User talk:Anachronist

Please use my talk page rather than emailing me.

If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. If you initiate contact here, I will respond here.

Put new messages at the bottom. I will not notice them at the top.

Greetings of the season

~ ~ ~ Greetings of the season ~ ~ ~

Hello Anachronist: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas3}} to send this message.

--Dustfreeworld (talk) 11:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Greetings!

Merry Christmas!

—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 01:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Maon Kurosaki

Hello. I would like to inquire if it would be a good idea to try unprotection of Maon Kurosaki, especially that it's been almost two years since her death and I imagine whoever was disrupting the article may have lost interest by now. I brought this up on WP:RFUP but you rejected it as premature. Now that the election has passed, I wonder if it may be an appropriate time to at least try unprotection, if not pending changes protection, without prejudice against re-protection if disruption continues. If you cannot unprotect yourself, would it be fine to ask a second opinion from a different sysop, or would it be a bad idea to request it now? I understand that you said to wait another year, but that seems too long a wait and I feel like sufficient time has passed anyway. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I am not the protecting administrator. The last one who applied protection to Maon Kurosaki was Courcelles, who protected it as an arbitration enforcement action because COVID-19 is a contentious topic, and still is, regardless of whether an election has passed.

@Courcelles: What do you think? There aren't any edit requests on the Talk:Maon Kurosaki, so it's possible the article doesn't have anyone's attention. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Courcelles hasn't been very active lately (they hadn't edited since April at the time of my RFUP request, and as of today haven't edited since the 12th), hence why I approached you instead. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:08, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to leave the protection in place for now. The disruption about her death being "caused" by a COVID-19 vaccination lasted a whole six months before the article was protected, and the disruption looks like it didn't come from just one editor. While the election is over, the transition is not, and there are still plenty of vocal vaccine-denialists in full force, especially now that Trump seems intent on nominating one of their ranks to lead the health department. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Anachronist!

Happy New Year!

Anachronist,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 19:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 19:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for visiting my talk page and noticed your message

Thank you for visiting my talk page., I noticed your message, it was a copy-paste typo. I copied it from a source for reference and the keyboard paste button is not what I was supposed to write there. I will pay attention to such mistakes in future edits. Spworld2 (talk) 10:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! ~Anachronist (talk) 07:12, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, Anachronist. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 00:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Kajsa Ekis Ekman

Why didn't you correct any grammatical errors instead of deleting the entire content of the introduction that I posted before the old introduction to the article about Kajas Ekis Ekman? In my opinion, my text gave a more balanced view of what she is doing today.Dala11a (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Because what you added were broken-up sentences that repeated what was already said, and you provided a bare URL citation that was already given in more detail elsewhere. We don't need two introductions. I could ask you, why didn't you improve it instead of just add more sentences that said the same things? ~Anachronist (talk) 15:47, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad in Hinduism

Perhaps you'll find it interesting, I think it came up on the Muhammad talkpage once. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:32, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Raoul mishima

In light of the recent AN/I discussion I think the question of whether Raoul mishima has a COI regarding Sokka Gakkai is something that needs to be revisited. There's an (albeit somewhat weak as not backed up by diffs) allegation there that Raoul mishima has made a habit of POV editing across a wide swath of related articles. Simonm223 (talk) 14:26, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Mariano Vivanco

Hi there - Mario here - Studio Manager at Mariano Vivanco. I noticed you were in the history tab for the article on Mariano Vivanco. Would you please be so kind as to help with adding more? I've added some source materials in the talk tab but it has yet to be added. I can't seem to do it because I get flagged for being part of Mariano's organization (COI). Many thanks, Mario Marioatphotomv (talk) 11:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Sally Carrera

It has been indef protected since 2023. Can you perhaps try to remove the protection and test the water so that IPs can edit? Page views significantly already dropped and the article is in bad shape. Thx 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 01:15, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Well, there weren't any constructive edits from IP address before protection, and I have no reason to think that would change if protection were removed. However, I have downgraded it to PCP. Anons can edit but each edit must be approved by a reviewer. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:56, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Socks

Hi Anachronist. I noticed that you blocked the account Kiera Flipper as a sock, but it is older than the account Kiera Fliper, which you left unblocked. Isn't it customary to block the newer account as a sock? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

In this case, she wrote a draft article about herself, spelled "Fliper" throughout. Assuming that is the correct spelling of her name, and that she created the newer account in an attempt to correct it, I blocked what seemed to be the mispelled name that is unlikely to be used in the future.

It seemed less like a case of socking than simply creating a new account with intention to abandon the old one. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

FYI, template isn't mandatory

Re:Teahouse post. It's a common misconception that it is, and while I'd probably like userpage disclosure to be required under either local policy or the TOU, it's just one of 'bout three options paid editors have for disclosing. As per Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#Wikimedia Foundation Terms of Use, You must make that disclosure in at least one of the following ways: a statement on your user page, a statement on the talk page accompanying any paid contributions, or a statement in the edit summary accompanying any paid contributions. So yeah. Template isn't mandatory, and while I certainly don't mind telling paid editors to use it, it's not a requirement, legal or otherwise. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 01:36, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

You're right, I meant to convey that disclosure is mandatory, and indicated the preferred way. Disclosure on the Teahouse page doesn't qualify. It needs to be visible in a permanent place that is easily found by other editors. I disagree that it's sufficient to do it in an edit summary only. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:39, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I just clarified my comment on the Teahouse. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:55, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, and sorry to be a nuisance. Teahouse disclosure is insufficient, I agree, though I suppose I'm grateful that they're trying to dothings by the book and not just forging ahead in mainspace. I'm also with you that edit summary disclosure aren't that good - if I were queen for a day, I think I'd like to make all three forms of disclosure (notification on talkpage, giant sign on userpage, mentioning financial COI in edit summary) mandatory for all paid editors editing about people, products, or organizations, but alas. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 04:40, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

No need to apologize. If you hadn't brought it up, I wouldn't have known to clarify my sloppily-worded answer to a newbie who would benefit from clearer communication. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Golden Gate

Hi Anachronist, it's been nearly 8 years since you placed the Golden Gate article under semi-protection. This article was never supposed to have been protected indefinitely. Finding the request leading to the protection, you intended for the protection to expire in only 10 days, but looking at the protection log, it was just never set to expire. Now that nearly 8 years have passed, and the article not seeing very much frequent editing, do you think you can unprotect it to see how it goes? BriDash9000 (talk) 11:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I've removed the protection. However, I observe that throughout the article's entire history, the vast majority of unconstructive or reverted edits were made by anonymous IP addresses, suggesting a negative net benefit to the Wikipedia project if it is left unprotected. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)