Ymblanter

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

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

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

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello; Is it possible to do any conversion by ?bot? as seems to have been done for these Chinese ones? The format of the Japanese lists is intended to be internally similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I guess this is more a question to @Multichill: than to me, but I guess if it were he would do the conversion himself without asking me. Let us wait what he answers. If the conversion is not possible, I volunteer to do at least some of the manual conversion (one-two lists per day).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I tried converting with a bot, but didn't manage to do it without too much mess so I abandoned that. Multichill (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hi Ymblanter. Draft:Nikolay Antipov was on the verge of G13 deletion, but the man is obviously notable. It looks like a machine translation of ru:Антипов, Николай Кириллович. I have added a few English language book citations, would copy-editing be an easy task for you? Thanks, Sam Sailor 18:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for reminding me, I will be slowly working on the draft.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Great, thank you. Sam Sailor 18:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Would you consider applying? We could use another active Russian speaker. Something we’ve been working on is getting people not to handle as many requests from languages they aren’t familiar with and this has lead to a small backlog from some wikis. I know you aren’t active on ru.wikipedia now, but being able to read the requests on meta and figure out if it’s within policy would be incredibly helpful. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

@TonyBallioni:, do you have any idea how much time investmet this could be? I am operating close to the upper level limit of my abilities, and if it is enough to check some page once per day and react to pings, I could still do it, but continuously monitoring a page would probably be too much.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:06, 23 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

I think that’d be the most, and checking once every few days would even be helpful. It’s a volunteer project and getting more volunteers from different language groups is always a plus. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:37, 23 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I was actually thinking of organising a contest to get my old stubs expanded. Basically what I did in the early days on here was to identify notable missing articles, simply identifying them and getting them up, thinking in the long term at what is best. The problem is that a lot are really off the anglospere radar and don't get expanded but really should have decent content even if short. The idea that I mass created copyvio articles amuses me, I doubt there's more than a few dozen out of 100,000. I might see if I can get a hotlist of stubs created and run a contest to see who can expand the most. Alternatively I can request deleting them all which would mostly be negative as most can be fleshed out..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

The list is at the CCI investigation page(s). No, I do not think you should delete them, and indeed most of them (I do not know whether most is 90%, 99% or 99.9999%) do not contain any copyvio. But having them expanded would be nice. For Russian districts, I am going through them anyway, and it still could take years, but if I am still alive I will do them. I sometimes write on more exotic topics, but for example Chinese stubs typically require some understanding of Chinese sources for their expansion, and attention could be brought to them it would be great.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:17, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

The task of building this encyclopedia is just so gigantic isn't it? I feel guilty in seeing so many short stubs but really should have been created with much more content but it was all done with the mindset of trying to make this encyclopedia have coverage of everywhere on the planet and really try to tackle systematic bias. I did a lot of good, a lot of them have been expanded but there's a worrying number untouched in ten years. Nobody is developing them. You know Czech and Turkish villages, German rivers etc, articles we should have but nobody is editing. We need something to get them improved. There's probablt a lot of African villages which should probably be redirected into a list, some of those villages in Burkina Faso and Benin etc are still unlikely to have anything online within the next ten years, though on a county or municipal level it seems to be gradually improving in some areas as they come online.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes, this is an evergreen question what should be redirected and what should have separate articles. This is of course diffisult but I would say administrative divisions of levels 1-2-3 are probably fine, and reasonably big settlements (say above 10K) should be fine as well. For the rest, I would say we either have easily available sources or not. Once I tried to expand an article on a Czech village and could not find any information above the standard one which was already in the article. On the other hand, a Czech speaker would know what to search for and might be more successfull. African villages are probably hopeless for the time being unless there are very clear sources covering them. I created some time ago an article on a new province of Zambia (first level administrative division), English is an official language of Zambia, and it was still difficult to find any reasonable information.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I mean look at Madjoari Department (not mine). Even the bigger province is a short stub Kompienga Province. If we can't even get that right it's useless worrying about hundreds of localities within them. If all we have is a population figure I think we should redirect them all into lists by district/province like a gazetteer until there is sufficient info. I'm more embarrassed at seeing how many stubs I created which are still empty than worrying at people finding vios!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

When I was writing about districts of Mozambique, it was easier for me that articles already existed, templates were there, and I just needed to add info from my sources. I suspect Burkina Faso is similar, and I speak French. Villages could be a completely different story whatsoever.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, can you find anything on this in Russian or find a way to translate Mongolian, I tried to destub it but struggled with the web sources I found. Russian wiki has some decent info on it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:37, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I will have a look. --Ymblanter (talk) 13:47, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I found a source for the population at here 8010, looks like there's some other facts in there in the tables. I remember about 12 years back the sums were all half liners and there was no info on the web at all about them!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:02, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Cheers. It would make a massive difference to the encyclopedia wouldn't it if we could get every article on localities up to that sort of minimum quality. Most of the districts are still one liners.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes, and this is what I am systematically doing with Russia (see e.g. Firovsky District as a random example). Concerning Ulaankhus, it also borders with China (and actually its borders with Russia and China are separated), but yesterday I could not figure out how to write this properly. The article I found also contains some information on the geography (mainly relief), I will see whether there is something useful to add to the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I was just looking at that, that narrow strip to the southwest, Xinjiang I think. You and Ezhiki have done a terrific job with Russia, it's massive!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

This is definitely Xinjiang, but to add it in the list, we need to know which Mongolian sums this border separates, and I could not figure this out yesterday. Thanks for compliments for Russia, Ezhiki is unfortunately inactive but I am still around. There is still plenty of work to do there.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Firovsky District is several times more than adequate, a lot of these stubs if they even had a paragraph of text like the lead it would make a big difference, something which actually looks like something you'd see in an encyclopedia, not a crappy online database. "Life is what you make it" they say, well "The encyclopedia is what you make it" rings true too! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I added a translation from Russian wiki for Altai, Bayan-Ölgii but I couldn't access the sources. Can you see if you can source it. If not I've just remove it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think I tried to get the sources from the Russian wikipedia yesterday and one was off-line and another one was archived but not particularly reliable. I will have one more look in the evening.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

There is only one Russian source there, [1], which has quite a lot of info about the aimak (though the reliability is questionable, but it should be ok at the end), but very little specifically about the sum.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Don't worry about it. I started Kikhchik, Russian wiki has two settlements of the same name, one a village which existed nearby long before that was set up. I think it would be best to have one article covering them both but you might disagree. Looking in Google Books the river seems the most notable. It's transwikied and if possible the source need checking and verifying. Won't keep bothering you as I know you're busy but you might want to look into it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:08, 1 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, can you find a list of subdistricts of Afghanistan? I can't seem to find any. Of course even the districts mostly need expanding and researching but it would still be good if there was a list somewhere.† Encyclopædius 14:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Mmm Kot-e Ashro looks like it is actually the town of Jalrez itself now. Falling Rain isn't reliable but is usually right on coordinates and looking on google maps it says it's Jalrez now. This source though says Kot used to be the district capital until taken by the Taliban. Odd. What do you think?† Encyclopædius 15:02, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Usually these things come out if the census, but then one of course needs to be able to read Pashto, and also I am not sure there was a census in the last 50 years. Any other statistical info would be good as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I can't find the coordinates for Zaiwalat either. It's an educated guess for now but not sure.† Encyclopædius 15:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Found it I think.† Encyclopædius 16:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I spent some time searching, I can not find the list of subdistricts. Will try again tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

This one says that the subdistricts were eliminated by Taliban in 1996 and are not in use anymore.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

 

Happy New Year!

Ymblanter,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 15:37, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

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

Abishe (talk) 15:37, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, happy New Year to you as well. Ymblanter (talk) 15:40, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have noticed IPs continually changing the nationality of Russian figures who acquired Israeli citizenship in recent years, including those who decided to stay in Russia, with now there being general edit warring over the nationality. See for example Ivan Urgant ([2][3][4]), Alla Pugacheva ([5][6][7]) and Maxim Galkin ([8]). I remember this being similarly done on Arkady Volozh but now this is affecting many other articles. Is page protection the best course of action in this case for these pages? This has been going on for many months so I am not sure. Mellk (talk) 02:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is indeed not appropriate, certainly not without discussion, and needs to be reverted. Has any of the articles been targeted more than once? Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Maxim Galkin for example I count four times he is changed to Israeli. I see this was the first change on 9 October 2023 where the name in Russian was removed and the first sentence was changed to "Soviet-born and Israeli comedian". At least some of these changes are made by IPs in the range 95.152.0.0/16 and I see a lot of changes on other BLPs by IPs in this range. Alla Pugacheva there are more IPs changing this. Mellk (talk) 06:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I added pending changes to both for a year, let us see what happens. Ymblanter (talk) 06:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks. Happy new year. Mellk (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sure, happy New Year to you as well. Please let me know if disruption continues in other articles. Ymblanter (talk) 06:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for protecting Saleh al-Arouri, can you also protect Osama Hamdan please? He is also reported as assassinated and receiving a heavy influx. Ecrusized (talk) 16:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done Ymblanter (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

In your edit here you moved a category (Category:PBS member networks) that was falsely tagged as C2D. PBS is not the primary category nor is there a page called PBS member networks, so on what grounds did you accept this move? Gonnym (talk) 12:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure I understand. The article is PBS and not Public Broadcasting Service, We do not have the article PBS member networks, but we do not have the article Public Broadcasting Service member networks either. It probably should go to a full discussion anyway, since there are objections from both sides, the question is only what name does it have in the meanwhile and what is going to happen in case of no consensus decision. Also pinging @Mvcg66b3r:. Ymblanter (talk) 12:30, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

		The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award
		For over 360 article reviews during 2023. Well done! Keep up the good work and thank you! Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

NPP Awards For 2023 2401:1900:2082:B110:0:0:0:1 (talk) 15:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

??? Ymblanter (talk) 16:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 30, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 17:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I admittedly do not fully understand WP:PENDINGCHANGES interface. When looking at history of 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel every single edit has "Automatically accepted" tag which I find distracting. Is PC necessary on articles that are restricted to ECP? Since you added it, I figured I'd ping you directly. Kind regards ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

In December, I placed the page under temporary full protection. A bad thing about protection upgrade is that when it expired, the page does not go back to the previous protection (in this case, extended-confirmed one) but instead becomes unprotected (this is being reported as a bug for a long time but apparently there is no interest in fixing it). Therefore the best practice is in this case to also add pending changes, to avoid anonymous vandalism / POV pushing showing in the article. This is what I have done, and nobody removed it. Now I have removed it because it is indeed not needed, thanks for paying attention. Ymblanter (talk) 20:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I saw your recent edit to the Monkey King page. I'm not the person who made the previous addition, but I wanted to let you know that the listed powers do indeed come from the original 1592 edition of Journey to the West. This is just for your information. I don't have the energy to cite each one. Ghostexorcist (talk) 02:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I will undo my edit them (if it has not been done yet). Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think something went wrong, this page you deleted needs to be undeleted and the other one, Category:Years of the 20th century in the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic, either redirected or deleted. I don't get why you would delete a page, and then ask for another one to be redirected there. Fram (talk) 13:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

The move is usually done by the bot, and for the bot to do the move the redirect has to be deleted first. If I get it right, the bot has already done the job (I asked it also to keep the redirect), and before asking the bot I made sure we do not get any redlinks there. If you still see something which you think is not okay please let me know, these category moves in the cases the category is given by a template are notoriously difficult. Thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

May be I should have directly moved the category suppressing the redirect, but usually at CfD it is not considered a good style. Ymblanter (talk) 13:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have reverted edits for years in 3 Soviet republics, as the standard nav template works fine providing that redirects are in place where a standard template-generated name is not to be used. No offence intended. I will look into simplifying and documenting these points. Did I miss a discussion somewhere about this set? – Fayenatic London 23:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

No, there was no discussion, I just needed to find a solution when the new categories are visible and the old ones are not, and I could not find any. If this is what you have done it should be perfectly fine. Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

BTW I only edited two Sovet republics, Turkmenian and Moldavian. Ymblanter (talk) 06:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Right, I found the third one Category:Years of the 20th century in the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic deleted but still populated, so I redirected it, and that was all that was needed. – Fayenatic London 23:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Great, thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm not sure if this is the place to suggest this or not.

Is there any way to remove the indefinite lock, or at least set a date for it to be unlocked rather than indef? This is for the Playboi Carti article.

The reason I ask is that I believe there should be a note on the birthday stating something along the lines of "While most published sources support a 1996 birthday, self published sources state a 1995 birthday" or similar. Since it is contested material, WP:DOB states it should include both or be removed. I believe this would cut down on the edit wars from both sides of the debate since it presents both arguments. Thank you.

Awshort (talk) 10:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I would prefer not to unprotect it for the time being, because what was happening in the article is not really acceptable. However, if there is discussion at the talk page of the article and there is consensus between all parties about the birth date, an extended-confirmed editor will implement the consensus. Ymblanter (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think you should undo your block of Queen Raducanu (talk · contribs). All edits between their vandalism warning and their edits to the team event medal article seem to be in good faith and, as a new user I don't think they know of WP:NPOV.

I also think you are WP:INVOLVED as (among other reasons) you appear to have a vested interest in the skating medals. Jasper Deng (talk) 18:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

They have been previously warned, so I do not think this is a bad block. I will undo it however because of the involved argument. Whereas I have zero vested interest (I believe I actually started the article, this is why I have it on my watchlist), and nobody can really prove that I was POV editing, I agree it does not look good. Ymblanter (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Jasper, I appreciate it. As for you Ymblanter - I correctly updated the team figure skating event from 2022’s games to show that ROC got demoted to the bronze medal this week. Some bright spark has undone this to show the ROC still winning gold. Surely you should be blocking whoever did that & if that is yourself then you should do some research into things before changing them back. Queen Raducanu (talk) 11:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Actually, it seriously worries me that you do not understand which part of your edit was totally inappropriate. Ymblanter (talk) 01:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Queen Raducanu: We keep in line with what IOC has done, and only IOC (or CAS on appeal) has authority to officially alter medal assignments. IOC has not officially approved this change even as ISU has released updated rankings. The consensus (agreement) by the community at Talk:Figure skating at the 2022 Winter Olympics – Team event#Gold for USA is for this. Ymblanter did do their research and the only reason I requested they unblock you was WP:INVOLVED; had it been by an uninvolved administrator the block would've remained, and I otherwise endorsed the block.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I blocked specifically for this edit, not for changing the medals - assuming good faith, a user can be not sufficiently informed about the recent developments and should not be blocked for one- or two-time introduction of unsourced content. Ymblanter (talk) 23:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Per If you belatedly notice and want to oppose a speedy move that has already been processed, contact one of the admins who process the Speedy page. If your objection seems valid, they may reverse the move, or start a full CFD discussion. please revert Category:HBO Max original programming. Television and film categories do not use anachronistic names. We always use the name at the time, and if needed, use a category to group them. Gonnym (talk) 07:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I reverted the processing and sent it back to the speedy page. Ymblanter (talk) 07:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

If I'm not mistaken, both categories existed, so reverting the bot like this isn't better as it will move pages that should be in the Max category. If you just re-create the page, I'll find the pages the bot moved and just revert it. Gonnym (talk) 08:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think I am done restoring page histories, thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 08:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Arbitrators have proposed a motion to suspend the Mzajac case for three months at the proposed decision page. During this period, Mzajac will be temporarily desysopped, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac/Proposed decision#Motion to suspend for further information. Comments are welcome at the proposed decision talk page. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 19:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, I will have a look. Ymblanter (talk) 19:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Dear Administrator, could you please engage in the discussion and read the entire thread? There seems to be an issue. Your attention would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aramaic#Shmayo_deletes_sourced_information

PersonJanuary2024 (talk) 23:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, was there any past discussion that you remember about the usage of "the" before governorates? Most of the articles now do not have "the" but there are a few articles about governorates in the Caucasus region where "the" is used e.g. Black Sea Governorate and Elizavetpol Governorate. It seems a few other editors work on those articles specifically and prefer "the". Thanks. Mellk (talk) 17:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am not a native speaker. When I came here the ones which existed did not have the, if I remember correctly. May be something for the central discussion, but we should come with a single pattern, whatever it could be. Ymblanter (talk) 23:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks. I will probably start a discussion at Talk:Governorate (Russia) later then. Mellk (talk) 00:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Great, thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 00:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, please unprotect File:Jyllands-Posten-pg3-article-in-Sept-30-2005-edition-of-KulturWeekend-entitled-Muhammeds-ansigt.png since it's not experiencing that much vandalism now. —Matrix(!) (a good person!)_{[Citation not needed at all; thank you very much]} 11:36, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I do not think it is safe. This is a topic which would attract vandalism throughout our lifetime. Ymblanter (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ymblanter, may I ask where it says that Ikh Hob Dikh Tsu Fil Lib lyrics is copyrighted till 2029? Was the original version copyrighted or English one, or both? Can you please provide a link? Thanks, Jacob0790 (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

If it was published in the US in 1933, the text is under copyright for 95 years, both Yiddish and English text (assuming nothing strange happened, for example explicitly released in public domain). One can look up copyright rules, for example, at commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States. Ymblanter (talk) 18:47, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I understand there were disagreements on the article False rape accusation, but seriously, was it really necessary a protection from editing for an entire year? Why so long? Especially now that I started a topic in the talk page about it. Usually a protection is so long when edit wars proceed even after the first short block, so why this time is different? 151.36.46.173 (talk) 08:26, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

It was previously protected for six months. The next protection will likely be of indefinite duration. Ymblanter (talk) 08:28, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Didn't know that. 151.36.46.173 (talk) 08:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

The Moscow transliteration vandal is back yet again Special:Contributions/185.79.103.160. Thanks in advance—blindlynx 16:13, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done Ymblanter (talk) 16:20, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

and again Special:Contributions/109.252.206.120... i don't suppose there is another way to deal with this?—blindlynx 15:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done, indeed, blocking every appearance seems to be the only way. Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Cool, just making sure. Thank you again for dealing with this regularly—blindlynx 20:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sure, no problem Ymblanter (talk) 20:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Another one. Mellk (talk) 00:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done Ymblanter (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I am perplexed as to why you are so passive-agressive in reverting my picture change on Clervaux railway station. What do you mean by "inserting your picture in every single possible place in the Wikimedia Universe" ? I understand you might take a form of personal pride in the 2014 image as you took it yourself, but all I want to do is to make the article better by having a picture that is more recent, higher quality and shows the station building from closer. In your picture, the road bridge, which is not the subject of the article, is at the forefront, which I personally find to be unnecessary as again, this is about "Clervaux railway station" and not "Clervaux railway station, above which there is a road bridge". Could you please clarify why you think your picture is preferrable to the more recent one? Procrastineur49 (talk) 16:33, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I do not see any advantage of your picture, and I really do not like that you went through all the projects and replaced there pictures by your picture. As far as I am concerned this behavior is absolutely unnecessary. My picture is only used in one project (here), I indeed took trouble to travel there and take it, and and I not happy for it being mass-replaced. Ymblanter (talk) 17:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

And of course if the station is under a bridge it is under a bridge. I do not see why this should be hidden in any way. Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

For the record, I did not "go through all the projects and replace the picture", it was only on English and French WP and on Wikidata. Also, it is not "my picture". It saddens me that you are making such a big deal out of this. Procrastineur49 (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Alexei Navalny#Nationalist. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Brusquedandelion (talk) 13:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Really? Thank you for teaching me Wikipedia policies, I obviously are not familiar with them and never thought they could even exist. I am happy to get a lesson from a user with 600 edits who is editing in a contentious topic they are not familiar with. Ymblanter (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't think I was teaching you anything, though your acerbic and sarcastic response (and in particular the fact your immediate urge was to complain to other administrators to get me blocked) suggests that you think you are better than me because I have edited Wikipedia fewer times than you, or because you are an administrator and I am not. At the very least, it doesn't.

If you're already familiar with Wikipedia civility guidelines (which I never doubted to begin with), then that is all the more reason to be civil. Thus your response doesn't really make sense, except as indicating a feeling of superiority ("how dare this pipsqueak talk back to me, the might so and so...").

Administrators such as yourself should make more, not less, of an attempt to be civil. I recognize I am not perfect, but neither has anyone placed in a position of confidence, as Wikipedians have with you. Brusquedandelion (talk) 07:57, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

So you have just got a 31 h block and still have not understood anything. Prepare yourself for a longer block then. Ymblanter (talk) 07:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Are you threatening me? Are administrators supposed to behave this way? Brusquedandelion (talk) 08:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

No, I am stating the obvious thing. I can not block your account myself. Ymblanter (talk) 11:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ymblanter,

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 20, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Tnx. Ymblanter (talk) 20:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

They must check the information 2806:250:414:C010:19BC:A5BE:AC56:7112 (talk) 22:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)Reply