I appreciate you have a source. But who are you? What is your source. Advance UK take issue with being labelled far right - see their posts on X. I am happy to discuss further but you must appreciate that in the UK (are you British) far right is a perjorative term used by political opponents. Have you read their postings?Dunkelmann (talk)12:19, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whether they protest the label is not relevant. SeeWP:MANDY. No party is ever going tonot protest that label.
Yes I am sorry. But when there is a dispute who decides whether it gets left, amended or removed. As a novice at this I understood everyone has an opportunity to amend. But it seems there are editors who have a final say. I am learning so help me out here. I see you have a lot of experience and I have none.
How do I raise a dispute over the use of the term?
If someone edited a page of a famous person and misdescribed them presumably some check would be made? I wonder if it is possible to see why prior editors used the term?Dunkelmann (talk)14:13, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No editor has a final say on Wikipedia, not even admins. Everything is decided byWP:CONSENSUS building. You've done the right thing by starting a talk page discussion - I'd wait and see if more people chime in before taking it further. —Czello(music)14:15, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Czello. Since 81.106.144.198 has been blocked for one week, but there's another Triple Crown article the IP involved before that, which is messy and fancruft edits. Would you take a look? Thanks for your time.183.171.120.139 (talk)10:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean the professional wrestling one or a different one? If so could you link it and I'll take a look. I've taken a glance through the professional wrestling one but everything appears to be sourced (although the male NWA entry seems to use a spurious Wordpress blog). —Czello(music)11:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't trust unreliable sources, thrash is very aggressive, progressive rock has nothing, its evolution is speed metal. All the rest is just a forcing filler and always speculative.
You are the only ones to create this mythomania, in the other languages speed metal is the fundamental actor in the creation of Thrash, there is no need to think about it, the other is a forced invention to magnify a genre that is not technical at all nor fast, well look at you.181.42.43.118 (talk)07:30, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The statement is talking about thetechnicality in relation to thrash, not the aggression. I specifically moved the wording so that "aggression" is associated with punk, not prog. —Czello(music)07:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be able to do it? I just could not be bothered. I just stopped myself from returning fire on the Rhea Ripley talk page. A source there would solve everything, and I already said the doco itself was not enough due to the controversy Bryan Alcarez referred to.Addicted4517 (talk)06:48, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The thread was closed, but I couldn't help but notice your use of the term BlueAnon. BlueAnon is not a thing. It's a right wing rhetorical trick that employs whataboutisms to downplay the importance of QAnon in the MAGAsphere, while simultaneously painting legitimate criticism of Donald Trump as conspiracy theories. It's just another name for "Trump derangement syndrome".46.97.170.26 (talk)13:05, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's a way of pointing out that thereare wild conspiracy theories about Trump that are on the level of those coming from MAGA, e.g. stolen election theories. —Czello(music)13:07, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Czello, the thing is we typically do only marriages in a BLP, unless we're talking about well-documented and important relationships. What we have here is really not that.Drmies (talk)15:05, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. That was me. So moderator, I've told this user that turnstiles are not a good way to measuring the actual attendance of events. I've been to numerous events from all varieties, including AEW All In 2025, and I've told this user that several people did not have to go through a turnstile and got their tickets scanned (including mine) to speed up the process as it was busy. I've also specified that the article in his source stated that the actual attendance was closer to what WrestleTix had aggregated, which was at 27k. If there is an official rule that states you are to follow turnstile, then I'll oblige. If not, every other major professional wrestling event should be reverted to the total attendance as opposed to turnstiles.Jakeburtonz (talk)21:25, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My friend, I not once said that me going there was an actual source. I'm recounting my experience which I've told you, resulted in several people not going through turnstiles which automatically means the turnstile number is wrong. Total attendance listed in the wrestlenomics article, which is 23,759, is closer to the actual number than the turnstile count.Jakeburtonz (talk)21:33, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First
the wrestlenomics article mentions 21,973 is the turnstile count and the rest is the people that work for the stadium
The news comes from public records obtained by Wrestlenomics that revealed the actual turnstile count (aka tickets scanned for those coming into the venue) at 21,973 which included 274 suite tickets out of 678 that were actually sold. Actual attendance in the venue was listed at 23,759 according to the documentation. While not specified, the difference could be arena workers and other personnel.
Stop making new topics every single time. Just reply to the same one. Total attendance also refers to humans in that venue who did NOT go through a turnstile, which is why the total attendance is closer to the actual attendance as said. Watch Brandon Thurston's video covering this story, he explains it.Jakeburtonz (talk)21:45, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Literaly Czello agrees with the tunrstile count being used because he is the one user who changed all the wrestlemania attendance figures to the turnstile count,we don’t have a proof of what you are trying to say,brandon thurston himself is the reason all in 2023,2024 got changed2600:4809:1130:4D00:CC7E:47CE:2A:577 (talk)21:48, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In your close of the Reform Uk far right topic you said they should bring it up in 2026. But I wanted to say I disagree with that because as far as I know the moratorium on a RFC for right wing to far right is decmemebwr this year. And I think it could be useful to have one when it becomes available given how the last closed discussion prior to this one went.GothicGolem29 (talk)12:34, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AFIAK there was never an official moratorium put in place; it was a suggestion after the first RfC to wait 6 months, but since then we had a second RfC, hence why I've suggested we push the next discussion forward also. —Czello(music)12:47, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Idk what the offical process looks like but it seemed to me to be consensus on it as multiple people supported a moratorium and no one disagree.Alsothe moratorium I am discussing was at or after the last RFC as far as I remember.GothicGolem29 (talk)12:52, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did get a bit confused so apologies this wasn’t after the last RFC it was another RFC at the same time as a as the other one and in it everyone who comments on a moratorium agreed with it with three people wanting a moratorium of 6 months you didn’t specify and someone else wanted one for a year.GothicGolem29 (talk)14:53, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just realised I linked the whole archive apologies I meant this particular RFC by this name in that archive:RfC: Should "far-right" be added as a descriptor for Reform UK?GothicGolem29 (talk)14:55, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So yeah, this was as the first RfC concluded, hence why I suggested that the second RfC should probably push that debate onwards by an extra few months. After all, the second RfC ignored the moratorium. I'm guessing this is because only five of us agreed with the moratorium, and typically they have much more wide-ranging consensus.
So basically I'm not really sure if the moratorium is in place or not - if it is, it's already been ignored quite brazenly. Probably the best bet is to simply close new discussions like I did with the one today. As for when the next discussion should take place... meh, I suppose let's see where we're at in December, though personally I think it should go into the spring. —Czello(music)14:59, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There doesn't seem to be a source. But what then is to be done with the Councillors seat count bar in the infobox (I know it's barely visible), or other articles such as those for opinion polling? Is there a "neutral" or "unknown" colour for these circumstances, to use as a temporary measure? (e.g. by changing the colour code in the module).~2025-34464-66 (talk)17:44, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, typically we go for greys for this sort of thing. However I think given that their conference should be soon this is probably a temporary problem. —Czello(music)11:52, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But then that's an argument for keeping it in the infobox. Once it was added to themodule, rightly or wrongly, the genie was out of the bottle. The party color template has been used in several articles, in addition to the Your Party (UK) article: Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election Leadership approval opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election Hastings Borough Council Glasgow City Council Lancashire County Council A different colour has been used inWalsall Council. Forgive me, but you can see that it is inconsistent to remove it in one place, but leave it elsewhere (including the seat bars in the infobox)? Things may be clearer in 10 days or so, but there won't necessarily be any verifiable source even then. The colour as specified in the module is the colour on the party's website, and on its documents (which incidentally, say nothing about branding). Personally, if it were up to me, I would put the colour in the infobox and instead of "Red", I would put, say, "TBC" or similar against the colours box. Alternatively, the module could be changed, albeit temporarily, to(a slightly darker shade of grey, just because I like the code #444444). Is there a risk then, though, that newer readers may think that that is the party colour? However, I won't pursue this any further, as itis a temporary situation and I'm sure I can live with minor inconsitencies. Perhaps we should just treat it as "lessons learned" for any future similar cases. Walsall will need changing in due course, though, one way or another (I doubt the party will use that colour). (formerly ~2025-34464-66; my TA# only lasts for a browser session).~2025-35205-32 (talk)15:27, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Czello. Per your request, your account has beengrantedtemporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals usingtemporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that isonly to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to reviewWikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:
Accessmust not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).
It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:
When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or moreIP addresses (using theCIDR notation format).
Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visitingSpecial:Preferences. Happy editing!Giraffer (talk)14:10, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary account IP monitoring for Republican Party RfC
Given you just had temporary account viewer rights granted, I’m wondering if you would be willing to use it to monitor the soon to be RfC for the Republican Party page as the chances of people abusing temporary accounts for it is high. If not, no worriesRetr0r0cket (talk)07:44, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I should be able to, yes - I'll review the permissable uses of it just to make sure that wouldn't be in violation, but I think that should be fine. —Czello(music)08:09, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
