User talk:Callanecc

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 92.25.4.173 (talk) at 14:38, 14 October 2014 (→‎John Galea: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User talk:Callanecc/Header


You've got mail!

Hello, Callanecc. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Blake Gripling (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of Piggy Tales episodes

Hi. Please restore List of Piggy Tales episodes. Yes, the article was started by a banned user, but I've improved it and added sources, so the original reason for delete is not valid any more. Thanks.--Carniolus (talk) 16:16, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

The rotating-circle-within-rotating-circle view of Chakravyuha has been promoted without any military basis or even without consultation with any military officers.

Most of the historical battles, fought from the days of bows and arrows, are studied even today. Not only Napoleon but also right up to Romes war with Hannibal - the time when the weaponry was similar to that used in Mahabharata.

I request you to study these battles and battle formations.

Also, if you are interested in factual assessment, please try making such formations with toy weapons. If you are further interested, please add a horse or two and see how impracticable it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.70.20.14 (talk) 16:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You need to go to the talk page and explain the change you want to make, making sure that you cite reliable sources which support the change you want to make. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 16:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protect

Hey, would you be able to semi-protect Ray Allen again? Since the last semi-protection expired, there have been no useful or constructive edits by IPs or new users. There is also a reported sports transaction involving him that has not been made official, and IPs and new users are constantly editing that i.e. further violations of BLP. DaHuzyBru (talk) 18:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help - rules interpretation?

Hey there - a question for you pertaining to Module:Iraqi insurgency detailed map: One user, 83.117.189.21, has made 11 unsourced edits this afternoon, seen here. I reverted the initial batch, and summarized "unsourced edit - please provide sources for this edit". The unsourced edits continue, and actually have increased in volume. If I revert again, I break 1RR, but the edits don't even have summaries, let alone sources. I don't know how to proceed. Obviously I don't want to break 1RR, but it's just irking me to sit back and watch a mess be made. Any feedback or assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:59, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Boredwhytekid: The 1RR (in this instance) doesn't apply to IPs, see WP:GS/SCW. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:03, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring User:Exec8's image uploads?

On behalf of the Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines, may I request the restoration of User:Exec8's image uploads now that their account as been cleared of sockpuppet issues? I can do the restoration as an admin myself but I think it would be a bit conflict of interest as Exec8 and I have collaborated with each other in the wiki for years. --Lenticel (talk) 05:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:35, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'll go ahead and notify the Tambayan. --Lenticel (talk) 06:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the aid dude, as always! I trust him too, so it's a shame he got caught up in a sockpuppetry case which he wouldn't honestly do. Blake Gripling (talk) 07:09, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah the evidence was there but on another look there are some aspects which didn't fit. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:12, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the change. Honestly, I haven't done any edits for a month now and just read these comments only today. --Exec8 (talk) 12:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Karis_McLarty

Hello, please can you delete the comment of nha trang at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Karis_McLarty

the comment is offensive to me. he said karis is an energatic self promoter. that means karis wrote all the source and the wiki article? It is not true. Warn that user to be civil while commenting. The wiki article and the discussion can be seen by people from all over the world. It is harasment for us. Delete the whole article or such comments please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.47.231 (talk) 10:32, 8 October 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

Your Instant Reversion of My Edits to "Portuguese Profanity"

Callanecc,

I am amazed at your almost instant rejection of the entire edit I made to the relevant section of the "Portuguese profanity" article, particularly because the only reason you give is "because it didn’t appear constructive to me". I would very much like you to let me know in what specific ways was my edit not "constructive".

As a native English speaker, and a professional English teacher, it was clear to me that some, at least, of the section was written by people whose English is not especially fluent, and I was editing the section to ensure that the expression was more fluent and accurate, as well as clearing up some imprecise information. My entire edit was constructive in purpose.

I look forward to your response.

211.31.213.200 (talk) 13:27, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few problems as far as I can see:
  • We generally try and avoid subjective terms such as "slur" as it has multiple meanings, instead we use the words which you replaced
  • We try and use internal links (for example with Casper the Friendly Ghost) so that people who aren't familiar with it can read about it
  • The names of Countries are almost always capitalised (that is American people)
  • Changing how "Chinese or Asian" were referred to changed the meaning (that is removing the word descent)
  • No offense intended, but there are other areas of the expression used which don't make as much sense as what was there before (such as "a very curse word") and where you've changed a word to an incorrect spelling (eg associated to associeted).
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:44, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Callanecc,

I am absolutely bewildered by your comments above. All the weaknesses you list are those of the *original* version which I edited out! If you actually look at what I did, you will see that I removed most of the uses of the word "slur" (for the reason you mention, as well as unnecessary repetition) and replaced it with "insulting", "derogatory", "pejorative" and "offensive".

I also corrected the existing spelling in numerous places and certainly did not introduce any new misspellings. (It's possible I missed one or two.)

I was the one who included a number of internal links, including the one to Casper the Friendly Ghost, for the very reason you mention.

I am very annoyed by your apparent misreading of what I did, and I strongly request that your revert to my edit, which fixes the very problems you've identified in your dot points.

Tullyvallin (talk) 00:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely apologise I don't know what I was looking at. I've reverted my edit on the page. Again my apologies. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore bikel

I strongly believe your block of Theodore bikel is mistaken. The POV tag has been discussed quite a bit on Twitter and other parts of social media. A Twitter user that tweeted several times about the POV tag edit-war as it was happening has the exact account name there as the Wikipedia account. Seems this person saw the edit war as it was happening and jumped into the dispute using the exact same account name. It may be the editor's real name as well, in which case a false accusation of sock-puppetry should be withdrawn promptly.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 18:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, are you gonna look into that block?--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 05:35, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Was on Special:Unblock/Theodorebikel when I got your message just then. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:36, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 05:43, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

School asking students to add incorrect information

Susie0susie (talk · contribs) has said she has been asked to add incorrect information, as have another 100 students at her school. I'm guessing that CU's can't check to see if she is using a school account in order to identify and contact the school, but no harm in asking. Dougweller (talk) 09:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly a justifiable reason to check, but personally I'd rather wait to see if there is another account or it was just an overstatement. Having said that I wouldn't mind if you wanted to make a quick CU request at WP:SPI for another opinion. In any case might be worth leaving a message on the user's talk page asking their teacher to contact us. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:47, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Quick CU request done, will add note to talk page. Dougweller (talk) 11:45, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, trying to break the new DS alert coding

Hi, FYI please see some testing I did and if you agree there's an issue, to whom should we address the matter? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:34, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adnarkey case is missing the archive link

Hi Callanecc. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adnarkey which you closed recently. It's missing the usual link to the case's archive. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's there now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Iselilja (talk) 17:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Scholarlyarticles SPI case

[1] You what this without action? Think you missed a word. Also, I think this edit is a clear violation of WP:SCRUTINY given the RFC/U. As is, "A number of editors have raised the question as to which version of the these two versions are libelous" (i.e., her) --NeilN talk to me 03:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding of the RFC/U (please correct me if I'm wrong as it's not an area I'm familar with) is that it wasn't closed with a statement that Scholarlyarticles should avoid the article and was mainly about their actions overall. So they weren't under any restrictions or current discussion so they haven't violated the requirements of WP:Clean start. The only thing they haven't done is disclosed the previous account, which we can ask them to do with a talk page message. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CLEANSTART says, "...new account must avoid editing patterns or behaviors that would allow other users to recognize and identify the account." But disclosing and editing with only one account is good enough however she won't really get the benefits of a clean start. --NeilN talk to me 03:33, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've tagged both accounts as alternates of each other which is the practice once a clean start has been identified. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Language on the GG article

Just went through the talk page, ALL mentions of the word fuck are by Ryulong haha, oh there's one by TaraInDC telling someone to fuck off Loganmac (talk) 11:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And I asked him to stop, what's your point? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:23, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS user right

Hi, I just noticed you changed my user rights to "OTRS members". I'm curious about what effect this has. Is it just a designation similar to slapping a category tag on my user page, or is it actually a "right" in the sense of a switch that allows me to do something?

I could have added myself to that user right, but I didn't even realize it existed until I was notified that you flipped the switch. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:44, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The user group only has the read right so it doesn't allow you to do anything. At this stage, it exists only for Special:AbuseFilter/635 which logs OTRS templates placed by non-OTRS permission queue members. I've just been adding it to accounts which have been in listed in the log but which have access to the permissions queue. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:09, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An issue at BLPN needs the attention of an admin

A BLPN was closed prior to 7 days of review, and the consensus so far was that it was a BLP violation. Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Investigative_Project_on_Terrorism I notified the closer User_talk:Lithistman on his talk page. I'm not sure what else to do. This issue must be resolved - the controversy has gone on for nearly 7 months. Thank you. Atsme☯Consult 19:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DS alert

Could you please look at this edit? As I recall, the last time I alerted an editor to WP:ARBPIA, before I committed my edit, it allowed me to check if any alerts had previously been left. Here, that didn't happen. Also, when I looked at the edit filter log with this user name, I didn't see my alert added to the log. Could you explain what's going on and if I did something wrong? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted my alert because Dougweller advised me he'd already had one. I should've seen it as it was very close to mine, but my technical questions still remain when you have a moment.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:26, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I had a similar problem when I left this one, it let me save on first try. I thought maybe it was because the user had several earlier DS warnings in different areas. Dreadstar ☥ 21:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Discussing the same issue with NewsAndEventsGuy here at the moment. Since AGK is away I'll bring it up on the clerks mailing list to check it'll do what I want it to do. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:41, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FYI for anyone, Callanec linked to a midpoint in my debug testing notes, which begin here. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:13, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More recently, I used the template again, and the familiar pink box came up as it used to do. FWIW, I was using the topic code blp. However, it reported that another user had alerted twice, but the two entries were identical (date and time), and the other user had alerted only once.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What are the names of the users so I can have a look at the page histories? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:00, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Europefan / GLGerman

Hi Callanecc,

we have currently high acticity of this troll in German Wikipedia. I have checked the IP addresses that he used during the past six months and calculated these ranges:

It looks like the provider (Vodafone) arbitrarily assigns addresses from these five ranges, so to mute this user, I think you need to block them all, or at least No 2 to 5. Currently only the second and third are blocked. No 4 and 5 have been blocked in the past. --PM3 (talk) 00:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info PM3, I'll keep it in mind. Europefan hasn't used any of those ranges (apart from the two which are currently blocked) for a couple months so I'm going to hold off on blocking them and wait to see what happens next. But thank you for calculating them! Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Look at this: [2] I am sure that this is an Eurofan block, but it's way too large. You may reduce it to the two ranges that I calculated, that will set free 27,648 unneccessarily blocked IPs. --PM3 (talk) 06:37, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well that explains why there are no recent edits. I'll have a closer look and check with Salvio giuliano in case there is someone else he's targeting. Thanks again, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

TheTruth

TheTruth200 now has a sock. User:Thetruth300. Can you please indef them both as Vandalism only? VVikingTalkEdits 09:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cathal Pendred

Hi Just wondering why you deleted the Wikipedia entry for Cathal Pendred? Cathal is a huge star in Ireland, a current UFC star on a 2-0 run and former Cage Warriors Welterweight champion and I feel With the growth of MMA in Ireland there is a considerable interest in this fighter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard-88 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Galea

Hi I am just wondering if the John Galea article could be re looked at . there are more major sources from Attitude Magazine , NiJI Magazine and GTimes that have featured John in the last two weeks as well as many others. However it is blocked. - http://attitude.co.uk/rising-star-john-galea-announces-new-single-and-ep/

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Callanecc&oldid=629581724"