↓↓↓ NEW MESSAGES GO TO THE *BOTTOM*. NOT THE TOP. ↓↓↓ Please add new messages to thebottom of the page. If a conversation is started here, I'll respond here; if it starts on your talk page, I'll respond there.

I prefer to communicate viatalk pages. Please only email me if there is a good reason not to conduct a conversation on a talk page. Ido not respond to emails regarding link deletions and other issues that should be discussed on your userpage or the article talk page.

If you've come here because you want to know why I removed some external links you've added, please readWikipedia's policies on spam,Wikipedia external link guidelines andconflict-of-interest first. Because of Wikipedia's popularity, it has become a target for folks looking to promote their sites, which is against Wikipedia policies. Wikipedia is not a free advertising platform.wikipedia

PLEASE LEAVE NEW COMMENTS AT THE *BOTTOM* OF THIS PAGE.

• Policy
  • Wikipedia:Stand-alone_lists#Selection_criteria
  • Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Lists_of_people (which refers back to the above link)
• Essay
  • Wikipedia:Your alma mater is not your ticket to Wikipedia
  • Wikipedia:Write_the_article_first
• School administrators:WP:RFCSCHOOLADMIN

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For your helphere. Thank you!JeffSpaceman (talk)19:56, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i have a sneaking suspicon that AA11super plane and that porkz accounts are sock/meat puppets would be good to protect the pages that porkz mentioned in their unblock request toolocalBluepikmin (whistle the pikmin)15:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirectThe B has been listed atredirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets theredirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 5 § The B until a consensus is reached.GilaMonster536 (talk)02:31, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took a glance atWP:RFPP, and there is a user asking for something to be protected (obviously). However, they also release their username and password. Can you or another admin revdel that and block/lock the account as compromised? I don't think anyone knowing a users password will let that account be stable. That account's future isin an oblong box of trolls able to take advantage of it.right here.☩^{(Babysharkboss2)}15:39, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2601:840:4300:0:0:0:0:0/48 is a known LTA on zoo articles. Please disable talkpage and email when blocking them.DMacks (talk)03:12, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will do in the future.OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:29, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In January you partially blocked105.112.10.207 (talk ·contribs). On 19 April an editor using this IP address made a disruptive edit toTalk:Aquarius (astrology).Jc3s5h (talk)17:42, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I partially blocked that range, which likely has many different users. I don't think the test edits to that talk page are related to the editor targeted by the partial block. I've warned the recent IP editor.OhNoitsJamie^Talk21:08, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you removed the election table atCrittenden County, Arkansas, only to have it restored by a new editor. The source is"Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections", accessed on November 18, 2016.

I've never been able to find any of the data used in hundreds of these "election results" tables at that source.

I wonder ifTylerKutschbach is back at it. Cheers.Magnolia677 (talk)15:37, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed you blocked the IP...you're one step ahead!Magnolia677 (talk)15:41, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, defitely TK. I also added some new IP ranges to my edit filters. Thanks,OhNoitsJamie^Talk15:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

Hello, you have blocked a large IP range which is part of an IP block belonging to a Slovenian telecommunications company (https://www.nirsoft.net/countryip/si.html). Due to this, a large number of users using mobile data are blocked, despite not having edited anything on Wikipedia before.92.37.79.117 (talk)12:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Talk page watcher) Users are free to edit from that IP address range, they must simply sign in to their account. If they don't have an account, one may be created for them viaWP:ACC. --Yamla (talk)12:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you have a moment to look atPulaski County, Arkansas. This is likely another sock. Thanks!Magnolia677 (talk)09:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, tagged and bagged.OhNoitsJamie^Talk11:14, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know this[1] was a good while ago but it gave me a chuckle, thanks :D.

GoldRomean (talk)18:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, thanks for the goat!OhNoitsJamie^Talk18:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look atthis account. They seem similar toan LTA you recently blocked, though I'm not sure if they are the same person. Thanks –PharyngealImplosive7(talk)19:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Might be the same user, but I'm not 100% sure. In the case of the IP, they are not a vandal per se, but were being very belligerent and abusive when anyone questioned/challenged their edits, which is why I added the filters; e.g., they call someone a name, get a /64 block, then make the same edits from another IP. If it is the same person, I'm OK with them creating an account for accountability as long as they collaborate appropriately with other editors without resorting to attacks. However, I haven't been following them too closely; another editor or admin may disagree with me and want to block that account, which I am OK with.OhNoitsJamie^Talk19:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note the user has been blocked for 31 hours for logged-out editing and not communicating well. –PharyngealImplosive7(talk)15:04, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The cited USA Today article is incorrect. I explain in the linked Talk topic.

I can provide Yearbook photos to verify.

I found a local newspaper story from August 1987. Philip is quoted in the story, and they list his age as 13. That, combined with Bruno Mars wishing him a Happy Birthday on July 17th, would make his birthday July 17, 1974.

Let me know how I can link to the image.

Talk:Philip Lawrence (songwriter)99.49.59.166 (talk)16:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,check this out. Six different accounts added that toMarvel Rivals over the past two days and it's been popping upelsewhere as well.   –Skywatcher68 (talk)23:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another one turned up today.   –Skywatcher68 (talk)04:41, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Filter has been modified by Daniel Quinlan.   –Skywatcher68 (talk)14:24, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was away from the computer for a few weeks, still getting caught up.OhNoitsJamie^Talk14:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OnNamudag Raj I saw that you blockedUser:Oficialhistory602, on the same page is another user literally calledUser:Officialhistory601 (not blocked) and just recently a user namedUser:Offohistogram popped up, editing one of Oficialhistory602s draftsDraft:Surpur, editing two articles where Oficialhistory602 added something regarding Namudag Raj and it getting removed, and editing Namudag Raj. Maybe I'm just worrying over nothing, but I'll admit my weirdness sensor got pinged. I guess what I'm asking for is a another pair of eyes looking over this and if something should be done(SPI, something else idk)Trim02 (talk)14:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; borderlineWP:DUCK, but I think I'll create anWP:SPI as I suspect there are more.OhNoitsJamie^Talk15:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

Hi Ohnoitsjamie, it's been seven years since you placedthis article under semi-protection due to apparentvandalism andthis protection request. Looking atyour overall protection log on 2 April 2018, you also semi-protected four other articles for apparently the same reason, however those protections were set to expire in six months, but not this one. Was this an oversight, or did you actually intend to protect this article indefinitely?BriDash9000 (talk)09:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was an oversight. I try to only protect things indefinitely if the article (1) is an obvious long-term vandal magnet or (2) has history of increasing temporary protections; neither appears to apply in this case. I'll unprotect it and see how it goes.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought! I'm also weirded out how this had been semi-protected longer thanTara Strong's main article, which actually got semi-protected indefinitelyon October 2020.BriDash9000 (talk)08:20, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to checkthis out. –PharyngealImplosive7(talk)04:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hey so I've seen you've dealt with "2600:387:15:1D13:0:0:0:7" before? could you block them from editing the reptile zoo page? sorry i dont know the correct way to go around that still pretty new to wikipedia

also semi related, could you point me in the direction on how to get that page semi protected? this is the 3rd time its been vandalised the past few days (to the point this IP could also be a sock puppet to Brewe108 but i have no evidence)

anyways thanks in advance for any help you can provide, sorry if I've contacted you over something i shouldn't offHCPM (talk)21:31, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That IP is from a very large IP range with many different users. At the moment, it has some partial blocks; those prevent users from that range from editing certain articles. We do fully block large ranges sometimes if there's too much disruption from them; this particular range is borderline; there's a mix of good faith and disruptive edits. RegardingThe Reptile Zoo, that range has only edited that article once. I've removed your claims of "abuse" because that violatesour original research policy; that is, it's your interpretation of a video.OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is someone meant to provide evidence of it? nobody is writing a paper on something that is clearly abuse, if there is a video of someone hitting a dog nobody is going to write a paper about its so is that not usable as evidence for abuse? like what is the correct way to go about this? (also apologies if this isnt formatted correctly)HCPM (talk)16:15, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "correct" way to go about it other than finding a third party reliable source, period. Also seeWP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.OhNoitsJamie^Talk18:49, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But the issue is that the company purposely hides and removes the infomation, they commit blantant animal abuse and yet there is nowhere that speaks on it outside of dicussions in youtube videos and reddit which cant exactly be used as evidence can it? and also if you look at the articles praising it... those people have no expertise in reptiles what so ever, one article praising him is from someone who is an expert in "AI and Robotics" like? but I do see your point i just kinda.. want to know what can be done to change this? does it just have to stay this way until someone makes something that be used as a source? sorry for all this btw if its annoying its just.. something so clear cut cant be spoken about due to lack of written sources? its just disheartening i supposeHCPM (talk)19:31, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, Wikipedia is not aWP:SOAPBOX; there is nothing to be done about your issue with this business on Wikipedia. You'll see that Reddit and Youtube are clearly categorized as not reliable sources onWP:RSP. I'm not discussing this further with you.OhNoitsJamie^Talk20:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,regarding this, I'm unable to accept the AFC because it's create-protected.CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk)17:35, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're saying you were prepared to accept that draft as appropriate for article space?OhNoitsJamie^Talk18:52, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey — Inoticed youadded a new block (which will run concurrently with my block) to88.156.215.58(talk ·contribs ·WHOIS) instead of 'changing block parameters' (as normally happens when reblocking a user/block-conflicting via Twinkle or another tool). Was this intentional? If not, this might indicate a slight bug in how adding new blocks vs. modifying a current block is handled now that multiblocks are enabled here. Many thanks! —TheresNoTime (talk • they/them)12:39, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After I made the block I noticed that you'd blocked the IP at about the same time; are you sure it added it concurrently? The current timestamp is still 3 days from now. I have a feeling the devs will need to tweak the new interface a bit now that it's in wider use.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:00, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Block/88.156.215.58 shows two currently active blocks (that is, two blocks running together concurrently) — did you set the block directly onSpecial:Block or by using a tool? (I personally used Twinkle, which probablydoes need some updates to make things a bit clearer now). Sorry for all the questions, just wanting to stamp out any little remaining bugs as soon as possible :-) —TheresNoTime (talk • they/them)13:11, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't use any tools for blocking.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:36, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:TheresNoTime - (in dramatic reverb voice):MULTIBLOCKS!.OhNoitsJamie^Talk14:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is "dupe video"? this media shows hilltop youth in action so it contribute to the page.יורם שורק (talk)20:57, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dupe as in "duplicate." The video does not need to appear twice on the same article.OhNoitsJamie^Talk21:16, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GreetingsOhnoitsjamie. An editor calledDavidd02 has been vandalising the pageNkoranza by removing sourced content, adding unsourced content and provding sources that do not verify changes they made on the article. Various editors including I, have left a message on his talk page since May 5. But there has been no change to his behaviour.Kwesi Yema (talk)03:38, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

My name is Davionne Jackson and I am a Grammy Award Winning Singer-Songwriter. Specifically for Chris Brown’s “11:11” project, however, I am not seeing my name under the specific recording I contributed to? I have my Grammy Recognition Certificate for the album and I would like to speak about getting my credit via Wikipedia.172.117.205.102 (talk)18:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need a third-partyreliable source that includes that name to be able to add additional credits; your own personal social media accounts and PR sites don't count as reliable sources.OhNoitsJamie^Talk18:09, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Technical Barnstar
	For your work at1161 (hist ·log) –PharyngealImplosive7(talk)00:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see a serious lack of kitties here!On a more serious note, you've done great lately. Keep it up!

🪷nahida17:43, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

I've replied to your response. –PharyngealImplosive7(talk)17:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning on140.177.83.6(talk ·contribs ·WHOIS) As you can see from their talk page, they've been adding "X is Jewish" nonsense, labeling non-Jews as Jews because their names are similar, since November of last year. Can we please get some kind of major warning or block? Thanks.Viriditas (talk)20:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks for the heads-up. I monitor a few other ranges who make similar edits, though this one geolocates to a different area.OhNoitsJamie^Talk21:11, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't give any advanced notice before deleting and salting Jack Welsh. I went to the "discussion" page, and all of the comments were from 2020. I left my own replies on comments that I then realized weren't even about me.

Things have changed since 2020. Just do a google search for the man. He pops up in dozens of newspapers and magazines. I'm not connected with this subject, I don't really care all that much, but this process of just deleting a page SIMPLY BECAUSE it has been deleted in the PAST seems contrary to logic to me. Things change. That's the nature of time, that's how time works.Guylaen (talk)04:30, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That article had beensalted because of multiple recreations; which you havealready discovered. That should've indicated to you that it was likely to be deleted again. You are welcome to use theWP:AFC process; in doing so, you'll want to note that it was previously deleted and salted. You'll need to convince reviewers that there is a signficant change inWP:DEPTH of coverage (vs getting mentioned in the news for stunts).OhNoitsJamie^Talk11:58, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The anon user overtagging SE Asia media articles is back, editing atUser:158.140.164.44. Their MO now seems to be adding dubious {{copyedit}} tags to random articles. I'm in the process of going through and reverting the worst of it.Jdcooper (talk)11:38, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added that range to my filter, thanks!OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jamie, just to let you know, this user is back editing atUser:~2025-34762-63. They have been adding {{copyedit}} and {{notability}} tags, mostly juuuust about warranted, but I'm keeping an eye on their edits in case they go rogue again.Jdcooper (talk)14:04, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about this one; might be the same user, but as you noted, the notability tags in this case are reasonable. I did adjust my edit filters a bit so they should notify me if they start doing more pointless tagbombing.OhNoitsJamie^Talk14:26, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain it's the same user.. they're editing many of the same articles they used to, and they have a very distinctive style of edit summaries. But yeah, I'm hoping their editing has improved in the interim period.Jdcooper (talk)14:57, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

@Ohnoitsjamie: I've replied to your email back. –PharyngealImplosive7(talk)03:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making the edit, but I cannot edit any page. This is essentially I am blocked from editing.110.145.79.237 (talk)17:49, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A block-evadingWP:LTA uses the range you are on; the edit filter is an alternative to a full block on that range, and it only trips on certain topics and wording. You'd have a much easier time if youcreated an account.OhNoitsJamie^Talk18:05, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could I make a stand alone page for notable people inSomerset, Kentucky?75.89.79.133 (talk)18:15, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The current number of notable people wouldn't justify a standalone list at this point.OhNoitsJamie^Talk19:04, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jamie you marked the Page "Aimsey" I've created earlier this morning for deletion and deleted it and I would love for you to restore it because I was still working on it. I just decided to take a break for a bit. I will be adding more resources and more stuff to it if you restore it. I'm trying my best to be a good editor.HiimowoomgYT (talk)13:04, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That page was already deleted per consensushere because it didn't come close to meeting ournotability criteria. That version you created didn't include anyreliable sources whatsover. Please take the time to learn how Wikipedia policies work, especially regarding notability and reliable sourcing, before trying to create an article.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[section name edited because I didn't noticethe above]
I see that you justSALTedJack Welsh (YouTuber), which was an obvious workaround of the also-SALTed article using his full name, something which has been a recurring issue with his fans trying to create an article on him, as noted atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Massey Welsh. Since that AfD, there have been sources that have appeared about him; however, they appear to fall short of ones needed for an article. He has been mentioned in the Guinness Book (seehere), but Guinness isyellow-fielded at WP:RSP. He had a mainstream news article written about him last year inMetrohere which was picked up by numerous other publications such as theNew York Post, butMetro is a tabloid, plus the article only covers a single video, not his body of work as a whole nor his influence on YouTube. It might have been appropriate to list him atList of YouTubers, but that requires entries with existing articles, bringing us back to square one.

I believe I have a compromise: He is mentioned, with ref, atTommyInnit#Internet career. Redirecting the two deleted articles above there would satisfyWP:TARGET andWP:RSURPRISE, and also discourage editors from trying to create a standalone article. With me not being an admin and you being the last one involved with this, I'm placing this idea here.Mapsax (talk)02:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[addendum, sorry]Another Guinness document says "He has also been liaising with Guinness World Records for many years", likely cementingWP:COI for a standalone article and making the redirect argument stronger.Mapsax (talk)03:06, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't rule that out, but I'm not quite convinced that it's necessary. For one, it's questionable as to whether he should even be mentioned atTommyInnit in the first place and secondly, existing edit filters should catch any attempts to circumvent those saltings. It's quite possible that Massey will eventually have enoughWP:SIGCOV to meet notability guidelines, but that's not the case yet.OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:27, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Before I respond, I should note that he knows about these discussions, even showing WP screenshots recently – seethis video posted July 1 (roughly 3:20 to 4:45 with a long aside in the middle).

I did fail to mention that the ref in question atTommyInnit is also Guinness. (Speaking of potential sources, had I continued to examineWP:RSP, I would have seenWP:METRO andWP:NYPOST.) It's the ambiguity of Guinness and the lack of knowing whether something is paid or not that's complicating things. EvenWP:RSPF doesn't help any (note the chart in the last section). There just seems to be just enough notability to keep this in mind as being noted somewhere on WP if only through objective numbers, which is why I figured that it was worth a second look as of late, though as you note not yet at least due to lack ofWP:SIGCOV. I don't know, maybe I'm being persuaded too much by Guinness Book.WP:NODEADLINE, I've made my case, I'll hang back now.Mapsax (talk)00:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given the continued attacks on UK nuclear power related articles, can you perhaps take a look at my suggestions for semi-protection atWP:RPP? Thanks.10mmsocket (talk)17:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not including to protect that many articles, as I'm not sure how practical it is to protect every nuclear power station article though I certainly wouldn't object if someone else wanted to do it. There are alternative measures for handling LTAs like that.OhNoitsJamie^Talk19:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. --10mmsocket (talk)19:43, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just a heads up that your revdels still left the usernames visible as the revert edit summaries included them. I've hidden them now.SmartSE (talk)23:09, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!OhNoitsJamie^Talk00:10, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jamie,

Hi, I recently found out that my account has been stolen and I didn't have access to it. Meanwhile, someone edited a lot of pages using it, which lead to a ban signed by you. I regained control of the account, changed the password, now everything should be fine. If it is not much of a hastle I would appreciate coming back to the wiki society, healthily helping the community (of course if you are able to bring me back at all).

Thanks.

P#s. If you need any proof of my rightfulness, I also have an account on the Ukrainian wiki, which I used to create a couple of articles that have passed all checks and are live. If you need that, let me now.Timtim40a (talk)12:56, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher).@Timtim40a: It might be helpful to let Jamie know the name of the old account. Best.-- Deepfriedokra (talk)13:09, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Selangor_F.C._Under-23&diff=prev&oldid=1302605432

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ydlp19#ANI

Please can this vandal be banned, and mess reverted93.140.39.137 (talk)13:05, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear to me how that's vandalism, and this is not a subject area that I am knowledgeable in.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:45, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to bring to your attention a potential case of undisclosed paid editing on the Wikipedia articleSanty Sharma.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santy Sharma

Kindly Review this ( Mentioned Detailed in Deletion Section )

If am wrong at some point please do let me know.

Thank you for your time.

Novaclia🌀Novaclia (talk)16:19, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you offer some insight? I have a decision to make, but am sliding inexorably into a decline.-- Deepfriedokra (talk)13:43, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

does this affect me if my brother is permanently banned from any parts of wiki He did some nsfw activities multiple times I haven't done anything but he has and uses my device sometimes for "research purposes" i don't know what he used it for recently but I had to make an account that I use for school and I don't want my brother to affect me so

My question is does this affect my access too wikiDelta07 Qm07 (talk)14:54, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that you are beingtruthful, as long as you are the only person using this account you should be able to edit Wikipedia. If your "brother" were to use your account, it would be consideredcompromised and immediately blocked indefinitely.OhNoitsJamie^Talk15:24, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question is IF he is there how is it compromised if he used it for info for research and not editing? I need this for college so "IF"Delta07 Qm07 (talk)15:27, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Compromised" meaning if he uses your account. I quoted "brother" because I've heard theWP:BROTHER story a million times. Please don't message me again, I'm not interested in discussing this further.OhNoitsJamie^Talk15:40, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mQwerfjkl (bot). I haveautomatically detected thatthis edit performed by you, on the page2026 United States Senate election in Michigan, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• Amissing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix |Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is afalse positive, you canreport it to my operator.Thanks,Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk)12:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello- first of all, thank you for the deletion of the disruptive/vandal edits on bothThe Really Loud House andTalk:The Really Loud House. Just wanted to quickly add on that I thinkthis should be deleted too?... Aside from that, thanks for the help.Magitroopa (talk)18:37, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks for catching that. DoneOhNoitsJamie^Talk18:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi Jamie, seeing you as a frequent editor on this so I thought I'd ask you directly; I experimented with updating some info on this page and attempted to cite official govt websites, which was reverted by another admin (which could've been in part bc i was goofing around previously and in the edit summary - my fault) with the explanation that i should seek perennial sources; in a separate edit, removing info with an old citation needed tag led to your partial restoration with a citation to an official govt website. im amenable to either approach, and obv better sources would be better, but whether to include info with this kind of source appears a little subjective and open to an editor's interpretation. in your view, would you find any part ofthis edit to be worth restoring to the page? Tfyt70.226.13.3 (talk)20:09, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any obvious problems with your edit above, though I don't see the list of communities served mentioned in any of the new sources you added; perhaps that was the "unsourced" part EditorShane3456 was referring to; you'd have to ask him. Why did you write "adding vandalism" as your edit summary? That, along withthis edit which appears to be vandalism is going to draw more scrutiny to future edits from this IP.OhNoitsJamie^Talk20:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ah ok I see what you mean - I reckon I pulled the list of communities from the GFD website's home page instead of the "about us" page I cited. I'll take a 2nd crack at it. Thanks70.226.13.3 (talk)20:24, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now-blocked79.135.127.84 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·filter log ·WHOIS ·RDNS ·RBLs ·http ·block user ·block log) has made some offensive edits on a number of nuclear power station articles, plus one other unrelated article. In the past you have hidden very similar edits by what I'm guessing is the very same editor on these articles. Any chance you can take a look? I have also listed a couple of the pages atWP:RPP, but feel free if you're so inclined to semi-protect those and the others. Thanks.10mmsocket (talk)07:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP-hopping LTA.OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:39, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I sourced the change directly from interview from Kendrick where he says this - “I always said “Section 80” was just a warm-up for the story I’m trying to tell. “Section 80” was more about the people, my debut album will be more about me.” (Source)

This is from 2011 after it got released and before GKMC so its clear his intention was always for Section.80 to be a mixtape and GKMC to be his debut album.

On his feature on Power by Rapsody, he refers to TPAB as his second album - “My second LP had real niggas on POTUS lawn” (Referring to the cover art of TPAB)

Or on his own song Sing About Me, I’m Dying of Thirst - “You wrote a song about my sister on your tape And called itSection.80”

The consensus that this is an album is purely because of the fact that people trust wikipedia and dont make their own research.

The words of the artists matter far more than “consensus”Cerealny Kaiser (talk)05:47, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No they don't. You need to get consensus for a change that impacts the templates and all of the other discography articles.OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:08, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedHelen Wheels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageHell on wheels.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)07:59, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It always makes me laugh when a VOA does such a poor job they manage to get themselves blocked before even doing anything. Keep up the good work.Lynch4418:29, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Perhaps not the most well-thought-out scheme there...OhNoitsJamie^Talk18:36, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was going to report it toWP:AIV via Twinkle but didn't realise that once I warn someone using Twinkle, the prefilled revision data disappears, and I wasn't quite sure where to find it again. So I appreciate your help on that front.

Regards,Shield.^{\\|T| -|C| \\}00:54, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it will not be the last block, but the next one will be much longer.OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. For some reason, it said my IP address was blocked by you. It led me to some random ip address that was not me. I was still able to log in to my account.

Its probably just a bug, but im letting you know anyway.Unconstructive33 (talk)11:28, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP addresses on mobile devices change frequently.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:14, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if thisis needed just yet? I reverted an edit byCm9122 as they purposely misgenderedHunter Schafer on the article talk page, see[2], which I reverted and left a warning on their talk page. Could you take a peek at their responses on their talk page please? They might respond better to an admin?Knitsey (talk)18:38, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now blocked, sorry to have disturbed you.Knitsey (talk)19:07, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glad that was sorted out quickly, thanks!OhNoitsJamie^Talk19:33, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the response given to the inaccurate accusation presented at the "User talk:98.32.141.216" page. I never have, nor ever will, use an LLM to compose any part of an edit. (I am not sure whether to be amused or insulted.) (a professor)98.32.141.216 (talk)15:41, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PerWikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports#62.73.72.101, for filter 1202 you should switch toMediaWiki:Abusefilter-disallowed-LTA instead of thedefault message. Thanks.Codename Noreste (talk)18:06, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks for catching that.OhNoitsJamie^Talk22:07, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedBrian Daboll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageAmerican.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)19:52, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please revdeletethis edit as serious libel?Entranced98 (talk)14:30, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks!OhNoitsJamie^Talk14:38, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An IP and a vandalism-only account are causing heavy disruption to this article, could they please be blocked ASAP?Entranced98 (talk)15:04, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind taking a look at a situation? New user,User:NewJerseyFanatic2025 added a massive list of town to the lead ofJersey Shore with the simple line of “Largest cities in the region:.” When I reverted, explaining that lists don’t belong in the lead due to it being a summary of the article and that this is not the format lists are add in anyway, their response was to revert it back saying “Well, it's being added to the lead anyway.” Eight minutes later, they moved it out of the lead but it still remained in an improper format and was reverted once more. Their response was to, once again, revert back. It’s obvious by their immediate argumentative response that this user isWP:NOTHERE to collaborate or follow any sort of established guidelines. Thanks.NJZombie (talk)03:30, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be premature label the user asWP:NOTHERE; let's start with some warning and feedback on their talk page (which I've begun).OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:13, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I see you noticed, the exit warring continues.NJZombie (talk)20:38, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of by Ponyo. I reverted all butJersey Shore back; you can do the honors there as I've already reverted several times.OhNoitsJamie^Talk20:45, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it?

Disclaimer: Wikipedia makes no guarantee of validity178.222.183.91 (talk)05:44, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed on that user page are those of the editor's and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of any entities they represent.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:36, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, it looks like you partially blocked97.83.21.236 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·filter log ·WHOIS ·RDNS ·RBLs ·http ·block user ·block log) but they've found some new targets. Perhaps a broader block is needed? --ZimZalaBim^talk02:17, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That particular IP now has 4 years to find some new hobbies. Added some filters as well, thanks!OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please revoke TPA?~delta^{(talk •cont)}01:36, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done, but I don't see any recent talk page edits; did someone already delete them?OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:57, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: Yeah, ERCheck G3'dUser talk:2605:59C0:6E11:D810:CC7E:A816:4A9A:9D4D andUser talk:2605:59C0:6E11:D810:7874:F6A4:6F53:6BC3 yesterday.~delta^{(talk •cont)}17:19, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jamie,Can you rdKisan Singh toKishan Singh of Bharatpur as an alt spelling? Looks like the page was protected a few years ago due to unrelated shenanigans. Thanks.Gotitbro (talk)06:09, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 DoneOhNoitsJamie^Talk11:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like they've started editing logged-out after being blocked; seeDraft:Our biography. Although if I were you I wouldn't have blocked them so fast as going straight to a Level 4 warning is for intentional and unambiguous vandalism, not misguided disruption.Passengerpigeon (talk)20:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd don't feel great about blocking students in a class, but the failure to respond to feedback is frustrating.OhNoitsJamie^Talk20:24, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recently noticed that a while ago you reverted an edit of mine on the page "Fastest animals" in the mammals section, regarding the addition of the maned wolf to the list.

If top speed doesn't count, what could count to define an animal's speed? Or even how fast it is positioned relative to others? Cheetahs can reach up to 120 km/h in a race, but that's not their average speed (which is even rivaled by that of its prey), what makes it objectively faster is its top speed.

As for the questionable source, I think it's something that makes more sense to disagree with and doubt.Vexiooo (talk)12:24, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I explained the reason for the revert in the edit summary; the article is already too bloated as it is; it's not intended to be a list of every animal's speed. More importantly, "a-z-animals.com" is not likely to meetreliable sources criteria. Please take further discussion to the article's talk page.OhNoitsJamie^Talk12:58, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s 2025 and analog PAL signals are still distributed in cables by some (2 at least) cable TV providers. The map and the related section should probably reflect that.Guest826220 (talk)17:24, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss it on the article talk page. You'll need to providereliable sources as well.OhNoitsJamie^Talk17:42, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

for that revert on the Prestonsburg, Kentucky, bus crash article. I see you've noticed this editor - I assume it's one person, though their IP changes it's always somewhere near Boston and/or Concord NH - has persistently altered ages and other information of children killed in various disaster articles - bus crashes, school shootings, bombings, fires, etc. Thanks for blocking other involved IPs (I had reported some of the recent IPs but the report went stale so nothing was done on that report). The probable master is listedhere. -Shearonink (talk)14:09, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have an edit filter for this LTA that I've adjusted in light of the recent activity. Please feel free to message me directly if they're able to evade the filter again.OhNoitsJamie^Talk14:13, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will watch this article also and if I catch anon IPs vandalizing the page I will let you know if you don’t catch it.DawnB3 (talk)— Precedingundated comment added23:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a check on Kartik Aaryan’s page. Too much fake praise happening there.Aliya Zaita (talk)11:41, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	The original barnstar for one of the originals. Happy20th(!) WikiBirthday! Here's to 20 more :)tony15:02, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I would've missed it had you not commented here!OhNoitsJamie^Talk15:55, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well we can't have that! And hey, roughly 7 weeks from now will be 20 years sinceyou created a page which is very special to me ;) --tony17:10, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The formative years... :)OhNoitsJamie^Talk17:39, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Wiki B day Jamie! Hoping for many more years of good service to the encyclopedia!— Precedingunsigned comment added byDawnB3 (talk •contribs)00:03, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!OhNoitsJamie^Talk00:22, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Ohnoitsjamie. Your wiki edit anniversary was 2 days ago, marking 20 years of dedicated contributions to this Wikimedia project. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. With over 270,373 edits, your dedication is an inspiration to the community. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you all the best for the year ahead :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee❚❙❚❙❙✉14:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to just indefinitely banthis IP address. They're just going on a vandalism tear and it's clear that's all they're here for.Rusted AutoParts16:53, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just take a look. Am in the middle of trying to piece together what is going on... So many similarities, the editing is very compelling that it's our regular suspect. This new editor has 1)changed the ages of at least 2 of the victims, 2)claimed a specific time the accident occurred which is unsupported by refs, 3)mangled some references, etc . Can maybe this poor article be protected? -Shearonink (talk)02:34, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While a new user editing this article is a little suspicious, I'm not 100% sure it's the same user. The changes they made to the lede were contructive. Regarding age changes, while the existing source for "Reva Cheryl Matney" says she was 7, several other sources I found say her name was Rita and she was 8[3] (Lexington Herald-Leader),[4] (KENTUCKY NATIONAL GUARD

50th ANNIVERSARY REMEMBRANCE), which leads me to believe the current source is probably wrong (Rita is much more common than "Reva.") The remembrance source also says that Rosset was 27, not 26. For now I'm inclined to (cautiously) assume good faith.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So I basically am now just using this account, idk why, guess I just like to read Wikipedia mostly. Anyways, I signed in just to ask why I keep getting blocked from editing. I am a newbie to this stuff kinds, so idk if I need to give you my IP as I was not signed in. I never made any vandalious edits on here or really any wiki before. I just changed a mistake or 2 and added a new category. Now you blocked me for sockpuppeting. Just wanted to know what is up. Did my IP catch a stray or something? -ConanHighwoods (talk)

(talk page stalker) TheUser:ConanHighwoods account is not blocked. What other acccounts, IP or regisered, do you use?Liz^Read!Talk!04:52, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per Liz, there's not much to "clarify" until I have an idea of what IP you are talking about.OhNoitsJamie^Talk13:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have dealt with the report at AN3, but my subtle comment seems to have been missed, so I'll remind you appear to be also edit warring on this article,[5],[6],[7] and thethree revert rule applies toall editors.Ritchie333^(talk)(cont)16:44, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand that. That's why I reported it to 3RR.OhNoitsJamie^Talk16:55, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed you protected the page and RD'd the vandalism - thanks for that. However, since you revdelled the usernames of the vandals, I should mention that their usernames are still visible in the edit summaries of the people who reverted them. –Epicgenius (talk)19:35, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned those up. I don't want to waste too much time trying to scrub *all* of the graffiti, but I'll continue scrubbing the easy stuff. (Fun fact; in my old neighborhood, I did weekly graffiti walks and cleaned up IRL graffiti. It's oddly satisfying).OhNoitsJamie^Talk19:41, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have atemporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with thetemporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern:~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with thetemporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant thetemporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet thecriteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. atWP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators arenot permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators willautomatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted theAccess to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy viaSpecial:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects theautoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. OnSpecial:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should useSpecial:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access isgenerally not allowed (e.g.~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g.~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward3RR, but notHey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• SeeWikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via theUser Info card, available inPreferences →Appearance →Advanced options →Enable theuser info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly,Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation atWikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written byMz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk)02:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you please help moveCategory:Speculative fiction сonventions toCategory:Speculative fiction conventions? The letter "c" in "conventions" is written in Cyrillic. Regards.Medelam (talk)14:36, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 DoneOhNoitsJamie^Talk15:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For helping take care of that Boateng nonsense. Thank you for your assistance!JeffSpaceman (talk)16:37, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, glad to help!OhNoitsJamie^Talk16:40, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please accept or deny some of the entires? It has been sitting for a week or so without getting tended to. There are categories likeTentacles/tentacle monsters in fiction that have 20+ examples just sitting there unvetted. I tried to do it myself, but idk if only users with a certain amount of edits can do it, as I saw no hub or anything that would let me. Godspeed!

ConanHighwoods (talk)22:30, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As the subject states. Thanks.Chevroletmycarexploded (talk)23:45, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need to find areliable source stating that the subject is known by that nickname. I see that a columnist in The Guardian calls him EBLJT, but only a single opinion piece jokingly mentions JT.WP:BLP policies require stronger sourcing than that.OhNoitsJamie^Talk00:53, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 82.173.160.29 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·filter log ·WHOIS ·RDNS ·RBLs ·http ·block user ·block log)

Do you perchance recall what led you to sockblock this IP last year? Looking at your blocks around that time, and their edits around that time, I can't piece it together. (See their recent TA edits, which Ican't link, for why I'm asking.) --Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]}(they|xe|🤷)21:02, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having trouble remembering, but looking at the history and sequence of blocks it looks like it was a followup to a previous block; I may have been following up on an noticeboard posting. The IP's topic area isn't one I typically follow. In any cases, it's clearly the same wikilawyering user.OhNoitsJamie^Talk21:11, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, no question it's the same person, but I'm trying to work out whether they're currently evading any block, or if it should just be handled as a regular user-conduct issue (which will be slightly complicated by the fact that no one can publicly cite their IP edits toward blocking the TA). Looking further, they hadthis false positive on a filter you maintain, which ledEggRoll97 to edit the filter toremove the offending string. Perhaps that's what put them on your radar a day later, and they reminded you of someone. --Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]}(they|xe|🤷)21:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You blockedthis temp account some days ago, and thisnew temp account is now making the same edit repeatedly.Perception312 (talk)14:06, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...and they're blocked already. nvm xDPerception312 (talk)14:08, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:18, 15 November 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

Codename Noreste (discuss •contribs)19:18, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:19, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ohnoitsjamie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

tony20:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at the history and this meatpuppet issue goes back over the course of a few days at least. Not sure where this is coming from but it must be widespread.PCHS Pirate Alumnus (talk)22:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that; a newly minted meme on some forum or Discord probably. I have some mitigations in place that should help going forward.OhNoitsJamie^Talk22:20, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same thing, Discord, Reddit, Facebook, X, Instagram, Tiktok, YouTube, SnapChat, something along those lines. Same as the "67" nonsense. Blessings.PCHS Pirate Alumnus (talk)22:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening,

Earlier today I made an edit on the page for Matthew Stafford adding an NFL record he tied. It was reverted and I didn't see a reason listed. I've only made a handful of edits and this is the first one that's been reverted. Could you let me know what the problem was so I know for future edits?

Thanks!Cultogon (talk)02:16, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]