![]() | 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 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
What was the point of that block? I saw it made some edits to a page that just got deleted, but that's not even a K-12 school, it's a university, and there haven't been a bunch of vandalism edits in recent history either. ♥ Kailey 2001 ♥ You just got reverted by a high school cheerleader. ♥ 23:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Moi Widr. Could you have a look at the deleted November 2015 version of Ergun Kocak and see, if the present version can be G4 tagged. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 10:22, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations on becoming an administrator. I see that you mentioned vandalism as your expertise.
I come to you with a question. I see the American Airlines article to be in not good condition so I have started to improve it. I have even added a few facts that were not there before. I see this as a big project that will take months to make it a featured article or good article.
I have been accused of vandalism 2 times for putting a chart about the airplanes that the airline flies. This is strange since many airline articles have a chart of the fleet (what airplanes they have, like 20 Boeing 747's, 100 Boeing 737's, etc.) I politely asked my accuser but no response. Huh?
Proof 1.
False accusation of vandalism (see edit summary) Also no discussion by the accuser to explain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Airlines&diff=prev&oldid=714969114
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Airlines&diff=prev&oldid=714639908
Proof 2. Airline fleet charts are common and present in nearly all airline articles.
United Airlines
British Airways (rated as a good article)
Air France
Lufthansa
Finnair
Air Canada
Qantas
Japan Airlines (rated as a good article)
Hawaiian Airlines
JetBlue
Proof 3. Evidence of discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ABBAlover11011&diff=prev&oldid=714750218
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_Airlines#fleet
Thank you in advance for your attention into this matter. Ensign Hapuna of the Royal Hawaiian Navy (talk) 23:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Widr. I noticed the block of 197.129.131.239 (talk · contribs) and I wanted to let you know that the same thing went on yesterday from this IP 197.129.6.5 (talk · contribs). I am not asking for a block since this person has obviously not editing from that IP anymore. I just wanted you to have this info in case the situation continues. Whoever it is certainly has a "bee in their bonnet" about something. Hopefully they will be moving on to some other forum soon. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:36, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I've seen you contributing a lot and you became HUGELY interested in contributing to Wikipedia since you have become an administrator. I've also checked that when someone reports any user on the Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism page, within 3 minutes, you block the user for some period of time or indefinitely. Keep enjoying cleaning vandalism with the mob on Wikipedia! Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 16:48, 14 April 2016 (UTC) |
Can I ask you to look into the archived discussion on Charlene McMann? It was archived without closure. Thanks. --Cahk (talk) 05:46, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
ProfileBot - Self identified itself as a "bot of Profile101", a sock puppet account. Figured I'd let you know :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:23, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Widr, I owe you many thanks, fist bumps, and pints of beer for your efforts at blocking the sock puppet accounts that have been repeatedly (attempting) to troll Wikipedia. Your dedication to protecting Wikipedia is amazing, and it's great that one of the admin shoes are filled by someone as awesome as you! Major props, dude. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:52, 15 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there. Our mutual friend has a habit of using his talk page for unsavory purposes, so I recommend checking the no-talk-page-access (and the email one) when blocking. Favonian (talk) 09:45, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Can you move Wikipedia:Shueisha back to Shueisha? It was part of the Cow cleaner 5000 sock's disruption. —Farix (t | c) 10:08, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
You may want to revoke talk page access for the SOCK ..--Cahk (talk) 10:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Another account bent on attacking you, apparently: Widr on Winstons. This is the third one in the account creation log this morning. Somebody needs a dadgum range block. White Arabian Filly Neigh 15:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place ((subst:Dobos Torte)) on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
According to WP:BLANKING, block notices on IP talk pages should remain for others who use the IP, at least temporarily. What am I missing? Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Just a heads-up: Special:Contributions/Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr is misusing their talkpage access. So far not in spectacularly bad ways, but if they belong to either of the two bunches of socks I suspect them to be part of (so basically, either the "Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum"-group or the Cowcleaner group, leaning to the former by length-of-username and the whole "I'm blocked? Let's spam my own talkpage full of nonsense to the point it lags folks trying to open it" post-block MO), it might be a good idea to just plain remove their TP-access. I've yet to see any of those socks use it constructively, but I have seen about half a dozen of 'm misuse it when not removed. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 16:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Just my appreciation for pending changes review right approval. When the permanent resident Canada goose pair hatch goslings in our back yard in May, I'll send you an image. Looking at your edit count, the likely award name shall be Perseverance. From North Georgia (US State), I am — Neonorange (talk) 21:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry to annoy you over insignificant crap again but could you watch the page and make your own judgement when future edits occur so I don't have to annoy more people requesting protection again? As expected, the hogwash has resumed. —DangerousJXD (talk) 09:57, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello there. Can you please tell me why you removed the entry corresponding to Flightmemory (talk · contribs) [1]? As far as I can see, the user has been sufficiently warned but kept their behaviour anyway. Isn't it actionable?--Jetstreamer Talk 21:14, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
See link:[[2]]. Are all the templates he's creating vandalism, test edits, or neither? Peter Sam Fan 15:34, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Widr. Though you page-protected Jimmie Lee (comedian) — and thank you for that — an anon IP shortly afterward made the same WP:BLP vios and promotional-spam edit as the others did, though the page is recorded as protected through April 25. Maybe something didn't take? Thank you again, for any help. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there. I saw that you denied my request for file mover, which is probably fair enough, considering that I haven't been that active requesting the renaming of files locally. I've made a few more requests now, and I plan to be more active there. I was wondering if you could possibly now reconsider my request? Thanks! Omni Flames let's talk about it 06:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! I'll be sure to make good use of the tools! Omni Flames let's talk about it 10:32, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
HI, I noticed you recently protected the page Generation Z, in response to the disruptive editing from an IP editor who uses multiple 2606:6000 accounts. Apparently, this IP editor also uses the registered account User:Wwwma, as evidenced by this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Generation_X&diff=714590502&oldid=714590273. Are users who prompted the page restriction allowed to switch back to a different auto-confirmed account to avoid the page restriction they prompted? --DynaGirl (talk) 01:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
MariaJaydHicky's new account Special:Contributions/3LWfan involved Gwen Stefani, Rihanna and others. 115.164.85.210 (talk) 05:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
You are seriously being an amazing admin since the successful RfA. Thank you for blocking all of those vandals, and I'll see you on the battlefield! :D Jdcomix (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC) |
With your block of [User:Ceb1031]- so much so, that by the time i thought I recognised the account he was impersonating (User:Cebr1979), the entry was gone. All it was, was that I went and checked- and Cebr1979 was indef'd (for various things) a while back- so I'm wondering- perhaps that wasn't so much an impersonator, as a sock? Checkuser, maybe? Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 12:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
You blocked 37.49.138.98 recently, who I notified earlier of vandalism. I have no complaints about the block, but as their edits seem to indicate that they don't speak English, I had a question about similar situations. Is there a formal policy on dealing with editors who don't speak the language of the wiki they're editing? Of course the problem could have been avoided if they hadn't done so in the first place, but in the event that it happens, what should one do? Would I redirect them to the wiki they understand, or simply not bother, as in this case it seems as though they only vandalized pages with no intent to contribute helpfully. What are your thoughts on this? Regards, Zupotachyon (talk) 06:43, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know that I've been granted "Autopatrolled" permission. I appreciate the trust you and other fellow editors have shown me. I'll do my best to ensure I keep earning it. Best regards Ambrosia10 (talk) 03:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Widr. Just my two cents', but I think you may inadvertently come down a bit hard on BeatlesLedTV. Yes, they've got a 100% revert-reaction from editors here, which would certainly suggest disruptive editing. But, as Binksternet and I have just been discussing, instructions at Template:Infobox song do in fact allow for the additions BeatlesLedTV was making, as an alternative to having full album track lists. Personally, I consider those before-and-after titles utterly trivial, so I'm pleased to see them binned this time around. But I hadn't appreciated that we do support their inclusion, at that template, when I undid a raft of similar edits to Beatles song articles, a couple of months back, and I believe Sundayclose undid the changes at articles I didn't get to. So, in fairness to BeatlesLedTV, we clearly need to get consensus on this issue and address the template instructions. Best, JG66 (talk) 06:27, 21 April 2016 (UTC)