Open main menu



Hello, TonyBallioni. It has come to my attention that I have been checkusered by you, and that you think Rivselis is the same person as me. It is not. I have heard the checkuser tool is not very accurate. In this case I think it has given a bad result. I understand that anyone using checkuser must provide a case-specific policy-based justification. Can you point me to the discussion where you explained your reasons for the checkuser? Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 18:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

I have not run a CheckUser on your account. A check was performed by a CheckUser on another project who informed me that the technical data and behaviour matched. I compared with the data available on and determined that this was likely true. I do not have access to the rationale behind what led to the check on your account by a CU. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
What do you mean by "the data available on enwiki"? There is absolutely no data on enwiki about me going back at least four years. If you didn't checkuser me, who did? If you are just following orders, who has instructed you to do this? And don't you think an email response would be a more appropriate venue for a discussion of this sort? —Neotarf (talk) 19:46, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
If you wish to discuss this further, you should contact the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee, the Ombudsman commission, or Trust and Safety. I have forwarded the email you sent me to the ArbCom and Trust and Safety. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:10, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for responding here. I find it concerning there are non-transparent surveillance files being collected about me by unnamed persons, on unnamed projects, for unnamed reasons. I also find it concerning that an email I sent with the expectation that it would be kept private has not only been revealed to have been sent here on a talk page but has also been forwarded without my permission to individuals who have published Personally Identifying Information (PII) about me in seeming contravention of the Privacy Policy. —Neotarf (talk) 20:53, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I won’t be responding further. I’ve told you how to proceed. Meta does not exist to further disputes, and continuing to use it for that purpose after you’ve been told how to move forward can result in you being blocked here by a local meta sysop. Please address any future concerns to the groups I have listed above. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:06, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Hey Tony. Neotarf has a history of using Meta to wage a war against the Great Injustices done unto them. FWIW, you've took the right tack here. If anything, I'd have disengaged sooner! AGK ■ 13:42, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Sana'ani Arabic

Hi I know you from English Wikipedia. I was surprised when I saw your comment there. I want to tell you that creating another WikiProject for Sana'ani speakers is not going to "divide Arabs" or "divide Arab contributors". It's actually the opposite. It's gonna increase the the amount of contributors in the Arab world. You see many editors (me for example) fail to communicate with other editors while editing in Arabic wikipedia. I also find it very hard to write in Arabic wikipedia. I am a native Arabic speaker but you can see I have few edits there. Why?? Because I always get reverted. I can edit in English Wikipedia better than in an Modern standard Arabic Wikipedia.. just wanted to tell you that. Best regards.--SharabSalam (talk) 20:38, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi SharabSalam, thank you for coming here. As I said on that page, I'm a big advocate for the importance of the Arabic Wikipedia in the global Wikimedia movement, and I do my best to help it behind the scenes when I can (mostly through CheckUser, but in some other ways as well). My concerns with this are that it'd be similar to the issues with the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia, which if you are not familiar with is a very controversial, and sometimes emotional, topic among many members of that community. The concerns that we'd have another failed project dividing a vibrant, growing, and important part of the Wikimedia movement are what concern me. That, and from a larger perspective, I'm not sure we'd have the user base to sustain it, so it very well could become just a project dominated by spambots that would add more of a burden to the Small wiki monitoring team. I'm not really sure what the best way to address your (valid) concerns there, but it may be worth it talking to some of the community members from who have commented on that proposal for their thoughts. Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. I do appreciate them :) TonyBallioni (talk) 20:47, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Meta:Requests for translation adminship/DannyS712

Just a courtesy note that I mentioned you at this M:RFA (but forgot to ping you). Feel free to delete this section after reading. Best, AGK ■ 13:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks as always for being so courteous, AGK. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:52, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

User:Reuben Heydenrych

User:Acalamari may not assist soon, so may I ask you: I created the above commons account for a user who wants to upload botanical images. But I forgot to go through the usual create account procedure. So his account/user page is currently not linked to his email or any password. Is it possible to delete the above commons page so that I can recreate it? Or what do you suggest? JMK (talk) 12:05, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

The user has apparently resolved the problem, so no further action is necessary. JMK (talk) 14:35, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "TonyBallioni".