User talk:CambridgeBayWeather
Archive 01, Archive 02, Archive 03, Archive 04, Archive 05, Archive 06, Archive 07, Archive 08, Archive 09, Archive 10, Archive 11, Archive 12, Archive 13, Archive 14, Archive 15, Archive 16, Archive 17, Archive 18, Archive 19, Archive 20, Archive 21, Archive 22, Archive 23, Archive 24, Archive 25, Archive 26, Archive 27, Archive 28, Archive 29, Archive 30, Archive 31, Archive 32, Archive 33, Archive 34, Archive 35, Archive 36, Archive 37 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
I have two requests for people coming here:
- If you intend to revert personal attacks could you please use the {{subst:unsigned|user name|date}} template instead.
- If you are here to complain about something I deleted could you please tell me the name of the article that you are talking about. If you do I will respond but if you don't I will ignore you.
Bobov dynasty
Hi Cambridge!
I would like to bring to your attention that misleading info has been put in the Bobov wiki by people who have agenda's. I tried few times to correct it but was deleted by others. At this point you have closed the editing options while the misleading, agenda promote info. is still out there. If you need more elaboration on the happenings please get back to me.
O. Bobov
Protection of articles
How did you protect I (film) article, bro? Can u tell me? :D Ssven2 (talk)
Can you please protect Kaththi article bro, atleast for 2 months because the vandalism is too much to handle. :D. Thx Ssven2 (talk)
Question about Full protection of Neil deGrasse Tyson
Now I see, it was a different reason then I thought. At least this makes sense even if I don't agree. Thank you.
Gforce Pakistan
Hello my friend, You know how this all works. You have made a change to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_Force_Pakistan We'll ask you nicely to revert it back to as it was. We are not looking for trouble. Some Gforce Made members are not very happy with this change. We'll pay you $500+ Dollars for Giving the wiki back to us and We can adjust the price if you want. Please Respond.
Yours Sincerely, D'Amico (Associate and Messenger of GForce Pakistan). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gforcepakistan4 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 13 November 2014
I'm not sure what's going on in this article, but its been on the Special:PendingChanges list for several hours with Thesnowymanlan seemingly the main instigator in an Edit War or disruptive editing at the very least. Would you mind taking a look [1]? Thanks, --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 12:35 pm, Today (UTC−8)
- Scalhotrod. Thesnowymanlan has been blocked and all is well. Until his next sockpuppet pops up. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you :) By the way, you can add Editing others comments to their list of violations. It took 2 tries to leave the above note for you. -- (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 00:56, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Next one?
Thesmashbrobrawler, same edit. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 01:16, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
- Scalhotrod, probably so I blocked them. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 07:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, could use your input and/or action on this article. A User has been adding a link to copyrighted image on IMDb.com IMO in violation of WP:HOTLINK and WP:COPYVIO using the Template:External media. This is also in the midst of ignoring recommendations on the Talk page as they keep re-inserting the template over and over [2]. I'm done reverting as my policy cites and concerns go ignored even though I think I am covered by the exceptions to 3RR. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 19:52, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
By the way, this person claims that they are also an Admin on their User page. I don't know how to verify this, but just a heads up. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 20:18, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
- Might suggest reading the discussion at Talk:Laura Marano#External image if you choose to get involved in this. Scalhotrod does not appear to have a good understanding of what WP:HOTLINK and WP:COPYVIO allow and prohibit with respect to external links, which is all I am appropriately adding. It is not a hotlink, obviously, as Wiki software has disabled hotlinking, and it is not a linkvio as the image is legally hosted on the referred to site. Also my having an admin account that I seldom use now is not relevant to this issue. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:30, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for looking into this, my apologies for the misinterpretation. I had seen similar uses deleted previously without contention or incident, but either this instance is different or the others misunderstood as well. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:06, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
- No problem. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:46, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
- By the way, I posted similar apologies and explanations on the Talk page to to User Geraldo Perez. I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong and apologize even when its an honest mistake. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 20:02, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
- No problem. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:46, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks for protecting The Holocaust. Hopefully this will force the waring parties to move onto the Talk Page and talk it out. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 17:03, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
- Gaia Octavia Agrippa, no problem. I hope it works. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 08:59, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
1989 Tour Stage Set up
Why did you delete that information and put a lock on edits? I will never donate money to wikipedia again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1:3781:23B2:5B4:1895:5AB3:E2A6 (talk) 16:35, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't delete the information someone else did. I protected it because it violated the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
I read that and maybe I don't understand the rules as well as you do. In what way did it violate the biographies of living persons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.187.86.190 (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't just look at the edits 2601:1:3781:23B2:5B4:1895:5AB3:E2A6 made I checked other edits as well. For example. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:53, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for your good works ... ~~ Trueside 12:14, 14 December 2014 (UTC) |
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for your good works ... ~~ Trueside 12:14, 14 December 2014 (UTC) |
Ban or protection needed
Hello,
An anonymous user keeps on removing large sections from Yeni Şafak article. Is it possible to protect the article or ban the IP of the user please? His IP is 137.122.64.60. Thanks. Gezginrocker (talk) 14:53, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
- Semi=protected for a week. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:00, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for quick response.Gezginrocker (talk) 15:00, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
IPadPerson (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Teach Me
Hi man,Can you Teach Me How To use Unblock and Block 115.133.38.236 (talk) 06:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sure. First you need to register an account. Once you have done that edit for several months. They should be constructive and valid edits. Participate in all areas of Wikipedia. However, before you do that read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. Eventually either someone or yourself will take it to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Good luck. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:27, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I need to know Tag Filter and Performer 115.133.38.236 (talk) 01:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you link to what it is? CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 01:44, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Tag Filter and Performer are in Block log.Continue From 115.133.38.236.,Can you please The Tag Filter And Performer Cause I don't know how to use it,thanks.Load Vordemout (talk) 02:11, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Ah. Performer is the person that did the blocking. If you at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/CambridgeBayWeather you can see how it is used. Tag filter would allow you to look for actions by an editor using a specific tag. The lists can be found at Special:Tags. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 04:46, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Performer use my name right Load Vordemout (talk) 14:20, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Anybodys will do. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:40, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Can you example Block please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Load Vordemout (talk • contribs) 03:48, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not blocking someone for no reason. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:18, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Ok,Performer is for what and Tag Filter is for what. Load Vordemout (talk) 02:58, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
- I already answered that above. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks.124.13.234.53 (talk) 05:38, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Korra (The Legend of Korra)
Hey, I saw you locked down the article. Look, I've been trying to work out something acceptable in the Talk page. I'm the one who started a talk topic and I even went to Sellingpapayas's personal talk page, which they then deleted. But they and Rhydic have been having none of it. And the ideas that 1) GBLT relationships require special authorial external-to-the-work confirmation (asserted by both) and 2) their to-my-eyes highly forced interpretation of events somehow being "objective" and mine (with supporting evidence, only a little of which I've had time to list) being invalid (asserted directly by Rhydic) is frankly raising GBLT erasure flags all over the place.
So I guess I'm asking: what happens now? The page is locked down Sellingpapayas's way until December 26th, so they get their erasure until then? Or what? Solarbird (talk) 22:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Solarbird, I don't know who is right and who is wrong but an edit war will only end up with people being blocked. You need to keep talking it out on the talk page. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- I've been trying, but Sellingpapayas in particular has just been REVERT REVERT REVERT combined with accusations. Like I said: I've been trying, and I've been the only one offering any sort of middle ground. I guess it'll float until the 26th then, but I don't expect it to improve. The authors said this ending would be controversial, so. Solarbird (talk) 22:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- But constant reverting isn't good. Even though there are only two editors reverting you it does indicate a minor, and easily changed, consensus. If it resumes on the 26 then I am sure that people will be blocked. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:49, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, I wasn't the only one being reverted. Several other people were too. I'm just the only one with a confirmed account, so I strongly contest the idea that they have any sort of "consensus." The major review sites (such as IGN) for example, also disagree and are talking about the confirmation of the relationship in reviews. (Me, I've been around here a while. Not so active lately, but a while. Before I had a confirmed account I was editing too, but from IP address only. SO OLD or something.) Solarbird (talk) 23:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- You should probably bring the sources to the discussion. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:09, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Have done. They were demanding confirmation from authors, or nothing. But once the article got locked down, they stopped talking. Here's the IGN link, fwiw: http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/12/19/the-legend-of-korra-the-last-stand-review Solarbird (talk) 23:11, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Just something you might want to mention (don't know where else to put this in being non-account) is the Dimartino oneof the creators and the one who did that episode posted on his facebook page a link to an article that says that Asami and Korra are together and that (and I quote) "if you think this final shot was denoting mere friendship, you're kidding yourself." The fact that Dimartino posted this is him endorsing the article and everything in it as true as he didn't make any statement about it being wrong. This is kinda irrefutable proof and evidence form the mouth of one of the creators. And if they try to argue that he didn't read the entire article (as the Korrasami statement comes at the end of the article) then simply respond with the fact that the URL which he had to have read to copy it over literally says korra-season-finale-recap-gay-asami so there is no way he didn't know and was in complete endorsement of it and the Korra and Asami statements in it. There is no way that they can refute this and if they do then they are being petty and their argument is unsubstantiated, based purely on their opinion which I believe is violation of the wiki rules that you need to be neutral and that poster POV isn't allowed. 81.97.84.26 (talk) 19:43, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Have done. They were demanding confirmation from authors, or nothing. But once the article got locked down, they stopped talking. Here's the IGN link, fwiw: http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/12/19/the-legend-of-korra-the-last-stand-review Solarbird (talk) 23:11, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- You should probably bring the sources to the discussion. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:09, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, I wasn't the only one being reverted. Several other people were too. I'm just the only one with a confirmed account, so I strongly contest the idea that they have any sort of "consensus." The major review sites (such as IGN) for example, also disagree and are talking about the confirmation of the relationship in reviews. (Me, I've been around here a while. Not so active lately, but a while. Before I had a confirmed account I was editing too, but from IP address only. SO OLD or something.) Solarbird (talk) 23:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- But constant reverting isn't good. Even though there are only two editors reverting you it does indicate a minor, and easily changed, consensus. If it resumes on the 26 then I am sure that people will be blocked. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:49, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Hey, so, while I was out today, Tutelary yanked out a huge chunk of my argument about this topic and flagged it "copyright violation." I wrote it. I wrote it here, I reposted to my blog, and on my blog, SAID I WAS WRITING THIS ON WIKIPEDIA AND WAS THE SAME PERSON. I've reverted it, but if we're at this kind of point, I have to go to administrators now. Can we do something about this?
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! | |
Wishing you and your fam a happy holiday season from your friend down south and a bit to the west. Rosiestep (talk) 01:37, 20 December 2014 (UTC) |
Electronic cigarette
I can fully sympathise with why you locked the e-cig article again, but is there any chance you could undo the change Doc James was edit-warring in and that got frozen when you locked it? Thanks.--FergusM1970Let's play Freckles 20:29, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- There was no consensus for the change by User:MSGJ. The original version is this one from Dec 19th [3] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:42, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with MSGJ about that. Right or wrong he felt that a consensus did exist. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 20:49, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- There was no consensus for the change by User:MSGJ. The original version is this one from Dec 19th [3] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:42, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Page protection
Hi CambridgeBayWeather; Thanks for granting the page protection on Metropolitan (1990 film). I had originally requested Semi-protection (rather than Full) in order to investigate a possible sock. For such a low page-count article, I suddenly received 3 back-to-back quick responses from different dynamic IP editors and one other regular editor with an account. The IP editors appeared to be single purpose accounts as well. My plan was to revert on the Semi-protected page with my account in order to try to encourage the dynamically changing IP editor to open an account for them to make their revert, and thereby obtain more information on what looks like a sock. Reverting the page to the last neutral version, say thirty days ago, after the page goes to Semi-protection (only if you agree) should accomplish the same thing. My WHOIS on the IP editors showed only partial info as to the edit coming from Comcast somewhere in Mount Laurel, NJ, with no further info from my limited account. Cheers. FelixRosch (TALK) 20:46, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- User:FelixRosch I reverted back. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 20:59, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Felix, you don't seem to understand that the version of the article you supported was poorly written and even seemed to have been composed by someone who doesn't speak English as a first language. The other IP editor was attempting to create and maintain a plot synopsis that was comprehensive, well written, and not vague. There was virtually nothing to discuss beyond your frankly incomprehensible insistence that a terribly written plot summary remain intact. All you've really done is cause a lot of problems and compromise the integrity of an article.2601:E:2000:1A3:C914:D4EF:A4BA:8D03 (talk) 22:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Previous user should please acknowledge that I am the one who initiated Talk discussion. @CambridgeBayWeather; Your edits appear to have move things ahead, and there is a very high certainly in my review that the three separate accounts (including the dynamically changing IP accounts) involved are not three separate persons. FelixRosch (TALK) 16:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
- Felix, you don't seem to understand that the version of the article you supported was poorly written and even seemed to have been composed by someone who doesn't speak English as a first language. The other IP editor was attempting to create and maintain a plot synopsis that was comprehensive, well written, and not vague. There was virtually nothing to discuss beyond your frankly incomprehensible insistence that a terribly written plot summary remain intact. All you've really done is cause a lot of problems and compromise the integrity of an article.2601:E:2000:1A3:C914:D4EF:A4BA:8D03 (talk) 22:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Protection of usertalk page under WP:UPROT
I notice you protected User_talk:NorthBySouthBaranof under WP:UPROT. But WP:UPROT doesn't include talk pages, only their username space. Tutelary (talk) 21:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- User:Tutelary I went back and unprotected it. But Wikipedia:Protection policy#User talk pages does say that it can be done. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:26, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- It does but it says for vandalism--which it still qualified but I just wanted to correct you in case you wanted to protect some person's user page indefinitely by their own request. That would only be valid if there was constant and repeated anonymous vandalism or trolling. In any case, your action was right even if for the wrong reason, but if you persisted protecting other people's talk pages under that wrong reason, you could lock out good faithed IPs/new users. Tutelary (talk) 21:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. It's actually been a strange day for talk pages getting protected. Not sure why. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- It does but it says for vandalism--which it still qualified but I just wanted to correct you in case you wanted to protect some person's user page indefinitely by their own request. That would only be valid if there was constant and repeated anonymous vandalism or trolling. In any case, your action was right even if for the wrong reason, but if you persisted protecting other people's talk pages under that wrong reason, you could lock out good faithed IPs/new users. Tutelary (talk) 21:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Metropolitan (1990 film) edit war
Thank you for your attention to the edit war occurring at Metropolitan (1990 film). Unfortunately, the version you restored appears to be written in ESL manner that is vague, difficult to comprehend, and incomplete. I strongly encourage you to compare the currently protected version with other recent edits and consider restoring the one which appears to have been written by a native English speaker.2601:E:2000:1A3:C914:D4EF:A4BA:8D03 (talk) 22:25, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- I would also encourage you to take a cursory look at Felix's talk page, which demonstrates a history of conflict with other editors and warnings from several administrators regarding disruptive behavior. This appears to be more about a troublemaker wanting to stir something up than maintaining the quality of an article.2601:E:2000:1A3:C914:D4EF:A4BA:8D03 (talk) 22:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- I will also point out that the other user attempted to start a dialogue with Felix on Metro's talk page during the revert war, to which Felix never responded.2601:E:2000:1A3:C914:D4EF:A4BA:8D03 (talk) 22:37, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Previous user should please acknowledge that I am the one who initiated Talk discussion. FelixRosch (TALK) 16:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
- Which I then responded to. And which you ignored.76.31.249.221 (talk) 17:47, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
- Previous user should please acknowledge that I am the one who initiated Talk discussion. FelixRosch (TALK) 16:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
- I will also point out that the other user attempted to start a dialogue with Felix on Metro's talk page during the revert war, to which Felix never responded.2601:E:2000:1A3:C914:D4EF:A4BA:8D03 (talk) 22:37, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- I would also encourage you to take a cursory look at Felix's talk page, which demonstrates a history of conflict with other editors and warnings from several administrators regarding disruptive behavior. This appears to be more about a troublemaker wanting to stir something up than maintaining the quality of an article.2601:E:2000:1A3:C914:D4EF:A4BA:8D03 (talk) 22:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Fredrick Brennan semi-protected
I have been civilly debating Ryulong on that talk page, and now I cannot answer his most recent statement. I want to explain why WP:BLP1E does not apply. Please unprotect the page so I can rejoin the discussion, or at least put a note at that point that I am prevented from responding due to the page being protected. 70.133.151.184 (talk) 02:03, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
- The two problem IPs were/are blocked so I unprotected it. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:05, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
My Last Day Without You
I would like to request the page be unprotected. The other day I got mad and started deleting the text several times because Cyristhelad for months keeps deleting 361 bytes of documented factual information I have tried to add. I will no longer delete all of his info (and didn't for many months) but I want to be able to put my factual info in and keep it there without him constantly deleting it. At the very least Cyristhelad should be dealt with too for removing my 361 byte addition all the time.
Thanks 76.14.244.233 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.244.233 (talk) 03:16, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
- OK. I unprotected it. I would suggest that rather than try an reinsert the material you go to the talk page and sort it there first. Inform the other editors and ask them for opinions. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:23, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Can you please sort out Binksternet as they are harrasing me and other users (Stanlyfe) by calling us sock puppets without any evidence; I think Binksternet should know to have fact over fiction Muicfantasy (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not clear on what you mean by sort them out. It may be a dialect thing but your usage suggests number 6 and I think I'll pass on doing that. Anyway he has made the required report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky so it isn't really harassment. If he was calling you a sockpuppet and not making a report then you might have a claim. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:33, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
- He made the claim way before he did the report and then kept reverting my edits doesn't that count somewhere? Muicfantasy (talk) 21:47, 21 December 2014 (UTC) P.S. it was number 5
- Hmmm. I could block both of you for Wikipedia:Edit warring but I don't think that really helps. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:56, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Merry Merry
To you and yours
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:48, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Request unprotection of Korra (The Legend of Korra)
In light of new information provided by the creator (other links on the talk page), the edit war is resolved. I request full unprotection, or at least reduction to semi. This is coming to you, as the protecting admin. CRRaysHead90 | #RaysUp 01:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)