Jump to content

User talk:Coltsfan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Protected "User talk:Coltsfan": Persistent block evasion ([Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 21:33, 23 November 2018 (UTC)) [Move=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 21:33, 23 November 2018 (UTC)))
Anorp (talk | contribs)
Line 41: Line 41:
:::::::Understand and thanks for the clarification. I'm not familiar with technical aspects of a range block; I've just seen it done once or twice. FWIW, I have no connection to the current content dispute or to any of the previous socking. I only stumbled upon this because of IP(s) were posting basically forum shopping on pages that were on my watchlist. If WP:PP is a better way to handle this, then that's fine. I do think though that the IP will be back since there does seem to be a bit of NOTHERE involved. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|talk]]) 06:49, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
:::::::Understand and thanks for the clarification. I'm not familiar with technical aspects of a range block; I've just seen it done once or twice. FWIW, I have no connection to the current content dispute or to any of the previous socking. I only stumbled upon this because of IP(s) were posting basically forum shopping on pages that were on my watchlist. If WP:PP is a better way to handle this, then that's fine. I do think though that the IP will be back since there does seem to be a bit of NOTHERE involved. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|talk]]) 06:49, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
{{u|Marchjuly}}, {{u|EdJohnston}}, protecting the pages seems to be a way more productive thing than just keep blocking or engaging in EW. I appreciate all the tips and inside thoughts you guys had. Thank you. [[User:Coltsfan|Coltsfan]] ([[User talk:Coltsfan#top|talk]]) 09:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
{{u|Marchjuly}}, {{u|EdJohnston}}, protecting the pages seems to be a way more productive thing than just keep blocking or engaging in EW. I appreciate all the tips and inside thoughts you guys had. Thank you. [[User:Coltsfan|Coltsfan]] ([[User talk:Coltsfan#top|talk]]) 09:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

== Você não vai nos parar! ==

Nós somos várias pessoas comprometidas com a verdade e a reinterpretação da história.

Revision as of 02:46, 24 November 2018

Say what you will, and say what you might! But don't ignore who it's for at the end of the night...

So, what do you have to say?


Emmanuel Macron

In the Talk:Emmanuel Macron page, there is an anonymous troll erasing your comments and calling you a "communist militant". I reverted it for now, but you might want to take some action against the personal attacks. Dimadick (talk) 10:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning, Dimadick! He is just another "keyboard warrior". Coltsfan (talk) 12:02, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Coltsfan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Coltsfan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notification

Hi Coltsfan. It doesn't appear you were notified of WP:AN3#User:Coltsfan reported by User:49.180.99.171, so I'm just doing so as a courtesy. It also appears that IP who started that AN3 discussion is also IP 49.195.121.29 and most likely the same person behind SacredGeometry333. My suggestion to you would be to add these and any more IPs pr accounts which seem suspicious to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BDMKK. You can do this by going to WP:SPI and clicking on "How to open an investigation". An admin might step in and block these accounts without an SPI, but starting one can sometimes help speed things along. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:15, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning, Marchjuly. But this guy simply changes his IP and has evaded many blocks, so keep reporting it won't do much. The thing is just to stay vigilant. But i'll hear your advice. Thanks. Coltsfan (talk) 02:44, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An admin might be capable of a WP:RANGEBLOCK of these IPs since they all seem to be IP 49's, but I don't know much about the technical side of IP blocks so not sure. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:53, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If there is nothing in common for these IPs except the 49, a rangeblock is not practical. But prominent articles like Jair Bolsonaro can easily be semiprotected, and that might be almost as good. Let me know. EdJohnston (talk) 04:52, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@EdJohnston: There does seem to be sufficient behavioral evidence to tie since IPs 49.180.99.171 (talk · contribs), 49.195.121.29 (talk · contribs), and 49.181.144.250 (talk · contribs) to at least to SacredGeometry since they all have been basically WP:FORUMSHOPing over the dispute between SacredGeometry and Coltsfan. I was thinking about adding to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BDMKK, but page protection might be a better solution in this case. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:22, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Add IP 49.195.133.159 (talk · contribs) to the list as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the 'User' template to the above IPs to make it easier to search. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 06:21, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some range contributions to look at: Special:Contributions/49.195.0.0/16, Special:Contributions/49.180.0.0/16, Special:Contributions/49.181.0.0/16. We can't justify /16 blocks for this level of abuse, but something smaller could work. Just have to identify some smaller ranges. EdJohnston (talk) 06:27, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Understand and thanks for the clarification. I'm not familiar with technical aspects of a range block; I've just seen it done once or twice. FWIW, I have no connection to the current content dispute or to any of the previous socking. I only stumbled upon this because of IP(s) were posting basically forum shopping on pages that were on my watchlist. If WP:PP is a better way to handle this, then that's fine. I do think though that the IP will be back since there does seem to be a bit of NOTHERE involved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly, EdJohnston, protecting the pages seems to be a way more productive thing than just keep blocking or engaging in EW. I appreciate all the tips and inside thoughts you guys had. Thank you. Coltsfan (talk) 09:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Você não vai nos parar!

Nós somos várias pessoas comprometidas com a verdade e a reinterpretação da história.