User talk:LateNightCoffee

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 15 days are automatically archived 0 or more at a time by if there are more than 2.

"Lone wolf (disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Lone wolf (disambiguation) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 20 § There's no need to redirect from a disambiguation like this. People don't tend to stumble into NAME (disambiguation), usually they stumble into NAME and need help navigating until a consensus is reached.

^SMason_Garrison 21:47, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here even: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 20#Lone wolf (disambiguation). CNC (talk) 07:08, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@CommunityNotesContributor, thank you for the correct discussion link. Late Night Coffee (talk) 07:25, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LNC, I'm honoured to hear from you. It seems other editors have not been so lucky. Were you going to engage in the discussion about your conduct? Regards, CNC (talk) 07:30, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@CommunityNotesContributor, yes, but I need to read it first. This got escalated while I was away, before I had time to respond to the original messages. Late Night Coffee (talk) 08:00, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing it! ^SMason_Garrison 12:12, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison, I have told you about 4 times that your links in these are wrong. It's not difficult to get right. Your own time spent giving feedback, to me and others, would be more productive if you gave a smaller number of shorter and more carefully written messages.

I'm very frustrated that you keep telling everyone that I should be blocked based on WP:CIR, and that you spent "so much time" explaining, when so many of the messages you wrote contained broken links, or the wrong links, or completely irrelevant auto-generated text, etc.

You wouldn't need to spend so much time sending so many messages if you put a little bit more time into making sure your first message was clear and accurate. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 07:21, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How is this at all relevant to the redirect for discussion? Again, I recommend your focus on the conduct issues being raised about you.^SMason_Garrison 12:18, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent church attack category requests

Many created the category but had technical failures in adding the articles and/or categories to the recently created cats. Please handle this manually 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 12:05, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The other requests (Islamic philosophers) worked well. I suspect the difference to be the leading date, which confused the automated system 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 12:09, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Heya, FYI LNC is currently blocked from categories and templates so can't do this themselves Blue-Sonnet 13:53, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue-Sonnet Thank you. To clarify, both for me and for them, are they allowed to address manually the technical failure of the redirect creation script, or would that break the terms of their block? 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 14:59, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I hope I haven't caused you any trouble. I'm not really sure what I am allowed to do in this situation. @Blue-Sonnet replied here after I asked them for advice. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 15:56, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if I'm completely forbidden from editing the category section of pages. I'm able to edit pages, so I could complete this, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to. I am allowed to use {{edit partially-blocked}} so the category request page seemed like the right place to request categories. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 16:06, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of WP:AFC/C seems to me to be to be valid, because you make a request and pass control to a reviewer.

The issue is that the script hit a gremlin and did not do all it might have done. @Voorts: as blocking admin are you able to clarify what LNC may do in this instance, please. I do not want to encourage them by accident to do something that will cause them problems. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 16:21, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I could use {{edit partially-blocked}} on each page. Somebody suggested that as a way to request changes to the categories on pages as well as changes in category space, but I worry that doing it that way creates a lot of work for other people?

Sorry again if I caused any trouble. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 16:29, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The blocks are to category space (10) and template space (14). LNC, I've told you this before. @Everyone else, please stop pinging me. I am not LNC's keeper. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:07, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't reply earlier, I've had a lot to do today! I thought it might be best if I popped a quick message here myself as well as reply to LNC on my own page since I wasn't sure when I'd be able to check this again.

AFAIK it's not a TBAN (not allowed to discuss anything broadly construed etc.) but a specific PBLOCK. So edit requests are fine but they cannot actually make any edits themselves. Considering this also went to ANI, it might be best if they err on the side of caution and try to steer clear from cats/templates? Blue-Sonnet 17:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I will just slog through tidying up. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:09, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:27, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you! Sorry, this is an unusual situation all round Blue-Sonnet 07:25, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue-Sonnet I think the key thing here is for no-one to encourage LNC by accident to do or try to do a thing they are currently not allowed to do. I would very much like sufficient time of community-acceptable work to pass for them to be able to mount a successful appeal to their block.

I have purposely not examined the reasons for that block, preferring to look at their actions today and in the future, not those in the past.

@LNC, if you are in any doubt about an action, even a 1% doubt, please do not perform the action. I believe that formal requests using official processes, such as WP:AFC/C ad {{edit partially-blocked}} to be acceptable. @BS, please correct me if you interpret matters differently. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:21, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nope I definitely agree - we've been discussing things in my Talk page where I've encouraged acting with an abundance of caution. LNC was worried about breaking the terms of the block and came to me for advice, which was the right thing to do.

As long as they continue to double-check with a more experienced editor before doing anything they're unsure of - or just avoiding it entirely - then I don't foresee any major issues.

Going forwards, I'd say to avoid templates and categories as much as possible; where that's unavoidable they should ask for advice from an experienced editor.

The Wikipedia:Teahouse and Wikipedia:Help desk are good places to get advice - I think the Teahouse is quicker but also carries the risk of a newbie jumping in and having a great big guess, so watch out for that! Helpdesk is usually used by more experienced editors, so you'll get more of those responding to queries. Blue-Sonnet 10:43, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. One problem was that people got upset at me for asking too many questions, but I can probably solve most of those now by going to the Teahouse and Help desk with "is someone with a namespace block allowed too... ?" instead of asking one of the people who is already annoyed at me. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 17:48, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that sounds like a plan! Try helpdesk first, you're less likely to have confused newbies interrupt the discussion there. Blue-Sonnet 02:44, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I think a few people have been telling me the rules for a topic ban, because they didn't notice mine was different, e.g. the correction I needed to ask for in the deletion request above. Does this mean that I don't need to use {{edit partially-blocked}} on pages I'm not blocked from? Or that suggestion might have only applied to correcting errors on reverted edits? Late Night Coffee (ping me) 02:15, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

P-blocks are partial blocks (see the wikilink in my earlier post), so it sounds like you're using the right process for that. Blue-Sonnet 07:24, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

1RR vios

Hi LNC, looks like you’ve got 4 reverts at Bondi Beach shooting within the past 24 hours[1][2][3][4]. That’s a lot of reverts for a 1RR page.

Hope you can do better with this going forward. Mikewem (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

LateNightCoffee this thread Mikewem (talk) 22:16, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those don't match a previous version? While I get some sleep, you can find me the previous version that said at least two of these:

"Without prior permission"
"interviewed the former patient"
"target = People attending"
or had ^{[better source needed]} attached to the name?

You have made a similar or greater number of edits in the same time frame that remove things I have added or re-add things that slightly resemble a previous version more closely than any of those. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 22:24, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikewem, I'll go back to how I was interpreting "revert" previously.

Previously I was following the revert rule obsessively strictly, but nobody else seemed to be following it as strictly as I was, so, based on what other editors on the same page were doing. I switched to a less obsessively strict interpretation of what counted as a "revert". I'll go back to being more obsessively strict about it with my own edits, but I expect you and the other editors to do the same. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 13:34, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You don't bend that rule as often as some other editors. The worst offender is probably WWGB, who seems to mostly ignore the 1RR on that page, but I don't know if or how to talk to WWGB about it? Late Night Coffee (ping me) 13:34, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

June 2026

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to change the title of a page by cutting its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Draft:Naveed Akram (Australian). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. If the verdict of the AfD discussion is "redirect", the page history of the main article will be retained at that title. --Finngall ^talk 17:28, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Finngall, I did move it: 00:24, 30 May 2026

LateNightCoffee ... moved page Draft:Naveed Akram (Australian) to Naveed Akram (Australian)

I recreated a new version over the redirect, to draft a complicated revision. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 12:40, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category requests

Please double and triple check your requests. You may wish to refer to my user talk page. No need to comment there. I missed something that you also missed. You missed it first, though!

I'm not very concerned wth the cat merge requests, that's part of the normal hurly burly of Wikipedia, but please don't fail to check the a parent cat is not a redirect to another. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 22:50, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nominations

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 June 1 § Category:ISIL terrorist incidents in Balochistan, Pakistan

Categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 June 1 § Category:ISIL terrorist incidents in Balochistan, Pakistan on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mclay1 (talk) 03:43, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Attacks by target nationality has been nominated for deletion

Category:Attacks by target nationality has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 22:36, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]