User talk:Widr/Archive 29

Stockton Beach
It seems you have placed a block on the editing of the "Stockton Beach" article. This is to protect an abusive user called "AussieLegend" who keeps deleting dissenting opinion about whether the film "Mad Max" was filmed at that location. The film itself states in its VHS credits that it was "Filmed Entirely on Location in Melbourne, Victoria" (not New South Wales), and there are several credible articles (by experts on Australian film) stating that the claims made about it being filmed in Stockton were fabricated. When references to this dissenting opinion were presented in the article (while leaving the original claims intact), it was reverted. Then both sides of the story were added again, and reverted.

The actual claims that the movie was filmed there have no primary source to back them up. There are "references" to support them, but only due to this being an urban legend. This sort of overprotective, one-sided attitude does Wikipedia no favours. Until someone can produce a primary source (e.g. a statement from someone involved in the film, some documents from the filming, or some other piece of evidence that actually supports the assertion as being more than an urban legend), then this overprotectiveness of the story is absurd.

Let both sides be presented, along with their references, and let readers decide. -- Jim 5 May 2016
 * Article's talk page is the place for this discussion, and I see you have already started it there. Widr (talk) 13:57, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Discussion on the talk page looks like it has been going on for years. AussieLegend just shuts it down, as he "owns" the page. He claims since he "created it in 2007", he has final say. I have no intention of creating a Wikipedia account just for this one argument, but it seems on the balance of evidence that this an urban legend that Wikipedia is helping perpetuate, and I can't do a thing about it while the page is protected, and AussieLegend has reverted my (well referenced) edits. What can I do? He is shutting down dissenting opinion and now has locked me out from including well-supported references that don't agree with his belief. I just feel helpless, and am really upset. This is enough to turn me off Wikipedia for life. Why can't we just include both sides of the story? Why is he allowed to just shut down dissent over and over again? -- Jim 5 May 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.37.5.190 (talk) 14:15, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * He claims since he "created it in 2007", he has final say - That's not at all what I said. What I did say can be clearly seen here, ironically in a section titled "Contentious editing and possible meatpuppetry". Why ironic? Widr, I don't want to fill your talk page with extraneous stuff as all you did was protect the page, but I thought I'd just point out that I'm seeing some indications of sock/meatpuppetry with the latest edits. The anonymous editor has used multiple IPs but all seem related in various ways. The same company owns some of the addresses but not others. WHOIS shows people with the same first, but different last names and different addresses but the same phone number. (I won't bore you with details at this time) And then there were two interesting edits by the same IP. 104.37.5.190 posted this signing as "Blake" but then, this, as "Jim". 14 minutes later, "Jim" had a new IP address. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 15:58, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I use 3G and a privacy service. IP addresses change all over the place as a result. As for the names, there are two of us sharing a single laptop. I am Jim, my boyfriend is Blake, we're both pretty pissed off with your attitude and refusal to accept facts, and are both working on getting both sides of the story added back onto the page. --Jim — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.250.161.85 (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That seems like meatpuppetry to me, and not surprising given your claim that you've created 20 accounts with which to edit-war. Perhaps the protection of this page needs to be upped to full. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 06:32, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * We created two accounts. One for me, one for Blake. When I went to inform you of this, Blake added an extra "0" to the "2" as a joke while proofreading it. I quickly changed this back, as that was immature, and removed the reference to his account (since he's off sulking anyway, so is unlikely to use it right now). I don't see any problem with any of this. Partners are allowed to have separate accounts. JimMarlor (talk) 10:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/85.76.71.66
Can you block him/her? Because he/she involved disruptive editing. 183.171.183.11 (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Widr (talk) 16:39, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

IP block
Hi Widr. I see you are an administrator. Could this IP please be blocked long-term? The person is a serial pest and has been blocked many times in the past with a differing version of "2601:246:2". Alternatively, the articles being vandalise by said IP could be semi protected as this person always comes back. Really hope you can help. Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 14:21, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I blocked for a short time, but protected the articles for three months. Hope this will help. Widr (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. That will help for sure! DaHuzyBru (talk) 14:33, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Hiparis915
You have indefblocked this user for creating nonsense pages. I can see that he has repeatedly a page, in several variations all now deleted, which clearly falls foul of speedy criterion A7 (and possibly other criteria as well), but I cannot find any nonsense pages justifying an indefblock. Could I please ask you to indicate diffs? --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 19:14, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * "Nonsense pages" comes as a part of the block template, but "or other inappropriate pages" is there also. Repeatedly creating articles that are only meant to advertise the user's YouTube channel is to me a clear indication of the sole reason they are here for. Widr (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Userlane
Could you rollback and block ? They seem to have the same pattern of disruptive editing of which is still under the 31-hour block you gave them yesterday. Thanks, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Both blocked indefinitely. Widr (talk) 04:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Alex pinter/sandbox
Does this qualify as advertising? Essentially a guide to spam Wikipedia.--Cahk (talk) 10:12, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Not sure about this one, so I'll pass for now. Widr (talk) 10:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Question about BLP
Since you wrote a trillion articles about them, what is the policy for the biographie of a person in his own website and how should it be sourced?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 10:36, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit busy now (at work), so can't write a full essay here, but some of these links might be useful: WP:BLP, WP:AUTO, WP:ABOUTSELF, WP:COI. Hopefully these will help you. Widr (talk) 10:51, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Milan.tlach
Note that User:Milan.tlach is a logged-in version of a shifting-IP hoaxer who's been going since at least March (cf. User:139.216.88.32, User:101.186.67.227) - all of their edits have been to add the same handfuls of fake entries to movie cast lists and actor biographies. Surely that calls for an indef block rather than giving them a third chance in a week's time? --McGeddon (talk) 19:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeffed now. Widr (talk) 20:06, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Cheers. --McGeddon (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for editing the my biography page - Dr. Peter Collins, Forensic Psychiatrist. An individual has been trying to discredit me professionally and has inappropriately using Wikipedia to do this. My responses have been polite and academically appropriate. Question - The person who edited it returned it to it's original form (thankfully). I tried to add the category ==Selected Publications== but it was removed theresoonafter. Am I not allowed to place the books, book chapters or articles I have authored or co-authored on the page? Please advise so I know what to do in the future. Many thanks - Peter Collins Lamplighter98 (talk) 21:35, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:COI. You can make suggestions on the article's talk page, but it would be best not to edit it yourself. Widr (talk) 05:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Repeat offender
Hi.

Yesterday you blocked for obvious vandalism/sock puppetry. Well, even more obvious is, whose making the same lame vandalism edits of switching images at NJ Transit articles. Block needed ASAP. oknazevad (talk) 22:44, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

2606:6000:FD0B:CA00:ED25:3332:E7CF:9B12
You just blocked. Would you kindly REVDEL all the user's contribs per RD2 and revoke talk page access?  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 05:35, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

I need to dull your senses

 * Here, here!!! - Agreed; well done! SQL and I are chatting right now about how quick and good you are at blocking trolls and vandals. You're awesome! Keep it up! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:05, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha, thanks for the kind words, both of you. Widr (talk) 06:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Beat me to it! Was just about to send a beer for your edits on The Wachowskis.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 06:19, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I think I can accept another one. ;-) Widr (talk) 06:27, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

AIV process query
Hi, Wondered what the process is when an IP Vandal hops to another IP just after receiving a final warning. With my AGF hat on, I would say it was a coincidence, but some may argue it's been done deliberately to circumvent a potential block. Could you take a look at the edits on Mouthshut.com by Special:Contributions/106.220.147.200 (especially for comparison this: ) and by Special:Contributions/106.220.253.241 (especially for comparison this: ). Clearly the same person.

If the second IP makes it to WP:AIV would you consider blocking the first one as well? Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 15:40, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No doubt it's the same user. However, since they seem to have stopped now and haven't been disruptive elsewhere, I won't block (AGF hat on as well). After all, they appear to be just an unhappy customer. I protected the article instead. Widr (talk) 16:12, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. To be clear, I wasn't asking for a block, it was a theoretical question in case either IP vandalised after a final warning. Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 16:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It would depend on several things, such as the nature of vandalism, time frame and previous editing history. Widr (talk) 16:23, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! Widr (talk) 19:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Musiceditor123456 and Musicloverforev1234's new account
Special:Contributions/Kfliffer11 is Musiceditor123456 and Musicloverforev1234's new account. He/she involved same Beyonce song articles. 115.164.94.60 (talk) 06:51, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Ongoing edit war
Hi, I dont like to "shop" for comments and I am sorry if I break a rule here, but I have to inform an active admin about Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Both editors are edit warring over several articles, and even though they are communicating at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics it does not mean that they can revert eachother until consensus has been found. If you look at article history at Spain at the 2016 Summer Olympics you see the "+174" and "-174" since 10 May and that they edited this 9 times each (diffs from one of the editors on that article include, , , , , , , ,. I dont know what to do about this, since the report at WP:ANEW seems to have gone stale. Qed237&#160;(talk) 09:44, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I forgot to mention that both editors have been warned here and here for edit warring and has removed other warnings at their talkpages. Qed237&#160;<b style="color:green">(talk)</b></i> 09:49, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'll pass. I currently don't have time (or interest) for anything too complicated and what is beyond blatant vandalism. Widr (talk) 10:02, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks anyway. Do you know what I can do, or should I wait and see if any admin will do something at ANEW? <i style="font-family:Sans-serif"><b style="color:blue">Qed</b><b style="color:red">237</b>&#160;<b style="color:green">(talk)</b></i> 10:10, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That would be best for now. There are admins who patrol ANEW frequently, so they are likely to respond sooner or later. Widr (talk) 10:14, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will add my information above, with the diffs, there and see what happens. Have a nice day! <i style="font-family:Sans-serif"><b style="color:blue">Qed</b><b style="color:red">237</b>&#160;<b style="color:green">(talk)</b></i> 10:16, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

October 2015 GNI Per Capita
Hello, I heard you said this edit was not constructive. But it is. Because some of the countries do not have data so please do not try to kill me since I was originated from one of those countries that does not have data. It ruined my life. You have ruined my life. My school teachers have ruined my life. The god have ruined my life!!!!!!!!!!!!! BooHooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.61.145.18 (talk) 04:46, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the blocking
Of User:Bigeasy1995. Might you possibly check Bigeasy1984 and Vietnamesearenotchinese, as they're making the same kind of edits? Thanks muchly. :) -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Union of Opposites  ‖ 08:17, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, since they are clearly the same person. Widr (talk) 08:21, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Cheers. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Health and Welfare  ‖ 08:24, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Lookie Lookie at my Cookie!
TJH2018 talk  19:16, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If Widr starts whistling Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head, we'll know why ;) <sub style="color:green;">Fortuna  <sup style="color:red;">Imperatrix Mundi  12:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Request for protection for 2016 Indian Premier League
Sir, the page 2016 Indian Premier League is repeatedly disrupted by vandalisms and disruptive edits... The semi protection expired today... I request you to protect the page at least till the end of May otherwise it will become extremely difficult to maintain the quality of the article...I request you to kindly give some protection to the page at least till the tournament is over... Thanks... Cricket246 (talk) 12:21, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Protected for a month now. Widr (talk) 12:28, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot... That will help us to carry on with the contributions to the page without any disrupution... Thank you so much for the help... Cricket246 (talk) 12:55, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Chetank9982
I'm surprised you only blocked this user for a week, despite dozens of warnings. A permanent block seems called for. — swpb T 13:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Next one will likely be indefinite. They won't do any harm in the meantime. Widr (talk) 13:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

‎IP user 217.23.230.61
Hi Widr,

IP user ‎217.23.230.61 seems to have learnt nothing from his ban: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cramlington&diff=prev&oldid=720064294

I'll leave matters to your discretion. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:25, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked again. Thanks. Widr (talk) 15:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:FOTOMIRROR


A tag has been placed on User talk:FOTOMIRROR, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. CAPTAIN RAJU ( ✉ ) 08:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

IP 112
I noticed on User talk:112.202.13.178 you blocked this IP for edit warring. Was it a very short block? They seem to have continued with the same uncooperative and controlling behaviour uninhibited, and without a break. Sionk (talk) 11:10, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked again. Widr (talk) 11:15, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Gustavo Petro
Hi, I have a dispute over the content of the following article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustavo_Petro

I added a section called Mention in Panama Papers, because this politician was mentioned in the "power players" of the panama papers. See this link. However the user xenophrenic keeps deleting it. I already wrote a note in the talk page. Can you mediate please?

thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldero (talk • contribs) 18:16, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no. You will have to ask someone else. Widr (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Why
Widr, you continuously block people from the IP address 64.56.10.206, even though they make constructive edits. If it would let me curse you out, I would. Please stop, it is extremely annoying. Thank you. Titgaylez (talk) 14:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Kindly show me evidence of that continuous blocking. Widr (talk) 14:20, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! Widr (talk) 14:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Javanshir Kazimov
Possibly a SPI was going on-as both the creator of the article and the guy removing the speedies were 2 different people (apparently). Wgolf (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * BTW-might want to salt Javanshir kazimov also. Wgolf (talk) 19:16, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

75.164.115.223
Hi Widr. Thanks for blocking 75.164.115.223. I was wondering if you could possibly revoke talk page access? I believe that they're using it inappropriately. Thank you. Omni Flames  let's talk about it  08:11, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Not yet. They have made an unblock request. Widr (talk) 08:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry, they posted that after I posted this and I just noticed it. Omni Flames   let's talk about it  08:26, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It's academic now. User:Yamla must've read your mind ;) <sub style="color:green;">Fortuna <sup style="color:red;">Imperatrix Mundi  11:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Independent business
Please protect Independent business because there are new vandals there every minute. CLCStudent (talk) 15:27, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Widr (talk) 15:29, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Our friends are now vandalizing Independent Company. CLCStudent (talk) 15:45, 17 May 2016 (UTC)