User talk:KrakatoaKatie/Archive 31

AN3/Voremph
I've posted a response to your decision here. Could you reconsider your decision please. As explained in my response, I find it difficult to understand your rationale that the fourth diff wasn't a revert for the purposes of 3RR. But more than that, I really don't understand your rationale for full page protection. Voremph was trying to force through a change to the article through his 4 reverts/edits. I only reverted once and UCaetano only reverted twice. I did not revert him again and left his edit in place when I reported him to AN3. UCaetano had not reverted since earlier in the day. Other than from Voremph, where was the threat of edit-warring that required full protection coming from? If you believe that Voremph's fourth edit wasn't a revert and he wasn't edit-warring, then, by that estimation, no one was edit-warring at all! DeCausa (talk) 09:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, please note this update to my response. There is absolutely nothing "personal" going on here - at least from my side. DeCausa (talk) 09:24, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I would also appreciate it if you would take a look at the thread on this in the article talk page (Talk:Iran) where the user's behaviour has become increasingly disruptive over the course of today. DeCausa (talk) 21:34, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hello and thank you for your edits. I take on board your comment that the IP vandal 202.137.241.195 did not warrant any action being taken as the nine previous cautions given on his or her talk page were insufficient unless the IP user vandalized after a level 4 warning.

However, with regard to your earlier point for me to not report such vandalism unless there is a level 4 warning, would you nevertheless agree that each admin's decision is personal and an admin may indeed decide to take a look at the long-term picture to see if there is clear evidence of long-term vandalism taking place, which may not have actually triggered a level 4 warning but which nevertheless indicates a pattern of long-term vandalism.

If you decide not to take any action against somebody with numerous cautions over a long-term basis, including recent cautions given in October 2015, then that is absolutely your right to make that decision and one that I fully respect.

However, the point I would make is that other admin do sometimes look upon things differently, as each decision is personal by each admin. And I did note that another admin appeared to agree with my analysis of long-term vandalism by issuing a 3 month block against the IP user, despite the vandal not making any further edits after I reported the issue to admin.

My contributions to the AIV thread were of course purely intended to attempt to reduce long-term vandalism, whilst at the same time respecting each decision that any admin chooses to make.

The 3 month block which has now been issued to the IP vandal demonstrates that admin each take their own personal decision based on what they believe the evidence to be. Hopefully we can continue to both fully respect each other's contributions in the desire to reduce long-term vandalism. Regards, Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 02:29, 29 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Welp. Normally I wouldn't say anything to something like this ridiculous attempt at a victory lap, but I've had a bit of a day, so what the hell – let's dance.
 * It's one thing to come here to ask something like, "Why didn't you block the IP/user I reported?" I'm always happy to explain any action or lack of action on my part, and I would have been happy to go into more detail with you if you had asked. It's another thing entirely to try and bait an admin into either questioning the actions of another admin or starting a wheel war (never gonna happen with me).
 * Therefore, the point I would make is that you don't 'fully respect my decision' not to block the IP, since you decided to come all the way over here and call me out on it after decided to block (his block is fine – I simply think that if you're going to talk about someone, you should do it with their knowledge instead of whispering 'another admin').
 * Since you're here and your comment clearly indicates you want some kind of response, here's some advice, so you don't dig yourself deeper into the hole you've managed to make: stop getting your feelings hurt when an AIV report or RFPP or any other request for admin action is declined for whatever reason, and stop going onto someone's talk page to call them out for doing/not doing the things you don't like/like. It's unbecoming and it's definitely not "kind." Katietalk 00:54, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid you have completely misinterpreted the points I was making. It's unfortunate, but that's life. Sometimes when there are just words on a computer screen and not the usual visual and audio forms of communication such as tone of voice and body language, words can sometimes get misinterpreted in the wrong way. My entire ethos is based on collaboration, politeness and civility and working with others in a respectful way to make Wikipedia an improved project with reliable sources that people can have confidence in and a reduction in the vandalism that regrettably spoils many articles. I certainly have no desire at all to bait anybody. It is simply not something that I would ever want to do and I have no desire to be critical of others or "call out" any admin. I respect everybody's individual decisions. It's unfortunate that you got the wrong impression. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 03:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Block
User:68.230.10.40 is still removing content from pages despite several warnings. Sorry for your loss as well.-- Will C  15:17, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I've taken care of it. --Neil N  talk to me 15:21, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks -- Will C  19:41, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015: The results
WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is. All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. , a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to. Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:


 * wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 330 featured pictures in the final round.
 * wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 160 did you knows in the final round (310 in all rounds).
 * wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for 26 featured articles in all rounds.
 * wins the prize for fourth place
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize and the FL prize for 11 featured lists.
 * wins the most prizes: a final 8 prize, the GA prize for 41 good articles, and the topic prize for a 13-article good topic and an 8-article featured topic, both in round 3.
 * wins the news prize for the most news articles in round 3.

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

, and  18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

JSTOR
Hi Katie, you should have received an email with a link to a Google form to complete - could you please either do so or email me if you did not receive it? Because there are more applicants than available accounts, not responding could result in your slot being passed to a waiting editor - please feel free to re-apply later if that happens. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Intifada
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Intifada. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

My actions at Metrojet Flight 9268
Hi KrakatoaKatie. I would be interested in your take on Administrators' noticeboard. --John (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

WP:PERM
Hey! Per WP:PERM/R, I wasn't sure if you knew that Huggle requires rollback. It's arguably the most powerful of the semi-automated tools, or at least can cause the most damage if misused. Just a friendly note :) Hope you are doing well, sorry to hear of your recent loss. My condolences and best wishes &mdash;  MusikAnimal  talk  21:34, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind thoughts. Never used Huggle, but I did use Twinkle way back in the day, and it doesn't require rollback and it gives you options as well. Honestly, all rollback is is a little link that says 'rollback' in the diff and the edit history. Twinkle does the same thing except it doesn't let you do it from the page history (AFAIK). I kept the 'rollback' option of Twinkle enabled for years after I got my mop, though I don't anymore. To be clear, I'm not opposed to giving you rollback in a month or so if you have some solid reports to AIV in the meantime. Thanks again. :-) Katietalk 21:47, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Katie, this message was from me, MusikAnimal... :) I was pointing out how you said in your deline of Chevvin's request that, where Huggle does not apply as it requires rollback. Nonetheless I'm sure Chevvin appreciates the further explanation you've made here. Sorry for the confusion! &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  02:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for clarifying, and for your kindness. My head isn't where it should be sometimes these days. But I'll get there. :-) Katietalk 02:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks and questions about my unblock
KrakatoaKatie, I am the user previously known as Againstdisinformation. I have noted that you supported my unblock and I woukd like to express my gratitude as well as my condolences for the loss you have recently suffered. I am no longer young and I have, not so long ago, lost the one person who gave meaning to my life, so that I can feel empathy. Setting these personal considerations aside, I have two questions that I hope you will have the kindness to answer. The first one concerns the pictures of Victoria Nuland on my talk page. You stated on AN that "That photo thing was atrocious". It is true that it was in poor taste, but the most relevant fact is that they were placed there by another editor. I was only guilty of replying to that editor that I found them funny and then proceed to forget about them. How would you react if I were to place them on your talk page and you were subsequently indefinitely blocked for failing to remove them? Why was that editor never asked a single question? Why did she never confirm that I had never asked for these images? Surely, it must be a greater offence to place them on someone else's page than merely receiving them without ever having asked for them. Where is Justice? The second question concerns my username. I chose it, not to "irritate" anyone, but rather as a statement of principle, making clear to everyone the task I had assigned myself. For example, ridding Wikipedia of groundless innuendos made by some editors about political figures they dislike. Such as: X was an opponent of Y, X was murdered on Y's birthday therefore, either Y ordered the murder or else, it was a present to him. I had already stated numerous times that I wanted to change that username, since I had come to think it was an ill-advised choice I had made on the spur of the moment. Whence, since I was freely stating that I wished to do so, came the necessity to impose the change on me as a humiliating condition for my unblock? I hope that you will not take offence, but I have the unpleasant feeling that my human dignity has been trampled, and this is not an easy thing to swallow for an old man. Γνῶθι σεαυτόν (talk) 21:42, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * If you wanted to be unblocked for some kind of vengeance over having your dignity trampled, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but your quest isn't going to be successful. unblocked you so you could contribute to the encyclopedia. That means writing articles. Stay away from the talk page drama and stop trying to make a statement of principle. Listen, I'm probably as old as you are, and I can get along here just fine when people insult me (and admins get the worst of it). Grow a thicker skin or disengage. That's my advice. Katietalk 18:34, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Let me cite Bernie Sanders: "people 'are sick of hearing about your damn Victoria Nuland pictures".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  18:41, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * KrakatoaKatie, I am not seeking any kind of "vengeance", and I want this to be absolutely clear. I would appreciate it if people did not attribute lightly such contemptible feelings to me. Had I been seeking revenge, I would have brought the case to ANI. I just want to know why Toddy1 was never asked any question, when it seems it was the obvious thing to do. As I told you, I am grateful to you and to for supporting my unblock. If you find anything wrong with my editing, please let me know with a gentle voice. Almost anything can be obtained from me in this way, while addressing me in an overbearing tone achieves generally nothing. As I told you, I am no longer young and I appreciate polite exchanges of ideas, not conflict as some editors have suggested. As for writing articles, I have been doing that as an I.P. for a long time. Writing a scientific article under the username "Againstdisinformation" would have been ludicrous. I chose that username only after reading articles on current affairs which were less than neutral, some of them containing outright fallacies. Regards.

Please comment on Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Rollback
Hello. I did heed advice to sign up for the CVU, but guess what? My trainer went inactive. Also, please take a look at the user's edits at Abu Qatada. Since I didn't have a proper template, I mistakenly chose the one most related to the issue. He was blanking sections because he didn't find the source reliable, which it was.The StormCatcher (talk) 06:02, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the CVU people aren't exactly active these days. Basically, with a couple of months of contributions to AIV, we'll reconsider. Rollback is granted for counter-vandalism work only, so do counter-vandalism work. :-) Katietalk 18:27, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

IRC cloak request
Confirmation of request. Katietalk 17:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Sound advice
Thanks for this sound advice, duly noted and acted upon. Jeppiz (talk) 19:08, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

John lackey signed with the Chicago cubs he's no longer a free agent. As well as Zack Grienke signed with Arizona D'Backs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.0.92.49 (talk) 01:45, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm a serious baseball fan. I heard the Greinke rumors when they first started, but the team has to confirm it before it can be added to the page. Guys fail physicals, deals fall through, stuff happens. Katietalk 01:49, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Block ?
How can you block an editor like me? with 17.000 edits in 6 months !! No one on Wikipedia has so many edits in this short period !--Alexiulian25 (talk) 15:20, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Check also what Eldumpo did to so many articles, he never add a word, just delete !! Like this Wikipedia will run out of aticles !--Alexiulian25 (talk) 15:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

It is not possible, you have to implement a rule for this, at list a period of warning, every editor to know that he has to improve his work, not to come back on Wikipedia and see all your work or other people work ruined because of an editor like Eldumpo !!--Alexiulian25 (talk) 15:24, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * You've received the required warnings. Nobody cares about how many edits you've made in however much time. They care that you stop attacking other editors. Don't do it again. Katietalk 15:25, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, I understand about me, what are you going to say to Eldumpo ? He provoked me, he deleted many many things on Wikipedia, check his history, he just deletes, no improving, it is this normal behaviour ?--Alexiulian25 (talk) 15:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * He isn't making personal attacks. You are. Katietalk 15:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The number of edits are irrelevant especially since all you do is clogg up article history with 50 edits a day on the same article instead of making fewer but bigger edits. Your real "edit count" would probably be 10% of your number. And as Katie says, it is not about the number it is the very poor behaviour. Qed237&#160;(talk) 15:59, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This is the final straw, Alexiulian25 continues to insult Eldumpo in his native language here Google translation here. This is crossing the line. JMHamo (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Just Dropping By
Hi Katie! Just dropping by to say hello...I'm not sure if you remember butttt for a couple of months in early 2011 you were my admin coach until I had a little mishap (5 years ago, now???). It does not feel like 5 years...anyway, hope all is well! I've been on-and-off wiki since then, participating where I feel needed. Good to see you still around! We need solid contributors like yourself. Anyhow, have a nice holiday! T ofutwitch11  (T ALK ) 17:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Rollback request on PERM
Hi Katie. I see that CatcherStorm has applied for rollback again on Requests for permissions/Rollback. I declined the first request, and you declined the second one. However, he incorrectly claimed that he now has 1700 mainspace edits (he actually has about 650) and also seems to insinuate that he has finished CVUA training, which I see no evidence of. (I did some research, and he has completed some stages of training, but I see no official certification from his trainer that he has completed the entire program.) Finally, he states that he asked administrator Anthony Bradbury if he should apply for rollback, and he states that Anthony gave the go-ahead. However, I looked at the actual discussion on Anthony's talk page (the "Should I apply for rollback now?" thread at the bottom), and he actually did not. In fact, he told CatcherStorm to wait for another couple of weeks before applying again. I was also rather unsettled by the wording of his last request, since he seems to be very focused on accumulating rights, so that he can move toward his "ultimate goal of becoming an administrator." Anyway, I wanted to ask you what your opinion on the matter is, since you declined his last request just two weeks ago. (This is his third request in less than a month!) Biblio  worm  19:01, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I saw that one, and left it alone precisely for this reason, so somebody else could look at it. Is he the one who 'desperately' needed rollback? I can't remember. I don't think he has enough AIV work, and I told him to do counter-vandalism for a couple of months right here on this page just a week ago. Canvassing really turns me off. Let's ask and  what they think because CatcherStorm doesn't want to know what I think right now. Katietalk 20:54, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Clearly not ready, which I think we can all agree on. I don't like to be harsh, so I tried not to be. Feel free to chime in if you have more to add. Best &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  21:43, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
I have replied to that Favonian thing. Qwertyxp2000 (talk &#124; contribs) 19:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Reverting edits on an iOS device
Hi,

I was wondering if you knew how to revert edits on Wikipedia whilst using an iOS device? Do I need to install the app, or is there a way to perform this action on the mobile website?

I look forward to your reply at your earliest convenience.

Kindest regards,

Chesnaught555 (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2015 (UTC) Chesnaught555 (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I think you'd have to do it from a mobile web browser. Sorry, but I'm not an expert on the mobile Wikipedia experience. :-) Katietalk 16:10, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, thank you very much for your help. :)

Kindest regards,

Chesnaught555 (talk) 16:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for RfPP help!
I thought I was going to have to do that backlog on my own! Ged UK  13:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Good God, do I know that feeling. You're welcome. Katietalk 13:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you
Your attention to Loham is greatly appreciated. Atsme 📞📧 22:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Spshu
I personally think Spshu should have been indeffed because he has a long-term pattern of disruptive edit warring. His first block was in 2013, and if you look at his talk page, he has shown a bit of incivility toward other editors. Electric Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 00:11, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Have you raised this issue at ANI? I think you should. I won't unilaterally indef an editor for something like this without an ANI discussion, particularly since those articles aren't under GS or DS. Katietalk 00:16, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If I had administrative powers, I would most certainly indef him if he's been at it over a long period of time. Electric  Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 00:20, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I hear you, but I'd like input first. I really hope you raise it at ANI. And you don't have to ping me on my own talk page. ;-) Katietalk 01:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Chris Richards (musician)
Kate,

I do not understand why you have redirected the page for Chris Richards. I have been a fan of his and created the page years ago and all of a sudden it gets redirected to the Suffocation band page. Would you be so kind to explain?

Regards,

Tony T — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.77.165.88 (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If you have a draft, submit it to Articles for creation. They'll assess it according to WP:MUSICBIO, which clearly states the musician must have notability independent of the band. I don't know if that's the case, and you've made no attempt to gain consensus that it is. In any event, edit warring about it is not acceptable. Katietalk 00:21, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Ok Kate but wouldn't that also mean that the other band members would have to adhere to the same rules like Terrence Hobbs and Michael Smith? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.171.186.224 (talk) 00:36, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not going to argue about it here. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Either submit a draft to AFC, or don't. Katietalk 01:04, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Kate, are you serious? I was simply asking a legitimate question and you get all huffy puffy. I was arguing I was simply asking for help and to be educated since you are an expert. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.171.186.224 (talk) 01:30, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Longer block for using a sockpuppet to continue to edit war
Yesterday you blocked User:Bianbum for 24 hours for edit warring at Turnitin. He or she appears to have continued the exact same edit war by logging out. Can you please (a) extend his or her block and (b) semi-protect the article for a bit? Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 15:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Rollback rights for Zppix
You granted User:Zppix the rollback right yesterday. This user has only been active for two months and in my opinion is not experienced enough for the revert button. I am requesting that you review his or her edit history. I'm mentioning this because of a recent incident in which Zppix made an inappropriate revert and left a level three vandalism warning on an IP's page. The IP's edit had no edit summary, but it was not only not vandalism, but was actually a needed edit that I reinstated. The IP had no previous warnings and no previous edit history.
 * Revert
 * Warning on IP's page
 * Discussion of incident

I wouldn't have brought this up if I and others had not noticed other instances where Zppix has made inappropriate reverts, jumped straight to high level warnings for minor infractions, given unjustified warnings. or made mistakes in article review, speedy deletion or prod decisions. See and  for examples that are still on the user's talk page. There are many more examples in the archived portion of his or her page. Meters (talk) 19:38, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

if your talking about the revert i made after i got my rights that was an accident and i personally aplogized for it privately. I've been with wikipedia for utmost a year. I am human, everyone even ADMINS, make mistakes.Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 20:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Your use of rollback has been inappropriate at times. I gave it to you, and I'm seriously considering revoking it. You need to read WP:VANDAL closely – particularly WP:NOTVANDAL – stop giving uw-vandalism3 warnings for first time offenders, and slow down with the rollback button.
 * Yes, administrators make mistakes, and we're held accountable. This is a perfect example. I do not like being made a fool of, and I feel your actions and reactions are close to that. Take more care in what you're doing or stop doing it period. Katietalk 20:17, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Zppix, you didn't restore the edit, remove the warning, or reply to the IP's concerns raised on both your talk and the IP's page. All of this should have been done in the case of an error. Mistakes happen, but there seem to be too many of them. My concerns remain, particularly given your response to polite feedback on your talk page, such as this. When several different experienced editors have taken the time to point out on your talk page that you are making mistakes, you should listen. Meters (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * An aside... The Archive bot seems to be acting up. The past talk page history I referred to was archived, bu the archive link does not show up on the talk page. Meters (talk) 20:26, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

{{yo|Meters}] Thank you for bringing this to my attention. If it continues, please let me know here. My attention is divided right now and I'm not able to monitor someone as closely as I normally would. Katietalk 20:29, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * [u|Meters] The archive bot is not malfunctioning the archive box is broken atm Ive been trying to fix it. look at the edit history to see the archives Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Gamal Abdel Nasser
Sorry, I didn't see your response before fully protecting that page for a day. I hope that's ok but please feel free to undo. Didn't mean to step on your toes. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:47, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No, you're good. I almost did that, but it's a GA, there's no consensus to drastically change the lede like that, and I figured the AN3 regulars would be able to sort out any socking. It's a tough call - could go either way with it. :-) Katietalk 20:52, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ed Sheeran
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ed Sheeran. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Vandals are the bad guys
Block THEM next time, and stop picking on the people trying to help. 85.210.182.11 (talk) 13:40, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Do you mind reverting the lock you placed on Atlanta United FC
Do you mind reverting the lock you placed on Atlanta United FC until the lock vandal has been resolved? The anon has been blocked so there's no need for it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:29, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure. On it. Katietalk 23:30, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you see what I did? An offensive image and some 9-11 conspiracy theory stuff? I made a minor change to the template and it went away. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:34, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah! WTF? The template history is clear, so I don't understand. I speak a little bit of template but that was whack and I hate that it was my edit that put it in. Damn. Katietalk 23:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Spshu
Spshu's unblock request and following comments here are a personal attack against me. I think you should revoke his talk page access. Electric Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 20:17, 13 December 2015 (UTC)