User talk:Yunshui

Nina Bal socking

Can you please take a look at user Brewingbeer that was registered in August, but begin editing today. No edits outside Draft:Nina Bal and giving the same kind of excuses when asked to disclose links where they advertise paid Wikipedia-editing services. SPI - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vivekok. Thank you. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:57, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

That was an interesting one, thanks for throwing it my way. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:31, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Guess what? YGM. GSS ^💬 04:58, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Barnstar!!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This is for your valuable efforts on countering Vandalism and protecting Wikipedia from it's threats. I appreciate your effort. You are a defender of Wikipedia. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 16:31, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Much obliged, thank you. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:36, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for unblocking me Yunshui, I really appreciate it! Gumshoe97 (talk) 19:50, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I can give you info

I have been aware that some of the kids at my school have been vandalizing Wikipedia, and during class I was talking about my message to Diannaa, and I could have sworn that some one acted by making the profane name "dianaasucks" in response to that. Also it was a BIG mistake talking to the class about my Wikipedia block, and I hope no one does anything profane in response to that. sorry for any inconvenience I have caused you.Gumshoe97 (talk) 20:04, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for your tireless efforts for Wikipedia Yunshui! Gumshoe97 (talk) 20:26, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Ecsite Events

That account was just created today . Don't you think a straight up block is bitey ? Necromonger...We keep what we kill 13:30, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

It appears to have been created solely for the purpose of adding links to the organisation's website, so no, I don't think a block is at all inappropriate. They are clearly not here to contribute. They cannot edit under that username in any case, and will need to change it before they can return to editing, but the block also alerts them to the fact that such edits are unwelcome. We have a horrific problem with promotional editing on Wikipedia, and I can tell you - from long and bitter experience - that it is almost never worth the time and effort involved to explain to every single one of these editors why what they are doing is not permitted. They are welcome to change their username, address the reasons for the block, and return to editing - I keep an eye on users whom I have blocked for spam usernames and promotional editing, and will unblock them myself if they post a suitable unblock request - but they cannot edit here as long as their goal is to bump up their site's SEO rankings by inserting links into Wikipedia. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:38, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

User:Saqiwa

I understand why the ANI was closed in that way, but the WP:CONSPIRACY-like response you got to your post on Saqiwa’s user talk and then their subsequently copying-and-pasting of that thread onto various article talk pages kinda further indicates more of a WP:RGW approach to editing than a WP:HERE. Saqiwa’s been advised not to copy-paste entire discussions from one talk to another like this before, but for some reason they continue to do so. — Marchjuly (talk) 06:31, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Posting on those pages is a very obvious violation of his topic ban, so he now has a couple of days off to enjoy. I fear you may have been right about the imposition of the TBAN being equivalent to an indef, but the consensus wasn't solidly in favour of a block and I wanted to at least give him the chance to avoid taking a permanent vacation from editing... Yunshui ^雲_水 07:13, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

I think that they might be able to contribute positively if they just stopped assuming that everyone who challenges one of their edits has to be doing so because of some Wikipedia conspiracy against Fiji. It would also help if they could realize that Wikipedia is not really the best way to try and resolve any real world disputes or differences of opinion about how Fiji is covered by reliable sources. Perhaps, this short block will give them time to reflect; otherwise, I think suggesting WP:ALTERNATIVE might be the only thing that can be done to try and help them further. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:26, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I thought this would probably happen, but they are back editing Fiji articles now that their block has run out. Either they don't understand what the topic ban means (that's a possibility), or they've just decided to ignore and continue on as before because they feel they're in the right regardless of what anyone else says (more likely the case). -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:33, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, looks like you were right. I've made the usual escalation to 72 hours, but if they go straight back to editing Fiji articles after that - given that they haven't even attempted to edit anything else - I think the next block would be justified in being a straight jump to indef. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Urgent Email

Hey Yunshui,

I was creating an article and it was deleted (G11). However, I read the policies and I removed all external links and anything that has to do with "promotion". is it good to go now?

All the best,

Seif Eldawy