User talk:Acroterion

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

If you leave a message for me: I will respond here. Either add this page to your watchlist or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page. If I leave a message for you: Please respond on your talk page. I will add it to my watchlist, so you don't need to notify me, unless I don't respond when a response is expected. This helps keep discussion easily readable and in one place.

Please leave a new message.

Archives

Q2 2007 Q3 2007 Q4 2007 Q1 2008 Q2 2008 Q3 2008 4 2008 Q1 2009 Q2 2009 Q3 2009 Q4 2009 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q3 2010 Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4_2016 Q1_2017 Q2_2017 Q3_2017 Q4_2017 Q1_2018 Q2_2018 Q3 2018 Q4 2018 Q1 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q1 2021 Q2 2021 Q3 2021 Q4 2021 Q1 2022 Q2 2022 Q3 2022 Q4 2022 Q1 2023 Q2 2023 Q3 2023 Q4 2023 Q1 2024 Q2 2024 Q3 2024 Q4 2024

Here is the newly edited version. Feel free to use it. " Auxiliary213 (talk) 15:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just been blocked for abusing editing privileges. Doug Weller talk 15:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no surprise. I was busy baking for friends who are coming for lunch, a much more rewarding exercise than trolling the noticeboards or dealing with them. Acroterion (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, what are you baking? Doug Weller talk 16:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just brownies, nothing complicated, but the kitchen smells great now. We're all going out for lunch and will come back here for dessert. Acroterion (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Love brownies, but to be honest, I can't make them as good as Ghirardelli does.[1] Doug Weller talk 16:37, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are Ghirardelli, I've long since given up doing anything else. You can get them in the UK? Acroterion (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes/ Amazon. ebay but cheapest at Costco. Doug Weller talk 17:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, Wikipedia:Notability (species) was adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

• Following the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: CaptainEek, Daniel, Elli, KrakatoaKatie, Liz, Primefac, ScottishFinnishRadish, Theleekycauldron, Worm That Turned.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

---

No idea how to put this gently, but the ongoings under Heiar and Moccia were serious and are common knowledge in the I-25 corridor. Three players sexually assaulted three other players and two student workers, and a UNM player was killed by a NMSU player. "Hazing" doesn't describe what happened at all. 67.209.213.65 (talk) 16:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The references don't support your assertions. If you think it ought to be included, find explicit reliable sources. "Common knowledge" isn't admissible here, and the biographies of living persons policy applies. Don't report rumors or unsubstantiated assertions of serious criminal conduct. Acroterion (talk) 18:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but recent sources such as this [2] and this [3] are unambiguous, they use wordings like "sexual assault" and "sex abuse" for the happenings on the NMSU basketball team. KFIX and ESPN are mainstream news sources with no particular agenda. It's permitted to call a spade for what it is. 67.209.213.65 (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To add to this: two of the men who were assaulted were paid 8 millions in restitution. If you can get that amount in a settlement you know the cSe had merit. 67.209.213.65 (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then don't call it "rape." And we don't infer from sources that anything "has merit" in that manner from a civil proceeding, that doesn't establish criminal culpability, only that there was a settlement. Yes, bad things happened, but we can only report on what reliable sources explicitly state. Inference is of no use here; stick to the sources and don't embellish or interpret. Acroterion (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The report from NM DOJ [4] does not mince words. The executive summary on pg 3 uses words like "sexualized hazing" and "sexual assault", and on page 10 the DOJ is explicit in stating that Heiar was terminated for cause shortly after the abuse was reported to police. That Moccia was terminated for cause is not disputed, that fact is widely reported in the news. "Scandal" is too mild a word for what went on at the institution.

As far as criminal proceedings go, two of the three suspects have pled guilty, and the third one is currently at trial and is looking at 5 years of prison. The complaint from the State is for "Criminal Sexual Penetration", "Criminal Sexual Conduct" and "Conspiracy to Commit Criminal Sexual Conduct", it's not great.

(Aside: US criminal law is a mess, many actions that ought to fall under criminal law are instead brought as civil actions, most infamously police misconduct. The public prosecution needs to stay in the good graces of the police, so the injured party brings a civil action and then settles before the case gets to a jury. At some point the "non-admission of liability" clause ends up being not really meaningful. Someone suffered injury, and they are awarded much money, and we can't call it for what it is. Suspicious people will say that was the intention all along.) 206.206.141.101 (talk) 19:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We call it exactly what reliable sources say it is. The problem with the edits this weekend was with amplification beyond what the sources said. There is no bar to stating the issues (in accordance with the due emphasis guideline, and remembering the requirements of the biographies of living persons policy); we just need to stick to the references. All I want you to do is to stick to what reliable secondary sources say in accordance with policy, and we can talk about the problems with the program. We just have to do it with care and accuracy; this is the #7 website in the world, and we have a responsibility to get it right. No editorializing. Acroterion (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user made one edit, the creation of a promotional userpage, and was reported to UAA. Seeing the report, I deleted the page, and made a choice as an administrator to warn rather than go for the no-warning block.I made this clear at UAA.[5]

I'm curious as to why you thought it was appropriate to override my decision an hour later, when they had made no further edits? I believe my choice was within the bounds of administrative discretion and should not have been overridden without good reason. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 00:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have different ideas of what constitutes a promotional-only account with username issues, I guess, it looked pretty clear-cut to me. I didn't think of it as overriding you, please don't take it that way, and honestly I didn't check to see who might have deleted the page; we shouldn't have to go walking on eggshells around certain administrators. We've all had occasions where we've taken a more gentle or lenient approach, or abstained entirely, and had another admin take a different action. This is the nature of our distributed administration of this website. I have a less optimistic idea of what demands a promotional account is likely to impose on our volunteers than you do, I guess.

However, I am happy to reverse the block, as always, if another admin disagrees. While you may not think so, my overall approach to spammish accounts is pretty close to yours, and I believe I've made that clear in the RFC. I have different reservations about promotional usernames than you do, and it bothers me that we tend to act more harshly on accounts that at least are being more honest with us (like this one) than somebody with a throwaway username that's doing the exact same thing. I don't have a wise solution, except that the editing interface for user page creation might offer better guidance that WP isn’t like Facebook, and if you’re looking to expand your social media presence, you’re in the wrong place. Acroterion (talk) 02:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I don't think anyone need walk on eggshells around me, but I do feel that any admins decision to take a particular course of action shouldn't overriden without a compelling reason. I see blocks I wouldn't have made all the time, but I don't just go undoing them unless they are truly egregious.

I think the thought of some sort of caution or warning when creating a user page/sandbox is a good one, and not an idea I believe I've seen before. We clearly have an issue where lots of people every day think this is the place to come to "get the word out" and something like that could help curb it at least a little bit, although knowing how the software is we'd want to make sure it actually works on the mobile apps as well.

As I recall, the community has asked in the past for something similar when usernames are created, that being the obvious other facet of this issue, but I don't think we ever actually got it. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 06:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An absence of action isn't easily discernable here, and given the way the various queues and happenstance work it's not always the case that a deletion without a block indicates some kind of forbearance. However, I would have figured that out if I'd looked at the talkpage; most of the time it's just a speedy deletion flag, but sometimes not, as in this case. Keep in mind that those who patrol the edit filters look at the edit filter detail output, which is usually more diagnostic than what might have been successfully saved.

However, it was my impression that you were not particularly concerned with spam username/spam actions, but rather an apparently good-faith username with spammish content who might be brought around to being a contributor, and userspace deletions. There may be a unicorn out there who registers a promotional name and posts promotional content, who might be persuaded to be a contributor, but I haven't encountered one yet. I've nursed promotional editors along, and can't say that I've had any successes. I've had better luck with vandals, who aren't financially or ideologically committed to vandalism. We've got a recent serial sockpuppeteer who is somehow trying to edit on behalf of the UAE Federal Tax Authority, who is an example of the more extreme sort, who has rejected patient advice and who presumably has been commissioned to establish an FTA presence on all platforms no matter what.

Spambots are another matter, and we should show no mercy there. They're prohibited by the ToU, and should be treated as LTA block evaders. They're tailored to superficially look like good-faith accounts, and they've been running as long as I've been here. They're much less of a problem than they used to be.They're instantly recognizable once you've seen a few, and I always tag the deletions and blocks with custom summaries: "spambot."

As I've pointed out, my practice, and that of most admins, is to delete and warn for the promotional content without an accompanying promotional username, but the usernames that represent organizations pose a general username policy issue apart from promotion; it would be more of a question whether to softblock or hardblock in those cases. I would generally softblock if there was no accompanying promotion, or more likely just wait and see what they do (which is a standard answer at UAA), since a lot of those accounts have second thoughts and never edit. I'm not actually sure how the 499 edit filter interacts, I think it logs only and doesn't warn. There are a lot of false or ambiguous positives with 499 (as I said at the RFC, about half can be ignored), perhaps a more narrowly-tailored filter might target a smaller subset with a warning, but that's outside my skillset to construct or even propose in much detail. Perhaps 499 could be tailored for a fairly general reminder to not be promotional and to remind that WP isn't social media. I'd prefer proaction over reaction, which is the current state of affairs. Acroterion (talk) 12:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Acroterion (I'm also tagging Liz in this request as a draft deleter who is), can you undo Draft:Milot Avdyli because the player is expected to debut (after being transferred in this transfer window) at Vorskla Poltava in the Ukrainian Premier League which according to Wikipedia is a fully professional league, and I believe that the draft can serve as a kind of starting point for the development of the article before its debut, which after its debut will be concretized into a full article. BalkanianActuality (talk) 01:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait for Liz, but as usual, I have no problem with undeleting these drafts so you can work on them. Let me know if you don't hear from her; weather depending, I may be away for a while tomorrow for some minor eye surgery. Acroterion (talk) 02:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, if there's no reaction from Liz, then I'll let you know and wish you a speedy recovery. BalkanianActuality (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for returning the draft article! BalkanianActuality (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could I get a revdel for this please. [6] Thank you. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 20:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In general, pro forma racist vandalism isn't normally revdel'd, unless it concerns a specific individual or is particularly gross (i.e., "kill all ***). But they've earned themselves a week-long block and a place in my watchlist. Acroterion (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Got it 👍 Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 20:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An elaboration - the "grossly-insulting" modifier is important, as opposed to the obnoxious-racist-jackass-who'd-better-watch-their-damn-mouth-if-they-don't-want-to-spend-a-week-at-the-dentist stuff. Acroterion (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I didn't make the request but I am a little confused. I was earlier told on a talk page to report an edit very similar to the one reported. Am I not supposed to request revdel these kind of stuff? Gaismagorm (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, going by the way I read the policy, it didn't rise to the level of grossness usually revdel'd. We get a lot of dumb nasty vandalism, and we don't need to scrub the histories of all of it; revdel should be employed somewhat sparingly. We remove things that can bring harm or express a desire to harm, are copyright violations, insult or degrade specific living individuals, are the products of sustained disruption campaigns. or reveal the identities of people who wish to remain anonymous. For stupid schoolboy vandalism like this, it can stay there as a monument to their ignorance. Your request above was similar to this one.in its level of obnoxious rather than gross. Other admins may have a somewhat lower threshold for removal from the history, but it has never been meant for all vandalism. There does seem to have been a trend to apply it more generally to ethnic slurs like this one, but it's not uiniversal. Acroterion (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Pickersgill-Cunliffe and Nick-D look at Germans in the Flanders Campaign and 50 years of Australian military history Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on the state of the Wikiproject

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nathalie Dupree, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hamilton, New Jersey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I struck a nerve. Seems like you don't enjoy being reminded huh? 37.19.107.94 (talk) 01:09, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2025).

Administrator changes

• Arcticocean
• Wugapodes

Euryalus

CheckUser changes

• Firefly
• L235

Oversighter changes

• Firefly
• Guerillero
• L235
• Moneytrees

Technical news

• Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
• A 'Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been closed.

---

Hey Acroterion, the user named Ithizar got blocked and has some user rights. I checked their contributions and does not have good behavior. Are you allowed to remove user rights in situations like these? Just wondering. StormHunterBryante5467 (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They're indefinitely blocked with no talkpage access. There's no point in taking any further action. Acroterion (talk) 20:16, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh alright StormHunterBryante5467 (talk) 03:34, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parksfan1955 (talk) 02:16, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since you blocked the IP 72.22.227.228 for vandalism, including a grossly antisemitic message, would you mind revdel'ing the linked diff? I can't see any good reason to keep it around. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 05:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at three aspects of World War II Op-ed: Matarisvan on ways to improve A-class reviewing numbers

Could you please address this request for page protection if you are available? The article Anshul Jubli has been getting relentless blatant vandalism today and needs protecting ASAP. Thanks in advance! Entranced98 (talk) 13:33, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done, two weeks this time. Acroterion (talk) 13:37, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, could you please delete this revision? [7] It's purely vandalism and contains Chinese-language ethnic slurs for Korean people. See Gaoli bangzi for context; "棒" is being used in this fashion. It calls Koreans slaves and dogs; Google translate roughly verifies this. seefooddiet (talk) 06:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and the IP blocked. Acroterion (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of canceled nuclear reactors in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Northville, New York.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw you temporarily blocked the above IP address last month. I just wanted to let you know that the user posting from that IP address is the banned user Joseph A. Spadaro. The posting style and range of interests are unmistakable. I've left a note to this effect on the IP's talk page. Best wishes, --Viennese Waltz 06:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[8] Thanks. Doug Weller talk 07:51, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took a quick look at their contributions, nutty and poor English. I see you reverted them. CIR? or DE? I'd say in any case they don't belong here. Doug Weller talk 07:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CIR would be my view. Acroterion (talk) 13:49, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'd block but I'm involved I guess. Doug Weller talk 16:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The articles on the books Abolition of Man by CS Lewis and You Gentiles by Maurice Samuel should be locked-up or at least under semi-protection to prevent vandalism/crypto-nazism

You can see what i'm referring to in my last edit on You Gentiles TeoCopr (talk) 20:46, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There hasn't been sufficient disruption to justify protection; we don't pre-emptively protect articles. I'll add them to my watchlist though. Thanks for keeping a watch. Acroterion (talk) 21:25, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For taking out the trash on my talk page. Thank you! JeffSpaceman (talk) 14:11, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).

Administrator changes

• Jarry1250
• Lethe

CheckUser changes

• AmandaNP
• Drmies

Oversighter changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
• A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
• A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.

Technical news

• A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
• Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.

---

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Thanks for making me smile today. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, recently my created article related to Dr. Muhammad Amin Nezami has been removed, so I wanted to republish it with more accurate information and reference but before doing that I need you to allow the article to be republished, I`ll appreciate your guidelines to work on the articles ahead.

Thank you. Ambrosebasil57 (talk) 20:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you asking me? It was deleted (again) after the deletion discussion was closed four days ago. If you want it undeleted, use the process at WP:DRV, explaining how you addressed the issues raised in that discussion, having first contacted Explicit, who did the deletion. I see that you removed your paid contributor notice and it had to be restored; don't do that. You might want to consider that the article simply isn't eligible for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Acroterion (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel'd with some others from that range. Since they keep doing this I've blocked the range for a while. Acroterion (talk) 12:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at works on a female astronaut and a senior US Navy officer Op-ed: Adam Cuerden on his experiences with a recent featured picture Timeline: This month in military history

just pinging, seems they are still vandalizing the Unite the Right rally User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 15:09, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've been active on this page before. This needs revdeletion, and maybe the page needs semi-protection. Thanks in advance. Jfire (talk) 02:28, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks for watching out. Acroterion (talk) 02:33, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you for the swift response to the IP.

I recently got singled out on 4chan in relation to Yasuke CTOP despite having very little to do with the article mainspace. Now that the game has released I expect to receive an uptick in IP harassment. I wanted to ask what the fastest way to handle it and if there was any preventative measures you would recommend. Relm (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Using arbitration sanctions involves some delay and paperwork. Straight-up harassment (leavened with silly legal threats in this case - what does Homeland Security care about a Hanoi IP complaining about an article concerning Japan and a game?) is easily blockable as a normal admin action. Just report it at AIV, making it clear that it's personal attacks/harassment. If the talkpage disruption escalates we can protect the talkpage for preferably short periods. If you are directly harassed, take it to AIV or ANI, and we can protect your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 02:23, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Will do. Relm (talk) 02:39, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Acroterion, thanks for taking care of that Brazillian BLP violations IP. Hopefully the block actually stops them because I saw a previous IP 2804:214:8626:7CDC:1:0:AD4C:DC0 engaging in the same editing, which is not in that /64 range unfortunately. Anyways, their user account was User:Pollyanna Chita Ferreira Cunha, which it looks like they've logged out of it in an attempt to evade scrutiny (compare diff by account to diff by IP). Do you reckon we should block the account too?

Regards, — AP 499D25 (talk) 03:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added peer-reviewed secondary sources to Chromotherapy in line with WP:MEDRS. However, I've been blocked for doing this which is unsubstantiated. Objectiveanalysis (talk) 12:59, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You were blocked for a bright-line violation of the three-revert rule. You are not entitled to edit-war because you think you're right. Acroterion (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Acroterion,

I hope you are well today. I was reviewing discussions on ANI from today and in a discussion you closed, you included a link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles. Was this your intention? Because I didn't understand the connection. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I meant AR. But the target of AAR is funnier. Feel free to fix it. Acroterion (talk) 03:38, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AR is WikiProject Argentina. I'm guessing you mean WP:AARV i.e. Wikipedia:Administrative action review. Shortcuts can be confusing at times. Nil Einne (talk) 06:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed [9] Nil Einne (talk) 06:37, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was finishing up lunch and the phone was ringing, so I didn’t get a chance to check. Acroterion (talk) 10:25, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Acroterion,

Could you reinstate the rough draft we had started on Stephen Czech? We had just started it; it is not ready for review.

Best,

Todd Stephen Czech (talk) 18:05, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we?" If you are writing on behalf of Mr. Czech, you are required to declare a conflict of interest and abide by the conflict of interest policy. Otherwise, it looks like Mr. Czech is writing an autobiography. If not, there is still an undeclared COI. Accounts may not be shared. Acroterion (talk) 23:30, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2025).

Administrator changes

• Giraffer
• Goldsztajn

Dennis Brown

• Cyclonebiskit
• Nohat
• Someguy1221

Bureaucrat changes

Barkeep49

CheckUser changes

0xDeadbeef

Oversighter changes

GB fan

Moneytrees

Miscellaneous

• Sign up for The Core Contest, a competition running from 15 April to 31 May to improve vital articles.

---

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at the Borneo campaign of 1945 and warfare the South African way Timeline: This month in military history

Hi Acroterion, I thought your response was perfect. You were respectful, whilst quoting policy and sympathetic whilst rationally explaining your answer. Thank you for that. Knitsey (talk) 12:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't want to be dismissive or unsympathetic. I've spent most of my career in school design, and I clearly remember where I was when Columbine and Sandy Hook happened, and the reactions of the teachers, students, and administrators. We deal with the consequences every time we design a school nowadays. I know how I'd feel if something like that happened at one of my schools.Acroterion (talk) 12:44, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Without getting all political, it must be a terrible position to be in, to have to put so much consideration into that type of security.

No wonder you answered the question with such thought, your response was more considered than mine would have been. Knitsey (talk) 13:37, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, we have to consider ballistic resistance against various weapons now, access control, and how long the security vestibule might hold out while a couple hundred seven and eight-year-olds having lunch next door can escape. Not to mention reverse evacuation from outdoor activity areas and arrival spaces to the relative safety of the indoors. It's profoundly depressing. All while planning an environment that's welcoming and conducive to learning. I reckon there are around 20,000 children in schools I've designed, and probably about 30,000 people who live, work or learn in buildings I've designed every day. I'd rather they didn't have to worry about being safe. Acroterion (talk) 17:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is amazing. 30,000 people potentially much safer because of you. I hope you are really proud of what you have achieved. Knitsey (talk) 18:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This: Western civilisation. 2A02:B021:F04:559:9D71:A69B:B131:2717 (talk) 15:48, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How should I do that, in your opinion? Acroterion (talk) 19:27, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For your help over at ANI. I appreciate it. JeffSpaceman (talk) 14:13, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/6380725 Jimmysauce2017 (talk) 13:02, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not Wikipedia, we're not interested in what you see on mirrors. Acroterion (talk) 13:05, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it mirrored from wikipedia years ago. for this reason an investigation was requested. It does seem suspicious that Natalac's Wikipedia page has been repeatedly vandalized and deleted, despite his apparent success and widespread recognition in the music industry. Jimmysauce2017 (talk) 13:11, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We're not going to waste our time on things that may have happened 13 years ago. Acroterion (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

but Its still happening today though despite different writers from different walks of life across different countries nationalities different times after wider spread recognition apparent success in the music industry and different cultures. it seems very odd. Jimmysauce2017 (talk) 13:31, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said elsewhere, your time would be spent more productively in providing a draft article that demonstrates notability, rather than looking backward to versions that clearly were not acceptable on Wikipedia. You are seeing a conspiracy where none exists, the article was deleted by normal processes for content that isn't adequately referenced or is inappropriately promotional. Acroterion (talk) 14:11, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i can try but going by how many times its been speedy deleted, made into drafts etc in this pages history dating back over the years and or over a decade i would request your assistance in protecting this page to attempt to complete this task cause we both can see this isn't a job for a beginner. going by how many others have attempted. Jimmysauce2017 (talk) 07:47, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There’s no reason to protect anything, any article must stand or fall on sourcing and notability. If it was protected, you wouldn’t be able to edit it anyway. Start with a draft and follow normal review procedure, it’s not a special case. Acroterion (talk) 11:05, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Protection was not right wording. What im requesting is some assistance Jimmysauce2017 (talk) 12:35, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

or even an collaboration with other editors or Administrators like yourself. Jimmysauce2017 (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a topic I'd be interested in, but I suggest you read WP:NOTE and specifically WP:MUSICIAN so you understand what is needed to establish notability, and the reliable sourcing policy and the verifiability policy so you know what you need to do. Acroterion (talk) 22:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You recently reverted an edit I made on the White Power article on which I attempted to make language more neutral. You commented "I don't think this does what you think it does." Could you elaborate? Thank you!

Note: I am not a radical and am in fact typically opposed to white supremacist groups, but no phrases are completely charged with wash a single viewpoint, and I intend to clarify that. This was an innocent edit, and I have no malice, I simply want clarification on your comment. For ease of access : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_pride ThatWhichIsUnnamable (talk) 03:13, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding more words doesn’t improve the sentence, it just made it sort of mushy. We don’t need to add vaguely qualified hedges in that way. Stick to plain declarative language based on the sources. Acroterion (talk) 04:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But is it aligned with the neutrality policy to just say all of these statements made by groups with this phrase included are automatically racist? I have trouble believing that every use for "White Power" is racist. ThatWhichIsUnnamable (talk) 11:41, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, ya know, the page does say "primarily used by", which I think conveys the point well enough.

I hereby withdraw my argument. Thank you for adding another usage of "hedge" to my vocabulary, and for responding when I asked for clarification. Have a nice day. ThatWhichIsUnnamable (talk) 12:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

<edit conflict>The neutrality policy doesn't require us to water information down in the manner of "the sky is blue, except when it's cloudy or sunrise or sunset or nighttime." First of all, it's bad writing style to muddle things Second, if there are significant exceptions, they can be described in subsequent prose. One of the common issues we see on WP is a tendency to make individual sentences do too much work, a product of the editing environment where things are tweaked rather than composed as a paragraph in one go. One sentence doesn't have to try to cover every base, let's leave that stuff to AI. Yes, there are outliers with different philosopjies in all cases, even fringe groups have fringes. Take a look at WP:FRINGE for how outliers are handled. Few articles can be boiled down to a single sentence. Besides, seriously, can you show us a case in which "white power" is not in some fashion a racist concept, from sources? Acroterion (talk) 12:19, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First, your point about finding a non racist use for it is a good point (I don't think I can easily find a source for that). 2: Is that really a common issue on Wikipedia?(Making sentences do too much work). I have not seen the fringe page before, so thank you for showing me that. You have proven your point sufficiently, and I agree with you now. Thank you, and may your edits continue to be well thought out. Have a good day. ThatWhichIsUnnamable (talk) 12:30, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, don't get me started about editors who overload infoboxes, captions or short descriptions. There is a (natural human) tendency to read the first few lines and to ignore the body of the article. Always remember that the lead paragraph(s) (not lead sentence) should summarize the sourced article body. Happy editing! Acroterion (talk) 12:41, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, "primarily used by" is a concise way of covering any exceptions. Acroterion (talk) 12:19, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Acroterion,

I just wanted to say that your message came across pretty rude. I understand you disagree with my edit, but I respect we have on style or formatting. But the way it was phrased- saying things like “more words are not better” or “unnecessary verbosity” felt dismissive and unnecessarily harsh.

I’m here to contribute in good faith and improve articles where I can. I would have appreciated a more constructive tone, especially since I was trying to add helpful context. A collaborative environment is more effective when we treat each other with respect. Thank you, Beatlemania2002 (talk) 11:44, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Differences on style or formatting, sorry. Beatlemania2002 (talk) 11:46, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you feel that way, but if you choose to interpret a straightforward explanation of how your edits seem to be problematic as "rude," encounters with other editors will continue to be difficult for you.. You will have to get used to being disagreed with, and I'm not sure how "a more constructive tone" could have been framed under the circumstances. A professional copyeditor would have been a lot more blunt than I was. Acroterion (talk) 12:06, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And while you're here, another editor has made an essentially identical edit to Harry Truman's article, which interests me. That one's been reverted too. Acroterion (talk) 12:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve taken your points on board, though I still feel the tone could have been more constructive. I understand not everybody communicates the same way, and I’m not expecting that to change- but I do believe mutual respect always helps collaborative work. I’ll continue contributing thoughtfully and will take the feedback into account as I go forward. Just wanted to clarify my perspective- nothing more. Beatlemania2002 (talk) 16:27, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Geolojoey (talk) 02:26, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Gommeh. I wanted to let you know that your signature does not comply with the requirements for signature appearances. Your signature may have too little contrast; you can use tools like this to determine the contrast. Wikipedia's requirements for contrast between colors are 4.5. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Your signature is all black, which can look weird for users who use dark mode. It can be hard to tell who you are. Gommeh _(t/c) 19:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News to me, the signature predates dark mode I guess. I'll see about adjusting it do something that is more in the middle. Acroterion (talk) 22:17, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Test. Acroterion (talk) 02:14, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like that worked, thanks. Acroterion (talk) 02:20, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For taking care of this garbage -- disgusting would be an understatement. But thank you for the assistance, as always. JeffSpaceman (talk) 00:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Userpage Shield
		Thank you for dealing with that mess! Nahida 🌷 12:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).

Administrator changes

Rusalkii

NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)

• Master Jay
• Orderinchaos
• Roger Davies
• Tinucherian

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, administrator elections were permanently authorized on a five-month schedule. The next election will be scheduled soon; see Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections for more information. This is an alternate process to the RfA process and does not replace the latter.
• An RfC was closed with consensus to allow editors to opt-out of seeing "sticky decorative elements". Such elements should now be wrapped in {{sticky decoration wrapper}}. Editors who wish to opt out can follow the instructions at WP:STICKYDECO.
• An RfC has resulted in a broad prohibition on the use of AI-generated images in articles. A few common-sense exceptions are recognized.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

---

The message still reads a racial slur repeated several times despite your previous edit, please fix it, if possible... 2806:108E:18:6C5C:BDEE:AADE:62C9:B8C2 (talk) 04:32, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) As far as I'm aware, there is no direct way to fix the page preview. Page previews are supposed to show the current version of the opening paragraph, but sometimes the servers retain a previous version for a little longer than they're supposed to. Just to rule out a cache issue, I cleared the cache on my browser, but the vandalized preview is still there. Even switching to another browser didn't fix it. I hope someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we'll unfortunately have to wait for the servers to sort this out on their own. - ZLEA _T\^C 04:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at aspects of World War II Review essay: Nick-D on Osprey Publishing Timeline: This month in military history

You reverted vandalism to this article, but there had been a long and ongoing string of attacks which were still going on. When you reverted the last attack, you just reverted the page back to a previously vandalized version. I had already reverted it back to its earliest clean version. Ormewood (talk) 20:59, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I am preparing dinner, so my level of attention may not have been up to the occasion. Acroterion (talk) 21:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]