User talk:CLCStudent: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:03, 19 January 2021

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170
171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180
181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200
201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210
211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220
221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230
231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240
241, 242, 243

This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by .

Confederate Monument (Portsmouth, Virginia)

It may not have been your intention, but one of your edits, specifically one that you made on Article, may have introduced material that some consider controversial. Due to this, your edits may have been reverted. When adding material that may be controversial, it is good practice to first discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them, to gain consensus over whether or not to include the text, phrasing, etc. If you believe that the information you added was correct, please initiate that discussion. Thank you.

This user is a member of the
Counter-Vandalism Unit.

NicoARicoA

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Yo Ho Ho

Denisarona (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Removed valid contribution to CRI

Not sure why you recently reverted a valid contribution to the CRI page. Even though the edit came from an anon IP please actually review edits before reverting them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Color_rendering_index&type=revision&diff=997212438&oldid=997212395 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDcolor (talk • contribs) 15:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, CLCStudent!

Happy New Year!

CLCStudent,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for your contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. KAS^(talk) 20:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Warning levels

Make sure that you warn users starting at level 1, then level 2, then level 3, and so on. I notice that you constantly skip warning levels when warning users when it's not necessary or appropriate, and it results in users being reported too soon. I've seen a couple of users reported by you that only had one warning what-so-ever over simple vandalism, and one where the user wasn't recently warned at all. Remember that we only skip warning levels or jump straight to a level 4 or level 4im if the vandalism is severe (such as libel, BLP violation, or harassment), or in cases of block evasion or other issues. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Thanks for dedicating your time and energy toward reverting vandalism. It's a thankless job, and (coming from someone whose done it for over 10 years) I appreciate it a lot. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:25, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To add to my message: This behavior of skipping warning levels and not leaving sufficient warnings before reporting users to AIV was the reason that your rollback flag was removed by Ritchie333 back in August. I don't want to see you fall into the same habit as what was discussed in that ANI report, and it looks like you might be doing so. I just want to put this on your radar so that you can fix the issue before you find yourself in hot water again. Let me know if I can help in any way. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:08, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I see you've completely ignored Oshwah's request already [1] so to focus your mind, if I find you failing to use the warning levels system again, I'm going to block you from editing WP:AIV. Nick (talk) 23:15, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've had yet another report about you failing to use the correct vandalism warning levels. If you fail to explain yourself, I will block you from making any reports at AIV. Nick (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick: Which one? CLCStudent (talk) 23:12, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The warning that I start with all depends on the extremity of the vandalism. If it involves defamatory content, I begin with level 4. If it involved attacking another person, I generally start with level 3. If you point me to a specific one, I can explain in more detail. CLCStudent (talk) 23:16, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess a resolution I can make is to always start with level 1 or 2 warnings. CLCStudent (talk) 23:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I'm confused with this report to AIV. You've said that the IP is IP hopping with their vandalism, when I checked the warnings ClueBot warned one IP once and you warned the other one once. I'm confused as to why this was reported with only 2 warnings issued, all I've done is warn the IP that carried out todays vandalism.-- 5 albert square (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to IP hoppers, I usually just skip the warnings and go straight to AIV because that is something this site just cannot have. CLCStudent (talk) 01:50, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want, one change I can make is to give them the "using multiple IP" warning before reporting. CLCStudent (talk) 01:51, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CLCStudent, quick note, but I (or someone else) can elaborate if necessary: in the case for this IP, its changing is likely completely out of the user's control. The actual "address" would probably be 2A02:C7F:B2EE:D000::/64, and their IP is anything in that range. I believe {{Uw-multipleIPs}} is more when bad-faith disruption is being done through multiple IPs with an intent to avoid detection or evade blocks, which I doubt is the case here. Perryprog (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're up late

Hullo. I've never seen you on at this time. Just wanted to wish you a belated Happy New Year and hope you and yours are safe and healthy. Ifnord (talk) 03:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate it, and same to you! CLCStudent (talk) 03:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Templates?

Hey, where can I find the templates you use when dealing with vandalism? (those that you put on people's talk pages) Thanks! BrownFerret (talk) 13:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may find those on WP:WARN. CLCStudent (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! BrownFerret (talk) 13:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not vandalising

I was fixing the video format at Crash test --108.17.71.32 (talk) 20:47, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this wasn't vandalism. It was clearly a good-faith attempt to add an image and move another. Enterprisey (talk!) 00:04, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The admins made a mistake with this one, but I will not pursue it further. CLCStudent (talk) 18:23, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I replied under the wrong comment; you were correct that the IP was edit-warring at crash test, but the controlled impact demonstration edits were mostly fine. Nevertheless, none of the edits were vandalism, because they were good-faith. Enterprisey (talk!) 06:27, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

31.127.126.135

As a general rule, if they want to blank their talk pages after they're blocked, it's better not to engage. The block notice is still in the history and the block is still in the log so will be seen by any future admins considering a block, but really we want them to go away so sometimes it's best to let them have their "parting shot". It's certainly not wise or helpful to goad them. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I just lost my temper there. CLCStudent (talk) 22:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	I've seen you around for quite some time and I really appreciate your hard work in fighting vandalism. Please keep up the good work. :) Ashley yoursmile! 19:48, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. (Elsewhere in your talk page it's mentioned that this is a repeated issue; pinging @Oshwah to discuss.) Vaticidalprophet (talk) 20:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I have been starting off with level 1 or level 2 warnings in all cases except for extreme cases. Could you point me to a case where my warnings were too harsh? CLCStudent (talk) 00:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My object of concern here is User talk:2601:19C:4501:8C30:999E:E749:2334:5EC9 (man are these masked IP pages unwieldy), where you escalated to a level 3 warning on a potentially good-faith ('critical' and 'bad faith' are frequently conflated) edit after an only loosely related level 1 notice. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 22:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I can agree to be more careful with good faith edits. CLCStudent (talk) 01:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for your work over in the filter log. SHINYedit^bonjour. 20:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply] Vandalism reports Please stop reverting or removing my vandalism report(s) from the report page in question. Kleo-Sine (talk) 17:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 129: / Line 129: @@
 |-
 |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for your work over in the filter log. [[User:Shinyedit|SHINY''edit'']]<sup>[[User talk:Shinyedit|bonjour.]]</sup> 20:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
+== Vandalism reports ==
+Please stop reverting or removing my vandalism report(s) from the report page in question. [[User:Kleo-Sine|Kleo-Sine]] ([[User talk:Kleo-Sine|talk]]) 17:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)