![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 32 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Why was not it indef blocked? It has been vandalising since 2010 and it's obvious they can't be trusted. Luxure ( talk) 07:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
This should be ready to unhat. Let me know if there's anything more I need to do. Thank you for your patience. Regards, — Neotarf ( talk) 09:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Can you please go and review the accusations Neotarf is making on this page, literally most of it is completely unrelated to this case and damn near all of it is without any diffs and is accusing people not even involved with this case of misconduct. I feel the need to defend myself but I also think it's something that is going to cloud the issue too. Can you please review and moderate, I'm going to log out a while because I really don't want to pop off but a lot of the shit they are posting is so misrepresented it's not funny. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 03:18, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I noticed you reopened the PiCo SPI. Thanks for doing that, but I'm not sure if/how to proceed. I do think there is a good chance someone is socking right now on WP:DRN. "First century" is too vague.... (PiCo) -- I agree with PiCo - "first century" is far too vague. (StAnselm) However it's hard to show conclusive evidence for long-time contributors -- simply agreeing with each other on something oddly specific. Since the IP activity was stale, do I have a path forward here? Andrevan @ 20:14, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello. You warned this person for his/her behavior in the Dreamcast topic in February, and I feel this person, with the backing of two others, is blocking the addition of useful content in the Atari Jaguar page. Moreover, an editor in 2011 found fault with the same thing I have been trying to correct, as is indicated in Talk.
TheTimesAreAChanging created an entry in Talk called "Recent IP edit" just recently. The convolution of demands now includes that a directly relevant appraisal of the worst video game console controllers ever made specifically include the Atari Jaguar in order to be cited, even though, by not being included, it is clear that other designs were considered worse by the article's author, a fact that is directly relevant as a rebuttal to the complaint included in the Wikipedia Atari Jaguar article. Moreover, the article also supports the rebuttal that the phone keypad design feature was used on other prior systems, which casts doubt upon relying heavily upon the Jaguar controller's inclusion of that feature as evidence of it being "the worst ever".
Three editors seem intent on maintaining the current imbalance on the page, characterized by the inclusion of three separate criticisms of the controller (one of which is a photo of a controller with a critical caption). The IGN editor's analysis is simply faulty. There have been worse designs, such as the controller of the Mattel Intellivision and the controller of the Atari 5200, both of which are included in the critical article "The Worst Video Game Controllers Ever Designed" that I cited and which TheTimesAreAChanging and others are refusing to allow, after I removed three other sources that received other complaints.
The other article is by Ronald Diemicke and one of the three editors said the source, due to it being MobyGames can't be used. Despite that, the article does include the Jaguar controller (thus satisfying the three editors' -- in my view obstructionist -- objection to the Gerry article) and yet ranks three other controllers higher in the list of "worst ever" designs. His choice for the worst controller ever is a very logical one.
I fail to see why so much energy is being put into blocking even the smallest attempt to correct the imbalance in the Jaguar's controller criticism, but I suspect it is a similar case vis-a-vis the aforementioned Dreamcast edit war. Comments critical of the controller criticism imbalance from 2012 on the Talk page were on the flaming side. However, an editor named Andrew1718 removed the IGN editor's complaint about the controller in 2011, arguing that the analysis was not well-supported ("I removed the bunk about the Jaguar having the 'worst controller' ever". So, I am hardly the only person who has found fault with the exaggerated criticism of the controller. The inclusion of the flawed appraisal of the IGN editor with no counterpoint is bad enough, but then there are two more criticisms of the controller in the same Wikipedia article!
Thank you for reading this. I am sorry to both you with what should not be something that has taken so many hours of time already. I really would appreciate it if you could look into this, since it is a longstanding unresolved problem with a Wikipedia page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.12.52 ( talk) 22:18, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Okay starting here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mjnichols, then there seems to be one though that seems to be connected to that user though as he did the same pages Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HaroldSalasI/Archive. So yeah it just got confusing and I need someone to merge these, thanks! Wgolf ( talk) 03:02, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Yunshui 雲 水 14:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Thought you might want to take a look at this proposal on Malusia, given how much of a persistent nuisance he is. I'm not sure if it's absolutely necessary to just hand out bans for those who have only been a problem user for just a year or two, but I guess enough is enough for someone who has confused and deceived users for quite some time. Blake Gripling ( talk) 03:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
I DS-BLP templated this user, but wanted to make sure this was correct. It doesn't look like the user actually edited the BLP subject articles or talk pages, but they did engage in an ANI discussion about the BLPs and they made a BLP-violating edit to another users talk page, which was revdeleted and user was blocked. Just making sure the template was the right thing to do in this case. Dreadstar ☥ 22:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
The user page contains clearly as " River Stumpf" that was familiar. Can you sockpuppet him/her? 183.171.168.48 ( talk) 07:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Any thoughts on adding Emikhan9999? Looks remarkably suspicious to me... Yunshui 雲 水 08:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
I redirected Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khursheed Khan Pictures to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Showitwew then saw your note, and rollbacked my edit. /Khursheed_Khan_Pictures didn't have any valuable case information, and the same socks were reported at /SHowitwew. Why then would we need a merge? Do we typically always merge duplicate cases, as opposed to using redirects? Thanks — MusikAnimal talk 22:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Re: Gamergate controversy. Is it ok if I ask you to clarify how the article involves a BLP issue? I'm just trying to learn the ropes, and acquire a better understanding of policy. Thx. Atsme☯ Consult 14:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that! Might want to put a page protection on that variation too. But yep thanks! Wgolf ( talk) 04:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
I think we might want to revdel the edits he made on the Syndicate page and several others to keep him from linking to those on other articles. I can provide you with diffs if you want to, too. This guy and his crazy antics is really getting in my nerves. Blake Gripling ( talk) 14:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Would you mind responding to this?. Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 22:17, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Blake Gripling ( talk) 01:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Please restore List of Piggy Tales episodes. Yes, the article was started by a banned user, but I've improved it and added sources, so the original reason for delete is not valid any more. Thanks.-- Carniolus ( talk) 16:16, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
The rotating-circle-within-rotating-circle view of Chakravyuha has been promoted without any military basis or even without consultation with any military officers.
Most of the historical battles, fought from the days of bows and arrows, are studied even today. Not only Napoleon but also right up to Romes war with Hannibal - the time when the weaponry was similar to that used in Mahabharata.
I request you to study these battles and battle formations.
Also, if you are interested in factual assessment, please try making such formations with toy weapons. If you are further interested, please add a horse or two and see how impracticable it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.70.20.14 ( talk) 16:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, would you be able to semi-protect Ray Allen again? Since the last semi-protection expired, there have been no useful or constructive edits by IPs or new users. There is also a reported sports transaction involving him that has not been made official, and IPs and new users are constantly editing that i.e. further violations of BLP. DaHuzyBru ( talk) 18:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey there - a question for you pertaining to Module:Iraqi insurgency detailed map: One user, 83.117.189.21, has made 11 unsourced edits this afternoon, seen here. I reverted the initial batch, and summarized "unsourced edit - please provide sources for this edit". The unsourced edits continue, and actually have increased in volume. If I revert again, I break 1RR, but the edits don't even have summaries, let alone sources. I don't know how to proceed. Obviously I don't want to break 1RR, but it's just irking me to sit back and watch a mess be made. Any feedback or assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 19:59, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, please can you delete the comment of nha trang at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Karis_McLarty
the comment is offensive to me. he said karis is an energatic self promoter. that means karis wrote all the source and the wiki article? It is not true. Warn that user to be civil while commenting. The wiki article and the discussion can be seen by people from all over the world. It is harasment for us. Delete the whole article or such comments please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.47.231 ( talk) 10:32, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Callanecc,
I am amazed at your almost instant rejection of the entire edit I made to the relevant section of the "Portuguese profanity" article, particularly because the only reason you give is "because it didn’t appear constructive to me". I would very much like you to let me know in what specific ways was my edit not "constructive".
As a native English speaker, and a professional English teacher, it was clear to me that some, at least, of the section was written by people whose English is not especially fluent, and I was editing the section to ensure that the expression was more fluent and accurate, as well as clearing up some imprecise information. My entire edit was constructive in purpose.
I look forward to your response.
211.31.213.200 ( talk) 13:27, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Callanecc,
I am absolutely bewildered by your comments above. All the weaknesses you list are those of the *original* version which I edited out! If you actually look at what I did, you will see that I removed most of the uses of the word "slur" (for the reason you mention, as well as unnecessary repetition) and replaced it with "insulting", "derogatory", "pejorative" and "offensive".
I also corrected the existing spelling in numerous places and certainly did not introduce any new misspellings. (It's possible I missed one or two.)
I was the one who included a number of internal links, including the one to Casper the Friendly Ghost, for the very reason you mention.
I am very annoyed by your apparent misreading of what I did, and I strongly request that your revert to my edit, which fixes the very problems you've identified in your dot points.
Tullyvallin ( talk) 00:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I strongly believe your block of Theodore bikel is mistaken. The POV tag has been discussed quite a bit on Twitter and other parts of social media. A Twitter user that tweeted several times about the POV tag edit-war as it was happening has the exact account name there as the Wikipedia account. Seems this person saw the edit war as it was happening and jumped into the dispute using the exact same account name. It may be the editor's real name as well, in which case a false accusation of sock-puppetry should be withdrawn promptly.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 18:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Susie0susie ( talk · contribs) has said she has been asked to add incorrect information, as have another 100 students at her school. I'm guessing that CU's can't check to see if she is using a school account in order to identify and contact the school, but no harm in asking. Dougweller ( talk) 09:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, FYI please see some testing I did and if you agree there's an issue, to whom should we address the matter? NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 13:34, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
On behalf of the Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines, may I request the restoration of User:Exec8's image uploads now that their account as been cleared of sockpuppet issues? I can do the restoration as an admin myself but I think it would be a bit conflict of interest as Exec8 and I have collaborated with each other in the wiki for years. -- Lenticel ( talk) 05:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the change. Honestly, I haven't done any edits for a month now and just read these comments only today. -- Exec8 ( talk) 12:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adnarkey which you closed recently. It's missing the usual link to the case's archive. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 14:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Iselilja (
talk)
17:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
[2] You what this without action? Think you missed a word. Also, I think this edit is a clear violation of WP:SCRUTINY given the RFC/U. As is, "A number of editors have raised the question as to which version of the these two versions are libelous" (i.e., her) -- NeilN talk to me 03:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Just went through the talk page, ALL mentions of the word fuck are by Ryulong haha, oh there's one by TaraInDC telling someone to fuck off Loganmac ( talk) 11:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
A BLPN was closed prior to 7 days of review, and the consensus so far was that it was a BLP violation. Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Investigative_Project_on_Terrorism I notified the closer User_talk:Lithistman on his talk page. I'm not sure what else to do. This issue must be resolved - the controversy has gone on for nearly 7 months. Thank you. Atsme☯ Consult 19:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Could you please look at this edit? As I recall, the last time I alerted an editor to WP:ARBPIA, before I committed my edit, it allowed me to check if any alerts had previously been left. Here, that didn't happen. Also, when I looked at the edit filter log with this user name, I didn't see my alert added to the log. Could you explain what's going on and if I did something wrong? Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 19:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
More recently, I used the template again, and the familiar pink box came up as it used to do. FWIW, I was using the topic code blp. However, it reported that another user had alerted twice, but the two entries were identical (date and time), and the other user had alerted only once.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 04:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc,
we have currently high acticity of this troll in German Wikipedia. I have checked the IP addresses that he used during the past six months and calculated these ranges:
It looks like the provider (Vodafone) arbitrarily assigns addresses from these five ranges, so to mute this user, I think you need to block them all, or at least No 2 to 5. Currently only the second and third are blocked. No 4 and 5 have been blocked in the past. -- PM3 ( talk) 00:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
TheTruth200 now has a sock. User:Thetruth300. Can you please indef them both as Vandalism only? VViking Talk Edits 09:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Just wondering why you deleted the Wikipedia entry for Cathal Pendred? Cathal is a huge star in Ireland, a current UFC star on a 2-0 run and former Cage Warriors Welterweight champion and I feel With the growth of MMA in Ireland there is a considerable interest in this fighter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard-88 ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello again! First, thank you for making sure that things "work" at ArbCom. Second, it looks like this edit by Lithistman, while well intentioned, moved the response to an incorrect location ( DaveApter's, where it should have been moved to Zambelo's response section, I believe). I am reluctant to edit other's responses. As clerk, would you move it to the correct location? Thank you for looking, Tgeairn ( talk) 02:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Can you please put registered users protection in place for Indian Super League and 2014 Indian Super League season pages? The league is new and the inaugural season has just started and as you can note from the history, there is a lot of vandalism (like adding spam links, removing sourced content) and the regular editors have a tough time while keep removing such content. And most of this vandalism comes from unregistered useres. Coderzombie ( talk) 13:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 05:47, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed you changed my user rights to "OTRS members". I'm curious about what effect this has. Is it just a designation similar to slapping a category tag on my user page, or is it actually a "right" in the sense of a switch that allows me to do something?
I could have added myself to that user right, but I didn't even realize it existed until I was notified that you flipped the switch. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 14:44, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello sir, With all sense of humility as an editor who has learn from his past, I had finally decided to report 'Tiptoethrutheminefield based On a behavior I considered disruptive and the extent of damages he might caused to the project (wikipedia). I can no longer fold my arms to see a bad condition getting worst. Tiptoethrutheminefield joined wikipedia 6 month ago with 436 edit to unique pages (only created one poorly referenced page so far) but move around AfD, Talk pages and ANI to attack other editors, directing Non-sequitur comment to editors that vote against their wish at AfD and often follows them around wikipedia for the purpose of attack, even with no experience on how things work here on wikipedia. This one to Epeefleche. After I told him here, to refrain from directing non-sequitur comment to me, he apologized but repeated the same thing here again yesterday. Also am aware that he has just been banned from Armenia and Azerbaijan related article For disruptive behavior. I don't want any problems with him and I don't want to warn him. I just had a serious issue in a just concluded discussion at ANI and have learn from my mistakes, I don't want the same thing to repeat itself that's why I had come to report to you instead of reacting to his comments. Thank you sir. Wikicology ( talk) 19:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Looking through his edits of the past few days, it is notable what a high percentage of them are of articles to which he followed me, as anyone can plainly see.
I think these edits, coupled with his admission that he is following me (though, with a bulk of his edits this week being ones where he followed me, it was clear in any event), and his admitted rejection of an uninvolved editor's warning (as well as my own), and the upset he is causing me, are not what our Project has in mind as acceptable editing. Epeefleche ( talk) 07:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
He/she defends admins for accusing on Talk:Diamonds (Rihanna song). It must be MariaJaydHicky’s IP. 115.164.53.12 ( talk) 06:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/E4024, how do you know they're using two different equipment? I think using a checkuser won't hurt. Étienne Dolet ( talk) 20:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time or upgrade to semi? -- George Ho ( talk) 02:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Is this what you hoped to see from Titanium Dragon when lifting their topic ban? Are unfounded intimations that Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu fabricated the death threats against them for attention considered acceptable on the encyclopedia? I have opened a WP:ANI thread on this issue. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 10:18, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, TheLateDentarthurdent has contacted me saying they're being affected by an IP range block and would like an exemption. I can vouch for the editor and the fact that this is the only IP they can use at their current location. Would you mind having a quick look? Thanks,-- Cúchullain t/ c 14:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, After returning from the ban the user repeated the offence. Now what ? “ WarKosign ” 14:11, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi C, an editor brought to my attention a user named Karlhard, who has only been editing for about 3 weeks, but who has processed a crapload of deletion nominations. The concerned editor suspects that they may be a sock, although I admit, I don't know who they might be a sock of. But I think we've all seen n00b users jump into advanced editing, and when we notice them, our sock detectors go off. If you could keep an eye on them, it would be appreciated. Thanx, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:51, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
I was recently warned about DS. This is rather odd, the only change I made to the page is removing a extraneous quote mark. Yes I know Ds applies, but still rather odd to be warned after something like that. Is there some other reason you found what I did possibly in violation or felt the need to warn me? Or do you have it automated or something? -- Obsidi ( talk) 03:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. You can read translations.
Recent changes
File information cleanup
Problems
Changes this week
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
13:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
I had already made it clear that I considered your last post on my talk page to be unhelpful. I had put your sources question down to lack of knowledge on your part (such as an inability to look at the actual sources, or a lack of understanding that looking at the actual sources should be a requirement in any AfD). However, in light of your latest posting I now wonder if the real intent of it, and the latest post, was harassment. If you had really wanted clarification about what I meant by "garbage source", why did you not ask on the actual AfD page? Your latest post is even more unreasonable [11] - you accuse me of reverting without providing a reliable source yet fail to provide a single diff showing I have done any such thing. What am I to make of that? Is it another display of ignorance (a lack of realization that diffs should be given when accusing an editor of something), or part of an ongoing harassment? Please, do not post any more of your "advice" or "questions" on my talk page, and stop making false accusations. Tiptoethrutheminefield ( talk) 14:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello sir, its my pleasure to inform you that I love to enroll at the above academy and to be a student under your tutelage. I will be glad if my admission is granted. Thanks. Wikicology ( talk) 18:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate limiting factors and will be happy to take my enquiry elsewhere. I was advised in an by RGloucester to contact you regarding breaches by User:Technophant as indicated at User_talk:Technophant#SCW.26ISIL_sanctions and taken up at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Request for clarification on Syrian Civil War and ISIL sanctions - warning policy. Help or advice would be equally appreciated. Gregkaye ✍♪ 06:24, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Could you please take a look at WP:AN#Request for clarification on Syrian Civil War and ISIL sanctions - warning policy. What seems to have happened here is that Template:SCW&ISIL sanctions and Template:SCW&ISIL enforcement have not been updated to make it possible for any editor, as opposed to only administrators, to add what is basically a sanction alert to another editor's talk page. I certainly thought that this had been done and I thought we'd sorted it out here. [14] I can't see any reason for this to be an Admin only notice with a different process from general sanctions. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 15:20, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 September 28. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
Software changes this week
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
05:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 09:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
insource:
keyword for
text searches. It caused issues with the
new search tool. It will come back later.
[26]
[27]Problems
Software changes this week
<
indicator>
tag in these templates instead to add the icons.
[32]
[33]Future changes
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey Callanecc, shouldn't Patrol forty's "evidence" (just a rant against Eric Corbett, resulting from too many sour grapes) be scrapped completely from the Evidence page? They were never in good standing, as far as I'm concerned; Courcelles can tell you more. Drmies ( talk) 03:11, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
Problems
Software changes this week
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Guidelines. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
81.153.185.157's (MariaJaydHicky) return as 81.148.240.215. He/she is continuing disruptive editing again. 183.171.181.49 ( talk) 08:15, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I've been looking at the Historicist SPI, which seems to have been abandoned for several weeks. Since you appear to have been the last CU to touch this case, I was wondering if you have any more observations on it. Thanks for any comments. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:46, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. I noticed that when you created Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda that you removed several involved parties from the case. This wouldn't be important were it not for the fact that it limits the amount of evidence that can be presented. Could you please add the involved parties (the users who made statements) to the active case main case page? Many thanks.- Mr X 12:36, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, can I have this page and this page deleted do you think? Baaarny ( talk) 20:54, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 04:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Could you take a look at the "Waldorf education" and "Banning Policy closed" sections of WP:AC/N? The quotebox from the "Waldorf education" section has been pushed down into the "Banning Policy closed" section — and if viewed using Firefox, the quoteboxes in the two sections are superimposed one on top of the other, making the text unreadable.
This happened right after the latest archival action by "Lowercase sigmabot III", and I reported it on Sigma's talk page ( User talk:Σ/Archive/2014/November#Lowercase sigmabot III mangled a page, but the bot people are insisting it's not their fault or responsibility. Since you are one of the arb clerks (and the one who posted the "Waldorf education" notice), I thought I should bring it up with you and see if you have any ideas on how to fix the problem so that all the text on the noticeboard page can be read. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:04, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
A new sock has appeared. Take a look?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 01:48, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Make that two.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 02:58, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
It keeps happening. Need a sleeper check as he used an account registered in August 2014.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 03:56, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Another August account.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 07:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
On the Arbcom GGTF proposed decision Talk page: in mobile view, the sections after the section you collapsed are displaying as subsections instead of standing on their own. I suspect that the reason for the messed up display is that the section was closed with {{hab}} instead of {{cob}} but I'm not sure about that. I'm reluctant to change this on the page myself so I thought I'd bring it to your attention. Thanks. Ca2james ( talk) 17:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Civility. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I had blocked this range as part of the Macy VG IP vandal, specifically as anon-only, and you reblocked earlier this week with {{ checkuserblock-wide}} and also acc-create disabled. 174.236.97.16 has requested an unblock saying that they can't edit, "even when logged in", which shouldn't be the case; they would, however, be unable to create a new account with your new block parameters. For some reason, the system detects ME as the blocking admin instead of you, but I'd still like to defer to you in this case (if there is anything to even be done). ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 10:10, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
There are the sources- /info/en/?search=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Stop_to_deleted_towns_in_As-Suwayda_governorate. -- Pototo1 ( talk) 10:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I tried WP:RPP, but the extension requests there were declined. What do you think? -- George Ho ( talk) 20:24, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I opened a SPI per a previous question you asked regarding my idea that some of the invovled case parties were editing logged out. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lightbreather the IP was ok with the checkuser but Lightbreather after showing up has now decided to go silent again as well as the IP. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 11:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I'm trying to figure out how diffs, links, and words are counted for the DangerousPanda Arbcom Evidence sections. I'm tring to use MrX evidence section to try and figure out the counting is done, but I'm confused, things don't add up for me. Can you explain how you're counting what? Thanks. (For diffs, I'm assuming you're counting arrowed icons that have numbers. For links, I'm assuming you count arrowed icons that have text.)
I have some specific Qs too:
Again thanks. Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 08:18, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello! This edit to the General sanctions page appears to have included text from the copied applicable area ("Pages related to Austrian school of economics and the Ludwig von Mises Institute"). I do not think that was your intention, but I hesitate to correct anything related to that case. Please double-check. Cheers! Tgeairn ( talk) 09:06, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Someone is saying this was not imposed by arbcom. If that's so, then it must have originated from ANI. Should I go there and ask for an alteration to the IBAN? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Please see discussion on my talkpage. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Aspromonte goat. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
It seems that many sanctions were recently revoked by the Arbitration Committee, but that the page Wikipedia:General sanctions was not updated to reflect this. As you are a clerk for the Committee, I figured I should alert you to this incongruence. RGloucester — ☎ 00:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. Since your recent CU I have added two more in the same section, so perhaps you can do another check without opening a brand new SPI. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 11:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
The editor no provide evidences that's why I remove that. -- Pototo1 ( talk) 20:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
The user was the similar contribution pattern with his previous blocked users River Stumpf and Gifchief. Can you sockpuppet him? 115.164.208.58 ( talk) 11:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Yup! 12 Reverts in less than 24 hours. No discussion. I have a hunch 2 or 3 of them get paid by the State Bar to run public relations for the Bar on Wikipedia. They shredded the article just as thought they would. I'm not going to make any reverts. I am not going to make any edits. I am not even going to read that 'article' (advertising brochure) for the State Bar.
Hope you are having a good day. Peace & Love.
Here are examples of the total defacing of the article.
These are back-to-back reverts. Look at the article history for the rest. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=State_Bar_of_California&action=history
If you want to revert it back, protect the article, and press the issue of a discussion. This is the date to revert it back to. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=State_Bar_of_California&oldid=635744334
Apart from that, good luck. This is total waste of my time, but I wish you well. It's somebody else's problem now.
2.177.11.225 ( talk) 19:30, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
2.177.163.10 ( talk) 12:04, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I've never made one edit on the Jordan Belfort article, but you can see Ravensfire reverting the edits of others and edit warring: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jordan_Belfort&action=history
Fantastic communication style with others: (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ravensfire)
And now they are buddies?
On the State Bar Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=State_Bar_of_California&limit=250&action=history
As I said before, it's good to spot these situations up front. As for the joy of being a Wikipedia editor ... count me out. I'm an educated grown-up, with small children and life responsibilities. Whomever wants to fix Wikipedia will need to get a handle on this type of behavior, including what you see above: e.g., 12 Reverts in about 24 hours by Srich32977 and Ravenfire's fantastic communication style.
You know what's even more puzzling? That on his User page, Srich32977 states that he is co-owner in a night-time law school in California that depends upon being certified by the State Bar. So I guess it makes sense for him to revert that article 12 times a day: ("About S. Rich: Hello, and welcome to my user page! First off, I'm S. Rich and I have an interest in a privately owned California law school.") Yup, that's the smell of neutrality in the air.
Have a great day. 2.177.11.158 ( talk) 13:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Is this not a violation of this (see also, [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60])? Please advise. Thanks. — ArtifexMayhem ( talk) 06:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
If i twice revert editings which made without identifying the source it is will be violation the 1RR rules or not? Here are the editings that have been made without specifying the source: here here I've already revert one from this editings. And provide the source confirming my actions. here So now I want to ask I can revert and second here not breaking the 1RR. Just this editor Tgoll774often violates the rules to edit. When he edits without identifying the source.
All his editings is violation of the rules of edit and facts systematic vandalism. So maybe there is a way to influence it. Hanibal911 ( talk) 13:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Hello, it seems User:NE Ent has put one of his comments on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda/Workshop in a section reserved for comments by Arbitrators. However, NE Ent is not yet an arbitrator as far as I know. Please could you move his comment? I thought it best not to refactor his comments myself, given the dire warnings and such at the top. Thine Antique Pen ( talk) 18:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
living people
Thank you for quality articles on people, active in diplomacy (
Dave Sharma) and international education (
Alec Lazenby), for welcoming new users and
articles, for teaching new vandal patrollers, for
performing also minor admin tasks, for
picking up ideas, - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
A year ago, you were the 685th recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize. - I asked the candidates for arbitration about an edit you may remember: pleasing answers culminate in "no foul, play on", the nicer wording for AGF ;) ( discussed a year ago) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Please give me ACC interface URL.
accounts
Sorry, I got a little off track here [70] and would prefer to remove the comments, if possible. As others have replied, didn't want to that on my own, don't know what the protocol is. NE Ent 11:17, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I believe the message should read " maximum of 2000 words and 200 diffs for non-parties " ?--
TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom
06:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
What do you think about the fact that criticisms of British political institutions and political scandals have an independent Wikipedia page, and Wikipedia Admins previously included criticisms of the California State Bar on a case-by-case basis (see Keller below), but the main article on the California State Bar has now been wiped clean of even the slightest critiques (from mainstream news sources, the US Supreme Court, Legal Journals, and Law Professors)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_scandals_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keller_v._State_Bar_of_California
I value your input. 2.177.3.1 ( talk) 10:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Greetings from the
Guild of Copy Editors
![]() Candidate nominations for Guild coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015, are currently underway. The nomination period will close at 23:59 on December 15 (UTC), after which voting will commence until 23:59 on December 31, 2014. Self-nominations are welcomed. Please consider getting involved; it's your Guild and it won't coordinate itself, so if you'd like to help coordinate Guild activities we'd love to hear from you. Cheers from your GOCE coordinators
Jonesey95,
Baffle gab1978, and
Miniapolis.
Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC) |
Hello, Callanecc. I am trying to figure out why you deleted this draft article that I have been working on. Its creator doesn't appear to be blocked or banned. Some edits were made by such a user, but they were reverted. What's the problem? — Anne Delong ( talk) 13:17, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
I requested PC extension at RFPP, but it was declined. Will you do it instead? -- George Ho ( talk) 01:55, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 17:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
What about this one? -- George Ho ( talk) 17:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I added the 9 Dec 2013 case to the archive, which was presumably missed. Also, Pottinger's cats still needs to be affirmed and tagged. Manul 14:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
What would you think of letting community discretionary sanctions be notifiable with Edit filter 602, just like Arbcom's? This would make it easier for admins to manage the alerts, and reduce the size of the CS log files. We would not use Template:Ds/alert for this, it would be a newly-written template that would also invoke Template:Z33. If anyone thinks this is a good idea, it would need Arbcom's permission. An alternative would be to use a different Z-number but copy Arbcom's code. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 04:31, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed re Z template (though we'd need to make sure that there couldn't be a crossover in the filter, I was referring to Template:Ds/* templates. One single enforcement page (in addition to AN) with similar formatting to WP:AE or WP:GS/GG/E sounds like the best idea to me. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 09:21, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Or we just remove the sentence altogether. No matter how it's worded it's not going to make complete sense and it's pretty obvious (to me at least) that to avoid it you don't edit in the area. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 06:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick action on this. Another editor expressed some concern on my talk page that the SPI was going to take too long. Hopefully this will help to restore some faith in the system. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:39, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I received a notice on my TP, and don't understand why you included it considering I asked you the very question about sanctions on your TP. I don't feel the sanction is deserved as I have tried in GF to correct a BLP violation at G. Edward Griffin. Please explain your reason for the warning. Atsme☯ Consult 11:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello Callanecc,
Please delete these revisions at Terrorism in Australia made by an anon. user:
Please note that the situation is highly volatile and NSW Police (while having no jurisdiction here) have requested that this information be removed (see here: Sydney Morning Herald Statement (Live Blog), particularly the 6.32pm statement)
Goodnight from Australia,
Luxure Σ 13:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 32 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Why was not it indef blocked? It has been vandalising since 2010 and it's obvious they can't be trusted. Luxure ( talk) 07:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
This should be ready to unhat. Let me know if there's anything more I need to do. Thank you for your patience. Regards, — Neotarf ( talk) 09:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Can you please go and review the accusations Neotarf is making on this page, literally most of it is completely unrelated to this case and damn near all of it is without any diffs and is accusing people not even involved with this case of misconduct. I feel the need to defend myself but I also think it's something that is going to cloud the issue too. Can you please review and moderate, I'm going to log out a while because I really don't want to pop off but a lot of the shit they are posting is so misrepresented it's not funny. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 03:18, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I noticed you reopened the PiCo SPI. Thanks for doing that, but I'm not sure if/how to proceed. I do think there is a good chance someone is socking right now on WP:DRN. "First century" is too vague.... (PiCo) -- I agree with PiCo - "first century" is far too vague. (StAnselm) However it's hard to show conclusive evidence for long-time contributors -- simply agreeing with each other on something oddly specific. Since the IP activity was stale, do I have a path forward here? Andrevan @ 20:14, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello. You warned this person for his/her behavior in the Dreamcast topic in February, and I feel this person, with the backing of two others, is blocking the addition of useful content in the Atari Jaguar page. Moreover, an editor in 2011 found fault with the same thing I have been trying to correct, as is indicated in Talk.
TheTimesAreAChanging created an entry in Talk called "Recent IP edit" just recently. The convolution of demands now includes that a directly relevant appraisal of the worst video game console controllers ever made specifically include the Atari Jaguar in order to be cited, even though, by not being included, it is clear that other designs were considered worse by the article's author, a fact that is directly relevant as a rebuttal to the complaint included in the Wikipedia Atari Jaguar article. Moreover, the article also supports the rebuttal that the phone keypad design feature was used on other prior systems, which casts doubt upon relying heavily upon the Jaguar controller's inclusion of that feature as evidence of it being "the worst ever".
Three editors seem intent on maintaining the current imbalance on the page, characterized by the inclusion of three separate criticisms of the controller (one of which is a photo of a controller with a critical caption). The IGN editor's analysis is simply faulty. There have been worse designs, such as the controller of the Mattel Intellivision and the controller of the Atari 5200, both of which are included in the critical article "The Worst Video Game Controllers Ever Designed" that I cited and which TheTimesAreAChanging and others are refusing to allow, after I removed three other sources that received other complaints.
The other article is by Ronald Diemicke and one of the three editors said the source, due to it being MobyGames can't be used. Despite that, the article does include the Jaguar controller (thus satisfying the three editors' -- in my view obstructionist -- objection to the Gerry article) and yet ranks three other controllers higher in the list of "worst ever" designs. His choice for the worst controller ever is a very logical one.
I fail to see why so much energy is being put into blocking even the smallest attempt to correct the imbalance in the Jaguar's controller criticism, but I suspect it is a similar case vis-a-vis the aforementioned Dreamcast edit war. Comments critical of the controller criticism imbalance from 2012 on the Talk page were on the flaming side. However, an editor named Andrew1718 removed the IGN editor's complaint about the controller in 2011, arguing that the analysis was not well-supported ("I removed the bunk about the Jaguar having the 'worst controller' ever". So, I am hardly the only person who has found fault with the exaggerated criticism of the controller. The inclusion of the flawed appraisal of the IGN editor with no counterpoint is bad enough, but then there are two more criticisms of the controller in the same Wikipedia article!
Thank you for reading this. I am sorry to both you with what should not be something that has taken so many hours of time already. I really would appreciate it if you could look into this, since it is a longstanding unresolved problem with a Wikipedia page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.12.52 ( talk) 22:18, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Okay starting here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mjnichols, then there seems to be one though that seems to be connected to that user though as he did the same pages Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HaroldSalasI/Archive. So yeah it just got confusing and I need someone to merge these, thanks! Wgolf ( talk) 03:02, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Yunshui 雲 水 14:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Thought you might want to take a look at this proposal on Malusia, given how much of a persistent nuisance he is. I'm not sure if it's absolutely necessary to just hand out bans for those who have only been a problem user for just a year or two, but I guess enough is enough for someone who has confused and deceived users for quite some time. Blake Gripling ( talk) 03:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
I DS-BLP templated this user, but wanted to make sure this was correct. It doesn't look like the user actually edited the BLP subject articles or talk pages, but they did engage in an ANI discussion about the BLPs and they made a BLP-violating edit to another users talk page, which was revdeleted and user was blocked. Just making sure the template was the right thing to do in this case. Dreadstar ☥ 22:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
The user page contains clearly as " River Stumpf" that was familiar. Can you sockpuppet him/her? 183.171.168.48 ( talk) 07:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Any thoughts on adding Emikhan9999? Looks remarkably suspicious to me... Yunshui 雲 水 08:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
I redirected Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khursheed Khan Pictures to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Showitwew then saw your note, and rollbacked my edit. /Khursheed_Khan_Pictures didn't have any valuable case information, and the same socks were reported at /SHowitwew. Why then would we need a merge? Do we typically always merge duplicate cases, as opposed to using redirects? Thanks — MusikAnimal talk 22:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Re: Gamergate controversy. Is it ok if I ask you to clarify how the article involves a BLP issue? I'm just trying to learn the ropes, and acquire a better understanding of policy. Thx. Atsme☯ Consult 14:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that! Might want to put a page protection on that variation too. But yep thanks! Wgolf ( talk) 04:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
I think we might want to revdel the edits he made on the Syndicate page and several others to keep him from linking to those on other articles. I can provide you with diffs if you want to, too. This guy and his crazy antics is really getting in my nerves. Blake Gripling ( talk) 14:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Would you mind responding to this?. Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 22:17, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Blake Gripling ( talk) 01:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Please restore List of Piggy Tales episodes. Yes, the article was started by a banned user, but I've improved it and added sources, so the original reason for delete is not valid any more. Thanks.-- Carniolus ( talk) 16:16, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
The rotating-circle-within-rotating-circle view of Chakravyuha has been promoted without any military basis or even without consultation with any military officers.
Most of the historical battles, fought from the days of bows and arrows, are studied even today. Not only Napoleon but also right up to Romes war with Hannibal - the time when the weaponry was similar to that used in Mahabharata.
I request you to study these battles and battle formations.
Also, if you are interested in factual assessment, please try making such formations with toy weapons. If you are further interested, please add a horse or two and see how impracticable it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.70.20.14 ( talk) 16:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, would you be able to semi-protect Ray Allen again? Since the last semi-protection expired, there have been no useful or constructive edits by IPs or new users. There is also a reported sports transaction involving him that has not been made official, and IPs and new users are constantly editing that i.e. further violations of BLP. DaHuzyBru ( talk) 18:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey there - a question for you pertaining to Module:Iraqi insurgency detailed map: One user, 83.117.189.21, has made 11 unsourced edits this afternoon, seen here. I reverted the initial batch, and summarized "unsourced edit - please provide sources for this edit". The unsourced edits continue, and actually have increased in volume. If I revert again, I break 1RR, but the edits don't even have summaries, let alone sources. I don't know how to proceed. Obviously I don't want to break 1RR, but it's just irking me to sit back and watch a mess be made. Any feedback or assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 19:59, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, please can you delete the comment of nha trang at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Karis_McLarty
the comment is offensive to me. he said karis is an energatic self promoter. that means karis wrote all the source and the wiki article? It is not true. Warn that user to be civil while commenting. The wiki article and the discussion can be seen by people from all over the world. It is harasment for us. Delete the whole article or such comments please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.47.231 ( talk) 10:32, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Callanecc,
I am amazed at your almost instant rejection of the entire edit I made to the relevant section of the "Portuguese profanity" article, particularly because the only reason you give is "because it didn’t appear constructive to me". I would very much like you to let me know in what specific ways was my edit not "constructive".
As a native English speaker, and a professional English teacher, it was clear to me that some, at least, of the section was written by people whose English is not especially fluent, and I was editing the section to ensure that the expression was more fluent and accurate, as well as clearing up some imprecise information. My entire edit was constructive in purpose.
I look forward to your response.
211.31.213.200 ( talk) 13:27, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Callanecc,
I am absolutely bewildered by your comments above. All the weaknesses you list are those of the *original* version which I edited out! If you actually look at what I did, you will see that I removed most of the uses of the word "slur" (for the reason you mention, as well as unnecessary repetition) and replaced it with "insulting", "derogatory", "pejorative" and "offensive".
I also corrected the existing spelling in numerous places and certainly did not introduce any new misspellings. (It's possible I missed one or two.)
I was the one who included a number of internal links, including the one to Casper the Friendly Ghost, for the very reason you mention.
I am very annoyed by your apparent misreading of what I did, and I strongly request that your revert to my edit, which fixes the very problems you've identified in your dot points.
Tullyvallin ( talk) 00:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I strongly believe your block of Theodore bikel is mistaken. The POV tag has been discussed quite a bit on Twitter and other parts of social media. A Twitter user that tweeted several times about the POV tag edit-war as it was happening has the exact account name there as the Wikipedia account. Seems this person saw the edit war as it was happening and jumped into the dispute using the exact same account name. It may be the editor's real name as well, in which case a false accusation of sock-puppetry should be withdrawn promptly.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 18:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Susie0susie ( talk · contribs) has said she has been asked to add incorrect information, as have another 100 students at her school. I'm guessing that CU's can't check to see if she is using a school account in order to identify and contact the school, but no harm in asking. Dougweller ( talk) 09:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, FYI please see some testing I did and if you agree there's an issue, to whom should we address the matter? NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 13:34, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
On behalf of the Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines, may I request the restoration of User:Exec8's image uploads now that their account as been cleared of sockpuppet issues? I can do the restoration as an admin myself but I think it would be a bit conflict of interest as Exec8 and I have collaborated with each other in the wiki for years. -- Lenticel ( talk) 05:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the change. Honestly, I haven't done any edits for a month now and just read these comments only today. -- Exec8 ( talk) 12:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adnarkey which you closed recently. It's missing the usual link to the case's archive. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 14:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Iselilja (
talk)
17:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
[2] You what this without action? Think you missed a word. Also, I think this edit is a clear violation of WP:SCRUTINY given the RFC/U. As is, "A number of editors have raised the question as to which version of the these two versions are libelous" (i.e., her) -- NeilN talk to me 03:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Just went through the talk page, ALL mentions of the word fuck are by Ryulong haha, oh there's one by TaraInDC telling someone to fuck off Loganmac ( talk) 11:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
A BLPN was closed prior to 7 days of review, and the consensus so far was that it was a BLP violation. Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Investigative_Project_on_Terrorism I notified the closer User_talk:Lithistman on his talk page. I'm not sure what else to do. This issue must be resolved - the controversy has gone on for nearly 7 months. Thank you. Atsme☯ Consult 19:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Could you please look at this edit? As I recall, the last time I alerted an editor to WP:ARBPIA, before I committed my edit, it allowed me to check if any alerts had previously been left. Here, that didn't happen. Also, when I looked at the edit filter log with this user name, I didn't see my alert added to the log. Could you explain what's going on and if I did something wrong? Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 19:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
More recently, I used the template again, and the familiar pink box came up as it used to do. FWIW, I was using the topic code blp. However, it reported that another user had alerted twice, but the two entries were identical (date and time), and the other user had alerted only once.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 04:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc,
we have currently high acticity of this troll in German Wikipedia. I have checked the IP addresses that he used during the past six months and calculated these ranges:
It looks like the provider (Vodafone) arbitrarily assigns addresses from these five ranges, so to mute this user, I think you need to block them all, or at least No 2 to 5. Currently only the second and third are blocked. No 4 and 5 have been blocked in the past. -- PM3 ( talk) 00:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
TheTruth200 now has a sock. User:Thetruth300. Can you please indef them both as Vandalism only? VViking Talk Edits 09:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Just wondering why you deleted the Wikipedia entry for Cathal Pendred? Cathal is a huge star in Ireland, a current UFC star on a 2-0 run and former Cage Warriors Welterweight champion and I feel With the growth of MMA in Ireland there is a considerable interest in this fighter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard-88 ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello again! First, thank you for making sure that things "work" at ArbCom. Second, it looks like this edit by Lithistman, while well intentioned, moved the response to an incorrect location ( DaveApter's, where it should have been moved to Zambelo's response section, I believe). I am reluctant to edit other's responses. As clerk, would you move it to the correct location? Thank you for looking, Tgeairn ( talk) 02:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Can you please put registered users protection in place for Indian Super League and 2014 Indian Super League season pages? The league is new and the inaugural season has just started and as you can note from the history, there is a lot of vandalism (like adding spam links, removing sourced content) and the regular editors have a tough time while keep removing such content. And most of this vandalism comes from unregistered useres. Coderzombie ( talk) 13:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 05:47, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed you changed my user rights to "OTRS members". I'm curious about what effect this has. Is it just a designation similar to slapping a category tag on my user page, or is it actually a "right" in the sense of a switch that allows me to do something?
I could have added myself to that user right, but I didn't even realize it existed until I was notified that you flipped the switch. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 14:44, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello sir, With all sense of humility as an editor who has learn from his past, I had finally decided to report 'Tiptoethrutheminefield based On a behavior I considered disruptive and the extent of damages he might caused to the project (wikipedia). I can no longer fold my arms to see a bad condition getting worst. Tiptoethrutheminefield joined wikipedia 6 month ago with 436 edit to unique pages (only created one poorly referenced page so far) but move around AfD, Talk pages and ANI to attack other editors, directing Non-sequitur comment to editors that vote against their wish at AfD and often follows them around wikipedia for the purpose of attack, even with no experience on how things work here on wikipedia. This one to Epeefleche. After I told him here, to refrain from directing non-sequitur comment to me, he apologized but repeated the same thing here again yesterday. Also am aware that he has just been banned from Armenia and Azerbaijan related article For disruptive behavior. I don't want any problems with him and I don't want to warn him. I just had a serious issue in a just concluded discussion at ANI and have learn from my mistakes, I don't want the same thing to repeat itself that's why I had come to report to you instead of reacting to his comments. Thank you sir. Wikicology ( talk) 19:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Looking through his edits of the past few days, it is notable what a high percentage of them are of articles to which he followed me, as anyone can plainly see.
I think these edits, coupled with his admission that he is following me (though, with a bulk of his edits this week being ones where he followed me, it was clear in any event), and his admitted rejection of an uninvolved editor's warning (as well as my own), and the upset he is causing me, are not what our Project has in mind as acceptable editing. Epeefleche ( talk) 07:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
He/she defends admins for accusing on Talk:Diamonds (Rihanna song). It must be MariaJaydHicky’s IP. 115.164.53.12 ( talk) 06:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/E4024, how do you know they're using two different equipment? I think using a checkuser won't hurt. Étienne Dolet ( talk) 20:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time or upgrade to semi? -- George Ho ( talk) 02:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Is this what you hoped to see from Titanium Dragon when lifting their topic ban? Are unfounded intimations that Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu fabricated the death threats against them for attention considered acceptable on the encyclopedia? I have opened a WP:ANI thread on this issue. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 10:18, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, TheLateDentarthurdent has contacted me saying they're being affected by an IP range block and would like an exemption. I can vouch for the editor and the fact that this is the only IP they can use at their current location. Would you mind having a quick look? Thanks,-- Cúchullain t/ c 14:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, After returning from the ban the user repeated the offence. Now what ? “ WarKosign ” 14:11, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi C, an editor brought to my attention a user named Karlhard, who has only been editing for about 3 weeks, but who has processed a crapload of deletion nominations. The concerned editor suspects that they may be a sock, although I admit, I don't know who they might be a sock of. But I think we've all seen n00b users jump into advanced editing, and when we notice them, our sock detectors go off. If you could keep an eye on them, it would be appreciated. Thanx, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:51, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
I was recently warned about DS. This is rather odd, the only change I made to the page is removing a extraneous quote mark. Yes I know Ds applies, but still rather odd to be warned after something like that. Is there some other reason you found what I did possibly in violation or felt the need to warn me? Or do you have it automated or something? -- Obsidi ( talk) 03:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. You can read translations.
Recent changes
File information cleanup
Problems
Changes this week
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
13:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
I had already made it clear that I considered your last post on my talk page to be unhelpful. I had put your sources question down to lack of knowledge on your part (such as an inability to look at the actual sources, or a lack of understanding that looking at the actual sources should be a requirement in any AfD). However, in light of your latest posting I now wonder if the real intent of it, and the latest post, was harassment. If you had really wanted clarification about what I meant by "garbage source", why did you not ask on the actual AfD page? Your latest post is even more unreasonable [11] - you accuse me of reverting without providing a reliable source yet fail to provide a single diff showing I have done any such thing. What am I to make of that? Is it another display of ignorance (a lack of realization that diffs should be given when accusing an editor of something), or part of an ongoing harassment? Please, do not post any more of your "advice" or "questions" on my talk page, and stop making false accusations. Tiptoethrutheminefield ( talk) 14:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello sir, its my pleasure to inform you that I love to enroll at the above academy and to be a student under your tutelage. I will be glad if my admission is granted. Thanks. Wikicology ( talk) 18:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate limiting factors and will be happy to take my enquiry elsewhere. I was advised in an by RGloucester to contact you regarding breaches by User:Technophant as indicated at User_talk:Technophant#SCW.26ISIL_sanctions and taken up at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Request for clarification on Syrian Civil War and ISIL sanctions - warning policy. Help or advice would be equally appreciated. Gregkaye ✍♪ 06:24, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Could you please take a look at WP:AN#Request for clarification on Syrian Civil War and ISIL sanctions - warning policy. What seems to have happened here is that Template:SCW&ISIL sanctions and Template:SCW&ISIL enforcement have not been updated to make it possible for any editor, as opposed to only administrators, to add what is basically a sanction alert to another editor's talk page. I certainly thought that this had been done and I thought we'd sorted it out here. [14] I can't see any reason for this to be an Admin only notice with a different process from general sanctions. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 15:20, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 September 28. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
Software changes this week
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
05:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 09:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
insource:
keyword for
text searches. It caused issues with the
new search tool. It will come back later.
[26]
[27]Problems
Software changes this week
<
indicator>
tag in these templates instead to add the icons.
[32]
[33]Future changes
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey Callanecc, shouldn't Patrol forty's "evidence" (just a rant against Eric Corbett, resulting from too many sour grapes) be scrapped completely from the Evidence page? They were never in good standing, as far as I'm concerned; Courcelles can tell you more. Drmies ( talk) 03:11, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
Problems
Software changes this week
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Guidelines. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
81.153.185.157's (MariaJaydHicky) return as 81.148.240.215. He/she is continuing disruptive editing again. 183.171.181.49 ( talk) 08:15, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I've been looking at the Historicist SPI, which seems to have been abandoned for several weeks. Since you appear to have been the last CU to touch this case, I was wondering if you have any more observations on it. Thanks for any comments. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:46, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. I noticed that when you created Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda that you removed several involved parties from the case. This wouldn't be important were it not for the fact that it limits the amount of evidence that can be presented. Could you please add the involved parties (the users who made statements) to the active case main case page? Many thanks.- Mr X 12:36, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, can I have this page and this page deleted do you think? Baaarny ( talk) 20:54, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 04:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Could you take a look at the "Waldorf education" and "Banning Policy closed" sections of WP:AC/N? The quotebox from the "Waldorf education" section has been pushed down into the "Banning Policy closed" section — and if viewed using Firefox, the quoteboxes in the two sections are superimposed one on top of the other, making the text unreadable.
This happened right after the latest archival action by "Lowercase sigmabot III", and I reported it on Sigma's talk page ( User talk:Σ/Archive/2014/November#Lowercase sigmabot III mangled a page, but the bot people are insisting it's not their fault or responsibility. Since you are one of the arb clerks (and the one who posted the "Waldorf education" notice), I thought I should bring it up with you and see if you have any ideas on how to fix the problem so that all the text on the noticeboard page can be read. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:04, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
A new sock has appeared. Take a look?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 01:48, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Make that two.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 02:58, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
It keeps happening. Need a sleeper check as he used an account registered in August 2014.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 03:56, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Another August account.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 07:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
On the Arbcom GGTF proposed decision Talk page: in mobile view, the sections after the section you collapsed are displaying as subsections instead of standing on their own. I suspect that the reason for the messed up display is that the section was closed with {{hab}} instead of {{cob}} but I'm not sure about that. I'm reluctant to change this on the page myself so I thought I'd bring it to your attention. Thanks. Ca2james ( talk) 17:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Civility. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I had blocked this range as part of the Macy VG IP vandal, specifically as anon-only, and you reblocked earlier this week with {{ checkuserblock-wide}} and also acc-create disabled. 174.236.97.16 has requested an unblock saying that they can't edit, "even when logged in", which shouldn't be the case; they would, however, be unable to create a new account with your new block parameters. For some reason, the system detects ME as the blocking admin instead of you, but I'd still like to defer to you in this case (if there is anything to even be done). ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 10:10, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
There are the sources- /info/en/?search=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Stop_to_deleted_towns_in_As-Suwayda_governorate. -- Pototo1 ( talk) 10:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I tried WP:RPP, but the extension requests there were declined. What do you think? -- George Ho ( talk) 20:24, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I opened a SPI per a previous question you asked regarding my idea that some of the invovled case parties were editing logged out. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lightbreather the IP was ok with the checkuser but Lightbreather after showing up has now decided to go silent again as well as the IP. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 11:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I'm trying to figure out how diffs, links, and words are counted for the DangerousPanda Arbcom Evidence sections. I'm tring to use MrX evidence section to try and figure out the counting is done, but I'm confused, things don't add up for me. Can you explain how you're counting what? Thanks. (For diffs, I'm assuming you're counting arrowed icons that have numbers. For links, I'm assuming you count arrowed icons that have text.)
I have some specific Qs too:
Again thanks. Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 08:18, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello! This edit to the General sanctions page appears to have included text from the copied applicable area ("Pages related to Austrian school of economics and the Ludwig von Mises Institute"). I do not think that was your intention, but I hesitate to correct anything related to that case. Please double-check. Cheers! Tgeairn ( talk) 09:06, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Someone is saying this was not imposed by arbcom. If that's so, then it must have originated from ANI. Should I go there and ask for an alteration to the IBAN? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Please see discussion on my talkpage. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Aspromonte goat. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
It seems that many sanctions were recently revoked by the Arbitration Committee, but that the page Wikipedia:General sanctions was not updated to reflect this. As you are a clerk for the Committee, I figured I should alert you to this incongruence. RGloucester — ☎ 00:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. Since your recent CU I have added two more in the same section, so perhaps you can do another check without opening a brand new SPI. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 11:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
The editor no provide evidences that's why I remove that. -- Pototo1 ( talk) 20:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
The user was the similar contribution pattern with his previous blocked users River Stumpf and Gifchief. Can you sockpuppet him? 115.164.208.58 ( talk) 11:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Yup! 12 Reverts in less than 24 hours. No discussion. I have a hunch 2 or 3 of them get paid by the State Bar to run public relations for the Bar on Wikipedia. They shredded the article just as thought they would. I'm not going to make any reverts. I am not going to make any edits. I am not even going to read that 'article' (advertising brochure) for the State Bar.
Hope you are having a good day. Peace & Love.
Here are examples of the total defacing of the article.
These are back-to-back reverts. Look at the article history for the rest. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=State_Bar_of_California&action=history
If you want to revert it back, protect the article, and press the issue of a discussion. This is the date to revert it back to. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=State_Bar_of_California&oldid=635744334
Apart from that, good luck. This is total waste of my time, but I wish you well. It's somebody else's problem now.
2.177.11.225 ( talk) 19:30, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
2.177.163.10 ( talk) 12:04, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I've never made one edit on the Jordan Belfort article, but you can see Ravensfire reverting the edits of others and edit warring: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jordan_Belfort&action=history
Fantastic communication style with others: (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ravensfire)
And now they are buddies?
On the State Bar Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=State_Bar_of_California&limit=250&action=history
As I said before, it's good to spot these situations up front. As for the joy of being a Wikipedia editor ... count me out. I'm an educated grown-up, with small children and life responsibilities. Whomever wants to fix Wikipedia will need to get a handle on this type of behavior, including what you see above: e.g., 12 Reverts in about 24 hours by Srich32977 and Ravenfire's fantastic communication style.
You know what's even more puzzling? That on his User page, Srich32977 states that he is co-owner in a night-time law school in California that depends upon being certified by the State Bar. So I guess it makes sense for him to revert that article 12 times a day: ("About S. Rich: Hello, and welcome to my user page! First off, I'm S. Rich and I have an interest in a privately owned California law school.") Yup, that's the smell of neutrality in the air.
Have a great day. 2.177.11.158 ( talk) 13:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Is this not a violation of this (see also, [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60])? Please advise. Thanks. — ArtifexMayhem ( talk) 06:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
If i twice revert editings which made without identifying the source it is will be violation the 1RR rules or not? Here are the editings that have been made without specifying the source: here here I've already revert one from this editings. And provide the source confirming my actions. here So now I want to ask I can revert and second here not breaking the 1RR. Just this editor Tgoll774often violates the rules to edit. When he edits without identifying the source.
All his editings is violation of the rules of edit and facts systematic vandalism. So maybe there is a way to influence it. Hanibal911 ( talk) 13:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Hello, it seems User:NE Ent has put one of his comments on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda/Workshop in a section reserved for comments by Arbitrators. However, NE Ent is not yet an arbitrator as far as I know. Please could you move his comment? I thought it best not to refactor his comments myself, given the dire warnings and such at the top. Thine Antique Pen ( talk) 18:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
living people
Thank you for quality articles on people, active in diplomacy (
Dave Sharma) and international education (
Alec Lazenby), for welcoming new users and
articles, for teaching new vandal patrollers, for
performing also minor admin tasks, for
picking up ideas, - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
A year ago, you were the 685th recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize. - I asked the candidates for arbitration about an edit you may remember: pleasing answers culminate in "no foul, play on", the nicer wording for AGF ;) ( discussed a year ago) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Please give me ACC interface URL.
accounts
Sorry, I got a little off track here [70] and would prefer to remove the comments, if possible. As others have replied, didn't want to that on my own, don't know what the protocol is. NE Ent 11:17, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I believe the message should read " maximum of 2000 words and 200 diffs for non-parties " ?--
TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom
06:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
What do you think about the fact that criticisms of British political institutions and political scandals have an independent Wikipedia page, and Wikipedia Admins previously included criticisms of the California State Bar on a case-by-case basis (see Keller below), but the main article on the California State Bar has now been wiped clean of even the slightest critiques (from mainstream news sources, the US Supreme Court, Legal Journals, and Law Professors)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_scandals_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keller_v._State_Bar_of_California
I value your input. 2.177.3.1 ( talk) 10:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Greetings from the
Guild of Copy Editors
![]() Candidate nominations for Guild coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015, are currently underway. The nomination period will close at 23:59 on December 15 (UTC), after which voting will commence until 23:59 on December 31, 2014. Self-nominations are welcomed. Please consider getting involved; it's your Guild and it won't coordinate itself, so if you'd like to help coordinate Guild activities we'd love to hear from you. Cheers from your GOCE coordinators
Jonesey95,
Baffle gab1978, and
Miniapolis.
Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC) |
Hello, Callanecc. I am trying to figure out why you deleted this draft article that I have been working on. Its creator doesn't appear to be blocked or banned. Some edits were made by such a user, but they were reverted. What's the problem? — Anne Delong ( talk) 13:17, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
I requested PC extension at RFPP, but it was declined. Will you do it instead? -- George Ho ( talk) 01:55, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 17:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
What about this one? -- George Ho ( talk) 17:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I added the 9 Dec 2013 case to the archive, which was presumably missed. Also, Pottinger's cats still needs to be affirmed and tagged. Manul 14:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
What would you think of letting community discretionary sanctions be notifiable with Edit filter 602, just like Arbcom's? This would make it easier for admins to manage the alerts, and reduce the size of the CS log files. We would not use Template:Ds/alert for this, it would be a newly-written template that would also invoke Template:Z33. If anyone thinks this is a good idea, it would need Arbcom's permission. An alternative would be to use a different Z-number but copy Arbcom's code. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 04:31, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed re Z template (though we'd need to make sure that there couldn't be a crossover in the filter, I was referring to Template:Ds/* templates. One single enforcement page (in addition to AN) with similar formatting to WP:AE or WP:GS/GG/E sounds like the best idea to me. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 09:21, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Or we just remove the sentence altogether. No matter how it's worded it's not going to make complete sense and it's pretty obvious (to me at least) that to avoid it you don't edit in the area. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 06:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick action on this. Another editor expressed some concern on my talk page that the SPI was going to take too long. Hopefully this will help to restore some faith in the system. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:39, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I received a notice on my TP, and don't understand why you included it considering I asked you the very question about sanctions on your TP. I don't feel the sanction is deserved as I have tried in GF to correct a BLP violation at G. Edward Griffin. Please explain your reason for the warning. Atsme☯ Consult 11:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello Callanecc,
Please delete these revisions at Terrorism in Australia made by an anon. user:
Please note that the situation is highly volatile and NSW Police (while having no jurisdiction here) have requested that this information be removed (see here: Sydney Morning Herald Statement (Live Blog), particularly the 6.32pm statement)
Goodnight from Australia,
Luxure Σ 13:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)