User talk:Just Step Sideways

I used to be called Beeblebrox. I'm fine with it if anyone still calls me that, or Beebs, or whatever.

tracks of previous discussions

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 Archive 39 Archive 40 Archive 41 Archive 42 Archive 43 Archive 44 Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48 Archive 49 Archive 50

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 08:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

XFD backlog

V	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Total
CfD	0	0	0	7	7
TfD	0	0	0	5	5
MfD	0	0	3	0	3
FfD	0	0	0	0	0
RfD	0	0	0	57	57
AfD	0	0	0	0	0

−

I'm not sure if it should have been closed at all, it doesn't seem like there was much of a conclusion to it (and yes sure, you're an admin, but it didn't read like you were advising them as an admin, but instead summarizing it - but maybe that's just me), but if you're going to close it you should at least mention that the OP was page blocked because of their hostile edit summaries? – 2804:F1...EA:6CE2 (talk) 04:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming we're talking about this, that seems like a sperate issue from their .... unlikely accusations. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 21:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, fine. I just had both forgotten that you were an admin (before editing my message to acknowledge you are) and read it as if it was a summarization closure - from that point of view it seemed insufficient to just give advice that the discussion (that ended days before) didn't give and not mention the boomerang block. Sorry. – 2804:F1...92:375B (talk) 05:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

• Asilvering
• Significa liberdade

• Good Olfactory
• Hesperian
• I JethroBT
• TommyBoy
• Woody

CheckUser changes

• Barkeep49
• Izno

• Doug Weller
• Spicy

Guideline and policy news

• Administrator elections are a proposed new process for selecting administrators, offering an alternative to requests for adminship (RfA). The first trial election will take place in October 2024, with candidate sign-up from October 8 to 14, a discussion phase from October 22 to 24, and SecurePoll voting from October 25 to 31. For questions or to help out, please visit the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections.
• Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether there is a consensus to have an administrator recall process.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Historical elections has been closed.
• An arbitration case regarding Backlash to diversity and inclusion has been opened.
• Editors are invited to nominate themselves to serve on the 2024 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission until 23:59 October 8, 2024 (UTC).

Miscellaneous

• If you are interested in stopping spammers, please put MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist on your watchlist, and help out when you can.

---

I need 2 pages Dalit Dastak and National Dastak.I found your name in the list of Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles hence requesting you. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Now at User:Pharaoh of the Wizards/Dalit Dastak and User:Pharaoh of the Wizards/National Dastak. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your prompt response.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Fuad Shukr handout.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I wrote yesterday a new article "Forced Islamization of the Samaritans", i find out today that it qas deleted completely, i don't understand why. Can you explain it to me please? Enhazaam (talk) 06:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @Enhazaam: Did you check the deletion log? There are some blue links in the entry: try them. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain the connection to the Israel-Arab conflict? Enhazaam (talk) 10:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Enhazaam:, that kind of article would take an experienced editor a lot of work just to maintain neutrality and faithful adherence to reliable sources. You may have achieved that; I can't see what you wrote. But unfortunately it does not matter because topics associated with the Israel-Arab conflict have been placed under restrictions by the arbitration committee as a result of previous disruption. The link in the log takes you to the relevant page—WP:CT/A-I (or, 'Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict'). The restriction that applied to you, unfortunately, is that only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area. You are not, so you cannot. SerialNumber54129 11:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I fail to see how the Samaritans have anything to do with the Israeli-Arab conflict. They are ethno-religious people who have been persecuted for centuries. I simply wrote an article about the known fact, that they were persecuted and forced into Islam following the Levant being conquered by the Arabs.

The Israeli-Arab conflict is not an issue related to this part of history. Enhazaam (talk) 12:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, neither I nor the person who nominated the article for deletion have accused you of acting with bad faith or malice. However, the defined scope of this contentious topic designation instructs users that it is to be broadly interpreted, and in light of that I think it is a reasonable position that the forced Islamization of a group of Hebrew people dwelling within the borders of historical Israel is subject to the WP:CTOP rules placed by the Arbitration Committee. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for your clarification on the subject. Enhazaam (talk) 11:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I'm sorry to open this again. It's just I put a lot of work into the article... Will I be able to republish the article at some point? When will that be possible? I just want to be sure, so that I don't work for nothing... Thank you Just Step Sideways in advance. Enhazaam (talk) 11:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hypothetically you can re-create it as soon as your account is extended-confirmed. However I would also note that shortly before it was deleted it was tagged for WP:NPOV issues as well. My suggestion would be that when the time comes, I could undelte it and draftify it for you so that could be worked out first. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would be very kind of you. Thank you! Enhazaam (talk) 14:33, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• For the benefit of any other confused British or Irish stumbling on this topic - it was about the Samaritans, not The Samaritans. Cabayi (talk) 11:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JSS,

I see you are becoming active in closing AFDs. If a discussion just has a deletion nomination and one editor arguing for Deletion, our regular closers close these discussions as "Soft Deletions" per WP:NOQUORUM. This is due to the low participation in the discussion and this closure allows for restoration of the article at a later time should an editor wish to work on the article and improve it. This doesn't happen with a straight Deletion closure. Our biggest problem in AFDLand these days is low participation in most discussions and a Soft Deletion acknowledges that fact.

If you use XFDcloser, which I hope you do, you'll notice that you can check a box to make the deletion a Soft Delete. Please consider doing this in the future if you agree with the policy I linked to. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been using it when there seems to be a compelling reason to do so. It is a shame that so many AFDs seem to either attract either way too many comments or almost none at all. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and realizing the utility of XFD closer is exactly what led to me getting active in this again. It's so easy now. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag (2nd nomination) was never going to be a walk in the park. The creating editor (autobiographer) deserved a consensus, and I believe that she now has one. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was bored and thought "I'll close some AFDs" and of course that was the last one open for the day because nobody wanted to deal with it. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 17:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JSS,

Unfortunately, this article isn't eligible for Soft Deletion as it either was PROD'd in 2019. Soft Deletions are like PRODs, articles are only eligible for a Soft Deletion if a) they haven't been PROD'd or to AFD before and b) there are no Keep votes. It's important to review the article page history. So, I think this AFD will have to be closed as a straight Delete. I hope my earlier message wasn't confusing.

Thank you for helping out at AFDLand, we can always use a few more discussion closers! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well dammit, I have to admit I did not check the talk page before choosing that option. That's entirely on me. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping me get Twinkle on my account. Apologies again for the ANI post. Thanks, TeaLoverHistoryGuy (talk) 23:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime, it's a great tool that I've been using for a very long time. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 01:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Wikipediocracy-related conduct and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Sincerely, Dilettante 19:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say that I agree with you after seeing your comment, I was focused on the words themselves and not the message itself. 331dot (talk) 20:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I figured it was something like that, and I wouldn't block for "tit" on its own either. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]