User talk:Favonian/Archive 44

Archive 40

←

Archive 42

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

Archive 46

→

Archive 50

BKFIP

Letting you know in advance that having stumbled on the now deleted statement at the Arbitration case request, and noted that you were the one to block Two.25.45.251 as a sock of the banned Best Known For IP, I feel I must once more break a lance for this person. I plan to put it on AN/I rather than AN, although the community ban discussion was on AN, because I'd like not just admins to see the posting. I can't think of anywhere else as appropriate, although my first thought was the talk page of the arbitration case itself. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Come what may. :) Favonian (talk) 17:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah ... Section is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Two.25.45.251. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Do you hear any quacking?

? Thanks, GAB^gab 22:15, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I do indeed. Favonian (talk) 05:33, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

• Hello. there... You have been helping me with this 'WHAT' guy..lol. I must have really pissed him off. The only issues I've had recently, was with a 16 year old boy from Germany calling himself: "The Ultimate Boss", now he is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BlueJoshua300 Perhaps he is doing a sock puppet revenge thing. Sorry for the hassle my friend. Perhaps if these IP addresses are from Germany, you will put two and two together. I hope it's not him. I have no clue why all the hate. Oh well...thanks again.→ Pocketthis (talk) 21:09, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

@Pocketthis: The two blocked vandals could be the same as the account you refer to, but the evidence is a bit thin. Apart from a certain dislike for you, the only overlap is the Dawn article, but their edits are completely different. Only a CheckUser (which I'm not) can unearth the connection, if any, and they usually require stronger evidence before unsheathing their mighty tools. For now, it looks like the suspect is going on WikiBreak, so we may have to wait a bit for further development. Favonian (talk) 10:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

• Whoever it is, has been trying to log into my username. So far, 4 failed attempts. Put all this together with the childishness of it all, and it would lean toward an adolescent. That's why I thought about the person mentioned above. I thought I gave him pretty good advice on the Twilight talk page, after he was tweaking the sky articles daily. He said he would stop, and then the very next day he was back. I then went to his talk page, and got tougher with him, as his insolence continued, and I could see that he had authority figure issues. He is a smart kid. Maybe too smart...lol. Thanks for your efforts.→ Pocketthis (talk) 15:26, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Fawcett baronets

Hello, I see that you deleted the above page a couple of times. The person who keeps trying to "create" this fake baronetcy does seems to be oddly persistent (see my reverts at List of baronetcies in the Baronetage of the United Kingdom: F), including unrelated London Gazette refs to make it seem like its sourced. The only connected account I can see as a non-admin is [1] which you blocked for sock puppetry. Could you provide some context as to who this is, or what the original account is? –72 _(talk) 09:22, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Oh yes! The wannabe peer, Baronofashford (talk · contribs), has been around for a long time. I've blocked one account and one, apparently static, IP. Favonian (talk) 09:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much – nice to be able to see a list of connected accounts! Really very strange considering the years spent on all of this... –72 _(talk) 09:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Cocainaenvenenada

Hello. Thanks for protecting Las Acevedo, but would you mind protecting Ezili Dantor and The Weather Smells Like Oranges too? See page history of the articles for why. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 11:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Favonian (talk) 11:17, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Ogando seems to have spent most of the past 24 hours trying to get his name into Wikipedia... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 11:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Look familiar?

Hi, self explanatory probably In ictu oculi (talk) 07:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/77.77.216.185 ...

... who you just removed TPA from is yet another sock of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bosnipedian operating on a frequently used range (see the latest report in the SPI, where the whole 77.77.216.0/24-range was rangeblocked for a month). They also edited as Special:Contributions/77.77.216.183 a couple of days ago, so may I suggest another rangeblock? - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Quite so. Off again, this time for three months. Favonian (talk) 19:19, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

HarveyCarter

RollingWhitmore appears to be another HC sock, pushing the same tired old trope that Japan declared war before Pear Harbor. [2] Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: I rate it  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) and perform the ancient Wikipedia rope trick. Favonian (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

OK, sounds like a plan. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:32, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

(tps) Nah, that's him alright. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:36, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

50.207.48.154? Comment

Hullo. Just curious, how did you identify that IP as coming from a school when I get a different listing (cable company) via whois? Again, just curious. Ifnord (talk) 18:42, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

I got the host name from this lookup, and then it was a simple matter to identify the name of the school. Favonian (talk) 18:44, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank-you for sharing. Ifnord (talk) 20:08, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

146.198.31.68 (aka 146.198.31.73 ??)

Hi Favonian ..think this is another instance of our friend 146.198.31.73 and 146.198.27.192 editing Leicester with no edit reason. He's mostly concentrated on Leicester Urban Area Regards JRPG (talk) 11:03, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

@JRPG: I've upped the ante a bit by putting in place two range-blocks. Should at least make this person's career more complicated. Favonian (talk) 17:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Favonian. No idea of the psychology behind this behaviour though he wastes a lot of people's time. Regards JRPG (talk) 20:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for again being proactive and reactive on this one, folks. The Equalizer (talk) 01:56, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Yet another sock?

Seems to be the season. I didn't notice this, another editor Hzh did here, but interact tool suggests Hzh's suspicion correct. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Weekly Shonen Jump

Hi. Would you please lift the move-protection at Weekly Shonen Jump (magazine) and move it to Weekly Shonen Jump (American magazine), the vandalism is long gone – I nac-closed the RM and fixed the links, but then I discovered that I can't move it. No such user (talk) 15:57, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Never mind, moved via WP:RMTR. No such user (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

3 socks still unblocked, one still disrupting

Hi Favonian, good morning, any reason why Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kauffner hasn't been archived? The two Kauffner socks ceased when challenged, as usual, the Bobby Martnen sock is still Anglicizing Poland articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:40, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Krajoyn sock?

User Hornetex restoring Ectegrap/Krajoyn sock edits. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:16, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that's him. Blocked. Favonian (talk) 15:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you sir. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

This user has an...intransigent editing style reminiscent of Krajoyn. They've messed with the infobox stats on the Second Italo-Ethiopian War, have thrice reverted my attempts to post a deletion notice on an article they created, and attempted to cover up said deletion process by removing the notice I left on their talk page. -Indy beetle (talk) 01:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Favonian! Here's another one, most likely: User:Clarader. Registered on the 25th, did exactly 10 edits, waited two days, and then began making the exact same kinds of edits at Second Italo-Ethiopian War as Krajoyn. Obvious game-playing to get around the semi-protection at that article. I imposed the semi-protection because of socking, but this is the second time since protection that an autoconfirmed sock has showed up at that article. What would you think about upping the protection to extended confirmed? (If you think that's justified - you do it, OK? 0;-D ) --MelanieN (talk) 18:09, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Oops, I see you are offline for a few days. I'll block this one as a presumed sock, and leave the question of protection till later. --MelanieN (talk) 18:13, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

FYI I just blocked another likely sock: User:Genomism. Same MO exactly. --MelanieN (talk) 23:36, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

And User:AustralianRupert applied extended confirmed protection so we are good. --MelanieN (talk) 04:29, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Porcenl

Hello, Favonian. You recently protected the page Battle of Nördlingen (1634) for persistent sock puppetry (page history). Today a new user, Porcenl, removed the padlock, along with other unexplained changes. After I reverted, Porcenl re-added some of the edit. Not sure if this is related to the sock you were protecting against, but thought you should know. (The user appears to be making dubious, unexplained changes to other pages as well.) Thanks, Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 19:27, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Drmies, for dealing with this. Looks like Favonian is away, hopefully temporarily. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 15:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

• Whoa, we can't do with Favonian! Laszlo Panaflex, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Krajoyn. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:24, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Unwarranted Block

Hello, I noticed today a block on my i.p. address on my iPad. I'm usually logged in and I may have done some edits in the past not having been logged in. I was surprised reading the warning, having been blocked by your handle. Here is my address: 107.77.224.0/21. May I ask why? -- HafizHanif (talk) 03:39, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Have you a reason for the i.p. block? -- HafizHanif (talk) 02:03, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, though technically the current block was put in place by KrakatoaKatie (witness this log) who used her CheckUser insight to confirm my suspicion that a habitual vandal was using this range to evade his well-earned block. Prior to the current block, some choice examples of what led to the renewal of the block were provided by 107.77.228.168, 107.77.225.216, 107.77.230.22, 107.77.230.58 and 107.77.229.131. After the block, KK gave this reply to an unblock request. Other request were less deserving of an answer. Favonian (talk) 16:43, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I looked at the log and then clicked on the i.p. associated with my iPad at that page. All of those edits I am assuming are supposed to be from this iPad I am writing from at the moment, correct? I don't see any familiar edits. I scrolled down and recognized an article I edit quite often (reverting vandalism / erroneous edits), entitled "Prophets of Islam", and when I click on that particular edit's history, I see my user name reverting vandalism previously, and then an anonymous i.p. address doing yet another nonsensical edit. Was my reverting of a vandalism (and noting it as such) flagged by one of those anonymous addresses you listed? As I mentioned in my earlier response, I rarely edit without being logged in, desiring to keep a record when doing so, thus the few times I have were likely by mistake...and now looking at the various edits supposedly connected to this iPad, I think there is something majorly wrong here. No one else uses or has access to this iPad. Is there any way a particular i.p. address can be 'used' from another location, or hijacked, or borrowed, from another device not the physical machine (this iPad) that may be associated? In other words, do i.p. addresses ever change for any given device? On occasion I reboot this iPad and clear all cookies and history (it's old and sometimes crashes); would clearing of cookies also allocate a new or different address? -- HafizHanif (talk) 03:45, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

You (and the above-mentioned, itinerant vandal) are assigned dynamic IPs in the range 107.77.224.0/21, which includes some 2000 different addresses. The ever-changing nature of these IPs forces us to block the entire range – not just those individual addresses caught vandalizing. This, unfortunately, causes collateral damage such as preventing you from editing anonymously but then again, using a named account is much to be preferred anyway. There's nothing more I can or will do about this at present. Favonian (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate the clarity and your time. This issue is reason why, at my page, I advocate to disallow anonymous editing altogether. Cheers. -- HafizHanif (talk) 19:07, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

do you mean stubborn head?

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:STEWIEMONSTER#October_2017https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:STEWIEMONSTER#October_2017 STEWIEMONSTER (talk) 17:43, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Comparing a fellow editor to a goat is not polite. Favonian (talk) 17:45, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

It's normal to call people stubborn head if they are stubborn. That's what I and humanity use all day. That is just normal. A goat is stubborn. So that would be the best image to imagine if talking about stubborn things.STEWIEMONSTER (talk) 17:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Sue Wallace

You say that speedy deletion was declined, I can't see where that happened? Theroadislong (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad I see it here now [3] Theroadislong (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

and here. Favonian (talk) 16:38, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/172.78.220.121

See Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Talk:Norse cosmology for more info... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 18:17, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm well aware of the situation, but I'm also lazy. Invoking 3RR is an easy, if short-term, way of defusing the situation. Alternatives are range-blocks and talk page protection – both generally deemed heavy-handed. Favonian (talk) 18:20, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Range-blocks aren't possible since they have multiple huge ranges to hop on... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 18:22, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Tesla

Hi. The page protection had expired on 10th of October. Could you remove the protection so I can post some sources? 141.138.55.61 (talk) 09:26, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

The article is semi-protected indefinitely, and for a good reason. The talk page was protected until October 10, which has come and gone, so you are now able and welcome to suggest inclusion of your sources there.

For the benefit of my faithful talk page stalkers, we are talking about Nikola Tesla, not Tesla, Inc.

Favonian (talk) 09:53, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I cannot hear Nikola's name without thinking about the Woozle, because in Swedish the woozle is a tessla. And now I am curious - what is it in Danish? --bonadea contributions talk 20:24, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm ashamed at the unimaginative Danish translation, Bonadea. It uses the plain "væseldyr" (weasel animal) for woozle; well, at least we are systematic: "elefantdyr" (heffalump), "Tigerdyret" (Tigger). Favonian (talk) 20:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Protection for article targeted by vandals

Hi, Favonian. Can you please Semi-Protect the Hurricane Irma article for 2 months? The first 3 semi-protections (brief) saw a wave of vandalism and sockpuppetry immediately after each protection expired. Also, almost all of the IP edits at Hurricane Irma in the past week were either pure vandalism or totally unconstructive. The article also saw spike in sockpuppetry activity, namely from Incorrigible Troll recently (who also generated new socks within the past day, as of this writing). The article also has very high viewership, and given the fact that Hurricane Irma is still a relatively recent disaster, it appears to be a fresh target for both anonymous vandals and sockpuppeteers. Given the mess that's coming in, can you please Semi-Protect the article for 2 months, until things settle down a bit? Thanks. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:26, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Favonian (talk) 11:33, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! LightandDark2000 (talk) 13:21, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Being quick in blocking users. Pretty fast. Apap04 (talk) 18:27, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Sock

Hi, could you take a look at TheBoysAreBackInTown (talk · contribs), looks like Mr Pingu is socking. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 22:25, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Mattythewhite. Pretty blatant. Favonian (talk) 15:55, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Your block made to 143.231.249.131

Hi Favonian - I wanted to ask if you realized that this IP belongs to the US House of Representatives? Did you notify the Wikimedia Foundation Communications Committee as required under the blocking policy as a block of a sensitive IP address? Don't fear, because I went ahead and did this for you ;-). You're all set and there's nothing that you need to do. Cheers! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:23, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Poor committee is being deluged by letters. I fessed up immediately and stoically await the drones. Favonian (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

HAHAHA... cool deal - glad you saw that it was. The block was justified and I would have made it had you not done so. I doubt we'll even hear back from them - I think we have to let them know just so that they're aware in case they get contacted by the media or some other org about it. That's pretty much it... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:30, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

More importantly than this, the Republic can now sleep safely, knowing that their Representatives and their staffs are keeping us safe and prosperous by editing the articles for Glee and Sonic the Effin Hedgehog on Wikipedia. It makes a citizen proud. Anmccaff (talk) 17:22, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Certainly better than hanging out on Twitter, which seem to be what the Executive Branch prefers. :( Favonian (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

I dunno...tweets go away faster. Pox on both...well, all three might be more accurate, but the Senate has been a little saner than House or White House. Anmccaff (talk) 17:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Favonian. This will be of interest. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:00, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Recent block of 213.183.54.44

Hi,

Thanks for blocking this guy - it's probably Accopulocrat (talk · contribs). Just out of curiosity, when would you use such templates as colocationwebhost and webhostblock in the blocking template, as you did here? Thanks, GAB^gab 17:23, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

I derive inspiration from imitating well-known CheckUsers. ;) In this case, I tend to believe that the IP has been used by Krajoyn, who has been very active this last few days and is known to use such entry points into Wikipedia. Maybe the two are really one and the same. Favonian (talk) 17:29, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Maybe we could request a check. I don't really know about Krajoyn, but I have some experience with Accopulocrat, who focuses on genocide and mass atrocity articles. There is probably some overlap. GAB^gab 21:37, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Having read up on "your guy", I don't think they are the same after all. Krajoyn famously avoids any sort of discussion pages. Just checked if for another productive evening, this time as Rpgixtvancy. Favonian (talk) 21:46, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

[4]. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:08, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Kudos, zzuuzz! That's one impressive harvest. I trust the subject of our attention has sent you one of his habitual, appreciative messages. Favonian (talk) 17:24, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

V(X)fC

FYI. Have a good weekend! — fortunavelut luna 17:44, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, FIM. Why can't I be classified as a powerful editor? Anyhow, the IP is probably stale by now. Favonian (talk) 17:48, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh- it only edited 20 minutes ago! The problem though with powerful editors>>>"Your Powers are Weak, Old Man"  ;) — fortunavelut luna 17:56, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

6 days and 20 minutes, as far as my rusty math goes. Favonian (talk) 17:57, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Aaagh. 17:33 last week... not 17:33 tonight. D'oh. Thus my new slogan: "My Powers Are F***-All, Old Man" :D Thanks anyway. Sorry to bother you! — fortunavelut luna 18:06, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Log redaction of the User Creation log

I see that on October 22, you redacted the "Action and target" part of a User Creation log entry. Please note that this is unnecessary - for any self-created account, the only part which needs to be redacted is the username - everything else is clean of any redactable content. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Any mouse click saved is appreciated. Favonian (talk) 13:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-Protection request for Hurricane Nate (2017)

Hello again. Can you please Semi-Protect Hurricane Nate (2017) for 3 months? There has been some very persistent sockpuppetry there within the past couple of weeks. Although there is no sock activity right now, there's no guarantee that the LTA responsible for the vandalism is going to stay away, and it would probably be best to use a semi-protection to filter out all of the disruptive edits that have been coming to that article. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:40, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, LightandDark2000, but though I'm all for WP:IAR, protecting the article for several months based on the current level of vandalism would get me pilloried for not even pretending to believe in WP:PREEMPT. It is, of course, only a matter of time, but this site is all about keeping up appearances. Favonian (talk) 17:17, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Darn. I forgot about that. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:06, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-Protection for 2017 Central Mexico earthquake

Can you please Semi-Protect 2017 Central Mexico earthquake for a few months? There has been some very persistent vandalism/disruptive editing by IP editors over the past 1 1/2 months, even up until a couple of days ago. From what I can see, the vandalism isn't going to be going away, especially given how important that topic is. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:22, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Sad to say, the amount of vandalism on this article is puny by Wikipedia's elevated standards, so protecting it would be against current practice. Favonian (talk) 10:12, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Question

I completely understand why you deleted my sidenote on the biography of harold godwinson, however i dont quite understand how to ciye a source, as i have no expirience with html code Dr.Pietroczar (talk) 19:22, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

@Dr.Pietroczar: Wikipedia:Citing sources is a good starting point. Favonian (talk) 19:35, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

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!

User talk:Optakeover

Hey Favonian, what's up. Not sure if you were the one revdeling the abuse on Floquenbeam's talk page and mine. If so, thank you, but whoever did it left the edtior's name in the edit summary so I can still identify him. [5]. Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 10:48, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm the guilty part. The user name is (in this case) not a big deal. Some of the other socks had decidedly racist names. Favonian (talk) 10:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I see. Since you revdeled the usernames, I thought it would make sense to go the whole hog and remove all identification. Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 10:59, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Already done. ;) Favonian (talk) 11:00, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Just as I was about to say. Thanks Favonian. :) Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 11:01, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Also just to add, thank you for your eagle eyes, because I was trying to get on #wikipedia-en-revdel but no one seem to be active. Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 11:04, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, though a mole of advanced years would probably have spotted the attacks on Floq's talk page. :) Favonian (talk) 11:06, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

You may also go right ahead to revoke your latest vandal's talk page access. Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 11:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Shut down a small range of IPs for a week. Favonian (talk) 11:16, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet again

What could be done about the sockpuppet of Krajoyn User:Metalkp? Keiiri (talk) 06:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

@Keiiri: What could be done has been done. Thanks for your valiant struggle against this pest! Favonian (talk) 09:10, 16 November 2017 (UTC)