(edit conflict) And you can't look at revdel'd stuff, right? I remember that was very annoying, the time I handed in my tools. Maybe what you really want is semi-desysopped status? Bishonen | tålk08:21, 21 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]
See [1]. Apparently, the Human Diversity Foundation is offering a bounty for information that could be used to dox a Wikimedia Commons editor. Not sure what, exactly, I'm asking you to do here, but I thought making an admin aware of this would be a good idea. And I know you have a bunch of fellow admins as stalkers here. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.14:01, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, you reverted what, Gerda? The edit DeepFried links to hasn't been reverted. I suggest you do it, Deep, and I'll ask them why they're posting anything on the page of a blocked user who last edited 9 months ago. Bishonen | tålk20:07, 28 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]
ps: you archive so fast, or I post too rarely, no January pic anymore ... - on vacation, so I missed going around yesterday when the main page was graced with a Bach cantata (300 years), Mozart (270 years, family pictured) and Verdi mentioned (125 years). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
They clearly have difficulty taking our rules on board, Ekdalian. Telling you in an edit summary that "you are not Banik" unfortunately seems to speak volumes about their attitude.🙁 I've tried again to explain the rules (not that there was anything wrong with your own explanation) and given them a final warning. Bishonen | tålk15:18, 4 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]
You have covered all the points including their attitude and I completely agree with you, Bishonen. Thank you so much for your prompt action! Best Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 17:21, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That I missed. Didn't one of our King's sisters talk to angels and sell magical magnetic bracelets years ago, 80:s-90:s or so? But as royal families go, ours is pretty well behaved. Also, generally well liked. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:34, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
One of the Hagasessorna? Not to my knowledge. But Märtha Louise of Norway is .. er, well, being a self-described clairvoyant and talking to angels seems to be the least of it. Never mind, let's not talk about those people any more. Bishonen | tålk22:58, 8 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Today something new: a 100th birthday of someone alive, György Kurtág! In 2004 I was there when he and his wife played for the Rheingau Musik Festival where he was the featured composer. They played as the 2019 DYK said, on an upright piano, - listen, the last piece was the same. - More pics uploaded, enjoy. And Rosiestep shows the latest cat! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@(Bishonen|talk), there is an issue with my Melroross profile. I forgot my password and sent a re-set request to my Gmail address for this username - no password ever arrived. However, today my duplicate username 'Melrorross' which you deactivated at my request in 2024 (it was created by a typo mistake leading to an unintended duplicate profile), did allow a password change request from Wikipedia to the same Gmail address. The issue now being, that the two different usernames now appear to be blocked. I need a password re-set for Melroross which I have been using for 11 years.Can you please investigate and advise? Many thanks TempMelroross (talk) 02:29, 18 February 2026 (UTC) TempMelroross (talk) 02:47, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Ed. And the other name, Melrorross, is both blocked and redirected to User:Melroross, which seems right to me. Or, Ed, do you think a blocked redirect could somehow interfere with the unblocked status of the target? Bishonen | tålk09:38, 18 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]
@Bishonen,@EdJohnston it appears that the blocked redirect is interfering, creating a 'blocked loop' with the unblocked profile, Melroross and treats BOTH the blocked profile Melrorross (unwanted) and the in principle, unblocked profile Melroross as one. I believe I had created the Melroross profile with the same Gmail account but maybe there is no email linked- hence the never receiving a temporary password code. Does this mean I may have lost my oldest profile? Any other suggestions you can give me? Many thanks ~2026-10853-57 (talk) 12:57, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No, surely not. (I hope you still have the password you received for Melrorross..?) It seems odd that this only happens now and not before, but who understand these things (not me, for sure). We can try breaking the loop, either by unblocking Melrorross, or by deleting the redirect. I've tried unblocking, as I feel somebody might more easily, and in good faith, recreate the redirect. So there is now no block on either of the accounts. Now try, Melroross. If it works, of course the downside is that you'd better be really careful not to use Melrorross again. And if it doesn't work, I'll try undoing the redirect. Any comment, Ed? Or any other clever talkpage stalker? (Ed doesn't seem to be editing.) Bishonen | tålk13:25, 18 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Very odd, no idea how or why but good news is: I now can login with Melroross AFTER login in with Melrorross and changing a small detail on my Melroross profile. I have different passwords for the 2 profiles and happy to go back to Melroross again. I don't need or want Melrorross so, if you/another administrator can disable it once more, I'd be grateful. Again, many thanks for your help... peculiar occurrence Melroross (talk) 18:30, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Is a great movie. I don't know if you've seen it, but I highly recommend it.
It's also a sentiment I have right now.
A new user is upset about getting some pushback on adding OR to Glyphosate and decided to blatantly attack Tryp over it. When I left a sternly worded warning (I admit, I jumped a few levels, but the sheer childishness of the attack justified it, IMO) they decided to lash out at me, too.
Well, now you've got an extra diff to add to the pile. I had hopes Bish would work her charm on the fellow and wring a more congenial attitude out of them, but a topic ban (that would almost certainly function as a site ban) would settle the matter, as well. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.00:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
An extra diff to go the extra mile on the pile! For what it's worth, I don't intend TBAN = CBAN. Rather, I hope it would result in getting some experience in safer topic areas, but then again, I'm the eternal optimist. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:02, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Although the account is new, according to the user page it’s somebody’s special-purpose alt dedicated to “political conflicts in science-focused articles”. So in this case TBAN = CBAN probably would be true, depending on the scope of T.—Odysseus147902:03, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Odysseus' comment about the "alt account" got me thinking, and wondering if there is a risk of block evasion. But I think the mention of alt account on the user page may just be a clumsy reference to opening a named account after editing as a temporary account. A common sense reading of the start of Talk:Glyphosate#Section "Misinformation campaigns" makes it very clear that the temp account that started the discussion thread actually is CistronSSF. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:33, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bishonen.. hope you are doing well! I informed the new user Mona4320 regarding the new rules on contentious topics, but they continue to ignore the same. Moreover, they are abusing me (assuming I am from West Bengal) in this particular edit, 'Hijra' meaning enuch, 'Bhikiri baap' meaning beggar father in Bengali! Best Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the alert, Ekdalian. This could easily be a user who hasn't found their own talkpage. I've blocked them from mainspace with a note they won't be able to help finding (in the block log). Let's hope that takes care of the problem. Bishonen | tålk15:55, 8 March 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Sorry to bother you, I would like to bring to your attention another case of violation, this time by the user MY Gohad! You may have a look at my latest warning on their talk page; please see [this]. Best Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 13:08, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
They have now offered the excuse of having forgotten. That's a bit too much like saying 'I didn't take it seriously', so I've blocked for a month, which I hope will help them to remember in the future. (Your reminder was fairly long ago, which is the reason I didn't indef.) Bishonen | tålk13:36, 13 March 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Howdy, 'Zilla. Flatten any coastal cities lately? I'd invite you to go after the capital of my state, Tallahassee, but it's pretty flat already, I'm not sure there's much you can do to it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.17:13, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This was my first learning about that attack. All I can say about that is that I'm glad it was handled and to shake my head sadly at people who choose poor passwords and don't use VMs, VPNs and test accounts when doing tech work on web sites. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.17:46, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)I would say it's a failure in process controls, or in good sense lol. "hey, lets load a bunch of random userscripts, with no review, into the live environment. what's the worst that could happen?" hopefully it results in better controls and processes, as well as perhaps security measure regarding userscripts. -- Aunva6talk - contribs20:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
One of the sad truths of the modern web-based industry is that doing things the proper way is expensive, and that matter for both non-profits and for-profit entities on the web. The only systems where I've ever seen what I would describe as a flawless security process were all systems maintained by very small groups of volunteers who were doing it as a hobby and didn't mind losing money on it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.20:29, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Little fish very confused. (Nothing new about that...) What happened while I was logged out? No Java for anyone? How awful! And what's this about PEBKAK? Is there something wrong between my keyboard and my chair? Looks very nervously at caudal fin. And who did that insignificant child call a "putz"? --Tryptofish (talk) 21:01, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
PEKBAK is a fundamental truth of the universe. Almost all computer problems are PEBKAK problems. The only difference is timing. Did the PEBKAK issue happen during development, deployment or use, or did it happen elsewhere and just cause the problem at hand?
A perfectly understandable mistake, considering a woody putter’s no more unusual than a woody hammer. OTOH putzes is awfully tiny, I mean tinny.—Odysseus147903:44, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings to the hero of Wikipedia! I was suspecting an instance of an editor performing UPE cross-wiki; I've never dealt with / alledged anyone with cross-wiki abuse before and 'd like to know where should I start the discussion at (e.g., metawiki)? Or is it just fine to post cross-wiki findings on ANI thread and entrust the rest to the mop-wielding superheros? 海盐沙冰 / aka irisChronomia / Talk11:02, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen that administrators developed bias in favour of editors who are seen as anti-Hindus. Trangabellam never got blocked for multiple times biting new editors.
Krish! is not even a political editor.
He edits movie articles.
Trangabellam will jump into a movie article and do drama with his political edits.
But you blocked Krish!
Krish! wrote so many featured articles.
After your block he left Wikipedia. Because of your wrong decision Wikipedia lost a content creator.
The article has highest edits from Trangabellam, Tayi Arjakate, Kautilya, fowler, daxserver all are politically religious editors. I think you saw someone opposing your favorite gang of political editors and got angry.
I see you are complaining about a time-limited page block (a block from one Wikipedia page) from four years ago. (TrangaBellam left more than a year ago, unfortunately.) And ridiculously claiming that Krish! (that's you, obviously, because who else cares?) wrote "many featured articles" (no, not even one). All very sensible, I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Bishonen | tålk10:04, 9 March 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Krish! (who is probably you) called the block a blessing before making only 3 more edits in August before disppearing off the face of the Earth. He was welcome to wait it out and go edit other pages. He chose to retire or stop or whatever, which he's welcome to. 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945Peep peep!03:24, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's a newish ArbCom contentious topics rule, whereby only extended confirmed users (500 edits + one month's residence) may edit caste articles (WP:CT/CASTE). It's a good rule, which helps admins in the area, but of course brand new users don't know about it. Hence the hoo-hah. Glad the pocket spa was helpful, young JoJo! Bishonen | tålk19:59, 13 March 2026 (UTC).[reply]
What I'm hearing is that they decided to caste out the riffraff and bring a little class back to the topic.
I strongly believe that you deserve this for taking the most appropriate and prompt action as an admin! Thanks for being here. Ekdalian (talk) 07:27, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I'd like to bring the conduct of JokerDurden to your attention. In this edit,[3] JokerDurden attacked others as "loser Editors". When told in their talk page not to engage in personal attacks by Zalaraz, JokerDurden replied with "Was intentional though. Wanted everyone to read. Sometimes, it's necessary."[4] A few days earlier, the editor had engaged in an edit dispute at Jasprit Bumrah which eventually led to them attacking another editor (who had raised BLP concerns) with "So lazy. Leave Wikipedia."[5] JokerDurden subsequently added back the disputed content and called its removal vandalism.[6]WP:CIVILITY is required. I believe they need to be sanctioned. — EarthDude (Talk) 07:05, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You're so good at warning messages, Bish; I don't even know a warning can be written this way before reading yours. It reads stern and clear yet not pointy (aka. does not read like implied ad hominem - the form of passive aggressiveness yet so common in heated WP discussions).
And mo matter how formal-natured these messages get, some very human emotions / reactions are sprinkled between the lines. The emotional part makes these messages feel genuine and... "typed by a human mind instead of a prescripted template". It makes the reader feel like they're not being belittled, and that the sender is communicating with them as a person instead of from a position of power.
Thanks, Odysseus. I've written a comment now, explaining that I got the wrong article. That doesn't make Saffyr's aspersions any more true, though. Did you see this edit summary, Doug? I don't think we should put up with such conduct. But if they write a proper unblock request, I'll think about it. Bishonen | tålk20:55, 25 March 2026 (UTC).[reply]
I want to ask you a question regarding my block. Did you carefully read the discussion on the fascism talk page? I was debating with a couple of other editors with regard to the correct interpretation of the Staudenmaier source. My interpretation could be called a ´´literal reading´´ of the source, while the other editors seemed to be going for a ´´reading between the lines´´ approach. You might notice that unlike some of the other editors, especially MjolnirPants, I did not assume bad faith. I take the assume good faith guideline extremely seriously. I don´t think anyone who participated in the discussion was acting in bad faith. Also, if my proposal to remove the Staudenmaier source had been accepted it wouldn´t have changed the article at all. So I think this block was quite out of proportion. I want to emphasize that if I have been violating Wikipedia policies or guidelines, it has NOT been intentionally. Liberty5000 (talk) 00:20, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Liberty5000 You're focusing on a single topic too much for your edit count; just put the stick down and walk away and see if any other article interests you. Judging from the length of discussion, most constructive arguments should already be delivered and continuing the argument might not change anyone's mind. 海盐沙冰 / aka irisChronomia / Talk03:34, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I get it, but there are also no shortages of articles on politics in need of improvement - if you're getting into content disputes or feeling heated, try look around and there might be other articles that interest you.
You can even play the Wiki Game to look for interesting articles - choose two random politics-related article in your watchlist and try to warp between them, and half-way doing that you might've stumbled across another interesting politics-related stub. 海盐沙冰 / aka irisChronomia / Talk10:20, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bot that helps log arbitration enforcement (AE) protection actions on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. As a result of a September 2025 motion by the Arbitration Committee, administrators are no longer required to manually log AE protection actions. Instead, this bot is responsible for logging AE protections to the AE protection log.
While logging AE protections, this bot detected that you recently took the following page protection actions. These action(s) seemed to be AE actions based on the edit summaries, but the bot wasn't able to tell which arbitration case they related to:
If these were AE actions, please take a moment to log the appropriate topic code at the AE protection log. If they were not, feel free to remove the actions from the AE protection log, and optionally let the bot operator know about the false positives.
Going forward, in order to help this bot categorize AE actions, please include a link to the contentious topic under which the action was taken in the protection edit summary (for example, [[WP:CT/BLP]] or [[Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Biographies of Living Persons]]).
I have nominated The Relapse for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria, or help improve the article. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regard to the article's featured status (see review instructions). Z1720 (talk) 17:49, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to remove the protection from this so I can recreate it? I'm trying to tidy up the categorization on the comics end of things, and I have three articles that can fit under it, with a few more in the oven. Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:20, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You are invited to participate in the Destubathon of the Americas, a contest/editathon which will run from May 1 to May 31. The goal is to destub as many of our 475,000+ stubs for the Americas (from Alaska down to Chile) as possible. A good chance to have fun in expanding many of our old stale stubs and win up to £2000 ($2680) in Amazon vouchers for expanding stub articles. Sign up in the Contestants/participants section on the contest page if interested. Even if not interested in prizes you are still warmly welcome to participate in it as an editathon! Hopefully we can achieve something significant in the month of May together! ♦ Dr. Blofeld16:44, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. Pretty poor command of thou ("that thy explain thy demand for clarity"). Surely an LLM could manage that better? You want to warn him for the "imbecility" bit, perchance, Aunva6? Bishonen | tålk21:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks, Aunva6. There's a problem with your speedy nomination on the user talkpage, which I had trouble figuring out; please take a look and see if you can fix it. Bishonen | tålk21:44, 23 April 2026 (UTC).[reply]
In the voting phase, the candidate subpages close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies to vote has a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's vote total during the election. The suffrage requirements are similar to those at RFA.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for a few days, perhaps longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (this is a good page to watchlist), and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a non-recall candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and a minimum of 20 support votes. Recall candidates must achieve 55.0% support. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
Hi Bishonen, I'm not sure if SPI is the more appropriate venue, but I thought I would reach out to you as the blocking admin. You blocked User:Angelita Linares on 19 April as they were not responding to feedback ([7]). A temporary account has appeared, making the same type of edits that Angelita did.
Hi Bishonen, can I get your opinion on the user BondiComic2's userpage content? I blanked the first version because I felt it violated WP:UPNOT. They partly restored it, reasoning that "I do not see any explicit rule that a user cannot place a joke on their user page." I like satire as much as anyone, but it still looks like poor taste to post jokes that reference the 2025 Bondi Beach shooting. --Drm310🍁 (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, what a jewel, Drm310. I've blocked BC2 as a sock, removed any remaining "jokes" and written fairly stern notes to both accounts. I wonder if I should really block 'em both for offensive usernames? The names suggest their sole purpose here is to be "funny" about the 2025 Bondi Beach shooting. Disgusting. And, you know, no, that stuff bloody well is not 'satire'. Bishonen | tålk16:01, 19 May 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Oh, I definitely believe that their content crossed the line into offensive territory. I just needed some reassurance in case there had been any pushback regarding the deletion of "humourous" userpage content before. Thanks. --Drm310🍁 (talk) 16:22, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}
