![]() | 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 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | 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. |
I've explored the link between Finealt and Gabucho previously and thought it easiest to just keep them separate based on geolocation. What's easiest isn't always best though, so good luck!-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
You know that you had blocked Ryulong before, and he was also banned from Wikipedia? I have just created the Ryulong file here. I have added some brief information about his behaviour, but have not put into detail. I am sure you can add more. Qwertyxp2000 ( talk) 03:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Dear Callanecc, My name is Grace Kosaka and I am an actor, writer and film producer. On Dec 29, 2014 a user by the name of Familyismostimportant, posted unreferenced information on my page. As an actor, I have previously been stalked and this public posting of sensitive/inaccurate information puts me at significant risk.
More recently, on March 28, 2015 an individual with the IP 174.117.108.144 attempted to out me with respect to my sexual preference - as an actor this is particularly damaging. This entry was tagged by wiki as 'possible BLP issue or vanadalism'.
I am kindly requesting your help with respect to your check user status to establish the identity of these two individuals as I may need to take legal action to stop further attacks.
Any help you could provide me would be greatly appreciated.
Lisamichelle2008 (
talk)
21:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I find 72 hours remarkably light, given the longterm pattern of disruption on that article. Would you mind re-opening the AE thread? I would like to ask for a more thorough review of the situation and possibly further sanctions. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I have commented at the AE thread. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:18, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Very similar editing with Andrewbf and abusing multiple accounts. Can you sock him/her? 115.164.88.57 ( talk) 07:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, thank you for the revdelete on the negative controversial content (and @ Materialscientist: for the page protection). I apologize for my involvement, but in case of a potential edit warring towards me, I'm not intending to do so. DivineAlpha 05:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Possible sleeper has appeared. Whpq ( talk) 10:05, 18 May 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
Changes this week
Meetings
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Callanecc: I am a editor from Iran and my favorite subject is Iranian modern history. Therefore, I work on Iranian book and sometimes Iran-Iraq war books. Also, I edited several articles in addition to Iranian book. These articles are Negotiations on Iran nuclear deal framework, Comprehensive agreement on the Iranian nuclear program, Casualties of the Iranian Revolution, Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi , April 2015 Nepal earthquake, Ja'far Sobhani, Sayyed Ibn Tawus, and Yemeni Civil War (2015). I try to contribute in any article but my major contribution is about Iranian modern history especially Iran-Iraq war. A user ( User:Anders Feder) reported my username in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. He said that I am Srahmadi sockpuppet. I have this account and don't know about Srahmadi. I think that Anders Feder follow me and his behavior hurts me. His faith dose not appear to be a good faith. I read the Defending yourself against claims section and understand that I can send my request for you. Please help me and say that what should I do? I don't have abuse behavior with my account and don't need another username. Papeli44 ( talk) 10:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
LouisAragon ( talk · contribs) is an extreme pro-Persian POV-pusher who has been blocked for socking/edit-warring. The Bacha Bazi article has to be written with WP:NPOV. All the sources confirm that bacha bazi is a "Persian" phrase and is mostly done in "northern Afghanistan". He doesn't seems to like that fact so he wants to twist the information around in order to mislead. I think he should be blocked, that's the only way people such as him will ever learn. I removed Pakistan because nobody in that country heard of Bacha bazi.-- Krzyhorse22 ( talk) 23:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I'll keep an eye on it. It probably wouldn't hurt to engage with them on the talk page now that the article is full protected. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 01:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc! I just noticed that you put pending changes protection on the article Russians, but you set it to Pending changes level 2 protection rather than Pending changes level 1 protection, so I just wanted to check – did you mean to set that to PC level 2 (the use of which, I gather, is still controversial), or was that a mistake and you meant to set it to PC level 1? Thanks in advance! -- IJBall ( talk) 17:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
What you meant from "especially [ ] & [ ]" at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log#Pseudoscience ? OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc this editor LightandDark2000 has break the 1RR. diff, diff. Lindi29 ( talk) 13:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I was saying "Thank you". ~~ LDE JRuff~~ 20:00, 25 May, 2015 (UTC)
I am very sorry to see this. I am not surprised, but I am disappointed. I have thought for some time that you were working on a "fast track" to "govcom". The first block can be explained via the WP:AE crap .. but the second block is obviously a stalking "let's get him" block. In my humble opinion - I support those who actually create content. I understand that the "powers that be" need to maintain some sort of "WE IZ THE POWER" ... but I don't have to like it. Shame on you for for your behavior. Trying to silence a content editor is disruptive - and personally I think you should be blocked for your behavior. — Ched : ? 04:12, 31 May 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.
Problems
Changes this week
Meetings
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't mean to pester, but I do find it highly irregular that the result of the HRC move request has not yet been revealed. It has been nearly a month since the request was closed. If it is reasonable, may I ask for an update on the progress of the closure? RGloucester — ☎ 18:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callan! How are you? I'm back on Wikipedia after few months of absense and I'm ready for the ArbCom clerk training. Cheers, Jim Carter 07:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. Thanks for the revdel etc, but please unprotect my UTP. Or if you must protect it, please do it for just an hour or so. Best, — SMALL JIM 09:06, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the help; I very rarely get comments from new people on my talk page, so a day of semiprotection shouldn't be a problem. I wonder what I did to attract this guy's attention? Nyttend ( talk) 12:10, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You blocked User:Mikon47 but posted the block notice at User talk:MoAtoum. I think you meant to post just a warning, as you had said at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MoAtoum. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 01:06, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I agree Darkness Shines is blocked, but we can't ignore his concern. Is there any chance that the sockmaster is still active in WP with new socks?-- Cosmic Emperor 07:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
You can stop a war of edits between those editors (LightandDark2000 and 햄방이). They also violated two rules 1RR and 3RR. Here: here here here here here here here here I tried to intervene but they ignored me. here But that would not be drawn into a war of edits, I stopped trying stop this war of edits. Maybe you as admin can stop these actions. Because they dont want stop and war of edits between these two editors still continues. Hanibal911 ( talk) 11:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Have you seem to forget something? -- George Ho ( talk) 00:29, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
A week's block for trivia was a bad and unconstructive action, and a week at that. However he had broken the terms of the GGTF ruling, so no real excuse can be made on his part. A wiser admin, with their eye on the broader picture, might have blocked for a day, or even a minute.
Extending this block to two weeks today is egregious, even by the standard of Eric-blocking. It's pointless, it's vindictive. For you to extend it yourself makes it look even more so. If something "needed preventive protection" (and why else?), there are no shortage of less-involved admins who would have jumped to defend WP as needed.
I expect you to ignore my comments. I wouldn't even be surprised if you then blocked me in return (yes, my expectations of admin behaviour are that low). This was a bad block though, made worse by its extension, and please don't think that it is supported by all other editors. Andy Dingley ( talk) 09:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm sure you're a nice guy Callanecc and everyone has assured me you're a good admin but a quick skim through your recent contributions suggests you are more interested in dishing out punishments than writing an encyclopedia, and that's seriously worrying. I urge you to find a neglected article, improve it and ask Eric to GA review it. You will immediately see why people are so defensive about him being blocked. I sincerely believe nobody can truly understand that unless they've done substantial content work. In my view, content writers are the heart and soul of the project. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:10, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
(Could it be your "better angel" has evolved [or devolved] by your experiences in clerking & the other enforcement roles you pointed out!? Combined w/ the acquisition of admin power [to block]!? To the point where an editor like Richie333 sees a need to remind that you appear to have "left the building" and holed up in a different one across the parking lot!?) IHTS ( talk) 11:28, 30 May 2015 (UTC)2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: The articles I've created, because at the end of the day that's what Wikipedia is for. Content creation doesn't come easily to me so when I create articles like Dave Sharma I'm quite proud and happy with it. But I think my best contributions are in the various places where I can help others [...]
I don't see how discussing me has much to do with this block. That's curious, as if separating or disassociating yourself from the block. (It's axiomatic that actions are a function of decisions to act, and decisions are a function of knowledge + values + attitudes + objectives etc., and those are functions of an individual. If the block exists in a vacuum or disjoint from you as you're seeming to suggest, then why do you suppose the many other admins who saw the same conditions as you didn't exercise any block, but you did?) IHTS ( talk) 22:19, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
"why we have WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF & (to an extent) WP:NPA"is more of the same (IDHT/dust cloud). (I have no idea what you are trying to say, unless it is the same argument you keep proffering: that any self-reflection before admin action is something to be avoided, since will somehow disable you from ever imposing a block in any circumstance. That's not what I've been suggesting. But you love dust clouds. And I don't like being frustrated after communicating as clearly as I possibly can, either re diff counting or this issue. So again, I GIVE UP.) IHTS ( talk) 08:40, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, please steer clear of any further blocks on Eric Corbett, if/when he s/ return to editing. No matter what he writes, nor where. Please leave your concerns to another admin. (I'm only one editor and don't like speaking outside of my own experience. I've had two experiences with you, and one of them related to a technical blockable policy breach. What you chose reacted to, and what you *didn't*, teaches me that your self-view of objectivity and straightforard rules enforcement is mistaken. You make selections ending up favoring an editor or cause whether you're aware of doing so or not. You are not in a position to rate your own objectivity.) IHTS ( talk) 06:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 09:54, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 10:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 02:47, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
86.165.14.37 ( talk · contribs) isn't Theduinoelegy, it's an IP sock of Billy from Bath ( talk · contribs) , whose original account in his real name was blocked for disruption four years ago. They have recently returned and have resumed what they call "their battle," using numerous BT IPs to mess around with my past actions and to harass David J Johnson ( talk · contribs). The last part of their first edit to Theduinoelegy makes that clear [20]. RBI. Acroterion (talk) 15:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Mediator Barnstar | |
For your participation in the 2015 Hillary Clinton move request. Took a little while for a decision, but I appreciate that you provided a clear and concise interpretation of the consensus. Couldn't have been a decision that was overly easy to make. Kudos. NickCT ( talk) 23:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC) |
A new editor called "Trollpolice" has taken over from what "Deleteroftrolls" and the three IPv6s were doing yesterday, blanking big blocks of this talk page. "Trollpolice" can be blocked for blatant edit-warring, but if you were to run a CU and connect that account to "Deleteroftrolls", then that latter account could be blocked as well. (None of these accounts are me, of course.) I don't particularly care if the thread on the talk page involving myself (the last one) is blanked or archived or left as it is, but there's no reason the page should be disrupted the way it is at the moment. Thanks, BMK ( talk) 20:31, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 04:50, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
He is indeed a sock of that SM. Is there any way DS can be unblocked.-- Cosmic Emperor 03:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
I've gone through the edits by the latest batch of socks at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jaredgk2008 and reverted a lot of vandalism, and I have a couple of suggestions. It looks like they've added Jay Mariotti to Lee Corso and Woody Paige as a vandalism target with a number of the sock accounts attacking it in the past month, so would it make sense to semi-protect that too to at least keep non-confirmed accounts out? Also, a lot of the vandalism I found (as with previous socks) was adding nonsense about Lee Corso to unrelated articles, so might it make sense to add an edit filter to prevent that? I can't see there being many genuine additions of "Lee Corso" to other articles, and false positives would surely be pretty rare. Mr Potto ( talk) 09:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, another editor and I have been in disagreement about the Blue Army (Poland). I had assumed that the article is under the WP:ARBEE 1RR sanctions, but I see it isn't. Am I allowed to add it to the list? Also, how to I notify another editor about ARBEE sanctions - can I place the 'Ds/alert|e-e' template on their talk page? best, - Darouet ( talk) 20:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Your DS sanction against me was unwarranted, Callan, and reminiscent of the bias you have consistently shown toward me since your first unwarranted ARB warning at Griffin for a rogue emoji I had no control over. I am asking you to remove the sanctions and recuse yourself from any interaction with me in the future. You clearly did not properly investigate the behavior of Yobol, an editor who was not involved in any of the Kombucha TP discussions, and who actually was the one edit warring in this case, but it appears your bias against me caused you to automatically act against me without question.
I copied the following from Yobo's contributions which includes mention of the sanction reminder and polite warning I posted to his TP. You sanctioned the wrong editor, Callan.
You know full well that the onus of proof is on the editor who wanted to restore the material I corrected and challenged as noncompliant with policy. The onus was on Yobol, not me. I cited 3 quality Reviews that surpassed the quality of the old 2003 review that used to cite the noncompliant material. He was edit warring each time he restored noncompiant material. I will not provide the actual diffs here because when I've demonstrated similar behavior by other uncivil, POV pushing editors in the past, including the railroading attempts against me, the harassment, the incivility, the tag-teaming and other disruptive behavior, you hatted my requests for help, and kept pointing me to ARBCOM. Perhaps the time has come for ARBCOM to investigate this whole mess in one felled swoop. If they decide that I truly am the one who deserves sanctions for trying to be compliant with NPOV, then so be it but it's all going to come out in the wash, dating back to Griffin with some of the same editors and the treatment and ill-will that I've experienced since. Atsme 📞 📧 13:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
June 8 (diffs with edit summaries - read them because it exposes the provocateurs and edit warriors in full tag team accord....)
June 9
June 15
June 16
June 20
Callanecc is this another one of my posts that you have decided to ignore or are you considering my request? Please respond. Atsme 📞 📧 22:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, since you have not responded to my requests, I filed an appeal. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Arbitration_enforcement_action_appeal_by_Atsme Atsme 📞 📧 19:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey, do you think that any of the accounts that have edited Sandeep Anand are sockpuppets of User:TekkenJinKazama? I only ask since the article is associated with one of his sockpuppets in the past and there have been some recent accounts that have tried to create the page. I'm not seeing any overwhelmingly large signs that they're possible sockpuppets which is why I haven't brought this to SPI. For the most part these accounts have been largely satisfied to try to re-create Anand's article, so they have no edits elsewhere. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
No issues, you say? Just ask my therapist and he'll tell you otherwise. And if you don't believe him, ask his therapist.
Seriously - thanks for your support at my RfA. I shall strive to be worthy of the honor in all my dealings, and hope I shall prove to have warranted your trust. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 05:48, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I see that you've put the Asdisis SPI case into the open state. I've requested initially a CU on the accounts and the IP. It was rejected without any explanation, with a threat posted on my talk page. Would be it appropriate request again a CU for this SPI? Thank you.-- 72.66.12.17 ( talk) 12:16, 12 July 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.
15:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Before you go ahead with the request for adminship for User:Wesley Mouse, you should read through the mess he made here. It's far worse than a simple 3RR shows.- 91.10.49.211 ( talk) 13:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Can you explain to me what you are talking about? Tell it to me like I'm 5 years old, please. Thanks-- Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 06:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Callenec, it's my understanding that I am allowed 500 words to defend against a claim at AE, and am also allowed an additional 500 words for a boomerang request against the filing party. Is that correct, and if so, what is the standard AE format for packaging the boomerang request? Should it be a subsection under my "statement" in reply to the request against me, or should it be packaged as a stand-alone AE filing, or something else? Thanks in advance for guidance. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 13:37, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
10:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VibrantBabhan ( talk • contribs)
what was the notification for,for reminder,i have changed my name from Alhanuty to AlAboud83,plus the edit i made was a new edit after going on 8 day hiatus. Alhanuty ( talk) 12:37, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Cleanup Barnstar | |
Much obliged for your work fixing up Yakub Memon this afternoon. Yunshui 雲 水 14:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC) |
Need extension of protection at Rajiv Malhotra VictoriaGrayson Talk 23:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I agree, I think protection should be extended. -- Presearch ( talk) 04:25, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Any reason why you're leaving this notice on my talk page now? And doesn't that template alert you that you're giving the notice to someone who's already aware of them? Volunteer Marek ( talk) 05:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, I don't know if you missed my post earlier, but I'd asked here if you might be able to add Blue Army (Poland) to the list of ARBEE sanctioned articles. If you saw my earlier request and don't believe this article should fall under ARBEE editing procedures, I guess I'd just want to know why.
Haller's Army committed well known atrocities against Jews and Ukrainians at the end of World War I. Because of this, its activities and history are highly politicized, either by Jews and Ukrainians from the perspective of righteous victims, or by Polish nationalists from the perspective of justified force against fifth columns.
My efforts to improve the article by removing the unsourced Jewish Bolshevism myth, expanding on sources we already use, or bringing content in line with sources have been met with a wall of reverts and no further talk page discussion.
I think that the sanctions really do improve the editing environment for these kinds of articles by forcing people to talk page discussion. Let me know what you think. - Darouet ( talk) 10:11, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, re WP:AE#NewsAndEventsGuy, NewsAndEventsGuy has retired in lieu of reply -- but two editors objected to my behaviour in other respects, and to the behaviour of Pete Tillman although he wasn't participating in this affair relating to NewsAndEventsGuy. What's appropriate now: Discuss the original filing as if it still matters? Discuss the new objections as if they're the true subject now? Require a new filing from the objectors? Peter Gulutzan ( talk)
Callanecc, re WP:AE#Peter_Gulutzan: am I right in believing that I cannot go over 500 words in total, including updates and replies to new posts? If so, may I have permission to go over? Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 01:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Template:Uw-af1 has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Eye
snore
03:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
Hope all is well. I recently saw that several users are recreating the user page of blocked sock KeyofNeptune. These users are: 2601:6c5:202:40:9157:e06b:af8:ddc6, IanTerryLV, and Ghardaian. Seems very suspicious. Is an SPI warranted? GAB ( talk) 14:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I couldn't figure out why you were listed as an arbitrator on the KWW and The Rambling Man case until I found this edit. Looks like there were some strange edits this morning! Liz Read! Talk! 18:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mat (Russian profanity). Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
I noticed recently that you mentioned me in a positive way (agreed with me). I also recall that I got pretty snotty with you a while back because I very much disagreed with you on something (although I don't recall the specifics). That does make you the bigger person, and I felt I should admit that. I apologize for being so abrasive in our previous encounter, although I do not recant my position. I just wanted to make note that I was aware, and impressed. Cheers, — Ched : ? 20:57, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi C, just checkin' about Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Beggin'for, you said that three were all linked--did you mean all four? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Callanecc. :) I was just reviewing Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Templates and went out of curiosity to review {{ BLP removal}}, which according to the policy "can be used on a talk page of an article (or a user) to explain why material has been removed under this policy, and under what conditions the material may be replaced." I don't think I've ever seen it before (although for all I know I used it years ago) and wondered what it said. I was a bit surprised to see it had been redirected some time ago to {{ Uw-biog2}} and was really no longer fit for recommended purpose. Now I'm curious about the reason for the repurposing of the template. :) And also wondering if the guidance in policy recommending the use of the template on article talk pages in a manner that clearly doesn't fit its repurposing be removed? I'm guessing it hasn't caused much concern, but {{ Uw-biog2}} really doesn't belong on article talk pages and doesn't at all explain under what conditions the material may be replaced. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
This is the IP user who commented in the AE report about WeijiBaikeBianji that you recently closed. Could you please reconsider that decision? The last admin to express an opinion about the substance of the report, Edjohnston, suggested the report should be closed with a warning to the user being reported, and no admins opposed that outcome. The reason the article has not been edited recently is because the RFC on it was reopened, but if the eventual conclusion of the RFC is to include the disputed paragraph, there is a danger of additional edit warring if the editors removing the paragraph don't accept that result (which is likely, based on the pattern on that article thus far). 43.228.157.59 ( talk) 19:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
Thanks for helping me stop the vandals. I couldn't of done it without you. Ashboxboy ( talk) 12:17, 13 August 2015 (UTC) |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Does this count as a breach or partial breach of 1RR or the tit-for-tat principle of the Troubles restriction: [35] and [36].
I had been typing this response to Gob Lofa when they did the partial revert. Mabuska (talk) 20:48, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Callanec, The suckpuppet User:103.56.218.198 has opened an edit war at the Alebtong District article, deleting referenced material, introducing dead links, basically removing anything other than what he thinks should be there; all this while I was actively editing the same. I have abandoned editing that article and have sought your help. See also what he is doing to Andrew Gutti. Two of this user's domains are currently blocked, User:103.56.218.191 and User:103.56.218.197 are currently blocked. Thank you. Fsmatovu ( talk) 06:22, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Can I ask you to reconsider this block on Mabuska. I have given my reasons there. Scolaire ( talk) 07:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors August 2015 Newsletter
![]() July drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 24 people who signed up, 17 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. August blitz: The one-week April blitz, targeting biographical articles that have been tagged for copy editing for over a year, will run from August 16–22. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the article list on the blitz page. Sign up here! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, KieranTribe, Miniapolis, and Pax85. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
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.
16:17, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 20 August 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.
13:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Image use policy. Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm afraid things seem to be heading the wrong way again and I have been forced to raise Gob Lofa's behaviour again, and as the blocking admin who was looking into an IBAN and TBAN for one or both of us, your input would be appreciated. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Gob_Lofa. Mabuska (talk) 13:06, 30 August 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
ext.visualEditor.viewPageTarget.init
. Use ext.visualEditor.desktopArticleTarget.init
instead.
[53]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.
21:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion. Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Looks like we have another Caradoc29105 sock: FreshPerspectivea. Same sort of page style as seen at KeyofNeptune's page. GAB Hello! 19:33, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
After reading these remedies I got an impression that logging of warnings in this area should be done by uninvolved admins. It tells: "Any uninvolved administrator may, at his or her own discretion..." ... "Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor shall be given a warning...". However, it seems that a heavily involved user stated giving indiscriminate warnings and loggins to a number of others, including even people who are only peripherally involved (I did not edit these pages for more than a week and made very few edits before). Is he doing right thing? My very best wishes ( talk) 19:58, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm not 100% sure exactly how to interpret the 1RR rule on Troubles articles, but here we have Gob Lofa not accepting a revert to the previous stable version. It is very clearly a Troubles related article. He has been carrying out sensible edits for a bit, but now it appears he needs monitoring again as controversial edits are being mixed with sensible ones ---- Snowded TALK 20:39, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
Remedy 2 (Roscelese restricted) of the Christianity and Sexuality case is modified to read the following: Roscelese ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is subject to the following restrictions. Other than in cases of indisputable vandalism or BLP violations, they are indefinitely prohibited from:
These restrictions may be appealed to the committee twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. Should Roscelese breach any of these restrictions, she may be blocked for per the standard Enforcement provision below.
For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) 03:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, as a user in the edit filter manager user group we wanted to let you know about the new wikipedia-en-editfilters mailing list. As part of our recent efforts to improve the use of edit filters on the English Wikipedia it has been established as a venue for internal discussion by edit filter managers regarding private filters (those only viewable by administrators and edit filter managers) and also as a means by which non-admins can ask questions about hidden filters that wouldn't be appropriate to discuss on-wiki. As an edit filter manager we encourage you to subscribe; the more users we have in the mailing list the more useful it will be to the community. If you subscribe we will send a short email to you through Wikipedia to confirm your subscription, but let us know if you'd prefer another method of verification. I'd also like to take the opportunity to invite you to contribute to the proposed guideline for edit filter use at WP:Edit filter/Draft and the associated talk page. Thank you! Sam Walton ( talk) and MusikAnimal talk 18:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I'm back now. If you left me a message and you still want an answer could you please repost it? Thanks, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 02:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I rev/del'd one of the IP's edits. I don't know if you want to suppress it.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 04:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
That's fine and all but couldn't you have fixed the vandalism on the page before protecting it? DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 05:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Would you mind deleting and adding similar creation protection to Template:MySpace? That is almost certainly where they'll head next. It's template protected, so I haven't been able to actually nominate it for deletion, but it's eligible under WP:G8. Thanks for helping out! ~ Rob Talk 06:43, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, just trying to help. :) -- 110.20.234.69 ( talk) 09:55, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I removed Liberal Party of Australia leadership spill, 2009 from the 'See also' section since WP:NOTSEEALSO says: "As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes." I see that it's a different event, but the event is included in the navbox. Schwede 66 10:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate your quick response to my oversight request. Have a great day! YoPienso ( talk) 13:32, 14 September 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 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | 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. |
I've explored the link between Finealt and Gabucho previously and thought it easiest to just keep them separate based on geolocation. What's easiest isn't always best though, so good luck!-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
You know that you had blocked Ryulong before, and he was also banned from Wikipedia? I have just created the Ryulong file here. I have added some brief information about his behaviour, but have not put into detail. I am sure you can add more. Qwertyxp2000 ( talk) 03:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Dear Callanecc, My name is Grace Kosaka and I am an actor, writer and film producer. On Dec 29, 2014 a user by the name of Familyismostimportant, posted unreferenced information on my page. As an actor, I have previously been stalked and this public posting of sensitive/inaccurate information puts me at significant risk.
More recently, on March 28, 2015 an individual with the IP 174.117.108.144 attempted to out me with respect to my sexual preference - as an actor this is particularly damaging. This entry was tagged by wiki as 'possible BLP issue or vanadalism'.
I am kindly requesting your help with respect to your check user status to establish the identity of these two individuals as I may need to take legal action to stop further attacks.
Any help you could provide me would be greatly appreciated.
Lisamichelle2008 (
talk)
21:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I find 72 hours remarkably light, given the longterm pattern of disruption on that article. Would you mind re-opening the AE thread? I would like to ask for a more thorough review of the situation and possibly further sanctions. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I have commented at the AE thread. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:18, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Very similar editing with Andrewbf and abusing multiple accounts. Can you sock him/her? 115.164.88.57 ( talk) 07:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, thank you for the revdelete on the negative controversial content (and @ Materialscientist: for the page protection). I apologize for my involvement, but in case of a potential edit warring towards me, I'm not intending to do so. DivineAlpha 05:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Possible sleeper has appeared. Whpq ( talk) 10:05, 18 May 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
Changes this week
Meetings
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Callanecc: I am a editor from Iran and my favorite subject is Iranian modern history. Therefore, I work on Iranian book and sometimes Iran-Iraq war books. Also, I edited several articles in addition to Iranian book. These articles are Negotiations on Iran nuclear deal framework, Comprehensive agreement on the Iranian nuclear program, Casualties of the Iranian Revolution, Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi , April 2015 Nepal earthquake, Ja'far Sobhani, Sayyed Ibn Tawus, and Yemeni Civil War (2015). I try to contribute in any article but my major contribution is about Iranian modern history especially Iran-Iraq war. A user ( User:Anders Feder) reported my username in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. He said that I am Srahmadi sockpuppet. I have this account and don't know about Srahmadi. I think that Anders Feder follow me and his behavior hurts me. His faith dose not appear to be a good faith. I read the Defending yourself against claims section and understand that I can send my request for you. Please help me and say that what should I do? I don't have abuse behavior with my account and don't need another username. Papeli44 ( talk) 10:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
LouisAragon ( talk · contribs) is an extreme pro-Persian POV-pusher who has been blocked for socking/edit-warring. The Bacha Bazi article has to be written with WP:NPOV. All the sources confirm that bacha bazi is a "Persian" phrase and is mostly done in "northern Afghanistan". He doesn't seems to like that fact so he wants to twist the information around in order to mislead. I think he should be blocked, that's the only way people such as him will ever learn. I removed Pakistan because nobody in that country heard of Bacha bazi.-- Krzyhorse22 ( talk) 23:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I'll keep an eye on it. It probably wouldn't hurt to engage with them on the talk page now that the article is full protected. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 01:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc! I just noticed that you put pending changes protection on the article Russians, but you set it to Pending changes level 2 protection rather than Pending changes level 1 protection, so I just wanted to check – did you mean to set that to PC level 2 (the use of which, I gather, is still controversial), or was that a mistake and you meant to set it to PC level 1? Thanks in advance! -- IJBall ( talk) 17:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
What you meant from "especially [ ] & [ ]" at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log#Pseudoscience ? OccultZone ( Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc this editor LightandDark2000 has break the 1RR. diff, diff. Lindi29 ( talk) 13:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I was saying "Thank you". ~~ LDE JRuff~~ 20:00, 25 May, 2015 (UTC)
I am very sorry to see this. I am not surprised, but I am disappointed. I have thought for some time that you were working on a "fast track" to "govcom". The first block can be explained via the WP:AE crap .. but the second block is obviously a stalking "let's get him" block. In my humble opinion - I support those who actually create content. I understand that the "powers that be" need to maintain some sort of "WE IZ THE POWER" ... but I don't have to like it. Shame on you for for your behavior. Trying to silence a content editor is disruptive - and personally I think you should be blocked for your behavior. — Ched : ? 04:12, 31 May 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.
Problems
Changes this week
Meetings
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't mean to pester, but I do find it highly irregular that the result of the HRC move request has not yet been revealed. It has been nearly a month since the request was closed. If it is reasonable, may I ask for an update on the progress of the closure? RGloucester — ☎ 18:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callan! How are you? I'm back on Wikipedia after few months of absense and I'm ready for the ArbCom clerk training. Cheers, Jim Carter 07:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc. Thanks for the revdel etc, but please unprotect my UTP. Or if you must protect it, please do it for just an hour or so. Best, — SMALL JIM 09:06, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the help; I very rarely get comments from new people on my talk page, so a day of semiprotection shouldn't be a problem. I wonder what I did to attract this guy's attention? Nyttend ( talk) 12:10, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You blocked User:Mikon47 but posted the block notice at User talk:MoAtoum. I think you meant to post just a warning, as you had said at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MoAtoum. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 01:06, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I agree Darkness Shines is blocked, but we can't ignore his concern. Is there any chance that the sockmaster is still active in WP with new socks?-- Cosmic Emperor 07:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
You can stop a war of edits between those editors (LightandDark2000 and 햄방이). They also violated two rules 1RR and 3RR. Here: here here here here here here here here I tried to intervene but they ignored me. here But that would not be drawn into a war of edits, I stopped trying stop this war of edits. Maybe you as admin can stop these actions. Because they dont want stop and war of edits between these two editors still continues. Hanibal911 ( talk) 11:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Have you seem to forget something? -- George Ho ( talk) 00:29, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
A week's block for trivia was a bad and unconstructive action, and a week at that. However he had broken the terms of the GGTF ruling, so no real excuse can be made on his part. A wiser admin, with their eye on the broader picture, might have blocked for a day, or even a minute.
Extending this block to two weeks today is egregious, even by the standard of Eric-blocking. It's pointless, it's vindictive. For you to extend it yourself makes it look even more so. If something "needed preventive protection" (and why else?), there are no shortage of less-involved admins who would have jumped to defend WP as needed.
I expect you to ignore my comments. I wouldn't even be surprised if you then blocked me in return (yes, my expectations of admin behaviour are that low). This was a bad block though, made worse by its extension, and please don't think that it is supported by all other editors. Andy Dingley ( talk) 09:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm sure you're a nice guy Callanecc and everyone has assured me you're a good admin but a quick skim through your recent contributions suggests you are more interested in dishing out punishments than writing an encyclopedia, and that's seriously worrying. I urge you to find a neglected article, improve it and ask Eric to GA review it. You will immediately see why people are so defensive about him being blocked. I sincerely believe nobody can truly understand that unless they've done substantial content work. In my view, content writers are the heart and soul of the project. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:10, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
(Could it be your "better angel" has evolved [or devolved] by your experiences in clerking & the other enforcement roles you pointed out!? Combined w/ the acquisition of admin power [to block]!? To the point where an editor like Richie333 sees a need to remind that you appear to have "left the building" and holed up in a different one across the parking lot!?) IHTS ( talk) 11:28, 30 May 2015 (UTC)2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: The articles I've created, because at the end of the day that's what Wikipedia is for. Content creation doesn't come easily to me so when I create articles like Dave Sharma I'm quite proud and happy with it. But I think my best contributions are in the various places where I can help others [...]
I don't see how discussing me has much to do with this block. That's curious, as if separating or disassociating yourself from the block. (It's axiomatic that actions are a function of decisions to act, and decisions are a function of knowledge + values + attitudes + objectives etc., and those are functions of an individual. If the block exists in a vacuum or disjoint from you as you're seeming to suggest, then why do you suppose the many other admins who saw the same conditions as you didn't exercise any block, but you did?) IHTS ( talk) 22:19, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
"why we have WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF & (to an extent) WP:NPA"is more of the same (IDHT/dust cloud). (I have no idea what you are trying to say, unless it is the same argument you keep proffering: that any self-reflection before admin action is something to be avoided, since will somehow disable you from ever imposing a block in any circumstance. That's not what I've been suggesting. But you love dust clouds. And I don't like being frustrated after communicating as clearly as I possibly can, either re diff counting or this issue. So again, I GIVE UP.) IHTS ( talk) 08:40, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, please steer clear of any further blocks on Eric Corbett, if/when he s/ return to editing. No matter what he writes, nor where. Please leave your concerns to another admin. (I'm only one editor and don't like speaking outside of my own experience. I've had two experiences with you, and one of them related to a technical blockable policy breach. What you chose reacted to, and what you *didn't*, teaches me that your self-view of objectivity and straightforard rules enforcement is mistaken. You make selections ending up favoring an editor or cause whether you're aware of doing so or not. You are not in a position to rate your own objectivity.) IHTS ( talk) 06:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 09:54, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 10:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 02:47, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
86.165.14.37 ( talk · contribs) isn't Theduinoelegy, it's an IP sock of Billy from Bath ( talk · contribs) , whose original account in his real name was blocked for disruption four years ago. They have recently returned and have resumed what they call "their battle," using numerous BT IPs to mess around with my past actions and to harass David J Johnson ( talk · contribs). The last part of their first edit to Theduinoelegy makes that clear [20]. RBI. Acroterion (talk) 15:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Mediator Barnstar | |
For your participation in the 2015 Hillary Clinton move request. Took a little while for a decision, but I appreciate that you provided a clear and concise interpretation of the consensus. Couldn't have been a decision that was overly easy to make. Kudos. NickCT ( talk) 23:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC) |
A new editor called "Trollpolice" has taken over from what "Deleteroftrolls" and the three IPv6s were doing yesterday, blanking big blocks of this talk page. "Trollpolice" can be blocked for blatant edit-warring, but if you were to run a CU and connect that account to "Deleteroftrolls", then that latter account could be blocked as well. (None of these accounts are me, of course.) I don't particularly care if the thread on the talk page involving myself (the last one) is blanked or archived or left as it is, but there's no reason the page should be disrupted the way it is at the moment. Thanks, BMK ( talk) 20:31, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Renew PC? -- George Ho ( talk) 04:50, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
He is indeed a sock of that SM. Is there any way DS can be unblocked.-- Cosmic Emperor 03:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
I've gone through the edits by the latest batch of socks at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jaredgk2008 and reverted a lot of vandalism, and I have a couple of suggestions. It looks like they've added Jay Mariotti to Lee Corso and Woody Paige as a vandalism target with a number of the sock accounts attacking it in the past month, so would it make sense to semi-protect that too to at least keep non-confirmed accounts out? Also, a lot of the vandalism I found (as with previous socks) was adding nonsense about Lee Corso to unrelated articles, so might it make sense to add an edit filter to prevent that? I can't see there being many genuine additions of "Lee Corso" to other articles, and false positives would surely be pretty rare. Mr Potto ( talk) 09:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, another editor and I have been in disagreement about the Blue Army (Poland). I had assumed that the article is under the WP:ARBEE 1RR sanctions, but I see it isn't. Am I allowed to add it to the list? Also, how to I notify another editor about ARBEE sanctions - can I place the 'Ds/alert|e-e' template on their talk page? best, - Darouet ( talk) 20:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Your DS sanction against me was unwarranted, Callan, and reminiscent of the bias you have consistently shown toward me since your first unwarranted ARB warning at Griffin for a rogue emoji I had no control over. I am asking you to remove the sanctions and recuse yourself from any interaction with me in the future. You clearly did not properly investigate the behavior of Yobol, an editor who was not involved in any of the Kombucha TP discussions, and who actually was the one edit warring in this case, but it appears your bias against me caused you to automatically act against me without question.
I copied the following from Yobo's contributions which includes mention of the sanction reminder and polite warning I posted to his TP. You sanctioned the wrong editor, Callan.
You know full well that the onus of proof is on the editor who wanted to restore the material I corrected and challenged as noncompliant with policy. The onus was on Yobol, not me. I cited 3 quality Reviews that surpassed the quality of the old 2003 review that used to cite the noncompliant material. He was edit warring each time he restored noncompiant material. I will not provide the actual diffs here because when I've demonstrated similar behavior by other uncivil, POV pushing editors in the past, including the railroading attempts against me, the harassment, the incivility, the tag-teaming and other disruptive behavior, you hatted my requests for help, and kept pointing me to ARBCOM. Perhaps the time has come for ARBCOM to investigate this whole mess in one felled swoop. If they decide that I truly am the one who deserves sanctions for trying to be compliant with NPOV, then so be it but it's all going to come out in the wash, dating back to Griffin with some of the same editors and the treatment and ill-will that I've experienced since. Atsme 📞 📧 13:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
June 8 (diffs with edit summaries - read them because it exposes the provocateurs and edit warriors in full tag team accord....)
June 9
June 15
June 16
June 20
Callanecc is this another one of my posts that you have decided to ignore or are you considering my request? Please respond. Atsme 📞 📧 22:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, since you have not responded to my requests, I filed an appeal. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Arbitration_enforcement_action_appeal_by_Atsme Atsme 📞 📧 19:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey, do you think that any of the accounts that have edited Sandeep Anand are sockpuppets of User:TekkenJinKazama? I only ask since the article is associated with one of his sockpuppets in the past and there have been some recent accounts that have tried to create the page. I'm not seeing any overwhelmingly large signs that they're possible sockpuppets which is why I haven't brought this to SPI. For the most part these accounts have been largely satisfied to try to re-create Anand's article, so they have no edits elsewhere. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
No issues, you say? Just ask my therapist and he'll tell you otherwise. And if you don't believe him, ask his therapist.
Seriously - thanks for your support at my RfA. I shall strive to be worthy of the honor in all my dealings, and hope I shall prove to have warranted your trust. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 05:48, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I see that you've put the Asdisis SPI case into the open state. I've requested initially a CU on the accounts and the IP. It was rejected without any explanation, with a threat posted on my talk page. Would be it appropriate request again a CU for this SPI? Thank you.-- 72.66.12.17 ( talk) 12:16, 12 July 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.
15:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Before you go ahead with the request for adminship for User:Wesley Mouse, you should read through the mess he made here. It's far worse than a simple 3RR shows.- 91.10.49.211 ( talk) 13:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Can you explain to me what you are talking about? Tell it to me like I'm 5 years old, please. Thanks-- Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 06:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Callenec, it's my understanding that I am allowed 500 words to defend against a claim at AE, and am also allowed an additional 500 words for a boomerang request against the filing party. Is that correct, and if so, what is the standard AE format for packaging the boomerang request? Should it be a subsection under my "statement" in reply to the request against me, or should it be packaged as a stand-alone AE filing, or something else? Thanks in advance for guidance. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 13:37, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
10:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VibrantBabhan ( talk • contribs)
what was the notification for,for reminder,i have changed my name from Alhanuty to AlAboud83,plus the edit i made was a new edit after going on 8 day hiatus. Alhanuty ( talk) 12:37, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Cleanup Barnstar | |
Much obliged for your work fixing up Yakub Memon this afternoon. Yunshui 雲 水 14:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC) |
Need extension of protection at Rajiv Malhotra VictoriaGrayson Talk 23:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I agree, I think protection should be extended. -- Presearch ( talk) 04:25, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Any reason why you're leaving this notice on my talk page now? And doesn't that template alert you that you're giving the notice to someone who's already aware of them? Volunteer Marek ( talk) 05:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Callanecc, I don't know if you missed my post earlier, but I'd asked here if you might be able to add Blue Army (Poland) to the list of ARBEE sanctioned articles. If you saw my earlier request and don't believe this article should fall under ARBEE editing procedures, I guess I'd just want to know why.
Haller's Army committed well known atrocities against Jews and Ukrainians at the end of World War I. Because of this, its activities and history are highly politicized, either by Jews and Ukrainians from the perspective of righteous victims, or by Polish nationalists from the perspective of justified force against fifth columns.
My efforts to improve the article by removing the unsourced Jewish Bolshevism myth, expanding on sources we already use, or bringing content in line with sources have been met with a wall of reverts and no further talk page discussion.
I think that the sanctions really do improve the editing environment for these kinds of articles by forcing people to talk page discussion. Let me know what you think. - Darouet ( talk) 10:11, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Callanecc, re WP:AE#NewsAndEventsGuy, NewsAndEventsGuy has retired in lieu of reply -- but two editors objected to my behaviour in other respects, and to the behaviour of Pete Tillman although he wasn't participating in this affair relating to NewsAndEventsGuy. What's appropriate now: Discuss the original filing as if it still matters? Discuss the new objections as if they're the true subject now? Require a new filing from the objectors? Peter Gulutzan ( talk)
Callanecc, re WP:AE#Peter_Gulutzan: am I right in believing that I cannot go over 500 words in total, including updates and replies to new posts? If so, may I have permission to go over? Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 01:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Template:Uw-af1 has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Eye
snore
03:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
Hope all is well. I recently saw that several users are recreating the user page of blocked sock KeyofNeptune. These users are: 2601:6c5:202:40:9157:e06b:af8:ddc6, IanTerryLV, and Ghardaian. Seems very suspicious. Is an SPI warranted? GAB ( talk) 14:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I couldn't figure out why you were listed as an arbitrator on the KWW and The Rambling Man case until I found this edit. Looks like there were some strange edits this morning! Liz Read! Talk! 18:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mat (Russian profanity). Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
I noticed recently that you mentioned me in a positive way (agreed with me). I also recall that I got pretty snotty with you a while back because I very much disagreed with you on something (although I don't recall the specifics). That does make you the bigger person, and I felt I should admit that. I apologize for being so abrasive in our previous encounter, although I do not recant my position. I just wanted to make note that I was aware, and impressed. Cheers, — Ched : ? 20:57, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi C, just checkin' about Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Beggin'for, you said that three were all linked--did you mean all four? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Callanecc. :) I was just reviewing Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Templates and went out of curiosity to review {{ BLP removal}}, which according to the policy "can be used on a talk page of an article (or a user) to explain why material has been removed under this policy, and under what conditions the material may be replaced." I don't think I've ever seen it before (although for all I know I used it years ago) and wondered what it said. I was a bit surprised to see it had been redirected some time ago to {{ Uw-biog2}} and was really no longer fit for recommended purpose. Now I'm curious about the reason for the repurposing of the template. :) And also wondering if the guidance in policy recommending the use of the template on article talk pages in a manner that clearly doesn't fit its repurposing be removed? I'm guessing it hasn't caused much concern, but {{ Uw-biog2}} really doesn't belong on article talk pages and doesn't at all explain under what conditions the material may be replaced. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
This is the IP user who commented in the AE report about WeijiBaikeBianji that you recently closed. Could you please reconsider that decision? The last admin to express an opinion about the substance of the report, Edjohnston, suggested the report should be closed with a warning to the user being reported, and no admins opposed that outcome. The reason the article has not been edited recently is because the RFC on it was reopened, but if the eventual conclusion of the RFC is to include the disputed paragraph, there is a danger of additional edit warring if the editors removing the paragraph don't accept that result (which is likely, based on the pattern on that article thus far). 43.228.157.59 ( talk) 19:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
Thanks for helping me stop the vandals. I couldn't of done it without you. Ashboxboy ( talk) 12:17, 13 August 2015 (UTC) |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Does this count as a breach or partial breach of 1RR or the tit-for-tat principle of the Troubles restriction: [35] and [36].
I had been typing this response to Gob Lofa when they did the partial revert. Mabuska (talk) 20:48, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Callanec, The suckpuppet User:103.56.218.198 has opened an edit war at the Alebtong District article, deleting referenced material, introducing dead links, basically removing anything other than what he thinks should be there; all this while I was actively editing the same. I have abandoned editing that article and have sought your help. See also what he is doing to Andrew Gutti. Two of this user's domains are currently blocked, User:103.56.218.191 and User:103.56.218.197 are currently blocked. Thank you. Fsmatovu ( talk) 06:22, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Can I ask you to reconsider this block on Mabuska. I have given my reasons there. Scolaire ( talk) 07:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors August 2015 Newsletter
![]() July drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 24 people who signed up, 17 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. August blitz: The one-week April blitz, targeting biographical articles that have been tagged for copy editing for over a year, will run from August 16–22. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the article list on the blitz page. Sign up here! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, KieranTribe, Miniapolis, and Pax85. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
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.
16:17, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 20 August 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.
13:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Image use policy. Legobot ( talk) 00:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm afraid things seem to be heading the wrong way again and I have been forced to raise Gob Lofa's behaviour again, and as the blocking admin who was looking into an IBAN and TBAN for one or both of us, your input would be appreciated. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Gob_Lofa. Mabuska (talk) 13:06, 30 August 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
ext.visualEditor.viewPageTarget.init
. Use ext.visualEditor.desktopArticleTarget.init
instead.
[53]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.
21:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion. Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Looks like we have another Caradoc29105 sock: FreshPerspectivea. Same sort of page style as seen at KeyofNeptune's page. GAB Hello! 19:33, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
After reading these remedies I got an impression that logging of warnings in this area should be done by uninvolved admins. It tells: "Any uninvolved administrator may, at his or her own discretion..." ... "Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor shall be given a warning...". However, it seems that a heavily involved user stated giving indiscriminate warnings and loggins to a number of others, including even people who are only peripherally involved (I did not edit these pages for more than a week and made very few edits before). Is he doing right thing? My very best wishes ( talk) 19:58, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm not 100% sure exactly how to interpret the 1RR rule on Troubles articles, but here we have Gob Lofa not accepting a revert to the previous stable version. It is very clearly a Troubles related article. He has been carrying out sensible edits for a bit, but now it appears he needs monitoring again as controversial edits are being mixed with sensible ones ---- Snowded TALK 20:39, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
Remedy 2 (Roscelese restricted) of the Christianity and Sexuality case is modified to read the following: Roscelese ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is subject to the following restrictions. Other than in cases of indisputable vandalism or BLP violations, they are indefinitely prohibited from:
These restrictions may be appealed to the committee twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. Should Roscelese breach any of these restrictions, she may be blocked for per the standard Enforcement provision below.
For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) 03:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, as a user in the edit filter manager user group we wanted to let you know about the new wikipedia-en-editfilters mailing list. As part of our recent efforts to improve the use of edit filters on the English Wikipedia it has been established as a venue for internal discussion by edit filter managers regarding private filters (those only viewable by administrators and edit filter managers) and also as a means by which non-admins can ask questions about hidden filters that wouldn't be appropriate to discuss on-wiki. As an edit filter manager we encourage you to subscribe; the more users we have in the mailing list the more useful it will be to the community. If you subscribe we will send a short email to you through Wikipedia to confirm your subscription, but let us know if you'd prefer another method of verification. I'd also like to take the opportunity to invite you to contribute to the proposed guideline for edit filter use at WP:Edit filter/Draft and the associated talk page. Thank you! Sam Walton ( talk) and MusikAnimal talk 18:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I'm back now. If you left me a message and you still want an answer could you please repost it? Thanks, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 02:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I rev/del'd one of the IP's edits. I don't know if you want to suppress it.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 04:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
That's fine and all but couldn't you have fixed the vandalism on the page before protecting it? DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 05:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Would you mind deleting and adding similar creation protection to Template:MySpace? That is almost certainly where they'll head next. It's template protected, so I haven't been able to actually nominate it for deletion, but it's eligible under WP:G8. Thanks for helping out! ~ Rob Talk 06:43, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, just trying to help. :) -- 110.20.234.69 ( talk) 09:55, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I removed Liberal Party of Australia leadership spill, 2009 from the 'See also' section since WP:NOTSEEALSO says: "As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes." I see that it's a different event, but the event is included in the navbox. Schwede 66 10:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate your quick response to my oversight request. Have a great day! YoPienso ( talk) 13:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)