Archives

Before July 2009 August - December 2009 January - July 2010 August - October 2010 November - December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March - October 2011 November 2011 - January 2012 February - March 2012 April - July 2012 August - October 2012 November 2012 - May 2013 June - December 2013 January - May 2014 June - December 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

• If it's been a while and I haven't got back to you about something, then by all means drop me a note to remind me.

Hi @Smartse: Howdy. I sent this article to draft because it had two references which looked like spam links, basically linking to yoga site which is selling product. The editor states that Siddhasana and Virabhadrasana which are GA articles, and both use "yoga journal", which is a commercial site, journal. Its looks and reads like a spam link, and is seemingly selling product. It looks like a spam but he says its a reliable source. In the conversation the editor states they has been using the sites for a while. The GA reviewer on Siddhasana was blocked. [Yogapedia] is another commericial link to a shopping site. I think there is something dodgy here. scope_creep^Talk 19:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda odd input here but I just wanted to express appreciation for all of your hard work on wikipeida. People like you are what make this phenomenon function appropriately.

Good luck on that relentless quest for effectively navigating this overwhelming mass of ever-increasing misinformation within our beloved interconnected global consciousness. But I digress, thanks again.

I hope the future continues to find you well. Taktixal (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that this was not the most scintillating detail, but it's a short article on, frankly, a mostly trivial person. In the source, he discusses the curriculum, and while it is not clear whether he had a hand in designing that, he appears to be more involved than just showing up for the announcement. I have no strong feelings about this, but I don't see how it is a negative. BD2412 T 18:43, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: This would be better discussed on the talk page wouldn't it? Now that we've started though, my reading of the fairly low-quality source (essentially a mouthpiece for the Indonesian government) is that the article is about GISAIDs activities, rather than Bogner and he was representing them. It's already included in the GISAID article, so I don't see why such a run-of-the-mill activity merits inclusion in his biography too. And yes, I agree that he's not super notable, but that isn't a reason to try to plump up the article with trivial details. SmartSE (talk) 18:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have concerns about the reliability of the source, I would suggest taking that up at WP:RSN. It is used as a source in hundreds of articles. If you want to remove all of the trivial details from this subject's article, there will be no article left. BD2412 T 18:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Smartse, I understand your reasons for removing the ANI post. Where should I forward the evidence privately? Vickyfoxx (talk) 14:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vickyfoxx: I am forwarding it to WP:ARBCOM who are best placed to deal with it. SmartSE (talk) 14:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I apologize if I posted in the wrong place and used a new account, but it's because I fear retaliation and harassment from these kinds of users. I myself don't want to out or harass anyone. I hope the Wikipedia community can look into this matter. Vickyfoxx (talk) 14:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

please no one answers me I ask you how it is possible to be unblocked for Blocked Sochkpuppet Gaetano Minale ...... it's been seven years now, Thank you Gaetano Minale — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.12.180.196 (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoria:Wikipedia:Cloni_sospetti_di_GAETANO_MINALE?fbclid=IwAR2m-zLK-9tRw7uUrLSTxYW4Bh2Lj1dK2IOEYUUOHwXToXkiB26KCtgrXcM 79.12.180.196 (talk) 15:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Gaetano Minale

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gaetano_Minale?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR2Z1Vtbyj8PMLl1DvZY3qe6171Ip6gmg4yq01CoHyqyPF7khDzAsbqX3K8_aem_AcUwDQKUwi9Pp013CvPEbvWvHXy8TTBAZTtjVmdElZRpeSE8EJnxLYszk7rAPzMzf1GRcADYfZ4hVT7_3mx0i7RB 79.12.180.196 (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bestandlastalbum.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a 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 our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Smartse. I'm trying to clean up the Geoffrey von Maltzahn article, as he's a partner at the firm I work for, Flagship Pioneering. Given my COI, I won't be editing the article directly and will instead make requests for editors to review.

I see that you added the flag to the article (alerting readers that it "may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies") back in June 2023. As such, I'm hoping you can help me with my first request, which I've posted on the article's Talk page. I'm proposing that the Awards and recognitions section be removed entirely. To me, this feels like the most potentially promotional part of the page and a good place to start.

I would be grateful if you could review the request and let me know what you think. Many thanks. Lindy D at Flagship (talk) 01:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smartse, nice work on Rotmans. If you still remember you blocked Blmmta (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as they were accepting paid jobs on Upwork but were not disclosing them on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, they were wrongly tagged as a sock of User:Amansharma111. It is very clear now that Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sjutt and User:Blmmta were operated by the same person - could you please revisit their Upwork profile (or I can provide again) so you can easily verify this? It is important to rename Sjutt SPI as Blmmta, so we can have 30 October 2023 as the cutt-off date for speedy deletion. There is a lot of spam to clean up. Thanks for your efforts. 87.200.126.222 (talk) 17:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@87.200.126.222: Sure email me at <username>wiki@gmail.com and I will take a look. SmartSE (talk) 18:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that some years ago, you added a COI tag to Bloomberg Philanthropies, which remains there to this day, with the edit summary, "coi - written entirely by single purpose accounts". I assume you refer there to User:MartinVanBurenNo8, User:Home3879, and perhaps the still-active User:Draper765. I am contemplating pursuing the COI issue, and wanted to know your thoughts, and specifically if these edits were the ones you had in mind. While I don't know that it is fair to say that it was entirely written by SPAs, I would agree that the initial formation of this article raises questions. BD2412 T 13:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: That was perhaps a little over exaggerated of me, but the stats confirm that the majority of the content was written by close-to-SPAs. JoMarch868 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is another account and Katherine Oliver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is also in a horrendously promotional state and another SPA did initially disclose a COI: [1]. Blackbird68 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is another account with a singular interest in Bloomberg-related articles but who denied a COI. SmartSE (talk) 14:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's pretty blatant. I'm surprised the Philanthropies article is so choppily written, for all of that effort. BD2412 T 15:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]