Ivanvector (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
:Just notifying you of [[:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Bring back Daz Simpson: NPA and ASPERSIONS]] as a courtesy since I mentioned you by name in the thread. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|talk]]) 06:17, 3 June 2019 (UTC) |
:Just notifying you of [[:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Bring back Daz Simpson: NPA and ASPERSIONS]] as a courtesy since I mentioned you by name in the thread. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|talk]]) 06:17, 3 June 2019 (UTC) |
||
::Thanks, {{ul|Marchjuly}}. For some reason I got your ping from ANI but no notifications about your messages here. Hmm. [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] (<sup>[[User talk:Ivanvector|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ivanvector|Edits]]</sub>) 11:57, 3 June 2019 (UTC) |
::Thanks, {{ul|Marchjuly}}. For some reason I got your ping from ANI but no notifications about your messages here. Hmm. [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] (<sup>[[User talk:Ivanvector|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ivanvector|Edits]]</sub>) 11:57, 3 June 2019 (UTC) |
||
:::I'm not sure what happened with the other notifications. Perhaps there's a bug or something happened on my end. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|talk]]) 21:19, 3 June 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:20, 3 June 2019
Stop
Stop deleting my request and protect Chuck E. Cheese (character)
- Learn how to write a proper request or stop disrupting the page. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:42, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
- Protect the page.
- Add your request at the BOTTOM of the list, not the top, give a reason why you think the page needs to be protected, and sign your request. There are instructions and examples in the blue box at the top of the page. You should have time to read it in the hour that the requests page is protected. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
- Protect the page.
Request For Protected Bepanah Pyaar article
I request you to have protected this article Bepanah Pyaar because this article is many IP user try to make unhelpful changes so I request you sir accept my request and protect this article at least 1 month, Thank you. Goodd-002 (chatme) 17:58, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Goodd-002: sorry, I am currently not participating administratively in any areas covered by active arbitration enforcement, as a protest. Please see WP:RFPP for instructions on how to add your protection request to the queue. Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:00, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
About reverting my edit on Jaiveer
Hi, You reverted Speedy Deletion, that's not why I've come here, the author of Jaiveer is creating single line articles and I don't think articles are within Wikipedia guidelines, That's, why I targeted the user and was tagging Author's articles you see creator's recent articles & his username, is also represented (News Paper) so please have a look at author's contributions as user has been continuously making one line stubs in Mainspace. WikiLover97 (talk) 17:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
- The best I would do is advise them to do it in the draft space. Although they're creating very short stubs, they're clearly referenced and accurate. They are certainly NOT nonsense nor pure vandalism. Please stop your disruptive tagging. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:37, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Prince Edward Island automobile ban
On 19 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Prince Edward Island automobile ban, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Canadian province of Prince Edward Island banned automobiles for more than a decade starting in 1908? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Prince Edward Island automobile ban. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Prince Edward Island automobile ban), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
— Maile (talk) 00:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring. Should the talk page history also be retrieved? Also, this entire issue seems to stem from the fact that when a new Documentation subpage (Template:…/doc
) is created, it explicitly states <!-- Please place categories where indicated at the bottom of this page and interwikis at Wikidata (see [[Wikipedia:Wikidata]]) -->
. Useddenim (talk) 15:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- I've restored the talk page history. It probably wasn't necessary, but it also won't hurt anything, and since you asked I went ahead. I'm not an expert on categories by any means but it seems to me that adding the category to the documentation page should have worked. I'll ask someone who knows better than I do. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Ivan, my guy, I'm bout to start swinging. So a user called Kvng requested permission to create this draft before some dickhead who apparently wouldn't know fashion-related notability if it sat on their face decided to erase the comment and reject the draft because they don't think (just that... they don't think) she has enough significant coverage–despite the fact that user Kvng pointed out 6 specific instances that show significant coverage in the article. He said quote :@Ivanvector: I am ready to accept this draft into mainspace based on significant coverage in multiple reliable sources ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]). It looks like this is locked down pretty tightly - I can't even create Draft talk:Cora Emmanuel. Can you loosen things up? ~Kvng (talk) 20:38, 17 May 2019 (UTC) The new "reviewer" thinks she hasn't been signed to enough agencies or some senseless vapidity like that to show notability when there is like 5 paragraphs of career information with citations for verification. I mean, does she have to fly? Cure the common cold? So what I'm requesting here is for you to just move the page yourself as that's what the previous reviewer asked before this troll got involved. It had been sitting there for months prior to this new incident. Thanks. Trillfendi (talk) 18:28, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- I don't know why but I didn't get Kvng's ping from the draft, but Scope creep clearly didn't actually review this, as it clearly had been accepted before the drive-by decline for bogus reasons. Trillfendi, even if the latest review was clearly incompetent, we have a policy against personal attacks. Please dial it back.
- I have reverted the draft to Kvng's review and restored Trillfendi's comment which Scope creep removed for some reason, and I have removed the blacklist entry blocking creation of the pages. Cora Emmanuel itself is create-protected at extended-confirmed level, so any of you should be able to create it (courtesy ping Airplaneman). Kvng, please complete your review and promote the article, I could do it but I would do it wrong. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- I did review it and I thought she didn't have coverage per WP:SIGCOV and still don't and I was planning to reject it totally, but thought it might be worth leaving it for a couple of weeks to see if sufficient sourcing could be added. I object to being called dickhead when the process was followed exactly. I would suggest a third uninvolved editor who is the Afc group take a look at it, otherwise it is heading Afd. scope_creepTalk 20:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Scope creep: what is the problem with me finishing my review? I have not been involved in the kerfuffle. You are, of course, welcome to nominate it for deletion after I accept it. ~Kvng (talk) 20:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- None as far as I see. I hadn't see you for days. Crack on. scope_creepTalk 20:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- Running it to AfD after it's accepted is a good approach if you think notability requirements aren't met. I don't like to see drafts languish, and I'm also no expert on notability when it comes to fashion models, but AfD should give you a fairly definitive answer one way or the other. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:33, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- None as far as I see. I hadn't see you for days. Crack on. scope_creepTalk 20:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Scope creep: what is the problem with me finishing my review? I have not been involved in the kerfuffle. You are, of course, welcome to nominate it for deletion after I accept it. ~Kvng (talk) 20:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- I did review it and I thought she didn't have coverage per WP:SIGCOV and still don't and I was planning to reject it totally, but thought it might be worth leaving it for a couple of weeks to see if sufficient sourcing could be added. I object to being called dickhead when the process was followed exactly. I would suggest a third uninvolved editor who is the Afc group take a look at it, otherwise it is heading Afd. scope_creepTalk 20:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Checkuser blocks?
I note that you have placed several blocks that are marked as "checkuser" blocks using {{checkuserblock-wide}} and similar templates. It does not appear to me taht you hold the "checkuser" permission. Therefore I am confused. The one-year block of 195.99.33.0/24 is of particular interest to me. Can you help me understand what's going on? UninvitedCompany 17:12, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- That block was made on April 20, 2019. Ivanvector voluntarily gave up his CU rights on May 3 (see his userpage).--Bbb23 (talk) 17:24, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you. Sorry for the noise. UninvitedCompany 17:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi UninvitedCompany! I responded to your email to the functionaries list, that is unless it got bounced. I can give you more information about that block but not on-wiki. I emailed the checkusers list but that one I don't know if I still have access to, nor if you do. As for the permission, I think you might have checked the local rights log, while checkuser is one that is logged globally. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:42, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. That's all I need for now. UninvitedCompany 17:54, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll stop emailing you :) Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:54, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. That's all I need for now. UninvitedCompany 17:54, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi UninvitedCompany! I responded to your email to the functionaries list, that is unless it got bounced. I can give you more information about that block but not on-wiki. I emailed the checkusers list but that one I don't know if I still have access to, nor if you do. As for the permission, I think you might have checked the local rights log, while checkuser is one that is logged globally. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:42, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Page watchers
On ANI, you mentioned how many editors were watching a specific article. How can you tell? (I think it can be useful for some articles to know if it's being watched by others, but don't know how to find that info.) Schazjmd (talk) 15:42, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
- Assuming you're on desktop, in the menu at the left there's a link called "page information", which shows you some technical info about the page you're on including how many editors have the page on their watchlist. I don't know how accurate it is, though, and you can't tell from that who is watching. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:06, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
- (ironically a page watcher) There's no reason to suspect the count is inaccurate. However, if the number of watchers falls below 30, only administrators see the exact number. Non-admin users see something like "fewer than 30".--Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
- Ahh, you're right, I forgot about that. I wonder what the reason for that is? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- See WP:W (Number of watchers).--Bbb23 (talk) 02:14, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- I suppose part of the idea is to keep potential vandals from being able to tell if a page is unwatched or close to it. Unfortunately, as I've discovered, there are plenty of unwatched pages where vandalism will stick around for long periods. Admins are trusted users, so there's no concern there. Enigmamsg 17:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- See WP:W (Number of watchers).--Bbb23 (talk) 02:14, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- Ahh, you're right, I forgot about that. I wonder what the reason for that is? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- (ironically a page watcher) There's no reason to suspect the count is inaccurate. However, if the number of watchers falls below 30, only administrators see the exact number. Non-admin users see something like "fewer than 30".--Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
2 problems
Hi, brother,
This category must be deleted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:CS_Oltchim_R%C3%A2mnicu_V%C3%A2lcea_players because it will stay blank since the club now is renamed and we have this category instead: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:SCM_R%C3%A2mnicu_V%C3%A2lcea_(handball)_players.
Also please delete this page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SCM_R%C3%A2mnicu_V%C3%A2lcea_(women%27s_handball)&redirect=no since there were two different clubs until April 2019. It's the page of the club formed in 2013, but now this club is part of the CS Oltchim Râmnicu Vâlcea aka SCM Râmnicu Vâlcea (handball) (it acquired the record and will continue to be the old club under a new name).
Thanks! Tiramisucuzmeura (Talk/Edits) 18:19, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Tiramisucuzmeura, thanks for your edits and your message. We have strict rules about speedy deletion, I can't delete the page if you tag it with the wrong kind of deletion. You can see a list of the tags available WP:CSD here. If the reason you want to delete the page doesn't fall under one of these definitions, then you need to start a deletion discussion; see WP:DELETION.
- I redirected the first category to the team's new name. We do that in case someone else writes an article about someone who played for the team before it was renamed, to make sure that they use the right category. I see that you already did that for the second category.
- When you want to create a link to a page you don't need to paste the full URL, just enclose the page title in two square brackets, like this:
[[pineapple]]
renders as pineapple. If the page is one that has special handling in the software, like categories do, you have to add a colon (:) to the start of the link, like this:[[:Category:SCM Râmnicu Vâlcea (handball) players]]
creates Category:SCM Râmnicu Vâlcea (handball) players. - I hope that helps! Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:42, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Updating LTA pages for new characteristic IP range?
After my semi-apology to Sro23, I finally got my report on the apparent home IP of WP:Long-term abuse/Fangusu filed at AIV (and actioned later). But while tagging on a question at ANI it finally clicked that the most recent IP was not on the list of characteristic IPs (172.56.xxx.xxx and 172.58.xxx.xxx). Very close (old) though (new).
That's the prep. The question is, what is the bar to meet to add a new characteristic range? Oh, and physical location needs to be updated to add Sacramento area. That could be done now given usage last several months (CalUniv at Sacramento). Shenme (talk) 00:07, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Shenme! I've been following Fangusu for many years now, longer than I can actually remember, and I wrote most of the LTA page originally. The ranges I listed in the infobox were those that were active at the time. There's not really a "bar", we just add info if we think it will be useful for future investigations. When it comes to IP ranges, "close" is not really a thing, two IPs are either in the same subnet or they're not. The 172.56 and .58 addresses are inside 172.32.0.0/11 (or 172.32.0.0 to 172.63.255.255) which is a very large T-Mobile range, while 172.85.185.67 is outside that range and assigned to a different ISP, one I don't recognize actually but I'm not up to date on all the various small American service providers. It's entirely coincidence that the similar numbers also happen to be physically located near each other.
- According to the tool we most often use, that address is within 172.85.128.0/17 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)), which is small enough to be useful in terms of investigations. Having a look at the contributions from that range, I'd say that Fangusu has been using 172.85.185.67, and also Special:Contributions/172.85.176.34 and Special:Contributions//172.85.204.30, but that's as far back as I've looked. So yeah, I say list it.
- As for location, Sacramento is probably accurate but we don't need to be terribly specific. IP geolocation is pretty rough in some parts of the United States anyway. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:04, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Discussion at User talk:Bbb23#User:Bring back Daz Sampson again
You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Bbb23#User:Bring back Daz Sampson again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:25, 2 June 2019 (UTC)Template:Z48
- Hi Ivanvector. If you're watching Bbb23's user talk and this link is unnecessary, then my apologies. I'm only posting it as a courtesy since you were one of the administrators who posted in support of this editor being unblocked. I'm not questioning the unblock, only expressing concern that the editor is starting to repeat behavior which played some part in their being blocked in the first place. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:30, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- Just notifying you of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Bring back Daz Simpson: NPA and ASPERSIONS as a courtesy since I mentioned you by name in the thread. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:17, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, Marchjuly. For some reason I got your ping from ANI but no notifications about your messages here. Hmm. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:57, 3 June 2019 (UTC)