User talk:Whaledad

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Afrikaans | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | corsu | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | emiliàn e rumagnòl | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | kar | kurdî | Limburgs | lietuvių | Baso Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | مازِرونی | Napulitano | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | پښتو | Runa Simi | română | русский | sicilianu | سنڌي | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ  | українська | اردو | oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Hello Whaledad, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). If you would like, feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Happy editing! Ottava Rima (talk) 02:46, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


A better way to reach me is Overleg.

Superprotect letter update[edit]

Hi Whaledad,

Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.

Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.

I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.

Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.

Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.

Thank you for your engagement on this issue, and please stay in touch. -Pete F (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Global user page migration[edit]

Hello Whaledad. Synchbot deleted your local user pages on all wikis as requested. You can see the full log on your archive page. :) —Pathoschild 03:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

The bot also updated your talk pages on all wikis (see full log). —Pathoschild 07:39, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey[edit]


You’re getting this message because you participated in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey and we want to make sure you don't miss it this year – or at least can make the conscious choice to ignore if it you want to. The 2015 survey decided what the Community Tech team should work on during 2016. It was also the focus of Wikimedia hackathons and work by other developers. You can see the status of wishes from the 2015 wishlist at 2015 Community Wishlist Survey/Results.

The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey is now open for wishes. You can create proposals until November 20. You will be able to vote on which wishes you think are best or most important between November 28 and December 12. /Johan (WMF) (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)


Did you even look at my global userpage (which would have been transcluded on nl.wikiquote)? I’m a sysop on who is one of the most active users in fighting spam. I’m also a global renamer, and an OTRS member. If you can’t bother to look at a userpage before making a preventative spam block on a user with no edits to a project you have no business having advanced permissions on any project, and I encourage you to resign as a sysop and bureaucrat. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:23, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

I endorse this resignation request, and will pursue a forcible desysop if you do not voluntarily resign. This behaviour gives all WMF projects a very bad reputation. Nick (talk) 15:27, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Tony, I sincerely apologize for this unjust block. As soon as I became aware, I have removed the block. We get a large number of spammer accounts through NL Quote and I try to pre-emptively block those. As I'm traveling this week, I have not given each of those accounts the total global check that I usually do. That's a mistake, from which I have learned. Whaledad (talk) 16:07, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

It’s ridiculous. You blocked me with talk page access and email access disabled. If this weren’t a small project with virtually no active admins you’d be desysoped in a heart beat. You also appear to be blocking accounts with no global edits, also with talk page access and email disabled. If I weren’t a user who was active in the global community and knew that stewards would step in if needed, I’d basically be blocked on a project with no avenue of appeal. Do the right thing and hand in your tools. This behavior is below what we expect of sysops on any project and you shouldn’t keep the tools simply because the only one person noticed your groundless blocks. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:18, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
It is good that you apologized - But Tony's very right here. SQLQuery me! 17:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC)


RadiX 02:28, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I know what this is related to - Natuur12 RonnieV Vinvlugt wthjmkuiper Mvdleeuw Woudloper- you guys gave this clown CHECKUSER? That's an extremely bad idea. Just look ONE TOPIC ABOVE. Wow. SQLQuery me! 02:51, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
  • This is beyond ridiculous. This user has issues dating back YEARS on nl.wikiquote and has set up a fiefdom there where he rules by arbitrary decision and is basically the sole admin, refuses any attempt at actual accountability, and blocks user at random without even bothering to check their user page. This user has no business having any advanced rights on any project, and if need be I will esculate this to the WMF and seek his removal as a CheckUser as an office action. He literally blocked me on nl.wikiquote for preforming a global rename. This defies all explanation. Whaledad, if you have any decency, you will resign this and your other rights. You simply cannot be trusted. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:58, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
I also like to notify as most contributing ex-user at nl.wikiquote, that those issues at wikiquote have (in my opinion) never been dealt with. In my opinion he overloaded the system with absolute copy-vio alligations six years ago, and did a similar thing six moths ago at the English Wikiquote. I have been trying to find an entrance to get attention for this (in my opinion) misconduct (see for example here at, June 2014) but ran into the other administrator at that assisted him over the years. People just didn't seem to care that they had turned the Dutch Wikiquote into a dead valley.
Now there is more to it, see for example here, and I can give more links. If Whaledad doesn't voluntarily resigns, I would very much appreciate if an investigation would be started here to investigate my and other complains of alleged misconduct. -- Mdd (talk) 09:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
The link hereabove to RfC is obsolete. See here for the subsequent developments. De Wikischim (talk) 08:39, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
@Mdd: - The issue you're referring to is not something of 3 months ago, but almost 2 years now (though the aftermath lasted until last year, see the new link I've given). De Wikischim (talk) 11:39, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The Dutch Arbcom did indeed, without doubt, decide to make Whaledad a checkuser on the Dutch Wikipedia. We know Whaledad to be a constructive and integer contributor to that project.
The way TonyBallioni reacted on a simple mistake by Whaledad was way out of tune for anyone, and certainly for someone who seems to be having some functions (any function at all!) within the Wikimedia-family. Assume good faith, no personal attacks and common decency are definitely not describing the reactions from TonyBallioni.
Whaledad has repaired his mistake, no other harm was done. TonyBallioni had never contributed to and probably is not going to do so, as he lacks knowledge of the Dutch language. TonyBallioni knows his way around at, so he managed to out his (uncomfortable) feeling. That should do for anyone who is willing to contribute to Wikimedia, only people baring (personal) grudges could even insist to continu arguing about this.
I think it is time to get this case closed and have Whaledad do his work as a checkuser on the Dutch Wikipedia, as TonyBallioni should get to his jobs around Wikipedia and I to mine, at least after my holidays. Sincerely, RonnieV (talk) 22:30, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
I figured you would double down on your mistake. SQLQuery me! 00:50, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
RonnieV, I will be submitting a formal complaint to your ArbCom about this, which will include among other things that your ArbCom broke a promise to the local CUs to consult them, and that many of them object to this appointment as well. I look forward to constructive dialogue with you. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:53, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, attack the victim. Looking at what Mdd shows - this is not the first issue with this editor. AGF isn't a suicide pact. A careless admin on a seperate project that can't tell the difference between a renamer performing a rename, and a spambot shouldn't be an admin - much less a CU! SQLQuery me! 01:00, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Some reserves about this CU appointment should be made at least. In the past, Whaledad has made some very big slips in his functioning as a sysop on Wikiquote-nl. On that point, I can do nothing but agree with TonyBallioni and Mdd. De Wikischim (talk) 08:26, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Some months ago, Whaledad made a new very serious mistake as a sysop by giving user:LIVE NIEUWS a permanent ban on Wikiquote-nl. Without the slightest piece of evidence, he assumed Livenws to be a sock puppet (of my account) ([1]). I really hope such blunders won't occur again if he's a CU. De Wikischim (talk) 14:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

As SQL refers to "what Mdd shows", I feel I have to provide some background:

  • Mdd was a problematic user on NL:WP, which ultimate lead to an Arbcom case which resulted in an Arbcom measure to reign him in (which after a few mishaps was successful - basically by Mdd leaving NL:WP)
  • These issues predated any problems on NL:WQ and I was not involved in any of these issues
  • After leaving NL:WP Mdd went to NL:WQ and "invented" the creation of encyclopedic pages on WQ using quotes (which included quotes from actual, copyrighted encyclopedias. This was both outside of the scope of N::WQ and a violated of the Dutch "citaatrecht" (a much more limited legal principle than "fair use"). Several NL:WQ users at the time (including me) either improved those pages or nominated those pages for deletion, which was in most case done by one of the sysops (I wasn't one of them at the time). Mdd resisted heavily, in the same style that had gotten him into trouble at NL:WP. He posted requests to the sysops that all other users be blocked and all deletions reverted.
  • When this didn't happen, he left and went to EN:WQ. After some similar page creations there, he ultimately has done a lot of good work there, and is a sysop there.
  • Really flabbergasting is Mdd's claim that I have placed disrupting VfD requests on EN:WQ. I found a series of pages (about 100) that were created by very literally copying (about one-third to one-half) of a quote collection book. This is a flagrant violation of all fair-use rules and EN:WQ guidelines. After contacting the page creator and try to make him see the error of his ways, he just turn to whataboutism and refused to comply. After this I created VfDs for about 90 of those articles. Obviously the creator voted "keep", but others either voted "delete" or asked for the pages to be brought into compliance. Just days before Mdd actually wrote the words above, HE was the sysop who completed the requests. For a small number of them he corrected the lead and added quotes, which brought them somewhat into compliance, but most of them were ... DELETED by Mdd!

As for TonyBallioni: Yes, blocking him was a stupid mistake, which I apologized for and tried to explain to him. But somehow he has made it his life's goal to get me thrown out of every official position at Wikimedia. TonyBallioni must be so happy that he never makes any mistake. Although his actions pertaining to the Steward Elections are far from faultless. Whaledad (talk) 22:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

What a Dutch treat, that first sentence alone: Years of dedication to the Dutch Wikipedia reduced to a simple simple truth: Mdd was a problematic user on NL:WP. This is your opinion, yet you present it as an absolute fact. This is what I call an absolute claim, where instead you could have said: In my opinion Mdd was a problematic user, or relate it it was the opinion of... This first sentence alone...!? I think these kind of absolute claims are stigmatizing, and should be avoided.
By claiming you "overloaded the system with absolute copy-vio alligations," I meant two thing. First, you might have found the 100 pages, but there was already one VfD going on, undetermined because of the complexity of the matter. Instead of waiting how this would end, you first started 100 proposed deletions requests, dismissed every counterargument, brought up another 100 VfD's, found a loyal sympathizer, and even made it an issue at the next election...!?
The second thing is the absolute copyright claim. The initial first VfD suggested a possible copyright violation, while you promoted it to a flagrant violation of collection copyright AND of the copyright, and now you speak of flagrant violation of all fair-use rules and EN:WQ guidelines. At Wikiquote I dismissed the initial relative copyright violation claim with the comment in the initial VfD, proposed a cause of action, and I took the nominator's public thanks for his approval. I eventually closed these cases after a long offline talk with the page creator, and I am grateful that he continues to contribute to Wikiquote.
If you have any problem with that, please bring that up locally. I thank TonyBallioni and SQL for their ongoing effort. -- Mdd (talk) 09:08, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
Mdd contributions to Wikimedia projects 2004-2018
Beside the above explanation about my problems with Whaledad's performance, I would like to add a few words on my own behalf. In the 53 years of my life, I have been in the news for about 45 years for performances is several fields from local to national and international sources. In the past 14 years I contributed about 10 years full time to Wikipedia divided over the Dutch and English Wikipedia and Wikiquote, and Commons (see illustration). Just for the record, I imported a biographical article about me six weeks ago into the Dutch Wikipedia, which was removed yesterday just after I made the above comment. I will further comment about that locally.
Now back in 2012, I took a leap of absence for half a year after a series of five Arbcom cases. In the first I defend De Wikischim, in the second was against me, the third I tried to discuss enduring cooperation, in the forth I build a case against Sir Statler, and the fifth was against the ongoing conflict between two alleged parties. In that fifth case the Dutch Arbcom came up with the, in my opinion flabbergasting conclusion, that I was a problematic user on NL:WP. Their first evaluation half a year later contradicted itself, and the next evaluation after two years just forgot about me. I will comment about that locally.
Before the Arbcom come up with their verdict about me, Whaledad, Sir Statler and some other users had gone over to Wikiquote and eventually took over. Interesting is, that Whaledad had started there, maybe half a year earlier, concerned with the lack of sources in the work of the second largest contributor at that time. In that time, just as recently at Wikiquote.en, I admit he had some good reasons for concern. I value his work as a critic, but in my opinion his administration at Wikiquote was not fair and counterproductive. I will also further comment about that locally. -- Mdd (talk) 08:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Just for the sake of clarity: "Sir Statler" is the former name of user:Graaf Statler, who has been globally banned here on Meta since June 2016. De Wikischim (talk) 10:03, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
My actions at the steward elections were as a relatively new participant to meta, were taken with what appeared to be consensus at the time and was in line with practice I was familiar with on my home project, and the election committee eventually removed the comments themselves. You are blocking users at random, and you only got caught because an nl.wikipedia arbitrator discovered that you had blocked a global renamer and en.wp sysop. The issues there are huge. Your apology is accepted, but there has been no indication you actually get the issues in play as to why it was wrong. This is about your actions as a member of the global Wikimedia movement, not mine.

Look, you have no business being a CheckUser. You simply don’t have the trust needed to be a CheckUser on a WMF website. You can see how controversial it is: do the right thing and step down. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:32, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

More deflecting by attacking the victim here. I guess that's one way to do it. SQLQuery me! 00:51, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

In the period 2012-2017, I was an active contributor to Wikiquote-nl (before being shunted off). Therefore I now have the right to take part in a discussion about possible changes in the policy of that local project (the discussion itself has been initiated here) byMdd). Additionally, this morning, Mdd submitted a request to unblock my account on Wikiquote-nl, [2]. Could perhaps a steward from here grant this request? De Wikischim (talk) 09:38, 4 July 2018 (UTC) The discussion itself is really necessary. See this new comment by FotoDutch (translation: the Dutch version of Wikiquote does not offer a perspective to work, if just one single person can do whatever they want without being corrected by anyone else). I fully agree with this comment, as I believe it accounts for the fact that the whole project has become lame since 2016. De Wikischim (talk) 10:22, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

For clarities sake, both Mdd and De Wikischim have shown very disruptive behavior on the Dutch Wikipedia and are both subject to Arbcom rulings limiting their actions. Their remarks here should therefore be read with caution. BoH (talk) 12:40, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

The issue here − Whaledad's recent appointment as a CU − has nothing to do at all with ongoing and past issues between some specific users on the Dutch Wikipedia (in which Whaledad was not even involved, his involvement concerns Wikiquote, which is a different Wikimedia project). I suppose the stewards here will not have themselved deluded by such kind of red herrings. De Wikischim (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

REDIRECT at the top[edit]

REDIRECT tag to other wiki does not work. You'll want to use {{interwiki redirect}}. — regards, Revi 09:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)