User talk:Smalljim: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 10:05, 21 April 2015

How to use talk pages: (guidelines from Template:User talk top)

Please continue any conversation where it was started.

Thus if I have left a message on your talk page please DO NOT post a reply here.

I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.

If you want to initiate a conversation, please create a new heading here.

Continue existing conversations under existing headings.

Create a new heading if the original conversation is archived.

Indent your comments when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
Sign your comments automatically using ~~~~.

Talk page archives: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8

Block of 74.3.185.242

I think this is not a correct block, nearly all edits seem to be correct. See http://www.sportshall.ca/stories.html?lang=EN. The only one mistake what I found is the edit in Ken Murray (ice hockey), but this is wrong linked from List of members of Canada's Sports Hall of Fame. Florentyna (talk) 10:25, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It may seem harsh, but I've explained on the IP's talk page and told him/her how to obtain help in adding references now that the short block has expired. It's very important that editors talk to one another. —SMALL JIM 16:37, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sparkythedog14

Thanks for fixing 😃 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparkythedog14 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

Thanks for your anti-vandalism action in my article about CH Sevilla.

Best regards,

Wikirodgil (talk) 19:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Undo my unconstructiveness

Hey,

have found out that most people from the order of the garter are actually very big criminals. As my understanding Wikipedia is a website that provides information based on finding and facts. So, do the research. Here is a reference Jordan Maxwell - The Inner World of The Occult. If you research the names of the people associated with the order, you will also find their criminal activities.

kind regards, HeerLorcan — Preceding unsigned comment added by HeerLorcan (talk • contribs) 22:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a template that contains useful links to your talk page. Perhaps you ought to read up on how this website works before you make any further edits. I hope this helps, —SMALL JIM 22:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A user you recently warned

Perhaps you'd like to see this? Nothing outrageous except calling sysops nerds and calling you "Small-D*ck Jim". —George8211 / T 22:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I've reverted. If he continues in the same vein, I'll block for disruption. —SMALL JIM 22:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

why did you remove the article i created

why did you smalljim remove my article i created — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blurred Pixels (talk • contribs) 12:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a brief explanation on your talk page. You should read the other messages there, and follow the links in them. The most important is Your first article, especially the section "Things to avoid". —SMALL JIM 12:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from 59.101.129.169

http://www.lodgedevotion.net/devotionnews/education-editorial-articles/famous-australian-freemasons/large-list-of-notable-and-famous-australian-freemasons — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.129.169 (talk) 12:53, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on the IPs talk page. —SMALL JIM 13:40, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

you might want to revoke talk page access to that one user you just blocked since they used the talk page to insult me Saturn star (talk) 17:42, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still watching (User talk:Amerrill0256) and I will revoke access if he persists, but he may have given up now. —SMALL JIM 17:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your quick work dealing with ArindamDey AD. It's bloody time-consuming trying to revert and warn a user like that without doing a 3RR yourself... then to go through the trouble of filing RPP and edit warning noticeboard entries. Do you know of a faster way to handle offenders like that, other than directly contacting an admin you know and hoping they're around to respond? --Drm310 (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just happened along at the right time, eh! It's unusual at this time of day for someone to get away with it for so long. It's probably easier to treat it as plain vandalism (he ignored multiple templated warnings): just report at AIV and move on. —SMALL JIM 16:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noted for next time. Thanks again. --Drm310 (talk) 16:46, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war at Metric expansion of space

You are engaged in what I see as an edit war at Metric expansion of space, and have violated the the WP:3RR. Please stop reverting, and discuss on the talk page. Thanks, crh23 (talk) 10:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Crh23: You may see it edit warring – other admins and I see it as disruptive editing by the IP who is repeatedly trying to enforce his substantially unreferenced version of an article over the long established and well-referenced version. Have you seen the article's history (he's been at it since 12 Feb), the page protection log (it's been protected twice since then), and the fact that the vandal has been blocked twice before? —SMALL JIM 11:09, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Very much so, but if a user is being disruptive then surely there is intervention required (such as a protect), rather than just constantly reverting, especially as it is very possible that the IP has good faith, if misguided. crh23 (talk) 11:13, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In cases like this, one can always hope that just one more message will make a difference, but he did not reply to the enquiry that I made – without reverting – as to whether he'd read WP:CONSENSUS. The relevant policies/guidelines have been explained to the user many times and he clearly has no intention to abide by them. If he continues to introduce these changes using different IP addresses, then yes, PP may be appropriate again. —SMALL JIM 11:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to ShwingGumme

This user is not legitimate. They've created a few hoax articles, which are either unreferenced, or have a reference that points to something else entirely. All of their other edits are extremely dubious at best, and blatant vandalism at worst (bear in mind this comes in the context of me reverting two bad edits to the page prior to that). Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have little doubt of this. I'm just trying to gather a little more evidence: which he/she has now provided by ignoring my reasonable enquiry. —SMALL JIM 13:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, and thanks for taking care of the block - just thought I'd let you know of exactly how I saw things (your AGF lasted longer than mine) :) I've also gone and nuked everything that they did, and tagged their articles under CSD:G3. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we could call it AGF. I find that asking a reasonable direct question like that is an easy way to get supporting evidence: I recommend it! Thanks for the quick reverts. —SMALL JIM 13:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's closer to AGF than coming to an identical conclusion, but just going straight for the "nuke all edits" option like I did. I tend to prefer to remove vandalism as quickly as possible, particularly when it comes to kid's TV, where young kids will just assume that what they see is gospel. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:27, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Being almost certainly less knowledgeable in this area than you, I chose to try for behavioural evidence as well. It would be embarrassing to block if the edits were valid – and there are so many obscure kid's cartoons and production houses to check up on! —SMALL JIM 13:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider myself that knowledgeable on this decade's kids shows. However, I've had Winx Club on my watchlist for ages due to several known vandals, and it was that article that alerted me to this particular one - dates set in the future for these shows immediately set off an alarm bell, because a few sockers have done this. I took a look at their contribution history, and checked out their creations... and my suspicions were confirmed. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. Could you apply your experience to Special:Contributions/2.14.129.226? I reverted the addition of Neko Teens to Template:Works of William Joyce, which suggests that the other edits from here may well be dodgy too. —SMALL JIM 13:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. They come under a remit of "unexplained change" at the very least, and I couldn't really find anything on Google to back them up. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks – very much appreciated. —SMALL JIM 16:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for blocking the IP, whose record and his continued access to Wikipedia remind me of The Wire:

Man On Stoop: Like every time, Snot, he'd fade a few shooters, play it out til the pot's deep. Snatch and run.
McNulty: What, every time?
Man On Stoop: Couldn’t help hisself.
McNulty: Let me understand. Every Friday night, you and your boys are shooting craps, right? And every Friday night, your pal Snot Boogie… he'd wait til there's cash on the ground and he'd grab it and run away? You let him do that?
Man On Stoop: We'd catch him and beat his ass but ain't nobody ever go past that.
McNulty: I gotta ask ya: If every time Snotboogie would grab the money and run away, why'd you even let him in the game?
Man On Stoop: What?
McNulty: If Snotboogie always stole the money, why'd you let him play?
Man On Stoop: Got to. This America, man.

LLAP, Dear ODear ODear (~~is a~~) 20:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

go away

stop harassing me i can do what i want — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dingwang22082208 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'Cause of death' vandal

You have blocked this guy multiple times: the long-term vandal who disrupts biography information. I made a case page about him which you can see at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cause of death vandal.

I will ping other admins who have blocked this guy: Materialscientist, Favonian, Ymblanter, 5 albert square, Moriori and MusikAnimal.

I was able to trace him back to May 2014 but your block log here indicates there was significant earlier activity. If you care to point me to one or more earlier IPs, I could add these entries to the LTA case page, to make it more informative. Binksternet (talk) 23:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Binksternet. I'm sorry that I can't spare much time for this at present. I did keep a list of the reverts & blocks I made on this vandal up to last October. The best I can do is dump the IP list here (latest first; the oldest I traced is from Nov '13). Apologies for the raw format (cut'n'paste), but I hope it'll be useful.

"86.173.15.250", "86.181.213.142","86.173.14.128", "86.173.8.21", "86.173.15.60", "86.156.112.152", "31.53.139.88", "217.16.219.233", "86.156.115.149", "94.6.144.247", "86.149.123.169", "194.83.175.2", "5.81.38.182", "31.51.171.255", "86.147.46.230", "86.156.112.250", "86.147.45.173", "81.132.240.195", "86.147.28.111", "86.163.23.56", "81.156.87.99", "86.147.192.198", "86.169.227.252", "86.147.28.239", "78.32.196.49", "86.147.44.132", "188.222.200.172", "82.41.110.75", "86.159.66.85", "86.157.182.246", "86.149.121.44", "?109.149.53.68", "86.157.181.90", "109.151.125.66", "31.50.23.193", "86.156.112.214", "86.149.124.107", "86.140.155.132", "86.147.193.77", "81.132.242.2", "86.157.181.7", "31.53.139.112", "82.4.104.140"

—SMALL JIM 23:44, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I worked in your list, noticing in the process that you have been persistently on top of this guy, along with Malik Shabazz. A few other admins have blocked this vandal once or twice. Thanks for taking care of the wiki! Binksternet (talk) 02:31, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

About "Bubsy teh Bobsy"

Hello.

You deserve a good job for blocking "Bubsy teh Bobsy", a vandal which reportedly joined Wikipedia for vandalism. According to the contributions page on him, it is reported that he has made vandalism only on 5 pages which means he has contributed just five times.

Right now, I order you, when, you rescind the ban on him, and he continues to make vandalism, block him for infinite, and adjust so that he can't do anything: he cannot make another account and his e-mail will be blocked. Also I decided to show you what I posted onto Bubsy teh Bobsy's talk page in a quote:

If YOU continue vandalism like this after you get blocked, I will tell Smalljim to block you TO INFINITE!!!!!!

, then, I signed myself, 6:51pm, 16 March.

If someone tells you to unblock him, simply ignore or shorten the block up to six months, but, if he comes back, extend his block to 120 months (10 years) in order to "teach him a lesson".

I hope you can block more vandals. Guy9374isback2 (talk) 18:58, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Granules India Limited

Hi Jim,

The title article has a history of editing by IP addresses, and the editor who is currently pumping up the promotional content of the article has never edited any other Wikipedia article. He has reverted my rollbacks twice.

I don't usually do this and am unclear on how to proceed. Does this go over to COIN now? I suspect that it won't do a lot of good unless it is coupled with long term partial protection, as vitually all of the edits to this article since its creation have been performed by IPs mapping to New Dehli or by registered users with little or no track record of editing other articles.

Thanks

Formerly 98 (talk) 21:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned it up a bit further. It's not too bad though too many references are to primary sources, and some of them don't appear to refer to the content: this may be due to a reorganisation of the company website. Checking and correction of this would be a useful next step for someone.

I don't think there's any need to take further action regarding COI: its quite a common problem with this type of article. I've got it on my watchlist now, as I'm sure you have. When the company representative pops up again, it'll be a matter of educating and/or warning him/her about compliance with our rules. Hope this helps, and thanks for your vigilance. —SMALL JIM 11:20, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jim! Formerly 98 (talk) 12:33, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

Fine but what was so wrong with it and how did you know I did so fast? Stremdog — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stremdog (talk • contribs) 18:03, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've put a standard welcome template on your talk page. I'm sure you'll find it helpful. —SMALL JIM 18:14, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage shield

		The Userpage Shield
		For reverting vandalism on my talk page when I was offline. Optakeover ^(Talk) 18:39, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're very kind. I just enjoy helping to keep the place tidy :) —SMALL JIM 20:32, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User blocked

A fellow worker of mine had encountered a problem on the page 'Yorkshire' in which it did not appear to show the demonym, which is Yorkshirish. This is a well known thing in parts of Yorkshire, however hasn't been on the Internet very often and is often overlooked. We wanted to change this, however with our several efforts both me and my colleague got warned and with her final effort, she was banned from editing. Could she please be unblocked from editing and the mistake put on the page please? Many thanks! Chaserleviosa29298 (talk) 22:15, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chaserleviosa29298: OK. But you need to find a reliable source that the demonym for Yorkshire is as you say. Then it could go in. Alternatively you could raise the issue on the Yorkshire talk page and ask for help and advice from other editors interested in the article. Without any evidence, your persistent changes from two accounts and an IP address looked like vandalism. However, on the basis of what you say, I've unblocked User:Roberta1357. —SMALL JIM 22:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to but in, but that Denonym is patent nonsense. The User and Sockpuppets, used for block evasion have been tagged and reported at SPI. Richard Harvey (talk) 00:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer, Richard. At the time a quick web search showed several hits on both versions of the term, though looking again now I'd agree there's nowt in it. If you check the timings though, you'll see that there was no actual block evasion. Overall it would have been clearer if I had added "Of course, I will be watching your edits from now on" to my reply above :)

Both your actions and Lukeno94's (e.g. his "rm trolling") suggest that this is an ongoing problem, but I can't see that it is – perhaps it's in some other Yorkshire-related articles? —SMALL JIM 11:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have been searching the internet and I cannot seem to find an example of the term, however I assure you it is a term. I will continue to try and find evidence and will inform you immediately when I have discovered it. However I do have to say to Richard Harvey that it is a term used in parts of Yorkshire, but is not widely known in larger areas like Leeds or Harrogate. Also I don't have any connection to Lukeno94 but I suspect he is just trying to cause problems. Of course I understand you watching my edits too.

Also, what is a sockpuppet? I do know the user 'Roberta1357' and see her regularly, however I am not sure if you are referring to me trying to get her account back for her or whether you think that I am her? Could you please clarify? Thank you! - Chaserleviosa29298 (talk) 17:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have Yorkshire relatives, and not once has the term "Yorkshirish", or any such derivative, ever come up. So don't try pulling the "trying to cause problems" stunt, thanks. The fact you have no evidence for it speaks volumes, and two brand-new accounts pushing the same sort of thing at the same time? Yeah, I'm not gonna take that seriously. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm truly sorry if this has offended you in any way, but it is a term which is widely where I was brought up and where I live currently. And yes, claiming you were trying to cause problems is a very rude thing of me to do, I'm sorry. However both mine and my colleague's accounts are only recently made because previously we have not had a need for an account on this website until we saw the mistake. But may I please reiterate that I am greatly sorry for any displeasure this could have caused you, but please do take this claim seriously. - Chaserleviosa29298 (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest you just drop this now and do something useful, either in Wikipedia or perhaps elsewhere. —SMALL JIM 17:40, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will build up my case and bring it back in the future, however I do not appreciate how I have been treated and in future I suggest you don't sound as displeased with people as you have with me. It's wrong to assume people are doing only trying to vandalise! I will also be attempting to contribute to this website. Also I find it a huge dishonour to know that you do not take my suggestions seriously, but I do appreciate that you did help in some cases, so thank you and I will be contacting you soon. - Chaserleviosa29298 (talk) 17:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for the block. Danger^Mouse (talk) 13:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for deleting the bad cookie part on my page XXGADGET135XX (talk) 17:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Admin/moderator requirements/request

I was wondering how You became an admin on Wikipedia is it possible I can request to be and administrator or a moderator Thank you --XXGADGET135XX (talk) 17:25, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I left a short reply on user's talk page. —SMALL JIM 09:55, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjaya Baru

Dear Mr. Smalljim, I'm Sanjaya Baru. Please stop constantly editing my profile. If you have any further queries, you may call or meet me at my office or residence in New Delhi. It is not for you to edit.

)

I've left a message about conflict of interest on the talk page of the IP address you're currently using (User talk:182.64.14.47). This explains our policy on this matter. —SMALL JIM

Thanks

Hi, thanks for blocking the user. These series of abusive messages have been going on for months now. My user page and talk page had to be protected a few months back because the user refused to leave them alone. And now, they are targeting my archives and the pages on my watchlist. Frankly, I am really sick and tired of reverting. I really don't know if there is a permanent solution to all this, because the user has threatened to make "infinite" accounts to harass me. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...and here we go, from one more IP address]. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:33, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The third one. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:50, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent isn't he! I guess I'll suffer now too, having blocked him. It's just something we have to bear from time to time, unfortunately. The best response is to show that you're not bothered: just report it. I'll keep an eye on your pages for a while and will revert and block. Semi-protection is a possibility if it gets too bad. How did it all start? —SMALL JIM 09:59, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, yeah, it's crazy. I have a vague memory of how it started. With their original account, Mriduls.sharma, the user used to make quite a lot of experimental edits, including adding random height information and non-free images to Arjun Kapoor's page. I reverted all their edits, and the user was eventually blocked. He then began socking and posting abusive messages on my user and talk page. 5 albert square was very helpful and helped protect these pages, but now the user is now finding new ways to harass me. It's actually been going on since the past 6-7 months, can you imagine. Sigh! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 10:07, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, that's useful background. Wikipedia is supposed to be a friendly place where we all collaborate to build the encyclopedia. But everyone who's been here for a while knows that that isn't always the case. Develop a thick skin is the best advice I can give. —SMALL JIM 10:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

True. Thanks again for the help. Much appreciated.

--Krimuk|90 (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Every morning I log into Wiki to find some sort of vandalism by this user. I see a regular pattern of vandalising my talk page archives, which kind editors like you and C.Fred help revert. Would it be possible to temporarily semi-protect my archives to avoid this? I am also pinging 5 albert square in this discussion, who has been most helpful in dealing with Mridul Sharma in the past. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:55, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a reasonable request in the circumstances. I've indefinitely semi-protected archives 1 to 15, except 13 which was already done. —SMALL JIM 09:36, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! I really appreciate it. :) I don't want to sound too demanding, but would it be possible to semi-protect my previous username pages as well? Sharma seems to have found a new hobby in targetting those of late: User: Smarojit and User talk:Smarojit. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 10:02, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK done that too. That's your lot for today ;) —SMALL JIM 10:05, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible block evasion

Hi SmallJimm, Could you please take a look at this edit by Helpsome on the talkpage of indef blocked EurovisionNim. Looking at the preceding edits by Sharbaitgaming. I get the impression that Sharbaitgaming is an unreported sockpuppet of EurovisionNim. Richard Harvey (talk) 18:04, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't touch the talkpage of EurovisionNim. I reverted an edit on the userpage of EurovisionNim. People don't get to edit other people's userpages. Am I being accused of being a sock because I removed someone adding content to someone else's userpage? Helpsome (talk) 18:13, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the idea is that Sharbaitgaming may be a sock of blocked user EurovisionNim. I'll look into it in a while. —SMALL JIM 18:16, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Helpsome My unreserved apologies for any confusion. I was soley referring to the edits by Sharbaitgaming, I have reworded my message above accordingly. I only noted it after realising that EurovisionNim has been using 60.224.249.55 for block evasion for some considerable time, until I got it temporarily blocked today, and wanted to get the other, if a Sock, to be shut down before he reverts to using it again. Richard Harvey (talk) 18:32, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. I completely misunderstood what you were saying. Helpsome (talk) 18:44, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Richard Harvey. It's a bit old – Sharbaitgaming hasn't edited since 18 March, so I don't feel inclined to block now, and I'm not a checkuser, so can't check the underlying IP addresses. I'll keep an eye on the account: perhaps you could too and let me know of any further activity, in case I miss it? —SMALL JIM 20:20, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re Ederyn Williams

SmallJames... you only have a BSc????

With so much time on your hands to edit wiki, where do you work? Call-centre or Tesco's?

Ever had a girlfriend? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.86.241 (talk) 19:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that's all I needed to know (this diff refers). —SMALL JIM 19:43, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reason of my page deleted..

Why was my official page deleted. Please send me the reason why it was deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.167.108.153 (talk) 14:55, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell without more information, such as the name of the page and when it was deleted. Otherwise, you may be able to understand if you read our guide: Why was the page I created deleted? Hope this helps, —SMALL JIM 15:01, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional only account

Ram Avatar Kila (R.A.Kila) (talk · contribs). Babita arora 11:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I've deleted his pages and left him a message. In future you should probably tag such pages with {{db-notwebhost}}. But note that some admins have a greater tolerance of this than others – what is allowable in user pages is intentionally not precisely specified in the guidance. —SMALL JIM 12:31, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Smalljim: I definitely know about WP:CSD. I expected, you would block him. bcoz account is being used only for promotional purposes, wouldn't he eligible for an indefinite block? Babita arora 08:16, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If he persevered, yes, eventually. But we still go through the escalating warning process – such edits are often a case of misunderstanding what's allowed here, and there's always the hope that these people may turn into valuable contributors. —SMALL JIM 08:50, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regular conversation

How did you get that big banner on your page?' — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigAvery (talk • contribs) 16:42, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I replied on user's talk page. —SMALL JIM 18:58, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request Sockpuppet talk pageblock

Hi SmallJim, Would it be possible to block the talkpage access of Sukhleenkoyr. He is a blocked sockpuppet of Amanharleen and persistently removing the page sock tag. I tried to do it on AIIV, but the bot thinks it is a sorted request and removes it. Richard Harvey (talk) 17:04, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not needed. He hasn't edited the page again, and someone else has moved the tag to the right place. —SMALL JIM 19:06, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

what is your problem all my info in the edit is public

Hey, what's your problem? all this info is known and available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.79.193.27 (talk) 21:07, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To be acceptable you would have to show that that opinion has been published by a reliable source: this is our central policy of verifiability. If such a source is available, you can do this by adding a citation. If Wikipedia didn't have this requirement, it would turn into a website full of personal opinions which would destroy its value as an unbiased collection of information. —SMALL JIM 21:19, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Taikikudo is blocked for vandalism of hoax

help me. That User_talk:Taikikudo is another hoaxes such as all of tv shows. But User:Taikikudo is block for 7 months like vandalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.167.107.137 (talk) 23:47, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:WayKurat seems to have dealt with this for now. I'll look into whether a block is appropriate. —SMALL JIM 09:45, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amouage

Hi Jim,

It wasn't intended as promotional. Amouage is our client and they sent us the brief to upload the content with the references. Kindly explain what part is wrong and we will amend accordingly.

Thank You Adam Adamaljabry (talk) 12:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamaljabry: OK. I think that means that our specific guidance on paid advocacy applies to you. The more general guidance on conflict of interest will also apply. You should probably refrain from editing the article. Wikipedia tries hard to maintain its value to its readers by being scrupulously neutral. I hope you understand. —SMALL JIM 14:41, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: following another edit to the article, I blocked indefinitely as an advertising-only account. —SMALL JIM 10:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Krank Amplification

I am new to Wikipedia and I am trying to figure out why my updates were deleted to this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krank_Amplification

"Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Krank Amplification with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed"

I simply copied the info from their website www.krankamps.com that they are back in business. I hit save page and nothing happened, hit save again.

There is nothing destructive with this edit nor is it vandalism. Thank you! Gawkgawk (talk) 22:01, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Gawkgawk: Actually the warning I gave you was about advertising, but there are at least two problems with your addition: 1. You can't just copy content from websites here - that's copyright violation. 2. What you added sounded like an advert - Wikipedia doesn't do advertising (among a number of other things). You could have a look at our plain and simple guide to learn more about contributing to Wikipedia. I hope this helps —SMALL JIM 22:10, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Smalljim: Thank you! Gawkgawk (talk) 22:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Boney kapoor

They both the same ip, I presume? -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 10:03, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well they're all from National Internet Backbone (India) and making the same edits so that's enough. I'll protect the page for a while if it continues. —SMALL JIM 10:06, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

National anthem

Your recent editing history at National anthem shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Thanks. You reverted 4 times. — Pikachu2568 ^pika!_sand ^moves @ 10:17, 8 April 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Well you got my attention. (1) WP:DONTTEMPLATETHEREGULARS is generally observed guidance. (2) Anti-vandalism reverting and warning is not edit warring. —SMALL JIM 11:01, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

jgma

HELLO,

I WAS STILL WORKING ON THE JGMA PAGE AND EDITING IT TO BE SUITABLE FOR WIKIPEDIA. WHY WAS IT DELETED, AND HOW CAN I ACCESS THAT INFORMATION AGAIN?

THANKS

VanessaJGMA (talk) 16:10, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@VanessaJGMA: I'm sorry, but the text was so far from being acceptable on Wikipedia that I have removed it. It looks as if it was copied from the company's website, which would also make it a likely violation of copyright. If you read the links in the message I put on your talk page, you will understand the problems, I think. Apologies if I sound brusque, but we get many many attempts to use Wikipedia for advertising. —SMALL JIM 16:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help!

Propel Luxury

FYI it's been recreated. —George8211 / T 20:11, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ta. Deleted again and final warning issued (being generous!) —SMALL JIM 20:14, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

N.W.A

Thanks for the recent cleanup of the N.W.A article. Is it possible to semi-protect the page so that only registered users can edit/modify it? I check on it every once in a while, and there is always a ton of vandalism or nonsensical edits by ips. Account registration @ wikipedia is free and uncomplicated, so in my opinion this could facilitate the maintenance of the article without barring anyone from editing who's willing to register an account. Thanks, esse quam videri - to be rather than to seem (talk) 13:48, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Herr chagall: Sorry for my delay in replying. It seems to have gone quiet again now, but I see the article has been protected several times in the past. I've added it to my watchlist and if there's another outbreak of vandalism, I'll consider semi-protecting it again. For reference you may get a quicker or more favourable response by making a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. —SMALL JIM 10:16, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Smalljim:Thanks, will do! Just today, there were vandalism attacks again, (starting with [[1]], which were reverted by User talk:Gogo_Dodo. -esse quam videri - to be rather than to seem (talk) 15:26, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did see those – when I stated up the computer this morning! I'd have reverted if I was 24/7 :) —SMALL JIM 15:29, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For using admin tools to protect the Reference Desks against vandals. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:09, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Robert, you're very kind. During a vandal-fighting session, reverting and blocking them is so little trouble that I often prefer to do this instead of using page protection: it keeps the vandal busy and keeps the page(s) open for all other contributors. —SMALL JIM 09:51, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent semi-protection needed

Nikola Tesla was fully protected, but that recently expired. Prior to that, it was indefinitely semi-protected due to excessive nationalistic edits and other vandalism, and that has started up again. Could you please reinstate this protection? The vandalism is rapid and I've had to revert more than 3 times. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:22, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If it's only one person, as it seems to be here, we prefer to warn and block, at least initially. If it persists a report at WP:RFPP is best. —SMALL JIM 14:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A report has been up at RFPP, but it's not one person; it's two registered (but brand-new) users and one IP. The page had been semi-protected for four years prior to the full-protection, for exactly these edits; this issue will never go away. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Stradivari007 and Gandalfsivi are different people? I suppose it's possible... But I think it's best if an admin who already has some familiarity with the dispute and an interest in ethnic disputes makes the decision on protection. I'm sure we can stay on top of it till then. —SMALL JIM 16:06, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I mean they're separate accounts, which is not a good sign. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:36, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kempty Falls

Why have u edited the page on kempty falls... there is new development happening in the area and sharing the info wld help the tourists and the locals....

Aseemvarma: there are many places on the internet where you can advertise, but Wikipedia is not one of them. Can I suggest that you read our guide on conflict of interest – I think that will help explain. —SMALL JIM 22:22, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove my work!?!?

Hello! Can I please ask why you removed my work from my wiki page of Impact Academy. I would really like to get this resolved because what you removed was a project for one of my english classes. I can make edits to the page but you will make me flunk if I cant get that information back to its original state.

@Inspiron2320: I'm sorry, but you added a lot of information that is not appropriate for the encyclopedia, such as contact details for administrators, etc. Have you followed the links in the welcome message posted on your talk page? Perhaps you should try drafting the article in your own userspace - as described in Help:Userspace draft - instead of making a live article. I hope this helps. —SMALL JIM 17:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mundo do dinheiro

Hi Smalljim. Left you a note on my page. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 21:04, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Food Business School page

Sorry, I am new to Wikipedia and this is super confusing to me.. My page, "Food Business School" was deleted. Apparently, because my username was not associated with me, as an individual... so I created a new account, hi. I would like to re-create the Food Business School page and was instructed to contact you before doing so.. Can you explain the next steps to me? Thanks

Yes. Just read our guidance essay: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not about YOU, our policy on copyright violations, and our Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. —SMALL JIM 20:21, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't like your edit

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Britt_McHenry&oldid=656800866

I'm disappointed that you don't approve of edits that remove vandalism. —SMALL JIM 22:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Touchpill

Just wondering whether you might have been a bit short with User:Touchpill. I was about to give him/her some gentle advice about CopyVio only to find his/her three minutes of glory were up and he/she and been blocked! Just wondering ? Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:27, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Velella: The first thing posted was a chunk of our article on Google with details changed, the second was some generic text that appears in several websites. Overall I thought WP:NOTHERE / vandal. Do you want to give him another chance? I won't object if you do, though I wouldn't be surprised if he's already created a few more accounts. —SMALL JIM 09:40, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. The problem when you are not an admin is that you don't get to see past deleted actions. At some time in the future when the software is updated it might be good for non-admins to be able to see a history trail which included past deletions even if the details are redacted. I have no special locus for this individual so I am content. Regards Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point, I didn't think that you wouldn't have seen the first deleted page. Thank you: I appreciate this reminder of the responsibility that comes with being an admin. —SMALL JIM 09:57, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Laurence Dunbar

There has been a large amount of vandalism on Paul Laurence Dunbar over the past days from IPs, which you have tried to mediate. After looking at the IP accounts responsible, this looks quite poor and I did not leave an message for the IP since the situation appears something more than "standard notification" type of disruption. Do I count over 14 (fourteen) test edits in the last two days. Can you take a quick look? MusicAngels (talk) 16:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MusicAngels. I think it's just schoolkids playing around. Only 3 IPs and I've blocked one of them. I'll watchlist it for a while and will protect if it doesn't die down. —SMALL JIM 16:13, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right. That little outburst did it. I've semi-protected the page for a while. —SMALL JIM 17:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hb8lug

Hi Smalljim, I noticed that you blocked this account for sockpuppetry. Any idea whose sock this might be? However, he has resorted to spamming admin user pages with his sandbox draft [2][3] via proxies. It looks like he has stopped now but perhaps we should just get an edit filter for this nonsense. De728631 (talk) 09:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

De728631: all I really know is that he's referred to as the Politecnico vandal and we delete his repetitive contributions when we spot them. Reaper Eternal may know more – see his recent talk page history! There are performance considerations to edit filters, so we don't tend to use them for less damaging vandalism like this. —SMALL JIM 11:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Thank you for the explanation. De728631 (talk) 13:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I did check Reaper's talk page history and found this guy. De728631 (talk) 13:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That'll be the one. Well spotted. For reference: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Isseasa. —SMALL JIM 16:39, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dalmatian

You recently blocked this IP. Would you have a quick look at the recent edits to Dalmatian, please and the IP's talk page? Your block notice was also slightly changed ... Thanks. SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've blocked again. I was vaguely watching, but didn't notice it was the same IP that I'd already blocked. —SMALL JIM 17:42, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:53, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New Page creation

Hi,

I had created a page for a seafood company Pescafresh, which was deleted as I used the brand name while choosing my username. As I was not aware of the naming guidelines, I was under the impression that I had to create different logins for any article/content that I may submit.

Request you to please let me know how I can get that page active again.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chandersingh0204 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I deleted the page because it was unambiguous advertising and would have needed a complete rewrite for it to be acceptable in this encyclopedia. Can I suggest that you read the messages that I've posted on your talk page. I think they will explain for you. —SMALL JIM 12:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:HerolindBerishaa

Hello, my friend. I actually blocked him before I saw your post. I decided not to unblock, but rather to leave him blocked awaiting his response to my offer. I hope that is okay. If not, please say and I will do as you wish. All the best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anna. Funny how often two admins take action at just the same time isn't it? My finger hovered over the block button, but I did decide to give him one more chance - softy old me! No problem with the block, he did manage to re-create part of the page anyway after I deleted it. I don't think the photo of himself suggests good faith either. He's been deleted from the Albanian 'pedia too.[4] —SMALL JIM 13:59, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Yes, that was the second time he'd moved his userpage to the mainspace. So, after a note about it, and he did it again, I'd seen enough. That reminds me, I should speedy tag the image over at commons as out of scope.

By the way, it is nice to see a softy. I am one too, although I am trying to be a bit tougher.

Oh, and I love your userpage image.

Best wishes. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's another coincidence, Anna: I reverted a vandal post on this page just as you posted your message meaning that I didn't see the alert, hence this delayed reply.

It's not always good to be a softy here, of course – it's hard to judge how much softitude to apply to a vandal based on the limited information that's available in most cases. But trying to get it right adds interest to the otherwise mechanical revert-warn-block process, and when it's busy it helps keep the old brain cells active. The image – it was a bit of a joke when I added it six years ago, but less so today. Maybe I should change it for this one, with the same caption, so it remains a joke :) —SMALL JIM 09:33, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I always see a lot of coincidences and Wikipedia, considering it is such a big place. By the way, he had another account which I blocked. As for the softy thing, I do err on the side of caution whenever I can. The image, I like it. Although the new one is an interesting painting (very), the old one has such charm. I think I will make it my wallpaper for a while. All the best. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:57, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, Goya's last works were something else. I have two books of Benjamin Stone's photos which I've always intended to put on Commons. I love this one too. Cheers, —SMALL JIM 10:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They certainly are. They remind me a bit of Skull of a Skeleton with Burning Cigarette. I'm not nuts about the horn dance image. It makes me think of poor, dead animals. And yes, do put those photos on Commons. Quite an asset. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I like the Van Gogh: a definite similarity there, and also the incidental link to David Sedaris who makes me laugh. Now, deer shed their antlers annually so it's not that bad – I'm sure they were just picked up off the ground. But it's the determined expressions I like the most, except the boy on the right who just doesn't want to be there. I'll dig the books out and have a look at them. I haven't done any graphics work for some time. —SMALL JIM 12:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Iamthegreatestever

Thanks for promptly blocking this Vandal. He was creating spam pages as fast as I could tag them and place warnings. Lemlinspire (talk) 16:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's what I do. —SMALL JIM 16:37, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 246: / Line 246: @@
 {{od}}Seems to be a reasonable request in the circumstances. I've indefinitely semi-protected archives 1 to 15, except 13 which was already done. &nbsp;—[[User:Smalljim|S<small>MALL</small>]][[User talk:Smalljim#top|<small>JIM</small>]]&nbsp; 09:36, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 :Thank you so much! I really appreciate it. :) I don't want to sound too demanding, but would it be possible to semi-protect my previous username pages as well? Sharma seems to have found a new hobby in targetting those of late: [[User: Smarojit]] and [[User talk:Smarojit]]. --[[User:Krimuk90|<span style="color:#1F75FE">'''Krimuk'''</span>''|''<span style="color:#FF6347">'''90'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Krimuk90|<span style="color:#008B8B">'''talk'''</span>]]) 10:02, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
+::OK done that too. That's your lot for today ;) &nbsp;—[[User:Smalljim|S<small>MALL</small>]][[User talk:Smalljim#top|<small>JIM</small>]]&nbsp; 10:05, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 ==Possible block evasion==