User talk:Black Kite: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 13:42, 30 August 2024

"And while I'm alive, I'll make tiny changes to earth." Frightened Rabbit

Black Kite
Hi, I'm an administrator here, and have been since 2007. I'll try to answer any questions here as soon as I can, though I do have periods where I'm not available. For admins: if you think I've done something really f***ing stupid and I don't respond to a question about it, please feel free to reverse it ... we can work it out later on.

For Talk Page Archives, click here.

If you email me via Wikipedia, please leave me a note here (unless there's a good reason you do not want that fact to be public). I do check my Wikipedia email fairly regularly, but not that regularly.

AN3 decision

I've had a handful of thanks since posting this. I'm thinking of asking at AN if what you said has consensus support amongst admins. Not to seek any sort of sanction against you or DrKay (I've never had any reason to think you're not a good/effective admin) but just to clarify if what you said is indeed an unwritten rule applied by the admin corps - if it is I'm surprised but I'd like to know. So before I do that I just want to check if you're absolutely sure of your position on that. DeCausa (talk) 20:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, what I said at AN3 was more combative than i should have been. Sorry about that. I was just a little shocked at the time to be honest. DeCausa (talk) 20:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I think it's just common sense more than anything else - you've got a drive-by editor inserting unsourced OR into an FA, and someone trying to keep it out. I can't ever see a situation in which they should be sanctioned for that. Black Kite (talk) 20:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for taking the time to look. A couple of things we might want to take forward to any AN discussion; is a "drive-by" editor an official thing here, and if so, what is the opposite of a drive-by editor? I've probably been one for the majority of my 200,000 edits. I had no idea it gave you fewer rights to expect others to treat you fairly and abide by policy. Common sense is a very dangerous rationale to use for administrative decisions in my opinion. It was common sense among white people for a very long time that black people could be bought and sold as slaves, for example. I definitely prefer a rationale based on policy and community consensus. I don't think that an FA should be exempt from normal editing practices, in the absence of a community consensus to that effect. (I know there's a procedure for leniency for TFA, but this is not relevant here.) The FAC process isn't perfect and we do get some clunkers promoted sometimes. The principle that (generally speaking) "anyone can edit" and the prohibition on edit-warring are the most important things in a wiki. The behaviour of edit-warring, being an admin, and issuing a templated warning, is in my opinion a highly worrying intersection behaviorally, and I was surprised you didn't pick up on that. I don't therefore think that you made the right decision there, but so it goes. See you at AN, maybe. John (talk) 12:23, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is WP:AN#Is reverting alleged OR from an FA exempt from the 3RR brightline? DeCausa (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
  {{User:MiszaBot/config
 |maxarchivesize = 30K
-|counter = 94
+|counter = 95
 |minthreadsleft = 1
 |algo = old(48h)
@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 }}
+== AN3 decision ==
+I've had a handful of thanks since posting [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FEdit_warring&diff=1241542074&oldid=1241541176 this]. I'm thinking of asking at AN if what you said has consensus support amongst admins. Not to seek any sort of sanction against you or DrKay (I've never had any reason to think you're not a good/effective admin) but just to clarify if what you said is indeed an unwritten rule applied by the admin corps - if it is I'm surprised but I'd like to know. So before I do that I just want to check if you're absolutely sure of your position on that. [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 20:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
-==Orphaned non-free image File:Swansscrew.jpg==
+:Btw, what I said at AN3 was more combative than i should have been. Sorry about that. I was just a little shocked at the time to be honest. [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 20:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
-[[File:Ambox warning blue.svg|35px|text-top|left|⚠|link=]] Thanks for uploading '''[[:File:Swansscrew.jpg]]'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a [[Wikipedia:Non-free content|claim of fair use]]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see [[Wikipedia:Non-free content#Policy|our policy for non-free media]]).
+:: No problem! I think it's just common sense more than anything else - you've got a drive-by editor inserting unsourced OR into an FA, and someone trying to keep it out.  I can't ever see a situation in which they should be sanctioned for that. [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (talk)]] 20:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
+:::Thank you again for taking the time to look. A couple of things we might want to take forward to any AN discussion; is a "drive-by" editor an official thing here, and if so, what is the opposite of a drive-by editor? I've probably been one for the majority of my 200,000 edits. I had no idea it gave you fewer rights to expect others to treat you fairly and abide by policy. [[Common sense]] is a very dangerous rationale to use for administrative decisions in my opinion. It was common sense among white people for a very long time that black people could be bought and sold as slaves, for example. I definitely prefer a rationale based on policy and community consensus. I don't think that an FA should be exempt from normal editing practices, in the absence of a community consensus to that effect. <small>(I know there's a procedure for leniency for TFA, but this is not relevant here.)</small> The FAC process isn't perfect and we do get some clunkers promoted sometimes. The principle that (generally speaking) "anyone can edit" and the prohibition on edit-warring are the most important things in a wiki. The behaviour of edit-warring, being an admin, and issuing a templated warning, is in my opinion a highly worrying intersection behaviorally, and I was surprised you didn't pick up on that. I don't therefore think that you made the right decision there, but so it goes. See you at AN, maybe. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 12:23, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
+==Notice of noticeboard discussion==
-Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in [[wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#F5|section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --[[User:B-bot|B-bot]] ([[User talk:B-bot|talk]]) 17:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
+[[File:Information icon4.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:AN-notice--> The thread is [[WP:AN#Is reverting alleged OR from an FA exempt from the 3RR brightline?]] [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 17:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
-== ITN footer needed ==
-Hi Black Kite, in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AIn_the_news&diff=1237537245&oldid=1237462019 recent edit here] "<nowiki>{{In the news/footer</nowiki>" was removed. Best, [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 08:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
-* Thanks, got it as soon as I posted it but then my browser decided to hang while I was fixing it! [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (talk)]] 08:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
-== Burke's Peerage ==
-You can't get a more reliable source in these matters than Burke's Peerage - I have already quoted the link and if you don't have the book 107th edition you can search online for the format of nobles <nowiki>https://www.burkespeerage.com/search.php</nowiki> it is standard practice to provide info on the current noble's family and heir to the title, lineage, etc. Link above search for Hypatia Lumi Brim-DeForest and Huxley Byron Brim-DeForest [[User:Kellycrak88|Kellycrak88]] ([[User talk:Kellycrak88|talk]]) 08:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
-* Burke's peerage isn't the problem. Adding details of information about non-notable children is. [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (talk)]] 08:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
-*plus you are still using "armorialregister.com", which doesn't seem to be a reliable source but a purely commercial venture, and you are at 4RR (which, considering that you warned me about edit warring yesterday when I was at 2RR, is something you should be well aware of). [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 09:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
-:You are breaking the the standard format accepted across wikipedia for noble titles. It is standard practice to show the lineage of noble families, look at any peer's page, you will see the peer's family members. Hence Burke's Peerage has this format showing the family. Especially in this case the heir to the title and family have titles Younger and Maid of Balvaird. Their arms are registered with the Lord Lyon the monarch's representative in Scotland. All the info is confirmed in Burke's Peerage. In regards to the Armorial register it might very well be a commercial organisation but that doesn't mean it's international register of arms it's invalid. Every herald of every country collects fees for registering and producing arms, they're government agencies, this doesn't mean they're invalid. [[User:Kellycrak88|Kellycrak88]] ([[User talk:Kellycrak88|talk]]) 09:44, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
-::The armorialregister.com is not a government agency though, they are a private company with no official status as far as I can see. For £100 you get a PDF certificate that you have registered with them... [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 10:06, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
-:::You<nowiki>'re ignoring the fact I put Burke's Peerage, it is an established source of noble families. Anyhow, putting Burke's aside a moment, Armorial Register still verifies an applicants information it's an international register of arms and I believe they've been around some decades, I don't see why you're disqualifying that as a source. You can''t just pay £100 and get anything you like put up. The guy behind it is a trusted industry source I'</nowiki>ve watched his youtube presentations on coats of arms he knows his stuff.
-:::http://armorialregister.com/arms-sco/brim-deforest-h-arms.html
-:::All it does it record arms registered at heralds. See the grant it says '''Grant: The Court of the Lord Lyon, Scotland, 14th January 2020, (Page 97, Volume 93) “Public Register of All Arms and Bearings in Scotland”.'''
-:::That means her arms as '''Hypatia Brim-DeForest, Maid of Balvaird''' is registered with the Lord Lyon the herald in Scotland representing the monarch in Scotland.
-:::It is 100% relative to the page. Claiming the family are not notable when they're listed in Burke's Peerage as a noble family and ALL OTHER PAGES FOR PEERS ON WIKIPEDIA have family members listed, is breaking standard format.
-:::I welcome other opinions from others to reach consensus before the page the is reverted. [[User:Kellycrak88|Kellycrak88]] ([[User talk:Kellycrak88|talk]]) 11:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
-:::: I would strongly suggest you do not revert the page again. We absolutely ''don't'' need birthdates and full names of children.  See [[WP:BLPPRIVACY]].  All that is required is "he is married to X and has two children". [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (talk)]] 11:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)