This user is an edit filter manager on the English Wikipedia.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has CheckUser privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user is a member of the Wikimedia volunteer response team.

User talk:Elockid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
E L O C K I D
Fairytale folder home.png
             
Nuvola apps chat.png
               
Nuvola apps kate.png
               
Crystal Clear app kservices.png
               
Crystal Clear app file-manager.png
               
Crystal Clear filesystem folder html.png
               
Crystal 128 mail.png
Home               Talk Page                 Contributions                 My Stats                 Archives                 Subpages                 Email
E L O C K I D ' S U S E R P A G E


Archives
Button Icon BlueSky.svg 2009
Button Icon BlueSky.svg 2010
Button Icon BlueSky.svg 2011
Button Icon BlueSky.svg 2012
   
Button Icon BlueSky.svg 2013
Button Icon BlueSky.svg 2014
Button Icon BlueSky.svg 2015
 
Vista-file-manager (blue).png

EFM[edit]

Hi Elockid - thought I'd ask what my chances are of getting them EFM right? I've been active over at the false positives page and do look over the requested filters every now and then, and have a pretty decent understanding of regex. Any thoughts? Thanks -- samtar whisper 15:27, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Looking back at your request from September, I'd say that there's been improvement and that you're well on your way. Probably though to ensure that no one else opposes your request, I'd follow MusikAnimal's advice and also work on WP:EF/R. For more advanced permissions, not having a need would be seen as hat collecting. So be sure to also put the areas you'd be willing to work on like handling new filter requests, improving current filters, etc. ElockidHappy holidays! 18:18, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice Elockid, I'll see if my regex-fu is up to scratch with the current requests Face-smile.svg Happy New Years! -- samtar whisper 19:43, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Happy New Years to you too! ElockidHappy holidays! 21:28, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
@Elockid: Sorry to bother you again. I've had a look, and drafted up some regex for one, but it seems regex doesn't play as big a part as it seems? Could you point me in the best direction to learn about the rest of the edit filter coding? Thanks again Face-smile.svg -- samtar whisper 19:23, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) mw:Extension:AbuseFilter/Rules_format is the place to go for all the info on available conditions. Regex does play a fairly big part though, many filters are simply 'we know a vandal writes this phrase every edit' and writing some regex to catch that text. Sam Walton (talk) 19:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Pretty much what Sam said. The link that Sam gave is very useful. ElockidHappy holidays! 23:34, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Elockid[edit]

Thanks! ElockidHappy holidays! 13:51, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit filter notice[edit]

Hi Elockid. Per a recent guideline RfC, if a filter is switched to disallow a notice should now be posted to WP:EFN (preferably beforehand). I've done that for 743; the RfC didn't get huge input so no worries about not noticing/remembering! Sam Walton (talk) 17:47, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Haven't seen that RfC yet. Thanks for the heads up. ElockidHappy holidays! 17:50, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Laurent Tillie[edit]

Hi, you protected Laurent Tillie from creation. Can you please move Laurent Tillie (volleyball) to Laurent Tillie. Thank you! Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 22:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. ElockidHappy holidays! 23:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi again :), Thanks for previous time. I have the same question again, can you please move Draft:Evgeny Sivozhelez to Evgeny Sivozhelez. Thank you Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 18:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
It's me again, please move also Draft:Artem Volvich, to Artem Volvich Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 16:15, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done and Yes check.svg Done. Elockid Message me 20:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

question[edit]

How do you archive pages? because I want to clean up my talk page but I am not sure if its something only admins can do or? Saturn star (talk) 06:00, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Archiving is something that everyone can do. It's really simple. There are two ways archive, you can either do it manually or automatically.
To do it manually, you do following:
1) Highlight the sections that you want to archive.
2) Right click or press Ctrl+X (Windows) or Command+X (Mac)
3) If you haven't created an archive page, you can create one and call it something like Archive 1. Paste the sections on the archive page.
4) At the very top, place {{archive}}
5) On your talk page, create a link to your archives. You can use a template like Template:Archive banner.
If you want to do it automatically, you can have a bot do it. There's several to choose from here. For example, if you want to use ClueBot III, just follow the instructions at User:ClueBot III#How to archive your page. That's pretty much it. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask. Elockid Message me 14:00, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

On the occasion of the troll's Hitler section...[edit]

Hi Elockid, a general question based on your deletion (and priors) of this section: Does WP:Deny command deletion of such sections in their entirety, even including constructive contributions of users without any cause for a complaint? So is it wrong to try an adjusted version without the troll's content like this and if so, why? --KnightMove (talk) 19:53, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Even though there are constructive comments there, the responses acknowledges them. This in turn would defeat the purpose of denying them recognition since acknowledgement is still a form of encouragement. I wouldn't say that it's necessarily wrong to do an adjusted version per se, but when dealing with trolls, it's generally best practice to remove anything that indicate that we want them here. Elockid Message me 20:07, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Well... if this is consensus here, ok. --KnightMove (talk) 20:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Rv[edit]

Hi, why gave no summary? Is he blocked? Thx. Edit: Ah ok i see he got blocked today. prokaryotes (talk) 16:28, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

That's a banned troll who has been disrupting this encyclopedia for some time now. Elockid Message me 16:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Possible block target[edit]

I'm not sure if this is the one you were targeting, but based on their talk page request you might want to extend the scope of the block. Tiggerjay (talk) 04:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks and range widened. Elockid Message me 04:40, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

More trouble from probable sockpuppets of a blocked IP[edit]

Elockid, I see that you blocked a series of IP addresses including 178.73.210.88 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 178.73.210.76 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), and 178.73.210.113 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) in December. Presumably the same person has carrying on the disruptive discussion at Talk:Earthquake prediction as 77.238.217.1 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 77.238.218.228 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 77.238.213.29 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). RockMagnetist(talk) 21:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I blocked the 178 IP since it was a webhost. In general, webhosts host proxies or other anonymizing services. A blocked user was abusing that range which is why I blocked it. It doesn't appear that the blocked user is the same person as the 178 or 77 IP. I can't find any evidence right now that suggests the 77 IP is hosting any proxy services. Elockid Message me 13:05, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't know about the proxy service, but I don't see how they could be different users. Their only contributions are to continue the discussion from the same viewpoint on the same talk page. If you could tell me the userid of the blocked user, I could test this on the sockpuppet site. RockMagnetist(talk) 20:50, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Apologies for the late response. What I meant was that there was a blocked user who created accounts using the the 178 IP. The blocked user who was creating the accounts has no relation to the person editing Earthquake prediction. They only created accounts and used those accounts to disrupt the project. The person editing Earthquake prediction did not prompt the block and is likely just unfortunate collateral. Elockid Message me 21:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
O.k., thanks. RockMagnetist(talk) 21:18, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Bean[edit]

Vandalism still occurs. Extend PC? --George Ho (talk) 08:21, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Apologies for the late response. Elockid Message me 21:17, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Endorsement of SPI[edit]

I need you to do an immediate checkuser check on this case https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Anhinhhhd&action=edit&section=1. The users are getting out of control. CLCStudent (talk) 17:44, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we can't do much in the way of blocks or preventing more accounts. I thought there was an edit filter to prevent these edits. I'll try to find it. Elockid Message me 17:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Req Semi-Protect[edit]

Hi, Elockid.

Thanks for the reversions on my talk page. Would you consider semi-protecting it for a few days or a week? I find the messages less annoying than the notifications and the time wasted. BTW, in general, I prefer such comments just be left, not reverted, but I certainly didn't mind it in this case.

Thanks,

μηδείς (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Alrighty, noted for the future. I'll semi your talk page as soon as I get on my main account. ElofoSho (talk) 01:13, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, ElofoSho, I appreciate it, and would love to know what in the world your username derives from. I am guessing Hebrew, although I have only studied isiZulu and various Indo-European languages. μηδείς (talk) 02:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Ok, Ilokano and Tagalog? Nevertheless, ElofoSho and Elockid still strike me as Hebraic, for some odd reason. μηδείς (talk) 03:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
It's Philippine based. I never would have thought that my username would sound Hebraic. Ironically, my best friends are Jewish and probably being friends for so long, I might have unconsciously made my names as they are now. Elockid Message me 04:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk page revocation[edit]

You should revoke talk page access for user:2601:803:c402:95f0:dd8e:bb07:dc49:f585. 2602:306:3357:BA0:5DD5:8A07:3172:13EB (talk) 14:28, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm given them a note. If though they have repeated this behavior, I can revoke it for you. Elockid Message me 14:35, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

195.177.126.149[edit]

Who is the primary account for 195.177.126.149? You blocked him/her for a year but they have no talkpage. Curro2 (talk) 00:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I didn't look to see if there was an account editing on the IP. I just noticed the IP was an open proxy and blocked it per WP:No open proxies. At this point, without having done any further investigation, I don't know who's using that address. Elockid Message me 01:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

see the talk for 166.170.31.143[edit]

I am using a public WiFi because of an AT&T IP range block. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.153.172.185 (talkcontribs)

This range has had a long history of abuse from more than one user. Several long-term disruptive users have been using the range along with other vandals/disruptive users. This is clearly evident by the block log of the range. I am getting the impression that you think the range blocks all ATT customers. That is not the case here. The block would have been much wider and encompassed a number of other ranges if it did. Actually, a smaller percentage of ATT's overall customers use that range. Yes it may be an inconvenience, but again due to the long-term disruption from this range, a block is necessary. Elockid Message me 16:38, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

ACC[edit]

Your presence is requested at acc:#164218! :) -- Cheers, Riley 04:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

  • Follow up ping. :) -- Cheers, Riley 17:25, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
  • This is a request only you can handle, as blocking admin. -- Cheers, Riley 02:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Mail-message-new.svg
    Hello, Elockid. 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.
    -- Cheers, Riley 20:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

deletion and lock of michael felgate[edit]

why was this article deleted and locked please can you sort out this article its much needed thanks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Felgate

I have restored the article after a request at REFUND. It was previously deleted at AfD because the Cypriot First Division was not considered fully professional, but it is now accepted in the list at WP:FPL, so the player meets WP:NFOOTBALL. JohnCD (talk)

Feeding the Trolls[edit]

Hello Elockid, I was wondering if Feeding the Trolls is an acceptable practice for Wikipedia users to use against vandals? This tactic for confronting suspected vandals (including sockputtets) has been frequently exhibited by User:Darkknight2149, which has only stirred the pot and have lead to an increase of serious attacks on his talk page. A clear example of a post by his can be seen by his recent post at the bottom of his talkpage User talk:Darkknight2149. Furthermore, he has specifically threatened users by use of personal messages (even though some changes made by some IPs are constructive) and can't be reasoned with easily. Is his method of dealing with users appropriate for the wikipedia community?

PS: From the edit history of his talkpage, can you cross out those disruptive edits made by some angry users/sockpuppets (like those made by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.114.92.231 and other related users) as they are very inappropriate. Thanks! 63.92.232.41 (talk) 22:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Good evening, @User:63.92.232.41. I wanted to clarify that warning users of the potential consequences of their actions is not "feeding the trolls". I have mostly been unresponsive to the personal attacks. It was only when they kept going that I warned the user that, if it happened again, I would begin a sock investigation. The user did it again, so I'm currently preparing for that Sock investigation.
The whole situation began when I warned the IP-hopping user to stop edit warring on The Empire Strikes Back. The user (who has been blocked for personal attacks in the past) decided to leave me a message saying something along the lines of "Don't mess with my changes, fucker". I reported it, that particular account was blocked for a week, and now the user is using their resources to send non-stop personal attacks.
An example of "feeding the trolls" would be if someone vandalised a page by saying something like "Boba Fett is gay!", and I responded with something like "well, so are you!" when reverting it. I hope this clarified a few things. DarkKnight2149 22:44, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Suspicious activity[edit]

@User:63.92.232.41 After doing some checking, I find it curious that your only contribution to this site (at least with this IP) is this message. I also find it curious that you "coincidentally" left a message about feeding the trolls, something that was mentioned in many of the personal attacks. I have to ask, are you that user? DarkKnight2149 23:20, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

IP 72.64.6.79 and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bigshowandkane64/Archive[edit]

Hi Elockid, I'm not sure if this is of any interest to you, but here goes: I was at Simple Wikipedia when I noticed IP 72.64.6.79 (New Hampshire; ISP: Fairpoint) had left a pissy note on my talk page, seemingly grousing about something that happened at the English Wikipedia. I checked him out at English, and it looks like the IP is part of a range that you've blocked multiple times.

When I investigated what his beef was with me, I found this note at Simple where he complains to another disruptive user that he didn't like the way I changed "actress" to gender neutral "actor" at April Winchell and that I allegedly threatened to "smack [his] head in the 21st century".

This led me to this reversion of someone who turned out to be a CU confirmed sock of Bigshowandkane64, which will be of some interest to me going forward. (I know that privacy issues don't allow you to confirm any CU link). Anyhow, the same edits were made here from another New Hampshire IP (ISP: Comcast). So I'm bringing it to your attention in case you think another range block is warranted. If not, no biggie. Thanks, take care, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

ACC CU Backlog[edit]

Howdy, ACC has as a CU backlog of 23+ requests as of 20:28, 10 March 2016 (UTC). Any help would be appreciated! -- Cheers, Riley 20:28, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

unblock ip range request[edit]

Hello,

the IPv6 range 2001:41D0:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 is blocked according to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BlockList.

Can you please whitelist those ipv6 ranges that are specific to OVH ISP activities (http://www.ovhtelecom.fr) :

- 2001:41d0:70::/44 - 2001:41d0:fc00::/38

Regards, Florent

YGM[edit]

YGM. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

ISP 74.102.30.143[edit]

Hello, this ISP editor is currently not only vandalizing (occasionally) but actively removing maintenance tags from articles (often 3 to 5 a day). I would have simply reported this to Vandalism but I noticed that ISP 24.102.72.189 created 74.102.30.143's talk page shortly before that ISP was blocked. It seems to me that there's some sockpuppetry going on here especially when that ISP is also linked with Pokestarfan. You might have some clue...this is the first time I've tried to deal with someone like this. I wasn't sure if there's enough for the sockpuppet report. Thanks. Pjefts (talk) 23:08, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Unblock request on hold[edit]

I have noticed that there is an unblock request on hold at User talk:The Newspaper, where the admin placing it on hold tried to ping you, several weeks ago. Evidently he didn't know that pings placed inside unblock requests in that way don't work. Would you like to look at the request? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

An IP range block that affects my editing[edit]

Hi Elockid, probably due to someone vandalizing from an anonymous IP, you and or User:Vituzzu have disabled me from contributing to Wikipedia from my laptop. Can you look into this problem and override me by a specific IP (hoping that it is consistently assigned by the provider - I do not know that!) or, better, by allowing me to edit through my account anywhere while in this IP range. I appreciate the fact that you are fighting vandalism on Wikipedia! I will add the details right below. gidonb (talk) 10:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Your IP address is in a range which has been blocked on all wikis. The block was made by Vituzzu (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is leaky colo + open proxy at 188.166.232.125. Start of block: 16:14, 14 January 2016. Expiration of block: 16:14, 14 January 2021.

You can contact Vituzzu to discuss the block. You cannot use the "Email this user" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences and you have not been blocked from using it. Your current IP address is 188.166.90.42, and the blocked range is 188.166.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make.

You are currently unable to edit Wikipedia.You are still able to view pages, but you are not currently able to edit, move, or create them. Editing from 188.166.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by Elockid for the following reason(s):

Hi Gidonb. That IP range is allocated to Digital Ocean which is a known webhost. Webhosts are blocked because the tend to be hosts for open proxies or other anonymizing services. They've also been a major source of disruption across multiple projects, which is why the IP range is globally blocked. It looks like you may be editing through an anonymizing service. Is it possible to disable that or is it absolutely necessary? Elockid Message me 11:07, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
OK, I had disabled an app on my laptop and could edit again. Thank you for making sense out of the process! gidonb (talk) 15:43, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back![edit]

Longtime anon, created an account just to welcome you back! You've done a lot of good work here and I was half-afraid you were gone for good! We don't have enough good admins here, so it's good to see one of them return. RCBK5 (talk) 17:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Don't worry, if I ever decide to leave permanently, I'll make an announcement. Elockid Message me 22:26, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For you great work, for years...thanks!! Huldra (talk)
No problem. Always glad to help! Elockid Message me 02:03, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

A matter you were well acquianted with[edit]

Hello Elockid. I did some digging, and I noticed you were well acquianted with the Georgian sockmaster ~"Satt2". Well, he once again returned spamming the same frantic edits like he always used to. I know this has been some time ago for you, but could you perhaps take a look at the new SPI case I made for his newest sock and state your opinion? Perhaps taking a look at your own comments of back in the day will refresh a thing or two, might you have forgotten some matters. Bests and thanks - LouisAragon (talk) 02:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll take a good look at tomorrow/Sunday. Good thing I still have all their technical evidence. Elockid Message me 02:18, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Great. Thanks a lot. I don't think this matter will take much time. Btw, was User:Olivia Winfield CU blocked or blocked based on behavioral evidence? Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 13:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
That's based on behavioral evidence (non-CU block). The account you reported is a  Confirmed sock. Elockid Message me 22:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Matt Edmondson[edit]

We need immediate protection of Matt Edmondson due to heavy IP vandalism that is nonstop. CLCStudent (talk) 15:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Looks like Widr (talk · contribs) beat me too it. Elockid Message me 15:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Dewan357[edit]

I think Tcnj.best.college is a reincarnation of Dewan357. It's a really old account that has been dormant for four years now and missed in earlier checks. The intersection between this college in NJ and the theory related to India is a standard tell tale. I think Kww and I missed this account in our blocks of that time because he hadn't edited in the India space then. Alerting you as he often has a mass account creation strategy and you may want to keep an eye on this. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 11:43, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll definitely keep an eye on this. Elockid Message me 12:13, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Request for Unprotection of Jamaica[edit]

While I admittedly wasn't around when you protected Jamaica from "excessive vandalism," I believe that five years of semi-protection is long enough to protect a page from vandalism. Semi-protection was set to indefinite back in January 2011 on that page. -- Gestrid (talk) 04:45, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Given the history, I'm a bit reluctant to fully unprotect the page. I've decreased the protection to allow all users to be able to edit the page. But for now though, I'm going to put on PC and will remove it if the level of disruption is low. Elockid Message me 03:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, it doesn't look like the five years of semi-protection has changed anything. There have been seven-ish attempts (albeit over the course of about three weeks) at vandalism since you changed it to pending changes. I suggest raising it to semi-protection again. -- Gestrid (talk) 01:35, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

ANI Mention[edit]

Elockid, you were mentioned | over at ANI . This seems to be in reference to | this page for protection request. I'm not at all sure this user is legitimate, but I can't prove it myself. KoshVorlon 15:44, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Note that the IP editor who posted that has been blocked for block evasion. The post (which was in Spanish, anyway) has been reverted. The post is viewable at this diff. -- Gestrid (talk) 17:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)That's just Vote (X) doing his thing. I reverted it a few times, and sure it will appear again before the day's through. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:23, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Whoa. That's one huge SPI. -- Gestrid (talk) 17:52, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

OVH once again[edit]

I just became aware that the 2001:41d0::/32 range no longer is attributed to SAS but to OVH-DSL. Could you please check whether that rangeblock is still necessary? Thanks in advance, Huon (talk) 16:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (It's related to OVH) Yamla (talk) 14:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

A week plus later - is this rangeblock needed still? There is an unblock waiting regarding this. SQLQuery me! 05:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Oh, damn. I unblocked without checking ANI. -- Luk talk 12:20, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Deleted Page[edit]

Dear Sir, In 2010, I created a page Titled Tejinder Singh Sodhi, which was deleted by your good-self. Mr Sodhi is a well known award winning journalist based in Jammu and Kashmir presently working with Press Trust of India. He has lot many achievements to his credit and he has become a role model for young and aspiring journalists in the state and the country and I do feel that he should be there on wikipedia. It is requested that the page may be allowed on wikipedia.

regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.5.4.96 (talk) 14:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If Tejinder Singh Sodhi is notable (in Wikipedia's special sense of the word), as you say, please provide evidence of that. The page has been deleted four times (three of which were in July 2010, two of which were on two consecutive days) by three different administrators. To say he is notable is not enough. We at Wikipedia need at least one or two reliable sources that say specifically how he is a notable person. Not only that, but the article (were it to be recreated or undeleted, both of which are unlikely) itself would need to explain how he is notable. -- Gestrid (talk) 15:17, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Note: It appears there's currently a draft of the deleted page. It was last edited in March. -- Gestrid (talk) 15:28, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Unblocked OVH range[edit]

Hi,

someone I know is being affected by your block. As I understand it, part of this range is used by a French ISP (which is owned by the french Webhost OVH, but is supposed to be using different ranges for hosting and ISP purposes). 2001:41d0:fc00::/38 is the ISP according to ripe.net. Can you please double-check (and maybe narrow the range)? Cheers, -- Luk talk 12:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Unblocked me forever and help me[edit]

hi Elockid, i am in a conflict about 6 months ago with a selfish user blocked (unfair). i dont know many laws of wikipedia at that time. ok? after block i creat a other acount that is true in wiki law. but same user report me for vandalism and sockpupet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(Personal enmity). all of my edit is useful and for improve or create new article in sport events. but about 3 months all of my useful edit , delete by vandalism! or cockpupet!!!!!!!! i make a mistake but shouldnt prevent my activity for allllllllllllllllllll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i have one confirm acount by you and correct activity in wiki .dont block me by admins . you can check and see my edits and is vandal block me but is not vandal , i have a right active in wiki and not block. any person may "make a mistake" but Shouldnt always annoyed by admins and other users. i want and like edit in wiki and please help me. as soon as first my useful and correct edit , admins block me without reasonable evidence , only sockpupet and previous acount. i want a confim acount that not block for previous and unactive and blocked acount. wiki is for all but some users is selfish and for his/her monopoly delete and block other user.Tinakatrina (talk) 19:54, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hello, Tinakatrina. To me, it sounds like the reason your second account was blocked is block evasion. Actually, if your original account is still blocked, creating another account (the one you're using now) is also block evasion. If your first account is still blocked, I suggest you login to it and request an unblock using the {{unblock}} template and posting it to your talk page. Use it like this: {{unblock|''Your reason here'' ~~~~)}}. If you can't post to your talk page, follow the instructions on your original account's talk page to send a request to OTRS. -- Gestrid (talk) 20:24, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Abuse filters[edit]

Hi, because of an irritating AbuseFilter bug, we (Kaldari, MusikAnimal and I) are going to do an update next week that will affect some of your filters. We hope we'll fix all affected filters ourselves, but we're of course grateful if you want to help us. The issue is explained here; the current plan is here. In any case, we wanted you to be aware what's happening, and you're very welcome to help out of course. I'm sending you an email with more details. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 12:17, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Please exempt 2001:8d8:1fe::/47 from block 2001:8d8::/32[edit]

Hi Elockid,

you've created a block for 2001:8d8::/32, listing the web host 1and1's whole european IPv6 address space as "open proxy or web host". Out of that block, 2001:8d8:1fe::/47 is dedicated for corporate use by 1and1 employee workstations and doesn't fit the blocking criteria, but creates some colleteral damage. You may also contact User_talk:Rischmueller - he's a network engineer at 1and1, has been very active on the IPv6 article in german wikipedia and can also validate/approve my words.

Best, istalix Istalix (talk) 20:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, Elockid. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)