User talk:Favonian/Archive 29
 | 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 25 | ← | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | → | Archive 35 |
O Hello !
- O Hello mr.favonian
i dont care that you blocked me. I am not afraid of being blocked and from you. I am only afraid from Allah. I will do this as far as i can do. I will do this at the remaining of last drop of my blood.--عرفان ارشد (talk) 16:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- Rather lame sort of martyrdom, but since you insisted (by removing once more those images), I have blocked you temporarily. Favonian (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Baha'i faith
hi, sorry, I don't know where to present my argument. you told me about a challenge. anyway, I believe that number of followers ( like Christians & Muslims ) or historical precedence ( like Jewish ) are big factors. there are so many little other faith. so why "Baha'i faith" should be mentioned in same level as those three big religion? and "Mormonism" shouldn't be mentioned? I think these kind of edits are attempt by small faiths like Bahai's to show themselves as important as there most important Abrahamic religion. I think it is better to mention other faiths like Mormonism or Bahai in "other religion" list, not is a same level list. this is just because of "importance"
yours hamzeh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki hamze (talk • contribs) 11:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
- The right place would be Talk:Abrahamic religions and Talk:Daniel. It would appear that the membership of this faith is in the millions, so it's not all that small. Favonian (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
secondary Abraham faiths
Dear Favonian as you told I put a topic about main and secondary Abrahamic religions in related page. please take a look. this is why I remove Bahai's faith from main list. we can't put 100 little and big religions in same level of importance. regards,--Wiki hamze (talk) 13:18, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
2020 page move and User:LukePearsons
Please check his other contributions too. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 19:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Dizzzer
Virtually all of the edits on religious topics by Dizzzer (talk · contribs) have violated WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY or WP:NOR and have been reverted by me or other editors. Given your warning on his/her talk page, what would you suggest? Dougweller (talk) 08:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
- The recent edits are certainly tendentious, but I'm not quite ready to swing the hammer. The warning was quite a while ago, and partly caused by a different issue. I have left a stern warning and will try to keep an eye on this person's edit. Favonian (talk) 16:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Days and dashes
But I am using the ndash as stated by that style guide; it displays as – which is the exact same as the – I have introduced - it just saves a helluva lot of space! GiantSnowman 17:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
- It is argued in the style guide that the explicit HTML entity – reminds editors to use it for new entries, whereas "–" is easily mistaken for "-". Favonian (talk) 17:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
- @GiantSnowman: Note that "–" is translated into "–" in the actual HTML source, so it isn't making pages load any slower. Since I don't think the Wikipedia servers are running out of space, your concern must be that it looks uglier, with which I must disagree. Ginsuloft (talk) 23:37, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Consider protecting your talk page for a while?
Hi Favonian, do you want to consider protecting your talk page from unregistered users for a while? As you can see from your talk page history, your talk page received a lot of vandalism within the past few days, and it is mostly from the same vandal. I know that they are blocked, but they can do block evasion and come and vandalize your talk page again. So in conclusion, I'm worried if your talk page might get vandalism for the next few days. Jianhui67 Talk 17:18, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- Sort of comes with the job. ;) I'll leave the talk page open for anon IPs at the moment, but it won't take much for me to change my mind and semi it. Elockid has range blocked a goodly swath of Manitoba, so maybe my friend from Winterpeg will be discouraged—and maybe not. Favonian (talk) 17:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- Given my past experience as a rollbacker in Empires & Allies Wiki, a user hacked his account to become unblocked, but I don't think that will happen here. But some IPs might use another computer to vandalize after his first IP address being blocked, or even his mobile phones. That is ban evasion. Jianhui67 Talk 17:34, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
User:Koolx
I have issued a warning to User:Koolx who has been edit warring on the Goths article since Aug 17, 2013[1] and has not attempted to use the article's talk page. This user's edit warring started just after your page protection on July 11, 2013[2]. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:00, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! It was much overdue—meaning: I wonder why I didn't do that myself a long time ago. I have no doubt Koolx is "related" to the IPs, who caused me to semi the article, and the resemblance to Bldon2 (talk · contribs) is also interesting, though too old for CheckUsers to unearth the evidence. Favonian (talk) 05:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- I noticed that User:Koolx has reverted the article again.[3] I will let you handle this from here on out. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:59, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Jacob's Remnant
Any idea what that was all about? Good block. I wonder if there's any copyvio. Dougweller (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Good question! A picture like commons:File:Papyrus_115.jpg (is that Mitt Romney?) suggests malicious intent. This place attracts some really strange customers. Favonian (talk) 20:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| For your diligence in dealing with long-term, multi-account, trolling vandals, and the resilience to put up with the personal attacks. — MusikAnimal talk 22:01, 18 September 2013 (UTC) |
- Hey, thanks a lot! Fortunately, I have a fairly thick skin, and I derive a certain grim pleasure from watching my special friend from Winnipeg making such a big effort with so little to show for it. Favonian (talk) 22:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Blocked IP is back
Europefan, whom you just blocked, is back on another dynamic IP, 188.96.228.73 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- Looks like Mark Arsten has already done what needed doing. Favonian (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
- Now he's at 188.96.191.216 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I'm pretty sure that he has to drive somewhere every time he wants a new IP. :) --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
A beer for you!
|
Thank you for helping to erase vandalism. It is very much appreciated. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 09:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC) |
- My pleasure, and, though it's a bit early in the day, cheers! Favonian (talk) 09:53, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
I hope I didn't break any rules by blocking him for his edit at AN. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- It was, at worst, redundant since I just range-blocked him ;) He's a deranged troll from India with a "thing" about Scandinavia. Norwegian School of Economics is semi-protected because of his antics. Stay tuned for more action. Favonian (talk) 18:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- Now at Fairhair dynasty and its talk page. On advice, I opened a section at WP:AN on registered editors who appear to be the same person, trying to get a ban in order to revert on sight. Unfortunately it's been overshadowed by the Visual Editor section, plus it's been confirmed that sufficiently broad rangeblocks would do unacceptable collateral damage. Since you are familiar with the IP, do you share the view he and the registered editors are the same person? I will go block the latest one for the attack at AN, but I hope it's not bunches of people only one of whom makes threats. I don't like blocking people, especially when it looks as if it's just for trolling me and articles I have watchlisted. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks. Sorry to be so hesitant. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Oh, I'm pretty confident it's the same character, and I'd have no qualms about blocking him. Favonian (talk) 20:19, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- Now at Fairhair dynasty and its talk page. On advice, I opened a section at WP:AN on registered editors who appear to be the same person, trying to get a ban in order to revert on sight. Unfortunately it's been overshadowed by the Visual Editor section, plus it's been confirmed that sufficiently broad rangeblocks would do unacceptable collateral damage. Since you are familiar with the IP, do you share the view he and the registered editors are the same person? I will go block the latest one for the attack at AN, but I hope it's not bunches of people only one of whom makes threats. I don't like blocking people, especially when it looks as if it's just for trolling me and articles I have watchlisted. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Marie Curie
Hello, sorry to bother you but I am leaving a message because I have seen that you have been previously involved in discussions on the Marie Curie talk page similar to the one I am currently in. Basically, this is again a silly issue with the lead sentence of the article, with a few editors that seem to be very protective of anyone somehow Polish being called by anything else than only "Polish" in the lead sentence. I do think my views on the issue are the one reflecting the established Wikipedia practice. But since I am currently alone supporting them, it is quite time-consuming for me. This might not be the kind of annoying discussion you want to get into, but still, if you had time to have a look at the discussion on the Marie Curie talk page, that would be nice :-). In any case, have a good day :-)Tokidokix (talk) 03:55, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- @Tokidokix: First of all, I have to state the party line that no matter how right you believe yourself to be, edit warring is not permitted! Now, regarding Mme Curie I personally agree with you: she was born in Poland but was already a French citizen by the time she did the research that made her (exceedingly) notable, so some variation on the theme of "Polish–French" would seem appropriate. I have, on the other hand, promised myself not to get involved in any of those disputes with editors, who I prefer to label "patriotic enthusiasts" so as not to get dragged to the drama board. There was a similar controversy over Enrico Fermi, where representatives of said group prevented any labeling other than Italian from being used in the lead, and the lesson learned is that those who are willing to fight to the death for the sacredness of the Mother/Fatherland will wear down those motivated by less emotional factors. So, in conclusion, I wish you luck and, returning to the party line, "encourage you to pursue dispute resolution", but you're on your own.
Favonian (talk) 16:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, thank you for your reply :-). Well, I quite understand your point of view. It is my first time getting involved in a edit controversy on wikipedia, and it is certainly a bit frustrating to use so much time arguing about 3 words when one could do useful things elsewhere. But well, I am a patient person and I decided to see this as an interesting insight on how such passion-inducing questions can be handled on Wikipedia (although I would certainly like to find one or two editors arguing in the same direction as me so as to spend less time on this). So I guess this will be a long long discussion, that will hopefully avoid edit warring in the future. You can still have a look at the talk page from time to time to enjoy the show ;-). By the way, and as a matter of fact, I would not think the case of Fermi is as problematic, since he was actually awarded Nobel prize before emigrating (I guess that somehow depends on which proportion of his notability one consider he derives from his participation in the Manhattan project...). Have a very good day :-) Tokidokix (talk) 03:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
User:Calvinthebarber
This user, whom you blocked two and a half years ago, is requesting unblock, saying he's grown up since then.
I'm generally inclined to grant these unblocks, but as the blocking admin I defer to you. Daniel Case (talk) 15:13, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- Wikipedia loves the repentant sinner, so let's give him another shot with the proviso that if we catch him jaywalking, he gets the chair. Favonian (talk) 15:25, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
It would appear the IP hopping editor has moved from the Sasanian Empire, which you protected, to the Parthian Empire. Would you be able to protect the Parthian Empire? If the IP editor is interested in editing then he/she should be more than willing to discuss these changes. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:16, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
RE: Message
Hi Favonian,
Thanks for reverting there!, Wasn't completely sure how to deal with that at all so thank you :-)
Regards, -Davey2010T 17:10, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
IP blocks
Hi; today you blocked the IP 91.125.150.155 which had been posting on some talk pages about Wilbysuffolk/CrouchSwale sockpuppets with a block summary of "block evasion". Do you mind if I ask which IP or account this was evading the block of, and why they were blocked originally? Rcsprinter (talk to me) @ 18:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
- Based on behavior, I'd say it's either Crouch or one of our perennial pests. I cannot pin a precise identity on him, but it certainly didn't look like good-faith allegations against Wilby et al. Favonian (talk) 18:26, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
undos
Sorry about that. Some of my coworkers think it's funny to mess around on my computer. I apologise for thier actions. - Propatriot
- Then you'd better learn to lock it, because they seem to have made a habit of it, witness this contribution from yesterday! Favonian (talk) 18:52, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Oyvay.... I do apologise once again. I'm currently talking to them atm not to do this again. - PropatriotPropatriot (talk) 19:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Would you please...
...take a look at this? The epic kid (talk · contribs · email) is obviously a The_Epic_Kidd's sock.... José Luiz talk 00:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
- Blocked indefinitely. He wasn't exactly being subtle about it. Favonian (talk) 05:49, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| :)) Hommwock Smashr :)) (talk) 14:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC) |
WP:MRV Closing script
I have created a closing script for move reviews, which can found at User:Armbrust/closemrv.js. If you want to use it, than simply add
importScript('User:Armbrust/closemrv.js');
to your vector JS page and bypass your cache. (Not tested on monobook or modern either.) Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 02:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
You received this message because you closed at least one MRV discussion in the last six months.
IP and the Sasanian Empire
It would appear from this edit[4], that the IP that was making unexplained, non-consensus changes is back. Would you be interested in protecting Sasanian Empire again, unless you can think of an alternative. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:40, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- Re-protected, this time for three months. It's the lesser evil compared to a drastic range block. Favonian (talk) 12:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Struck or deleted
Hi, thanks for spotting/swatting the latest sock on Talk:Cao Dai Talk:Dong Son culture. You struck through RM contrib, but I have deleted in entirety on the basis of User:Kauffner community ban notice which says "Wikipedia's banning policy states that any edits made in violation of a ban may be reverted." since no one had seen it and replied. I don't know if my interpretation of this is fully correct, if it isn't please restore the struck through version. All the best. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- The policy certainly permits reverting, but I don't think it makes much of difference. I usually prefer striking, as it gives me an opportunity to explain my action. Edit summaries are not always adequate for that. Looks like there has been some opposition to the enforcement. Favonian (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- I think that was just a User not understanding the difference between a block and a community ban? Anyway - thanks again. All the best again. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Sasan article
It appears the IP that was making non-consensus changes is now attacking the Sasan article[5]. Could you protect this article? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, sir. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:58, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Maxwell D. Taylor article
Hello, and thanks for your feedback! Sorry---this is the first time I've edited any Wikipedia content, and I wasn't aware that an explanation was required for deletions. I'm General Taylor's granddaughter (and a copyeditor by profession), so when my father, historian John Maxwell Taylor, wanted to submit revisions to his father's page, the task of uploading it fell to me. His biography of Maxwell Taylor (An American Soldier) was published by Presidio Press in 2001.
Thanks again,
Katharine M. Shaibani (née Taylor) ∼∼∼∼ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmshaib (talk • contribs) 19:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- @Kmshaib: Sorry for being such a buzzkill, but you should probably read some of the links I'll leave on your talk page. Basically, you removed 30% of the article, and the result lacked sources as well as formatting. Favonian (talk) 20:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Can international premieres for English speaking countries be added to lists of episodes? I just think that Wikipedia should show the air dates for our readers in the UK, Canada, etc. 98.169.63.91 (talk) 20:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not particularly well-informed in this matter, so I suggest that you ask on WT:TV, the talk page of the project most concerned with articles of this sort. Favonian (talk) 20:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Help with another obscure author?
Hello, I noticed you did a lot of great work on the article I created for the British writer Mrs George de Horne Vaizey. I've just created another one for which there is even more scant biographical information, though I found an apparently comprehensive biography, Amélie Claire Leroy. If you would like to take a look/check that would be wonderful. Istara (talk) 13:42, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
- I did a bit of gnoming on the article, but you are right that it could do with some more references. Favonian (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! So strange and sad how there are all these hugely prolific authors from a century or so ago that are nearly lost from memory. She wasn't even listed in the Oxford Companion to Children's Literature. I managed to download an ebook of one of Leroy/"Stuart's" works, and it is highly readable. I'm planning to buy some used copies on eBay, and if there are any biographical notes in there, I'll add them. Istara (talk) 08:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Vandalism
before you assume i did it on purpose check again. It wasnt me. I left my computer on and saw waht had happen so i changed it back. Dont ever accuse someone of doing something — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonic123cool (talk • contribs) 20:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Are you implying that we should treat your account as compromised? Favonian (talk) 20:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect title of the "Millennials" page
Thank you for pointing out the problem with re-directs. However, the name of the "Millennials" page should be "Millennial Generation" -- not "Millennials".
For example, the name of Generation X's page isn't "Xers" and the name of the Baby Boomers' page isn't "Boomers". How do we get this changed to Millennial Generation? 172.250.31.151 (talk) 15:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- The instructions for starting a new discussion are at WP:RM/CM, but as the name has been discussed very recently, some "exasperation" may be expected if you start a new round. Favonian (talk) 15:48, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Reverts on salutation (SAW)
Hi,
You recently reverted few changes made by me on the "Barelvi and Zahiri and Salafi" page.
I saw your message on my talk page and you have yourself mentioned that it must have a neutral perspective, so you can, if you want, start a discussion on this topic, and you will come to know that all the Barelvis, and the Zahiris and the Salafis will agree to this point that in ISLAM it is always mentioned either (SAW) or (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) after the name of our Prophet Muhammed (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam), even if only Muhammed is mentioned or Prophet Muhammed, in both cases reference is being made to our Prophet (SAW) only. And I believe that WP:SAWW / WP:PBUH needs to be modified.If you want, start a discussion on this topic as well.
See the "Evidence from Quran" section on the this wiki page. [1]
Please forgive me. I didn't mean to hurt you. Thank you.
Furqanbhai (talk) 19:46, 23 October 2013 (UTC)furqanbhai
- I am well aware of the issues concerning the salutations, but unless the WP:PBUH guideline is changed, it will be enforced. Favonian (talk) 20:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- @Furqanbhai:, it is not Favonian that needs to start a discussion on changing the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles it is you. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 07:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
- @CambridgeBayWeather:, ok then, please tell me from where to start a new discussion on wikipedia so that anyone can participate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Furqanbhai (talk • contribs) 12:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
- It would be at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles following the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Request comment on articles, policies, or other non-user issues. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| Thank you so much for reverting vandalism on my talk page! Very appreciated. NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 02:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC) |
Sri Lanka Please take a look
Vandal|DinoGrado https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:DinoGrado_reported_by_User:Thomas.W_.28Result:_.29 Gotabhaya (talk) 09:51, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm, before I swing the clue stick I need to ask you, point blank: how come you arrived to intervene in this edit war at this precise time after so many months of inactivity? Favonian (talk) 09:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| Thank you for reverting vandalism on my talk page for the second time during the recent days! NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 00:05, 29 October 2013 (UTC) |
Happy Halloween!
 |
TheGeneralUser has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!
If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message! |
 |
Hi Favonian! Wishing you a very happy Halloween :-) TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:38, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Possible sockpuppet
Hello. I'd appreciate it if you could please look at this discussion and see what you make of it, particularly in terms of the sockpuppet angle. (It was suggested I ask Dennis Brown, but since he's on a break, I turned to you instead.) Thank you for any light you may be able to shed on this matter. - Biruitorul Talk 14:42, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- I tend to agree with Drmies: not quite a couple of WP:DUCKs, but there is quite a bit of correlation between the two accounts. I you follow the learned Dutchman's advice, there should be enough meat on the SPI report too galvanize the CheckUsers into action. Favonian (talk) 14:50, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
More blockage needed -Amanbir
117.225.129.235 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Thanks! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Done, and thanks for the revert! This character makes up for in persistence what he lacks in other qualities. Favonian (talk) 14:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
copyright material posted by mvukovic
sry, I didn't know about these rules, I'll read the rules more carefully, I did the same on a page concerning "Salona" thx for the warning..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvukovic (talk • contribs) 13:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
- No great harm done. I undid the edit to the Salona article while I was at it. Favonian (talk) 13:58, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Disruption on my talk page
Hello, I noticed that you have been heavily involved in fighting a sock farm that would never stop vandalizing my talk page (and the talk page of others). In another words, I have seen you block multiple sockpuppet accounts and reverted their vandalism. I have filed a SPI case here, you are invited to make a comment. NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 02:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thank you for being nice to a newbie at User:ObadaDaraghmeh.
Bearian (talk) 18:35, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- Gee thanks! :) An atonement for all the school kids I send off. Favonian (talk) 18:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't know English. [Google Translate] Chinese characters on Vietnamese Wikipedia are so Nipponese Dog Calvero added, it is not reliable. Nipponese Dog Calvero and the other puppet of Nipponese Dog Calvero frequently sabotage Vietnamese Wikipedia and Chinese Wikipedia.
IP 61.228.235.129 is Nipponese Dog Calvero Hsumei (talk) 12:25, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I don't speak any of those languages. On the other hand, 61.228.235.129 (talk) is obviously a sock and up to no good, so I've reverted and blocked him. Favonian (talk) 12:32, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Mandarin Chinese
Hi, The Holy Four (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) created one more move discussion, at Talk:Mandarin Chinese#Requested move to Mandarin dialects, in case you would like to decide what to do with it. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:52, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I noticed. What keeps me from closing it here and now is that another editor supported the proposal. I did leave this message for the closing admin. Favonian (talk) 20:56, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
IP:68.102.112.91
This IP appears to be spamming the category: X...anti-communist across numerous articles.[6] I removed this category from Henri, Count of Paris after reading the article and finding no mention of this individual as an anti-communist.[7] Other articles involved are clearly out of my area of "expertise", so I thought you should be notified. I would notify the IP, but I have had few results in getting an IP to explain their reasoning. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:25, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- It's certainly disruptive, so I have left this message on their talk page. Hopefully they get the point this time. Favonian (talk) 16:21, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Eleusinian Mysteries or Eleusisinian Mysteries?
Eleusis... different place?
Eleus-inian
Eleus --- I've seen this page before... and it has always been written Eleus.... and people have gone to Eleus...
How could you change the root?
Would it now be Eleusisinian Mysteries... instead of Eleusinian Mysteries?
Eleus- Elijah - Elias - Eli - Ellis - Illyah - Etcetera...
Eleusis.... why would that alter from the Eleusinian Mysteries?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:470:D:E89:3469:E5EE:8BE3:86C3 (talk) 19:00, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
For watching my back! Geoff Who, me? 20:32, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
November 2013
Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Autism. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. Please re-frame from making edit's that are offensive to people with disabilities to provoke responses, the fact is I was told to bring it to the talk page, which is what I did. There was no 'Vandalism', all was that was done was added a reply to the 'talk' board to discuss getting the page changed from 'disease' to 'condition', the fact is the page was offensive on the main page for Autism, is being used to spread false information to discriminate/provoke attack Autism to make out that Autism is a disease, I'm deeply offended by this. Continue removal/vandalism will lead me to reporting the issue to the moderators. The fact that you even tried to accuse me of what you're doing yourself is offensive. So I'm requesting you cease, desist before I take further action --Ronnie42 (talk) 11:57, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
There has been a mis-understanding, I have posted this on my talk page too, this seems to be what the confusion is about. Link here of conversation with admin link here. Just to be clear it looked like your account was vandalizing the page but in actual fact other comments were disappearing which I wasn't aware of while at the same time it looked like you was discriminating against Autism as disability. --Ronnie42 (talk) 15:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Wrong sock
Hi. I have just been looking at disruption to zh.wp and vi.wp and believe I misidentified User:Muhammad Ali Obama as a Kauffner sock when it was in fact a sock of the Taiwan based Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nipponese Dog Calvero vi.wp sock User:I Love Obama XXX. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
- Rather suspected as much, based on section #Vũ Hồng Khanh above. Good thing this person is guilty as sin when it comes to disruptive IP sockpuppetry. I'll remove the tag from the user page and wait for the next (real) sock of the perennial pest. Already paying out the WP:ROPE for one. Favonian (talk) 19:29, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
The subject is self-evident, since being simple maths it can be verified immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.244.246.9 (talk) 18:43, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter. Wikipedia only includes information obtained from reliable, secondary sources. Favonian (talk) 18:46, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
IP vandal on Hades
I have him under control. ThatRusskiiGuy (talk) 14:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
- Not quite, it seems. ;) I've sent him off of a couple of days. Favonian (talk) 15:02, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Content dispute on Turkmen people
Would you be interested in protecting the Turkmen people article? There appears to be a content dispute ongoing. Thanks! --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:37, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
- I am a bit puzzled by one of the combatants in this dispute. An edit such as this one indicates a person with less than noble motives and an ax to grind. There are also IPs afoot. I'll try to keep an eye on things, but sleep and work are bound to interfere. Favonian (talk) 20:23, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
- A closer look at Siktirgitir's edits shows he is stalking Edward321's edits.[8] --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
rosie o'donnell
you have threatened me with a block, wwhy, it is you who it is that stands uninformed and disam or discombobulatedGravy059 (talk) 18:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
regarding my warning
regardning my warning,
sorry for not reading the rules, i didnt know that you could only edit a subject three times in a short period of time, regarding calling you ignornat it seems we have different understanding of the word, I was looking for the swedish word okunnig , which means without knowledge, I meant no disrespect to you , what I meant was that you lacked information in that field and therefore should not edit because you didnt even know that the parthians lived in turkmenistan and soghdians in uzbekistan which in a historical perspective is a big error , I wanted you to realize your miss judgment and miss information, even the history of turkmenistan section and parthians in wikipedia clearly stats that they lived in modern turkmenistan and not the soghdians, anyhow,
regarding edward321 , I thought he was stupid or something because he just keept erasing my information without any reason, I stated there was a reference added and he ignored it , to me it seemed like he hade a motive or was deranged but I will never ever mention or make personal attacks again , I didnt mean to harm him,
also, I have information but its my ignorance ( if I use english word correct) (I mean no knowledge or littöe knowledge) of editing which is causing the problems, I dont know how to add a source, I should have read the guidelines before but will do now , so partial its my fault, but please dont blaime me I dont have bad inttentions, I just want to spread knowledge , If I done anything wrong on the way please do tell and I wont repeat it again, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siktirgitir (talk • contribs) 22:59, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
concering warning
If you give me a warning at least give edward321 warning as well, he didnt look at the facts when I represented the references but ignored it, it seems that not how a gentlemen and fair behavior is accepted on any tool that wants to spread knowledge, its not his personal site, its for everyone on the world, and should be edited in a way to promote knowledge and spread it not minimize it and less extent of it and have it your own version of it, as objective as possible, I tried to be that , you can look at my other contribitions, I tried to stay objective, --Siktirgitir (talk) 23:11, 3 December 2013 (UTC)siktirgitir
Lavash article
Here's another one. It appears user:KazekageTR has been trying since 7 Oct 2013 to place "Turkish cuisine" at the forefront of the Lavash article. KazekageTR has been reverted by Yerevantsi, Хаченци and myself over this issue. KazekageTR removes any posts on his talk page[9], does not use the Lavash talk page(to explain his edit), and appears to be out to make a point by placing "Turkish cuisine" at the top of numerous articles.[10]
Could you protect this page since this appears to be a content dispute? --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Kind of lame as content disputes/edit wars go, but I've given it the customary three days. Favonian (talk) 18:57, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I thought so as well. But with the spamming of placing "Turkish cuisine" at the top of numerous articles(example:Rice pudding where no other ethnic template is even shown), it's apparent this person is out to make a point(whatever that may be?). Pity Alabama isn't famous for Lavash, then I could put it before Armenian cuisine. :-D --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Now that really burns my cannoli! I'm Danish and we invented rise pudding, damn it! Just check out the picture in the infobox. :) Favonian (talk) 19:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Anasoon212
Do you think bocking of this user was a bit hasty? Looking at past contributions, two bad page moves does not warrant a block. Heck I've moved pages in the past at what I thought was right and uncontroversial only to have either had to move them back myself or by someone else. Simply south...... eating lexicological sandwiches for just 7 years 11:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- It would indeed have been hasty, had it not been for the past misdeeds of Hrachiko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The blocking rationale should have been "sockpuppet", so the labeling was too hastily done. Favonian (talk) 12:59, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Pending changes at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Can you please remove pending changes protection from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill? You applied it in September due to "Persistent vandalism: start of semester silliness" but that appears to have subsided a few months ago. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 17:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
You are being impersonated
Just thought you should know about these: [11] [12]. Looks like a dispute between the user ممنون حسین and Bobrayner. --Drm310 (talk) 19:57, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- Followup - looks like it's part of a larger problem: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Evlekis --Drm310 (talk) 20:00, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Yep, same mind-numbingly monotonous jerk who caused the section right above this one. Thanks for jumping into the fray. Favonian (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
IP
Thank you for blocking that IP. Why is that IP impersonating Reaper Eternal? Jianhui67 talk★contribs 19:29, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- It's long-term abuse by Evlekis. Favonian (talk) 19:30, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have actually informed Reaper Eternal. That IP is a true troll. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 19:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping deal with the problem. Alas, dealing with Evlekis-socks makes you a target... bobrayner (talk) 20:00, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- I'm actually afraid that I might get involved in this incident. JianhuiMobile talk 03:32, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Shouldn't the edits made by that IP be revdeleted? Those edits are pretty much insulting Reaper Eternal. JianhuiMobile talk 03:38, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping deal with the problem. Alas, dealing with Evlekis-socks makes you a target... bobrayner (talk) 20:00, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have actually informed Reaper Eternal. That IP is a true troll. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 19:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 17:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
— MusikAnimal talk 17:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Personal attacks by Siktirgitir
I find this unacceptable.[13] Since 4 December I have been waiting for Siktirgitir to present his evidence concerning Parthians and Turkmen, instead he logs out and posts a ranting diatribe against edward321, vsmith and myself. He then logs back in and signs his name.[14] I believe you warned him earlier about personal attacks.[15] --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure you're acting in good faith here, but your edits (like this one) are restoring a bad link. The url actually directs to a picture of a part of the male anatomy rather than a website that dislikes the station. I've taken it out again and added the page to my watchlist. Cheers, Paul MacDermott (talk) 08:05, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Wow, that was rather embarrassing. Good thing you caught it. I can assure you that my faith was better than that of Smack em in the chops!, Editing pranskster and 78.149.218.108, all of which are socks of the abominable Evlekis. Guess I need to be more careful with my revert sprees ;) Favonian (talk) 16:20, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Discussion at WP:COIN#Michael Mic Neumann
You are invited to join the discussion at WP:COIN#Michael Mic Neumann. You were involved in a prior discussion about that user. -- Lexein (talk) 10:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Hoope process
The process was invented by Hoopes and not Hoope. So the whole thing needs cleanup in the aluminium article.--Stone (talk) 22:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Happy holidays
JianhuiMobile talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
JianhuiMobile talk 07:15, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, This user is adding defamatory remarks on his talk page. Please look into this. Regards. Hitro talk 19:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
- Talk page access revoked. His utterances clearly identified him as one of our steady customers. Favonian (talk) 19:33, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Merry Christmas! :-)
Happy Yuletides! 
Merry Yuletides to you! (And a happy new year!)
.JPG)
~TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hi Favonian, Wishing you a very Happy and Wonderful Merry Christmas! Hope you are having a great time with family and friends :-) Best wishes. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:59, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. I appreciate that :) Caden cool 17:21, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- My pleasure! Others have done the same for my talk page. Thanks guys! Favonian (talk) 18:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
There aren't any good contributions by IP lately. Is semi-protection necessary? --George Ho (talk) 19:32, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Not really. The article already has pending changes activated, and it's only a single IP edit warrior that's causing the current trouble. I've warned them of the dire consequences, should they persist. Favonian (talk) 19:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
Jianhui67 talk★contribs — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:46, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
Happy New Year Favonian!
.jpg)
|
|
| Hello Favonian: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 20:25, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
|
Persistent POV pusher/vandal at Third Succession Act
Hi, could you have a look into this account User talk:184.43.129.160 and several of their IP socks, who have been pushing their unsourced personal views on the Third Succession Act during the last few days. They have now turned to editing my sandbox and undoing edits of mine on other articles for reasons of personal attack. Thank you! Buchraeumer (talk) 21:43, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
I have had to remove his unsourced personal essay from Leicester's article in reprisal. He also reverted another instance of NPOV balance on an article about some Italian. His thinks the 3 year old unsourced opinion on Lady Jane's article is the majority view. All I did was bring the Succession article to NPOV in line with the Lady Jane article for consistency and coherency, in the absence of sources stating his favoured POV. His POV is not consistent with history, nor does it have sources. My NPOV efforts were entirely in line with Wikipedia's own consensus. Also, this revert warrior has not replied on the talk page, just reverted again and again like the asshole he is. He gets what he gives is all I can say. BTW, I really don't care about his sandbox. He can do whatever the fuck he wants with it. I was making a point about his rudeness and assumed prerogative to revert without discussion. He hogs his favorite articles. I took it upon myself to revert my reversions of his own sandbox and the Leicester article. I trust I got my message across clearly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.43.129.160 (talk) 23:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's a pretty clear case of the IP edit-warring to add original research, so I have semi-protected the article for a week. Favonian (talk) 18:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Would you be interested in protecting List of Azerbaijanis article? A persistent IP has added fictional individuals along with improper accusations(drugs, pornagraphy, et.al.).[16] I have reverted this IP twice and posted a warning on one IP talk page.[17] --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:09, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, those additions were pretty worthless, so I've given it a month. Favonian (talk) 23:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 11:02, 4 January 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:02, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
WP:RD/H page protection
Please can I informally request the removal of page protection for Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. I don't see an official request in the WP:RFPP archives, and it's important for the normal operation of the reference desks that IP users are allowed to post. There doesn't seem to be any major vandalism currently taking place. I can convert this to an official request if necessary. Tevildo (talk) 21:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
- A somewhat belated reply, but just for the record:
- An "official" report at RFPP is not required. An admin can protect a place whenever he deems it necessary, and faced with repeated attacks from an IP jumping vandal, I did.
- Protection is of course unfortunate, especially for pages like those of the reference desk, but the actions of the IP were highly disruptive and included rather vile personal attacks. Range blocking was not feasible, considering how "scattered" the addresses were.
- "There doesn't seem to be any major vandalism currently taking place" isn't really that surprising. It is the desired effect of protection ;)
Wryly editor Comment
Good day Favonian. Just wanted you to be aware of recent user (User talk:John Tan 708) who has been making obtuse edits on various webpages and blanking some Bot advisories on his own page. I will not declare him a malicious editor, but, I suggest that he be monitored. There is some indication that he may be a professor at a university, and may be testing the "waters" of editor response to malicious edits. I don't know. ruben jc ZEORYMER (talk) 10:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't quite share your faith in this editor's intentions. One more "contribution" of that kind and he gets the chair. Favonian (talk) 15:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Question
Hi, you recently blocked an editor (indef), and following that, another editor then created a user page for the blocked editor, solely for the purpose of adding the {{blocked user)} template, along with the somewhat smug edit summary "good bye". The template's guidelines state that that should be done by the blocking admin. I'm wondering if you have an opinion on this. Thanks - theWOLFchild 13:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, the guideline says "While everyone can add this tag, it should typically only be placed by the blocking administrator" (my emphasis), and I don't feel that my administrative privileges have been infringed upon. In some cases, where the block was controversial and/or the block was subsequently lifted, having placed such a template could become awkward, but it'll be a cold day in Hell before the Mr. Lindberg is admitted back into the fold. Favonian (talk) 17:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| For your tireless and lightning work in reverting |
Would you be interested in protecting these pages? User:1241edit appears unwilling to discuss changes to referenced information. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:19, 11 January 2014 (UTC)