User talk:Asamboi

I've made 20,000+ edits since 2003. Comment accordingly.

Discussion at WP:ANI in which you are involved

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Content dispute at Shubhanshu Shukla involving numerous accounts/IPs and edit-war. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 15:05, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bare URLs as citations

Please do not use bare URLs as citations, as at Comac C909. They are unhelpful to readers and are subject to link rot. Please use templates like Template:Cite web instead. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 05:27, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two minutes after you wasted your time complaining, Citationbot formatted the bare URL. Which is why I leave this kind of thing to automation when using sources the bots handle fine. Asamboi (talk) 07:28, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the edit summary, it was fixed because I told Citation Bot to run - there is no automated system that automatically fixes bare URLs, it requires another editor to notice them and poke a bot.

And please don't be so rude… "wasting your time complaining" - I left a civil note about a concern, so please be civil in return. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 14:07, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Came here to say this too. I feel like we’ve had a good working relationship the last couple of weeks, so I hope you’ll take this in the spirit of collaboration that I intend it. While Wikipedia does have automated systems to fill out bare references, they’re not as good as a human editor like you or I could be. I’d highly recommend using a semi automated tool like ProveIt if you’re a source editor, or using the built in automated reference tool if you use VisualEditor. RickyCourtney (talk) 14:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I edit a lot on mobile where tool access is limited. I do hit up ReFill if I'm adding many sources, but at the end of the day this is (IMHO) a deficiency in MediaWiki. Asamboi (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Try using the visual editor. Its automated reference generator is really very good. RickyCourtney (talk) 20:16, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Visual Editor isn’t available on mobile. You do have to manually create the citation… however, in my opinion it isn’t really that difficult to quickly type out {{cite web |url=example.com |title=This is a citation |author=Joe Bloggs |date=1 April 2025 |access-date=15 July 2025}}.

There is always a tool like Citr which could be used - access using a mobile browser, and copy the generated named reference into the article source. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 20:47, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Visual Editor is very much available on mobile. RickyCourtney (talk) 21:06, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you’re using a mobile browser yes - I’m assuming they mean they use the app, and unless I’m missing something I can’t find the visual editor in the app. Personally I just use a browser in desktop mode… Danners430 _{tweaks made} 22:04, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SPI section

Special:Diff/1300019036: You should move the comment to "Comments by other users" section. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 22:02, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Using rollback like this requires an edit summary, see point six at WP:ROLLBACKUSE. Thank you. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 21:18, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting content deletion by IPs falls under point one. As you can see from the page's history, the article has an extensive track record of edit warring. Asamboi (talk) 22:58, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP editors should get the same treatment as other editors, and have the same good faith assumptions made about their editing. Point one is for "obvious vandalism", that was not obvious vandalism, they even provided rationale in their edit summary. I'm very familiar with the article's history. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 23:33, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Sorry for my ignorance in considering you as Assamese. Now I get it what is Asam boi all thanks to you. Manav2311 (talk) 10:34, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Cahill Press Release

Hey! Where does it say that the Press Release was published by the subject or his team? Everyone can pay for these dubious press release and make it look like something official. Would be nice if you could back up your editing as it seems very misleading and false. 79.255.14.198 (talk) 14:33, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn't claim Josh published it, it just says the PR was published by an agency. The contents of the PR are pretty much just a translation of the airliners.de interview though. Asamboi (talk) 22:07, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is this relevant though and why are you refusing to add reliable sources of the Australian and Focus which refer to him as Melbourne born and Australian, is there a reason? 79.255.14.198 (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

→ Talk:Josh Cahill. Asamboi (talk) 09:49, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop judging a book by its cover

If you're going to revert an edit with a mix of positive and negative parts, you need to carefully check that you remove only the illegitimate content and that you're keeping or building on any legitimate content. I've undone your revert except that I kept the unrelated reference removed. I hope you do realize that this behavior is not specific to Wikipedia and that you have done the same thing on Wikivoyage as well. You holding admin rights on Wikivoyage doesn't convince me either. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) _{Tamil speakers: Contribute here} 23:39, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) _{Tamil speakers: Contribute here} 00:19, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for cross-wiki harassment. Asamboi (talk) 23:37, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help for discussing AfD of Feraliminal Lycanthropizer (Woodard related)

Hi, I nominated the article Feraliminal Lycanthropizer for deletion. As you have taken part in the discussion around the David Woodard exploits, I thought you might provide insights in that discussion as well. Regards, 1904.CC (talk) 07:30, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Striking

Your striking here is frivolous. That RfC has nothing to do with any military, let alone Indian military history (which predates even the birth of this person). Even if your argument is accepted, then still, striking is carried out only when the comment was made while evading a ban. Koshuri Sultan is not doing that. Now go and read WP:TBAN to understand how it works. Orientls (talk) 14:27, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies of Indian Air Force personnel fall within the topic ban of "Indian military history, broadly construed". Asamboi (talk) 20:47, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are confusing "Indian military history" with "Indian military". This person's article does not fall under "Indian military history". Perhaps it will in 2040, but not right now. Orientls (talk) 10:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 60 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:24, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Asamboi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

In an AN discussion, administrator Daniel Case explicitly asked me, and I quote, I would really like to see Asamboi elaborate on the concerns raised here, where the concern was sockpuppetry in the RFC. I responded with two SPI-confirmed sockpuppets and a link to an inconclusive SPI I had initiated earlier.

This is my first block in 22 years of editing Wikipedia. Can you please clarify what part of my response constitutes a personal attack, and how should I have responded to this direct question?

Also @Daniel Case: in case I somehow misunderstood what you were asking for. Asamboi (talk) 21:22, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Declining this unblock request as moot since the block expired before any admin could review it. I'm sorry nobody accepted or declined this request before that happened. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:37, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You understood correcttly; don’t worry. But it seems from the comments below there was another side to the story, and thus it appears to me you have been properly blocked. Daniel Case (talk) 06:50, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm still genuinely not getting it. You asked to me elaborate on my concerns of sockpuppetry, I did so by linking to two confirmed socks & and an inconclusive SPI. How else should I have answered the question? Asamboi (talk) 09:54, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The way you did. My request has nothing to do with why you got blocked beyond the way you choose to phrase your response. Daniel Case (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This SPI was not "inconclusive" but conclusively established that no sockpuppetry was happening.

You were not just clarifying your "concerns" on this message, but you were endorsing your SPI and refuted allegations by saying "Some other users in the debate are also IMHO extremely likely to be sock/meatpuppets and you're invited to draw your own conclusions," despite negative results. It is upsetting that you still don't understand how you were violating WP:NPA. THEZDRX _{(User) |}_(Contact) 04:11, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, an SPI, with or without Checkuser being used, can never “conclusively establish” that no sockpuppetry is occurring. It can just suggest there’s no reasonable basis to believe that there is. A persistently inventive and knowledgeable user could find a number of ways to make it appear they are, in fact, two or three different people, far more than any means we could test for. For that reason we do not allow the use of Checkuser to “prove innocence”, unlike some other Wikipedias. Daniel Case (talk) 07:00, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I accept that the SPI did not identify any particular users as being current sockmasters, and it was not my intention to imply that they are. However, I stand by the evidence of unusual editing I provided in the SPI, which, to quote the endorsing clerk, is such a bizarre thing to edit war over, so obviously undue in a single-paragraph biography lead, that I'm really struggling to imagine a situation in which at least three unrelated people would try to force it in. Asamboi (talk) 12:13, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Tusker (Vanuatu beer)

On 7 September 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tusker (Vanuatu beer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Vanuatu beer Tusker is named after the tusks of a pig, a traditional symbol of wealth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tusker (Vanuatu beer). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tusker (Vanuatu beer)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Gulhifalhu

On 24 September 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gulhifalhu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Gulhifalhu, previously uninhabitable, is now described by the Maldives Independent as "engineered for urban disaster"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gulhifalhu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gulhifalhu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 14,076 views (1,173.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2025 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Emirates SkyCargo Flight 9788

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Emirates SkyCargo Flight 9788. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. XYZ1233212 (talk) 09:19, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Prince Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conglomerate. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]