User talk:Blue-Sonnet

A barnstar for you!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For your lovely behavior and helpful messages at this user's talk page and a general pattern of a welcoming and collegial attitude, even towards potentially hostile editors. Keep up the good work! LaughingManiac (talk) 06:38, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@LaughingManiac Thank you so much for this, it's really kind and cheered me up too!

I commented a couple of times on ANI & started to weigh in on situations that I had no experience of & Liz kindly gave me a heads-up on that. Someone else suggested that I could maybe reach out to people to offer help or advice on their Talk pages instead.

Since I'm pretty inexperienced with editing I've not been touching any situations where there's apparent malice, nor if it's really complicated & I'll cause trouble for others. Otherwise, if there's a competent editor who does really good work but it's getting genuinely frustrated, I think it's a good idea to reach out and acknowledge how they feel - I can do that at least!

Admins have to deal with so much stuff on here, so if there's a chance to keep someone who genuinely cares about their work from ruining their account, then I'd like to try 🙂

That said, I don't want to become a nuisance so if you or anyone else feels I'm getting too involved in something, need feedback or am otherwise out of line please let me know ASAP! I don't want it to look like I'm yeeting myself all over the place with a hero complex trying to save everyone 😁 Blue-Sonnet (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! I'll be sure to let you know if I have any feedback ^^ LaughingManiac (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Your post on my talk

You were right to point this out, actually - I suppose what they've been posting on their talk page isn't terribly urgent, but it's not a block appeal either, so I've revoked their talk page access. Cheers. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering Thank you so much for letting me know! I wasn't sure if they posted that before or after their block and had a bit of a panic over mentioning it 😅

I've got a feeling we'll see then again soon, they're pretty persistent... Blue-Sonnet (talk) 19:54, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

for you, who cared enough to leave such a heartfelt message.

you've really made my day, i want you to know that i won't ever forget this.. the things you told me really helped me out.. from the bottom of my heart, thank you. (。・ω・。) VortexiusV (talk) 02:12, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind message too, I'm really glad that you're feeling better & that I could help a little 😊 I've been in a similar place & made it out of the other side, so I know you will too x Blue-Sonnet (talk) 02:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Steven1991

@Blue-Sonnet, I see you are also a new user. remember WP:VOLUNTEER, you do not have to satisfy anyone here and no one is obligated to satisfy you. editing is a volunteer service, and though we support each other, remember to safeguard your personal boundaries, and to understand folks who upset you only have that power if you let them. good luck, and thank you for trying to assume good faith with all of us. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for that - I still need to build experience on when to draw the line, my desire to help coloured my perspective & inadvertently made things worse. Steven has sent an apology which is appreciated, but it shouldn't have gone that far with someone who was honestly just trying to help and I'm going to follow though on my promise to disengage.

I'm feeling better now since I just ate a ton of ice cream (I may pay for that later!) I didn't know what else to do and let my emotions boil over a little when writing my last post.

Thank you again for checking in with me x Blue-Sonnet (talk) 19:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

remember its just an encyclopedia and you don't owe anyone on here emotional support, though it is much appreciated. we all get frazzled on here sometimes and im glad you have empathy for others. thank you for helping make this encyclopedia a more welcoming place Bluethricecreamman (talk) 19:12, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Right back 'atcha on that last part! 😊 Blue-Sonnet (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

@Bluethricecreamman I think we've finally hashed things out and reached an understanding - fingers crossed for the future! Blue-Sonnet (talk) 00:26, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

In appreciation

		The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path
		For conducting yourself like the best sort of editor from the very start. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:05, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Response

You asked me the question Do you want an essay to be written because you think that you're being personally targeted?

Here is the answer: Yes I was personally targeted, but not in a form of one that you may think it was, in my case I was personally targeted because I just wanted to be friendly to this community, and the way how people were treating my GvK poster, felt like I was violated or an embarrassment to the community. In the AfD you looked at, Pokelego mentions here that can defend me, here is what Pokelego said "I would suggest the nom try and be a bit more respectful, especially since GojiraFan is a relatively new user still learning the ropes.", if you noticed, I am still learning the ropes on Wikipedia, meaning that I'm not perfect, or one of those bots.

Also in response to having an essay of WP:IDONTLIKEWHOCREATEDIT, I will write it myself.

Thanks

-GojiraFan1954 (talk) 06:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @GojiraFan1954, I'm sorry to hear you feel that way, but I really don't think you were personally targeted because it looked like you were several people. Each of your edits was under a different ID - either an IP or your username - so it looked like more than one person.

You said you were targeted because you wanted to be friendly - that's an unusual reason to target someone, so you're saying that you were friendly to someone and they harassed you because of that? Can you please show me a link so I can look into that for you because that should never, ever happen! If you're editing logged in and logged out under different IP addresses, it's really hard for me to find any of that No-one should be mean because you want to be friends.

I can see why you feel embarrassed about your edits being reverted, but you really don't need to be - everyone here makes mistakes and everyone gets reverted all the time.

I'm still pretty new and if you look through my contributions you can see that I'm still making mistakes now!

I felt super embarrassed when I got the post from Liz titled "ANI" above because I thought I'd been too nosey, but then I realised she just wanted to look out for me.

In your case, someone was too harsh and got told off by another editor, which must have been embarrassing for them.

They said sorry and offered to help you going forwards, which is exactly what I'd expect from a good editor - to apologise and try to fix things they've done wrong.

You're still new and learning, which is good! So, if someone removes or deletes one of your edits, that's totally normal on Wikipedia! Even people who've been here decades still disagree and delete each others work. It's an everyday thing here.

What's important is how we deal with it. If your work is deleted, you go to the Talk page on the article and tag that person to talk about it and see what to do going forwards. It's the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle process and it's the lifeblood of the encyclopedia. You might not have realised something, or they might have made a mistake. You might need a third person to help decide.

It's really hard to tell how someone feels when ask you have is writing, which is why Wikipedia is also built on assuming good intent in the first place. You always start thinking the other person is being genuine; you only presume that someone is editing in bad faith after it becomes clear that's what's happening. It's also much less stressful to assume the best in people!

You will make more mistakes on Wikipedia.

I will make more mistakes on Wikipedia.

Some of them might feel embarrassing.

What's important is what we do next.

I think we should take our mistakes to heart and learn from them. If someone points out I've done something wrong, that's a good thing - I now know something I didn't know before and wouldn't have known if I hadn't messed up! If I'm right, I can talk to the other person and help them learn. Look through my history and I hope you'll see how rewarding it can be to engage with others. There are times where someone has been editing in bad faith - in those cases you must be clear and show proof.

You should also be ready to admit that you might be wrong (this one did make me feel a little embarrassed for nominating it, when a really experienced editor voted against me).

If you ever need help, I'm still learning but I'll do my best - if you can stick to editing whilst logged in, that'll make it so much easier to see if there is anything to worry about, or just figure out what's happened!

@Armegon and @Cowboygilbert, do you mind chiming in if you have a moment to reassure @GojiraFan1954? I'm sure you feel the same way about Wikipedia, Armegon and you both clearly love Godzilla and want the best for the article! If you're busy or don't see this, then I totally understand ^_^ Blue Sonnet (talk) 08:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Clarification:

I just wanted to be friendly to this community by simply making sure that nothing is too old, I am being aware of what is going on around me, and not demonstrating the "WP:IDONTLIKEWHOCREATEDIT"-sort of behaviour, and that it should be modernized with a much newer image as I feared that people looking at an article with an old image in an infobox would be "boring".

Kinda like what Higuchi feared when he was teaming up with Anno on making Shin Godzilla. GojiraFan1954 (talk) 08:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense, and I do see how you felt that way when you had your edits undone with such a sharp response from another editor. It's good that you want to update images in the articles, but the rules about that can be a bit complicated if there are already some in place... I'd suggest working your way up and building experience - so look for some Godzilla-related articles that either don't have images or only have poor quality ones, then try to find a better version on Commons? You can even add a post to the article Talk page first and ask someone experienced for advice on what you should look for? It's more important to make sure that all Godzilla articles have a strong basis before we look at tidying up the bigger ones! I'm sure there must be small stubs that could really do with some citations or images, but get ignored because they're not well-known - that's somewhere true fans can really shine!

I'm trying to build up experience myself, so I'm sticking to smaller edits until I know enough about editing to try something big like a new article. Blue Sonnet (talk) 09:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

@GojiraFan1954, I am going to be truthful and give you the full thing. Armegon did act out of order but had acted in good faith and later apologized for what he said, but you continued to act in bad faith and continue to try to start a witch-hunt against him/her by pulling every single different card out of your back pocket. Then going to say that you are going to create this essay just because one editor had deleted your article. That’s disruptive and is not helping to contribute to the encyclopedia. While you may be new, we all were once new to the encyclopedia once too but we familiarized ourselves with policies and guidelines and acted in good faith towards other editors. I feel like if you really need to, is to take a break from editing Wikipedia and drop the stick. Also, like what @Blue-Sonnet said is to remain logged in while editing because if you are disruptive while logged out you can be blocked per WP:LOUTSOCK. Thanks, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 14:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

@GojiraFan1954: Blue-Sonnet and Cowboygilbert are right. You’re clearly new to Wikipedia and you’re bound to make lots of mistakes. So when you see more experienced editors undoing, reverting, or fixing your mistakes you shouldn’t take it personally like you did with this situation. There is no vendetta or conspiracy against you, especially if your edits are reversed if they fail to meet policy and guidelines. We were all once in the same boat as you are now: new to Wiki, making mistake after mistake — but we learned from those mistakes and became better editors because of it. I’m not gonna lie, I’m a little upset that you took me to admin-incidents over a trivial matter and tried to spin it into an impeachment. Disputes are typically taken to an article’s talk page or dispute resolution board; Admin-incidents are for extreme cases. But I also understand that you’re new. This is one of many mistakes that you will make, so leniency and good faith is warranted on you. From one Godzilla fan to another, I’m still willing to help you out when you need it - I’ve been editing 11 years, after all. Just understand that I’m not lashing out against you if I disagree on an idea or reverse an edit. Like Blue-Sonnet said, reverting and undoing is a common daily thing on Wikipedia. No vendettas or conspiracies, just edits that meet policy and guidelines. Armegon (talk) 15:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

"malformed" unblock request

Nothing malformed about it. There's a stupid bug, I don't know where, that damages the formatting slightly if {{unblock}} is preceded by a ":". If you want to make it go away while responding to an unblock request, just get rid of the semicolon. But no use telling the people making the requests about it; there's nothing they've done wrong that they can learn from. Usually these happen when someone uses the "reply" feature. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 03:35, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

@JpgordonOoh that's useful to know, I was looking through the code and couldn't figure it out, but then again it's nearly 4am and I've been playing games all night! Thanks for the heads-up! Blue Sonnet (talk) 03:38, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

A cup of bubble tea for you!

A delightful mix of ice, sugar and fat, with a faint overtone of tea-ness - a classic treat among chinese Gen-Zs, especially as an antidote to chili sauce. For you who always leave these warm, gentle and caring messages. irisChronomia (talk) 03:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

naumann

I don't think Nauman335 understands any of this at all. Literally WP:IDHT. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:08, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I know, combined with CIR - it feels like the discussion I had with Clioos' most recent sock, that lasted maybe two days before my AGF got kicked in the backside...

I ended up writing an essay in my sandbox afterwards, it might not have any place as a "proper" humourous essay but it made me feel a little better afterwards! Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:08, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I started something on the other side of the equation, about as complete as yours. User:Jpgordon/unblockers wants expansion eventually, though some of it is my personal approach. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:28, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Ooh, I'll take a look later, thanks! EDIT: I looked anyway 😁 It's a really good idea, I'm not an admin but some guidelines seem like they'd be helpful (even if it's only user pages like yours) since I've seen some disputes over the process, like whether the blocking admin should be consulted, how long to wait before going ahead without them, etc. Re. #8, anything that has "Thank you for your consideration" in the last paragraph is a giant red flag for AI, it's all over the place! Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

As is "Dear Wikipedia Administrator" and "moving forward". There are a lot more, but of course WP:BEANS. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Definitely! I work in insurance, mainly complaint and fraud investigation, so it's interesting to see the parallels on Wikipedia - we've started to get complaints and appeals written by AI (this is a good place to see them in the wild), but they do about as well as they do here.

It's also kinda fun to look through SPI's and try to figure out the tells, but I guess have a weird sense of "fun" now I write it out like that... Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:49, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

GPTZero has a new feature that detects AI-generated material that has been passed through a tool designed to obscure its AI sources. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 19:00, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I heard about obfuscation for AI art but not text, I'll have to save that, thank you!

I've also explored how to detect AI photos and videos, but that was more out of personal interest since it's all over YouTube, social media etc.

I've been trying to coach an editor who's insisting on using AI despite it making up every single source, they've unfortunately just moved into a second AI generated article after giving up on the first so I think they might be a lost cause...

We're going to be seeing a lot more of it, unfortunately. One day it could be an asset (if you ignore the ethics) but it's definitely not there yet. Blue Sonnet (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh by the way, I don't actually look at CAT:RFU very often. Instead, I use Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Requests for unblock, which shows me where there's been action in CAT:RFU most recently. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 21:24, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh that's much more useful! I've been trying to help avoid the giant backlog from a little while ago, if I can get the basic questions out of the way then admins have a clearer picture to work from, so this will really help! Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:46, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For your work in trying to engage with and educate blocked users. Your kindness and patience shines through in your approach to them. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 19:04, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Aw thank you @Beeblebrox:, that's really cheered me up - I'm glad I'm helping x

BTW Definitely tell me if I make a mistake or overstep in any way, the last thing I want is to make things harder for someone (Voorts was kind enough to do this earlier). Blue Sonnet (talk) 05:08, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

It's a real minefield, as you've seen some people are not very honest, and others seem unable to learn from their own mistakes, but we all muddle through as best we can. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 19:17, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Exactly! Admins have a lot of responsibility and work to do, so you can't be expected to take the time to walk literally every blocked editor through the appeal process after they've already been given the information they need (but don't read for some reason).

Sometimes a bit of handholding is all that's needed, or a simple question might give you the information you need to act, so I'm honestly quite enjoying being able to help in this way ☺️ Blue Sonnet (talk) 19:27, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Beeblebrox:, I've had another admin raise concerns that my participation in unblock discussions is inappropriate so I'm not sure if I'll be continuing, at least for the present. I'm sorry if I caused any problems for anyone. Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Well that's a shame. That particular admin is not a fan of my work either. I would not take anything he says as speaking for the admin corps in general. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 20:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

@Beeblebrox Thank you so much for your kind words, I think I was just taken aback since it was on another person's talk page and it came out of the blue!

I've taken a look through my work and I honestly feel like I'm helping people; although I'm not following the "traditional" path to editing I'm not breaking any rules nor causing harm to the project or others, which are my main concerns.

TBH That particular comment of mine might have been a bit too optimistic & maybe could have given the editor the wrong impression on their prospect of being unblocked? I'll need to bear that in mind since that could be harmful in itself.

I think I'll sleep on it, but unless someone has specific concerns beyond a general dislike of the idea then I'd like to carry on as-is. I'll make sure I stick to general advice and never misrepresent my position. I'm genuinely enjoying helping out with this too!

Anyway, sorry for bothering you and thank you for replying! I'll take this as a learning experience ^_^ Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Not sure who the admin you're speaking of is but somehow I suspect I'm in the same group as Beebs here. At least in my opinion, it's extremely helpful to have some non-admins hanging around the unblocks queue. Saves admin energy for the bits that actually require the tools, sure, but also, since you can't actually unblock, it takes the lopsided power dynamic out of it and makes it easier for you to help the blocked editor. Unless you're somehow making it harder to deal with the queue (and I have no idea how you'd do this), the worst thing you can do is embarrass yourself. Plus, I think it helps keep the unblocks admins honest. :)

Anyway, I'm here from , where I think you realized you got in a bit over your head, so I figured I'd come by and give you a tip: try not to ask any questions that can be answered with yes/no. For lots of reasons, but two main ones. From the admins' perspective, the more you can get the blocked editor to volunteer, the easier it is for us to tell if the editor has come to understand why they were blocked and what they need to change so they don't get blocked in the future. And for your own benefit, it helps you avoid accidentally asking leading questions. Thanks as always for the help. -- asilvering (talk) 00:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

@Asilvering Thanks, that's really helpful to know! I'm always worried I'll accidentally put my foot in it so the more I know the better :)

I'm trying to stick to basic stuff like linking to GAB, SO etc. but need to watch that I don't get carried away like I did there... Glad I didn't cause too many problems though!

If you look at my edits right before I lost my confidence a bit you can see what happened, but they didn't actually raise any issues beyond just not liking the idea, so I've decided to continue trying to help where I can.

Thanks again for the advice, I'll make sure to follow it! Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:38, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

I was just popping by to thank you too! One thing I wanted to bring up was to be careful about the phrasing of "ban" versus "block". A lot of blocked editors will use the word "ban", but here on Wikipedia, blocks and bans are very different: "Blocks disable a user's ability to edit pages; bans do not. However, bans may be enforced by blocks; users who are subject to a total ban, or who breach the terms of a partial ban, will most likely be site-wide blocked to enforce the ban" (WP:BLOCK). Importantly to the unblock process, the steps to requesting an unblock are technically easier (post an unblock request), whereas undoing a ban can be more complicated (e.g., through community consensus) (see WP:UNBAN). I hope that makes sense! Let me know if you have any follow-up questions, and feel free to reach out whenever. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@Significa liberdade Thank you too - I guess I'm carrying on then 😁 I've tried to be careful with using the word "block" instead of "ban" since I've used it accidentally in the past. I'll definitely keep an eye on it, if you see me do it again please let me know and I'll fix it asap! Blue Sonnet (talk) 07:28, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Good work, thank you

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		for lightening the mood with an editor who is not as fluent in English as they might wish, and showing them where they might edit their native language Wikipedia 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 00:04, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much @Timtrent, I'm just glad we got there in the end! Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:26, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for all your help with unblock requests! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

		Cookies!
		11wallisb has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hello @Blue-Sonnet! I was surprised when I saw your message to the editor involved at AN/I yesterday that you aren't an admin or a veteran editor! AN/I has been extremely intimidating to me personally, so I have a lot of respect for a new editor who has jumped straight in, despite the potential for some really unpleasant interactions with other editors. Yesterday is the first time I have reported anybody to AN/I, it really is a last resort!

I can see you mostly focus on advising editors who have submitted unblock requests. You are probably familiar with these already, however I thought I'd share some other venues where you could help other editors:

• Help:FRIENDLY - For answering general questions from other editors who need help!
• WP:MENTOR - Might be of interest? There is also WP:AAU!
• CAT:UTRS - This one would be of specific interest as (to my knowledge) it allows editors to view who has created unblock requests on their talk pages. It is basically an automated page where new unblock requests are listed.

This isn't my greatest area of knowledge, as I am mostly active at AfD, AfC and NPP, however I thought I would share these with you, in case they are of any interest! Thank you for your efforts on the project and hello from a fellow UK Wikipedian! Happy editing! 11WB (talk) 15:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Heya, thank you for the cookies!

I edit on phone so I can't do anything really complex, but I found out I'm quite good at explaining things to others - there was a big backlog at RfU (RFU?) so I thought I'd try to help out with basic advice, which leaves the admins more time to deal with complex queries & the overall decision 🙂

I got bitten & had some personal stuff going on so left for a while, but someone I respect asked if I'd think about coming back to help out, so I did!

I also lurk on ANI when I have insomnia; it's known as the "Drama board" so I really have to temper my instinct to jump in... A couple of times it looked like it might help to guide the editor involved on their personal Talk, so I've done that instead.

Thanks also for the links, I'll take a look!

[Edit: I've got the last one bookmarked already, I use it a ton so good call] Blue Sonnet (talk) 15:43, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

It's amazing you're so eager to participate at AN/I honestly, I've tried my hardest to avoid that noticeboard in my 7ish months on Wikipedia. I remember seeing a few editors who used to clerk there become looked upon unfavourably, as they often got in the way of administrators who usually complete tasks there. I find confrontation extremely difficult to deal with, so anything labelled with the word 'drama', I steer well clear of!

Many areas of Wikipedia have a sort of progression that editors can follow, for the area I work in, it usually begins participating at WP:AfD (Articles for Deletion), then maybe becoming an WP:AfC (Articles for Creation) reviewer, followed by general work at WP:NPP (New Page Patrol), and completing WP:NPP/S (New Page Patrol School) and finally becoming a WP:NPR (new page reviewer)!

I don't know what the equivalent progression for RfU would be, but I think that part of Wikipedia comes under the broader umbrella of WP:AN/I and WP:AN. Some editors are adept at cooling down potentially volatile situations, unfortunately I am not one of them... The post I made yesterday doesn't seem to have caused any drama (yet!) however, so that is reassuring that AN/I isn't all scary! I'll keep an eye out for you and try to pick up on some of your communication skills, as I think they would really help in my approach to managing the less pleasant discussions! 11WB (talk) 15:57, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the complement! If you want to see my baptism in fire, look at this talk page (from "Indefinite block" onwards, it's also mentioned on my own Talk further up). That was a journey, but I don't regret trying to help one bit.

I've also been threatened with legal action for suggesting a new editor would have trouble editing neutrally about his business/project, but luckily that's the worst it's been so far! Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:06, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I'll have a read of that later. I will say you are correct about one thing: 'Baldur's Gate 3 is awesome'! 11WB (talk) 16:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I may have just hit the Act 3 slump & gone back to Cyberpunk for a bit, don't tell the other fans! Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:39, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I have it installed, but haven't actually started playing it. D&D isn't my thing really. (I think this is non-public enough for me to say) My housemate has replayed it through at least 5 times, as there are many different ways to play it apparently! 11WB (talk) 19:31, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

My apologies for going off-topic by the way! It doesn't look like the editor from yesterday has responded yet either on their talk page or at the AN/I. I don't really know the process for AN/I, but hopefully this will be enough to provoke a change in editing behaviour! 11WB (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I've been gaming for decades (showing my age a little) so I love talking about it - I'll bet your housemate has heard about the BG3 slump, there are even skits about it on YouTube 😁

Re. ANI, I don't think they'll do anything if the editor disappears, since the issue would also be gone by extension. Sometimes threads just die off naturally, I think they get archived after a week of inactivity?

If that happens, it might be worth watchlisting a couple of their favourite pages, that way you can log a new thread & reference the old one if the behaviour continues. There's a good chance that they've been scared off by all the attention, so this might be the end of it?

It's bittersweet since there's a person who obviously wants to contribute, but either doesn't have the skill or gumption to learn how to do it properly. It often turns out to be someone who doesn't speak English very well, thinks AI is the solution to everything yet isn't able to see when it's screwing things up - I've had some (limited) success with directing those editors to their native language Wikipedia, so that way everyone's happy 😁 Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I could talk about videogames for hours, though I know Wikipedia has a strict no-socialising policy, so I have to very quickly stay on-topic! Which reminds me, I am familiar with some of the active editors over at WP:WPVG. They are very knowledgeable with Wikipedia policies and guidelines relating to articles (WP:N, WP:V etc). There are often very interesting discussions going on over there (some with drama...), I was involved in one during August (here and a few other simultaneous discussions). Was a very valuable learning experience, especially considering I really made a mess-up of understanding the situation initially!

To respond to the talk page discussion you posted above, I think you reacted extremely maturely. I am familiar with both @Asilvering and @Drmies. They are both experienced admins who do great work on the project, so you were definitely in good company there! The majority of editors have areas of weakness where they can improve, I know about mine now and it is simply a case of trying to improve on them! (Sorry for rambling, I just wanted to say I was taken aback by how confident you are at AN/I, and I wish I had the confidence socially to get more involved outside of where I am already contributing!) 11WB (talk) 20:22, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again for the lovely post, it took a while to build up confidence in general but I finally got there x

I'll take a look over there too, Wikipedia is so massive that I sometimes wonder if I'll ever see all of it's nooks & crannies 😁 Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

thank you

Ahoy! i wanted to thank you for correcting minor mistakes in my edits of GlassesUSA 173.206.50.207 (talk) 22:39, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

It's greatly appreciated but no need to thank me, you did the majority of it - that was good work 🙂 Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:56, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Blue-Sonnet hi, just pinging you because i did even more fact-checking, and there are incredible amounts of weird, mind-boggling LLM artifacts in there, could you check the article please? 173.206.50.207 (talk) 23:26, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not hugely experienced in article-space but I'll be happy to take a look when I can! Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:30, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Unblock updates

Hi there, and thanks again for all your support at unblocks! I wanted to reach out because I noticed you've recently responded to a few editors, mentioning that it's been a few days since we last heard from them (e.g., in this edit). This isn't a huge deal, but I wanted to reach out about two things. First, sometimes others add an "idletimestamp" to a request so that it's taken out of the queue of active requests. This timestamp is placed for the last time we heard from the editor and places the request here. Once the request is idle for a while, we can decline based on the request being stale. However, you can absolutely ping them to see if they've forgotten to respond! Second, if you're thinking about pinging editors for inactivity, you may want to install this script, which tells you how long a request has been stale. Anyway, thanks again! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:52, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Hiya, I've seen the stamp mentioned so that's really interesting to find out what it does! I'm on mobile do would the script still work? I've got Twinkle so I guess it would? Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:50, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Daniel_Quinlan: Does Catatonic work on mobile? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes! Daniel Quinlan (talk) 04:44, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Great! Now I've just got to learn how to use it now it's installed 😅 Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:14, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Fortunately, this one does all the work! Just go to: Category:Requests for unblock awaiting response from the blocked user. You should see the list of editors who we're waiting for a reply from. Now, you'll also see numbers next to each of them in green, yellow-ish, and red. The green have fresh responses, and the red are a bit stale. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:27, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! It's not showing for me yet so I think I need to fiddle with the cache a bit more, it probably didn't clear fully... Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:33, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

I ran into the same issue. Daniel explained how to get it working on his talk page. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:37, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Ooh good to know, I'll get working on that asap 🙂

It's finally working, thanks again both! Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:42, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Significa liberdade, I've spent a little while trying to figure out how idle timestamps are added, but I couldn't find a guidance page and looking through edit history includes a long string of numbers that broke my brain a little - is it a Twinkle thing or markup? Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

If you go to Template:Unblock, you'll see the documentation for the unblock request. The idletimestamp documentation is there. Basically, when you're looking at a new unblock request, you can ask a question, then manually add the following to the end of the request, right before the closing brackets}}: |idletimestamp={{subst:CURRENTTIMESTAMP}}. The "currenttimestamp" will auto-include a timestamp with a string of numbers. If you're looking at an unblock request with a prior timestamp and want to add a new one, you'll switch out the string of numbers with {{subst:CURRENTTIMESTAMP}}. Make sure not to accidentally remove the closing brackets or else the unblock request will malfunction. I've done this more than once, lol.

However, make sure to only add the idle timestamp if it's clear there's a question that multiple admins would want an answer to before unblocking. Sometimes, someone will ask a question but they don't find it necessary for an unblock. For example, sometimes we ask about COI/PAID while looking at a promotional username softblock, where the editor technically only needs to be renamed. However, sometimes we prompt while waiting for the renamer because we think a COI is possible.

I hope that makes sense! Let me know if you have any follow-up questions. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:26, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Great, thank you! I'll be careful & probably refrain from using it unless I'm absolutely certain, but it's good to know how it works. Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:49, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Significa liberdade, I've just seen this from @Pppery. I didn't realise that adding new comments would mess up the idle timestamps - is there a certain time limit where I shouldn't reply anymore, say 24 - 48hrs?

I don't want to make things harder for you, so I'd like to try to understand how it works in the background. Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Blue Sonnet! When looking for unblocks to review, I suggest going to CAT:RFU, then scrolling down to "Pages in category "Requests for unblock"" (bottom of page). This has you skip over "Summary of pending on-wiki appeals", which includes all open appeals, including those with an active timestamp. The pages listed at the bottom do not have a timestamp and thus, should be OK to comment on. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:58, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Oh, I use that page all the time but didn't realise that's how it was set out - good to know, thanks! Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:08, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Message from talk

Hi bro.

I have seen ur message regarding blank on summary in edit.

Actually, there was a issue so i given the edit so fast. Even through, there was nothing wrong about blank edit know right, but I try to give a short message on it so u see correct form of edit into summary.

Also a user called Raju2789 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been giving AI computer images of Indian Railways train board. As per Wikipedia I know there is wrong know about it. I coincidentally editing his articles to make sure that to keep original means real train board instant in life. I travel all over the India and click the photos of train board and that photo i upload in Wikicommons and this person is using copyright AI images. I totally not understand why Wikipedia allows this type of disprtive behavior. If u free u can look into this matter.

Thank u. 😄 DAR.45m (talk) 06:19, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi @DAR.45m, thanks for your message! I took a look through your last 100 edits and couldn't see any summaries, which was why I popped a quick message on your Talk.

You're right that is not against policy, but it only takes a couple of seconds and makes things much easier if anyone needs to investigate anything or understand why you made a certain edit. If you look at an articles edit history, you can easily track the progress through edit summaries without having to physically go into every edit one-by-one. I see it as a courtesy towards anyone who's looking at it in the future 🙂

Re. the dispute, I can see that you've already posted on ANI so it's best that the admins take a proper look at what's happened & decide how to respond. Blue Sonnet (talk) 07:53, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

Ur right but there are 1000 of articles which is " No edit summary " shows it. Every article has same but I take proper and try to write a small note on that it while editing.😄 DAR.45m (talk) 13:18, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	i have seen your comments on unblock requests, and think you are great at lightening the mood! Tankishguy 13:19, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I swear, you are the next Oshwah. Tankishguy 13:21, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

There can only be one Oshwah... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:22, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I'll try to live up to Oshwah's good name, thank you 😁 Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:33, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For attempting to guide blocked editors, even when it seems unlikely that they will follow your advice. Thank you, and I hope to continue to see you around.

Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:19, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Aw thank you - it's worth the effort for the times that it does work! Blue Sonnet (talk) 07:46, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Request for your honest feedback

I think you may be one of the few people who genuinely tried to give me honest and helpful advice. I wanted to thank you and also ask for your honest take. During ANI, I felt I was treated somewhat unfairly and got topic blocked. It seemed I was accused of deliberately ignoring DRN rules and knowingly violating original research and due weight policies while trying to tire another out on talk to get my way. That wasn't the case. I understand how it's easy to get that impression since verifying the full context takes time and effort. I don't blame others for that, but it's never easy being misunderstood, and I realised my persistence (which may come across as bludgeoning) prob didn't help my case. So I added context to my 2 draft appeals in progress. (Second one is prob more informative). If you have time, could you please take a look and tell me whether they make sense, and whether they seem like a reasonable path forward? JaredMcKenzie (talk) 02:52, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey @JaredMcKenzie, part of the reason is that the admin boards - especially ANI - are informally called the "dramaboards". Anyone who's on there is going to be under a massive amount of scrutiny from dozens of editors, so everything you do will be put under a microscope and your actions will have a much bigger effect than they might otherwise (like dancing in a nightclub vs. dancing on stage).

I understand the desire to explain yourself fully and respond to everyone, especially those who don't agree with you, it's a natural response.

On Wikipedia, if you follow through on that instinct without trying to temper it, you can inadvertently stymie (stifle) the natural course of a discussion - everyone should get their say and having one person metaphorically "shout" louder than others can make it really hard to understand how other people feel and what they're are saying. It can also feel quite intimidating ("if I repy, will they push back on me too? Have I got the time or energy to get into a huge debate like that? Maybe I shouldn't bother, I'm not in the mood anyway").

Obviously you weren't actually shouting, but replying to everyone can make it feel like others aren't having their voices heard & can create an atmosphere of intimidation, even if the poster is well-meaning.

The same thing happens if you repeat the same points over and over to each person who responds. You need to presume that they've taken the time to read through the previous posts and are aware of the situation (even if they haven't - if that's the case, others will notice and call them out on it). Trust that others will notice if another editor is being unfair and allow everyone to express their opinion in turn.

Try to be like Picasso. He's well known for his minimal art style, where he will look at a person or object and remove all the superfluous & unnecessary lines from his paintings. If drawing a cow, for example, he'd draw it with as few lines as possible until he got the purest essence of COW. You could still recognise the thing he drew, even if he'd removed as the extra bits that other people included.

It'd be a good idea to try to use that philosophy in Talk page posts - take as much as you can away from your post until the core idea is laid bare, simple and easy to understand.

Short and clear posts are also a matter of courtesy to other editors. Imagine that they're reading your post on a lunch break and the longer they take to read it, the less time they have to eat. Whatever technique works for you, use it.

Re. What do do next, I noticed that you've put a declaration of intent on your Talk and I'm worried that might be counterproductive for you.

There will be people who visit your Talk from the old ANI thread or who might have bookmarked it just to see what happens next.

I'd highly recommend not drawing attention to your future edits and just crack on with your work. You don't want others to look at specific edits in isolation of the rest of your work, I can guarantee that some might even see it as a challenge of sorts ("Oh so they think those are good enough now, let's find out!").

It could also attract the attention of those who come across your edits naturally and result in more amateur sleuths going through your edits to properly look for problems.

Any future unblocking admin will be looking at your entire history, so the list isn't going to do much good there anyway.

It's great that you want to show you can do better, but the best way to do that is to knuckle down and get on with it, quietly and efficiently 🙂

I also realise the irony of this long post, but I've been thinking of how best to explain this since yesterday - I'm addressing an entire ANI thread plus your recent Talk page, so this is as short as I can make it realistically without losing the essence of what I want to say. Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:45, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

@Blue-Sonnet I want to sincerely thank you for your reply. You already helped me a lot and I don't want to ask for more of your time. However, I do have a more detailed question I'd like to ask, if you're open to it. I asked an admin this question for the purpose of better comprehension. I was only confused when Mfield said some of the reasons for my topic block was due to arguing against a community consensus. But how can one argue against a community concensus that wasn't even formed? I am genuinely not aware of a community Consensus in talk page or on ANI noticeboard back when I had commented. My last comments on that ANI thread was merely explaining my actions and even admitting faults. and asking a second chance , answering direct questions . I admittedly did argue or correct Horse in ANI. But horse is only one editor (in dispute with me in article) and is not the community itself. I would really appreciate your view if I am still possibly misunderstanding how "arguing against community consensus" applies in my context. I just want to clear up confusion and understand things better going forward. JaredMcKenzie (talk) 08:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, from what I understand they're taking about the fact that you're still talking about the block and ANI discussion after it's ended. A decision was made by the majority of editors in that discussion (consensus) but you're still wanting to question it.

Even if you didn't see a consensus, others did and it's in your best interests to accept that. Admins have been here for a long time and they're used to determining and understanding consensus.

Remember how I said it'd be a good idea to let this go and knuckle down with editing quietly? Adding essays and pinging admins to go over your block again isn't really doing that. I mentioned how it'd draw attention and you're unfortunately getting that attention.

Admins want to see you working on making Wikipedia better through actively editing articles, but your Talk page isn't part of that. Taking up admins time to go over old ground can be seen as disruptive because they're volunteers too and sounds this in their own personal time - time taken answering your questions could be spent on another task.

Feel free to create essays in your sandbox or drafts, but the Talk page is for speaking to other editors directly through short comments & isn't really meant for long essays and the like. It makes it difficult to read and communicate properly.

The drop the stick and Wikipedia:Let it go articles might be useful for you to read.

Hopefully this doesn't come across as harsh, but I might not have explained properly before & hopefully this is a bit clearer. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

But just honestly didn't seem like that. Their very first reply seemed crystal clear and said, "As such please don't look at it in terms of time of what can I edit and for how long to remove this restriction, rather look at the spirit of the restriction. It was enacted for reasons that need to be addressed for it to be revoked. Some of those reasons include arguing against community consensus." I read their first reply to mean as the original reason I got blocked (or restricted) was due to arguing against community consensus and this needs to be addressed. Am I wrong to think that? Or did they merely misspoke. But I don't think it matters. You give a very good perspective that either way, I should be wise to WP:LETGO. It's probably for the best if I wish to lift the block and thank you for reminding me of that. JaredMcKenzie (talk) 13:34, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Glad to help! It's difficult to see what others do on the outside if you feel strongly, similarly it's hard to understand the feelings of someone who's in the middle when you're outside looking in.

In either case, I think you've made a good decision to step back and focus on other things. You can't win every battle and there will be times where something happens that you just can't understand. It's healthy to be able to go "meh, this just isn't worth the bother". Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:48, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

An 🦉 for you!

Hello, Blue-Sonnet. 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.

Just an invite for you! Hope you're well and thank you again for all the effort you put into helping blocked editors! 11WB (talk) 18:41, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I think I've got a small menagerie and a café now 😁

It's not showing yet but I'll take a peek when the message arrives. Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:49, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Email isn't my favourite form of communication, I did actually send it on the 9th. No worries though, I can send the same one again or just send it here instead! It was simply a short message and an invite to the NPP Discord - WP:DISCORD. TL/DR is it isn't strictly NPP and a few of the folks on there are familiar with you!

(That's basically what I put in the email!) 11WB (talk) 18:56, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

I found it! Wait, I'm famous already? 😉 Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Got your reply! The invite is always open so you are welcome any time! 11WB (talk) 20:29, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Non admin comment

Hi Blue-Sonnet. Is there a reason you put Template:Non-admin comment on your comments at ANI? 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 21:59, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, yep I've had some editors mistake me for an admin when I'm helping on unblock requests and I saw other non-admins were using it - if it's at all annoying I'm happy to stop since it takes extra time to write out since I'm on mobile!

It's an admin board so I wanted to make it clear that I'm not an admin, but thinking about it I'm probably the only person who uses it on ANI regularly. Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:24, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Blue-Sonnet ever thought about being an admin? think you would be a great one. Jp33442 (talk) 22:30, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, that's kind of you to say! I'm nowhere near experienced enough yet, but one day I'd like to work on SPI's - I deal with complaints and fraud in real life so it's in my area of expertise... Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:35, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Fair enough blue, you would be fantastic and hope you really get the bad guys in real life. Jp33442 (talk) 22:37, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. I do the same thing for unblocks whenever I come across them, but I don't really think its needed at ANI. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 22:31, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

That's a relief, it is a pain to write out on a mobile keyboard 😅 Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:32, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

@Jp33442, RfAs are extremely difficult processes. @Blue-Sonnet does excellent with unblock requests and at AN/I, however there are many, many other requirements. Content creation is probably the biggest. A lot of the participants look for WP:GA and WP:FA authored articles. An excellent gateway is through WP:NPP, and participation at WP:AfD, either creating or reviewing at WP:AfC and further down the road NPP itself. @Blue-Sonnet, you would be warmly welcomed at NPP if ever you wanted to get involved. I would definitely advocate for you and I am certain some of the other reviewers who are familiar with you would also! 11WB (talk) 15:24, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

I've been dipping my toe into a few other areas, unfortunately I'm limited by editing on a pretty cheap mobile phone right now 😑

It has a habit of randomly screwing up text on Preview, usually when I've been writing something long and complex! I wonder if this is a bug with mobile view or just my phone?

I do sometimes work on larger edits, but then I get disheartened when it starts to lookhfdeg Ike thissshdskj...

That said, it's really rewarding being able to work in an area that other people might not enjoy, doing tasks that save other people (admins) time & seeing genuine editors learn from their mistakes and getting unblocked! Before I started, so many were failing purely because admins are so busy that they don't always have the time & resources to guide new editors through their appeal. Blue Sonnet (talk) 15:32, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

I actually wanted to apologise if I've been bothersome. I occasionally read some of your comments at AN/I and on unblock requests, as I've found it helpful with my own communication with other editors. You are really good at explaining things in a way that makes sense and helps calm editors down. I also admire how you aren't afraid to jump right in at a noticeboard like AN/I, which is ripe with hostility, disagreements and drama. Your ability to communicate is many notches above my own.

The proof is on this very talk page. You have many editors and administrators complementing and thanking you for everything you do! 💫

Please don't stop! 11WB (talk) 15:40, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Nope neither of you have bothered me at all, it's nice hearing that I can make a difference and that others have noticed!

I'm quite proud of my Talk - I've only removed one thread from when I first edited years ago, but the rest is left as-is and shows my journey through Wikipedia. I hope it shows the people I talk to that I'm being genuine and really trying to help.

It's so easy to forget that we only have text to communicate with other people, so the other social cues we normally rely on are gone - I force myself to look at everything from the other person's POV even if I think they're wrong & start from there.

Besides, arguing on the internet never got anyone anywhere 😁 Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:08, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

11WB prefer lurking and occasionally commenting on stuff but thanks anyway. Jp33442 (talk) 15:57, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Have you tried some easy edits like the Wikipedia:Typo Team? It only takes a few minutes but things like weasel words are all over the place thanks to AI - you can even just cut and paste synonyms if they fit the context of the paragraph. Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:11, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

I have seen them blue but i prefer too just lurking and if i see a minor edit i will edit it, otherwise i just lurk like i said. Jp33442 (talk) 16:15, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Got it & thanks for replying, it's totally up to you of course! Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:22, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

As long as i don't make too much of a pest out of myself blue i am all right now. Jp33442 (talk) 16:26, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	(I don't know if 'diplomacy' is quite on the mark, but it's not far off, either.) I keep coming across your contributions on the talk pages of blocked or otherwise troubled users, and each time I do, I get more and more impressed – clear, calm, correct, and always constructive and helpful. Thanks for everything you're doing, and keep it up! :) DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:00, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Just to say I came here to send a barnstar for this exact thing only to see DoubleGrazing beat me to it by a few hours! Anyway, your comments at unblocks are fantastic and I just want to say thank you. CoconutOctopus talk 19:27, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Right back atcha, thank you for cheering me up like this 😁 I nearly quit after being bitten few months ago, but Asilvering asked me to consider returning and I'm glad I did! Blue Sonnet (talk) 19:28, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much, stuff like this really keeps me going and makes my day! Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:22, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Apologies

Blue sorry i got rid of my replies too you, did not want a page stalker sending me a message saying why i am not editing, agan my apologies. Jp33442 (talk) 12:45, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

You've got nothing to apologise for, it's totally fine! If there was a problem I'd have said so 🙂 Blue Sonnet (talk) 13:27, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks blue you're the best. Jp33442 (talk) 13:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Archiving

I saw this edit summary. I'm fairly certain you could just paste one of the templates at WP:AUTOARCHIVE (the subst ones) at the top of the talk page in order to set up archiving. You might be able to test in your sandbox beforehand. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 15:21, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Good to know, I remember trying a few things but I was on a super-old mobile that crashed if you had more than four tabs open & I gave up! I'll try that as soon as this page needs pruning, thanks! Blue Sonnet (talk) 15:26, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

ANI proposal

You might want to expand upon your proposal. There are examples of what proposals look like in the ANI archives here and here, for instance. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 02:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Good point, on it! Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

@45dogs Does this look better? Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:19, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

It looks like a standard ANI proposal, so yes. Thank you for improving it. I will also say that you should use equal signs instead of big formatting + bolding, like here. Best, 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 02:23, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Ah, the perils of editing on mobile 😅 Thanks for the help! Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:24, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

• Tangential, I love your calling Malin's edits "charming", it's so British and as an Aussie, I was thinking on the same lines. This editor is seriously a pleasure to deal with. Fork99 (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

  Ironically I was just watching YT video explaining English passive-aggressiveness to non-native speakers! I must say that the investigation into their editing history was very educational. Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:51, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

  Stop, this is too funny I have to say :) Fork99 (talk) 18:56, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

AI template suggestion

@Significa liberdade FYI I finally figured out where to make the suggestion for AI warnings on block templates - Wikipedia:Requested templates#c-Blue-Sonnet-20251128051400-Suggestion for block templates.

Looks like it's not that busy but at least it's out there! Hopefully someone who knows more about templates can give me some guidance & let me know if it's better requested elsewhere. Blue Sonnet (talk) 05:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:37, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Apologies if I came across too direct!

Hi @Blue-Sonnet! I apologise if I came across too direct over on @Unknown FG's talk page. You didn't have to cross out your message, and you are welcome to remove your message completely. Your advice is correct however, and any further posts did become meaningless after they doubled down on their intention to run using LLM sadly. 11WB (talk) 05:41, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Nah it's fine, I crossed it out after reading Significa's note from yesterday telling people not to pile on, except I went blundering in without reading it properly... Your note just made it clear that I wasn't really helping the matter.

If it's struck then it's still visible for whoever wants to read it, but I've also shown that I don't want to add to the inevitable explosion when voting opens, so I'm happy leaving it as-is. Hopefully that'll also be a way to discourage others from joining in from ANI & keep the discussion over there...

TBH I deal with unblock appeals on here and complaints in real life, so it takes a lot to phase me, you've got nothing to apologise for 🙂 Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:02, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Also I couldn't help myself with my last comment - I didn't realise how it read when I posted, but it's slightly funny so that's staying too.. Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:04, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate your reply, thank you! I would ordinarily ask whether maybe this editor could be guided in the way you assist with unblocks, however with them only responding using LLM, I would say it is probably not worth the effort unfortunately. 11WB (talk) 06:04, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

I really dislike posting at AN/I at all. It is a last resort in my view. I was concerned there may be a rebound as this editor is an admin nominee, however I think I may have been too overly cautious. 11WB (talk) 06:06, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Well there's only so much you can do for another person - it'd be great if we could talk to them properly, but they're going to have to deal with the consequences of their actions! Unfortunately there's none so blind as those who refuse to see, or whatever the saying that I can't remember is.

Going for adminship is massively public already, so all that's happening is this is being dealt with now rather than later. It's up to them if they keep going after that and want to hear it all a second time! At least the ANI thread isn't linked on everyone's notifications...

It looks like an admin can close the application once it's clear they've got no chance of winning, so hopefully it won't drag out too long if they do go ahead with it. Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:14, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

That is a line from the Book of Genesis, 48:17.

'There are none so blind as those who will not see.' 11WB (talk) 06:19, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Never mind! It is not from Genesis, rather it is written in similar words in the Book of Matthew, 13:13.

'This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.'

It is a big book, finding a specific quote is a tad challenging! 11WB (talk) 06:23, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Ooh I accidentally quoted the Bible, the atheist cabal I'm supposed to be a part of will surely disown me ;) Well, it's a good saying, all the same! Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:33, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

I've found that agnosticism has allowed me to be open-minded to the many multitudes of origin theories that exist across religion and science. 11WB (talk) 06:35, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

That's a healthy mindset to have! My parents were spiritual, but to the point that they believed in anything that sounded interesting (so open minded that almost every belief found a way in at some point) - I spent most of my teenage years and early adulthood re-examining those beliefs and they all came up short for me. That said, I'd still be open to proper scientific proof if it happened along! Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:48, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Following your plug ...

... I tried the Gaming Check used on myself. How do I interpret the results? Or is the key thing just to identify a great many edits in a very short time frame? Ravenswing 20:45, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

Heh, honestly I'm still trying to figure it out myself! In the last case it was clear on the bar at the bottom that they spammed edits on their sandbox (blue/purple) and the graph on the far right shot up vertically, showing they were hammering out edits at a ridiculously fast pace.

With PIA I'm still figuring it out - the dotted blue line is PIA so if that suddenly shoots up once they get EC that'd be a red flag - I'll try to find someone who knows a bit more about it, it'd be nice to have a guide/essay somewhere since it seems really useful! I'd be happy to write it myself too. Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:52, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

@Sean.hoyland I think you created the Gaming check tool (apologies if I'm wrong) - if so, do you know if we're planning to have some sort of guide or basic overview on how to interpret the results, or is it too soon for that since it's under development? Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:56, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

@User:Blue-Sonnet, it's a good question. I can say some things.

1. It's still very much still in development so anything could change.

2. My personal preference is not to tell people anything about how to interpret what they see, mainly because I don't know how to reliably interpret the results (I've looked at many hundreds of these kinds of plots long before the tool existed and I learned that I don't really know how to reliably identify gaming). WP:PGAME uses words like "unconstructive", "trivial", "dummy" etc. to describe gaming related edits, but the tool has nothing to say about these (subjective) properties. And in practice, as far as I can tell, when editors try to identify gaming, they are doing more than what PGAME says. They use their own heuristics, their personal I-know-it-when-I-see-it approach. This makes me reluctant to tell people what they should pay attention to. I might try to hook it up to an LLM's API if I can convince myself that a prompt describing the notion of 'gaming' and a bunch of plots are enough for the model to provide a reasonable interpretation.

3. I am planning to add basic descriptions for each plot to make it is clear what is being displayed, but I'm still not quite sure which plots to include. The notion of a 'PIA' topic area is an example of something that needs to be spelled out as the tool currently uses a very strict model of the 'topic area'. This may not be the same as more inclusive 'broadly construed' models many people use when they think about whether something is inside or outside of the topic area.

4. I can tell you what I see when I look at the plot for Tioaeu8943.

• In the context of the entire set of accounts that acquired the extendedconfirmed grant since 2018, 55 days from registration to EC is fast, and the fact that only there were only 14 days with edits during the pre-EC period may suggests the editor was in a hurry. There is a relationship between speed of EC grant acquisition and probability of being blocked for the Wikipedia extendedconfirmed user sub-population.
• cumulative bytes plot: Slope differences between the red pre-EC and gray post-EC sections are interesting. A shallow slope pre-EC that steepens post-EC may indicate gaming-like behavior. Gaming relies on the notion of intent (which we can't see), and the sudden appearance of many edits in the PIA topic area post-EC suggests that there may have been an intent to tunnel through the EC barrier placed in front of the PIA topic area using gaming. The EC barrier is a (bad) proxy for editing experience so anything that looks like an attempt to rapidly tunnel through it could be concerning.
• the pie chart: The post-EC percentage of edits in PIA is quite high (given the strict definition used of PIA), or at least not low. This may be relevant to the notion of intent.
• editing rate: Again, slope and slope changes are interesting here. The pre-EC line is much steeper than the post-EC line. Why? It is very common for there to be no slope change at the pre-EC to post-EC point presumably because the user is not gaming EC, doesn't care about the grant and may not even be aware of its existence. Tioaeu8943's plot is very unusual because there is a time gap between the revisions required to obtain the grant and the post-grant edits. I would be interested to hear from the user why that is the case. There are many possibilities and some of them are not good.
• page byte size change and the associated histogram: The plot and the histogram share the same y-axis, just to be clear. That will be clearer in the plot when I update it. The page byte size change data suggests potential gaming in the sense that there is a marked difference between the pre-EC and post-EC signals. The pre-EC signal is consists of small edits and is much less noisy than the post-EC signal. The histogram uses a 200-byte bin size, so if you see a red spike in the middle rather than a nice Gaussian distribution it can indicate gaming-like behavior.
• live revisions colored by namespace: In Tioaeu8943's case, this doesn't tell me anything useful. Although it's interesting to see how their editing changed over time (if you switch off the limit to pre-EC). Sometimes you can see lots of edits that could be "trivial" or "dummy" in the user namespace etc. e.g. user CherrySoda. But that isn't the case for Tioaeu8943.

Sean.hoyland (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Wow, I love all that data! So it sounds like something that can evolve as needed? I did notice some of those trends but couldn't quite articulate it.

I also did what Ravenswing did and looked up my own when I saw the graph comparing longevity to how quickly EC is gained - I took 2500 days so I guess I'll be here until the heat death of the universe 😁

I'll be keeping this post, it's really useful - thank you! Blue Sonnet (talk) 05:19, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

You see where your 2500 days fits into the general pattern (post-2018 pattern anyway) in these stats and these plots. Yes, I hope the tool can evolve as needed. Sean.hoyland (talk) 06:48, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, Sean. I figured that if I was going to use a tool to inform my opinion about someone's edits, I had damn well better get it right. That's very helpful. Ravenswing 07:18, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Gaming seems like a difficult thing. I thought I might be able to make a training set and train an ML model to recognize it. I made plots to see whether I could learn how to recognize it before asking a machine to try to do it, and I realized it is quite difficult. Tioaeu8943's case is a good example of the challenges. Sure, there are things consistent with gaming, but if you actually look at the pre-EC revisions, can you label them with words from PGAME like "unconstructive", "trivial", "dummy"? I don't think so. Sean.hoyland (talk) 07:35, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Broken English

One of my grandmothers came to US ca 1925. She made a living, raised her son, married a nice Hungarian fellow. She spoke what was called "broken English." Her English was never adequate, were she alive today, to write an English encyclopedia. My father spoke mostly good English, but he was not fluent and needed to translate everything. I've run into those who insisted they spoke good English, but it was broken and illiterate. I speak beginning German. Not nearly adequate to write an encyclopedia. Ran into one person who insisted English was their mother tongue. If so, they had a medical condition or were just badly educated as their English was mostly unintelligible. YMMV. Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:07, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

That was one of my thoughts - my mother is Dutch and my father has dementia so I'm currently experiencing both sides of the coin as far as language problems go.

There's another user I've been trying to help, they edit UK politics and have far more trouble communicating than Rookie - I think other Wikipedias have been mentioned there, but in that case I think it's not a 'native language' problem... Unfortunately, unless they tell us what going on, all we can do on our side of the screen is guess! Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:16, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your help at the TonySpraks SPI! - The literary leader of the age ✉ 15:30, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Not a problem! I wasn't sure if I would do it at first, but then it became more and more obvious. It was also a little funny to show the evidence that way, I'm surprised I got away with it 😅

Hopefully that'll show a clear behavioural pattern for future incidents, because they certainly don't give up easy.

The other socks were doing the same thing (including being generally creepy to female editors) but there's only so much you can do on mobile and keep your sanity intact, so I limited it to two socks. Blue Sonnet (talk) 15:36, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	You are an example to us all. (Certainly to me, in any case!) I keep seeing your name on the user talk pages of users with a COI, and users who have been blocked for one reason or another. You always communicate clearly and civilly, and assume good faith. Thank you! bonadea contributions talk 19:38, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Aw thank you! I don't know what's going on at the other end of the screen and everyone deserves respect by default. This made me happy ^_^ Blue Sonnet (talk) 19:57, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely seconding this @Bonadea. @Blue-Sonnet please don't let those editors burn you out because you're doing a great service. Star Mississippi 16:06, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! There are so many appeals that I've been grabbing a handful at a time and following them through until they get accepted/declined - it's a little less overwhelming that way 😅 Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:10, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

IMHO

It's one thing to suggest a user non-proficient in English work on Simple Wikipedia. IMHO, it's bad practice to suggest a contributor with behavioral problems should work downstream in simple.wiki. We shouldn't send them our weakest wikipedians. Sometimes we should let the blocked be blocked, and suggest instead they apply for clean start later when they've developed a more mature approach. BusterD (talk) 14:22, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Very good point, that's asking for trouble - I'll delete it Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:26, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Redacted, I didn't think that through properly - thanks for pointing it out! Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:28, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Please take a few minutes to read this lesson from a recent failed mentorship. BusterD (talk) 14:29, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Oh I remember when you first posted that, I really enjoyed reading it!

I was so focused on my view of this editor being well-meaning but misunderstanding that I lost sight of the fact that it doesn't explain why they just can't/won't follow instructions properly. It's way past someone just being a bit confused and is a behavioural issue, like you said.

Part of me knew that Simple wasn't a great idea when I started writing about the one-strike rule, I'll need to learn to listen to that part of my brain a little more often. Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:37, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Making many mistakes and attempting to learn from them is a best practice on en.wiki. Some mistakes are cheap and some are expensive. BusterD (talk) 16:38, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Came across a discussion

I came across the talk page of R2025kt and good job on being so patient and trying to help them out. All we can do is try to help people :) RossEvans19 (talk) 23:34, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I don't want to give up on anyone unless I'm absolutely sure I can't do anything else - I felt like I may have shown my frustration a little at the end, but hopefully that didn't show too much...

I'm going to start work on a few new blocked editors soon, there are so many appeals that I'm working in small "batches", that way I can follow them through to the end 🙂

I'll also follow their pages for a couple of months, to see if they need any extra support after being unblocked - that's nothing worse than working hard on an appeal and then watch it fall apart due to a misunderstanding!

At least in this case, we can all be sure that there's absolutely nothing more that co uld have done. Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

A goat for you!

You are consistently one of the friendliest and most patient editors on the site. Your conduct and drive to help new editors out is the gold standard that everyone should aim for. Thank you for making Wikipedia a welcoming place.

^LaffyTaffer💬(they/she) 21:27, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Seconded. ✨ 11WB (talk) 21:29, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you both! That last one did take some effort, I'll admit 😅 Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:34, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Because he decided to respond under my message I got hit with the barrage of messages - I'm sorry you had to deal with that. RossEvans19 (talk) 22:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Ouch - that must have been fun, I think I got sixteen in the time it took me to write the report! There must be a dozen people who got attacked at some point & I'm not letting that carry on if I can help it.

I knew he wouldn't react well so tried to be as fair as possible at ANI, but he was only going to stop once he got his preferred article published & that's just not going to happen.

TBH I've got a feeling this isn't the end of it, but hopefully I'm wrong... Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:57, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I had an uninvolved comment written out for your AN/I in support of an indef, however @Chaotic Enby took action before I finished gathering the links. For future reference, the specific policy violation among others was WP:BATTLEGROUND. You handled it very well, kudos! 11WB (talk) 23:00, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Ironically I was editing the report to correct some links that weren't diffs & add a wikilink to that page, but CE got to him first! Didn't seem to be any point after that 😁 He's also just lost TPA. Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:04, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Luckily WP:SPI is just over there, if needed. Thank you for always being so kind with new and blocked editors :) 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 23:40, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I've got the pages watchlisted and ready 😉 Thank you! Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Also seconding this, your approach (both at ANI and at unblocks) has always been more than exemplary! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:15, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't know how many more times I can say thank you, but I'll keep trying!

Thank you everyone, this all makes it very much worth the effort ❤️ Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:20, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Burying negativity with positivity is the best thing to do in my opinion! 11WB (talk) 23:28, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

The sad part is that all of this mess is now associated with his book & name on Wikipedia, there's no getting rid of that now. Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:36, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I really wouldn't dwell on this. They made a choice. In six months if the draft has no new edits, it will be deleted. Their talk page will remain as a record of their behaviour on Wikipedia. I doubt this will affect their book, ultimately it doesn't really matter anyway. 11WB (talk) 23:47, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Yep, it's more disappointment at seeing someone shoot themselves in the foot - everyone's lovely comments more than made up for it though!

I should archive at some point but I just don't have the heart to do it yet. It can wait! Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:03, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I keep meaning to send this wikilove your way since I look through unblock reqs for fun sometimes and you show up in most of them. But you (deservedly) keep getting so many barnstars and wikiloves that I didnt want to just reiterate the praise that you got an hour ago. This seemed like a situation where you could use the reminder of how valuable to the community you are. ^LaffyTaffer💬(they/she) 23:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Well I'll never say no to the kitten ones! I did start to second-guess myself for a moment, but I took extra care to be fair in this case and I honestly wouldn't have done anything differently (including this). Thank you! Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I would have participated in the ANI had I been online. I think we gave him every possible chance. Meters (talk) 05:45, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Definitely - I tried to be sympathetic when I first approached since that can de-escalate a lot of feuds. Editors who just got a bit angry but have potential will usually start to calm down when they see an ally, but he'd only be satisfied when he got what he wanted. Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:22, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

AI checker

In this post you reference AI checkers... Where might I find such tools? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 07:09, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I usually check Quillbot, ZeroGPT, GPTZero and one or two others - they're not hugely reliable so I'll use at least three (preferably four) then also check guidance pages such as WP:AISIGNS overall and WP:UNBLOCKLLM for block appeals specifically.

The rest comes from experience, such as the frequent use of "Thank you for your consideration" etc. - that one's a dead giveaway! Blue Sonnet (talk) 08:53, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks for the tips. Keep up the great work! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Glad to help and right back at'cha! Blue Sonnet (talk) 15:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I have an ornament for you!

Hi @Blue-Sonnet! Just thought I'd visit to give you a very special 🪩! Thank you for your incredible work on the project this year and have a wonderful Christmas! Seasons greetings! 🎄✨ 11WB (talk) 08:22, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Aw thank you! Merry Christmas and I hope you have a great New Year! Blue Sonnet (talk) 08:26, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Season's greetings!

“Hi there! It looks like you may have written this unblock request using a large language model; if that is true, please see WP:NICETRY and…” Blue-Sonnet, to consistently help out at CAT:RFU, day after day, takes an incredible amount of kindness and patience, especially in today’s world. I truly mean everything I said in my message; thank you for all your work at unblocks and elsewhere and for what you do helping editors on all ends—from those who unfortunately Don’t Get It to those who are just confused and frustrated. Happy holidays, happy Holiday, and I’m looking forward to seeing you over at CAT:RFU in the new year!

GoldRomean (talk) 19:07, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much, and I'll be glad to keep seeing you too ☺️ Blue Sonnet (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	Here, have another one! I really appreciate your kind and patient demeanour when helping new editors who have got themselves into trouble. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 09:37, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Yay, thank you! I wish my cat would have a kind and patient demeanor, she's currently nipping my shoulder because she wants treatos... Blue Sonnet (talk) 09:46, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Looking back at the past year, you are definitely one of the people I am grateful for. Even small gestures can make a big difference, and yours did. I'm fairly sure that without your advice, I might have ended up site-wide blocked given the rate I was heading. Thank you for your wise guidance and I wish you a happy New Year. 🙂 JaredMcKenzie (talk) 03:45, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

That's lovely to hear, thank you and I hope you have a good year too! Blue Sonnet (talk) 05:12, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy 25th Anniversary of Wikipedia!!

Feel free to read my story at User:Interstellarity/My Story and join in for some Wikipedia-related fun. I hope you like it. Interstellarity (talk) 22:16, 14 January 2026 (UTC)