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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | → | Archive 25 |
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. |
Kindly reinstate the category Category:5th-century Hindu temples, as now there are temples that fall into this category and are categorised accordingly. - Ambar ( talk) 21:07, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Could you please place an ARBEE edit notice on Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation? As you might imagine, it is a contentious topic that has seen repeated disputes. I think that an edit notice would be beneficial. Much obliged, RGloucester — ☎ 05:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 07:36, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc,
I'd like to request that the semi-protection be placed back onto Behdad Sami: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behdad_Sami
The reason it was on there this whole time was because of the amount of slander it received. Could you please put it back on there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.53.100.94 ( talk) 04:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, that makes sense. So if for whatever reason it does start getting slandered again, should I inform you, or post something with the admin you referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.84.117.56 ( talk) 05:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Callanecc, I assure you that I haven't used any accounts except 'Vasanthsac' and 'Balaji E.M'. Vasanthsac account is used as per my employer order to create a page named ' SAC Vasanth'. Balaji E.M ( talk) 05:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Please take note of my response here to this: Thank you. -- AmritasyaPutra T 02:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Fancy lifting it? Darkness Shines ( talk) 18:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
I wanted to know if DS is still allowed to work on SPIs concerning the socking on those subjects that falls under WP:ARBIPA. Thanks. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
This is occurring at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. Courcelles ( talk) 19:31, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Please strike your outrageous accusations and personal attacks against me at WP:AE. I will not be smeared in this manner. You've turned an AE request about mass page moves and about ignoring consensus into a page about a non-existent personal dispute, and proposed measures that solve problems that do not exist. This is disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. If you cannot address the evidence raised, I suggest that you are not fit to be commenting on this AE request, and therefore ask for a recusal on your part. RGloucester — ☎ 06:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For taking on even more Wikipedia responsibilities! I don't know how you juggle it all! Liz Read! Talk! 22:44, 30 March 2015 (UTC) |
Are you free for analyzing the behavioral evidence of relatively small accounts. Asking because the SPI been mishandled twice and checkuser shown them to be unrelated. Thanks. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
OccultZone doing the exact same thing he used as "similarities" between me and the other alleged socks. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
*Specific identification, "by IP". [2] [3] [4]
*Capital t of "talk" [8] [9] [10] [11]
|
Sorry to disturb you on your page, Callanecc. Zhanzhao ( talk) 03:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I concede the points about the "by IP" and "Talk". I didn't realise it was a copied subject header that appearedin the summery. The point about Talk being common and about "formatting" is still valid though, as are the rest of my points which I already made. I'm sorry I have intruded. Zhanzhao ( talk) 05:37, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Also see the messages on User talk:Ponyo#49.244.239.31 where multiple edits have shown concerns over this IP extension, 49.244, it is used by multiple sock masters. Why one of the account, "Bargolus" signed in after 8 years, [48] just to restore the preferred version of Zhanzhao? [49] Same way DanS76 had signed in after 58 days just for restoring the preferred version of Zhanzhao? This account had self admitted to be 49.244. [50] and then edited his comment with 124.41.243.167. [51] This account pushes some "link to a WSJ article" [52] while Zhanzhao pushed "article from WSJ". [53] There are more evidences that I can mention if you would like to look upon. There is a great likely hood of sock puppetry on going and Zhanzhao has learned how to fool CU results, a process that is being already extensively currently discussed on an RfC of this policy page. It seems to me like sock master is using wide set of IP addresses for that "one liner" that Zhanzhao wants on the lead of the article. So that he cannot be caught. There is no hurry, you can also review in a few hours. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Too lazy to do the template, but yeah, that thing you did was a silly thing, even for April 1st. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 15:16, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I simply wish to raise to the attention of the clerks the somewhat obvious I believe arrogance and possible incompetence, or at least ignorance, of one of the current trainees at WP:NPOVN and his and my talk pages. I think the specific name will be, under the circumstances, obvious. I have very serious questions whether anyone who can make such clearly unsupported statements with the apparent full assurance of his absolute correctness will necessarily follow the rules and procedures, or, perhaps, simply declare his opinions as truth by fiat, and I believe there are also legitimate concerns, based on his lack of understanding of some policies, guidelines, and frequently cited essays, whether he in fact has enough familiarity with those policies and guidelines to be able to function adequately in a clerking position. John Carter ( talk) 23:17, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
I've sent you an email. Feel free to share this email with all Wikimedia departments. Vernon Schieck 16:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 14:21, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I ask that you review the following comments which are quite typical of the behavior for which I've requested your attention. These comments are typical of the pattern that has developed on Griffin TP almost every single time I post something, or when I attempt to edit the article which is almost always reverted. It is clearly harassment and serves no helpful purpose in developing consensus. The post that resulted in the current PAs comprises links and excerpts to various WP policies and guidelines, [57], which I included in an attempt to help clarify some of the questions posed by a new collaborator, [58]. My keyboard was still warm when the following two comments were posted in response to my post rather than in response to the new collaborator's post:
If the purpose of DS is to encourage discussion and develop a consensus, then the above two PAs (what appears to be harassment) from the same few editors needs your attention. I am posting it here now because I've let such behavior slide in the past, and look where it got me. One last mention with regards to behavior issues from the same editors. The following appears to be WP:Canvassing. I certainly didn't receive any notice that the 1RR was lifted at Griffin, and neither did any of the other involved editors to my knowledge.
I find that last diff very disconcerting. Atsme☯ Consult 21:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
No. Dreadstar ☥ 21:42, 22 March 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
The following truly needs your attention:
|
See my comment at the bottom. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 02:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Sorry Callanecc, I tried to help but apparently failed miserably. I'll keep an eye on the talk page of the article and try to keep it on the straight and narrow, but helping with the above editor is beyond my ability. Dreadstar ☥ 03:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
|
Extend pc time? -- George Ho ( talk) 06:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 05:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
He was plays in the Indonesia Super League see soccerway, in history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.215.64.223 ( talk) 04:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Kharkiv07 Talk 15:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Happy Easter! Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC) |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Medical disclaimer. Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not to familiar with the Pakistan/India arbitration regime. Am I correct that there is no general 1RR restriction there? Reply here is ok. Thanks. Zero talk 11:01, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
My experience is that the 1RR was a great thing for the Arab-Israeli section. It doesn't stop edit-warring, but it makes people pause before reverting again. It also helps to get rid of fly-by-night political activists. I suspect that a similar restriction on the Pakistan/India area would be good there too, though it ought to be discussed more widely first. How would you feel about imposing it now on a few articles, such as the BJP article? Zero talk 05:18, 5 April 2015 (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 changes
Problems
Changes this week
Meetings
Future changes
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, I want to ask you kindly to restore the article Igor Radusinovic since now he have played in Indonesia Super League, thus making him notable. Source here. Cheers! MbahGondrong ( talk) 00:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Can you please impose semi-protection on Little India (location)? You had blocked Basdrhnrnz who was the biggest contributor of this article in terms of adding more bytes to it. [85] Now he seems to be restoring to his version through IPs. Content is copyvio, and these edits [86] are disruptive at best. I had already requested this at RFPP, but they really don't understand. [87] OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Callannecc, the bot keeps archiving the AE section I opened. I've reverted it twice; any more, and I'm beginning to look incredibly pushy. Even if that thing is to be closed no action, could you please formally close it, so that I know I can move on? Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 20:31, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Lower to pending changes? This person already resigned as a district representative. Also, people might cool down for a while. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:22, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
You mean 20 March 2016 or 20 April of this year? OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, the Arbitration Committee has closed the Clarification request: Article titles and capitalisation, which you were listed as a party to. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Liz Read! Talk! 19:55, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Greetings Callanecc. Worm is not online for nearly 5 days. Thus I would like to know from you if the creation of this SPI was any violation of my restriction. Although I don't consider it as violation because I hadn't referred to the particular article anywhere, and only named the editors who have contributed there. If I am correct, can I also refer to this filing over there? Thank you. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 00:20, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Panty & Stocking with Garterbelt episodes. Legobot ( talk) 00:13, 12 April 2015 (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 changes
Problems
Changes this week
Meetings
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
16:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
It's been over a month since this and things have been fine since then. I was hoping we could go with the 1RR rule now, and if things go fine for three months as you proposed, go back to the usual 3RR. -- Steverci ( talk) 02:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Dear Callanecc: 16 months ago you protected the above page to prevent anyone from creating a list of Girl Meets World episodes. Apparently fans kept trying to create the list when the episodes had not aired. Now such a list has been created as a Draft and has been accepted. It's at List of Girl Meets World Episodes. Is it time for the protection to come off? I don't follow this series, but I have been asked to move the page to the proper title.— Anne Delong ( talk) 22:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Callanecc. I was disappointed to see this post [96] on the Griffin talk page. I'm concerned there will be more IDHT, forumshopping and edit-warring if the full protection is allowed to expire. I hope you'll consider extending the protection so as to avoid another mess there. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 14:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Sock it is. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 13:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Your aquisitions are absurde! Did you even read the site which was referenced? It was in albanian and the text was chnaged and was referenced so it does not break any copyright issues. Secondly, what is promotional about the infomation posted? It explains the hisotry of the insitution just like any other financial serivce. There was absolutely no reference to any achievements just simple statistical data which was again (referenced). Please stop deleting my infomation pages for nothing because if I wanted to make a ad it would be talking about the services which this comapny offers. Something which I am not doing. Please return the page because I spent a lot of time building!! Lastly if you wanted to remove something in specific which apprarntly bothered the community you could of done so without removing the whole page as each person in entitled to read about a company! Wikifakes1996 ( talk) 13:10, 23 April 2015 (UTC) Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifakes1996 ( talk • contribs) 13:08, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
I am talking about the source from monitor.al which was a magazine which was weitten in albanian and the editor wrote it in english. The rest were Inagree from the companies website but under no copyright so i dont see why he cant use them. He is not going to make up the companies history!!my point is that some of it was copied why did you not simply delete the part and leave the rest of the post? Wikifakes1996 ( talk) 13:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Because Inreceived a notification that you would block me if I edited that lost again?!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifakes1996 ( talk • contribs) 13:18, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
|
I couldn't figure what was problem with my post. the explanation is vandalism? how was vandalism claiming there were false claims, which eventually became recognised as truth, about someones's identity. i was just bringing up false claim and shown documents about some of tesla's that considered themselves as croats (even though i could name much more) from that time. people recognise tesla's as serbs nowadays because they were orthodox, they eventually became serbs. at that time when tesla was born and alive, every other tesla from croatia expressed himself as Croat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gavrilo123 ( talk • contribs) 20:00, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thanks For Your Understanding! National Names 2000 ( talk) 07:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC) |
Hi, I'm sorry to bother you but can you look at this edit request: Talk:Phoenix_Global#Protected_edit_request_on_22_April_2015. It was made five days ago but no admin has reacted. I think you can see by the explanation and "support" comments that it's a non-controversial edit. — Jeraphine Gryphon ( talk) 08:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Can I choose a different article to work on please, as fpas has hounded me to the female infanticide one and is picking a fight, no doubt in the hope of getting me blocked. I will not be able to edit the article with him causing trouble. Darkness Shines ( talk) 12:41, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, can you please do something about FPaS constantly hounding me? Three articles created since my unblock, and he has turned up at each and every one of them. Any non admin editor carrying on like this would be given an IBAN, why the hell won`t someone stop this harassment? Darkness Shines ( talk) 16:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
As the ARBS have decided to drop this matter I ask again if I may try to bring another article to GA status. Darkness Shines ( talk) 16:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
And the hounding continues How long do I have to put up with this shite? Darkness Shines ( talk) 09:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, you once unblocked DS last year under the condition of a restriction on the use of rollback and Twinkle reverts ("explain all uses of Wikipedia:Rollback or Twinkle rollback functions notwithstanding the normal rules (which will apply to Twinkle rollbacks as well)") [117]. This restriction is still logged at WP:AC/DSL. Is it still in force? If yes, would you consider [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] as breaches of it? (Note that the last two of these diffs are from the very first 24 hours after his recent Arbcom unblock.)
I'm not the only person DS has been using these kinds of reverts against, but he certainly has developed a pattern of meeting every single edit of mine with them. These are immediate, repeated, hostile blanket reverts, often made immediately without even waiting for my explanation on talk (let alone providing his own), and particularly aggravating because they often affect multiple distinct matters without explaining which of them he is actually objecting to, and when it would be extremely easy to address them separately if necessary. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:08, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I want to re-open a sockpuppet investigation case for the editor Jytdog, I opened it back then because i noticed that both users pursue exactly the same changes, sound the same when discussing, use reflists within talk pages, have the same writing style and are active at the same hours (a detailed explanation and diffs can be seen here
[124]), I considered that enough evidence to conduct an investigation but apparently wasn't convincing enough back then.
What happened a week ago is that I was gathering diffs to open an ANI case regarding the behavoir of Alon12 (which has been very uncivil), but I found something that rang a bell. Before the start of the edit war in late December, there was an IP that was pursuing exactly the same changes that Alon12 pursues, here are the IP's edits [125] and Alon12's edits [126] for comparison. In fact, it was after the edits of said IP were reverted that the account Alon12 was created and given all the obvious similarities in these edits is a no brainer that the IP was Alon12 before creating his account (and he didn't even try to make it look otherwise). If we use a IP tracking website we find that the IP is located in a public library within New Jersey just some blocks away from New York City [127], why is this important? So, not only Alon12 and Jytdog have the same editing style, the same discussing style, want the same changes, use reflists in talkpages and are active at the same hours, now we know that the two editors . I believe all this justifies a checkuser investigation, and a geolocation using an IP tracing website might be necessary, to determine wheter both users are using the same IP, or if the suspect in question switches IPs when switching accounts. Thanks for your time.
Additionaly I think I've identified another Sockpuppet: The editor TexanAzteca, as seen on this diff [128] he pursues the same edits Alon12 and Jytdog do, and uses the same sources and arguments that Alon12 have used in the talk page for the article of Mexicans of European descent [129].
All this convinces me that re-opening the case is necessary, I ask you here for advise on how to do so: Do I just need to write all the new information down or is the assistance of a clerk needed in order to declare it as re-opened? Aergas ( talk) 23:59, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
I wanted to wait for you to reply because I know you're busy and I don't want to bother you, but just a reminder about the 1RR request because my previous section got archived and I was afraid you forgot. -- Steverci ( talk) 02:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea why this page attracts IP vandalism, but the repeated vandalism starts up every time the semi-protection ends. Could we have a permanent (or at least more permanent) semi-protection? Babysitting it is getting tiresome. Anyway, if so, thanks. Softlavender ( talk) 00:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Respectfully, I don't see that as meaningfully personalizing the conversation. The point being was that the user keeps moving the goal post. The focus wasn't directly on the user but on the users malleable application of policy and guidelines. Strict adherence is currently very important to them. Before in the conversation it was not. Before that it was. The position changes based on the the position they are promoting at the time. I don't really see that your suggestion here that we do not discuss the content of someone's argument. Is there any issue with what I said other than, "Because you want to get your way."
Honestly with the review of my comments I have to ask about the acceptability of other comments there. We have a user who would, "Personally, I would sue the living F out of WP if it hosted a bio like this about me." While this isn't a legal threat, they obviously lack standing, it is rather uncivil. While it is directed at no one specific, it really shoots at everyone that hasn't sided with them. You have Atsme asking how many GA's, FA's, and ect that I have worked on because of what I said at the start of Talk:G._Edward_Griffin#GA_Status.3F. This very line of questioning is personalizing. Actually you can dig thru the page and find issues with Atsme personalising the discussion. Atsme inability to overall drop the stick is also present. I'm not interested in using the sanctions here as a weapon, but I do think that those who are need to be held to those standards. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 14:48, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Aspersions. Thanks for opening that flood gate, Callan. Atsme☯ Consult 17:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Atsme, involving yourself here is not helpful at this stage. If you want to make the accusation of following you around there's WP:AE and WP:ANI. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 06:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Hello Callanecc. Under the new WP:DSLOG system, the old sanctions have been reorganized. But I recently had to figure out who imposed the 1RR on Armenian Genocide. It turns out it was User:Moreschi on 27 January, 2008. But this is no longer searchable in the logs, since 2008 is blanked. Per your edit here. Is there any way to fix this? How about a collapse box instead of blanking. Collapse boxes don't interfere with searching. Or perhaps no blanking at all, because unless you click on '2008' you won't see any of this. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 01:02, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Callanecc. Sometimes it takes more than 140 diffs to prove an editor to be a sock. [134] Although this case is a far bigger scope, it took more over 106 diffs just to get this case accepted. [135] Is there any provision that I can get more than just 100 diffs? I would request for about 300 diffs and 3000 words. Thank you. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
You instituted an iban on WarKosign an myself. WarKosign reverted my edit on the Israel article. When I complained on the admin notice board, WarKosign self reverted his possible iban violation with the comment "Self-reverting possible violation of an iban. Someone else should apply this change." His self revert with the message to other editors is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Israel&diff=657360828&oldid=657331946 After other editors responded to his message and reverted to his revert of my edits, I tried to discuss the revert of my edits on the Israel article talk page by creating a new section titled ""The borders of the new state were not specified.", not a NPOV". I found it impossible as WarKosign continued to comment on every aspect of the revert of my edits. WarKosign also continued to modify the revert of my edits in the article. I am confused as to how to respond to this, can you explain it to me? Thanks, Gouncbeatduke ( talk) 15:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey Callanecc, I would like to file two cases to AE, but I need some clarification for the first one, whether I should go for it or not. I had originally filed it on WP:AN, [136] and I had been told by someone that it is better to file such cases to WP:AE. There is clear violation of topic ban, his 3rd last edit on his last day (29 March) clearly violates the topic ban. [137] OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
My understanding is that you, Euryalus, and Mdann52 have volunteered to serve as a panel to close the HRC move discussion. I suggest that you begin to coordinate on how you're going to manage this closure. It might be useful to look at last year's closure, and how that was done. It was very thorough, including the likes of this large sheet of analysis by TParis. There has been a flurry of confusion about the closure, so firming this up would be useful on your part. RGloucester — ☎ 03:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a bit odd, and I might be able to fix it myself, but probably you would want to look at it anyway and be better placed to fix it. here you add a note about the latest Arb request but the link Special:PermanentLink/Special:Permalink/654877135#Brews_ohare goes nowhere, and gives no clue where it should go. I've not used these perma-links myself so don't know how they are supposed to work. I could probably find it easily with a search but you might have more success and anyway would want to know why it doesn't work now.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 18:09, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
It would be appreciated if you could keep an eye on the Dmitry Medvedev page as Need1521 is quite a prolific user of socks. Incidentally, this one, which has just chipped into the section on Jimbo's talk page with their first edit is almost certainly another of his socks. Valenciano ( talk) 22:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Please see WP:AN3#User:Maurice Flesier reported by User:Anastan (Result: ). User:Maurice Flesier was previously User:Maurice07. Since you made the entry about him in WP:RESTRICT back in 2014 you might be interested in the new AN3 complaint. If a block is appropriate here, then per the prior discussion an indef might be considered. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 00:14, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
You've been involved with the above before. I wonder if you have the time to take a quick look here and provide any advice? ---- Snowded TALK 18:48, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I reverted a nice, subtle slam against you. See the revert. Very creative. I haven't seen that type before. Bgwhite ( talk) 05:20, 4 May 2015 (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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | → | Archive 25 |
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. |
Kindly reinstate the category Category:5th-century Hindu temples, as now there are temples that fall into this category and are categorised accordingly. - Ambar ( talk) 21:07, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Could you please place an ARBEE edit notice on Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation? As you might imagine, it is a contentious topic that has seen repeated disputes. I think that an edit notice would be beneficial. Much obliged, RGloucester — ☎ 05:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 07:36, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc,
I'd like to request that the semi-protection be placed back onto Behdad Sami: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behdad_Sami
The reason it was on there this whole time was because of the amount of slander it received. Could you please put it back on there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.53.100.94 ( talk) 04:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, that makes sense. So if for whatever reason it does start getting slandered again, should I inform you, or post something with the admin you referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.84.117.56 ( talk) 05:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Callanecc, I assure you that I haven't used any accounts except 'Vasanthsac' and 'Balaji E.M'. Vasanthsac account is used as per my employer order to create a page named ' SAC Vasanth'. Balaji E.M ( talk) 05:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Please take note of my response here to this: Thank you. -- AmritasyaPutra T 02:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Fancy lifting it? Darkness Shines ( talk) 18:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
I wanted to know if DS is still allowed to work on SPIs concerning the socking on those subjects that falls under WP:ARBIPA. Thanks. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
This is occurring at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. Courcelles ( talk) 19:31, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Please strike your outrageous accusations and personal attacks against me at WP:AE. I will not be smeared in this manner. You've turned an AE request about mass page moves and about ignoring consensus into a page about a non-existent personal dispute, and proposed measures that solve problems that do not exist. This is disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. If you cannot address the evidence raised, I suggest that you are not fit to be commenting on this AE request, and therefore ask for a recusal on your part. RGloucester — ☎ 06:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For taking on even more Wikipedia responsibilities! I don't know how you juggle it all! Liz Read! Talk! 22:44, 30 March 2015 (UTC) |
Are you free for analyzing the behavioral evidence of relatively small accounts. Asking because the SPI been mishandled twice and checkuser shown them to be unrelated. Thanks. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
OccultZone doing the exact same thing he used as "similarities" between me and the other alleged socks. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
*Specific identification, "by IP". [2] [3] [4]
*Capital t of "talk" [8] [9] [10] [11]
|
Sorry to disturb you on your page, Callanecc. Zhanzhao ( talk) 03:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I concede the points about the "by IP" and "Talk". I didn't realise it was a copied subject header that appearedin the summery. The point about Talk being common and about "formatting" is still valid though, as are the rest of my points which I already made. I'm sorry I have intruded. Zhanzhao ( talk) 05:37, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Also see the messages on User talk:Ponyo#49.244.239.31 where multiple edits have shown concerns over this IP extension, 49.244, it is used by multiple sock masters. Why one of the account, "Bargolus" signed in after 8 years, [48] just to restore the preferred version of Zhanzhao? [49] Same way DanS76 had signed in after 58 days just for restoring the preferred version of Zhanzhao? This account had self admitted to be 49.244. [50] and then edited his comment with 124.41.243.167. [51] This account pushes some "link to a WSJ article" [52] while Zhanzhao pushed "article from WSJ". [53] There are more evidences that I can mention if you would like to look upon. There is a great likely hood of sock puppetry on going and Zhanzhao has learned how to fool CU results, a process that is being already extensively currently discussed on an RfC of this policy page. It seems to me like sock master is using wide set of IP addresses for that "one liner" that Zhanzhao wants on the lead of the article. So that he cannot be caught. There is no hurry, you can also review in a few hours. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Too lazy to do the template, but yeah, that thing you did was a silly thing, even for April 1st. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 15:16, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I simply wish to raise to the attention of the clerks the somewhat obvious I believe arrogance and possible incompetence, or at least ignorance, of one of the current trainees at WP:NPOVN and his and my talk pages. I think the specific name will be, under the circumstances, obvious. I have very serious questions whether anyone who can make such clearly unsupported statements with the apparent full assurance of his absolute correctness will necessarily follow the rules and procedures, or, perhaps, simply declare his opinions as truth by fiat, and I believe there are also legitimate concerns, based on his lack of understanding of some policies, guidelines, and frequently cited essays, whether he in fact has enough familiarity with those policies and guidelines to be able to function adequately in a clerking position. John Carter ( talk) 23:17, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
I've sent you an email. Feel free to share this email with all Wikimedia departments. Vernon Schieck 16:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 14:21, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I ask that you review the following comments which are quite typical of the behavior for which I've requested your attention. These comments are typical of the pattern that has developed on Griffin TP almost every single time I post something, or when I attempt to edit the article which is almost always reverted. It is clearly harassment and serves no helpful purpose in developing consensus. The post that resulted in the current PAs comprises links and excerpts to various WP policies and guidelines, [57], which I included in an attempt to help clarify some of the questions posed by a new collaborator, [58]. My keyboard was still warm when the following two comments were posted in response to my post rather than in response to the new collaborator's post:
If the purpose of DS is to encourage discussion and develop a consensus, then the above two PAs (what appears to be harassment) from the same few editors needs your attention. I am posting it here now because I've let such behavior slide in the past, and look where it got me. One last mention with regards to behavior issues from the same editors. The following appears to be WP:Canvassing. I certainly didn't receive any notice that the 1RR was lifted at Griffin, and neither did any of the other involved editors to my knowledge.
I find that last diff very disconcerting. Atsme☯ Consult 21:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
No. Dreadstar ☥ 21:42, 22 March 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
The following truly needs your attention:
|
See my comment at the bottom. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 02:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Sorry Callanecc, I tried to help but apparently failed miserably. I'll keep an eye on the talk page of the article and try to keep it on the straight and narrow, but helping with the above editor is beyond my ability. Dreadstar ☥ 03:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
|
Extend pc time? -- George Ho ( talk) 06:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Extend PC time? -- George Ho ( talk) 05:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
He was plays in the Indonesia Super League see soccerway, in history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.215.64.223 ( talk) 04:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Kharkiv07 Talk 15:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Happy Easter! Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC) |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Medical disclaimer. Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not to familiar with the Pakistan/India arbitration regime. Am I correct that there is no general 1RR restriction there? Reply here is ok. Thanks. Zero talk 11:01, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
My experience is that the 1RR was a great thing for the Arab-Israeli section. It doesn't stop edit-warring, but it makes people pause before reverting again. It also helps to get rid of fly-by-night political activists. I suspect that a similar restriction on the Pakistan/India area would be good there too, though it ought to be discussed more widely first. How would you feel about imposing it now on a few articles, such as the BJP article? Zero talk 05:18, 5 April 2015 (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 changes
Problems
Changes this week
Meetings
Future changes
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, I want to ask you kindly to restore the article Igor Radusinovic since now he have played in Indonesia Super League, thus making him notable. Source here. Cheers! MbahGondrong ( talk) 00:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Can you please impose semi-protection on Little India (location)? You had blocked Basdrhnrnz who was the biggest contributor of this article in terms of adding more bytes to it. [85] Now he seems to be restoring to his version through IPs. Content is copyvio, and these edits [86] are disruptive at best. I had already requested this at RFPP, but they really don't understand. [87] OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Callannecc, the bot keeps archiving the AE section I opened. I've reverted it twice; any more, and I'm beginning to look incredibly pushy. Even if that thing is to be closed no action, could you please formally close it, so that I know I can move on? Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 20:31, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Lower to pending changes? This person already resigned as a district representative. Also, people might cool down for a while. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:22, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
You mean 20 March 2016 or 20 April of this year? OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, the Arbitration Committee has closed the Clarification request: Article titles and capitalisation, which you were listed as a party to. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Liz Read! Talk! 19:55, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Greetings Callanecc. Worm is not online for nearly 5 days. Thus I would like to know from you if the creation of this SPI was any violation of my restriction. Although I don't consider it as violation because I hadn't referred to the particular article anywhere, and only named the editors who have contributed there. If I am correct, can I also refer to this filing over there? Thank you. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 00:20, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Panty & Stocking with Garterbelt episodes. Legobot ( talk) 00:13, 12 April 2015 (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 changes
Problems
Changes this week
Meetings
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
16:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
It's been over a month since this and things have been fine since then. I was hoping we could go with the 1RR rule now, and if things go fine for three months as you proposed, go back to the usual 3RR. -- Steverci ( talk) 02:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Dear Callanecc: 16 months ago you protected the above page to prevent anyone from creating a list of Girl Meets World episodes. Apparently fans kept trying to create the list when the episodes had not aired. Now such a list has been created as a Draft and has been accepted. It's at List of Girl Meets World Episodes. Is it time for the protection to come off? I don't follow this series, but I have been asked to move the page to the proper title.— Anne Delong ( talk) 22:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Callanecc. I was disappointed to see this post [96] on the Griffin talk page. I'm concerned there will be more IDHT, forumshopping and edit-warring if the full protection is allowed to expire. I hope you'll consider extending the protection so as to avoid another mess there. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 14:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Sock it is. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 13:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Your aquisitions are absurde! Did you even read the site which was referenced? It was in albanian and the text was chnaged and was referenced so it does not break any copyright issues. Secondly, what is promotional about the infomation posted? It explains the hisotry of the insitution just like any other financial serivce. There was absolutely no reference to any achievements just simple statistical data which was again (referenced). Please stop deleting my infomation pages for nothing because if I wanted to make a ad it would be talking about the services which this comapny offers. Something which I am not doing. Please return the page because I spent a lot of time building!! Lastly if you wanted to remove something in specific which apprarntly bothered the community you could of done so without removing the whole page as each person in entitled to read about a company! Wikifakes1996 ( talk) 13:10, 23 April 2015 (UTC) Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifakes1996 ( talk • contribs) 13:08, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
I am talking about the source from monitor.al which was a magazine which was weitten in albanian and the editor wrote it in english. The rest were Inagree from the companies website but under no copyright so i dont see why he cant use them. He is not going to make up the companies history!!my point is that some of it was copied why did you not simply delete the part and leave the rest of the post? Wikifakes1996 ( talk) 13:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Because Inreceived a notification that you would block me if I edited that lost again?!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifakes1996 ( talk • contribs) 13:18, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
|
I couldn't figure what was problem with my post. the explanation is vandalism? how was vandalism claiming there were false claims, which eventually became recognised as truth, about someones's identity. i was just bringing up false claim and shown documents about some of tesla's that considered themselves as croats (even though i could name much more) from that time. people recognise tesla's as serbs nowadays because they were orthodox, they eventually became serbs. at that time when tesla was born and alive, every other tesla from croatia expressed himself as Croat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gavrilo123 ( talk • contribs) 20:00, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thanks For Your Understanding! National Names 2000 ( talk) 07:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC) |
Hi, I'm sorry to bother you but can you look at this edit request: Talk:Phoenix_Global#Protected_edit_request_on_22_April_2015. It was made five days ago but no admin has reacted. I think you can see by the explanation and "support" comments that it's a non-controversial edit. — Jeraphine Gryphon ( talk) 08:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Can I choose a different article to work on please, as fpas has hounded me to the female infanticide one and is picking a fight, no doubt in the hope of getting me blocked. I will not be able to edit the article with him causing trouble. Darkness Shines ( talk) 12:41, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, can you please do something about FPaS constantly hounding me? Three articles created since my unblock, and he has turned up at each and every one of them. Any non admin editor carrying on like this would be given an IBAN, why the hell won`t someone stop this harassment? Darkness Shines ( talk) 16:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
As the ARBS have decided to drop this matter I ask again if I may try to bring another article to GA status. Darkness Shines ( talk) 16:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
And the hounding continues How long do I have to put up with this shite? Darkness Shines ( talk) 09:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, you once unblocked DS last year under the condition of a restriction on the use of rollback and Twinkle reverts ("explain all uses of Wikipedia:Rollback or Twinkle rollback functions notwithstanding the normal rules (which will apply to Twinkle rollbacks as well)") [117]. This restriction is still logged at WP:AC/DSL. Is it still in force? If yes, would you consider [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] as breaches of it? (Note that the last two of these diffs are from the very first 24 hours after his recent Arbcom unblock.)
I'm not the only person DS has been using these kinds of reverts against, but he certainly has developed a pattern of meeting every single edit of mine with them. These are immediate, repeated, hostile blanket reverts, often made immediately without even waiting for my explanation on talk (let alone providing his own), and particularly aggravating because they often affect multiple distinct matters without explaining which of them he is actually objecting to, and when it would be extremely easy to address them separately if necessary. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:08, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I want to re-open a sockpuppet investigation case for the editor Jytdog, I opened it back then because i noticed that both users pursue exactly the same changes, sound the same when discussing, use reflists within talk pages, have the same writing style and are active at the same hours (a detailed explanation and diffs can be seen here
[124]), I considered that enough evidence to conduct an investigation but apparently wasn't convincing enough back then.
What happened a week ago is that I was gathering diffs to open an ANI case regarding the behavoir of Alon12 (which has been very uncivil), but I found something that rang a bell. Before the start of the edit war in late December, there was an IP that was pursuing exactly the same changes that Alon12 pursues, here are the IP's edits [125] and Alon12's edits [126] for comparison. In fact, it was after the edits of said IP were reverted that the account Alon12 was created and given all the obvious similarities in these edits is a no brainer that the IP was Alon12 before creating his account (and he didn't even try to make it look otherwise). If we use a IP tracking website we find that the IP is located in a public library within New Jersey just some blocks away from New York City [127], why is this important? So, not only Alon12 and Jytdog have the same editing style, the same discussing style, want the same changes, use reflists in talkpages and are active at the same hours, now we know that the two editors . I believe all this justifies a checkuser investigation, and a geolocation using an IP tracing website might be necessary, to determine wheter both users are using the same IP, or if the suspect in question switches IPs when switching accounts. Thanks for your time.
Additionaly I think I've identified another Sockpuppet: The editor TexanAzteca, as seen on this diff [128] he pursues the same edits Alon12 and Jytdog do, and uses the same sources and arguments that Alon12 have used in the talk page for the article of Mexicans of European descent [129].
All this convinces me that re-opening the case is necessary, I ask you here for advise on how to do so: Do I just need to write all the new information down or is the assistance of a clerk needed in order to declare it as re-opened? Aergas ( talk) 23:59, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
I wanted to wait for you to reply because I know you're busy and I don't want to bother you, but just a reminder about the 1RR request because my previous section got archived and I was afraid you forgot. -- Steverci ( talk) 02:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea why this page attracts IP vandalism, but the repeated vandalism starts up every time the semi-protection ends. Could we have a permanent (or at least more permanent) semi-protection? Babysitting it is getting tiresome. Anyway, if so, thanks. Softlavender ( talk) 00:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Respectfully, I don't see that as meaningfully personalizing the conversation. The point being was that the user keeps moving the goal post. The focus wasn't directly on the user but on the users malleable application of policy and guidelines. Strict adherence is currently very important to them. Before in the conversation it was not. Before that it was. The position changes based on the the position they are promoting at the time. I don't really see that your suggestion here that we do not discuss the content of someone's argument. Is there any issue with what I said other than, "Because you want to get your way."
Honestly with the review of my comments I have to ask about the acceptability of other comments there. We have a user who would, "Personally, I would sue the living F out of WP if it hosted a bio like this about me." While this isn't a legal threat, they obviously lack standing, it is rather uncivil. While it is directed at no one specific, it really shoots at everyone that hasn't sided with them. You have Atsme asking how many GA's, FA's, and ect that I have worked on because of what I said at the start of Talk:G._Edward_Griffin#GA_Status.3F. This very line of questioning is personalizing. Actually you can dig thru the page and find issues with Atsme personalising the discussion. Atsme inability to overall drop the stick is also present. I'm not interested in using the sanctions here as a weapon, but I do think that those who are need to be held to those standards. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 14:48, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Aspersions. Thanks for opening that flood gate, Callan. Atsme☯ Consult 17:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Atsme, involving yourself here is not helpful at this stage. If you want to make the accusation of following you around there's WP:AE and WP:ANI. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 06:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Hello Callanecc. Under the new WP:DSLOG system, the old sanctions have been reorganized. But I recently had to figure out who imposed the 1RR on Armenian Genocide. It turns out it was User:Moreschi on 27 January, 2008. But this is no longer searchable in the logs, since 2008 is blanked. Per your edit here. Is there any way to fix this? How about a collapse box instead of blanking. Collapse boxes don't interfere with searching. Or perhaps no blanking at all, because unless you click on '2008' you won't see any of this. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 01:02, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Callanecc. Sometimes it takes more than 140 diffs to prove an editor to be a sock. [134] Although this case is a far bigger scope, it took more over 106 diffs just to get this case accepted. [135] Is there any provision that I can get more than just 100 diffs? I would request for about 300 diffs and 3000 words. Thank you. OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
You instituted an iban on WarKosign an myself. WarKosign reverted my edit on the Israel article. When I complained on the admin notice board, WarKosign self reverted his possible iban violation with the comment "Self-reverting possible violation of an iban. Someone else should apply this change." His self revert with the message to other editors is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Israel&diff=657360828&oldid=657331946 After other editors responded to his message and reverted to his revert of my edits, I tried to discuss the revert of my edits on the Israel article talk page by creating a new section titled ""The borders of the new state were not specified.", not a NPOV". I found it impossible as WarKosign continued to comment on every aspect of the revert of my edits. WarKosign also continued to modify the revert of my edits in the article. I am confused as to how to respond to this, can you explain it to me? Thanks, Gouncbeatduke ( talk) 15:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey Callanecc, I would like to file two cases to AE, but I need some clarification for the first one, whether I should go for it or not. I had originally filed it on WP:AN, [136] and I had been told by someone that it is better to file such cases to WP:AE. There is clear violation of topic ban, his 3rd last edit on his last day (29 March) clearly violates the topic ban. [137] OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
My understanding is that you, Euryalus, and Mdann52 have volunteered to serve as a panel to close the HRC move discussion. I suggest that you begin to coordinate on how you're going to manage this closure. It might be useful to look at last year's closure, and how that was done. It was very thorough, including the likes of this large sheet of analysis by TParis. There has been a flurry of confusion about the closure, so firming this up would be useful on your part. RGloucester — ☎ 03:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a bit odd, and I might be able to fix it myself, but probably you would want to look at it anyway and be better placed to fix it. here you add a note about the latest Arb request but the link Special:PermanentLink/Special:Permalink/654877135#Brews_ohare goes nowhere, and gives no clue where it should go. I've not used these perma-links myself so don't know how they are supposed to work. I could probably find it easily with a search but you might have more success and anyway would want to know why it doesn't work now.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 18:09, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
It would be appreciated if you could keep an eye on the Dmitry Medvedev page as Need1521 is quite a prolific user of socks. Incidentally, this one, which has just chipped into the section on Jimbo's talk page with their first edit is almost certainly another of his socks. Valenciano ( talk) 22:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Please see WP:AN3#User:Maurice Flesier reported by User:Anastan (Result: ). User:Maurice Flesier was previously User:Maurice07. Since you made the entry about him in WP:RESTRICT back in 2014 you might be interested in the new AN3 complaint. If a block is appropriate here, then per the prior discussion an indef might be considered. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 00:14, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
You've been involved with the above before. I wonder if you have the time to take a quick look here and provide any advice? ---- Snowded TALK 18:48, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I reverted a nice, subtle slam against you. See the revert. Very creative. I haven't seen that type before. Bgwhite ( talk) 05:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)