User talk:RegentsPark - Wikipedia


1 person in discussion

Article Images
I'm busy in RL and may not be able to respond swiftly to queries
September 25: Annual Election & Members Meeting
 

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our Annual Election & Members Meeting, with in-person at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, as well as an online-based participation option.

The Members' Meeting is similar to other WikiWednesday meetups, except that its primary function is to elect a new Board of Directors. We will elect three board seats, half of the elected seats on the board. After being elected, those elected can potentially appoint more seats.

We will also focus on the Wikimedia NYC Strategic Plan, our Financial Report, and Annual and Monthly event teams for the coming year.

Election info:

  • To run for election or to vote, you must be a dues-paying member of Wikimedia New York City, having renewed in the past 12 months.
  • Voting will be both online, via emailed ballots from the ElectionBuddy service, and in-person.
  • The poll will be open for the 48 hours between 8pm EDT on September 23 and 8pm EDT on September 25.
  • For additional information, please consult the Election FAQ.

Meeting info:

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct.

P.S. Also upcoming just before our annual meeting is the Latin music edit-a-thon, Wikicurious: Editing to the Beat (RSVP at Eventbrite), on Saturday September 21!

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey RegentsPark, recently I've had some disagreements with a user Jattlife121 on the page Anti-Sikh sentiment in Canada, if you go through the page's history, you'll see that much of the content clearly resembled AI-generated language (whether that was done intentionally or unwittingly I'm not sure, Jattlife insists that he did not use AI), see examples on my t/p-[1]. In addition, much of the events were clearly WP:SYNTHeized to erroneously boost content and incidents on the page (i.e. sources which spoke of racism and online discrimination against international students were used to state that Sikh students were the targets of discrimination, and sources which spoke about general racism against early immigrants were used in this train of logic- 1) Early immigrants in Canada faced discrimination 2) Sikhs were some of the early immigrants who arrived to Canada 3) Hence, Sikhs were the target of extensive discrimination, even though many of the sources made little or no mention of point 2)

Many incidents were straight up fabricated. And the original version of the article seemed to be overly zealous in promoting the WSO-[2], which made me suspicious of possible conflict of interest.

Now, Jattlife has added this section on the WSO page-[3] once again defending the WSO The WSO have responded that "Sikhs from various places and groups attended, and not all of them ended up joining the WSO, which was formally founded following this event" and that Bagri "was neither a member of the WSO nor joined after the convention". The source he provided was from a tweet by that very same organization. This is very clearly against Wikipedia's rules. I'm wondering if you could chime in here and remind Jattlife121 of Wikipedia's rules and norms surrounding proper sourcing and WP:SYNTH. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 18:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey Regents Park,
The Sikh Wikipedia community have had a lot of issues with this individual due to his constant negative editing and removal of content on the page. I currently have a whole backlog of stuff which I will be presenting soon. His particular focus is on discredited Sikh organisations, but if you give me a day or so this will be presented strongly.
I find it very odd that an individual who evidently isn't a Sikh hasn't constantly made edits in a negative light and I do think Wikipedia need to intervene. I also believe his account has been nominated in the past for deletion.
Give me a day or so and this will be all be presented. Jattlife121 (talk) 18:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Secondly, you are commenting on an individual from India in which there may be inherent conflict of interest with these articles, so its laughable you mention conflicts of interest. Jattlife121 (talk) 18:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
You're free to present whatever you wish against me- just know that it isn't against Wikipedia rules to "edit negatively" as Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED and I always use reliable, academic sources to back up my work.
However, you'd save yourself a lot of time by just reading up on the different types of sources on Wikipedia, and which ones are deprecated and which ones are preferred-[4]. We can't use tweets from an involved party to write exculpatory content on Wikipedia. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 18:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Jattlife121: Since you've taken this to ANI, I'll let this be handled there. However, do note that comments, such as the ones you make above, about the ethnicity (or lack of) or location (in or out of India) are absolutely not acceptable and you cannot question the edits of another edit based on what you think is their ethnicity or national origin. On Wikipedia, anyone can edit any page. We don't know, and generally cannot question the credentials of any user. Our main concern is that content be verifiable using reliable sources and that articles give due weight to significant viewpoints and avoid giving weight to minority viewpoints. Finally, articles should not contain promotional material. Best wishes. RegentsPark (comment) 21:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
RP, can this proxy be blocked per Wikipedia's policy on open proxies-[5]. Wikipedia's geolocation states this is a VPN-[6], and one of the sockmaster's other proxy, was also blocked as a proxy a while back-[7]. Both proxies have the same geolocation, ISP, and first 6 IP digits. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 14:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm not technically savvy enough for this. Perhaps @Bishonen: can help.RegentsPark (comment) 21:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, RP, you flatter me. I'm no good with proxies. Bishonen | tålk 00:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC).Reply

Looks like new users and IPs would listen/ understand [8] [9], latter is an EC user. Also have a look at this. Can these article be protected. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sat Sep 21: Wikicurious - Editing to the Beat ♫ @ Lehman College
 

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for the "Editing to the Beat" event of the beginner-focused Wikicurious series at Lehman College. This is the second event of the series, following the inaugural event at Civic Hall in July. Led by a 9-person live band demonstrating Caribbean and Latin musical genres, we'll engage with efforts such as WikiProject Latin Music, and will encourage editing on both English and Spanish Wikipedia. All are welcome, and newcomers and aspiring editors are especially encouraged to attend. Registration via Eventbrite is required for building entry, and is also encouraged on the event page on Meta.

The Wikicurious series is supported by Craig Newmark Philanthropies. Wikimedia NYC is an official affiliate and supported by the Wikimedia Foundation. Also supporting this event are Equis, The Celia Cruz Foundation, and the International Museum of Salsa. In association with WikiCari and AfroCrowd.

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct.

Meeting info:

  • RSVP is necessary for building entry.

P.S. Upcoming WikiNYC meetups:

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Personally I would have given him another chance. The draft he wrote is actually pretty good and (with some copyediting) would be a decent addition to Wikipedia, but he hasn't learned about proper sourcing. It looks like he had removed the wall-of-text sources from the draft with intent to add them back as inlline citations, before he was blocked. At first I thought he had a COI based on the username, but the name turns out to be historical. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm not so sure. I haven't seen any reasonable source for the nawab and, according to google maps, Atrauli is a small town in India. Add the repeated submission of the draft and this looks dubious. Still, if you think differently then let's see what the user says.RegentsPark (comment) 20:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Move Protected Page Parshurama. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 08:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I originally wrote this for the ANI thread and only bothered to re-write the intro so it's worded a little generally but hopefully that's okay. I'm posting this to you directly as it occurred to me there's no point saying this there since as I understand it, nothing can happen unless you either agree or I open a discussion at AN (rather than leave it at ANI). It sounds like you're busy so if can't deal with it but agree for any admin to reduce it if they feel it's justified, I'll go back to posting it there.

In my opinion, it's worth assessing if the ECP is still needed at Parashurama. While I don't disagree with the protection at the time, the focus of the article isn't something that would normally come under WP:CASTE community authorised discretionary sanctions. From what I see, the only reason it did is because of the long standing claims of living descendant [10] [11] [12]. That section was IMO rightfully excised just before protection [13]. (IMO it's rare we should have anything about living descendants of a mythology figure and when we do, it definitely needs careful attention to the wording.)

AFAICT, no one has tried to descent stuff back during the 30 months ECP AFAICT which might just be because of ECP. But while there does seem to have been a fair amount of silliness over that section over the years, I wonder if its removal might be enough to stop such nonsense at least from confirmed editors. In other words the presence of the section was the catalyst for much of the silliness around it.

If we don't expect that to reoccur, as far as I see, ECP under CASTE community sanctions cannot be justified. And I'm not convinced there was enough generally silliness from confirmed editors to justify long term ECP under our normal protection policy. Since the article also comes under Wikipedia:Contentious topics/India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan it could be moved to that where it would be easier to justify it. However it's quite difficult now, and probably not worth assessing how much of the non descent disruption came from confirmed editors. I will note that that extended confirmed protection at the end of 2021 seems to have been the first time the article was ever protected so semi-protection was never tried.

So I wonder if it might be better to at least try moving it to semi-protection. I'd note that AFAICT, while Vishnu is extended confirmed, currently the only other of the commonly recognised 10 avatars of Vishnu that seem to be protected are Krishna, Rama and Kalki and they're all semi-protected. And Vishnu's protection is recent [14] and seems to relate to a problematic sock but I think Prashurama might be far removed enough from what the sock is trying to do to avoid too much focus just like the other avatars of Vishnu. I know very little about this so perhaps there's something about Parashurama which makes such disruption much more likely here, especially perhaps stuff relating to the claims of descent. (I do see people claiming to be descendants of Rama but this might be at more of an individual level.) But wonder if this is just an unfortunate case where some nonsense was added back in 2007 and then became the focus of disruption which wouldn't have occurred otherwise.

Nil Einne (talk) 15:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just for clarity as I didn't mention it for WP:DENY reasons, the sock Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vinayvinyill/Archive seems to be focused on asserting the superiority of Vishnu over Shiva hence why I'm hoping they won't target Prashurama anymore than they would the other avatars of Vishnu. It doesn't seem to be caste related. Nil Einne (talk) 15:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure I follow everything you've written but you're right about the caste related. I think I used WP:CASTE because the last edit was social group related but, looking back further, the bulk of the disruption is, for want of a better phrasing, "god related". Regardless, 3 years is a long time and I'm happy to unprotect. I'll comment on ANI as well. Thanks for the detailed and thoughtful follow-up! RegentsPark (comment) 15:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I want to change the name of my account from Admantine123 to Adamantine123.-Admantine123 (talk) 16:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Admantine123: You can apply for a username change. See Wikipedia:Changing_username. WP:CHUS is the easiest for changing on en.wiki, but you might want to use [15] if you're editing on other language wikis as well.