User talk:Ferret: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Ferret/Archive 7) (bot
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 270: Line 270:
I saw your message regarding my Nintendo 3DS page edits. I was unaware that the information was being removed by another user. When I clicked submit, the added info just disappeared with no explanation why after I clicked submit, and almost immediately as well, my apologies. However, please check the links I reported as they are legitimate articles from Nintendo, thank you. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Techmaster12|Techmaster12]] ([[User talk:Techmaster12#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Techmaster12|contribs]]) 01:56, 1 March 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I saw your message regarding my Nintendo 3DS page edits. I was unaware that the information was being removed by another user. When I clicked submit, the added info just disappeared with no explanation why after I clicked submit, and almost immediately as well, my apologies. However, please check the links I reported as they are legitimate articles from Nintendo, thank you. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Techmaster12|Techmaster12]] ([[User talk:Techmaster12#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Techmaster12|contribs]]) 01:56, 1 March 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:{{Ping|Techmaster12}} Whether or not the information is true isn't in dispute. Whether the information adds anything of value to the article is. Since your December edit request for the same, you've tried to add this five times now, and been declined or reverted by 3 different editors. Please stop. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 02:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
:{{Ping|Techmaster12}} Whether or not the information is true isn't in dispute. Whether the information adds anything of value to the article is. Since your December edit request for the same, you've tried to add this five times now, and been declined or reverted by 3 different editors. Please stop. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 02:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

== History of Pakistan template ==

Hello,
Regarding your edit on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:History_of_Pakistan&action=history this page], it appears you’ve not locked in the version that was the previous status quo [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:History_of_Pakistan&diff=828009293&oldid=828009197 prior to this edit], but instead locked the version to one being promoted as one derived from consensus, when such consensus was actually not reached. Thanks for your time!
[[User:Willard84|Willard84]] ([[User talk:Willard84|talk]]) 11:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
:{{Ping|Willard84}} See [[Wikipedia:WRONGVERSION]]. Feel free to make an edit request for a template editor if you feel consensus is in your favor. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 11:47, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:47, 1 March 2018

(The 2nd or 3rd place)

Hello Ferret!😀 I want to ask you that if a game comes on 2nd or 3rd position should we just mention its nomination or mention that it was a "Runner-Up" or "2nd Place" holder?😕

Please check the Assassin's Creed Origins "Accolades" section. Tobi reverted my 2 edits on this matter. I'm not quite sure about this thing.😐 Thanks in advance!😊 Pure conSouls (talk) 07:32, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pure conSouls: I think it would depend on how its announced in the sources. Typically I think we keep to "Nom" and "Win". If the awards officially say "X won, Y was runner up" then runner up would maybe be appropriate. This would essentially be a direct "awarding" of "runner up", "second place", "silver medal" kind of thing. Note that the awards themselves would need to state this clear, not just secondary coverage which may be using "runner up" informally to indicate other nominees. -- ferret (talk) 12:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Source for third gen of home console

What I added was not reliable, but recognizable source for that address. At this point, there is no relatable and relieable source for me to find in google. Sorry for disappointing you, but my over-heated passion got me to do such a disloyal thing. Therefore, I hereby humbly apologize my action that cause your painful reaction for that source. 211.237.125.129 (talk) 15:56, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what your hyperbole is all about, but blogs and self-published sources are not reliable. That's all. -- ferret (talk) 16:17, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maintenance templates

Information about when to use each template can be found in Template:More citations needed#Differences from related templates and Template:More footnotes/doc. Rupert Loup (talk) 13:11, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rupert loup: Fair enough, but the More footnotes template gives the incorrect perception that the article is properly sourced but is not using inline citations. It does use inline citations however, extensively. The issue is unsourced content that isn't in the current sources. Inlining the existing citations won't resolve them. -- ferret (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Kaplan Edit

You undid my edit to the Jeff Kaplan article citing "they [SIC] did not appear constructive." By what standard are you making this assessment? I think it is useful (constructive means "serving a useful purpose") to clarify that the handle Kaplan chose (and still uses on the Blizzard forums), Tigole, is part of a spoonerism for the term "bigole titties", a chauvinist reference to women. I request that you reconsider your decision and restore my edits. I await your response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.181.65.15 (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My first message on a Talk page.

Yea. So thanks for undoing any edits I made on the page Roblox. I wanted to remove little sentences which apparently advertised about Roblox, but for some reason, a lot of words (like a whole paragraph) were mysteriously erased. I rarely make any edits on Wikipedia. But I do what I can to help. And I didn't know that writing a summary about edits was that important. I just hope I won't get banned or something.

--Devyash Mangra (talk) 15:09, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Devyash Mangra: You aren't at any risk of being blocked. Mistakes are fine, the message is just meant to let you know about it. -- ferret (talk) 15:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hey there. I've started a request for comment that you might be interested in – feel free to have your say when you get a chance. Thanks. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 15:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UTV Software Communications

Hey there Ferret, would you be able to evaluate the format, layout and content for UTV Software Communications? I want to turn it into a good article. I've done plenty of revisions on it but I feel that having an evaluation and necessary edits by you can really improve it. Thanks for helping out. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 19:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Iftekharahmed96: Not really familiar with the expected formatting of company articles, outside of what we generally see for video game companies. -- ferret (talk) 19:22, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, thanks for letting me know. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 19:26, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Link removal

Hi Ferret,

Curious why my link got deleted, have you read the article? Data is backed up by reliable sources. Thanks! --Star Helix (talk) 15:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Helix: It's almost insulting you're asking this. The site is clearly a referral code spam site, regardless of the truth of current crowdfunding levels. It is not a reliable source. -- ferret (talk) 15:44, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferret: I'm sorry to hear that. What do you consider reliable sources? Just trying to learn something here.--Star Helix (talk) 16:00, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferret: Maybe we should ask for a third opinion? This page is just an alternative to the randomizer. If articles like http://www.eurogamer.pl/articles/2017-05-21-kosmiczny-symulator-star-citizen-zgromadzil-ponad-150-mln-dolarow get approved, why not approve a researched <redacted spam link> (including sources). It doesn't even have adds on the page. I just find it a bit odd to dismiss an article without even reading it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Star Helix (talkcontribs) 17:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't understand what I reliable source is on Wikipedia, please look over at WP:VG/S as a guide - it shows many examples of sources to use or stay away from. Ferret's right in his stance that overly-promotional websites like this are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Your time would be better spent trying to find better sources. Sergecross73 msg me 17:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There's no way a websites that's primary purpose is referral code spam will be used as a reliable source. The fact that the code isn't on the article isn't relevant, since it's clearly within one click as the home page fo the site. I've removed a link from your message, please do not post it again. -- ferret (talk) 17:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I understand the nature of the problem has to do with the domain name and has nothing to do with the quality of the article. Have a good day!--Star Helix (talk) 19:42, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Star Helix No, that's not what we said at all. And I just caught you trying to add that link elsewhere. Sergecross73 msg me 19:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And blocked. It was clear spam from the start, but to insert the link after the discussion here was just silly. -- ferret (talk) 20:00, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sock: Maxwel.Rugby

User:Maxwel.Rugby is yet another sock of Lurulu. Same MO - with the period in his name with repeat editing on Simple Minds articles and not understanding editing basics. Hopefully you can ban him. Thanks. --Jennica / talk 19:35, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jennica:  Done -- ferret (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RE: I need a little help!

The ip user is still refusing to provide a source, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kirby_(character)&curid=239693&action=history. --Vaati the Wind Demon (talk) 21:43, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kirby

All you have to do is look at Kirby's prototype design Popopo(who by the way is clearly wearing shoes)to be able to clearly see that Kirby has red shoes and not red feet.

Nintendo of Europe has gotten way too many things wrong to be trustworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.21.192 (talk) 22:17, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to make your arguments at Talk:Kirby (character). It's not particularly strong evidence to point to a prototype design, as that's not Kirby. -- ferret (talk) 22:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unlocking a wiki page

Hello Ferret, I hope that you're having a great day. Would it be possible for you to unlock the Ruamrudee International School page for editing? The user(s) who provoked the edit war has been blocked due to Wikipedia:Sock puppetry (Reference: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Do do doggy). Thank you for your time. SwordMaster191 (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SwordMaster191: I'll leave it locked for now. The editor can easily sock again, and other IPs and editors were also involved. -- ferret (talk) 16:14, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A User targeting me with personal attacks in an AfD

Hello Ferret, I was wondering if you could assist me over in this discussion as the user Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz has started erroneously attacking me after I warned him about his conduct towards other users. He has also directly accused me of being a troll and then been defamatory in the edit log on his talk page referring to me warning him about his conduct. Could you please warn him so he stops with his attacks? Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ChieftanTartarus: Take it to ANI if you feel it warrants action. I'm not going to step in and make a call here on my own. There's plenty of admins already involved in that AFD so I'm sure it's been considered. -- ferret (talk) 17:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) He could probably calm down a little bit, but it doesn't seem like he's done anything worth taking action over. He shouldn't call you a "troll", but it's not like that alone is blockworthy or something. You're both better off doing the classic Wikipedia mantra of commenting on content, not editors. Sergecross73 msg me 18:22, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I decided that since he also decided to act defamatory in an edit log on his talk page: [1] referring to me that it warranted taking to ANI. I thank you both however for your assistance. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would just like to point out that the administrators on ANI seem to be more interested in doing nothing and accusing me of causing the issue in the first place rather than taking action. I didn't realise that the admins over there seem to enjoy witch hunting innocents. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 18:39, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, that's part of why I didn't recommend going there to begin with. If you're going to ANI, you really want a clear, concise, strong case when talking about personal attacks and civility. You don't really have that here. Its heated conversation, but nothing so bad as to need a block or anything. Sergecross73 msg me 18:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure you would still agree with me however that the user should have some sort of explanation by the administrators since he did not want to listen to me directly. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 18:53, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looking over his talk page with the various warnings and notifications would indicate he's well aware already, and is likely knowingly pushing the envelope. Someday, it'll likely get him blocked, but where we're at right now, he hasn't really pushed it that far. Sergecross73 msg me 19:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection

Can you please un-protect Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus, given that a consensus has been reached at this t/p thread.Regards! ~ Winged BladesGodric 13:23, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: My apologies but.... Let's wait at least one more day. This dispute has resulted in a total of 3 weeks of full protection being issued. I'd like to give the other editors just a little more time. Ping me again tomorrow if I forget. -- ferret (talk) 13:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm....~ Winged BladesGodric 15:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Winged Blades of Godric: Done earlier today, forgot to ping. -- ferret (talk) 23:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks:)~ Winged BladesGodric 03:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

protection of "list of European countries by average wage"

Dear Ferret, You have just protected "list of European countries by average wage". As for Central and Eastern European countries due to dynamic increase in monthly, quarterly wages and mainly for proper comparison with each other, it make sense to use the very last available data published by Statistical Offices. Please restore and use the wage data for December in case of Hungary as most of its neighboring countries (Ukraine, Romania, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) use the same period. Otherwise, the current information is misleading. It shows the past not the present not to mention that it is not possible to compare Hungary with its neighbors. At present it shows a difference, which does not exist. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attarte (talkcontribs) 16:34, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Attarte: Feel free to make an edit request on the talk page. Ensure you provide reliable sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inexplicable Barn Star Inexplicably Removed... by you...

I know neither why the gesture was made, nor why you acted to redact. Explain your edits to my talk page. Mavigogun (talk) 18:15, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mavigogun: Reverting edits by a sockpuppet. -- ferret (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

protection of "list of European countries by average wage" 2.0

Dear Ferret,

Reliable source can be seen on the page you protected: http://www.ksh.hu/docs/hun/xftp/gyor/ker/ker1712.html. „2017. decemberben a bruttó átlagkereset 327 700 forint volt, 13,5%-kal magasabb, mint egy évvel korábban.” In December2017 the average wage was 327 700 HUF, 13.5% higher than one year ago. It has always been seen there; however, at the moment the page uses data for the whole year (január-december) which wouldn't be a problem if all the Central and Eastern European countries used the same period. However, those countries, most of them use monthly data, a couple of them provide quarterly data. Only Slovakia uses data for the whole year; however, it is not provided by the Statistical Office which is… quite interesting, anyway. It would be useful to use recent data instead of data from the past taking into account the fact that as for Eastern and Central Europe there is a quite dynamic changes in wages. Of course, in January wages will be lower than in December, but it will happen in all countries in the region. The point is that Hungarian wages cannot be compared to the other countries in the region at the moment as most of them use the very last data while Hungary does not do so. There is a user, who are always mentioning propaganda when recent data (December) shows up in the page and she/he makes undo, which is probably a very fast and comfortable way of editing the page, but quite unfair. He did the same in case of Poland as for December. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attarte (talkcontribs) 23:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Attarte: Again, use the talk page of the article to make your requests. I have no interest in the content dispute beyond the fact that disruptive back and forth editing was occurring and needed protection to stop. -- ferret (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re DGoodwin

Hello, I was the user who had reported DGoodwin to AIV. I don't believe the user is technically socking, as their prior username User:CofCMAC was only softblocked(giving them the opportunity to register a new valid name) 331dot (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: The block was for promotion, the other note was just so anyone reviewing could see the past behavior of the other account. That is why I did not tag user page. -- ferret (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you are saying. My apologies, thanks for your reply. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Claude Giroux and the COI

Hello,

Thank for you for blocking the COI. I just have a question. They posted "it is disturbing to family members"[2] and that is why they wanted to content removed. I am wondering what Wiki policy is on this. Keep in mind; this content has been around since 2014, is sourced (I can even add more sources) so their comments about it being false are unwarranted, and it is worded in a neutral manner. The arrest doesn't seem to have affected his salary or his job so I am unsure if it is warranted to be removed under BLP policy. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:50, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Heavily reported in many reliable newspaper outlets, including his apology for the incident. Definitely not false. To be a bit blunt, if family is embarrassed or disturbed by it, they should take it up with him. Not a BLP violation, anymore than reporting any other arrest covered by reliable sources. -- ferret (talk) 00:53, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks. I just wanted to confirm. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Feret, I don't know if you or one of your talk page stalkers can look at this. Another IP is blanking parts of the arrest [3] deeming it false. I left them a message and a link to the talk page discussion [4] but it probably is the blocked COI (who is still blocked). HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Extended the block on WillyFont for block evasion, and range blocked the current IP set. Trying to avoid protection but let me know if they come back. -- ferret (talk) 20:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: F1F2F2

I've blocked that account. Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention. - Mailer Diablo 11:36, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Citations on Goblin Sword

Hello.

I believe you've added a tag to my article concerning the verifiably of my page.

I've added a few more citations. Please can you help find more sources. I am trying the best I can to keep the page on Wikipedia.

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 16:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CrayonS: See WP:VG/S for a list of vetted reliable sources for video games. Additionally, there is a Google Custom Search that will search these vetted sites for articles. -- ferret (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I've been checking that out. Thank you anyway. CrayonS (talk) 16:23, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Thank you for removing one of the tags. I believe the game is notable since it is a video game and I don't think you can really merge it in somewhere. However, it just needs more added content to it.

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 16:31, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CrayonS: You'll need to read WP:N. Video games are not automatically notable. The lack of a valid merge or redirect target would likely mean it gets deleted, if it were to be discussed. However, I simply tagged it to show concern. I have not submitted to to be discussed for deletion, so its not in any immediate danger. -- ferret (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferret Hello, I've briefly read it and will continue more on the Wikipedia notability page.

Thanks CrayonS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrayonS (talkcontribs) 16:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I am making more efforts towards improving the article.

Where is a good place to find help from contributors? Also, is my article good enough to have the tag(s) removed?

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 17:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

How do I know if an article is notable enough? I've put as much detail as possible and I think it is enough to establish a page. What do I need to do? Please help.

Thanks CrayonS. CrayonS (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CrayonS: Notability is not based on the state of the article or how much content there is. It has more to do with proving that the topic is notable enough to be included in the encyclopedia. This is demonstrated by how much coverage a topic has received. The issue you have is that this is a mobile game, with essentially nothing but 3 reviews (2 from publications that focus on mobile game releases) all published when the game was released (2014). Since then, there's been no continuing coverage, no indepth information or development stories. This suggests the game had no lasting impact, not even when it first released, and shows a lack of notability. Unless you can find a lot more reliable sources, you may want to focus on a new topic, as this one might not ever make the bar. -- ferret (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferret Hello. I've put a MetaScore citation in that might help quite well.

Pocketgamer and Toucharcade are quite good sources as well.

Does my article need more sources to prove of higher interest? Sure, Goblin Sword will never be Minecraft but I believe it has enough attention.

I'm quite new to Wikipedia by the way.

Thanks CrayonS (talk) 11:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Another thing, there are games like Super Hexagon that are articles here.

Anyway, I think Goblin Sword just needs more contributors. It needs significant improvements added anyway (the gameplay is still very unclear).

There are more than a few critics by the way.

I am planning to add more sources.

Thanks. CrayonS (talk) 12:09, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CrayonS: There's an argument known as WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Essentially, just because something else exists and seems to have the same issues, doesn't mean it should. It just means no one has gotten to it yet. Super Hexagon however is much more developed as an article, with considerably more sourcing. Keep in mind also secondary reliable sourcing is required to prove notability. Sources from the developer don't count, and not all reviews listed on sites like Metacritic are considered reliable. Many are explicitly considered unreliable. 148apps is considered a very weak source, and applenapps doesn't look reliable. Even if they were, you're still stuck at 4 reviews, from sites that explicitly review or list mobile apps, from 2014, so long lasting coverage is still not demonstrated. -- ferret (talk) 12:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I agree that two wrongs don't make a right.

I've improved the Goblin Sword article. It looks quite good now.

With sources, how are you judging them?

I am using the Google CSE and that seems to be working well. There are more than a few sources.

As for the review sites, they help establish the game is quite well known.

Sure, this game might not be as popular as what have you out there, such as Minecraft and other things. However, I think it is appropriate to keep.

In textbook, how many sources do you need to establish notability?

I think I need more contributors. How do you get them though?

To be quite honest, I really do care about the page and I'm desperate for it to stay.

Could you help me with my page please by the way? You are very welcome to contribute by adding new things and more sources.

Thanks. CrayonS (talk) 13:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Is a Google Translate of 4Gamer (a Japanese site) suitable for a source?

It's another source I have found that might be possible to add.

Thanks. CrayonS (talk) 14:01, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want more input, you might try posting to the WikiProject Video Game talk page, here. Ask if people would take a look at the article and suggest further sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe revoke talk page access, too

For [5]. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Typically check after a little while to see if necessary. Can't start off that way though, have to wait for them to continue. -- ferret (talk) 02:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I figured if they're blocked and the first talk page edit is to reconfigure another editor's name with malicious intent, the benefit of doubt is out the window. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And thank you for the blocks at Rockford U. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. -- ferret (talk) 02:54, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Curiosity

Just out of curiosity, (and I don't plan on arguing if I "don't like" your answer) why did you elect to fully protect the Billy Meier article? I saw that you deferred to Dlohcierekim on the level, but I was just curious as to why full protection occurred to you. Again, I'm not trying to pick an argument, just trying to get a handle on the thought process of an outside observer. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MPants at work: Both editors involved were close to gaining autoconfirmed, though they weren't quite there yet. In essence, I didn't expect semiprot to stop them long if at all. However, a lesser level is preferred in the end, so I deferred to Dlohcierekim since we could increase it if necessary (Dlohcierekim replied to RFPP that he had planned to defer to me) -- ferret (talk) 16:23, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I thought of that, but figured extended-confirmed protection would be the way to go. Just for the record, I would have been fine with full protection, in any case, as the page is fairly stable (which is my very mature and academic way of saying it was on the right version). I appreciate the quick answer! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:37, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@MPants at work: True enough, but the wording around ECP is still .... odd, with language about "If semiprot has failed" (which is a weird limitation). I may be taking too literal of a reading of that, I'll definitely give it higher thought in future cases. -- ferret (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo 3DS Page Edit

Hello,

I saw your message regarding my Nintendo 3DS page edits. I was unaware that the information was being removed by another user. When I clicked submit, the added info just disappeared with no explanation why after I clicked submit, and almost immediately as well, my apologies. However, please check the links I reported as they are legitimate articles from Nintendo, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techmaster12 (talkcontribs) 01:56, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Techmaster12: Whether or not the information is true isn't in dispute. Whether the information adds anything of value to the article is. Since your December edit request for the same, you've tried to add this five times now, and been declined or reverted by 3 different editors. Please stop. -- ferret (talk) 02:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

History of Pakistan template

Hello, Regarding your edit on this page, it appears you’ve not locked in the version that was the previous status quo prior to this edit, but instead locked the version to one being promoted as one derived from consensus, when such consensus was actually not reached. Thanks for your time! Willard84 (talk) 11:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Willard84: See Wikipedia:WRONGVERSION. Feel free to make an edit request for a template editor if you feel consensus is in your favor. -- ferret (talk) 11:47, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]