User talk:Aviyal/Archives/2012/January

This page 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.

deletion

Before you nominate any further article for deletion, please read WP:Deletion policy and WP:CSD -- and WP:N. Not being notable is not a reason for speedy deletion, only having no indication of any possible good faith imporance of significance--and that only for people, groups, or web content. Not books. DGG ( talk ) 00:08, 25 January 2012 (UTC)== Sorry to bother again ==

{{help}} Hello, sorry to bother again but could anyone please notify Ronhjones, that I'm a safe guy to process with (as AGK, the checkuser mentioned). I so excited to get an IPBE, I never had one. Special thanks to AGK and thanks in advance for Ronhjones 'nd you! /\ talk← Aviyal →track) /\ 20:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

auto-block, again

This user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Aviyal/Archives/2012 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

81.111.254.223 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

{{checkuserblock}}: Long-term abuse

Blocking administrator: AGK (talk • blocks)

Accept reason: IPBE granted - it's only needed until the main block expires in a week or so, and can then be removed. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this IP address or network has been used to disrupt Wikipedia. It has been blocked from editing to prevent further abuse.
If you are not the intended target of this block, please read the information below in order to receive assistance.

Wikipedia tries to be open, but we sometimes must block IP addresses to prevent editing by abusers, vandals, or block evaders. These blocks can affect users who have done nothing wrong. If you are a legitimate user, follow the instructions below to edit despite the block. Users who are the intended target of a range block may still appeal the block.

IP users (without an account): If you do not have an account and wish to bypass this block, an account can be created to allow you to edit. In general, these blocks only prevent users who are not logged in from editing; once you are logged in, the block will no longer affect you in any way. To request an account, simply click here and follow the directions provided on the page. It is important that you use an e-mail address issued to you by your ISP, school, or organisation, so we may verify that you are a legitimate user. When filling out the account request form, please refer to this block in the "comments" input field. If you've been instructed to request an account via email, please refer to this block in your message.

Registered users (with an account): Please make sure you are logged in to your account. If you are unable to edit while logged in, you may request IP block exemption to bypass blocks unconnected with you that affect your editing. Post an unblock request to your user talk page.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Thank you for helping Ronhjones. aviyal want's water 16:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Can you explain the reason behind this edit? JamesBWatson (talk) 17:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I wanted to get an IP block exception for 81.111.254.223, so I asked for a template that is available. /\ talk← Aviyal →track) /\ 17:56, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Aviyal is a straight match to the sock-master who made this range-block necessary, but collateral damage is certainly feasible. The accounts in question are what we sometimes call "technically indistinguishable", and in appeals of blocks based on such a connection, behavioural evidence must be relied on in determining how likely is a link between the appellant and the subject of the RB. In this case, with a somewhat generous assumption of good faith, I am happy for Aviyal to be unblocked (or granted IPBE as the situation actually seems to require). I will leave this in the hands of the reviewing administrator, but this checkuser's opinion is that it is safe to unblock (with my apologies to the blockee for the disruption). AGK [•] 22:37, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

block

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Aviyal/Archives/2012 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I made an account as AGK, the check user said, but still can't edit.

Decline reason:

You aren't blocked directly. Unless you can give us the IP address/autoblock information (which should appear on the screen you get when you try to edit other pages), or can point us to a page where AKG told you this, there's nothing we can do. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The account isn't blocked directly. You'll need to follow the unblock request details you see when you try to edit. Please also advise as to where AGF recommended to make the new account. Thanks! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Aviyal/Archives/2012 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

As you can see, I'm not blocked directly. But I created an account as AGK said, still waiting for an administrator to bypass the block

Decline reason:

One open unblock at a time, please. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:42, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Aviyal/Archives/2012 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi, I'm not blocked directly, but still can't edit, even though I have made an account as AGK said.

Decline reason:

Unfortunately there is no way we can unblock the IP block or autoblock which is affecting you unless you tell us what IP block or autoblock is involved. When you try to edit you will see a message telling you that you can't, and it will also give you the other information that you need to pass on to us. Please make a new unblock request including that information. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

aviyal want's water 23:07, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Can you copy and paste what you see when you try to edit? We can't help you without that. Daniel Case (talk) 05:42, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks but ...

I've been editing on Wikipedia for longer than I care to remember.

I have no desire to create a user account because there is no need for me to do so. It offers no advantage apart from having to remember to log in every time I access Wikipedia. 109.153.242.10 (talk) 18:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

You can use many tools and you can easily access templates. If you have an account. /\ talk← Aviyal →track) /\ 18:39, 25 January 2012 (UTC)== Blaming others for doing 'vandalism' when they are not ==

Please don't accuse editors of vandalism unless you're sure they have committed it. In particular, avoid using the word in edit summaries (such as "reverting vandalism"), and be very careful about posting vandalism warning templates on users' talkpages. Review the vandalism policy thoroughly before you do that, and see especially the section "What vandalism is not". Note that content disputes are not vandalism, and that good-faith edits of any kind, even if you think them misguided, are not to be considered vandalism. Vandalism accusations without any basis in policy are bad for the climate on the wiki and make constructive discussion more difficult. See also Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal".

--188.113.91.110 (talk) 18:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks but ...

I've been editing on Wikipedia for longer than I care to remember.

I have no desire to create a user account because there is no need for me to do so. It offers no advantage apart from having to remember to log in every time I access Wikipedia. 109.153.242.10 (talk) 18:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

You can use many tools and you can easily access templates. If you have an account. /\ talk← Aviyal →track) /\ 18:39, 25 January 2012 (UTC)== Blaming others for doing 'vandalism' when they are not ==

Please don't accuse editors of vandalism unless you're sure they have committed it. In particular, avoid using the word in edit summaries (such as "reverting vandalism"), and be very careful about posting vandalism warning templates on users' talkpages. Review the vandalism policy thoroughly before you do that, and see especially the section "What vandalism is not". Note that content disputes are not vandalism, and that good-faith edits of any kind, even if you think them misguided, are not to be considered vandalism. Vandalism accusations without any basis in policy are bad for the climate on the wiki and make constructive discussion more difficult. See also Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal".

--188.113.91.110 (talk) 18:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit to talk pages

I'm perfectly entitled to remove content from my own talk page and I don't have to provide an edit summary either as the appropriate comment is automatically added. 109.153.242.10 (talk) 13:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to MPlayer, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.—J. M. (talk) 01:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)