Note on file Please only block user if the name actually refers to hatred of other people or groups of people. -- DQB (owner / report) 14:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, so please be careful when blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 15:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Used ph instead of f attempting to skip filter: fag. Violating string: skibidialfagooningreal" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 15:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Promotional? 2" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 19:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case -- DQB (owner / report) 19:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Why do you think it's impersonation rather than editing their own article? Secretlondon (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
As per
If a username implies that the user is, or is related to, a notable, identifiable or well-known person, the account may be blocked as a precaution against impersonation until the user's proof of identity is provided.
mentioned under WP:IMPERSONATE. Correct me if I made a wrong interpretation. Thank you. Agent007 (talk) 17:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Disruptive IP-editing, including adding crap-sources to a BLP and repeated submissions that wastes time. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
And fwiw, there seems to be a Commons-aspect to it:[2][3]. Ping @Yann if you wish to comment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: As far as I can tell, the primary editor making additions recently has not been warned about their edits to the article. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 15:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: IP vandalism and POV pushing. See [4] for example. Borgenland (talk) 09:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 09:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Update: Offending IP restored WP:NPA comment on talk. See [5]. Borgenland (talk) 17:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
More targeted harrassment: [6] and [7]. Borgenland (talk) 18:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism and to prevent adding poorly sourced content. This party is popular now so risk of adding misinformation. Niasoh (talk) 10:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Spate of BLP-violating vandalism from IP users over the last few days. AntiDionysius (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 11:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
To the administrator, please check the talk page and this user's edit history in the article. Beshogur (talk) 11:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I was going to open separate edit warring topic, though there's ANI active as well. But to the adminstrator, keep reverting me and Jähmefyysikko (talk·contribs)
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
My suggestion is to leave out the following 2 sentences in the "German complicity" paragraph as they seem to be based on misunderstandings:
"She also highlighted police suppression of pro-Palestine protests throughout Germany[509] as evidence of state complicity.[508] Karen Wells et al. highlight how Germany has entrenched its complicity in Israel's actions by banning use of the word "genocide" in reference to Israel.[471][better source needed]"
1. In general violent protests are not allowed in Germany. As some of the first pro-Palestine protests were violent, they were sometimes forbidden by courts, if they were expected to turn violent. But that is common policy in Gemany with all subjects and not special for pro-Palestine protests.
Meanwhile, there even is a calendar concerning pro-Palestinian protests[8] with daily up to 20 protests all over Germany. Thus, there is no general police suppression of pro-Palestine protests as is suggested by the current wording.
2. The word “genocide” is not banned in reference to Israel in Germany - maybe that was a misunderstanding: What is not allowed in Germany is to call for genocide against Jews. The slogan “From the river to the sea” is seen as such call and banned. Gilbert04 (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
@FortunateSons: A quick browse shows at least for the first part support for removal, can you add any additional incite? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
I can confirm that both statements are broadly true. IMO, the best resource for this discussion (in the contemporary context) is probably Steinberg: Versammlungsfreiheit nach dem 7. Oktober - NVwZ 2024, 302. Direct citation: “Die Subsumtion unter diesen Tatbestand bereitet aber auch sonst Probleme. Die Stadt Frankfurt a. M. hatte dem Anmelder einer Versammlung „Frieden in Nahost" am 2.12.2023 untersagt, während der Versammlung zur Vernichtung Israels aufzurufen, dem Staat Israel das Existenzrecht abzusprechen, sowie die Aussagen „Israel Kindermörder", „Juden Kindermörder", „Israel bringt Kinder um" sowie „From the river to the sea" zu tätigen. Diese Beschränkungen hob das VG Frankfurt vollständig auf. Auf die Beschwerde der Stadt differenzierte der VGH Kassel Aufrufe zur Vernichtung Israels verstießen - wie gesagt - gegen § 111 StGB und die Aussage „Juden Kindermörder" erfülle den Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung (§ 130 StGB). Demgegenüber wurden andere Außerungen wie „Kindermörder Israel" oder die Bezeichnung der israelischen Militäroperationen in Gaza als „Genozid" nicht beanstandet und die Entscheidung des VG insoweit aufrechterhalten. Es sei davon auszugehen, dass bei den militärischen Verteidigungshandlungen Israels auch Kinder zu Schaden kämen. Eine solche laienhafte Zuspitzung sei im Rahmen der Meinungsfreiheit hinzunehmen. Anders hatte der VGH Mannheim am 21.10.2023 ein Verbot der Parole „Israel Kindermörder" und „Israel bringt Kinder um" durch die Versammlungsbehörde trotz bestehender Zweifel über deren Strafbarkeit aufrechterhalten; im Verfahren des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes sei nur eine summarische Prüfung möglich; eine einmal getätigte Äußerung könne nicht rückgängig gemacht werden. Die Unterscheidung zwischen antisemitisch und antiisraelisch stellt sicherlich eine Gratwanderung dar, die hier im Einzelnen nicht beschrieben werden kann“autotranslated: “However, the subsumption under this offense also causes other problems. On December 2, 2023, the city of Frankfurt am Main had prohibited the person registering a meeting "Peace in the Middle East" from calling for the destruction of Israel during the meeting, from denying the State of Israel the right to exist, and from making the statements "Israel, child murderer," "Jews, child murderer," "Israel kills children" and "From the river to the sea." The Administrative Court of Frankfurt completely lifted these restrictions. In response to the city's complaint, the Administrative Court of Kassel differentiated that calls for the destruction of Israel violated - as mentioned - Section 111 of the Criminal Code and that the statement "Jews, child murderer" constituted incitement to hatred (Section 130 of the Criminal Code). In contrast, other statements such as "Israel, child murderer" or the description of Israeli military operations in Gaza as "genocide" were not objected to and the Administrative Court's decision was upheld in this respect. It can be assumed that children would also be harmed in Israel's military defense actions. Such a lay exaggeration must be accepted within the framework of freedom of expression. On October 21, 2023, the Mannheim Higher Administrative Court upheld a ban on the slogans "Israel, child murderer" and "Israel kills children" by the assembly authority despite existing doubts about their criminal liability; in the interim legal protection procedure, only a summary examination is possible; a statement once made cannot be reversed. The distinction between anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli is certainly a balancing act that cannot be described in detail here.” There is no broad ban on pro-Palestinian protests either, and they were even allowed to happen on Oct. 7 of this year (in some cases). While there are legal disputes on specifics for both, I’m pretty confident that no reasonable person would disagree with “broadly permitted” regarding both claims. FortunateSons (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Bonus: there can be cases where something isn’t criminal, but can be restricted in other ways, for example due to different burdens of proof or social pressures. FortunateSons (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
I've removed #2. But there does seem to be evidence that pro-Palestine protests have been banned in parts of Germany at times.[9][10][11].VR(Please ping on reply) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[12]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Unfortunately that source seems incomplete. Germany has indeed suppressed peaceful criticism of Israel.[13] And Washington Post says "A planned photo exhibit in southwestern Germany was canceled as a result of social media posts by its curator, including one describing “genocide” in Gaza."[14]VR(Please ping on reply) 22:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Well, I do not think that any source will ever be complete. Let me add two more.[[15]][[16]] Gilbert04 (talk) 20:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Consider changing "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations, and accused the court of being antisemitic, which it often does when criticised" to "The Israeli government has been accused of consistently weaponizing antisemitism against it's critics, including in the ICJ ruling." Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
The Weaponization of antisemitism page hyperlinked over "often done" has many sources to draw from regarding the accusations' consistency and nature.
My main concern with the original text is that it's voiced as if it's an observation made by a Wikipedian. The benefit here is that the weaponization of antisemitism has a clearer consistency grounded outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps other ways to word this out include adding a time scale (increasingly accused since Oct. 7th) or specifying the critique (against critiques of their actions since Oct 7th).
If a lead paragraph change is necessary, there may be reason to outline Israeli motives and conditions for the genocide, including Zionism and anti-Arab racism. Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm not as familiar with the Holocaust erasure claims, but I'm happy with that reworking! If that weaponization of Holocaust denial detail isn't on the weaponization of antisemitism page already, it might be a worthwhile phenomenon incorporate if there's more citations you can find. I might look into it myself. Thanks! Ecco2kstan (talk) 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
That does sound quite balanced. +1 from me. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
@Vice regent: Would you please make this change, so we can close this request? ~Anachronist (talk) 21:28, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Protected by Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
They created 141 articles, with only one being deleted under G6, which is not a big issue. Their creations include BLPs and species-related articles, and no significant issues were found during checks. Two of their creations were taken to AfD but were later kept. I hope they can be added to AP. It’s up to you. Thanks. GrabUp - Talk 13:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Done, thanks for the suggestion. – Joe (talk) 14:19, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
I've been reviewing this user's contributions at AfC and I have consistently seen clean articles, and they have created 68, which is well above minimum standard. It is my understanding that AfCs approved by non-autopatrolled users (like me) go to the NPP queue, and because NPP is facing a huge backlog, I think that giving autopatrol would be beneficial for the backlog. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 02:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
@HistoryTheorist: If they're using AfC, then autopatrolled won't have any effect – as you say, it's the autopatrolled status of the reviewer that determines whether they go into the queue, not the creator's. I'd suggest encouraging them to stop using AfC and create articles directly, as a first step. But Not done until there's a significant number of creations that didn't go through AfC. – Joe (talk) 14:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
I have created more than 25 good articles and have insight to how English Wikipedia works. I will like to ease the workloads of reviewers by obtaining the autopatroller right
Tesleemah (talk) 14:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I'd like to get this right to delete unnecessary redirects (i.e. move pages over existing single revision redirects regardless of target). Additionally, I would also like to try to harmonize some pages of Spanish municipalities with the name of the country and the province (when necessary) instead of other subnational units (such as comarca). Moreover if a double denomination exists in some cases, I shall use the slash with spaces in between to enhance visual effect of different linguistic nomenclatures. However if an English form is more relevant I shall use it instead of double and local denominations. Other than that I could help elsewhere to move pages if necessary. Thank you, Nuvolet (talk)
A reasonable number of moves, but I not seeing any WP:RM/TR requests and am concerned by this RM which – based on the previous RM – seemed doomed to fail in the first place. This discussion also looks to be going against you. Primefac (talk) 18:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
I only can say I'll be responsible if you grant me this right. I can participate in more TM, I just need to get usedd.to them. Yes it failed however I understood the norms and moved similar articles to Countryname. I opposed to Anatolian plateau because there are other geographical units that use capitalization in similar contexts. — Jɑuмe(dis-me) 01:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Reason for requesting pending changes reviewer rights: I am an Wikipedian for more than three years and part of various wikiprojects I need permission to expand my works on Wikipedia and also to observe Wikipedia articles. Cactinites (talk) 15:28, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
I’d like to request pending changes reviewer rights. I have been active on Wikipedia for a while, focusing on improving content quality and helping maintain the integrity of articles. I am not new to reviewing edits, as I use edit-request tools to answer several requests by unregistered/registered editors that wish to see changes on several articles. I have read all policies on how to handle this right and know the responsibly that comes alongside it. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 16:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
I like helping out and reviewing recent changes, and I would like to be able to contribute further by receiving pending changes reviewer rights. Imconfused3456talk 01:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
I would like to help contribute to the Wikipedia community and help reviews happen quicker. I am passionate about unbiased true information being presented and I think this would be a good privilege for me. BittersweetParadox (talk) 07:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
I have been reviewing changes on many pages made by editors and IPs and helped by improving and protecting pages from vandalism. My editing history will prove that I am very capable and can be great help. I did set aside time and read and understood guidelines for vandalism, Reviewing pending changes and Protection policies before submitting this request. RangersRus (talk) 14:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
I've been patrolling recent changes and reverting vandalism for a while, as well as contributing to AfD, CSD and creating some of my own articles.
I'd like Pending Changes Reviewer because sometimes when I'm patrolling I see pending changes to a page that are constructive and I'd like to accept them.
Thanks for your time! MolecularPilot 04:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
I've been patrolling Recent Changes since August 28, 2024, and I helping to review pending changes. Thanks. Ampil(Ταικ • Cοnτribυτιοns) 02:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for pending changes reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([24]). — MusikBottalk 02:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
I would love to review and either accept or decline edits made to articles or pages under pending changes protection. I'm a New Page Reviewer and I'll like to review pending changes too. I’ve read the guidelines and have a clear understanding of them. Comr Melody Idoghor(talk) 09:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
With reference to my previous request for rollback rights submitted on 24 September 2024link and the advice received, I would like to re-submit my request. I have actively patrolled recent changes, reverting unconstructive or disruptive edits, addressing vandalism, and consistently warning editors. In more severe cases, I have reported offenders to administrators for further action and also requested for page protection. I have primarily used Twinkle for these tasks, alongside performing manual reverts. I believe that rollback rights would be a valuable addition to the tools currently available to me and going forward. Thank you. QEnigma (talk) 00:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([25]). — MusikBottalk 01:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Question: How did you determine that this edit was unconstructive? Malinaccier (talk) 13:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
An IP user was making numerous changes to articles containing Korean language links without providing sufficient explanation. Lacking familiarity with the language, I initially considered this a potentially disruptive mass-edit event. I reverted some of the edits and posted warnings to the user, which went unanswered. I subsequently reported the matter to the administrators, where another user pointed out that, although the changes were not necessarily unconstructive, the editor should have provided much clearer edit summaries. QEnigma (talk) 15:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
I've been patrolling Recent Changes since August 28, 2024, I've revert vandailsm and LTAs, I'am over 200 reverts form vandalism, and I'am interested the tools named AntiVandal and SWViewer, so I can patrol more faster. Criteria to make Successful:
✅️ At least 200 mainspace edits.
✅️ At least a month of experience patrolling Special:RecentChanges.
✅️ Wait 1 month your request.
✅️ No recent history of edit warring.
✅️ A track record of consistently notifying editors when reverting their edits. [26]
Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([27][28]). — MusikBottalk 02:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make (especially when reverting good faith edits). Are you aware of tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet which make this extremely easy? -Fastily 08:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I do for ~99% vandalism reverts, and +210 warns. 2 forgotten reverts and 1 LTA revert. Ampil(Ταικ • Cοnτribυτιοns) 13:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
@Fastily Yes, and I try do it also, I warning editors, and sending messages saves form the UV menu. Ampil(Ταικ • Cοnτribυτιοns) 09:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I have removed and reverted various vandal edits as well as unsourced edits.But when there are more than 1 vandal edits it becomes very tedious to do manually so I want to use this tool for such purposes.You may find not leaving an edit warning as a problem but I promise I will take care of it and I am even improving it as well.Thanks.Edasf (talk) 14:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
@Edasf: You might find Twinkle useful, both for its "pseudo-rollback" and for quickly leaving warnings. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
@Jlwoodwa Thanks for your suggestion I have used twinkle,but when there are vandal edits by user that isn't current revision this work is again tedious of doing.If you want I can put examples here.Twinkle's psuedo-rollback is another reason I request Rollback right.I also want to expand my anti-vandal works.Thanks. Edasf (talk) 06:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Not done Worth noting that rollback doesn't do anything that Twinkle doesn't already do. Regardless, I reviewed your contributions and found little to no recent anti-vandalism work. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 08:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
