User talk:Widr/Archive 26

107.191.80.5
What was the point of that block? I saw it made some edits to a page that just got deleted, but that's not even a K-12 school, it's a university, and there haven't been a bunch of vandalism edits in recent history either. &hearts; Kailey 2001 &hearts; You just got reverted by a high school cheerleader. &hearts; 23:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This was a school block, meaning that users will be able to edit if they create an account and then log in. Anonymous editing is not possible. School blocks are meant to prevent further disruption, that's why each block is usually longer than the previous one. Widr (talk) 18:49, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Ergun Kocak
Moi Widr. Could you have a look at the deleted November 2015 version of Ergun Kocak and see, if the present version can be G4 tagged. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 10:22, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Moi! There's no big difference, both look more like CVs than articles. Widr (talk) 10:34, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Guidance
Congratulations on becoming an administrator. I see that you mentioned vandalism as your expertise.

I come to you with a question. I see the American Airlines article to be in not good condition so I have started to improve it. I have even added a few facts that were not there before. I see this as a big project that will take months to make it a featured article or good article.

I have been accused of vandalism 2 times for putting a chart about the airplanes that the airline flies. This is strange since many airline articles have a chart of the fleet (what airplanes they have, like 20 Boeing 747's, 100 Boeing 737's, etc.) I politely asked my accuser but no response. Huh?

Proof 1.

False accusation of vandalism (see edit summary) Also no discussion by the accuser to explain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Airlines&diff=prev&oldid=714969114

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Airlines&diff=prev&oldid=714639908

Proof 2. Airline fleet charts are common and present in nearly all airline articles.

United Airlines

British Airways (rated as a good article)

Air France

Lufthansa

Finnair

Air Canada

Qantas

Japan Airlines (rated as a good article)

Hawaiian Airlines

JetBlue

Proof 3. Evidence of discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ABBAlover11011&diff=prev&oldid=714750218

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_Airlines#fleet

Thank you in advance for your attention into this matter. Ensign Hapuna of the Royal Hawaiian Navy (talk) 23:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * You did not actually have a question for me, but judging by the diffs you provided, this seems to be a content dispute that you should try to settle with ABBAlover11011. If that doesn't work, you can raise the issue at WP:ANI. Widr (talk) 00:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I've left a note for . I agree that and the other editor should try to discuss it between themselves, but I wouldn't throw anyone at AN/I except as a last resort. Before that, I'd try WikiProject Airlines or WP:DRN. Cheers ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. Widr's lack of interest to help has a chilling effect to good editors to edit. At some point, good editors simply say "heck with it, I am doing something else." I was about to quit that article until I read your (DoRD) comment. Asking someone to go to ANI is creating drama except for the rare circumstances. Ensign Hapuna of the Royal Hawaiian Navy (talk) 16:49, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, Royal Hawaiian Navy. It's not about my lack of interest to help, but more about the fact that I'm not the right person to help you in these type of matters. I was a bit puzzled why you came to me with this issue in the first place, since this is not something I have ever shown any special interest in or have knowledge of. You're right, I deal with vandals, but this surely has nothing to do with vandalism. In retrospect, it would have been better if I had not replied to you at all, but luckily DoRD gave you better advice. Widr (talk) 17:18, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I came to you because you are an expert on vandalism. Your comment above ("this surely has nothing to do with vandalism") is what I sought. It was so perplexing for this chart to be called vandalism so I wanted to ask a vandalism expert. Thank you for replying. Good luck on being an administrator. Ensign Hapuna of the Royal Hawaiian Navy (talk) 17:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Weird rant
Hello Widr. I noticed the block of and I wanted to let you know that the same thing went on yesterday from this IP. I am not asking for a block since this person has obviously not editing from that IP anymore. I just wanted you to have this info in case the situation continues. Whoever it is certainly has a "bee in their bonnet" about something. Hopefully they will be moving on to some other forum soon. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 16:36, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I missed that one. It probably wasn't reported at AIV yesterday. Widr (talk) 16:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! I'll do what I can when I'm around. Widr (talk) 16:52, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

‎Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive920
Can I ask you to look into the archived discussion on Charlene McMann? It was archived without closure. Thanks. --Cahk (talk) 05:46, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'll have to pass. ANI is not my thing, so to speak. Widr (talk) 06:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright, will just have to find another admin.--Cahk (talk) 06:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I have an account for you to block ;-)
ProfileBot - Self identified itself as a "bot of Profile101", a sock puppet account. Figured I'd let you know :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:23, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks. Widr (talk) 07:26, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks for your kind words and also for tireless patrolling! Widr (talk) 08:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Block settings for the hyperactive troll
Hi there. Our mutual friend has a habit of using his talk page for unsavory purposes, so I recommend checking the no-talk-page-access (and the email one) when blocking. Favonian (talk) 09:45, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, will do. I thought they might be too busy just creating new accounts. Widr (talk) 10:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Post sockpuppet cleanup
Can you move Shueisha back to Shueisha? It was part of the Cow cleaner 5000 sock's disruption. —Farix (t &#124; c) 10:08, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Already done by Zzuuzz. Widr (talk) 10:17, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Flavonian
You may want to revoke talk page access for the SOCK ..--Cahk (talk) 10:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * As usual, Zzuuzz beat me to it. Widr (talk) 15:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Another attack account
Another account bent on attacking you, apparently: Widr on Winstons. This is the third one in the account creation log this morning. Somebody needs a dadgum range block. White Arabian Filly Neigh 15:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Widr (talk) 15:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * (tps) The latest account is on a busy mobile range that probably can't be blocked unless the abuse intensifies, but I was able to do something about some other accounts. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:38, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, DoRD! Widr (talk) 15:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

 * Thanks for this! But did you not notice that my RfA was closed some time ago? ;-) Widr (talk) 15:38, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Obviously I didn't. I may have commented twice?  Sometimes I get lost in the forest ... too many notes ...  In any event enjoy the torte! 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 15:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hehe, you may have. Thanks again! Widr (talk) 15:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

81.156.136.226
According to WP:BLANKING, block notices on IP talk pages should remain for others who use the IP, at least temporarily. What am I missing? Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * No, they are free to remove the block notice. Only declined unblock requests should stay. Certainly nothing to edit war over. Widr (talk) 17:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Understood. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkpage access by sock you blocked.
Just a heads-up: Special:Contributions/Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr Widr is misusing their talkpage access. So far not in spectacularly bad ways, but if they belong to either of the two bunches of socks I suspect them to be part of (so basically, either the "Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum"-group or the Cowcleaner group, leaning to the former by length-of-username and the whole "I'm blocked? Let's spam my own talkpage full of nonsense to the point it lags folks trying to open it" post-block MO), it might be a good idea to just plain remove their TP-access. I've yet to see any of those socks use it constructively, but I have seen about half a dozen of 'm misuse it when not removed. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 16:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, thanks. Nthep already did the needful. Widr (talk) 16:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, great! Wasn't done yet when I started typing, but I got distracted and took 15 minutes between starting the message and posting it. Should've remembered that when taking so long to type you a message, I really should've refreshed the page to see if someone else had done the job in the mean time. Sorry for that. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 16:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


 * This sock is doing the same thing. --bonadea contributions talk 17:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks. Widr (talk) 18:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes review right—Neonorange
Just my appreciation for pending changes review right approval. When the permanent resident Canada goose pair hatch goslings in our back yard in May, I'll send you an image. Looking at your edit count, the likely award name shall be Perseverance. From North Georgia (US State), I am — Neonorange (talk) 21:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hehe, you're welcome. Widr (talk) 04:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Thing (comics)
I'm sorry to annoy you over insignificant crap again but could you watch the page and make your own judgement when future edits occur so I don't have to annoy more people requesting protection again? As expected, the hogwash has resumed. —DangerousJXD (talk) 09:57, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, the page is currently pending changes protected for a few more weeks. Those edits won't show up unless someone accepts them. Let's see again after protection expires. Widr (talk) 10:01, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Hello there. Can you please tell me why you removed the entry corresponding to ? As far as I can see, the user has been sufficiently warned but kept their behaviour anyway. Isn't it actionable?--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 21:14, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * AIV is for obvious vandalism. This is not obvious enough. You may want to consider taking this to ANI if it continues. Widr (talk) 04:42, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * When I did what you suggest in the past the thread got stalled and other admins told me that posting into WP:AIV was quicker. Whatever.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 10:08, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Bluetram
See link:[]. Are all the templates he's creating vandalism, test edits, or neither?  Peter  Sam   Fan  15:34, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no idea actually, I'm not into template stuff. Maybe one of my stalkers can help. Widr (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm creating the templates according to Template:Attached_KML, Template:Attached_KML/doc, WP:USRD/MTF/T. These templates are required to show linear objects, such as roads, railway and mass transit lines etc. Bluetram (talk) 16:09, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation, Bluetram. Widr (talk) 16:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh sheesh. Live and learn, and get insulted (see my talk page.) I should really learn not to get involved with these things. (I'm not really angry.)  Peter  Sam   Fan  18:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Jimmie Lee (comedian)
Hi, Widr. Though you page-protected Jimmie Lee (comedian) — and thank you for that — an anon IP shortly afterward made the same WP:BLP vios and promotional-spam edit as the others did, though the page is recorded as protected through April 25. Maybe something didn't take? Thank you again, for any help. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's pending changes protected, so edits won't appear unless some one of the reviewers accepts them. (And since the article is now heading for deletion, I don't think further adjustments in protection are needed at this point.) Widr (talk) 05:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

File Mover user right
Hi there. I saw that you denied my request for file mover, which is probably fair enough, considering that I haven't been that active requesting the renaming of files locally. I've made a few more requests now, and I plan to be more active there. I was wondering if you could possibly now reconsider my request? Thanks! Omni Flames  let's talk about it  06:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * First tell me this: what will you do after you have renamed a file that shadows Commons? Widr (talk) 06:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I would remove the Rename media and/or the ShadowsCommons if either of them existed on the file description page. Omni Flames   let's talk about it  00:22, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * And then? We need more help with file backlogs, but I want to make sure you understand all that is needed in the renaming process. Widr (talk) 05:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, and I'd also replace all of the uses of the old file name with the new one. Omni Flames   let's talk about it  09:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * And one last thing that will be needed? Widr (talk) 09:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I just took a better look at WP:FMV and it says that file usage on other Wikis should be checked, and Db-redircom should be placed on the redirect created. I'm assuming that's what you're looking for. Omni Flames   let's talk about it  09:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's it. Done now. Please make good use of it. Widr (talk) 10:07, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll be sure to make good use of the tools! Omni Flames  let's talk about it  10:32, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Page protection on Generation Z
HI, I noticed you recently protected the page Generation Z, in response to the disruptive editing from an IP editor who uses multiple 2606:6000 accounts. Apparently, this IP editor also uses the registered account User:Wwwma, as evidenced by this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Generation_X&diff=714590502&oldid=714590273. Are users who prompted the page restriction allowed to switch back to a different auto-confirmed account to avoid the page restriction they prompted? --DynaGirl (talk) 01:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not ideal, but I will try to keep an eye on their edits. Widr (talk) 05:10, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

MariaJaydHicky's new sock
MariaJaydHicky's new account Special:Contributions/3LWfan involved Gwen Stefani, Rihanna and others. 115.164.85.210 (talk) 05:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please go to WP:SPI. Widr (talk) 05:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! Keep reporting. ;-) Widr (talk) 11:57, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Blooming quick
With your block of [User:Ceb1031]- so much so, that by the time i thought I recognised the account he was impersonating (User:Cebr1979), the entry was gone. All it was, was that I went and checked- and Cebr1979 was indef'd (for various things) a while back- so I'm wondering- perhaps that wasn't so much an impersonator, as a sock? Checkuser, maybe? Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  12:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Can't say. WP:SPI might help. Widr (talk) 12:36, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah... seems a bit obvious. Right, cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  12:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

About 37.49.138.98
You blocked 37.49.138.98 recently, who I notified earlier of vandalism. I have no complaints about the block, but as their edits seem to indicate that they don't speak English, I had a question about similar situations. Is there a formal policy on dealing with editors who don't speak the language of the wiki they're editing? Of course the problem could have been avoided if they hadn't done so in the first place, but in the event that it happens, what should one do? Would I redirect them to the wiki they understand, or simply not bother, as in this case it seems as though they only vandalized pages with no intent to contribute helpfully. What are your thoughts on this? Regards, Zupotachyon (talk) 06:43, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry, perhaps I should have posted this on the Teahouse. Definitely should not have posted in the middle of the night. Zupotachyon (talk) 06:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, this is English Wikipedia, so by default editors are expected to write in English. You may discuss this on their talk page, especially if their edits otherwise seem constructive (which isn't the case here). Widr (talk) 06:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright, I will consider that next time I run into a similar situation. Sorry for wasting your time. Regards, Zupotachyon (talk) 22:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

"Autopatrolled" Permission
Thanks for letting me know that I've been granted "Autopatrolled" permission. I appreciate the trust you and other fellow editors have shown me. I'll do my best to ensure I keep earning it. Best regards Ambrosia10 (talk) 03:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for your articles. Widr (talk) 04:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

user:BeatlesLedTV
Hi Widr. Just my two cents', but I think you may inadvertently come down a bit hard on. Yes, they've got a 100% revert-reaction from editors here, which would certainly suggest disruptive editing. But, as and I have just been discussing, instructions at Template:Infobox song do in fact allow for the additions BeatlesLedTV was making, as an alternative to having full album track lists. Personally, I consider those before-and-after titles utterly trivial, so I'm pleased to see them binned this time around. But I hadn't appreciated that we do support their inclusion, at that template, when I undid a raft of similar edits to Beatles song articles, a couple of months back, and I believe undid the changes at articles I didn't get to. So, in fairness to BeatlesLedTV, we clearly need to get consensus on this issue and address the template instructions. Best, JG66 (talk) 06:27, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Binksternet reported the user at WP:AIV, and at a quick glance the edits seemed disruptive enough to warrant a short block. Let me know if there is consensus to lift the block. Widr (talk) 06:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The block looks good to me: protecting the wiki from disruption. If the guy makes a request for unblock then I would be interested in seeing what he says. Binksternet (talk) 09:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I note that these extra/partial tracklists have been removed by other editors, so re-inserting them with another account is bad form. At the articles of interest to BeatlesLedTV, there is a local consensus to dispense with such lists. Another strong concern was the very fast manner that these things were being added, so the block stopped the problem from spreading. Binksternet (talk) 09:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC)