Jump to content

User talk:Ivanvector

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Trout this user
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Geebee2703 (talk | contribs) at 14:15, 7 December 2017 (→‎Caroline Hutchings page now redirected to Caroline Danjuma). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:DailyBracketBot



Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Question

Can you please give me a good reason why i am getting a lot of warnings if i am giving a true fact?

ZLL123 (talk) 18:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ZLL123: sure, read m:What is a troll?. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SPI merges

Could you see to a few merges that Sir Sputnik has requested at SPI? They're marked admin attention needed, but only an admin clerk can handle them. ~ Rob13Talk 15:10, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BU Rob13 and Sir Sputnik: I absolutely can, but I won't be able to probably before 23:00UTC at the earliest. If nobody beats me to it then I'll take a look. And maybe we do need to have an "admin clerk needed" or "merge needed" status for this kind of situation. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:17, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that might be useful. In the mean time, any request for admin assistance that's been pending for more than a day or two is generally going to be a case merge. There's enough patrolling admins around these days that requests that any admin can handle get processed pretty quickly. As I write this, all pending admin requests are case merges. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:37, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

91.150.103.211

Hi, VJ-Yugo again. [1] Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:05, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like a different user to me, but man there's a lot of nonsense coming from the Balkans. I'm keeping an eye on it, anyway; see User:Ivanvector/Serbian Army vandal. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tensor product of representations

I would like to draw your attention to the de-redirecting that TakuyaMurata did for which there was a MFD on a Draft space project that constituted the majority of the content that was part of this. Based on the fact that they are also under a Topic Ban related to their Draft space creations, I am appealing to you as the editor and administrator who created the redirect. I also request the advice of Primefac as the administrator who imposed the Topic Ban and who also imposed the deletion of the content at MFD. Hasteur (talk) 02:30, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Hasteur: TakuyaMurata is banned from participating in discussions about the Draft namespace and various draft-related policies. He is not banned from writing content, whether he does so in Draft space, his User space, or in the main space. The MfD discussion you refer to closed with a note from Primefac that they would restore the content to be worked on if Taku asked, which he did around the end of October (which you can see in the deletion log at Draft:Tensor product of representations and now in the history at Tensor product of representations). And clearly he has improved it, so it seems the original concerns of the MfD (that the draft was stale, and that Draft space is not for hosting article fragments indefinitely) have been resolved. The only problem here is that Taku did a cut-and-paste move over the redirect, but I have already repaired that and left him a note not to do that again. Otherwise, I don't see a problem here.
If you have a good content-based reason why Tensor product of representations should not be an article, I think you know how to get to WP:AFD. But please also consider not hounding users who are trying to contribute in good faith. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I assert that after the MFD was sustained, the "good faith contributions" consisted of synonym golf that does not merrit inclusion, but since you've elected to throw in with textbook definition scrapers, I have no choice. Hasteur (talk) 22:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore it is not hounding to keep an eye on editors who have consistently shown an inability to respect the standard practices of the encyclopedia. Hasteur (talk) 22:21, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, if you don't think it should be included, take it to AfD. There is nothing actionable here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:22, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I concur with Ivanvector's assessment of the situation. The draft was moved (by request) to the user's space, improved, and reached an acceptable-enough state to merit an article. Thanks for letting us know about the copy/paste issue so that it could be fixed. Primefac (talk) 22:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ren Yifan

Hello Ivanvector,

I'm not familiar with the case above, but the nonstandard formatting there is causing it to appear in the list of malformed cases. Are there supposed to be two separate cases, 123Aristotle and Ren Yifan, or is this an incomplete case rename? Thanks ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:29, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DoRD: Ren Yifan was part of a three-way merge where all three of the cases had histories, so merging them would have created a long and confusing parallel histories situation. Although thinking about it now, I think that it might actually be better to do a proper merge and not worry about the parallel history; this isn't the first time I've had to clarify. Can't do it right now but I'll get back to it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:47, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFAR section title

LOL. When I first saw "#Statement by Ivanvector (MisterWiki)", I thought to myself "What?! Ivanvector is admitting he's the guy behind MisterWiki?! No way!" Imagine my relief (and tiny bit of disappointment) when it dawned on me what you actually meant. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:04, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I did a double take on that also.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, gotcha, I guess. I thought in preview that it might have looked something like that, but it seemed like the simplest way to disambiguate my thread from the other one on the page. I guess a (2) would have been easier.
I guess I'll just go ahead and certify that I'm not working for Mister Wiki, or for anyone. Nobody has ever paid me for Wikipedia contributions, and as a matter of principle I would not accept payments for my edits. I'm not even really comfortable with a few contests we've done that carry a monetary reward. It's ... icky. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:20, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I almost left you a comment encouraging you to change it for this reason; I did a double-take as well. Maybe (Mister Wiki case)? ~ Rob13Talk 17:25, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I modified it. If there's one thing I know it's that when three admins knock on your door about something you did, you probably need to fix something. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:38, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Poutine

Sorry for moving your comment BTW—I'm glad you're OK with it, but I should've asked first (especially since I just recommended that someone refrain from making contributions on others' behalf!). I felt that the new categories that were added used pretty heavily biased language, so I made some edits to make them a little less POV, and I thought your vote fit better in the other category. dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 21:20, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It does, and thanks. I was discussing just jamming those two headers together, but as long as they're separate my comment should be in the right section. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:22, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome. BTW, I suspect this whole thing is going to have to go to dispute resolution at some point, especially if the RfC fails. If that ends up being the case, which do you think is a better place to head to--DRN or ANI? dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 00:52, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not ANI, that's not for content disputes. Probably DRN, but I think the RfC will be successful eventually. It might take time for all the participants to find common ground. That's just how it works sometimes. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 00:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth I advertised the RfC at the Canadian Wikipedians' noticeboard and at WikiProject Food and Drink, which hopefully will bring more comments. More editors commenting usually leads to better discussions. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 00:56, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks for doing that. I was thinking of doing the same, but I've been busy. I think you're right about some common ground emerging, too—perhaps I was being too hasty to judge. dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 17:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SPI Quickie

Can you handle the clerk stuff here? It's old enough on the list that I suspect it will be overlooked if I don't prod someone in its direction. (And no action was a perfectly valid outcome for that SPI I pinged you to, by the way. I just wanted some outcome at that point.) ~ Rob13Talk 00:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All done. That was ... not so quick. Thanks for the ping anyway. I was going through old open cases earlier today but I didn't go through checked cases. Maybe tomorrow :) Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry! I admittedly have no clue on case merges, so I suppose I don't really know how quick that all is. I just went through some of the old checked cases, but not all, and some older open ones. ~ Rob13Talk 01:55, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! Merges are usually pretty straightforward, this one was only a bit complicated because there was also manual archiving to do, and the case itself was inherently complicated. Plus I was just kind of grumpy last night, for no good reason. The other case just kind of annoyed me, I prodded it two months ago to try to move it along, Alison left a comment that didn't really help, and then nobody else responded until you added more notes. I've seen since then that DQ's on a break due to health issues. I guess I'm getting a bit burnt out by SPI, but I'm not going anywhere. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:23, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extension of IPv6 block

Hi, last week you blocked the IPv6 address beginning with 2603:300B:E01:BF00 for repeated disruptive editing of Talk:February 29. The block has now expired and the IPv6 user is back making the same disruptive editing to the same page. Could you please put another, longer, ban in place? Thanks. --Marbe166 (talk) 18:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, for a month this time. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:03, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for keeping your promise.

I think what you did will serve the purpose. Readers will now know which Gaurav Sharma is which. Thanks so much --Bond111 (talk) 15:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Outing/not outing

If I have this right, a registered editor is editing while logged out? So posting a request for him to log in, on the talk page of the IP account, using some identifying info about either his registerred account or him personally is 'ok'...? - theWOLFchild 16:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it's fine, it's an editor who we've been trying to get to answer questions on their talk page about writing several articles and adding info without ever having added a citation to a reliable source. Instead of responding they logged out and edited as the IP, and they've done it enough times that now they're blocked. It's very obvious that the IP and the account are the same person, if you look at the history of any of the articles the IP has edited you'll see what I mean. If someone had gone and discovered the editor's IP somehow and then posted it here, that would be outing. This editor effectively disclosed their IP on their own, and WP:OUTING doesn't forbid stating the obvious. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:59, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then, thanks for the info. - theWOLFchild 20:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline Hutchings page now redirected to Caroline Danjuma

I have a small issue with a page that I modified titled "Caroline Danjuma" it has incorrect information according to the person to which the article is about. However I edited it but it was reverted by a [Darreg]. I reached out to him so he understands that his article (created without the permission of Caroline) is incorrect but he insists that it should not be edited. Please advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geebee2703 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Geebee2703: I moved the page back to Caroline Danjuma because I don't see any sources anywhere that say her name is Hutchings, and I've protected it so that it cannot be moved again. If you have a reliable source indicating that she goes by Caroline Hutchings then we can talk about what to do about it, but from the info available to me I can't even be sure that the person you're talking to is the same person as the article is about, and we're required to be careful when writing articles about living people. If Caroline would like to resolve her issue privately, she can see the instructions at WP:OTRS for how to email someone who can confirm her identity and evaluate whatever information she has that is incorrect in the article. Thanks.
@Darreg: FYI. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ivanvector: I would reach out to her to send the appropriate info as you have suggested thanks & yes it is the same person we are talking about. I checked the WP:OTRS page & i'm clueless as to how to get any email i can forward to her so she can reach out herself, please advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geebee2703 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Geebee2703: the OTRS page is a bit confusing and not very straightforward, but I think you want info-en-q@wikimedia.org. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:20, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) Related: Caroline Hutchings (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:27, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ivanvector: ok so you suggest I forward all my questions to the stated address? I spoke with her "Caroline" & she said she contacted a @Dennis Brown: but all I want (on her behalf) is know how to go about editing her page without breaking any regulations - please advice

Editions about Gulf

Hello, I recently updated some editions about Gulf company and some other editions, but some accounts was blocked by a sock puppets of consumersdistributingonline. I don't have any links with this account and I just want to edit with my best of possible, when we see edits of that account, we can see clearly that's them who want to relaunch the company that has this account. I often tried to keep an account for a long period but it was eventually blocked. If I edit on Consumers Distributing it's not to promote personally this. I know that someone try to relaunch the company and I tried to edit the best information possible. Also, I can tell you that I ever speak with him personally at phone and it's really hard to know something of concrete from him about the relaunch. I would want that this relaunch of the company works, I don't know what's happening now but I try to stay informed by consulting the website and others research on the web. I discovered the investigation page of consumersdistributingonline and when we see that, it really has no sense. When I have another account, it's because I forgot my password and it's in the suggestions of Wikipedia to open another account. I want soon doing some other changes on Gulf, and it's very good edits.

Also, please don't revert my edits because it's really not vandalism that I do. I improve articles and correct errors. If I edit in the future, I would like to don't be blocked. Thank you. (I just discovered from now how we can write a message to administrators and I will try to contact you other times, and you can block the account Santa Claude, I ever forgot the password for that account and I opened that by error and will not be useful) Bennyco (talk) 18:37, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bennyco: read WP:BLOCKEVASION, then read WP:STANDARDOFFER. You might also want to read WP:BROTHER. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:37, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

added Joe Roe
readded JzG
removed Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:58, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ivanvector. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yemeni Civil War (2015)

Hi the problem is the contributor refuses to go in talk page and continues to inpose his point of view. What is the solution ? --Panam2014 (talk) 17:03, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add the same warning for Chilicheese22 ? --Panam2014 (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Panam2014: Chilicheese22 already has a logged notice in the past year ([2]), we're not allowed to post notices more often than that. Thanks for following up, though. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. We should also saying that nothing of us have broken the 1RR. But Chilicheese22 is a recent contributor and has had a lot of problems with a lot of contributors. He does not accept the opinions of others on this point and he only seeks to impose his opinion. Now, since all his revocations are supported only by himself and no one supports him on the page of discussion, there would be no way to temporarily prohibit any deletion of the disputed mention (STC)? Also, I have an interesting piece. Instead of arguing, Chilicheese decided to repeat his actions, after the end of the protection, falsely claiming that there was no response in talk page, which is wrong. And he have insulted me as a "socketpuppet" and a "child", etc. What is the solution ? --Panam2014 (talk) 22:26, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to keep reposting things here, you've already said exactly the same thing at ANI. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:31, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but I want to know what to do if he continues to stubborn and continue to impose his changes? He will surely do it tonight.--Panam2014 (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ivanvector&oldid=814216109"