This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 35

←

Archive 39

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

→

Archive 45

Hi there,

I was reviewing an unblock request for this user and noted that you blocked it for abusing multiple accounts. However, I note that there are no contributions (live or deleted) for the account and no filter log entries. Could you help shed some light on the blocking rationale? Thanks, Mike V • Talk 18:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

It's obviously a troll account, aimed at RickinBaltimore. We have these different variations all the time. Widr ( talk) 18:37, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

More admirers? I'm touched. RickinBaltimore ( talk) 19:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. In that case it would be best if you used a block rationale for the username, rather than a sockpuppetry block in the future. Mike V • Talk 19:52, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Hotdogs in a wine bottle has requested a ban in this diff. Could you oblige them? Thanks :) - BilCat ( talk) 23:55, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) @ BilCat: Done by Oshwah just now. — Gestrid ( talk) 02:22, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just posting that when we edit conflicted. I'm glad someone was able to fulfill their "request". - BilCat ( talk) 02:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Account Rockypeter has been used only for remove speedy tags from Ketops13's recent posts you just deleted, and [1] after I restored the tags. Thanks, Wikishovel ( talk) 13:41, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

| Do you ever sleep? You always seem online._ CyanoTex ( talk) 08:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

No. I don't sleep. Ever. Widr ( talk) 08:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

| Are you sure you're not an owl disguised as a human? Because owls don't seem to be awake at day._ CyanoTex ( talk) 08:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

(Lurker) do you mean a night owl? :)/I'm certainly one! - BilCat ( talk) 08:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

| Night owls, yeah._ CyanoTex ( talk) 09:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

May want to take a peek at Melanielopez0214. The line between intentional vandalism and paranoid psychotic rantings may be a thin one, but user seems fairly evidently not here to build an encyclopedia. TimothyJosephWood 18:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank, I have not seen Applicants with fewer than 200 mainspace edits. ;-) Work with rollback is quick and easy ;-). -- OJJ ( talk) 08:32, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

This user seems to be trolling User SwisterTwister. see:

• 162.253.131.28 contributions [2]
• 162.253.131.29 contributions [3]
• 162.253.131.166 contributions [4]

Short rangeblock may be in order until they get bored? Cheers, Gricehead ( talk) 16:23, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I recall Widr saying he doesn't perform rangeblocks. *cough* KrakatoaKatie *cough*? :) Dat Guy ^Talk _Contribs 16:36, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't, but the three IPs are blocked. Widr ( talk) 16:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

There's a bit of collateral damage in that range, and since the individuals are blocked, I'd hold on the range block for now. Katie ^talk 17:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Another has recently been blocked. However, it has died down a bit. Dat Guy ^Talk _Contribs 17:06, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Might want to have a look here: [5]. RickinBaltimore ( talk) 18:00, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

And here. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 13:53, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

187.74.243.11 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS). I see you blocked this guy's last IP sock, so here's another. What an odd form of disruptive editing... —  PinkAmpers & ^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 14:16, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Indeed. Thanks. Widr ( talk) 14:18, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Heyo! Saw you just deleted Hogan Frick (AGAIN)... Would you mind protecting the page as well? Thanks!! -- Zackmann08 ( ^{Talk to me}/ _{What I been doing}) 16:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Omg, thank you for locking the page. It was getting so exhausting trying to revert edits every 5 minutes. I was trying to figure out how to lock it down, but I couldn't figure it out. Again, thank you so much!

ThePersonFrom2 ( talk) 20:54, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

No problem. WP:RFPP is usually the place to request for protection. Widr ( talk) 20:56, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Widr. I noticed that you recently blocked one of the IPs used by the Sao Paolo vandal who adds and then deletes spaces to random articles. Within the last few hours, he's been operating from this address: 179.228.13.73 (as seen here). NewYorkActuary ( talk) 07:10, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Blocked, thanks. Widr ( talk) 07:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Thanks for jumping in! You might want to look into User:Jstritzinger2 which seems to be the same editor under a different handle. ronaz ^Talk! 19:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

My computer was being used by my nephew who must have edited the section on alexander graham bell because i forgot to sign out, i also saw tabs of wikipedia open when he gave me back the computer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.158.2.4 ( talk) 19:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Studying chem and i was very confused for a sec. Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.100.56.83 ( talk) 02:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

And it looks like the creator of Aaron Jhinkoo made a draft logged off as well (interesting its a different IP then the one I warned earlier for removing the speedy-but to be fair IP's are tricky and get changed.) Wgolf ( talk) 05:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for swiftly addressing the vandalism/BLP issues at George Soros.

Safehaven86 ( talk) 05:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Dude. Your wiki on karah parshad is totally incorrect. I was able to post correct information on it and you have now re posted your mis information. Why would you do that? Are you not familiar with Sikh religious customs and traditions?? Blessed food is an intergal part of the Sikh faith. Id advise you to gain some knowledge on the subject before making edits my dear friend. I have been fortunate enough to grow up in a Sikh family and learned at a young age how to make karah parshad. Please p post correct info Jungblud ( talk) 09:50, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) The nice thing about Wikipedia is that you don't need to be knowledgeable about a subject to take part in editing. In Wikipedia, verifiability means that anyone using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it, furthermore it's also considered good form not to personally attack other editors... ronaz ^Talk! 10:15, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Another ( talk page stalker) Unfortunately, the information currently in that article, which is quite a mishmash, is itself totally unsourced. Perhaps Jungblud can help improve the article by adding some published reliable sources, or at least providing them on the article's talk page so that other editors can access them to improve the article. - BilCat ( talk) 10:21, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Widr. He's back, this time as 200.206.160.67 (as seen here). By the way, if there is another place I should be reporting these things, please let me know. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 03:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

You can report them to WP:AIV. Widr ( talk) 04:39, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Please note that I have reverted you edit at Camdean because it removed relevant infromation. Now I know that you are an administrator and the edit is very old, but this is unacceptable from such an esteemed editor. Moxhay ( Talk * Contribs) 22:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Chances are that it will get reverted again, as it is a blatant copyright violation. Widr ( talk) 22:52, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

How is it a copyright violation? I must warn you that if you revert back to the previous version of the article without proving to me that there is any sort of copyright violation, I have no choice but to report you to ANI due to your removal of information. Moxhay ( Talk * Contribs) 22:56, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

The "Education" section is a word-to-word copyvio, the rest is unsourced. Have fun at ANI. I have a feeling it wouldn't be your first visit there. Widr ( talk) 23:06, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

FYI, Ki113rWasp messaged me on my talk page ( diffs) asking for assistance, which I provided. I don't know if this will factor into your decision to leave the user blocked, but I figured I'd leave you a message so that you're aware. Hope you're having a good Friday! Cheers -- ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't see any message from Ki113rWasp on your talk page? Widr ( talk) 23:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Sooooo.... yeahhh... I'm a moron. I mixed Ki113rWasp up with Trueteller2016; I was keeping an eye on Ki113rWasp and also Trueteller2016, and I glanced at the wrong tab and thought your block on Ki113rWasp was on Trueteller2016. Forgive my idiot mistake. It's been a busy day for me :-P ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

No worries! Widr ( talk) 23:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Just in time for Halloween - wouldn't you know it. After a couple weeks of peace this IP 107.77.210.70 ( talk · contribs) is the latest one being used by the problematic person. Cheers. MarnetteD| Talk 16:35, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Blocked. Widr ( talk) 16:39, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

As ever many thanks. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday. MarnetteD| Talk 16:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

You may wish to revoke talk page access.-- Cahk ( talk) 07:50, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I was reviewing this editor's contributions at the same time as you. I'm surprised that you decided to block despite not a single warning on the talk page. Do you know something I don't? Okay that page was not suitable but who's to say they couldn't become a valuable editor in the future? Talk about biting newcomers ... Personally I don't think editors should be blocked without warning except in rare cases. — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 08:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I've also noticed that you sometimes forget to leave a block notice on user's talk pages, like in this case. Can you please take care to follow this part of the blocking policy? — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 08:05, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

If you feel that the block wasn't justified, you are free to unblock at your own discretion, but spammish accounts are usually blocked on sight. I rarely leave templated block messages nowadays; they will see the message when they try to edit. Widr ( talk) 08:24, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry but that is not an acceptable attitude. The blocking policy says "Administrators should notify users when blocking them by leaving a message on their user talk page." If you want to change the policy you can start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy, but until that time you need to follow the established policy. So could you please leave a message for the users you have recently blocked? — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 08:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

For this particular case I propose to leave User:Campus News Kenya soft-blocked as a potential username violation. But I will unblock and warn User:Matengo123 about multiple accounts and inappropriate pages. Are you okay with that? — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 08:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you are free to unblock at your own discretion. As for not leaving block messages, it's a common thing, and I could name some admins that never leave those. I haven't seen you at AIV until recently, so I'm not surprised that you haven't noticed this before. Widr ( talk) 08:51, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not talking about other admins; this discussion is about your actions. Do you agree to adhere to the blocking policy in future? — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 12:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Sure. However, you should realize that in some situations common sense tells us that it's best not to leave any messages. This wasn't one of those cases, though, so I'll give you credit for that. Widr ( talk) 14:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay I'm happy to leave it there. And thanks for all your hard work against vandalism. You seem to be online about 20 hours a day! — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 08:59, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Why did you block this IP for three years? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:20, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Because the IP returned to vandalize straight after the previous two year block expired. Widr ( talk) 16:26, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

The IP only made three edits in a fortnight. Cracking a sledgehammer with a nut a bit, don't you think? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Not really. Years of abuse easily justify the escalating blocks. Widr ( talk) 16:46, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Please take a look a the history of Westerbork transit camp. It may be a good idea to protect the article and check for contribs from that range (which may or may not be blockable). ((( The Quixotic Potato))) ( talk) 19:41, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Protected for a week. That should help. Widr ( talk) 19:48, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. ((( The Quixotic Potato))) ( talk) 00:16, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, can I interest you in this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:00, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, will have a look later. Widr ( talk) 12:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Looking for what the standard is here. Reviewing pending changes I came across an ip user who added the category "Jewish" without sourcing and found they had doen so for a number of pages, including a person who wasn't Jewish. In fact, that was the only kind of edit this ip has ever done. I added appropriate caution warnings to the talk page, plus a talk page note pointing out the trend. An admin came by and added an additional comment to my note.

I just noticed that the ipuser deleted my note and the admin's comment. They didn't delete the warnings. Is this kosher? Should I reinstate them? Here's the history. What's the policy? Thanks as always! Chris vLS ( talk) 16:02, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Generally users are free to remove messages from their own talk pages. See WP:OWNTALK. This means that the user has read the message. Widr ( talk) 16:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! Chris vLS ( talk) 16:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

For being so darn fast!

ronaz ^Talk! 16:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Widr ( talk) 16:23, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:99.194.52.254 reported by User:Rms125a@hotmail.com (Result: )
• 99.194.52.254 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hello Widr. This is about an IP you previously blocked, "for persistent addition of unsourced content". At first glance I can't tell what is going on. He did remove his edit warring notice and he never talks, so we can't give him much credit for good faith. There certainly are some unsourced changes, and some people do undo his edits. He does not seem to go past two reverts on any one article. Perhaps you can recognize a continuation of whatever pattern you noticed previously and can tell if a new block is appropriate. Which I certainly wouldn't object to. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 20:28, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider blocking them now, since their most recent edits haven't been reverted and they have also stopped editing several hours ago. To me, this looks more like a content dispute than actual edit warring. Widr ( talk) 20:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

You blocked Special:Contributions/208.70.120.21 yesterday for 2 years; just an FYI that they continue to vandalise through the block using Special:Contributions/208.70.120.22. Keri ( talk) 16:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, blocked. Widr ( talk) 16:16, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Widr,

I was in processing of editing my own page in succession for about three hours. I have a number of technical references on location services which need to be published. Ronaz(who works for the Danish government) kept hacking my page over and over again in the middle of my edits. I provided links to the supporting material and everything is cross referenced so I don't understand what the problem is?

The new page is self explanatory and includes references to US appellate courts which are admissable anywhere in the world. Can you please tell me why you deleted the page? My colleague stewart did the baseline work. And I think Ronaz needs to be terminated from the site, as he has nothing to do with my page. I have no business with the Dutch government and am not offering services there. Therefore he should be muted.

Thanks, John (jstritzinger2). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstritzinger2 ( talk • contribs) 15:31, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

It is not recommended that you create articles about yourself or your business; please see WP:AUTOBIO and also WP:NOTABILITY. Instead, you should wait until someone else without conflict of interest writes about you. Insulting other users will not help your case. Widr ( talk) 16:45, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) Lol I'm a hacker that works for the Danish government... that's the best one I ever heard on Wikipedia! ronaz ^Talk! 16:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Widr for blocking the persistent IP vandal and for semi-protecting the TV character bio, Robert Sugden. Any chance the same protection level and duration can be placed on the characters spouse, Aaron Livesy. Both characters are prominent in a long-running dramatic storyline. And it is looking evident these IP vandal edits are fans who are "overjoyed" about the characters finally getting engaged in the TV drama. Here in the UK, both characters have been nicknamed Robron by the fans - and the current storyline is only going to increase vandalism edits over the next couple of weeks. Cheers! And keep up the good work! Wes Mouse  ^Talk 19:06, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Done. Widr ( talk) 19:08, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

How is an IP that has vandalized Wikipedia repeatedly since 2009 "Stale" and not worth a block?

I am genuinely confused by the bureaucracy of this website. Uncontested ( talk) 10:18, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

There are clear instructions when you report users at AIV. Please follow those instructions. Widr ( talk) 10:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Just a quick head's up, I increased this IP's block to 72 hours. If they're planning to do something over the weekend, it's probably a good idea to make the block last for that duration. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:42, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Fine by me. Widr ( talk) 10:47, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Widr, did you extend 66derfav's block because of User:General Izatio? Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 14:50, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that was it. Widr ( talk) 14:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

• User_talk:Marianna251#Pending_changes_reviewer

Please do check this ( Talk:Physicist#Content dispute) because I find this wikipedian will use rights granted for WP:NOTHERE especially for behaviors like "Dishonest and gaming behaviors" and "Major or irreconcilable conflict of attitude or intention" - with Physicist article this is what has been done. Also consider the fact that I am requesting this from an insult received without any provocation or because the user thought this could be done, so look with fresh eyes on the situation and do what requires to be done for preventing future unconstructive incidents that could affect goodwill of the project. Additionally even this request was refactored by KGirlTrucker81 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Widr&diff=747875814&oldid=747875650). It is hard to guess under what policy this has been done or were considered as a sanctioned action atleast that from an admin's talk page. 117.215.194.133 ( talk) 20:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.99.37.49 ( talk)

Thanks for uploading File:Gloria Estefan - Always Tomorrow.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 02:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)