Jump to content

User talk:RegentsPark: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
comment
Line 91: Line 91:
* Hi RP, can you close that bloody thread please? It will go on and on otherwise. You can read the first five lines and you will know what it is all about. Cheers, [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 22:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
* Hi RP, can you close that bloody thread please? It will go on and on otherwise. You can read the first five lines and you will know what it is all about. Cheers, [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 22:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
*:Someone will doubtless close it sooner or later. It does seem that we're better off without that editor. Mar4d, I'll drop a warning on Lorstakings talk page. They shouldn't be dredging up old sock reports. But, honestly, you should just let it go because the editor you're defending doesn't seem defensible. (Adding) I don't think ARBIPA is applicable here since this is a behavioral issue being discussed on ANI rather than something directly related. --[[User:RegentsPark|regentspark]] <small>([[User talk:RegentsPark|comment]])</small> 23:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
*:Someone will doubtless close it sooner or later. It does seem that we're better off without that editor. Mar4d, I'll drop a warning on Lorstakings talk page. They shouldn't be dredging up old sock reports. But, honestly, you should just let it go because the editor you're defending doesn't seem defensible. (Adding) I don't think ARBIPA is applicable here since this is a behavioral issue being discussed on ANI rather than something directly related. --[[User:RegentsPark|regentspark]] <small>([[User talk:RegentsPark|comment]])</small> 23:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
:: Can you please sort out this madness [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siachen_conflict&action=history]. A user with 80-something edits in 4 years turns up on this longstanding article, adding "victory" to the infobox of an article on an ''ongoing'' military conflict. There is also evidence that he's causing disruption on other similar articles, and he's not a new user. As always, there's the edit warring and same crowd of users reinstating the POV. '''[[User:Mar4d|<span style="color: green;">Mar4d</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Mar4d|<span style="color: green;">talk</span>]]) 14:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:12, 20 February 2018

Yo Ho Ho

November 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Fishnagles. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.


Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia.

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Death date of Maharana Pratap

I have opened a discussion in the talk page as you said. Hagoromo's Susanoo (talk) 16:05, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting Indian Wikipedia Program resource distribution

In 2017 - 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India chapter (WMIN) and user groups will pilot a program encouraging Wikipedia communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program (Code name: Project Tiger) will:

(a) Support active and experienced Wikipedia editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and
(b) Sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Wikipedia content gaps.

The objective of the program is to provide laptops and internet stipends for existing editors who need support to contribute more actively. 50 basic model Acer Chromebooks and Internet stipends for 100 contributors are available for distribution. Provided resources are the sole property of the beneficiaries and should be used for the betterment of the movement.

If you're an active Wikimedian, and interested to receive support from this project, please apply. It will take around 10 minutes of your time, and will ask descriptive questions about your contribution to Indic Wikimedia projects.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eyes sought...

In light of this and this edit, it may be a quite good idea to convert the block into an indef per NOTHERE.~ Winged BladesGodric 16:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look later today (if no one gets to them before then). --regentspark (comment) 16:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
blocked. it is hard to find an edit of this user that hasn't been reverted. --regentspark (comment) 22:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks:)~ Winged BladesGodric 14:10, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Wondering if [1] is similar?--regentspark (comment) 14:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Likely no.Relatively more competent, in my experience.~ Winged BladesGodric 14:15, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ok. Thanks! --regentspark (comment) 14:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

mail

Hello, RegentsPark. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 06:49, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also this comment, and this deletion. Not very promising signs, to say the least... See also WP:OWNTALK:

the purpose of user talk pages is to draw the attention or discuss the edits of a user. Wikipedia is not a social networking site, and all discussion should ultimately be directed solely toward the improvement of the encyclopedia. User talk pages must serve their primary purpose, which is to make communication and collaboration among editors easier. Editors who refuse to use their talk page for these purposes are violating the spirit of the talk page guidelines, and are not acting collaboratively.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshua Jonathan: I think you are trying to provoke him. Whether or not the TBAN remains will require input from RP. Thanks, we got this. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 07:38, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Dlohcierekim: let me add, though, that MSW's block is not a green card to undo any and all of her edits. Edits made by socks of users who are indef site-banned may be 'routineously undone', but that's not the case with AVC/MSW: AVC was not blocked when MSW started editing, nor is AVC blocked indef now. Also, MSW was not the only editor with whom Js82 run into trouble, as can be seen from the link which I provided, and which he deleted right away. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:01, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, RegentsPark, and apologies for undoing your recent edit to the above mentioned article. I am going after the IP editor with a warning and encouragement to cite sources and leave edit summaries.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:47, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thanks for the note. --regentspark (comment) 21:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI on new ArbCom procedure

Just wanted you make sure you're aware that ArbCom recently enacted a change to DS procedures requiring admins to post an editnotice when imposing page-level restrictions. (The procedure forbids enforcement of page-level sanctions that don't have an editnotice.) This doesn't seem to affect the recent block of TripWire, because WP:ARBPIA has its own directly-authorized 1RR that isn't subject to those new procedures, but I thought I should let you know so that any future sanctions aren't invalidated. Thanks! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 04:35, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question...

...On something that doesn't need to be put up with. Can comments like these warrant a block or other similar sanction, especially in light of WP:ARBIPA? Reason I'd like to inquire is the user is out on a barrage of personal attacks, mud-slinging and unprovoked uncivil comments all over that ANI, and it's not the first one. So far the admins haven't jumped in to sort out the WP:SOUP. I've left a note on their talk, but I'd like to take your two cents so I can appropriately escalate should there be a future reference. Thanks and regards, Mar4d (talk) 17:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And this I'd say is the nail in the coffin. Mar4d (talk) 17:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi RP, can you close that bloody thread please? It will go on and on otherwise. You can read the first five lines and you will know what it is all about. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 22:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Someone will doubtless close it sooner or later. It does seem that we're better off without that editor. Mar4d, I'll drop a warning on Lorstakings talk page. They shouldn't be dredging up old sock reports. But, honestly, you should just let it go because the editor you're defending doesn't seem defensible. (Adding) I don't think ARBIPA is applicable here since this is a behavioral issue being discussed on ANI rather than something directly related. --regentspark (comment) 23:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please sort out this madness [2]. A user with 80-something edits in 4 years turns up on this longstanding article, adding "victory" to the infobox of an article on an ongoing military conflict. There is also evidence that he's causing disruption on other similar articles, and he's not a new user. As always, there's the edit warring and same crowd of users reinstating the POV. Mar4d (talk) 14:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]