User talk:Favonian

Rossi Firearms

This page is protected against creation. I suggest making it a redirect to Taurus (manufacturer) and then edit-protecting said redirect. Hellbus (talk) 19:11, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Favonian (talk) 19:22, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Relisting Kaiserslautern Central Station

Do you mind if I just closed this move request? I feel like I was responsible for the hurricane that led to the request for relisting. I said that they had to put notifications on all 121 articles. However, that doesn't actually seem necessary. Because these are all reversions of undiscussed moves, it would fall under WP:RMT, so one could still fulfill the request even though notifications weren't made on every page. -- tariqabjotu 21:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Fine with me. Favonian (talk) 21:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I'll let it play out for a few more days, just in case someone wants to lodge an objection (although I'm not sure how someone could object to all 121 moves). Also, I don't feel like moving all those articles right now. -- tariqabjotu 21:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Who is Vincent Morley?

The above question is the heading of a section on the Saint Patrick's Saltire talk page. It was posted on 3 December 2012 and has remained unanswered since.

I am the Vincent Morley in question and I provided details about myself, with links to my personal webpage and blog where details of my publications and background can be found. You deleted my reply and told me to "Please stop using talk pages such as Talk:Saint Patrick's Saltire for general discussion of the topic".

I have no wish to become a Wikipedia contributor and only became aware of this reference to myself when told of it by someone else. However, I consider it very odd that such a personal question should be posed on a Wikipedia page and that the subject of the question should be prevented from replying.

I therefore respectfully request that the question about me should be deleted entirely.

Vincent Morley (talk) 22:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Replied at WP:DRN#Talk:Saint Patrick's Saltire. Favonian (talk) 16:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I would be quite happy to have permission from anyone in authority, not necessarily from you, to post a reply to the question "Who is Vincent Morley?" Can I now do so? I don't want to do so without receiving explicit permission as I have already been given a "last warning" by another editor for the same offence.

Vincent Morley (talk) 18:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I may not exactly have the authority to grant permissions around this place, but I won't object to you re-adding the comment. What you'll get out of replying to a nearly nine-months-old comment from an editor who contributes infrequently is anybody's guess. Favonian (talk) 19:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you - I'll make a fourth attempt so. My purpose isn't to engage with the original poster but only to defend my reputation as a credible historian on a page where some doubt has been cast on it.

Vincent Morley (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

IPhonehurricane95/Typhoonwikihelper Sockpuppet attack

I suspect that User:Hiiiiiii im sheldon coooooper is a sock of IPhonehurricane95 for many various reasons.

1. He attacked me, by created a vandalized user page with my name (which has now been deleted). He is the only user who ever attacked my via my user space (in this case, the talk page of my IP Address), abeit as a Sock IP himself.

2. He vandalized Tropical Cyclone articles, compare with editing patterns of User: IPhonehurricane95 and his socks.

3. His onblock threats are almost exactly the same as those of his other sockpuppets.

If you don't mind, please check for other possible Sockpuppets of this vandalizer. I an growing extremely annoyed with his guy's attempts to unnerve me and attack Wikipedia articles. Thanks! LightandDark2000 (talk) 23:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

See IPhonehurricane95's Sockpuppet Investigation, for more information on the suspected sock. Could you please trace and block account creation for the IP Address(s) behind these socks? If you do, it may prevent the vandalizer from creating even more socks. (The IP range I provided on this page should help). Thanks! LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Yup, just like I thought. He has been confirmed to be a sockpuppet of IPhonehurricane95. I knew that it was probably only a matter of time before he decided to attack me, given everything that I have done to root out his socks. How are we going to handle this guy? Every time things seem to settle down, he creates more socks to vandalize Wikipedia. Is there a way that we could stop this? LightandDark2000 (talk) 23:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Saint Patrick's Saltire". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 10:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry

I am sorry and thank you. But why am I able to change what other people has written? Isn't it weird? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enginhakvar (talk • contribs) 11:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk pages are just like all other pages: in principle, everyone can edit everything. You should make a habit of previewing all changes you make before saving them. It has certainly saved me from numerous screw-ups. Favonian (talk) 20:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Your fix worked

This change caused the bot to see the date, but I don't know why :-). Maybe the trailing </span> or </small> tags had something to do with it. EdJohnston (talk) 16:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

There's some unstructured, experimental evidence supporting the hypothesis that the bot will dump new requests in the trash section at the end if the time stamp is not sufficiently recent. Since this request was three hours old before the initial problems were ironed out, it does fit the bill. Regrettably, I failed to divine the truth from the source code. Favonian (talk) 17:36, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

O Hello !

O Hello mr.favonian

i dont care that you blocked me. I am not afraid of being blocked and from you. I am only afraid from Allah. I will do this as far as i can do. I will do this at the remaining of last drop of my blood.--عرفان ارشد (talk) 16:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Rather lame sort of martyrdom, but since you insisted (by removing once more those images), I have blocked you temporarily. Favonian (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Baha'i faith

hi, sorry, I don't know where to present my argument. you told me about a challenge. anyway, I believe that number of followers ( like Christians & Muslims ) or historical precedence ( like Jewish ) are big factors. there are so many little other faith. so why "Baha'i faith" should be mentioned in same level as those three big religion? and "Mormonism" shouldn't be mentioned? I think these kind of edits are attempt by small faiths like Bahai's to show themselves as important as there most important Abrahamic religion. I think it is better to mention other faiths like Mormonism or Bahai in "other religion" list, not is a same level list. this is just because of "importance"

yours hamzeh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki hamze (talk • contribs) 11:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The right place would be Talk:Abrahamic religions and Talk:Daniel. It would appear that the membership of this faith is in the millions, so it's not all that small. Favonian (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

secondary Abraham faiths

Dear Favonian as you told I put a topic about main and secondary Abrahamic religions in related page. please take a look. this is why I remove Bahai's faith from main list. we can't put 100 little and big religions in same level of importance. regards,--Wiki hamze (talk) 13:18, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Days and dashes

But I am using the ndash as stated by that style guide; it displays as – which is the exact same as the – I have introduced - it just saves a helluva lot of space! GiantSnowman 17:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

It is argued in the style guide that the explicit HTML entity &ndash; reminds editors to use it for new entries, whereas "–" is easily mistaken for "-". Favonian (talk) 17:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

True that it says "it is better to leave them as –", but there is no "explicit" command. GiantSnowman 17:49, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

True indeed, but just before that it says "entries should be formatted using &ndash;". Modal verbs and Wikipedia scripture make a heady cocktail. Favonian (talk) 17:54, 8 September 2013 (UTC)mo

@GiantSnowman: Note that "&ndash;" is translated into "–" in the actual HTML source, so it isn't making pages load any slower. Since I don't think the Wikipedia servers are running out of space, your concern must be that it looks uglier, with which I must disagree. Ginsuloft (talk) 23:37, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

No, it was do with size. I obviously was mistaken. GiantSnowman 08:12, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

2020 page move and User:LukePearsons

Please check his other contributions too. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Done, with the help of several other editors. Favonian (talk) 19:31, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Dizzzer

Virtually all of the edits on religious topics by Dizzzer (talk · contribs) have violated WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY or WP:NOR and have been reverted by me or other editors. Given your warning on his/her talk page, what would you suggest? Dougweller (talk) 08:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

The recent edits are certainly tendentious, but I'm not quite ready to swing the hammer. The warning was quite a while ago, and partly caused by a different issue. I have left a stern warning and will try to keep an eye on this person's edit. Favonian (talk) 16:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Consider protecting your talk page for a while?

Hi Favonian, do you want to consider protecting your talk page from unregistered users for a while? As you can see from your talk page history, your talk page received a lot of vandalism within the past few days, and it is mostly from the same vandal. I know that they are blocked, but they can do block evasion and come and vandalize your talk page again. So in conclusion, I'm worried if your talk page might get vandalism for the next few days. Jianhui67 Talk 17:18, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Sort of comes with the job. ;) I'll leave the talk page open for anon IPs at the moment, but it won't take much for me to change my mind and semi it. Elockid has range blocked a goodly swath of Manitoba, so maybe my friend from Winterpeg will be discouraged—and maybe not. Favonian (talk) 17:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Given my past experience as a rollbacker in Empires & Allies Wiki, a user hacked his account to become unblocked, but I don't think that will happen here. But some IPs might use another computer to vandalize after his first IP address being blocked, or even his mobile phones. That is ban evasion. Jianhui67 Talk 17:34, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

User:Koolx

I have issued a warning to User:Koolx who has been edit warring on the Goths article since Aug 17, 2013[1] and has not attempted to use the article's talk page. This user's edit warring started just after your page protection on July 11, 2013[2]. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:00, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! It was much overdue—meaning: I wonder why I didn't do that myself a long time ago. I have no doubt Koolx is "related" to the IPs, who caused me to semi the article, and the resemblance to Bldon2 (talk · contribs) is also interesting, though too old for CheckUsers to unearth the evidence. Favonian (talk) 05:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that User:Koolx has reverted the article again.[3] I will let you handle this from here on out. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:59, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, that does it! I've blocked the account for a week, and if this kind of nonsense resumes, the next block will be indefinite. Favonian (talk) 15:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Jacob's Remnant

Any idea what that was all about? Good block. I wonder if there's any copyvio. Dougweller (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Good question! A picture like commons:File:Papyrus_115.jpg (is that Mitt Romney?) suggests malicious intent. This place attracts some really strange customers. Favonian (talk) 20:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For your diligence in dealing with long-term, multi-account, trolling vandals, and the resilience to put up with the personal attacks. — MusikAnimal talk 22:01, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks a lot! Fortunately, I have a fairly thick skin, and I derive a certain grim pleasure from watching my special friend from Winnipeg making such a big effort with so little to show for it. Favonian (talk) 22:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Blocked IP is back

Europefan, whom you just blocked, is back on another dynamic IP, 188.96.228.73 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Looks like Mark Arsten has already done what needed doing. Favonian (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Now he's at 188.96.191.216 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I'm pretty sure that he has to drive somewhere every time he wants a new IP. :) --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Probably not worthwhile to use forceful measures at this point. He has most likely moved on, either by driving or resetting his modem. ;) Favonian (talk) 09:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thank you for helping to erase vandalism. It is very much appreciated. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 09:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure, and, though it's a bit early in the day, cheers! Favonian (talk) 09:53, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I hope I didn't break any rules by blocking him for his edit at AN. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

It was, at worst, redundant since I just range-blocked him ;) He's a deranged troll from India with a "thing" about Scandinavia. Norwegian School of Economics is semi-protected because of his antics. Stay tuned for more action. Favonian (talk) 18:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Now at Fairhair dynasty and its talk page. On advice, I opened a section at WP:AN on registered editors who appear to be the same person, trying to get a ban in order to revert on sight. Unfortunately it's been overshadowed by the Visual Editor section, plus it's been confirmed that sufficiently broad rangeblocks would do unacceptable collateral damage. Since you are familiar with the IP, do you share the view he and the registered editors are the same person? I will go block the latest one for the attack at AN, but I hope it's not bunches of people only one of whom makes threats. I don't like blocking people, especially when it looks as if it's just for trolling me and articles I have watchlisted. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. Sorry to be so hesitant. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Oh, I'm pretty confident it's the same character, and I'd have no qualms about blocking him. Favonian (talk) 20:19, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Marie Curie

Hello, sorry to bother you but I am leaving a message because I have seen that you have been previously involved in discussions on the Marie Curie talk page similar to the one I am currently in. Basically, this is again a silly issue with the lead sentence of the article, with a few editors that seem to be very protective of anyone somehow Polish being called by anything else than only "Polish" in the lead sentence. I do think my views on the issue are the one reflecting the established Wikipedia practice. But since I am currently alone supporting them, it is quite time-consuming for me. This might not be the kind of annoying discussion you want to get into, but still, if you had time to have a look at the discussion on the Marie Curie talk page, that would be nice :-). In any case, have a good day :-)Tokidokix (talk) 03:55, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

@Tokidokix: First of all, I have to state the party line that no matter how right you believe yourself to be, edit warring is not permitted! Now, regarding M^me Curie I personally agree with you: she was born in Poland but was already a French citizen by the time she did the research that made her (exceedingly) notable, so some variation on the theme of "Polish–French" would seem appropriate. I have, on the other hand, promised myself not to get involved in any of those disputes with editors, who I prefer to label "patriotic enthusiasts" so as not to get dragged to the drama board. There was a similar controversy over Enrico Fermi, where representatives of said group prevented any labeling other than Italian from being used in the lead, and the lesson learned is that those who are willing to fight to the death for the sacredness of the Mother/Fatherland will wear down those motivated by less emotional factors. So, in conclusion, I wish you luck and, returning to the party line, "encourage you to pursue dispute resolution", but you're on your own. Favonian (talk) 16:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your reply :-). Well, I quite understand your point of view. It is my first time getting involved in a edit controversy on wikipedia, and it is certainly a bit frustrating to use so much time arguing about 3 words when one could do useful things elsewhere. But well, I am a patient person and I decided to see this as an interesting insight on how such passion-inducing questions can be handled on Wikipedia (although I would certainly like to find one or two editors arguing in the same direction as me so as to spend less time on this). So I guess this will be a long long discussion, that will hopefully avoid edit warring in the future. You can still have a look at the talk page from time to time to enjoy the show ;-). By the way, and as a matter of fact, I would not think the case of Fermi is as problematic, since he was actually awarded Nobel prize before emigrating (I guess that somehow depends on which proportion of his notability one consider he derives from his participation in the Manhattan project...). Have a very good day :-) Tokidokix (talk) 03:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)