User talk:NJA

Welcome to NJA's talk page! Please click here to leave me a new message.	01 • 02 • 03 • 04 • 05 06 • 07 • 08 • 09 • 10 • 11 • 12

Hi,

Thanks for writing me, NJA. I guess I don't understand who is supposed to update our company's page if not someone who works for the company. We wouldn't want anyone else editing our information.

Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan at DLT (talk • contribs) 15:47, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

As you accepted Thaigers advert link for media and ThaiVisa has been around longer and has more traffic per month and also is a partner of the nation multimedia, i would have thought it was a valid link.

Please note that i look after the major telcom and media outlets in Thailand so I will be contributing more now.

Thank you in advance for allowing me to re-add the correct media chanels to Wikipedia to make this more factual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TwoBitDoctor (talk • contribs) 08:14, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TwoBitDoctor: you must be aware of the conflicts policy and a requirement to WP:DISCLOSE publicly, per WP:PAID (if applicable). This does not mean someone else may not question the edits, but I think in regard to the single edit you’re speaking of that that website seems okay on reconsideration, N.J.A. | talk 10:09, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Yes aware, hence i only edited the link to be more accurate with the top media.

Thanks for understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TwoBitDoctor (talk • contribs) 14:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I created this account as a new bot account. A BRFA will follow shortly. In the meantime, would you mind unblocking? Thanks. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sorry. Though had you created the new account is using your present account it would have tied the name in the logs and made things a bit easier, N.J.A. | talk 11:14, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See, I'm not generally popular, so I decided to make myself a page - everything on the page is fact and biased or enhanced in any way. I'd rather be editing a page about me myself.

I'm new with Wikipedia, not using it, but editing. It'd be nice if I could remove "Draft" from the page title, but I guess I have to wait.

As for the "• if you've come to reply to a comment I've left on a talk page, then reply there and ping me." bit, I honestly don't know how. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daskriechtierofficial (talk • contribs) 14:49, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Quick question, who do you think OofenshmirtzEvilIncorporated is? Bradv pinged me to check them after they requested an unblock on IRC, and I don't see any accounts other than the ones in their account creation log. The CU log for the IP they were on also doesn't suggest them being an LTA, and given the ISP, I think the log would be pretty accurate historically. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:01, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony. I cannot recall, but there must have been something happening around that time that I attributed to that account for me to disallow talk page access. I have tried to recall the factors of the situation and all I can see is the filter log hits. Checking the block log for around the same time has not provided more clues. I could have a further look at logs leading up to this for perhaps more clues, but it may easier to give the user another chance since you have after all looked at it, N.J.A. | talk 01:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Yeah, it's probably worth restoring TPA at the least . The username is a bit trolly, but I don't think they're an LTA based on the CU data. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:29, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks NJA and TonyBallioni. I've restored talk page access now so they can appeal. – bradv🍁 01:39, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NJA. The IP is back with unsourced genre after the block is expired. Can you block for three months? 2402:1980:8249:A532:E35B:3739:A1AC:B0DC (talk) 13:47, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NJA, why did you do this, the user has a weird username but the two edits are constructive. Cheers Polyamorph (talk) 10:47, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They are globally banned. I reverted their edit as although perhaps adding a bit of information, it was the sort of edits a new account makes to allow them to be considered auto confirmed to then edit semi-protected pages. If there’s a source for the change you may reinstate without asking me about it, N.J.A. | talk 10:49, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for letting me know. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 11:12, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, could you help me with Patrick Fiori's Wikipedia page? I think someone from the Philippines vandalized Patrick's page and added a bunch of Filipino stuff that Patrick never did. I tried to fix it but I think I accidentally took out a few things in the singles table and forgot what was there before. Here's the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Fiori

If anything, I think there should be a page protection to keep this from happening again. This isn't good, and I wish to keep it as accurate as the French Wikipedia page has it for Patrick Fiori. Anything you can do will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Hajiru (talk) 16:12, 10 October 2019 (UTC)Hajiru[reply]

Hi. I've looked at the page's history and I do not see any serious issues at present that would indicate a need for protection under the policy. If that changes requests for protection can be made at WP:RFPP, N.J.A. | talk 16:59, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you go back a bit further before my edits, someone made weird edits by adding random names from Filipino actors, added that Patrick supposedly lived in Philippines, claimed he could sing and release music in Filipino, etc. I hope that made sense. Hajiru (talk) 17:11, 10 October 2019 (UTC)Hajiru[reply]

Hi, you may wish to review the policy in terms of when protection is warranted. There is not, at present, serious or ongoing issues that require protection. What you're doing, i.e. copy editing and explaining your changes in edit summaries and use of talk pages is the proper course of action at this time. Again, if the situation changes or escalates, list the page at WP:RFPP, N.J.A. | talk 17:14, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Sorry for bothering you. I was just frustrated that someone would put false information that made no sense for that singer. Sorry for the trouble. Hajiru (talk) 17:16, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No trouble and thanks for bringing it up. I'll keep an eye if possible. All the best, N.J.A. | talk 17:17, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Sounds good. Thanks for your assistance. Hajiru (talk) 17:18, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I've noticed that there seems to still be some people messing with Patrick Fiori's page. Someone must really believe that Patrick Fiori is a singer and actor from the Philippines when he is NOT. Patrick is from France and has Armenian and Corsican ancestry. Even the other Wikipedias have this. Is there really someone out there that looks like Patrick, or is this some weird troll who won't stop? I'm so confused by all of this. O_o What is your opinion on all of this? Hajiru (talk) 00:48, 22 October 2019 (UTC) Hajiru[reply]

What a weird way to deal with contributors from other wiki’s to block them without the account being active on this wiki. I made the account to use as a botaccount on nl wiki. Shame on you for not investigating. DutchTom (talk) 01:23, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let us just chill out with the outrage. I cannot run detailed checks on every “bot” name created and even if I did in this case they still are not compliant with policy nor can I see evidence they’ve sought bot approval. The user can request unblock on their page using the instructions thereon to explain their situation. This is not the place, N.J.A. | talk 01:29, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On nl wiki it is not required to ask for a botstatus when you make (less then) one automated edit per minute. Besides that, I am in the testing phase. It is required to show the bot works good and does not make mistakes before I could receive the status. It is just very very weird you block a global user with zero edits. I've never seen that before. Must be some kind of en wiki thing. Very weird. I am a sysop myself on nl wiki, we would never do this. As sysop people have a responsibility to check stuff before blocking. Now there is a blocklog for no freaking reason. DutchTom (talk) 02:10, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your comments but the policies and procedures between ni and en Wiki’s seem to be different. You’ve indicated, but not clearly, you may be the owner of that account. If so, go to its talk page as follow the instructions to sort this out. If you’re not the owner, then leave it for that person to resolve it. I am happy to unblock if you agree to undertake the steps required for approval. Again, the proper page is the blocked user page not here, but whatever, N.J.A. | talk 12:13, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. Ugh. Always EN-WP and their sysops with weird policy's and hate to their neighbours. "I cannot run detailed checks on every “bot” name created" the only thing you had to do is look at the CentralAuth page. If that ia too much for you, you are not worth this role. Blocking users is a heavy thing you guys use as sweets. Since there are centralized accounts these automatically account creations happen when clicking an internal link to another wiki. As respected Wikipedian the first welcome you get is a block. And you seem to find it normal... LOL. DutchTom (talk) 01:46, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I said I’d unblock the account if you (they) made a request on their user talk page. All I asked for was a nod that you’d undertake the steps required for approval. Instead you waited a few weeks to post an insult on my page. Not very “neighbourly”. Please stop posting here and you the talk page of the blocked account, N.J.A. | talk 11:41, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And even though you failed to actually do anything I kindly requested I’ve unblocked so that you can move on and not do drive-by insults in future. Have fun, but do not run it as an actual bot without following the steps that you’ve been advised of N.J.A. | talk 11:48, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just wandering why my my edits about Caesar the dog were removed

Iwasntallowedemojis (talk) 14:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because the edits were not written well. If they're relevant at all to the article, then consider the format of the text used to describe the same thing in the article about the dog, N.J.A. | talk 14:43, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was a piece of information about the funeral and Caesar isn’t listed anywhere despite the kings fondness towards him Iwasntallowedemojis (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also may I add that the article you linked agrees with me as it says in the royal life section “ he led the procession with a highland guard behind the carriage”

I see that you have blocked the above EE address range for a week, but unfortunately that means that I am blocked from any editing on Wikipedia whilst using my normal means of access. Is there any chance you could review your block? I am a reasonably prolific editor and disambiguator and am having to pay for the disruption caused by others. Apologies if this is the wrong way to go about requesting an unblock. but I have never been blocked before.

Cnwilliams (talk) 17:57, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cnwilliams, I've amended the block which may allow you to edit now while logged in to your already registered account. If this doesn't fix the issue let me know exactly the message you're getting, N.J.A. | talk 18:03, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and it seems to be fine now. Cnwilliams (talk) 20:03, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Title says it all. UGH! I'm so fed up with this nonsense! Can't those spammers be blocked permanently or removed from Wikipedia or something? Why in the world are they doing this to Patrick Fiori's page when there already is an actor who has even half of those things being added constantly! My patience with these people has run out. Please do something, even if it's to permanently protect the page from further edits until further notice. Sorry if I sound rude, but I'm just annoyed with these people and just want them to stop already. Why are they doing this? I just don't understand what is happening. I tried my best to revert it back to the way it was before. I'm not sure what else to try. I'm tempted to ask for page protection but I'm not sure yet. Sorry if I bothered you again. Hajiru (talk) 14:33, 9 November 2019 (UTC)Hajiru[reply]

Socks are blocked on sight and the page is now semi-protected for some time to see if that assists. Not much more I can suggest at this time, except to remain calm, N.J.A. | talk 13:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, and I agree there's not much else we can do for now. Thank you for your help! :D Hajiru (talk) 14:12, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

user:96.31.192.35 is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 13:06, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page protected while blocked, N.J.A. | talk 13:09, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I noticed you blocked User:Kidgaks as being a sock account. I saw a new user adding the same information as the previous sock to an article, word for word so it seemed suspicious to me. Then I noticed their username bares resemblance to yours: User:TwinNJAs and thought that was odd. I’m not fully sure of how to report suspected socks so I thought I’d bring it to your attention. Alex (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good find, thanks! N.J.A. | talk 13:53, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NJA. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.KetanPatelVns (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Hello NJA:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Donner60 (talk) 05:30, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by VIde00 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that after you reverted spam by User:AANURA, you left a message on their talk page. Is it from one of the templates? I've never seen it before. It goes much more straight to the point of "stop spamming the Wiki" than what I have found in Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. Is this tone only administrators are allowed to use? BernardoSulzbach (talk) 13:59, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, anyone can use the {{subst:uw-spam4im}} template for severe spam (where appropriate). It’s part of the Twinkle warnings and I see it listed in Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace as well. All the best, N.J.A. | talk 14:10, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NJA:, I'm extremely sorry that I did a mistake in creating a account using the Bot word which is generally been reserved for the technical purposes, but I didn't have any intention to violate the Wikipedia policies nor in the future I would ever do so. I admit I'm new user in Wikipedia, but I'm a good reader and from onwards I will adhere to all the policy and procedures while using Wikipedia. But I also like to apologise and would request you to tag me with all the important and relevant page regarding the polices so that in future by mistake also I don't any mistake. And thank you for believing in me and considering my request. I'm really happy that you gave time in considering by Unblock request in the winter vacation and also sad that I created a bad rapport with you all that I didn't explain and put my point on my talk page first rather than request the name change. Thanks IMBTech (talk) 15:01, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It’s all fine, no problem. Happy editing, N.J.A. | talk 13:25, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello NJA: 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, Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:13, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Happy New Year!

NJA,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:34, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

det er User:M77 BOOTS nå. er det OK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by M77 BOOTS (talk • contribs) 23:52, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@M77 BOOTS: Yes, thank you, N.J.A. | talk 11:55, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NJA. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:14, 5 January 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Interstellarity (talk) 12:14, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Interstellarity: Done, awaiting oversight, N.J.A. | talk 12:16, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it need oversight? Interstellarity (talk) 12:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that’s what the emergency email response will do, but if not then it’s at least removed from logs, N.J.A. | talk 12:19, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NJA, you recently blocked User:Ghar Junction for spamming. They are repeatedly putting the same spam content on their talk page. Would you consider extending the block to remove talk page access? Many thanks, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, N.J.A. | talk 15:24, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the block but it appears this editor is not here to engage with editors and has failed to respond to COI/UPE inquiries. I suspect the creator of the articles about her business is also paid (but that's another matter for COIN), anyway, my question is whether this can be extended to indefinite until they satisfactorily answer the question about their COI/paid editing. Praxidicae (talk) 11:16, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae: I was drafting a note on editing restrictions when you posted here. I wasn’t happy indefinitely blocking right now, but this may be the result if there’s no dialogue. This is their chance. Feel free to report any violation of the restriction to me or another admin, N.J.A. | talk 11:23, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like they've started ip socking. Doing the same thing "fixing typos" Praxidicae (talk) 12:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and they tried to remove the afd Praxidicae (talk) 12:05, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, blocked all around, N.J.A. | talk 12:12, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NJA it appears they've returned Praxidicae (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry edit-warring continues via the next IP. Another block please? Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:07, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I just wanted to let you know the edits I submitted were not advertisements and they followed Wikipedia guidelines properly, sources are cited and there is no advertising.

Denarius (D) is a modern cryptocurrency since 2017 and the world deserves to know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carsenjk (talk • contribs) 19:10, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NJA, please could you explain why you considered the reports about User:Firmincigars and User:Uptownlogodesign not a blatant violation of the username's policy? At WP:U I read textually: "Usernames are not allowed on Wikipedia if they: [...] only contain the names of companies, organizations, websites, musical groups or bands, teams, social media or streaming channels, or creative groups". It seems that this precisely meets those situations, isn't it? Is there a different understanding of this policy? Thanks in advance, --DoebLoggs (talk) 10:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DoebLoggs: Hi, although you cite the policy correctly, the intent, when blocking for username violations, is to prevent shared use/role accounts and blatant spamming for or on behalf of someone paying you (WP:PAID). Although both these accounts are potentially editing in a way that’s a conflict, none of the edits indicate someone working at the company created the account for corporate (shared/role) purposes as opposed to an individual who may or may not work for the company. Further, none of the edits are blatant spam, e.g. editing articles to market the products of any particular brand nor have they linked to inappropriate external sources. There could be a warning given not only about username policy, but also COI and PAID, but I disagree they’re blatant violations that require an immediate block. If you’re not in agreement you may take these to WP:RFCN for community consensus on this, N.J.A. | talk 10:45, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again NJA, no, I'm not in disagreement, I was just trying to understand the rationale behind your choice, just to improve my skills and avoid make unuseful reportings and wasting admins' time in the future. Thanks for your answer. Cheers, --DoebLoggs (talk) 10:54, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

on you page it says you live in Toronto. But it also says you are a citezen of the EU??? how?? Billy rocky fernansa (talk) 16:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I have created my first article "Dog insurance: get your dog a health insurance article". i noticed that has deleted. I added one external link for that article and that maybe the reason to delete it. So i just want to know is that okay to remake same article and without adding any links to that. Thank you.

Regards Pradeep.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dog Care (talk • contribs) 06:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page, N.J.A. | talk 13:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey NJA hope all is well. I saw that you blocked Brianlye (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for vandalism. It looks like they added a legal threat and generally just abusing their talk page privileges. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:35, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TPA revoked, thanks, N.J.A. | talk 13:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NJA! It's good to talk to you once again! I'm messaging you to ask about the issue with this account's username? It just looks like the user took the word "Chicken Nugget", switched the 'C' and the 'N', and removed the letter 'h'... It doesn't look to me like a username that warrants an account block. Is there something that I'm not seeing? Let me know. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On face value it's absolutely fine, and perhaps I'm too jaded from the approximately one "Chicken Nugget" themed username created daily, which is ultimately blocked for behaviour, LTA and/or socking reasons. As such I associate the name with demonstrating an intent on being disruptive. Saying this, if they ask for a review I would allow the unblock and if they even mildly seem sincere in intent I'd apologize for the block, N.J.A. | talk 16:50, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thanks for responding with your thoughts and the reason behind the block. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:53, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not that there's a connection, but this recent revert is an example of the pattern I see with that username implying a disruptive intent, N.J.A. | talk 16:56, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have 900 edits, about 400 of which were made in the mainspace. I have had the pending changes reviewer permission for over a year. I often search for vandalism so I would like to have this tool. Thank you for your consideration! —FORMALDUDE^(talk) 02:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC) (I'm contacting you because you're listed on administrators willing to grant rollback requests)[reply]

Hi @FormalDude: you look good to go. I’ll add the permission to your account, and although I trust you’ve done so do already, do re-familiarize yourself with the intended use of the rollback tool. Also, good job at skipping the queue and coming here for the permission assignment ;), N.J.A. | talk 11:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]