User talk:Eustress

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:Eustress)
Jump to: navigation, search

Some falafel for you![edit]

Falafel award.png For withdrawing the Salman Khan RM, not specifically that I have any stake for that RM, just nice to see editors who can change their minds with good grace. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

POTD notification[edit]

Hi Eustress,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:John F Kennedy Official Portrait.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on November 22, 2013. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2013-11-22. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Bangladesh Air Force ranks[edit]

Hi I Fuad from Bangladesh Air Force. If it necessary to confirm Wikipedia authority, I can submit my proof. I want to inform Wikipedia about the RANK OF AIRMEN OF BANGLADESH AIR FORCE. Before my work This ranks photo's not yet uploaded in Internet. For why you cannot realize the fact of Uploading our rank in Wikipedia. Hope you help me to upload AIRMENS RANK OF BANGLADESH AIR FORCE. Al Fuaduzzaman Sohan (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2013‎

Fuad, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and sorry you're having a hard time getting started. It appears that your edits to Bangladesh Air Force are being reverted because the images you have uploaded and referenced in the article (see, for instance, [1]) are being disputed as copyright violations. Please consult Wikipedia:Media copyright questions if you have questions about this policy, or engage editors on Talk:Bangladesh Air Force. —Eustress 18:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

A personalized New Year greeting[edit]

Hope you have a bright 2014! Acalamari 12:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Eustress, Happy New Year! I hope that you're well. :) Best. Acalamari 12:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for thinking of me, Acalamari. Best wishes to you as well! —Eustress 15:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

AfD on ALD[edit]

Thanks for your AfD comment. But why did you remove the notability template? My thought was the template might draw some interest by itself. In any event, I've seen articles rescued via the AfD process. (E.g., the inclusionists get going and fix things.) Maybe this one will do the same. – S. Rich (talk) 23:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

WP:RFPP Thanks[edit]

Hey Eustress,

I'm not sure if I've interacted with you before, but I'd like to take a moment to say hello and thank you for your work at Requests for Page Protection today. You single-handedly and tastefully responded to a slew of requests. So thanks! Airplaneman 14:03, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, happy to help! —Eustress 17:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
No, he made errors in responding to requests. You responded to the Katy Perry discography rfp saying user talk pages are exempted from prot. Its an article, not a talk page. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 04:53, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
You're right, thanks —Eustress 17:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Beauty and the Beast (franchise)[edit]

Hi, Eustress, I'm appreciate of your recent assist at Beauty and the Beast (franchise), but I don't think the current level of protection is sufficient to hand the problem I reported, though I did appreciate the duration! The article is being hit primarily by IPs from Vietnam, which, as far as I know, can't be rangeblocked successfully, and as I'd mentioned in my RPP, the grand majority of IP edits at the page have been from Vietnam-based IPs who are intent on promoting this hoax. The current protection requires that IP edits be checked through our reviewer system, but the reviewer system (as I know from my experience with reviewer permissions) only requires that reviewers revert what is obvious vandalism. If they don't know that there is a history of hoax editing at this article, or that any sort of future 2015 Beauty and the Beast project is bogus, then most of the bollox IP edits can still sneak through. I was hopefully wondering if you might consider elevating the protection to exclude IPs and non-autoconfirmed users without the review process. It's difficult to paint the complete picture for every admin who happens by, but Disney Junior (Asia) is another affected article with a litany of disruptive edits from these 123 and 113 IPs, and if it helps, I've called the Vietnam edits out in my edit summaries, for example here. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I understand your concern. Is it all right if we wait and see if the Feedback Protection helps? It's possible that may deter the vandals, and that would be preferred to semi-protection, which would prevent altruistic anons and new users from contributing to the page. —Eustress 15:43, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Sure. In the interim, may I also request that the protection at Hercules (2014 film)‎ be taken down a notch? There isn't so much an editor content dispute as there is just one disruptive IP user who is trying to assert his personal opinions of the movie. Please see this rambling talk page diatribe to understand what we had going on. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Done... Good luck, and please continue to do your best to be welcoming to new contributors. —Eustress 20:36, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, much obliged. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Rich Constable[edit]

Despite having tried to engage any of the anonymous IPs regarding their edits to the Rich Constable article, none have chosen to enter a discussion about how to proceed with writing it. I do not know if the anonymous IPs are one and the same person, though I'm inclined to think so. I do not wish to become involved in edit war, but am unsure as to how to proceed when dealing with a situation where there's no engagement, references are continually removed, original research is added, article structure is manipulated, and accusations of bad faith and vandalism are being made. You blocked the article based on edit warring, but have not addressed the fact that IP users are not following any protocol. Therefore, with that in mind, and the fact the the block will expire shortly, I wonder what you would suggest as to how to proceed. Below is the list of IP editors thus far involved.Djflem (talk) 18:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Djflem (talk) 18:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

I instituted full protection of the article because it appeared all editors have been engaged in edit warring. Please beware of issues of WP:ownership on your part; and be sure to notify IPs on their talk pages of your attempts at discussion, and issue vandalism warnings if discussion goes ignored. —Eustress 20:24, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Your kind advice to that editor not being heeded[edit]

Hi Eustress; From the notice you left for Editor Chealer regarding the "Wikipedia" page, I have noticed that he/she has ignored your fair warning on 6 August informing Chealer that ignoring guidelines and essays just because they are "policies" is unproductive and disruptive. User:Chealer has instead decided today on 10 August to switch back to the same dissent against WP:BRD and WP:Lede and now put it into boldface with Chealer stating,

Three of us have engaged on Talk page on "Wikipedia" for days and there has been not even a budge in the discussion by Chealer. My attempt to post the RFC for this was foreshortened by an editor who did not realize that the RFC was very short term. The results which were posted appear to be 4 to Support continuing Full Protection, 2 editors supporting a Topic ban with ANI against Chealer with no further full protection, and no-one supporting Chealer. This is the grouping of the 100 disruptive edits of User:Chealer from the last month collected into one place. If you would like me to post the links and diffs for one dozen or two dozen of the most harsh edit warring by Chealer for review, then let me know and I'll try to fill them in if the ANI is needed to help support a Topic ban. The 4 of us trying to help are getting pretty exhausted and may need more time of full protection to continue to try to reason further with Chealer:

If you would like us to continue to try to reason again with that user, then let me know and we can try again. LawrencePrincipe (talk) 00:54, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear the edit warring persists. You might consider initiating a report at WP:AN3. —Eustress 03:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I have reported both users on ANI at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Prolonged_edit_warring_and_content_dispute_on_Wikipedia EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 22:51, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

invalid links in deletion notices[edit]

When you posted deletion notices about the navboxes of university presidents, you linked to Oct 17 here, here, here and here, instead of Oct 15 where the deletion discussion is. That makes it more difficult for the authors to find your TfD. --rogerd (talk) 04:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

thanks for fixing —Eustress 03:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Beauty and the Beast (Disney franchise)[edit]

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 09:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar awarded[edit]

Editors Barnstar Hires.png The Editor's Barnstar
for prompt action on what ought not to be included. ElijahBosley (talk ☞) 12:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Groan[edit]

Remember protecting that page on Direct Hit (band)? I was wondering how an obscure band suddenly became the target of so much vandalism—apparently the band asked on Facebook (Google cache, might be gone by the time you see it) to have their page vandalized. Sounds like somebody has too much time on their hands... Altamel (talk) 06:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

No worries, thx —Eustress 19:09, 19 December 2014 (UTC)