User talk:jpgordon

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

For older history, check [1] as well as the archives.

You know why I'm here

അദ്വൈതൻ - what other accounts?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Avran Ninan. Nobody I've seen before, but as soon as അദ്വൈതൻ said "I haven't abandoned this account and started a new one to cover up these history", my radar immediately said "who even asked?" so I checked. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 21:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where did the user make that comment? I must've missed it. It's interesting that they created the new account before my block. Naturally, I'm going to tag - confirmed, proven, or suspected? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:02, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: right here. CU is quite unambiguous. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not very bright, are they? I've tagged as confirmed.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Somali clans

Hello admin, @Garabnimo has evaded their block after being blocked under their previous account @Samirlalas for restoration of questionable content at various articles related to the Somali people and their history. The account is now restoring content at the Somali clans article and is insulting with very bad language at the edit summary. Please have them blocked immediately. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, JP, just do it!--Bbb23 (talk) 15:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have also added a report at [2] Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 15:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which I've reverted because it's malformed again.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good moorning. Done. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kuči tribe

Hello, i am asking for advice.

In Kuči article there is a dispute about origin. While i think that direct, modern and academic source that directly addresses the claim of the origin and calls tribe "mixed in origin", which is based on the Ottoman census data from the creation time of the tribe (end of 15th century), some other editors are disagreeing and base their opinion on sources that comment on a 17th century language report by some catholic priest. While i have no problem with that report, as i've stated in the talk page, i don't think that something that happened 2 centuries later and only has 1 report, can be used to form an opinion that the tribe was Albanian in origin. I am saying opinion, because no source states directly that the tribe is Albanian in origin, and while they found sources that will group up this tribe with Albanian ones, those books don't talk about source, mostly about rules and traditions which are basically the same for all the tribes in North Albania, Montenegro and Herzegovina.

Talk page discussions go nowhere, as they don't want to agree to anything, and i am the only one that has to talk there. As you can see, few of them that are in my opinion holding the article as a hostage, make changes without any communication between themselves, in a short span of time.

I tried opening dispute resolution, but i doubt they will answer at all, as they didn't in the last 24 hours (keep in mind, if i make an edit now on any of the articles they control, i am reverted in about 5 minutes).

There's no reasoning with them, they claim that the question of origin doesn't need to be answered as it's WP:BLUESKY, which clearly it's not.

I always assume good faith, but based on their behaviour on other articles as well, i am starting to doubt that.

For example, they created page for Drekalovići, which is a brotherhood in Kuči (and was covered by that article), but they claim it's a tribe (they use sources that claim nothing like that, and won't change that or delete the page) just so they could stack Albanian tribes sidebar, which they push into articles.

They also constantly push for the Albanian variation of the name Kuči, instead of using English one. Both in the article, as well as in the talk page. They are slowly changing article until only the Albanian name is left, and that again makes me think that they have nationalistic POV which hurts the discussion. I asked them to at least not use that in talk page, but they declined.

I am doing my best here not to accuse them of something like tag teaming and pushing agenda, but it's really getting hard.

What can be done? Sorry for the long post. Setxkbmap (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Really, what you need is more eyes on the discussion. An RFC would be appropriate. This is a pretty complex issue regarding questions of sourcing and synthesis. I have no idea who in this dispute is correct. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:23, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never expected you to get into the sources, i just think that their way of working is wrong.

I will try RfC once dispute resolution is closed, which i assume will happen soon as they will never respons.

Thank you! Setxkbmap (talk) 22:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The synthesis part will be key. I look at Albanian in origin and immediately think hell yeah ^{[citation needed]}. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Setxkbmap (talk) 22:42, 27 August 2024 (UTC)/[reply]

A quick thank you...

...for your rapid response to my IP block exemption request, two years in a row. You make my life here on Wikipedia much easier, and your work is very much appreciated! Curt ^内蒙 17:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're so welcome! And thanks right back at you. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

Pppery

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Oversighter changes

Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Invitation to join the Twenty Year Society

Dear Jpgordon,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Twenty Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for twenty years or more.

Best regards, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]