User talk:Yamla/Archive 15
 | 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
ThePlanet.com
I edited right behind you and did not see your response to 67.18.217.74 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) until after I posted. We are blocking an entire hosting company? What if the individual ip is not an open proxy any longer? Just asking because I don't know -- hoping for enlightenment. Thanks! -JodyB talk 16:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that ThePlanet.com is primarily shared hosting. Because of this, some other admin blocked the entire range. We generally ask that people edit using their own ISP rather than routing through a third party such as ThePlanet.com. Anyway, unless ThePlanet provides a different IP address range for dedicated servers as opposed to shared servers, we can't block one without the other. We can't, for example, unblock a single IP address when the rest of the range is blocked. --Yamla (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. -JodyB talk 16:59, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
i am starting fresh
i have a new account which is peterparker 3000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterparker3000 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Grant Chuggle
In another one of his incarnations, User:MaryPoppins878 his is continuing to abuse his unblock privileges since you blocked the Grant page. Could you do the same for the MaryPoppins page at your convenience? Thank you. IrishLass (talk) 14:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Vicmm42 is back
User:Vicmm42 is back. First step was to re-upload the image you had deleted after blocking him, and re-insert it into Lindsay Lohan.Kww (talk) 03:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Blocked indefinitely, user has had plenty of warnings and blocks about this. --Yamla (talk) 16:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
One of the mouseketeers, quickly heading towards the side of evil. You know she has been a constant source of light trouble on the Ashley Tisdale stuff, mainly for putting in unsourced stuff. Now she's graduated to creating apparently imaginary albums, like De Repente and Raven-Symoné (album). Trouble is, I don't think she's really a vandal. I think she's a Brazilian high-school kid that doesn't quite understand why everything she does gets deleted. Is there a way to find a Portuguese-speaking admin that can have a little chat with her and put her back on the straight-and-narrow?Kww (talk) 03:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- I've pointed out the policies once again and issued a short block. Hopefully this will be sufficient. I don't speak Portuguese, unfortunately, but this person is editing on the English Wikipedia and thus we can expect that he or she understands English well enough. --Yamla (talk) 16:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Grant Chuggle
This was archived while you were away, just wanted to make sure you saw it. In another one of his incarnations, User:MaryPoppins878 his is continuing to abuse his unblock privileges since you blocked the Grant page. Could you do the same for the MaryPoppins page at your convenience? Thank you.IrishLass (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Fellowship of Friends
Helo Yamla
please, add [[pt:Fellowship of Friends]] in Fellowship of Friends.
Thanks Adailton (talk) 20:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Yamla, Happy New Year! A user with multiple IP addresses is vandalising the article on Tashan. Please take a look at the history of the page. The user has used these IP addresses to vandalise the page: 117.198.146.102, 117.198.144.236, 117.198.146.31, 117.198.145.176 and 117.198.145.82. Note the first eight digits is the same in all the addresses (117.198.14). I don't know what to do as the user will continue to use multiple IP addresses to add it bac again. I am getting sick of vandalising it over and over again. --Bollywood Dreamz Talk 03:26, 4 January 2008
Need an experienced admin to keep an eye on something
Hi Yamla, was wondering if you could please take a look at the discussion currently taking place at Thriller 25, specifically this thread)? There is a debate about whether or not this article should be merged with Thriller (album) (I am a part of this discussion). Whatever the outcome of the consensus is not a huge deal to me personally, but I am concerned about possible WP:OWN issues by a specific editor whose most recent comment is "you WILL NOT make Thriller 25 small enough to merge and you WILL NOT make Thriller smaller without a consensus that it actually needs to be". I'm afraid that whatever what the outcome, this user will plow forward with his/her preferred version no matter what, and since I am directly involved with this I feel it would benefit all involved parties to have a neutral person check in. One thing I do not want to do is overstep any boundaries here. Thanks in advance. - eo (talk) 22:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at something suspicious- possible sockpuppet of Daddy Kindsoul
Check out the user Udonknome- I find it highly suspicious that he's editing both Italian soccer articles and music articles, much like Soprani, and his first edit was in the same period as the blocking. Just something I noticed. Thanks. Monsieurdl mon talk-mon contribs 22:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Your edit to Image:Arianadumbledore.jpg
Hi Yamla, I am requesting that you undo your partial revert here. Keeping this imaged tagged for deletion due to it's orphan status advances one side in a dispute which caused an edit war and flies in the face of the spirit of page protection which is to allow time for a consensus to form. Relavent threads you might want to note can be seen here at ANI and here at AN I urge you to reconsider. Thanks, R. Baley (talk) 20:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Suspect sockpuppet
Yamla, I hope that all is well. I suspect that Cpzphantom is making disruptive edits once again now under another sockpuppet ("Cocoliras"). This new user keeps making the same type of disruptive edits. Could you please take a look?--Schonbrunn (talk) 16:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Grant's back
41.241.48.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) can you block him, please. His first edit was to Days of our Lives. I thought there was a range IP block. IrishLass (talk) 16:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Was thinking, could you protect the page, List of Days of our Lives cast members so random IP addresses, including the two vandals (Grant and another anon IP), can't edit the page. That would cut frustration and Grant's ability to mess with the page with his false information from rumour sites. IrishLass (talk) 20:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the help
Thank you for all of your help. Vermon CaTaffy 8 (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Spore
Why did you change the release back to TBA i just finished listening to the EA conference call and they said that it would be out in 2008 Before the holidays Stu212 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:RS. You have to cite such information. --Yamla (talk) 23:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Peaches Music & Video (Record Store)
I know it's been a while, but I feel that this article should not have been deleted. It was a well-known chain of record stores in the southeastern US--not just a single store.
- 16:52, 11 January 2007 Yamla (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Peaches Music & Video (Record Store)" (content was: 'Why are we considering deleting an article about a major chain of music stores.' (and the only contributor was 'Cylonhunter'))
--Mister Tog (talk) 05:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- This article failed CSD#A7. If you believe it can be recreated in such a way as to assert notability (multiple independent sources, etc.), please feel free to create an article in your userspace and then ask someone to move it over once they have verified your claims (in article) of notability and checked your sources are reliable. --Yamla (talk) 14:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Jade Raymond
An editor has nominated Jade Raymond, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jade Raymond and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Yamla
Excuse me, but pt:Fellowship of Friends has been eliminated in pt.wiki.
Thank you for help Adailton (talk) 17:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Questions
Can admins view pages that have been deleted? I think I heard they can but I'm not sure. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 04:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, unless they have been oversighted. --Yamla (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Can you take a look at [1]. It says for the deletion reason that I requested it, when I couldn't have requested it since I was in a car on my way to New Jersey when it was deleted. The page should've been 2 LOE that i had been working on at the time. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 20:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
It's back
See her contribs. Precious Roy (talk) 10:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Are we approaching critical mass yet? Precious Roy (talk) 20:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Waw!
I've never known of any user with that much contributions!!!--Damifb (talk) 16:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Image question
[2] I checked this image when it was added. The licensing template as written says that *any* image on the .net domain is licensed. Only those images on one of the .com domains are restricted to 2001 or earlier. I have reverted the edit on commons, but I thought I would draw this to your attention. If the commons template is misphrased and does not represent the OTRS ticket, that's a different issue. Gimmetrow 17:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I saw you speedy deleted Bingham McCutchen yesterday because of the edits somebody from the company kept making, but I'd like to ask if you could take another look at this article and the history. I seem to remember (although not with certainty) that there was already a perfectly okay start-class article further back in the history, fairly neutral and that, long before the employee(s) came along last week and started meddling with it to get it how they wanted; perhaps it would be better to just revert to the old version. Otherwise, the way I see it, the edits that person kept making have led directly to the complete erasure of an article. If any new editor could come along and edit an article straight into the garbage bin Wikipedia would be in all sorts of trouble! I can't remember exactly what was there but could you take another look, and possibly undelete it at a stable point in the history? • Anakin (contribs • complaints) 15:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- You are right, done. --Yamla (talk) 15:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm, the article isn't as good as I'd thought it was. Thanks though! :) • Anakin (contribs • complaints) 15:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Englandbridge
Perhaps I misinterpret, but it appears that User:Englandbridge is a sock of User:Tweety21, and IP sock of whose you just blocked. --Pleasantville (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, yes. This is a banned vandal who has caused substantial problems for the Wikipedia. --Yamla (talk) 16:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Don't forget Englandrules! Ta, Precious Roy (talk) 17:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Deletion Review for Alzano Virescit F.C.
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Alzano Virescit F.C.. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. CapPixel (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Tweety21
Hi Yamla, hope you enjoyed your snowboarding/skiing. The closest one I get is in Runcorn!
It must be damn annoying dealing with Tweety21 (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), and I'm willing to make a Wikipedia:Abuse reports/Tweety21 page to deal with this vandal. Hope this helps. --Solumeiras (talk) 19:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
She's back on her sock 142.205.212.203 (talk · contribs) here. Ward3001 (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Possibly another one as Burke and Hare (talk · contribs) here. Ward3001 (talk) 13:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- Good lookin' out but I think that's some unrelated vandalism. Precious Roy (talk) 20:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I've been considering filing a WP:LTA report. Do you think it would be worthwhile? If so, do you think it should go on the main page or as its own page (if you have any experience with LTA—I don't)? Precious Roy (talk) 17:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- I must admit, I thought there already was one. I'm not sure why I thought this as several people have suggested that creating such a page might be a good idea. In my opinion, I'd go with a report on its own page in this case but my experience with LTA pretty much only extends to Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Daddy Kindsoul and Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Verdict. In any case, much of the content of your sockwatch page could end up being copied into the LTA page. --Yamla (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- After re-reading the guidelines for creating a sub-page, I'm not sure that this qualifies so I put it on the main page. It can always be moved to a sub-page if someone else thinks it warrants one. Thanks again for all your help. Precious Roy (talk) 21:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
By the way, is the long-term soft-block on User talk:142.205.212.203 still working? If so, I hope that existing accounts under that, such as mine, are not affected. GoldDragon (talk) 01:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Why did
you revert my "vandalism" is this seriously what you do on vacation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.174.152 (talk) 19:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Pleaseee
Reverting to my edits for Miley Cyrus on the account Piazzajordan2. My sister found out my account password. And used this. Can i please have another chance. Please unblock me. I will assure you, this will never happen again. thank you. message back. -PiazzaJordan2Replacement —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiazzaJordan2Replacement (talk • contribs) 19:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- This is hardly the first time you've been caught vandalising. And then to set up a sockpuppet account with the expressed intention of avoiding blocks. Your block timer has been reset for one week. Any further vandalism may result in an indefinite block. --Yamla (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Admin bullying
Please explain how "Foz, not sure why you decided to stick your nose in here - but I'd rather an explanation why you ignored Waggers sneering attack on me than some whining rationale for blocking me." is construed as a personal attack meriting sealing my page. Thanks Sarah777 (talk) 23:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I have waited a reasonable amount of time for a reply. Do you not feel there is any obligation on an Admin to explain the reasons why they issue unusually punitive blocks? Even the "offended" Admin has distanced himself from your decision. Refer to my question above; how does that constitute "incivility" that would merit a talkpage block? Sarah777 (talk) 15:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- I did not see this message until just now. Please see WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. I simply do not believe that characterising someone's comments as a "sneering attack" and someone else's actions as "whining rationale" is at all appropriate. I am sorry you feel otherwise. --Yamla (talk) 22:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- And I only spotted this now. But the Waggers comment unarguably was a sneering attack. So that means you imposed a punitive block for me calling a fellow Admin's excuses a "whining rationale"? Is that the sort of proportionate behaviour we should expect from those entrusted with Admin powers? (Btw, I think this is somewhat more clear-cut than what I feel) Sarah777 (talk) 10:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- You are confused. I have never blocked you. However, I do expect and require that you abide by WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. If you believe you are not going to be able to be civil in the future, please let me know. --Yamla (talk) 15:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- And I only spotted this now. But the Waggers comment unarguably was a sneering attack. So that means you imposed a punitive block for me calling a fellow Admin's excuses a "whining rationale"? Is that the sort of proportionate behaviour we should expect from those entrusted with Admin powers? (Btw, I think this is somewhat more clear-cut than what I feel) Sarah777 (talk) 10:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- I did not see this message until just now. Please see WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. I simply do not believe that characterising someone's comments as a "sneering attack" and someone else's actions as "whining rationale" is at all appropriate. I am sorry you feel otherwise. --Yamla (talk) 22:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Dyslexicbudgie being fully blocked
I can see that User:Dyslexicbudgie has not learnt his lesson. Can you actually block them for like forever and take there user off or sometihng as it is becomeing an issue. Please reply Pattav2 (talk) 06:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- I show no contributions from that user for a month. Could you please let me know what actions you are talking about? Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 22:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, can you please weigh in on that page? I think it is high time we got rid of those images. Atleast I dont see any new evidence that they're not cpvios. Have you seen any? Please let me know. Thanks. Sarvagnya 17:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
This user whom you blocked for disruptive sockpuppetry for three months on October 26, 2007 is back active again. Not saying he's done anything disruptive as of yet, but you may wish to review. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- User immediately resumed violating WP:IUP and has been blocked for one year. --Yamla (talk) 15:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Be aware; it's highly likely that User:86.140.29.24 is him as well. No violations as yet, but just so you know. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Userpage
I noticed you had the same format errors as I had on my userpage. I've fixed it for you. Acalamari 17:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! Much appreciated! --Yamla (talk) 18:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Acalamari 18:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Is that a nonsense article? Zenlax T C S 20:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
AN discussion
As someone who had commented on the issue before, would you please weigh in on this discussion. Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Vandalize?
You sent me a message saying I was vandalizing the Scarlet Johansson page. All I did was correct the release date of her new album. Someone put it was being released on the 6th- she has publically said it's being released the 20'th. I make this correction and I get a message that I've been vandalizing. - January 31 2008, Samantha555
On the exact reference link used to quote that statement I changed, "Update: Her label has pushed her album back until May 20." You can actually refer to it and see for yourself. So I plead, I was not doing anything wrong, just making the correction that the source itself has recently stated. -February 2 2008, Samantha555 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.205.207.252 (talk) 09:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Tweety
Cancergirl (talk · contribs) may be her latest sock. Ward3001 (talk) 02:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Grawp
Why don't admins just block the IP address? I thought they did, but they're are still socks of him popping up. Why? --Alisyntalk 04:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- He's an IP-hopping vandal with access to a huge range. I've blocked three /16 blocks already and it isn't slowing him down. --Yamla (talk) 04:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Post new accounts at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Grawp; Alison is making that CU priority one and is blocking any IPs used for a few months apiece. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 04:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I'm on my way to bed now, but I will keep that in mind. I had never seen this troll before, kind of annoying. --Yamla (talk) 04:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've been dealing with him for the past fortnight or so. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 04:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- You deserve some sort of medal. --Yamla (talk) 04:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Did you intend to hard block these ranges? That's going to have some huge collateral damage. See unblock request from User talk:Apokryltaros. --B (talk) 05:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'd like to vouch for User:Apokryltaros. This is an extremely valuable contributor whose artwork has been used to illustrate three of the featured articles on which I've worked. I understand there's a problematic vandal on the loose and that these are difficult situations, but I believe that unblocking Apokryltaros needs to become an urgent priority, lest we alienate a truly irreplaceable editor who is most certainly unrelated to whatever vandalism is at hand. --JayHenry (t) 06:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I don't question that Apokryltaros is a good user ... the issue is whether there is a checkuser reason for hardblocking these ranges that we don't know about. --B (talk) 06:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I do understand that. I just want to make sure this isn't something that gets left until tomorrow and then forgotten for too long (it happens because we're humans, I'm not assigning any blame at all). Apokryltaros is one of only two or three editors on all of Wikipedia who is really proficient with Mammalian Paleontology, it wouldn't be acceptable collateral damage to lose him. And Yamla has already said he's going to bed for the night. --JayHenry (t) 06:19, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I don't question that Apokryltaros is a good user ... the issue is whether there is a checkuser reason for hardblocking these ranges that we don't know about. --B (talk) 06:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'd like to vouch for User:Apokryltaros. This is an extremely valuable contributor whose artwork has been used to illustrate three of the featured articles on which I've worked. I understand there's a problematic vandal on the loose and that these are difficult situations, but I believe that unblocking Apokryltaros needs to become an urgent priority, lest we alienate a truly irreplaceable editor who is most certainly unrelated to whatever vandalism is at hand. --JayHenry (t) 06:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Did you intend to hard block these ranges? That's going to have some huge collateral damage. See unblock request from User talk:Apokryltaros. --B (talk) 05:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- You deserve some sort of medal. --Yamla (talk) 04:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've been dealing with him for the past fortnight or so. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 04:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I'm on my way to bed now, but I will keep that in mind. I had never seen this troll before, kind of annoying. --Yamla (talk) 04:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Post new accounts at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Grawp; Alison is making that CU priority one and is blocking any IPs used for a few months apiece. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 04:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Natalee Holloway edit
Fine, if you want incorrect sources..then it's your call... Nytemyre (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please see WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:V, and WP:NOR. We have a source, you have been changing cited information so that it no longer matches the citation. This is not permitted. --Yamla (talk) 23:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Question?
Regarding a bit of the lingo regarding sock puppets. When you say that a log is stale, what does that mean? Figured I would ask that way if I am reading through a thing about a user being a sockpuppet or something, I know whats being talked about. Thanks :) Whammies Were Here 23:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm speculating here as I do not have checkuser access. Wikipedia does not keep access logs around forever. Once they are purged, a checkuser performed on an old account and a new account will not be able to show a conclusive match between the two. The logs are stale and have been purged. That is, they have been deleted so we no longer know what IP address the old account was operating from. --Yamla (talk) 23:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Images
Hello Yamla, User:Popatali is uploading so many images that don't follow Wikipedia guidelines. Look at his/her contributions history. I keep reverting his/her edits but he/she doesn't seem to listen. Furthemore, can you please delete these images: Image:PriyankaChopra.jpg and Image:Kareena Kapoor.jpg since both these images were uploaded from the BollywoodBlog licence. Although they are considered as Wikimedia Commons images, other images from the Bollywood Blog site were Wikimedia Commons images too but they were eventually deleted. --Bollywood Dreamz Talk 02:59, 5 February 2008
- I cannot delete those two images as they are on wikimedia commons instead of wikipedia-en. You'll have to track someone down on commons. :( --Yamla (talk) 05:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Sock Puppet
Hello. A user by the name of Ianjones1900 had been indef blocked from Wikipedia for repeatedly adding false info and copyright violations. It looks like he's back, this time with the usernames Ianjones600 and Ianjones457. Will you look into it? I also have suspicions about Ianjones, although he/she has only 5 edits and has been inactive for 18 months. Admc2006 (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Will do. --Yamla (talk) 18:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Speaking of sock puppets...I put a "bug" in Daniel Case's ear about Grant and what I believe is another sock of Grant Chuggle's. If you aren't too busy and get a sec, could you check it out too. I swear, that boy is just too easy to spot but I could be wrong. Thanks. IrishLass (talk) 18:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
omar epps
I don't understand why you're accusing me of vandalism. All I did was add an image of omar epps to a page on omar epps. I assumed it was an ok image to use since it was already being used on another wikipedia page, I didn't upload it. If I was wrong in doing so, fine, but it was an honest mistake and I don't appreciate you accusing me of intentional wrongdoing. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 21:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Did you not read the warning that you removed? The image was in blatant violation of WP:IUP and the warning specifically told you that such an image was inappropriate. --Yamla (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
unblockabuse template
Hi Yamla - thanks for stepping on on that anon-IP page with the unblockabuse template. I didn't know about that and am very happy to find it! I can't believe it's a very-much-used template though -- surely there aren't that many editors that are quite that desperately bored? --Lquilter (talk) 22:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hahaha, new around here? ;-) Good faith editors sometimes don't bother to read the policies they have been violating, and so continue to post unblock requests. Griefers just want to waste our time and can't think of anything more entertaining to do. --Yamla (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, a newly-minted admin. First vandal-blocks today and it was really interesting to see that editor spinning their wheels with dozens of edits to their own userpage! Thanks! --Lquilter (talk) 22:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Good luck! It's a fun place most of the time but you'll get the occasional death threat. Heck, I got one earlier today targeted at me personally and I see the unblock-en-l mailing list just got a generalised "go kill yourselves" message a few minutes ago. Woo. --Yamla (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, a newly-minted admin. First vandal-blocks today and it was really interesting to see that editor spinning their wheels with dozens of edits to their own userpage! Thanks! --Lquilter (talk) 22:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
not right?
I was about to decline the request for unblock for User:Whoisthisagain. However, this user has only used the unblock template once, which is hardly abuse of the template. Is your use of the page protection of the user talk page acceptable? If so, let me know for my own administrative education. Archtransit (talk) 22:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Death threats such as the one by Whoisthisagain are sufficient grounds to protect a page. Generally, a user gets up to two unblock reviews per block but given that a blocked user has already shown himself or herself unwilling to behave, unblock abuse may result in an immediate protection of the page. They are still free to contect unblock-en-l .at. lists.wikimedia.org or a member of WP:ARBCOM for further unblock consideration. --Yamla (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- OK with me.Archtransit (talk) 23:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
User talk:Not Something and Not Someone is a sock of Tgannon? I don't dispute the finding but you don't explain why on the user's talk page. Archtransit (talk) 23:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's obvious from the contribution log. See for example the identical edits [3] and [4]. --Yamla (talk) 23:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I was working on Ari Publican before you denied the unblock request. Please leave at least a one sentence explanation on why you believe the person is a sockpuppet. This would be very helpful. Thank you. Archtransit (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Even when I am not the blocking admin? --Yamla (talk) 23:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- You did determine that the person was an "obvious sockpuppet.". Unblock requests are done as an independent review, as cited by ArbCom. Therefore, it seems permissible for you to decide without consulting the blocking administrator. Since you have presumably done an independent review, if you explain your reasoning, others could use that information to catch future socks. Archtransit (talk) 23:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
omar epps
yes I read it, but as I said, it was an image that was already being used in another wikipedia article. If the image is a violation, shouldn't it have been removed from the other article? Maybe I misinterpreted the message, I'm not saying you were wrong for changing it back, but making a mistake about an image certainly isn't malicious. It just seems like giving me a "final warning" for vandalism over a mistake is kind of severe, considering I've never been warned about it before. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 23:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- No. Please read WP:IUP. Fair-use images may not be used to depict living people. The warning message, which you removed, made this plain. --Yamla (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I guess we're just not going to see eye to eye here, I didn't understand the warning message or the picture policy I guess. I really wasn't trying to do anything wrong, but I'll just have to be more careful in the future. I do not now, nor have I ever tried to vandalize a wikipedia page, but it seems your mind is already made up about what my intentions were. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have removed the warning message from your talk page. --Yamla (talk) 17:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you, I appreciate it and will be more careful about edits in the future.On Thermonuclear War (talk) 18:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have removed the warning message from your talk page. --Yamla (talk) 17:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I guess we're just not going to see eye to eye here, I didn't understand the warning message or the picture policy I guess. I really wasn't trying to do anything wrong, but I'll just have to be more careful in the future. I do not now, nor have I ever tried to vandalize a wikipedia page, but it seems your mind is already made up about what my intentions were. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
The lovely and talented Paulinho28
This guy just doesn't give up. He's still blanking talk pages both here and on his IP. Just left word at the intervention page, but I thought you ought to know as well. Thanks for blocking this guy. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Blocking anonymous users
Why bother? A simple IP address change, and we can go on, saying whatever we want. 76.182.32.227 (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- We also have range-blocks and can report you to your ISP if you continue attacking the Wikipedia. --Yamla (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yamla, User:91.108.254.97 reports that he/she is collateral damage. Who is the user whose actions caused the range block on 91.108.192.0/18 and what articles did they edit? Thank you. Archtransit (talk) 01:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- The diff you presented showed this block http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:91.108.230.171&oldid=189526699 of User:91.108.230.171. 91.108.230.171 is different from 91.108.254.97. Please explain. It doesn't make sense to me. Archtransit (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- Certainly. Many internet service providers assign IP addresses dynamically; that is, every time you reboot your modem, you will have a new IP. The IP addresses stay within a given range that are 'owned' by that service provider. This means that a very persistent vandal with a dynamic IP is unblockable, since he can simply grab another IP. A 'last resort' effort is to block the entire range, which is represented by the 91.108.192.0/18 number above (see here for how that nomenclature works). The addresses above are both in that range, and looking at the history of blocks in that range, the problem is severe and associated with checkuser problems; an unblock would be a very poor idea. Since range blocks are almost always 'soft' (i.e. they can still edit when they use an account), the user can contact the unblock mailing list to request an account be created for them. If you have any other questions about how this all works, please let me know! Kuru talk 01:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, Kuru. Couldn't have said it better myself. It's worth noting that this particular address range has had 14 blocks, including mine and not considering the unblocks since August of last year. It's clearly a big problem, one made worse by a promise to continue vandalising, otherwise I would not have blocked for six months. --Yamla (talk) 15:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
This [5] might confuse the user even more as he had nothing to do with the I.P. and the original blocking admin reverted the block saying it was an accident. --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 17:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- That's the standard unblock-auto template. It's what generally gets used in these situations. You are free to follow up with the user and explain in more detail, or to suggest changes to the unblock-auto template itself. Thanks for your work already with this user. :) --Yamla (talk) 17:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Re : Monica Belucci
Calm down, dude. I just added her year of birth which can be checked in the italian (and other) version of the article. There's no need to make such big a deal out of it you knowMitch1981 (talk) 20:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
If you understand italian, just check this documentary out [6]. It was made by italian channel TG5 and you can see a guy who was her teacher in kindergarten ... in 1968 (so she was definitely not born in 1968), besides the doc clearly states that she was born on the 30th of september 1964.Mitch1981 (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- I do not speak Italian, unfortunately. However, if the documentary does indeed state she was born in 1964 and if you believe this meets WP:RS, as seems likely, please feel free to readd the information, citing it as per WP:CITE. Thanks! --Yamla (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Magazine covers on Vogue (magazine) article
What do you have against the magazine covers on the Vogue's article? I can't uderstand your behavior! There's a lot of time that these pictures with Kate Moss and Gisele Bündchen were there! Now are you wanting to take off? What's your objective? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mywikipedista (talk • contribs) 02:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- See WP:IUP and the image's license. We cannot use them to depict the people generally or the magazine generally. --Yamla (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
inquiry
Blocked as a sockpuppet. We had additional information not available to the checkusers which ties this to Chadbryant. --Yamla (talk) 22:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Paul Harald Kaspar
I'm curious what type of additional information? I'm interested in improving my detective skills. My e-mail is enabled as is most admins. Archtransit (talk) 17:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
User talk:Rafaelsilba blocked - question
I didn't see any images uploaded in his log and his deleted contributions were on images uploaded by others. The only contributions I saw were adding category tags to some of the existing images. Was this the person you meant to block? --NrDg 05:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Nevermind - I see that the uploads were to commons, not here. Is it verified this is the same person? --NrDg 05:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Block
Hi Yamla. Last week you blocked me for 72 hours for inappropriate edits of mine, which I'll accept were perhaps a little extreme. This time round, I would like to avoid a block, so I would like to know to what extent I am, allowed to point out that I dislike people. If I were to leave a message here now saying "I don't like you", would that be enough to warrant a further block? If so I shall refrain as I wish to be a legitimate editor. 194.189.32.65 (talk) 11:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- You are to remain civil at all times. See WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Given your history of abuse, a comment like "I don't like you" may be sufficient to result in a block. --Yamla (talk) 15:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
What...?
Were you not aware that user:Endlessdan had already been blocked for the comments he made?? What's up with the obvious lack of communication between admins....?? -ElisaEXPLOSiONtalk. 14:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Btline
Sorry, I thought that as they are now redundant pages (misunderstandings) I could redirect them to my page to prevent any more confusions- believe me, there have been plenty! Can I revert? Thanks, Btline (talk) 17:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- They are not redundant. They show that you have abused sockpuppet accounts in the past. --Yamla (talk) 17:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- As I said above, they were confusions. I even admitted to one of them and gave a full explanation. This should be done to prevent any more unnecessary duplication etc.
Btline (talk) 17:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you are saying here. You previously falsely claimed you were unrelated to Rgsao. This was shown to be false and the account was blocked. The sockpuppet investigation and checkuser results need to stay. So long as you refrain from any further violations in the future, as you seem to be doing, this will not be an issue. --Yamla (talk) 18:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmmmmmm, that was a misunderstanding- but I won't go there now! Anyway, what I am saying is that, there is no point in having several pages on a mass of stuff when it can be redirected to my fresh start/ refreshed user page. If necessary, it can be moved to an archive of my talk page. I thought Wiki servers were full. Here is an opportunity to have a spring clearout, as such! i thought I was doing you a favour! Btline (talk) 18:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
:::You may also want to add {{User Alternate Acc|Dewarw}} to your userpage. --~~~~
No need. Btline (talk) 18:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- As you wish. Make sure you are aware of WP:SOCK and WP:BLOCK, as I'm sure you are. The easiest way to abide by these policies is to refrain from using your other account, Dewarw, again. This is certainly not your only option, but it is the safest. --Yamla (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Bairro de São José in Recife-PE (...)
I'm the author, I did the picture all by myself! This is my name! —Preceding unsigned comment added by FireOcean (talk • contribs) 02:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Olinda - First capital of Pernambuco - Brazil.jpg
A French friend called Cyrril Perrin did the pic on my own camera! —Preceding unsigned comment added by FireOcean (talk • contribs) 02:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
- In that case, you have chosen a false license for the image. --Yamla (talk) 03:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking me
What can I say? Sometimes I can be an impatient man. Thanks a lot.
Do I get to move that auto-block removal notice to a sub-page of my own (for archival purposes) or just outright remove it? I've always wondered about stuff like that. Casull (talk) 04:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- Generally, we like people to archive stuff. You are permitted to delete warnings and the like, though, so long as you have read and understood them. As an autoblock has nothing to do with you directly, though, there's absolutely no reason why you should keep it around, or even archive it. So feel free to just blank it. :) --Yamla (talk) 04:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Kollywoodtoday images
I'm rather confused.
- I've secured the permission of them.
- And I've sourced them.
- What else am I supposed to do?
Universal Hero (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- The problem is, it doesn't look like the images actually belong to Kollywoodtoday in the first place. Just to be clear, this is not your fault at all. The problem is simply that Kollywoodtoday is passing off images as their own when in fact they are screenshots or promotional images. --Yamla (talk) 14:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'll re-write to them and embark you upon their response. Universal Hero (talk) 15:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
C++
Response on my talk. --Elliskev 15:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikone
Can you block Wikone (talk · contribs) for 5 minutes? So he will learn about the BC -BCE thing. --helics (talk · contribs) 17:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have issued another warning to this user. If he or she continues, I will block. --Yamla (talk) 17:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Block of Helics
Yamla, you blocked Helics (talk · contribs) as an abusive sockpuppet of Iamandrewrice (talk · contribs) and he is now requesting to be unblocked. Unless I'm overlooking the account, Helics doesn't appear to be listed on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Iamandrewrice and they don't appear to have edited any of the same pages. Am I missing something obvious (it is awfully early in the morning)? - auburnpilot talk 13:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ok....so it was obvious. [7] Coffee time. - auburnpilot talk 14:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Happy Valentine's
Zenlax is wishing you a Happy Valentine's Day, {{subst:kdBASEPAGENAME}}! This greeting promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the love by adding {{subst:User:Flaminglawyer/HapValDay!}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Zenlax T C S 19:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
88.108.0.0/17 block
The block that you added to 88.108.0.0/17 also includes my IP, 88.108.83.0. I would add further comment to that but since it expires in less than 10 hours, which I intend on spending either logged in or in bed, I don't see a point any further than pointing out that that particular IP isn't Iamandrewrice. Have a nice day =). — Balthazar (T|C) 01:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- The block was anon-only so should not have affected you. Please let me know if it did stop you from editing, though! --Yamla (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Meera jasmine.jpg
To make a quality encyclopedia article, I think this image is necessary. The earlier version was not good. (you may compare both). I’ve mentioned in the image talk page also. Hope this ok. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose T 05:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- with respect to your comments "Blatantly false" I wish to inform you that it is a screen shot, croped it in adobe photoshop. --Avinesh Jose T 07:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if you're aware of the situation or not, but this is a long-standing and overall positive contributor. I (the blocking admin) and a number of other admins have considered an apology and/or promise not to vandalize anymore to be a sufficient but necessary condition for unblock. - Revolving Bugbear 20:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- I would fully support that. At the moment, he appears not to have made that promise. --Yamla (talk) 20:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Could you please unlock the Giovanni De Prà page, so I could create an article about him? Thanks! Gh (talk) 16:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi
Can a cool admin help a guy out? I want to add one sentence to the world of Wikipedia. But I can't. The sentence is factual, provable, reliable (I chose the New York Times version.)
Circumcision may decrease a man's risk of getting HIV but it may also INCREASE a man's risk of getting herpes and chlamydia. (and some doctors even say other STD's too but I won't get into that and I wouldn't put caps on INCREASE.)
The article on circumcision mentions the term HIV probably 100 times (I'm not joking) and mentions "herpes" or "chlamydia" not Once. Click on the article. You tell me if it's an article on the procedure or a pro-circumcision propaganda pamphlet.
Can a cool admin stop two guys named Avraham and Jakew (the site's dictators) from deleting my one sentence I want to add? Or possibly get new Admins to take over this article, which has fallen way below Wikipedia standards.
here's the New York Times piece... http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C07E4D91F3AF931A35757C0A961958260&fta=y
I used to love Wikipedia until I went to add a sentence, you know? Well, thanks. 70.114.38.167 (talk) 07:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Have you tried politely asking why your addition was inappropriate by posting your proposed addition and the citation for it on that article's discussion page? --Yamla (talk) 22:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Randy Jaiyan
Randy Jaiyan (talk · contribs) is moving multiple pages, adding more illegal images, and being a general pain. He was blocked by Daniel Case for the pictures earlier but you blocked him last weekend for incivility. Could you help again. He's created a bunch of pages and then redirected them. He's even moved actress pages, not just fictional characters. Any help is appreciated. KellyAna (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, it would be best for you to post this to WP:AIV. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject matter. :( --Yamla (talk) 22:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
delete, but no notification
Instead of keep on adding copyvio of my images in my talk page, could you please see the contribution of my images & keep on delete it. Please don’t add the notification in my talk page as it looks awkward to me. I already put it in my watch list of all image uploading details & every change would be notified immediately to me. So go ahead & delete all my images. No problem at all. Wish you all the best. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose T 05:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Let me ask one question, to specify an accurate source and license, Why don’t you add/change the proper tag/corrections on behalf of the up-loader/public, instead of deleting it? you deleted all images in which the source is properly mentioned. You deleted it only because of a minor problem i.e pd-screenshot. you should change that to pd-fair use rationale & keep.Thanks. (pls leave message here, its in my watchlist). --Avinesh Jose T 06:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- We are not permitted to use fair-use images solely to depict living people. Additionally, it is your responsibility as the uploader to provide correct information, not mine to correct it. In most cases, I could not determine the source, nor could I find an accurate license that would allow us to use the images. Finally, you asked for the images to be deleted. --Yamla (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- First of all, FUR living people policy page is no more active and I think the policy may have changed. In my case, except secretariat building image, I’ve properly provided the sources. You tagged my images only because of a minor issue i.e {pd-screenshot} which you should change, instead of commenting it as ‘blatant false’ and nominating for deletion. I said you should change it to {fair-use} as there is nothing prevents us from doing so (editing it). Listen, we all are contributing to this project to make quality encyclopedia articles. Please do not simply target established editor’s work and delete all images as you did it to me though I’d given proper sources. (It is true that I told you to delete as I was unhappy of your approach towards me). --Avinesh Jose T 04:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- By dictat of the Wikimedia Foundation, fair-use images may not be used solely to depict living people. This is not open to debate. It is not acceptable to use a fair-use image to depict a living person solely because the image looks good or because it pretties up the article. And I deleted your images because you asked me to. "could you please see the contribution of my images & keep on delete it". Had you not said that, I would not have deleted the images, only marked them for deletion as inappropriate-fair-use or as having false licenses (e.g. web page screenshots). --Yamla (talk) 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Also, please see WP:FUC which clearly states, "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." This means no fair-use images to depict living people. This is what it means. --Yamla (talk) 04:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- First of all, FUR living people policy page is no more active and I think the policy may have changed. In my case, except secretariat building image, I’ve properly provided the sources. You tagged my images only because of a minor issue i.e {pd-screenshot} which you should change, instead of commenting it as ‘blatant false’ and nominating for deletion. I said you should change it to {fair-use} as there is nothing prevents us from doing so (editing it). Listen, we all are contributing to this project to make quality encyclopedia articles. Please do not simply target established editor’s work and delete all images as you did it to me though I’d given proper sources. (It is true that I told you to delete as I was unhappy of your approach towards me). --Avinesh Jose T 04:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- We are not permitted to use fair-use images solely to depict living people. Additionally, it is your responsibility as the uploader to provide correct information, not mine to correct it. In most cases, I could not determine the source, nor could I find an accurate license that would allow us to use the images. Finally, you asked for the images to be deleted. --Yamla (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)