, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't see any harassment at your talk page. Lugnuts correctly reverted your changes; in this edit, you are changing the capitalization of article titles, the prior version properly capitalized the words as they were capitalized in the title. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:27, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

So basically you are saying there is no meaning in MOS:ALLCAPS and I should not follow these policies. I have been working on different articles and whenever I nominate any article all experienced editors' most common suggestion is of removing Souting in refernce (you can check my recent nom, and there suggestions about shouting in reference without which the artcile could not be GA or FA or FL). The Caps should be in only proper noun case, not in every words even if it is in the Title. Dey subrata (talk) 21:35, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

If you don't understand the concept of a reference title, I can't help you, per WP:CIR. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:37, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Gavingaming12

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 20:27, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for the heads up! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:35, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh yes, it's a barnstar

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For your tireless and effective efforts using the admin tools to help stop the vandals and spammers. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited EBay, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Genesys and Sitch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:37, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

"and home to many people."

My, that was very enlightening. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 16:11, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

I hear there are quite a few buildings and dogs as well. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:17, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

List of German people of ....

I spent in total many hours only f.e. only for the List of German people Turkish descent (to found out all the famous people of Turkish descent, etc.) and this takes much pain in the work. I shouldn‘t meant it badly when I‘m saying that I am range and no I cannot an accept this and don’t understand why you want to destroy all my work that I did. These lists (Turkish, Kurdish, Lebanese, etc.) were also only thought of an beginning, I wanted to do it step by step to many others countries (I start with the Orient, than I will do countries from East Europe, East & South Asian, than countries from sub-saharan-Africa, etc...), but all step by step. Why I do these lists? For example the List of German people of Turkish descent? I wanted to inform strangers - and that is the main sense of Wikipedia (Wikipedia should inform people and be a platform of knowledge, like a lexicon). But what I unfortunately see is more censorship and abuse. I only wanted to do a harmless list - also for me, but especially for other people, a list where everyone can see which promis have these and these origin and yes of course this also includes people who have not an article yet. You have to know, in Germany many people always asking, from which origin is this rapper or this youtuber, etc... and they want to know are there other f.e. singer, rapper, athletes who are of ... or ... origin. Know everyone have a list you find nowhere im the internet. Yes you can say it is an overview of prominent people who are (xy) descent.

So my idea was to do a list you found nowhere in the internet, where you have ALL the prominent people of the same origin in one list togehter, for example all rapper of Turkish descent who have some fame, a complete list, where also everyone can add persons etc... that was what I think and it is big project and than I see that people don‘t respect the work I did, destroy all the work, and delated almost the half of the article! Ok, if the informations in the article are all wrong or not correct or up-to-day than I could understand, but this was not the case. And this made my angry, there is not reason. That only happened because many people did not have an wikipedia article yet. This should be the only reason??! If you ask me, this is very ridiculous, and yes for me this is much harder and worser than all the other article vandalisms.

If it were up to me, everyone of those who are in the list deserve ad own article, but you don’t know how hard it is for example to do articles for everyone. This is too much for me, I can‘t and will do such a thing. It costs too much time and and it is mostly not easy and mostly also not possible to find more than only few informations. The only thing you find about a promi is his/her artist name, his/her profession, his/her country (f.e. Germany) and his/her origin (f.e. Turkey). For example, Xiara. She only released three songs and many audio additions, but of course she is a notable person. Her last song with Dardan was a big hit in Germany, has ca. 10 million views after 2 months which ich mich for Germany, and she also has more than 100,000 Instagram followers which is much for someone who only released three songs. I have researched, but I don’t found many informations, only that their parents are from Turkey. But you need more informations, otherwise the article of course will be delated.

The thing: Firstly, the article is for all people who have some fame so if you have more than 100.000 on a song (which is much) you are relevant for the list. And secondly, the fact that they did not have an Wikipedia article also doesn‘t made them not notable. For example Dilara. She has ca. 3 million Instagram follower (Yes, she is famous in Germany and many knows). You want to indirectly says or suggest that she or promis like Mert Matan, Hatice Schmidt, CanBroke, Nihan, Denizon, Samarita, Erencan, Batu, Ali471, MEL, Melisa Carolina, Hasibe, Derya, Kadr, etc. are not is not notable, but all these many football players of Turkish origin that hardly anybody knows and who were all not good enough for the Bundesliga (the first German league), but are all in the list and all have an article, are relevant enough to be mentioned in this list and notable, but people who have hundreds of fans not? Is it a joke? If you put all these (I think unknown) footballer on these list, than you also have to put Xiara, etc. on this list. Otherwise the list is joke and strange and not fair because many people who are famous are missing, while all these footballers and singer on the list for example who are not so famous are listed.

I hope you can understand a little more and I hope you will stop these actions (I mean delating all the people in the lists who have not an article now, but have sources in form of weblinks —> this cannot be a solution). Otherwise than I will try to delate all the whole articles (and I will move all my complete lists to User:Jnnc19 articles so there are not all completely gone, although I don‘t like it) because I don‘t see the sense on the list when famous people are all missing and much more unknown people are part of the list because is no sense. But I hope, it doesn’t come so far. It would be very, very pity.

If you have suggestion for improvements or want to make a positive contributions to the article and add more people than of course I would be happy and you are welcome.

Best Regards!

--Jnnc19 (talk) 11:19, 3 November 2019 (CET)

I have also looked at other lists on Wikipedia and they all have also people listed that doesn‘t have an article. You cannot not do a List of last survivors of historical events, but forget important or famous people only because they have not a Wikipedia article yet. The same is going with List of German people of Turkish descent and something like that. That someone has not a Wikipedia article doesn‘t mean that he or she is not relevant or important enough for the article. If any Miss Turkey or German is relevant enough for such a list, than the rapper and youtuber I have listed are also relevant enough. The List is called „List of German people of Turkish descent“ and not „List of German people of Turkish descent with a Wikipedia article“. --Jnnc19 (talk) 11:33,3 November 2019 (CET)

I will continue deleting entries that do not meet criteria for listing, per WP:V and WP:BIO. If you know over other lists that have redlinked entries that are missing either a reliable source or a link to another language wiki, those should be deleted as well. I'm already giving those lists a fair amount of slack by not deleting entries that only have articles in other language Wikipedias, as technically other wikis do not count as reliable sources. I understand that your additions are in good faith, but you've been warned twice (the last warning being a final one) and given the relevant policy links. Please heed the warnings and focus your efforts elsewhere. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:55, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

No, you didn’t. You have delated ALL people who have not a Wikipedia article. Every person I have listed in the page is linked to a reliable source so I follow all the Wikipedia rules and did nothing wrong and also didn‘t break any rule. If I have no sources given than I can understand that you delated things. But the person I have listed have all sources and proofs that they are of Turkish descent. Which warning? You have warned me or what do you mean? And I also don’t know what is your problem and why you are so strict? --Jnnc19 (talk) 16:17, 3 November 2019 (CET)

„If a person in a list does not have a Wikipedia article about them, a citation....“ Yes and this is what I have done, so what is the problem??? --Jnnc19 (talk) 16:25, 3 November 2019 (CET)

An individual's Youtube or Instagram account is not a reliable sources for establishing notability. It's what we call a primary source. You need third-party reliable sources for that. An acceptable source would be an article in Juice or some other established news or music site that had non-trivial coverage of the individual. Links to the subject's Facebook, Instagram, or Youtube account are not acceptable source. Links to genius.com are not acceptable either, as those profiles are not under editorial control; anyone can create them. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Youtube videos or songs and Instagram posts/storys from the persons themselves are the most reliable sources that exists because you have their own spoken word of the persons! A article of an foreign person for example Juice is not as reliable as an Youtube video of a Youtuber who said in his/her video that for example my parents are from Turkey. I also wrote to admins from German Wikipedia and they also said that links to Instagram or Youtube videos are ok and reliable and acceptable sources. Almost every article I have wrote have Youtube, Twitter or Instagram links and I also every second article on English and German Wikipedia have such links and then you want to told me that they are not acceptable sources???!!! What I did in the list is the same that I did with all the other articles I have written and nobody has a problem. You are the first one who said this. What I have used are "Self-published sources" and yes that are reliable sources after Wikipedia rules. Ok and I will remove all the Genius links and will replace them with direct links to their songs, but that changes nothing based on the article. --Jnnc19 (talk) 16:56, 3 November 2019 (CET)

Every language Wikipedia is independent of one another. I'm telling you what the policies are on English Wikipedia; policies from other wikis are irrelevant here. Direct links to songs are not reliable sources for establishing notability. You're going to be blocked if you resume adding entries that don't have suitable links. I've explained the policies clearly to you here and provided you with plenty of policy links. Please don't let a case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT lead to a block. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:59, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

What are you talking is wrong. Of course, direkt links for example to songs are reliable sources. Why all the articles in Wikipedia have sources like for example tweets of a person if it is against the rule. Sources like for example Songs are accepted as a source if it is for example the person himself who said this. If I did a video an said: „Mero‘s parents are from Turkey“ of course this is not accepted as a reliable source. But if Mero himself or f.e. his best friend says in a youtube video: „My parents are from Turkey“ than this of course a reliable and acceptable source and that is also what I have learned from Wikipedia. I have also explained the Wikipedia policy to you and you are I think the only one of Wikipedia who have this opinion. So if you will blocked me, this is against Wikipedia rules.

--Jnnc19 (talk) 17:15, 3 November 2019 (CET)

I'm not talking about sources to establish whether or not the individual is Turkish, Palestinian, or whatnot. I'm talking about sources to establish whether the person meets Wikipedia notability guidelines. Our WP:BIO policy is pretty clear in this regard; "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Note the "independent of the subject" part; that's the part the explicitly excludes the subject's own social media pages. I'm not discussing this further, as I don't feel like I can be any more clear about what our policy is. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of people named Daniel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Real Friends (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:38, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Heads up on SPI

I don't know if you can really do anything here, but I just thought I'd give you a heads up about this since I saw you were in the archive for a prior SPI on BigDWiki and have since blocked a few other IPs for block evasion. That one seems pretty straightforward, but I figure there's no harm in having a record on SPI.Nblund ^talk 00:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Just commented on it. Seems WP:DUCK from a behavioral perspective, even if CU doesn't pan out. Could also be WP:MEAT. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

What's this all about?

[5]? Johnbod (talk) 16:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	"Oh no it's oh no it's jamie"--victimsBlock award receivers. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 14:21, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Ha, thank you! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:24, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Your Block of User:LoganPaul19

The day after your block User:DuaLipa19 was registered which is now showing a very similar behaviour (lots of copyvio images added to articles here). You may want to look into this. I noticed the similarities between the two as I had Callum Booth-Ford on my watchlist. --Denniss (talk) 15:15, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed at Commons:Commons:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/LoganPaul19 --Denniss (talk) 18:01, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the update; pretty clear WP:DUCK sock, but nice to have CU confirmation (good for getting sleepers, too). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:03, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Dorarocks2003

Hi Jamie, any chance you could revoke talk page access for User:Dorarocks2003, who you recently blocked? The user is posting a link to an attack video which is highly inappropriate. Thanks, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 00:35, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

YungIsh

CIR is a relevant thing here. Care to drop the block? See my talk page as well. Drmies (talk) 03:29, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Dropped it like it's hot. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

A user you blocked is back....

Was on vandalism patrol and a user you blocked is back at it again.... [[6]] Sethie (talk) 07:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Putting words in my mouth.

I made a mistake and undid a revision you made to a page. You undid that undo and then said “Before accusing me of vandalism AGAIN”. First of all, I never accused you of vandalism. My comment on the original undo was “undid for suspected vandalism. I would like an apology for your comment that put words in my mouth. 2nd, learn to be more calm about a mistake.

I am sorry for my original undo, but you are too tense.Elijahandskip (talk) 17:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

More nonsense at Bishop Auckland

Special:Contributions/CursorDJ. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 19:47, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, that's one way to squander an auto-confirmed account. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:26, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Indeed. You might want to revoke talk page access. 🙄 SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 02:48, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

The folly of youth. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

George Watson's College

I have asked for protection on the above page. [7] as it looks like children messing about. It is the first time I have done this, so I am not sure if I have followed the correct procedure.SovalValtos (talk) 21:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

I will be protecting it in a few minutes, just waiting a few minutes to see if any other players would like to join the block party. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:01, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Blocked one more, protected. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Patriot83

I doubt this is worth getting checkuser involved, but a user that you blocked last month User:Patriot83 and an IP editor with a long-ish (and currently active) block log, User:184.89.19.67, appear to be the same. Patriot is making the same types of edits you blocked them for as well. Just an FYI. --Michael Greiner 01:28, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, pretty obviously the same editor. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:00, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

IP user: 219.89.209.120 Overlinking

Hi, On 15 November 2019 you have blocked IP User:219.89.209.120 for 2 weeks for Overlinking. Unfortunately he is back. Please look at his contributions today 3 December. I have undo some but he is fast, too fast!! - Jay (talk) 07:39, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

American frontier

Hello. It's me again. Here's the link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_frontier

There, go to the term section and you'll see my edit there. Emotioness Expression (talk) 07:46, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Can you give me some context? Are you asking me to review those edits? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:48, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I'm asking you to see my edit. Okay, so, I found a reliable source made by Richard W. Slatta called "Western frontier life in America". So, I put a quote from that reliable source in the "Terms West and frontier" section. That's it. That's the context behind the reason I ask you to see my edit. Emotioness Expression (talk) 06:20, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Damon Runyon's short story "Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the hot Tom and Jerry This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true. No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well O. MarnetteD|Talk 20:45, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Nuisance IP back

Jamie, the “we” IP 24.60.1.17 is back disrupting Chernobyl (TV series) and trolling my talk page. Would you care to have a “come to Jesus” chat with them on their talk page? They’re not here to contribute, just make a nuisance of themselves. Thank you! ----Dr.Margi ✉ 23:41, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

The quote referenced here does appear to be supported by this source. On the other hand, I see that there isn't any consensus to change to current wording. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

It's possible I overlooked it. Regardless, the IP declines to discuss and is playing the same games as before ----Dr.Margi ✉ 00:18, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

See my comments on the talk page. I'm going to have sporadic and limited access to Wikipedia over the next few days starting now, so it might be worth pinging another editor who's familiar with the issue. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:21, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, I see that the Collective Consciousness has been sent back to the Delta Quadrant for a few months. Happy editing, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, and the laugh! I'm in the midst of completing grades, have a splitting headache, and just didn't need the IP CC again. I imagine the ANI posting did the deed; Bbb3 was the blocking admin and he/she is a regular there. Happy holidays! ----Dr.Margi ✉ 03:28, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year Ohnoitsjamie!

Happy New Year!

Hello Ohnoitsjamie:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Donner60 (talk) 05:41, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

American frontier 2

Hey, Jamie. Remember the American frontier discussion we have? Well, today, I made a change, which is this:

(removed, copyvio)

So, tell me if this text is plagiarized or my original word. I'll be back checking on the reply you send. Thank you!!!!! Emotioness Expression (talk) 13:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

More than plagiarism, this is a blatant copyright violation. The text appears almost word for word at this location. --Yamla (talk) 13:20, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Ohnoitsjamie

	Sorry, Ohnoitsjamie
	Hey Ohnoitsjamie, You sent me a message that I am spamming on Wikipedia but trust me I have contributed some information also. but I don't know why its spam. please help me will my site get penalized by google. Please Help! Raghvbhaskar (talk) 02:55, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Not sure how you expect me to help you. The links on your talk page clearly explain our policies on spam. All you need to do is stop trying to add your site to Wikipedia. If you continue to try to add your site to Wikipedia, there may very well be a penalty in the form of spam blacklisting. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:57, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Signs of vandalism

There's a user called 93.185.16.137 who keeps changing Lietuvos rytas TV's parent company to "Singing Fish". DarthonTheOverseer (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anglo-Chinese School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Landmark Books (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

109.75.92.148

Thanks for the block on 109.75.92.148 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), and the deletion of the unconstructive revisions. Would you mind removing them from my talk as well? Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:06, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Glad to. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:10, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Yet another garden invader!

A friendly talkpage gnome suddenly showed up in your garden overnight, and began sweeping up the occasional mess. It hopes you don't mind it's intrusion.

--moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 17:18, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

decline I just came from

I need to learn more about edit filter 643. Incredible.-- Deepfriedokra 02:52, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

I only recently starting using exploring our edit filters when we were first getting hit with the fake customer service # spam; even more fascinating is trying to discern the LTA stories behind the filters. 643 is new to me.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:44, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Continuous disruptive edits

Hi, I see you blocked User:Krapnel001 due to continuous disruptive edits. The user continues to make such edits despite the warnings given; I have had to revert numerous edits more than once on various articles. In terms of the edits themselves, they mostly consist of excessive and unnecessary detail and are often grammatically incorrect. What is the appropriate action to take? Thanks Doogooder (talk) 08:41, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Skimming through the edits from the 15th, I didn't notice any obvious problems; can you link to some diffs? Before another block is issued, it might be helpful to give the editor more specific examples than what's in the warning templates what they are doing wrong. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:37, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there is a definite problem here with User:Krapnel001. Additional intervention seems like a good option. SolarFlash^{Let's talk about it} 14:04, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Apparently dead athletes bring out the trolls. Much appreciated. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:05, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Vile indeed. Glad to help clean up the mess. Let me know if you see any revisions that I missed for revdel. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:08, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

To these non-admin eyes, that looked filthy. I didn't find anything else which deserved WP:REVDELing. Narky Blert (talk) 01:40, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Another one, filled with juvenilia and defamatory content going back months: Joseph Pennacchio. Please take out you rev/deletion pen when you can. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:54, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you for starting on this, Alexf. The putrid comments go back much further. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:34, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Wow. Revdel'd back a few years. Added to watchlist, since protection is fairly short. If it immediately resumes, I'll protect for a longer duration. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:07, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, and really. One of the Rhodes Scholar IPs involved also had it in for Anthony M. Bucco, so there may be a history there, too. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:11, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Your block on User:99.185.41.67

I noticed that you has blocked this indefinitely, but according to this, IP addresses shouldn't be blocked indef. Also, IP addresses can be shared by multiple users… -216.25.187.4 (talk) 13:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that was a mistake; I probably had several WP:AIV-related tabs open with a mix of named accounts and IPs. Thanks for catching that, it has been fixed. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Re: User talk:96.244.204.197 - Apologies...

Apologies on not completely understanding external links; not attempting to "spam". I am an occasional Wikipedia user attempting to contribute information I hope is of value; I've created a user account. Regards WantToContribute (talk) 21:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370

Hey, Jamie. Can you update the information on the "Investigation" section? Emotioness Expression (talk) 05:33, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Update it with what? I don't think I've ever edited that article, so I'm not sure why you're asking me. If you have a specific concern, please bring it up at Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:35, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

List of hijabis from Germany

Hi! Thanks for your reversal at List of hijabis from Germany. I am worried about the creation of such an article. It targets Muslim women who wear a particular piece of clothing, with no particular context or relevance. Why do we need such a list? It is extremely prone to vandalism, not to mention it is discriminatory. What are your thoughts? I'm willing to nominate it at AfD. Thanks for your comments, PK650 (talk) 03:18, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of niche lists in general. Though there may be a few different ways to look at this, I'd tend to agree with you that at the very least it's not noteworthy for a Muslim woman to wear a hijab, or why it's noteworthy that one from Germany does. I don't think it's speedy-able, but I'd lean toward !voting delete in an AfD as violating WP:NOT. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:26, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Genre-warrior

Thanks for the block. See also SoftRockBan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

LogicandProportion

It is unclear why the kinds of information that was added to Dr. Mattson's wikipage including brief descriptions of early life and education, career, selected publications and a few examples of coverage in popular media has been completely removed. These kinds of information (and much more) are included on the wikipage for many other prominent scientists. For examples see pages for Eric Kandel, Judson Brewer, etc, etc, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogicandProportion (talk • contribs) 19:18, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I've never edited that article, so I have no idea you're coming to me about this. I assume you've already been directed to WP:COI. My warning to you over four years ago was in regards to this sort of edit. Wikipedia is not a platform for advancing your research.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Previously blocked IP 38.39.71.158

Hi, I see that you recently warned then blocked 38.39.71.158 (User talk:38.39.71.158 / Special:Contributions/38.39.71.158) for vandalism, and I am writing to let you know that this editor has continued to repeatedly vandalize Reese's Whipps, using misleading edit summaries. A renewed block may be necessary. IP 204.40.194.135 also added the same vandalism material to that article: Special:Contributions/204.40.194.135. Dialectric (talk) 01:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

They each have a month vacation to dream up new confections. Thanks for the heads up, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 06:15, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Delhi Private School, Sharjah

Thank you! Is it one vandal using many accounts, or a coordinated attack? 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:22, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

My guess would be loosely coordinated attack. Handled. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:25, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Kitchener edit

Hey Jamie, I hope I am contacting you corrected. I did leave the original message on my talk page but I see that you haven't read it. So here it is: Ok, fair enough. I am simply trying to clean up Kitchener's wiki page to be more inline with other cities. I was creating a new sub under culture for sports, like what most cities have, which was promptly deleted. I had to do a couple minor edits so that it was be linked properly. As it stands, sports and clubs is under a different section, and is a mess and includes teams that don't even play in Kitchener. Hardly a disruptive edit though for what I was trying to do.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffster1970 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Kitchner already has a sports section here. If anything is missing or needs to be updated, simply add it there. I'm not sure how else to explain it to you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:14, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Power duo for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Power duo is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Power duo until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 05:18, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Please block user from editing own talk page

I'm guessing from behavior that Sidlestark (talk · contribs) has been here before. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:43, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Done, thanks! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 05:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Socks in search of a drawer

You blocked Tehran.12345678910 for block-evasion and I blocked Yousef.iran.1398 as a sock of that one (credit to User:SharabSalam for detecting that). Do you know what other account is the actual master, so that we can tag all these properly? DMacks (talk) 15:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

DMacks, I think it's Iran.12345678910. I wasnt sure if these accounts know that sockpuppeting in Wikipedia is unacceptable so I sent him a warning assuming good faith.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 15:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

There is also some IPs that are changing climate, like 94.29.243.223 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I first noticed the persistent unsourced climate fiddling from an anon IPs in the 94.29.240.0/22 range. There's also Yousefmalekicr7 who was blocked in August of 2019. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:47, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Unblock Appeal/Request

I appeal for the unblocking of User talk:Odzwale who has been blocked for being on the same Ip address with User talk:Babalee11 who was blocked for promotion and advertisement. He has also been subsequents. I'm organizing a campaign/edit-a-thon at my University. Timmylegend (talk) 08:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Odzwale will need to file their own unblock appeal. I do acknowledge that it's possible that Odzwale is unrelated to Babalee11; Odzwale should note that in their appeal, and if they were part of a university project, describe that as well. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:41, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Waiting

You still owe me a apology for what you did. I created the ANI, I notified you about it but you haven't said a word on it. Are you avoiding the whole situation because you know you messed up? Do the right thing. --Vauxford (talk) 21:34, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't apologize on demand. Amended OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:37, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Let's not turn this molehill into a mountain, please. I really think it would be best if you commented at ANI, before someone starts needlessly escalating a simple mistake. But, at least, if you're not planning on posting to the ANI thread, please let me know here so I can annotate the block log myself. True, apologies on demand don't mean much, and I don't usually understand why people demand them so often. But apologies when you do something wrong - whether demanded or not - are always the best thing for your karma. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:53, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

The user was blocked for about 5 minutes after restoring edits that several socks had recently reinstated; upon realizing there was a good chance it was a false positive, I unblocked. Had the user talked to me about it further after I unblocked them, I likely would've apologized, but I'm not going to encourage running off to AIV to "demand satisfaction" for such a trivial matter. I have at least one block on my history that I think is BS, but I'm not whining about it at AIV. I respect your perspective, Floquenbeam and am usually happy to acknowledge mistakes when approached in a reasonable and civil fashion, but refuse on principal to interact with this user any further. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

I understand they're aggravating you; but you have to understand you've aggravated them too, no? You blocked them for being a sock, and didn't mention in your unblock that this was a mistake, just made them promise not to do something they have a right to do. Can't you see how this would piss them off? And that them being pissed off could lead them to do things that would piss you off? Anyway, I don't mean to pester, and won't post here any more unless it is clear I'm welcome. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:03, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

What the heck did I do to you man? Now you ignoring me like I'm the bad person here! Well aren't you a ray of sunshine eh? So you just not going to apologies to me for blocking a innocent user? How is that trivial? This attitude of yours and the refusal to owe up to your mistake just further gives administrators on here a bad name. --Vauxford (talk) 22:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Have you ever tried doing thankless backroom work? For years? It is not easy dealing with the many trolls and unhinged people on the internet. Stuff happens and mature people move on. Johnuniq (talk) 23:15, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

You owe this editor and WP an apology. Your behavior was appalling and unbecoming for an administrator. The editing restriction you placed is not the way things are done here and you know it. Anyone can undo a sock's edits....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:36, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

As a matter of personal principal, I'm not apologizing to the user under the circumstances; had they approached me directly first in a civilized fashion instead of immediately creating drama at ANI, I would've been happy to (as I have many times in the past for mistakes). Floquenbeam has already righted any wrongs (thank you, User:Floquenbeam), and I have no objections to those remedies. I will not be commenting on the matter further. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:28, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Jamie, you may have to comment again. I might take this to Arbcom. Your conduct continues to be appalling. So far as Floquenbeam, he shouldn't take to clean up your mistakes. You should. Do you want to re-consider?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

WilliamJE, I really feel that all this is unnecessary. People make mistakes, it may be better to let it go. Backroom work is very tedious, and sometimes incorrect assumptions will be made while doing it. (I've made such assumptions when handling a user before, and i'm not even an admin. I was incorrect to do so for obvious reasons)

I will acknowledge that Jamie probably should've annotated the block to indicate that it was a mistake, and that their handling has not been perfect, but as of now everyone is ganging up on them, being unreasonably harsh, and putting unnecessary pressure on them when the problem has already been solved. They have a job to do, let them do it. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 20:39, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Please allow factual info update on college of business, city universtiy - such as ranking, programmes. this is inline with update info that appears in business schools in general. for example, HKUST business school (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HKUST_Business_School) are very up to date — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.188.21 (talk) 20:24, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

update on college of business, city universtiy on ranking, program is needed. thx

Please allow factual info update on college of business, city universtiy - such as ranking, programmes. this is inline with update info that appears in business schools in general. for example, HKUST business school (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HKUST_Business_School) are very up to date thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.188.21 (talk) 20:39, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Please take the time to figure out why you've been blocked from editing. Read the various explanations and warnings you were given, the gist of which is the content you are trying to add violates WP:NPOV and WP:COI policies. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:40, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

read and thanks. wonder how long will the account be blocked. and wonder if how long would a user know when his/her application to change user name. if the user is blocked, it seems there is no way for the user to even request for an edit since wikipedia will display "you are currently unable to edit wikipedia" wonder if you can help or advise further.thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.188.21 (talk) 21:01, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

See WP:BLOCKEVASION (which this IP is now blocked for) and WP:UNBLOCK. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Confusing edits

Reverts such as this both introduce unsourced info, remove sources, and undo edits by other users (i.e. me) who are not sockpuppets. Why are you doing this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:03, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Those edits were all made by a now-blocked sockpuppet of Jshpinar. I understand that it seems odd to remove sources, but per WP:DENY, we shouldn't encourage future socking, i.e., "how many edits can I get in before they figure out I'm a sock?" OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

(Actually, Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Edits_by_and_on_behalf_of_banned_editors is probably more relevant here than WP:DENY. It's fine to selectively restore/retain some of the edits if you think they should stand. I'm approaching this more from dealing with a prolific block evader. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Do you really think it's a good idea to restore all of the edits of a banned user? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:14, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Sometimes the only way you can convince someone to stop evading their block is to tell them that policy allows us to unilaterally revert their edits. But, it's also true that established editors can restore those edits. Per WP:PROXYING, the editor who restores the sock's edits takes ownership of them. So, as long as the edits don't violate any policies or guidelines, it's legit, even if we think it's kind of annoying. You can always semi-protect articles to stop the socking if it gets bad enough. I get a bit anxious about that sometimes, though, because I fear that the sock will just move on to vandalizing other articles, and I won't be able to find the vandalism. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

OK. I'm concerned about the precedent we may be setting for Jshpinar, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:56, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

This SPI should interest you

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Heba jad who may well be Yousefmalekicr7 although the edit summaries are different. Doug Weller talk 14:25, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah yes; the LTA could be named "The Middle-Eastern Climate Fiddler." I'd initially only noticed the edits on Tehran, but I see they cover a broader scope. Thanks for taking care of that one! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Goodplacefreak20

I've given him a final warning already for his edits at The Good Place (season 4).[8] He deleted everything on his talk page and started whinging about bullying on my talk page.[9] Doug Weller gave him a warning for that. I just don't think he will ever understand. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Probably merited a block before my final warning, but I also wanted to weigh in on the consensus, which makes me somewhat involved; looks like the matter has been sorted now. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:34, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

GoodPlaceFanatic16 seems to be the same editor as Goodplacefreak20. Only now has he/she edited The Good Place articles now that Goodplacefreak20 been indef blocked. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:50, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Most likely, but I filed an SPI to be sure. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, you got your report in just before I tried to open one. :) --AussieLegend (✉) 17:22, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't catch that the second account was created right after a previous block. Yeah, that's a pretty loud quack; if the checkuser comes back positive, I'll apply WP:DUCK blocks to any future mischief. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Paleontologist99 socking again after their unblock

I thought I should let you know that User:Paleontologist99 was indefinitely blocked for block evasion [10] and was later unblocked [11], but they are still continuing to sock under multiple IP addresses:

• 50.226.218.210 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) [12] similar edits: [13] with [14][15][16]
• 73.208.44.57 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) [17] similar edits: [18][19] with [20][21]
• 50.226.218.222 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) [22] similar edits: [23] with [24]][25][26]

These three IP socks also geo-locate to the same location and ISP as the other ones that they were previously indefinitely blocked for: 50.196.213.1 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) [27] and here: 2602:306:CFC5:6240:5184:EEA5:36E9:64F4 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) 2602:306:cfc5:6240:c45a:d9c4:7ad7:fb51 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). They all edit similar articles and make similar changes to the articles. There are more examples of similarities between User:Paleontologist99 and their IP socks, but I chose just a couple examples; please let me know if you would like to see more diffs. Some1 (talk) 01:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. It's quite likely those edits are all from Paleontologist99; the question is whether or not the "logged out" editing was done in an abusive fashion (i.e., one of the reasons listed here). Do you know of any examples where those IP edits violated alt account/logged out policy? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:42, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Maybe the 'Avoiding scrutiny' bit, such as this [28] from the IP and later near edit-warring on a different article about the same topic [29][30][31]. But I understand if that's not enough of an "inappropriate" use of editing while logged out. I guess I just have a lot of examples of persistent disruptive editing and WP:CIR issues from User:Paleontologist99, with the recent one being them adding unsourced material to the lead [32] (and marking it as minor when it's not) again after being warned about the exact same thing on a different article more than a week before [33][34][35][36]. They were also the one adding unsourced material to the leads of multiple articles [37][38][39], which is what they meant by their comment to you here [40]. I know from previous experience that User:Paleontologist99 stalks my contribution history, so if they see and read this section, hopefully they'll know not to edit inappropriately with those IPs in the future nor add unsourced materials to articles. Some1 (talk) 04:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

He'll be please to see that I've "checked" the other generation articles and removed unsourced statements. Regarding the logged out editing, I'm going to continue examining that. Thank you for doing the legwork on the diffs. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:32, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Not me

There's a message that "This IP address is currently blocked" for my current IP (Special:Contributions/2606:A000:1126:28D:8C52:8F68:C701:7CD2} -- yet I've just made one edit (and it was not blocked). Presumably this does not refer to me; I have a dynamic IP. -- Just thought I'd let you know that I'm not blocked (thankfully) even though it says I am. —2606:A000:1126:28D:8C52:8F68:C701:7CD2 (talk) 08:38, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

A wonderful new tool we have is the partial block. I place a partial (targeted) rangeblock on the range you are on. Someone on that range was having fun with one particular article, and now they are not, thanks to that very selective block. Because it's only for one particular article (for now), the risk for collateral damage is low. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:00, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for explaining. 2606:A000:1126:28D:8C52:8F68:C701:7CD2 (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Use of the UK flag for Scotland

Was not intending test edit.

Use of this flag for Scotland is racist.

Did not know Wikipedia policy.

Will not try to change again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TwoeightsixU (talk • contribs) 15:04, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Perry Caravello

Hi there. I was surprised that, after revdel-ing the serious BLP violation to the article about Perry Caravello, it was still there an hour or so later. This is just to let you know that I took the initiative to report this to the oversight team, so it's now been completely redacted. I also felt the edit was so egregious that I have applied a one year block to User:4.14.20.26. I'm a very new admin who always likes to AGF with troublesome editors, but on this occasion I really felt it was appropriate. Do let me know if you think it was not justified. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I'd agree with you that doxxing is egregious, definitely worth rev-delling, probably worth oversighting as well. Blocking the IP for a year is the part that's a bit questionable. I have no problems with blocking IPs for long periods of time if behavior warrants it, but only if I have a sense that the same vandal is returning to that IP (or multiple vandals are using it frequently, e.g. school blocks). Given that there's only one edit from that IP, we don't have a good sense of to what extent that IP is dynamic. On the other hand, we do now have the option of more targeted blocks via Wikipedia:Partial_blocks. There is less risk of "collateral damage" (blocking innocent dynamic IP users) that way. If it was me, I would've either blocked the IP for a shorter period (1 week? maybe) or just blocked them for that article for a longer duration. I've added that page to my watchlist; if we see additional attempts, we'll get a better sense of how and where to apply blocks.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I welcome that feedback, and points taken. 'fraid I've not yet had a chance to master the partial block element, but will do so soon. I did think long and hard about the appropriate length, especially as I have always hated seeing certain other admins apply ridiculous length blocks for a repeated handful of fart-related edits from a school IP. Equally (and I am aware of the IP Blocking policy) I feel short blocks of a week for the most egregious edits sends quite the wrong message that we don't take some things seriously. I might have got this one wrong, and will reconsider it later in the week. But as I've stated on my user page, I am happy at this stage to have any of my admin actions changed or reverted without prior discussion if a more experienced admin feels I've not acted appropriately, or in the best interests of the Project or of other people. All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:21, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Protection level for Draft:Sanat Sawant

Hi Ohnoitsjamie,

Thank you for your quick actioning of and effecting the WP:SNOW closure of Draft:Sanat Sawant. While I'm not familiar with the details on this draft being tendentiously resubmitted without improvement, I noted that you salt protected the draft namespace title with Sysop-level creation protection. I see that the draft was created by an IPv6 editor, so I'm not sure if some autoconfirmed or extended confirmed editors were involved in editing this draft and for tendentiously resubmitting it, but given that Draft: namespace is not indexed by Google, at recent MfD discussions, Robert McClenon and I have often recommended, when required, either WP:AUTOCONFIRMED or WP:ECP level of indefinite creation protection for the Draft: namespace URL, to allow a neutral experienced editor to have another attempt should they be so inclined. I don't have any interest in working on this draft, but was wondering if, assuming extended confirmed editors were not working on this draft, you might consider lowering the protection level to ECP?

Cheers,
Doug Mehus T·C 00:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

That's a sensible suggestion; I've reduced the protection to ECP. Thanks for letting me know about the MfD discussions, it's hard to stay on top of those sorts of things that fall outside of typical policy links. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Ohnoitsjamie, No worries. Yeah, for main article space, I think administrator-level salt is more appropriate in these cases. I don't expect we'll see any extended confirmed editor wanting to recreate this draft any time soon, but just in case you're unavailable, say, in a year's time, having it at ECP level just sort of reduces the bureaucracy to recreate the draft. Doug Mehus T·C 01:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft talk:Sanat Sawant

Another IP at the talk page of this multi-declined item, which you deleted and salted, and blocked account and IP yesterday. Eagleash (talk) 07:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Eagleash: Ah, because it was a creation protected edit request. What's the protocol in these situations, do we allow the talk page to remain without an article page, or do we creation protect the talk page at ECP as well, possibly with an edit notice to draft the article in userspace? Doug Mehus T·C 14:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Dmehus: Well, the talk page has already been deleted once via G8 I believe. I am not at all certain what the procedure here should be... it seems logical to protect the TP as well but there may be reasons not to do so. Editors may wish to make useful requests at some later date maybe? Eagleash (talk) 15:22, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I requested the G8 deletion of the talk page the first time as I assumed Ohnoitsjamie had just forgotten to delete the corresponding talk page so, so far, it's only been recreated once. I'm not sure what our policy is on creation of the talk pages because, ultimately, where else does one request the ability to create a draft article? Perhaps a temporary ECP creation protection of, say, 3-6 months, to allow a "cooling off period"? Doug Mehus T·C 15:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Dmehus: I think it was correct to request deletion; not typical for someone to pesist like this. Short period of protection seems like a reasonable solution. Maybe a rangeblock? Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 16:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

ECP for three months on the talk page, rangeblocked 49.36.8.0/22. Maybe that will give them time to read some of the policy links they've been given, or get tired an move on to other venues. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks to the both of you for pitching in and for the helpful suggestions. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:07, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the help Jamie. Eagleash (talk) 21:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Eagleash and Ohnoitsjamie, those sound like great solutions. Thanks for effecting that. Doug Mehus T·C 21:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Helpline/reservation scam

Greetings, I noticed you blocked a range of IPs (2405:204:3000::/37 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) due to this scam. They have posted the phone # on Alaska Airlines, Qantas, and Lufthansa as well. I reported it to AIV, but the helperbot removes it immediately since there is already a block in place. Any help would be appreciated. Best, P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 19:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I expanded some of the blocks and tweaked filters. The desperation is humorous; all of the weird characters they're using to try to sneak them in...as if that's going to look legit to anyone with half a brain. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Full protection for Generation Z

Hi, if disruption continues, can you please change protection setting for Generation Z from semi-protected to fully protected. Thank you and happy editing! --Paleontologist99 (talk) 21:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

At this point I'm WP:INVOLVED, so I'll recuse myself from further admin actions at this time on that page. I have filed a 3RR report, however.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you for clearing the AIV backlog and allowing myself and others to relax with the reverts for a while! Thepenguin9 (talk) 00:40, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Can't help with the Kuwait coronavirus page due to IP block

Hey, I decided to create an account to help with updating the information in the Kuwait coronavirus page. However, I can't really do anything because my IP was blocked. I understand that it is to prevent any trolls or similar, but I genuinely want to help with maintaining and updating the page. Al3rbi.q80 (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Al3rbi.q80, if you were able to comment on my talk page as you did above, you're not blocked outright. The page you are trying to edit may be protected. You can make an edit request on the page's talk page if that's the case. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:56, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Webseriespro

Sir, I added this because I found the information useful, if you don't want me to add this link as reference. I won't do it again.

Please, Don't report this domain. The website is new but provides useful and true information. Everyone deserves a chance, I will never again add this domain as reference. Bhojpuri baby (talk) 07:26, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

It's already been reported for tracking purposes, but it hasn't been blacklisted yet. If I see anyone else add it again, it will be blacklisted. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:36, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Blocked IP

You blocked this IP address Special:Contributions/122.177.0.0/16 and we have an OTRS ticket Ticket:2020040310003722 saying they are unable to create an account, which was my initial advise but they are unable to do that. Can you assist with this or do I need to involve stewards? ww2censor (talk) 13:36, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

I enabled account creation for now, we'll see how that goes. Unfortunately, the LTA reservation # spammers (trying to add scam reservation and customer support phone numbers on airlines and other businesses) tend to use large public ranges, so it's difficult to avoid collateral damages. I've been experimenting with partial blocks, but unfortunately a partial block has a limit on how many individual targets we can block. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:21, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you the user confirmed they were able to create an account. Thanks. ww2censor (talk) 22:30, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit filter

Hi, is it possible to add an edit filter to a watchlist? Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:48, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

You mean so that pages in your own watchlist are screened for regex patterns? I don't think via the regular edit filter, but I could be wrong. I only recently started making small changes to edit filters, but I'm not well-versed on the topic yet. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I mean so edits that pass through a filter will appear on my watchlist regardless of whether I already have that page on my watchlist or not. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know. User:Suffusion_of_Yellow, do you know the answer to that question? I presume that filter creators have a way of testing filters privately before releasing them into the wild. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

There's just Special:AbuseFilter/test, which is limited to 100 edits at time. There's no way to create "personal" filters and leave them running. But I think Eagles247 wants to know if there's way to add an existing filter to your watchlist. That's not a MediaWiki feature, but I suppose it would be fairly easy to create a user script for something like that. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:21, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Ktdk

Hi Jamie. I see you had also warned this user about adding unsourced content. But even after many warnings, they don't seem to follow this. There have been multiple instances of this user adding or restoring unsourced content even after your message. Please have a look at this. Jetstreamer (talk · contribs) requested admin involvement in this matter as well. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 15:50, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

From the most recent edits, it seems like the user is making an effort, so I don't think an immediate block is quite warranted. However, I think they've had enough "strikes" at this point; let me know if they add any more additional problematic/uncited material and I'll block. I can appreicate that you and another editor are frustrated with this user. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:58, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Final block warning by admin

Sir I have not added 4 times citing a source from the 2nd warning I have added source from the next edit of mine where it was needed but this 4th time forgot to add the source please if you want check my previous edits really what I am saying is true please reply and I requesting you to take that warning back between 2nd and 4th warning I have done 50-100 edits In those I have added source where it needed please I am requesting you to please please take that warning back what I said above is true in that spicejet edit I have linked instead of sourcing what's wrong with linking Ktdk (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

4 times 2nd what? You've been asked by several users to include sources when you add content. The facts and figures edits you are making to airline articles always require sources, not just some of the time; you added unsourced content as recently as April 16. I'm not taking the warning back; all you need to do is consistently add or update sources to support any material you add or change. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:56, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Final block warning by the admin

Ok atleast tell me this may I know when you will take the warning back Ktdk (talk) 02:09, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

We don't "take back" warnings. You were given a final warning; that's it. As long as you don't add any more unsourced material, you're fine. If you do add unsourced material, you will be blocked; that's it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Zimbabwean young entrepreneur Ashlee Nyathi

Jamie hope you well, safe and stay active. I saw you blocked Ashlee Nyathi page cause of not notable. Ashlee Nyathi is notable very well young entrepreneur from Mbare Harare. As he from Zimbabwe, he been on the news sources in Zimbabwe, almost all of his news articles. He can not be on new York time or USA Today because his not from there, hope you understand. He’s being on Newsday, Dailynews, The herald, The standard, allafrica and more. I can even send your his reference(links). so please can you unblock him. I really don’t know why people block Zimbabwean public figure, entrepreneur and celebrities

(1) That page was deleted by three different admins after multiple creations and warnings, which is why I blocked User:Ashlee_Nyathi. Earlier multiple attempts to create Ashlee Nyathi resulted in the page being salted, which is what we do when users have trouble understanding the phrase "no, you may not create an autobiography." (2) If that user wishes to be unblocked, they can follow the {{unblock}} link on their page and request it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:50, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Vijayawada Airport

Please could you look at the above article regarding possible copyvio. I am not skilled in the area so may be wrong. I did not want to edit war. See my summary.SovalValtos (talk) 11:00, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the various steps you have taken.SovalValtos (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Ice hockey notability guidelines

Hello! My past 7? or so page creations pass the notability guidelines because those players are either on the First or Second All-American Teams. The international player pass it because they've played a game in one of the leagues listed in the guidelines. Since stats don't get updated until after the season, those may not be as clear unless you go to their stats page on another site. Let me know if you have any other questions! Eclipse13 (talk) 21:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Deprod notice

I declined your proposed deletion of Imo's Pizza. I'm not sure if it's notable, either, to be honest, but a Google search seems to indicate it's a fairly important chain in it's region. I found a short review in a St. Louis-area newspaper fairly quickly. I'm not sure if it's notable but I think it at least deserves an AFD. Hog Farm (talk) 04:12, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, with John Hamm as a customer, maybe you're onto something! They do have a fair amount of news hits, enough fodder for WP:GNG that it would likely survive an AfD. The "32nd largest" part was what zoned in on, but I guess we have quite a few of these articles. I appreciate the courtesy notification, cheers! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Whiteboards

Hello. I am confused as to why my edit on the Whiteboard page was removed. The information I added was straight from the "[1]" reference source listed already on the page. There are several other articles on the internet that I can add as well noting both accounts about who created the board, if needed. The [2] reference is an expired webpage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael4092 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I am confused as to why you think I'm involved. The edit summary clearly explains that Dianna removed your edit because it violates our copyright policies. You can't copy-and-paste text you find on the web and drop it in Wikipedia, per WP:COPYVIO. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

This was the username that sent me the message about my edit being removed. I am not that familiar with the Talk feature so please direct me if possible to who I need to contact. Secondly, it was not just copied and pasted. There is a source listed. Everything written in the "history" section including what I added comes straight from the source listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael4092 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I can see that it came "straight from the source listed." We call that a copyright violation. Click on this link to see that Dianna made it clear in the edit summary why it was removed. There's no point in contacting her because (1) our policies on copyrights are quite clear and quite firm and (2) the source you added does not meet reliable sources guidelines, so even if you paraphrased the content, that source would not be appropriate. If you take a closer look at the talk page of the IP address that you original posted from, you'll see that my warning to that IP address was dated January, 2020; whoever was using that IP address in January made some edits without warnings that I warned them about. At the bottom of the page, you'll see the copyright warning from Dianna. There's nothing further to discuss here. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok well if what you are saying is true then all other information coming from the source you are stating is not reliable should be removed from the page, most notably in the History section.

Block of User:69.92.161.206

Out of curiosity, why did you block this IP address indefinitely - was this intentional? They had only vandalised an article once and you didn't claim that they were an open proxy.

On an unrelated note, I love how you used Template:Test5i as their block notice; now that's a blast from the past!

Thank you, Passengerpigeon (talk) 00:08, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

No, that was not intentional, thanks for catching that! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:40, 29 April 2020 (UTC)