User:Winhunter
Winhunter (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) joined Wikipedia in 12 April, 2005 and became an administrator on 4 September, 2006.
Languages | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Search user languages |
Userbox | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||
Search user languages |
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |
Articles I...
[edit]Created
[edit]- Nationality Law of the People's Republic of China
- Higher education in Hong Kong (Translated)
- Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (Translated)
- Learn from Dazhai in agriculture
- University Grants Committee
Expanded significantly
[edit]My other accounts
[edit]- WinBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights)
- Winpublic (talk · contribs · count) (For use in public computers)
My bookmarks
[edit]
Administrative backlog
[edit]Reports
[edit]- 178.255.168.224 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – Tripped filter 614 five times in the last 5 minutes (Memes and vandalism trends (moomer slang + zoomer slang), details). Report false positive. DatBot (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
User-reported
[edit]- 83.58.148.140 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – On Talk:Carolingian Empire: vandalism after final warning. Remsense ‥ 论 20:00, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Макс666666 (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
- Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 20:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- This username matched "Attempting to skip filters using multiple similar characters" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 20:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note on file Multiple special characters can be contained in the same phrase, this rule detects when one or more occurs. -- DQB (owner / report) 20:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
User-reported
[edit]- Deez nut$445 (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as an inappropriate username. Johnj1995 (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Eve Tera (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. See contributions and abuse log. --Ratekreel (talk) 20:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Olasurekhid (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. See contributions and abuse log. --Ratekreel (talk) 20:05, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- University of Mid Florida (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. --Ratekreel (talk) 20:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for increase in protection level
[edit]Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
List of antisemitic incidents in the United States and related articles
[edit]Reason: Intermittent vandalism and aggressive participation (e.g. repeated personal attacks) by an non-EC user, who has refused to stop after being politely told several times that they were violating the WP:ARBECR by involving themselves in Israeli-Palestinian conflict-associated editing.
Examples of the said user’s ECR violations: I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII and VIII.
Also this by another non-EC user.
P.S. In the content of the article, “Israel” is mentioned 48 times, “Palestine” 6 times while “Gaza” 3 times. It has basically intertwined with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Steven1991 (talk) 12:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- To provide more context, within the past several days this user has made multiple attempts at trying to prevent other users from engaging with the page: 1, 2 , this just appears to be a latest attempt.
- They were told by an admin, Those edits aren't vandalism; this is a routine content dispute over inclusion, where WP:ONUS applies, especially given that there are WP:BLP concerns. If anything, repeatedly re-adding contested material without consensus is the most problematic behavior here. Anyone reviewing this should also be aware of OP's recent history ... On consideration, I suggest that you find other, less controversial topocs to edit
- They were also told, In looking at the article talkpage, there are numerous editors expressing concerns about content you are pushing to include. And you are repeatedly personalizing the dispute and casting plenty of aspersions of your own--to an unwise degree given your own recent block history (three in the past month), and made doubly so by your decision to call admin attention to this dispute. My best advice to you is to ... show more good faith at the talkpage, and make sure you understand WP:ONUS, WP:BLP, and WP:BLPCRIME; your hands are far from clean here
- On the article's talk page they began spamming (1, 2, 3, 4) me with alerts regarding ECR, when no one else agrees with WP:ARBECR applying to the article, and were told (1, 2), You know they're already aware of ECR, they were aware before you started alerting them.They're allowed to edit this article, just not be involved in WP:PIA. Now stop harassing them by spamming alerts at them. You've been told before not to do this with other users ... I already pointed out that they are allowed to edit this page as antisemitism as a whole is unrelated to WP:PIA & just because some aspects under ECR are included in the article, does not mean the entire article is under ECR. Now please, leave them alone, stop aggressively trying to kick them off the page, & focus on content Wikipedious1 (talk) 15:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- I.) Isolated instances of reversing edits that apparently violated the WP:VANDAL and WP:ARBECR are not considered edit warring, when some of your last week’s mass deletions of well-sourced content comprised a few to no reasons, as pointed out by one of the admins who intervened ( “Lol” is not a reason ), not mentioning those entries were directly associated with the A/I conflict in which you’re not supposed to have got involved in the first place.
- III.) Last week, I made a significant compromise by removing the vast majority of the specific entries you didn’t want to be kept in the list so as to address your “concerns”
so as to de-escalateforany disputesthe sake of de-escalation. - IV.) I have never ceased to follow the demands from you/other users concerning any other disputed content, despite my personal disagreement – I removed those entries accordingly without much questioning when it’s supposed to take place prior to any mass deletion attempts.
- V.) I have tried my best to be patient and keep all of my replies as polite, civil and humble as possible, none of which however seemed to have been reciprocated by you at any point of time. You do not appear to have shown
anysigns of improving your manner in your correspondence, which I find considerably intimidating. - IV.) It is not “spamming” when you appeared to have violated the rules of engagement repeatedly and got relevant reminders. They are reminders – gentle reminders. I advise you to follow the WP:AGF and avoid mischaracterising my actions as anything
“malicious”unfriendly when what I desire is respect.
You were asked repeatedly, as per the WP:NPA and WP:HA, to stop referring me to as an “entity” (dehumanising code word) or persistently employing offensive language in your replies to my polite and humble messages. You don’t appear to have apologised to me either despite your claim of having “reformed”.
Rather than listen, you appeared to have continued the suspected WP:NPA, WP:HA and WP:ARBECR violations. Reminders were given repeatedly as I didn’t want to bring in the specialised admins when they’re already busy enough – I have exercised maximal restraint throughout the process. Steven1991 (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)- I think your first point is the only one that seems reasonable to me, I did make edits and discussion regarding protests related to WP:PIA, which may be incorrect, however I have refrained from discussing the conflict, or taking a side, other than describing what I perceived to be Biden's side in the conflict (this was relevant to a disputed incident in the article). In other words I made edits and discussions about protests, and a public figure's opinions (Biden's), only when it was relevant to specific incidents on the list that were in contention. I do not believe the entire article is related to WP:PIA, however, and I would dispute that, and I would guess that that is not the consensus among the editors. I want to point out that I have refrained from editing the page until a consensus to the current impasse is reached. I also think it's strange that I was blocked for making improper edit summaries (including what you're referring to, I don't understand why you're still bringing that up or presenting it as an ongoing issue when it has been settled), which means an admin or admins saw my edits, and decided that I hadn't broken any rules other than making improper edit summaries and not properly discussing my edits. It just seems strange that only within the past <24 hours it appears to have become a problem, when I was blocked on the 12th of October. For any admins my question would be why no one seemed to have caught this additional, earlier breach.
- You don’t appear to have apologised to me either. I referred to you as the "Steven Entity" several times in 2 separate occasions, once on your talk page and once on the article's talk page, separated by the IIRC 48 hours of my block period. I thought it was all in good humor especially as a newer Wikipedia user who has not really engaged in discussion on an article talk page before, but since engaging with other editors I've since realized that creating nicknames for others -- only meant in good humor and not to seriously hurt other's feelings -- is an impediment to civility and consensus, and I have shed the earlier immaturity. I also noticed that you did not tell me to not refer to you in this way, so I thought it was okay to do so. In day to day civil discussion, as an example, I would expect someone to correct me immediately if I were to misgender them or mispronounce their name - in this situation I was only told by other members not to refer to you in this way, and you did not remark on it until after I already agreed to stop referring to you in this way. While it seems that this has been a major slight to you -- which is fine, you are of course allowed to feel that way -- I do get the feeling that it is being weaponized as another "point" you have in your dispute against me, in the same way your request for page protection seems to be another weapon you've decided to fire as part of the dispute rather than something you believe at a genuine level would allow for more meaningful contribution to the article. Though these points do not take away from the fact that my nickname for you was wrong. I do want to apologize to you for referring to you in this way on 2 separate occasions, and I do want to point out that I did agree to not refer to you in this way, and I have not done so since, I also want to thank you for improving my netiquette and my ability to use Wikipedia through engaging in our dispute. I'll repost this to your talk page as well, though I do question why you're bringing it up on this page and what relevance it has here, as well as what relevance some of these matters that appear to be settled have to this request for protection. Wikipedious1 (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
I've since realized that creating nicknames for others -- only meant in good humor
- It is not just a nickname. Calling a living person an “entity” is a form of dehumanisation. It’s not an isolated incident. It happened repeatedly. My perception of it being in violation of the WP:NPA is thus legitimate.
While it seems that this has been a major slight to you
- Still, you do not appear to be acknowledging that it is inherently wrong. It is not my subjective perception but an objective fact that it is under no circumstances acceptable to be doing what you seem to have ultimately shown the slightest bit of willingness to somehow feel apologetic for.
I do get the feeling that it is being weaponized as another "point" you have in your dispute against me
- Still, you are casting aspersions on me. I am sorry to say that you haven’t appeared to show the willingness to acknowledge that what has been done is inherently wrong under literally all circumstances in daily life.
in the same way your request for page protection seems to be another weapon you've decided to fire as part of the dispute
- Because the issue has continued. I have been pretty patient, polite and humble throughout the process, but what did I get in return? It is hard to describe, isn’t it? Steven1991 (talk) 19:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- V.) Your quoted user has apparently
NEVERnever been involved in the editing of that article at any point of time, not least the period 1 September~19 October 2024. The user is a disinterested party who made a highly subjective judgment based on very limited information and he has no administrative powers on the site and who’s supposed not to get involved either.
- I.) Isolated instances of reversing edits that apparently violated the WP:VANDAL and WP:ARBECR are not considered edit warring, when some of your last week’s mass deletions of well-sourced content comprised a few to no reasons, as pointed out by one of the admins who intervened ( “Lol” is not a reason ), not mentioning those entries were directly associated with the A/I conflict in which you’re not supposed to have got involved in the first place.
when no one else agrees with WP:ARBECR
It does not require any participant’s “agreement”. It is a site-wide rule applicable to every individual participating in Wikipedia’s editing activities. You were reminded by other users of such requirements in some of the entries pertaining to the discussion as well, which you don’t appear to have followed.Steven1991 (talk) 15:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Checking to see if protection is necessary. I could see protecting at EC level as related content for a limited time, like a year or so. But there needs to be diffs showing that more than a couple non-WP:XC users are engaging the topic area on that page. Sorry, the above is just too lengthy and disorganized for me to easily parse, so I suggest compiling the evidence concisely, with diffs alongside names and dates. Thank you. El_C 18:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Regarding non-WP:XC user participation, this and this user were also participating substantially in the article concerned and had
madebeen makingasignificant input touching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They are not supposed to have engaged in the first place until they have acquired an XR status, but such a site-wide rule has seemed to be ignored by them since they started their participation in the article concerned. The former non-XC user even posted about the matter associated with the article concerned on different Talk pages, which is not supposed to have been done, despite being reminded by an uninvolved admin to stay away from the topic area.Steven1991 (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)- Sorry, if it's just a couple of users, then it's more of an WP:AE/WP:ANI matter, but otherwise falling short of applying ARBECR (it'd be different if it was a primary article, but not for related content). Anyway, if those two users repeat the violations, they should be dealt with by warnings/blocking rather than protecting the page for everyone else. I'll leave this open for a while more, in case you have more evidence to submit that shows there being more than two non-XC users violating the remedy. Also, no links to talk pages or contribs, WP:DIFFs only, please. El_C 19:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your clarification. Steven1991 (talk) 19:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @El C hello I'm finding this user is using this event to harass me at this point by repeatedly linking events in unrelated discussions with admins such as this. I didn't want to make this post a mess but it seems it's beyond that point, the user Steven1991 has been engaging in mass edits on this page as detailed heavily here by SerialNumber54129, a large part of the editing included the continuous addition of articles related to Israeli-Palestinian which many of us have been arguing aren't related to the topic of the page. Regardless of the relevance it's hard to argue to the page being locked down and several contributing members being locked out if a single user is the one pushing for entries that force it to be locked down.
- Sorry for the long posting I don't want to drag out this request any further but feel input is only fair if I'm being dragged into the comments. Galdrack (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, if it's just a couple of users, then it's more of an WP:AE/WP:ANI matter, but otherwise falling short of applying ARBECR (it'd be different if it was a primary article, but not for related content). Anyway, if those two users repeat the violations, they should be dealt with by warnings/blocking rather than protecting the page for everyone else. I'll leave this open for a while more, in case you have more evidence to submit that shows there being more than two non-XC users violating the remedy. Also, no links to talk pages or contribs, WP:DIFFs only, please. El_C 19:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Regarding non-WP:XC user participation, this and this user were also participating substantially in the article concerned and had
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Looks like Dylan Florida is testing on this one too. Jalen Barks (Woof) 14:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked: 180.150.38.85 (talk · contribs). Its predecessor, 1.152.106.165 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), as well. In view of their general editing pattern, successors should probably just be shipped off to SPI for processing. Favonian (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- List of aviation shootdowns and accidents during the Saudi Arabian–led intervention in Yemen (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Reason: Anon IP edits, using WP:SPS like X, Ex-Twitter as source. Also unsourced material. Recomend to restore to mid protection. 30days accounts Mr.User200 (talk) 15:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Extended protection due to Arab conflict 2600:100C:B0A1:195:54A8:F1E5:B5B6:EF15 (talk) 15:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Last occurence of "X, Ex-Twitter" sourcing was on September 30, and "restore to mid protection" seems odd as the article has never been protected. Favonian (talk) 18:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term IP disruption. May fall under WP:RUSUKR. Mellk (talk) 17:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked: 92.253.236.0/22 (talk · contribs). One-month partial block from the article in question. Favonian (talk) 18:05, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Continued changing of cited information. Onel5969 TT me 18:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent disruptive edits, requesting temp-semi. Sir Calculus (talk) 19:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason:High level of IP Spam and sockpuppetry, including block evasion. Qutlooker (talk) 19:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
[edit]Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
- To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
- Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
- Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
- If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Current requests for edits to a protected page
[edit]Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
- Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among
{{Edit protected}}
,{{Edit template-protected}}
,{{Edit extended-protected}}
, or{{Edit semi-protected}}
to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed. - Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the
{{Edit COI}}
template should be used. - Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
- If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
- This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
My suggestion is to leave out the following 2 sentences in the "German complicity" paragraph as they seem to be based on misunderstandings:
"She also highlighted police suppression of pro-Palestine protests throughout Germany[509] as evidence of state complicity.[508] Karen Wells et al. highlight how Germany has entrenched its complicity in Israel's actions by banning use of the word "genocide" in reference to Israel.[471][better source needed]"
1. In general violent protests are not allowed in Germany. As some of the first pro-Palestine protests were violent, they were sometimes forbidden by courts, if they were expected to turn violent. But that is common policy in Gemany with all subjects and not special for pro-Palestine protests.
Meanwhile, there even is a calendar concerning pro-Palestinian protests[1] with daily up to 20 protests all over Germany. Thus, there is no general police suppression of pro-Palestine protests as is suggested by the current wording.
2. The word “genocide” is not banned in reference to Israel in Germany - maybe that was a misunderstanding: What is not allowed in Germany is to call for genocide against Jews. The slogan “From the river to the sea” is seen as such call and banned. Gilbert04 (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @FortunateSons: A quick browse shows at least for the first part support for removal, can you add any additional incite? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed #2. But there does seem to be evidence that pro-Palestine protests have been banned in parts of Germany at times.[2][3][4].VR (Please ping on reply) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[5]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately that source seems incomplete. Germany has indeed suppressed peaceful criticism of Israel.[6] And Washington Post says "A planned photo exhibit in southwestern Germany was canceled as a result of social media posts by its curator, including one describing “genocide” in Gaza."[7] VR (Please ping on reply) 22:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[5]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Consider changing "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations, and accused the court of being antisemitic, which it often does when criticised" to "The Israeli government has been accused of consistently weaponizing antisemitism against it's critics, including in the ICJ ruling." Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Weaponization of antisemitism page hyperlinked over "often done" has many sources to draw from regarding the accusations' consistency and nature.
- My main concern with the original text is that it's voiced as if it's an observation made by a Wikipedian. The benefit here is that the weaponization of antisemitism has a clearer consistency grounded outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps other ways to word this out include adding a time scale (increasingly accused since Oct. 7th) or specifying the critique (against critiques of their actions since Oct 7th).
- If a lead paragraph change is necessary, there may be reason to outline Israeli motives and conditions for the genocide, including Zionism and anti-Arab racism. Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[10][11] and a form of Holocaust erasure[12], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[13][14][15][16]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not as familiar with the Holocaust erasure claims, but I'm happy with that reworking! If that weaponization of Holocaust denial detail isn't on the weaponization of antisemitism page already, it might be a worthwhile phenomenon incorporate if there's more citations you can find. I might look into it myself. Thanks! Ecco2kstan (talk) 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- That does sound quite balanced. +1 from me. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[10][11] and a form of Holocaust erasure[12], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[13][14][15][16]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Inform readers of the distinction between the dagger symbol and the cross symbol in the infobox.
Under "Commanders and leaders" in the infobox Yahya Sinwar has a dagger next to his name, but others such as Marwan Issa have a cross next to their name. The distinction between these symbols is not immediately clear to someone reading the article, I feel that this should be explicitly noted on the page. The Elysian Vector Fields (talk) 20:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @TheElysianVectorFields: That isn't the article page, that's the infobox template. I changed the target for you above. It seems the dagger means "killed in action" (KIA) and the cross means "assassinated". I honestly don't know how I'd add a note to that effect. Maybe someone smarter than me can figure it out. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
The last few sentences of the second lead paragraph regarding assassinated Hamas leaders are too detailed for the lead. I don't believe including all of their names without reason is appropriate when the Infobox can convey a simpler understanding of their demise and state. Instead, figures of utmost relevance should be accounted for with reasons outside of their killings.
My suggestion is to change this:
In January 2024, Saleh al-Arouri, the deputy political chief of Hamas, was assassinated in Beirut, Lebanon. In July, Israel claimed to have killed military leader Mohammed Deif in an airstrike in al-Mawasi. In August, Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas was assassinated in Tehran, Iran. In October, Yahya Sinwar, the chief and preceding political leader of Hamas, was killed in a shootout in Rafah.
To this:
Throughout 2024, Israel has killed many of Hamas' political and military officials. Prominent figures killed by Israel include Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar, who have collectively served as political leaders for Hamas since 2007, and supposedly[citation for clarity] Mohammed Deif, who led Hamas' military branch, the Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades, since 2002.
This connects to Israel's goals described prior to this section, while establishing the impact of those killings pertaining to Hamas and Palestine as a whole. The readability of this is a bit wonky though, so if you have any better ideas, please let me know! Ecco2kstan (talk) 04:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- OOPS! I made a mistake in the title. This DOES NOT pertain to the Gaza Genocide article! This is about the Israel-Hamas War. Ecco2kstan (talk) 04:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Move Saleh al-Arouri from military to political due to him being the Deputy Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau before his death ElementalKnight987654321 (talk) 06:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Handled requests
[edit]A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.
23 protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Updated as needed. Last updated: 19:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC) |
7 template-protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Updated as needed. Last updated: 11:03, 19 October 2024 (UTC) |
WP:PERM
Requests for autopatrolled |
---|
Autopatrolled[edit]
Meets the minimum criteria, and a random sampling of their creations doesn't raise any red flags. My only concern is their liberal use of quotations in reception sections, but I don't consider it an overly serious issue for this permission as the copyright reports come away otherwise clean; I've also started a discussion on their talk page about it. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia Admins, I am requesting the Autopatrolled right to further support my contributions to Wikipedia. While I may not have thousands of edits or article creations, my work is rooted in careful research and learning from experienced editors. My focus is on Iranian early modern, modern, and contemporary art and culture, especially highlighting the stories of Iranian women often overlooked in history. I ensure all my edits are supported by reliable, academic sources, and I have a track record of accurate contributions with very few reverts. I believe that having the Autopatrolled right would allow me to continue enhancing the articles related to Iran and Iranian art and culture. Thank you for your consideration. Warm regards, Hounaam (talk) 22:53, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
I am requesting the Autopatrolled right, like any other editor, to help reduce the NPP work load. I have worked at AFC/NPP/AFD, and I've created good articles that would pass a deletion discussion if nominated. Cheers! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 11:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
They have created 60 Japanese-related articles, the majority of which are BLPs. None of them have been deleted, and no major issues were found upon my quick checks. Thank you. GrabUp - Talk 16:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
I have created 247 articles on English Wikipedia, covering a variety of subjects. I am currently a New Page Patroller and actively participate in Articles for Creation (AfC) and Articles for Deletion (AfD). I also enjoy turning the red links of notable recent deaths into blue, and I believe this right will help to reduce the workload at New Page Patrol (NPP). Thank you. Ibjaja055 (talk) 00:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I have created 25 articles by 2021, none of which has been deleted. Recently, I created another 3 articles, and in total I have made 3200 edits (none of which has been deleted). These articles and edits are primarily about modern Chinese history, which I am familiar with. And I just realized I may have been qualified for the "auto-patrol" right for a long time, but never asked for it. Therefore, I'd like to ask to become an auto-patroller which hopefully will also save some work for the new page patrollers in the future. Thank you very much. SCreditC (talk) 03:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Meets minimum criteria, no articles deleted, no behavior issues Mach61 17:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Meets minimum criteria (by a hair), no articles deleted Mach61 17:38, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I’m requesting Autopatrolled rights to help reduce the New Pages Patrol workload. I focus on classical Greek topics and have translated many pages from the Greek Wikipedia, having created over 50 pages so far. With these rights, I could streamline my contributions and make the review process easier. Thank you for considering my request. StuggerMax (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
I have returned to editing after a looooong wikibreak (life happens). Before that I was a reasonably active user in good standing for a couple of years and created quite a few articles only one of which was deleted (while I was on wikibreak so not around to add the additional sourcing, from specialist publications, that it needed to confirm notability). I'm in the process of updating many out-of-date articles about carnivorous plants, including filling in large gaps in the taxonomy, so I have well over 100 new pages on my to-do list. To reduce the burden on NPP, I'd like to request autopatrolled before I start churning through those please. YFB ¿ 16:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC) (oh, edit conflict proved me correct)
Has created over 2500 politician biographies under NPOL. Categories, stub templates, WikiProjects, infoboxes, formatting, etc. are always properly done. Never have to do anything except mark as reviewed. C F A 💬 16:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
|
Requests for AutoWikiBrowser access |
---|
AutoWikiBrowser[edit]
I want to replace links to old photos with links to better photos Kent Wang (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
I'd like to keep using AutoWikiBrowser to better add WikiProjects to talk pages in other languages, such as those in the Vietnamese versions of Establishments in Italy by year, as well as fixing (not necessarily removing like before) unknown parameters in templates. OpalYosutebito (talk) 13:22, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
I would love to use this for category maintenance and WikiProject tagging across a wide spread of articles quickly. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
I would like to use AWB for fixing various puntuations and citations issues found on WP:NPP and articles within my scope as sometimes it's hard to notice it. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:15, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
I need to add 'Flag of X District' and 'Flag of Y Region' categories to around 3,000 Slovakian flags, doing just about 5% manually took a full day. EnzoTC (talk) 04:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
|
Requests for confirmation |
---|
Confirmed[edit]
Reason for requesting confirmed rights Hello, I am unable to move article from sandbox to main page. I have had the account for more than 4 days and have made the 10 edits. Please advise thank you Casa del Espiritu Santo (talk) 19:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
|
Requests for extended confirmation |
---|
Extended confirmed[edit]
Hello, i reached 500+ edits please give me the rights From AS-RNY (talk) 04:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I would like extended confirmed access because 1. I would like to improve my editing and have more opportunity and 2. because I would like to edit Article:Wikapedia to fix grammar and punctuation. MersmanD (talk) 02:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights: I have been a Wikipedia editor for several years and I would like to make basic edits to pages that are locked for recent political reasons. Thank you for your consideration :) ELKelly23 (talk) 03:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Been Editing and contributing for 3 years and may have significantly less edits but have 274 contributions of perfect quality and now will be engaging myself more in Wikipedia. Thankyou theusualhuman (talk) 07:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
|
There are no outstanding requests for the event coordinator flag. |
---|
Event coordinator[edit] |
There are no outstanding requests for the file mover flag. |
---|
File mover[edit] |
Requests for new page reviewer |
---|
New page reviewer[edit]
Hi! I'm applying again as a reviewer, my last time apply on this new page reviwer was declined because my account wasn't 90 days and doesn't meet 500 mainspace edits and i have a contest article deletion. Now it was meet my criteria of 90 days (which is 91 days now i think), 500 mainspace edits and the article was I mentioned it was my article Namumula and the decision is to keep. I created 7 articles (one of my article was approved using AfC), 2 disambiguation and some redirects. I want to participate because i want to share my knowledge and to experience this, and to help lessen the backlogs and delete some unnecessary articles. Royiswariii | D-GENERATION X | u can talk me :) 06:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
|
Requests for page mover |
---|
Page mover[edit]
I'd like to get this right to delete unnecessary redirects (i.e. move pages over existing single revision redirects regardless of target). Additionally, I would also like to try to harmonize some pages of Spanish municipalities with the name of the country and the province (when necessary) instead of other subnational units (such as comarca). Moreover if a double denomination exists in some cases, I shall use the slash with spaces in between to enhance visual effect of different linguistic nomenclatures. However if an English form is more relevant I shall use it instead of double and local denominations. Other than that I could help elsewhere to move pages if necessary. Thank you, Nuvolet (talk)
|
Requests for pending changes reviewer |
---|
Pending changes reviewer[edit]
I've been doing RC Patrolling (as a part of Anti-Vandalism) on Wikipedia for a while now, and I think that having the Pending Changes reviewer permission could be a good idea - there have been numerous instances involving a pending changes edit that I look at while looking through Special:RecentChanges that i wanted to accept/deny/etc, and i feel that this permission would be beneficial for my efficeincy. DM5Pedia 04:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi! I believe that I'd be a good Pending Changes Reviewer, as I have a good amount of time on my hands, and can do monotonous tasks, like denying obvious vandalism, and the like. I meet, what I believe are all the requirements for this right, and humbly ask to receive this privilege. Thanks in advance! Legendbird (talk) 09:06, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting pending changes reviewer rights: I am an Wikipedian for more than three years and part of various wikiprojects I need permission to expand my works on Wikipedia and also to observe Wikipedia articles. Cactinites (talk) 15:28, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
To review pending changes on Wikipedia Gonzafer001 (talk) 09:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting pending changes reviewer rights: I have been a wikipedia editor for some time now and love to revert vandalism and unconstructive edits to prevent the spread of problems on wikipedia. I currently am a Recent Changes patrol and love my job! I have successfully achieved 1000 total edits (or ~ 325 mainspace edits) on the english wikipedia. I can't wait to be a pending changes reviewer, as it will allow me to stop the spread of vandalism even farther! Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits! 11:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
|
Requests for rollback |
---|
Rollback[edit]
Reason for requesting rollback rights: I have done TWO rollback rights request, and I am happy to say that I have surpassed 200 mainspace edits and have also surpassed 1 month of Recent Changes Patrolling.I love the ability to help, and I already love to prevent vandalism with the help of Ultraviolet and Twinkle. I am ready to join the rollbacker force to get access to more tools, like AntiVandal and Huggle for even faster response. Don't worry, I won't bite the newcomers unless necessary! Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 (Cheers! Let's Discuss over a cup of tea!) Celebrating 1000 Edits! 13:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
(Trying this again because one of my scripts broke the template) I have been reverting vandalism and patrolling recent changes for over a month now. The last time my request was declined, I simply hadn't been patrolling for a month at that point, and @Fastily had no other objections. I have consistently warned all vandals I reverted and reported many to AIV. I believe I'm ready to have rollback now. Also note that I am a pending changes reviewer. TheWikiToby (talk) 17:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting rollback rights: I have experienced myself with editing on Wikipedia and undoing vandalism on Wikipedia, and I think I am ready to undo vandalism the easy way. If anyone could reach out to me so we can get this settled and I can have my rights, then that would be great. Thanks! - Bigeditingideas (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I've been patrolling Special:RecentChanges for vandalism, and I sometimes encounter editors who rapidly vandalize many dozens of pages before being blocked. In these cases, I don't need to check each diff before reverting it, so I'm requesting rollback to more efficiently handle them. I am also interested in the tools that require rollback, such as Huggle. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
|
There are no outstanding requests for template editor. |
---|
Template editor[edit] |
Immediate requests
[edit]Category | Entries |
---|---|
Wikipedians looking for help | 0 |
Requests for unblock | 133 |
Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages | 0 |
Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations | 0 |
Candidates for speedy deletion | 5 |
Wikipedia fully protected edit requests | 15 |
Deletion
[edit]Category | Entries |
---|---|
Articles for deletion | 550 |
Templates for deletion | 95 |
Categories for deletion | 115 |
Wikipedia files for discussion | 21 |
All redirects for discussion | 317 |
Miscellaneous pages for deletion | 11 |
Possible copyright violations | 28 |
All articles proposed for deletion | 163 |
All files proposed for deletion | 12 |
Unsorted AfD debates | 3 |
All files with the same name on Commons | 6 |
Image copyright problems
[edit]Category | Entries |
---|---|
Orphaned non-free use | 444 |
Unknown copyright status | 30 |
Unknown source | 26 |
No non-free use rationale | 1 |
Replaceable non-free use images | 15 |
Disputed non-free use images | 10 |
Page protection
[edit]Category | Entries |
---|---|
Protected | 10 |
Semi-protected user and user talk pages | 1,241 |
Fully protected user and user talk pages | 445 |
Protected against vandalism | 5 |
Protected talk pages of blocked users | 34 |
Semi-protected | 2,368 |
Arbitration 500/30 restricted | 0 |
Cleanup
[edit]
General cleanup | ||
Category | Entries | Percentage |
---|---|---|
All pages needing cleanup | 34,415 | 0.5 |
All articles needing rewrite | 5,954 | 0.09 |
All articles needing expert attention | 1,317 | 0.02 |
All Wikipedia articles in need of updating | 39,319 | 0.57 |
Reference problems | ||
Category | Entries | Percentage |
All pages needing factual verification | 11,052 | 0.16 |
All articles with unsourced statements | 529,811 | 7.68 |
All articles lacking sources | 81,475 | 1.18 |
All unreferenced BLPs | 676 | 0.06 |
All articles needing additional references | 466,714 | 6.77 |
All articles needing references cleanup | 4,592 | 0.07 |
All articles lacking in-text citations | 105,759 | 1.53 |
All articles with dead external links | 311,466 | 4.52 |
Image cleanup problems | ||
Category | Entries | Percentage |
Image files for cleanup | 17 | - |
Wikipedia files lacking a description | 145 | - |
Wikipedia files with unknown source | 18 | - |
Other problems | ||
Category | Entries | Percentage |
All articles to be merged | 1,493 | 0.02 |
All articles to be split | 805 | 0.01 |
Unsorted Stubs | 0 | - |
Stub categories | 19,247 | - |
All uncategorized pages | 978 | 0.01 |
All orphaned articles | 53,891 | 0.78 |
All articles needing copy edit | 2,600 | 0.04 |
All articles with style issues | 19,428 | 0.28 |
All Wikipedia articles needing context | 2,759 | 0.04 |
All articles that may contain original research | 16,542 | 0.24 |
Miscellaneous
[edit]Category | Entries |
---|---|
Requested moves | 425 |
All Wikipedia neutral point of view disputes | 7,615 |
All accuracy disputes | 15,756 |
Articles with invalid ISBNs | 2 |
Articles with invalid ISSNs | 5 |
All articles to be expanded | 66,202 |
Special pages
[edit]Maintenance reports | Information |
---|---|
Broken redirects | |
Dead-end pages | Dead-end pages |
Dormant pages | Dusty articles |
DoubleRedirects | Double redirects |
Lonely pages | Orphaned articles |
Long pages | |
New pages | New page patrol |
New pages feed | Page curation |
Protected pages | Protection policy |
Short pages | |
Uncategorized | Categorization |
Uncategorized cats | |
Uncategorized templates | |
Unused categories | |
Unused files (images) | |
Unused templates | |
Without interwiki links | |
Most interwiki links |
Sub-page listing
[edit]Hong Kong
[edit]Misc
[edit]Delete | Keep | Neutral | Oppose | Support | Note | Template |
This is a Wikipedia user page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Winhunter. |
Multi-licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License versions 1.0 and 2.0 | ||
I agree to multi-license my text contributions, unless otherwise stated, under Wikipedia's copyright terms and the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license version 1.0 and version 2.0. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions under the Creative Commons terms, please check the CC dual-license and Multi-licensing guides. |