![]() | 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 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 |
On wp:Aiv, there is a no bots tag on it which is preventing HV user bot from clerking. CLCStudent (talk) 14:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Might want to revoke talk page access as well.--Cahk (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The No Spam Barnstar |
Thanks for blocking the multiple DigitalRavan accounts! RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks for semi-protecting the page. However this edit-warring has been going on since February, and protecting it for only 48 hours won't make much difference. Could you extend the protection to maybe a month or so? (Also, just before it was protected, one more change slipped by and hasn't been reverted.) Dhrm77 (talk) 05:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Should his edit be counted as promo?--Cahk (talk) 07:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
User:Dave Moreno has been blocked by Materialscientist. I'm not an admin, but I do believe more experience will help you deal with obvious sockpuppets without having to go through an entire procedure. Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 10:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
2607:fb90:584e:13db:0:46:f40b:a501 continues violating BLP on their talk page (I've reverted) Please extend the block and remove talk page access. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
...at Suman Sahoo - despite your warning minutes earlier, the article's been recreated again. Mike1901 (talk) 15:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I see that you protected the article while it still had a "Motive" section. Because VQuakr deleted the entire motive section while only the conspiracy theory subheading was under dispute, this ought disqualify him from editing the article and also puts into question his status as a user with extended confirmed and Reviewer privileges.
I fully understand your reasoning behind protecting the article but realize that VQuakr (now that DisuseKid has been blocked) was the only vandal in that thread. 209.140.44.56 (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Apologies for this forward request, I asked HighInBC but he was too busy at the moment, but it looks like you might be online. Would you mind closing this 3RR by blocking me (or not) as you feel appropriate? The editor who opened it pinged every involved party into the discussion and I'd prefer to just get it settled before it turns into a 30-page back-and-forth. LavaBaron (talk) 23:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
You have blocked [[Talk:Prince {musician)]]. Please unblock it. I can understand why the article page is blocked but if you do it to the talk page, many people cannot discuss it. If there are vandals, they can be banned and the vandalism removed.
Thank you. Purple Showers (talk) 23:21, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
The talk page is currently semiprotected because of vandalism and BLP violations. I'm off now, but if someone wants to remove the protection in the meantime, I have no objections. Widr (talk) 23:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thanks to your constant attention, AIV is less backlogged these days. Our saviour has finally arrived. Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 08:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Widr, thanks for all the work earlier in reverting the vandal that posted explicit images to user pages. I've placed a range block for one week, which covers twelve of the thirteen 70.x.x.x IPs used over the last couple of days. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Widr, Sorry to bother you but could you also delete this image as it's another copyvio aswell, Thanks for your help - It's much appreciated,
Thanks & Happy editing ... or blocking :), –Davey2010Talk 18:40, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Simply wanted to let you know this user returned. SwisterTwister talk 00:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't know how much rationale an administrator demands. I don't like my requests being rejected as "inadequate" as hoping history logs can explain enough. However, I must recap all history logs to make the request justifiable. Reverts have been happening lately, most of it likely vandalism or disruption. Editing frequency is either increasing or steadily increasing; it doesn't go down. The frequency of editing makes PC look inadequate, but I'm unsure if you want to upgrade configuration to semi-protection. I don't understand fighting fandom these days; it makes free-content encyclopedia look amateurish more than it might already be. Because of fandom, the article is a target to vandals. Is that enough rationale or too much? --George Ho (talk) 07:54, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
A 24-hour is not going to be sufficient. An IP editor has been posting the same form of personal attack going back to April 4[3] and I have mentioned it on Ed Johnston's talk page. Could you please page protect it for longer?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
Good job! KgosarMyth (talk) 13:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi, just wondering why you deleted my user page a few weeks back?Dmass (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Is abusing his talk page while blocked. Feinoha Talk 18:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Widr ! I have requested for this right. Could you please look at it. Thanks youBivek bhattarai (talk) 09:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
As you are admin i have work to grant you. Please checkout [[5]].Bivek bhattarai (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Widr. You just blocked a SPAV account. I believe he was also socking on the two IPs which were vandalising earlier before I gave them both 4im warning. Your choice to block. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jamestown,_Virginia&action=history. Thanks and regards, Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 14:42, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hey, Widr. Just wanted to give you a quick thank you for blocking 79.167.44.205 for persistent vandalism. When their block is up, I'll be sure to keep an eye on them. If you'd like a chuckle, check out this message the user left on my talk page after I left a final warning. I had a hard time keeping a straight face while responding in a non-sarcastic manner. Anyways, thanks again. Amccann421 (talk) 17:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Dear Widr,
I just wanted to express my gratitude and appreciation for granting me the reviewer rights. Best regards (Mona778 (talk) 23:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC))
Revoke talk page access?--Cahk (talk) 09:53, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Edit warring and less than civil words being exchanged. I tried to report on 3RV but my report did not seem to go through.--Cahk (talk) 10:16, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Can you allow permission for me to edit the article ? Seems to me that Herman Jaka has reverted to his version again, which is full of inaccuracies.Buonkee —Preceding undated comment added 10:25, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Widr. I'm writing about my request for the IRA article to be semi-protected indefinitely. You said there wasn't enough recent activity, but that's besides the point. This article has been constantly vandalised by unregistered users and barely any edits in the last month have been helpful in nature. Take a look through older edits and you'll see that this has been going on for a long time. The article is sensitive because the group killed so many people; it's inevitable that the group will receive hatred on Wikipedia but by semi-protecting the article, you're ensuring that the information stays factually correct and isn't manipulated by a vandal. st170etalk 19:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
I am Taiwanese, You convert to the correct entry. --223.136.139.100 (talk) 15:49, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Dear Widr, you made an edit changing the protection status of Payback (2016). I'm not really familiar with how such status changes work but I'm wondering if you actually changed the status given that edits like that happened later. Can you look into this again? Cheers, Str1977 (talk) 08:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the block there. Would you mind dealing with the garbage showing up on that user's talk page post-block? Toddst1 (talk) 20:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello. For several years, there was a section in the Gardner-Webb University page about an athletics scandal that made national news. A few weeks ago, someone deleted it without explanation. I see that it was reinstated today, removed again, and then the page was locked. Now the article reads like it could have been written by the university's PR department. The scandal section could been better written, but the content was accurate. If anything, the person who removed it committed vandalism. I am hoping that, with some added citations, this section about an important part of GWU's history will be left in place. This is only one of many sources which can be easily located via a Google search: [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.17.207.155 (talk) 00:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, could you please delete this expired BLPPROD when you have a moment. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 15:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Spam Barnstar |
Thanks for helping me this morning. Peter Sam Fan 15:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC) |
Would you mind semi-protecting my user page please? It's being hit pretty regularly by vandals. Some of the recent edits and/or summaries should probably be rev-del-ed. While you're there would you mind restoring the previous version history? When I thought I was permanently retired, I asked for the page to be deleted. Toddst1 (talk) 16:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
user:71.251.46.191 is abusing his talk page. CLCStudent (talk) 17:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
They seem to be abusing their talk page to attack editors after you blocked them. RA0808 talkcontribs 18:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Please lock Views to prevent vandalism. Thank you. Xboxmanwar (talk) 00:15, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits on the Sri Lanka page. I have referred to it repeatedly & found your attention to it helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fawnthom (talk • contribs) 06:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your help on reverting the nonconstructive contributions to Qzone page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xongkoro3 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
I saw you removed some of the reports at AIV with the rationale of "these are stale" Is there a time-limit for AIV reports? AusLondonder (talk) 07:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, could you please delete this PROD when you have a moment. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 14:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Hey Widr, sorry to be a pain, but I was tagged in some comments at the bottom of the page that were apparently intended to be part of the RM but got misplaced (they seem to have come just as SSTFlyer was closing the move). Would you mind reversing so we can get them comments in the same place? I wouldn't bother with it except that I think it may affect the outcome. Thanks,--Cúchullain t/c 14:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)