Other talk pages:   commons · fy:wiki · nl:wiki Archive

User JaffaCity and his "Palestinian Biological Bulletin"Edit

Hi Wutsje, I came across your edits removing the linkspam which user JaffaCity did place in many different language versions concerning his so-called scientific journal. We are currently discussing his activities in the german as well as the english wp, maybe this interests you. It seems that basically all activities of this user, including the research and publication, are fake. Greetings, Nico B. -- 18:31, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nico B., thanks for the notification, this certainly interests me. Their edits didn't look good at the time, but I had no idea the situation was this bad. I'm sure de:wiki and en:wiki will deal with this swiftly. Regards, Wutsje (talk) 14:08, 15 June 2020 (UTC)


I noticed a while ago there was an edit war about the spelling of Ketikoti. I really don't have enough knowledge in the topic to take a stance, but a I noticed that the user involved has once again been unilaterally changing the spelling and redirects on the English and other language Wikis, as well as on Commons. I thought I should let you know. Francoisdjvr (talk) 10:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

[Sorry for the slow response, I was afk for a week]   Hi Francoisdjvr, thanks for the notification. These edits were done by a long term structural pov pusher and sock puppeteer who has been blocked on nl:wiki for quite a while now (see here and here). I've corrected their edits once more (which they, rather sanctimoniously, only implemented on wikis where I am not a sysop): according to reliable sources, Ketikoti is the correct spelling of the name of this event, see here. Thanks again and regards, Wutsje (talk) 12:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Crosswiki spamEdit


I was wondering about this edit. While I do recognize that it is per definition cross wiki spam, is there anything actually wrong with it? Is the information false? Is the sources bad or unreliable? It shouldn't be removed just for the sake of it if the information is correct. While I do trust your assessment I would like to know what exactly is wrong with it. Thanks. /EstrellaSuecia (talk) 02:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi EstrellaSuecia, I take it GT'ing this edit wasn't helpful, my apologies. Here is an explanation in English. In my eyes, spamming a so called alternative for hydrochloroquine repeatedly cross wiki on the base of "sources" like this press release (which links to this site) or pages on sites like this one, this one and this one, does not add meaningful content to any article about (hydro)chloroquine in any language, as these "sources" obviously do not qualify as reliable. The only source mentioned in that edit with a short-lived whiff of reliability is the twice linked article on PubMed (link), but that dates from 2012 and even if the stuff indeed did show some In vitro antimicrobial and anticancer potential [...] against oral pathogens and oral cancer cell lines, in vitro activity alone definitely does not mean it is an effective alternative medicine or "health product". If that were to be true, you'd expect many more and more recent clinically relevant publications. Readers, especially those seeking medical information, should certainly not be misled about this. Regards, Wutsje (talk) 03:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)