User talk:Favonian: Difference between revisions
→62.80.172.18: we're all being ignored |
m →Question about good faith: I have a question for you... |
||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
You were already threatening to block me after just 2 disruptive edits; whatever happened to the fundamental principle of assuming good faith? All I wanted to do was simply give that IP another chance. [[User:VeenM64|VeenM64]] ([[User talk:VeenM64|talk]]) 23:15, 23 November 2017 (UTC) |
You were already threatening to block me after just 2 disruptive edits; whatever happened to the fundamental principle of assuming good faith? All I wanted to do was simply give that IP another chance. [[User:VeenM64|VeenM64]] ([[User talk:VeenM64|talk]]) 23:15, 23 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
:A couple of editors have tried, apparently in vain, to tell you what it means to assume good faith. As you appear incapable or unwilling to understand, I request that you stay away from my talk page. [[User:Favonian|Favonian]] ([[User talk:Favonian#top|talk]]) 08:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC) |
:A couple of editors have tried, apparently in vain, to tell you what it means to assume good faith. As you appear incapable or unwilling to understand, I request that you stay away from my talk page. [[User:Favonian|Favonian]] ([[User talk:Favonian#top|talk]]) 08:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
I still don't understand why you weren't being more compassionate towards me. After just '''two''' reverts on that IP's page, you were already giving me a level 4 final warning and threatening to block me. Why? [[User:VeenM64|VeenM64]] ([[User talk:VeenM64|talk]]) 18:59, 29 November 2017 (UTC) |
I still don't understand why you weren't being more compassionate towards me. After just '''two''' reverts on that IP's page, you were already giving me a level 4 final warning and threatening to block me. '''Why?''' [[User:VeenM64|VeenM64]] ([[User talk:VeenM64|talk]]) 18:59, 29 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
== good JOB == |
== good JOB == |
Revision as of 15:45, 1 December 2017
This is Favonian's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
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, 58Auto-archiving period: 14 days |
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Page move request
Hi there. Can you please move Hawija Offensive (2017) back to Hawija offensive (2017)? The second title is supposed to be the correct one, but due to a page move war, the article ended up at its current title. The current title violates WP:MOS, and is currently formatted differently from pretty much every other article in the same topic within the past several years. I can't revert the page move, because in order to do so, I would have to delete the destination page (which is currently a redirect), and I can't do that because I'm neither a Page Mover nor an Administrator. Can you please fix this issue? Thanks. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:36, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Poles
Thank you, Favonian, for saving my work at "Poles" from a misguided, poorly informed anonymous user. Is there a possibility of semi-protecting the article? Thanks! Nihil novi (talk) 19:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- There is. Edit-warring while IP-jumping constitutes disruptive editing in my book. Favonian (talk) 19:54, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you! Your work is greatly appreciated. Nihil novi (talk) 20:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Rev/Delete?
At least one racist edit summary, and some homophobic content added [1]. There may be more, though I haven't had the stomach to look. Too discouraged by what schoolchildren are learning from their parents. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 19:11, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done, though I don't buy the thesis that the little creeps are good by nature and merely ruined by their parents. Favonian (talk) 19:15, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. Without attempting to draw too broad a conclusion from what I wrote above, I'll still put money on the likelihood that the young ones at least heard such chatter from their formative influences. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 19:21, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, (no, it's not time for IP F1 boy yet!). I have confused myself (and things generally) re the above. Page was started in mainspace and as it was under development I moved it to draft (as it was likely in danger of speedy otherwise). Now I find the page has been re-started in mainspace here as well as the draft being submitted. Any form of action necessary in these circs. Page probably needs reviewing as might be a squeak as to notability. Cheers, see you in January when things could get "Rowdey" again. Seasons greetings if we don't speak in the meantime. Eagleash (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
Question about good faith
You were already threatening to block me after just 2 disruptive edits; whatever happened to the fundamental principle of assuming good faith? All I wanted to do was simply give that IP another chance. VeenM64 (talk) 23:15, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
- A couple of editors have tried, apparently in vain, to tell you what it means to assume good faith. As you appear incapable or unwilling to understand, I request that you stay away from my talk page. Favonian (talk) 08:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
I still don't understand why you weren't being more compassionate towards me. After just two reverts on that IP's page, you were already giving me a level 4 final warning and threatening to block me. Why? VeenM64 (talk) 18:59, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
good JOB
The corrector | |
you did help tiara226cute on your own help Tiara226cute (talk) 11:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC) |
11:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC)Tiara226cute (talk)≠≠
Sock of UAA IP
Here. LinguistunEinsuno 15:10, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
- Already dealt with, though this ones needs watching. Favonian (talk) 17:36, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Idiot Oshwah
I blocked that LTA account but after I left it open in a tab for a few minutes first... and I accidentally overwrote your block. Sorry about that... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- No problem. That dingbat needs all the blocks he can get! Favonian (talk) 18:12, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
I just zapped another one before it could edit anything. Just figured I'd let you know. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Aaand another... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:57, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- I protected the article and filed an SPI to document the event. All should hopefully be good now... *fingers crossed* ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:04, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Good Heavens, how they multiply. Wonder if that choice of name falls under WP:IMPERSONATE. Favonian (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Not sure - it could be. If it is, I don't know the editor that it's impersonating... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:07, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- He's been known to move in mysterious ways. Favonian (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Not sure - it could be. If it is, I don't know the editor that it's impersonating... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:07, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Good Heavens, how they multiply. Wonder if that choice of name falls under WP:IMPERSONATE. Favonian (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- I protected the article and filed an SPI to document the event. All should hopefully be good now... *fingers crossed* ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:04, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Deletion request
Hello. Can you please delete the pages I've listed below? They're all templates that were created by a sockpuppet of the cross-wiki abuser CIH0426. As far as I can tell, those templates have no use or merit whatsoever. Thanks. LightandDark2000 (talk) 23:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Template:Infobox typhoon/JMA
- Template:Infobox typhoon/10-min winds CWB
- Template:Infobox typhoon/HKO
- Template:Infobox typhoon/SMG
- Template:Infobox typhoon/NMC
Sock block
Please do something about this sock - Special:Contributions/2600:1017:B415:1E0C:21C7:C02B:3C0A:767F - same Geolocate - a burr under my saddle - identical history and touting - but what bothers me more is the fact that some admins who actually agree with the socks opinion don't bother to do anything about their block evasion - which I find really troublesome. Atsme📞📧 00:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, I live in the Central European Timezone and missed the chance to block the jerk. One of my colleagues did what had to be done. Favonian (talk) 08:05, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Please delete "Draft"
Hi, I do not know how to delete a frame. I request it. Please delete "Draft"(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:International_Union_of_Reformed_Churches) — Preceding unsigned comment added by James kel (talk • contribs) 21:15, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done. Favonian (talk) 21:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sir. Favonian,
- Not the whole document. Delete only "Draft".
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:International_Union_of_Reformed_Churches) — Preceding unsigned comment added by James kel (talk • contribs) 23:34, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, for crying out loud! You gave me the name, Draft:International Union of Reformed Churches, of a page in the "Draft" namespace, so there is no difference between "draft" and "whole document". I'll undelete the damn thing, after which I really don't want to deal with the matter again. Favonian (talk) 14:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Articles with severe vandalism
Hello again. Can you please semi-protect the articles 2017 Central Mexico earthquake and Hurricane Harvey for at least 2 months? Those articles have received a high amount of vandalism from IP editors within the past two months, on a frequent basis (each article also experienced some level of sockpuppetry within the same period). They are still regularly vandalized, especially the earthquake article. At least 95-99% of all IP edits to those articles within the past 2 months are either vandalism or just plain disruption. Incidentally, the vandalism rate at the Hurricane Harvey article has doubled or tripled within the last 2 weeks alone. The problem is compounded by the fact that both articles are high-viewership articles, detailing recent major natural disasters. Thanks. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Favonian: The articles are still being vandalized at a high pace right now. LightandDark2000 (talk) 02:56, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
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 {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the 5 albert square (talk) 05:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 159.122.86.43 (talk) 21:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Responded there. Favonian (talk) 22:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
User:Iamheretoedit
You just blocked this one, now User:Icreateusername is an obvious sock. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sock indeed – whoever the master. Favonian (talk) 07:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
62.80.172.18
Hi Favonian. Could you please have a look at this user who seems to be adding dodgy video links. I've reverted one as its obviously not a wp:rs but haven't looked at the rest though judging by the adverts the educational value seem to be dubious. Hope your anti-virus checker is good! Regards JRPG (talk) 12:41, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- They are dodgy alright. I've bulk-reverted and issued a peremptory warning. Favonian (talk) 12:47, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Favonian. I had expected that a warning from me would be ignored. JRPG (talk) 13:06, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Don't know about that, but they certainly ignored my warning. Favonian (talk) 13:26, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Favonian. I had expected that a warning from me would be ignored. JRPG (talk) 13:06, 1 December 2017 (UTC)