User talk:Widr/Archive 52

Rap music vandal
I noticed you declined this report. This was a report about an editor who habitually adds unsourced content to rap music articles. Both myself and other editors have added cautions to their talk page. I'm trying to improve the mess that many editors of rap music articles leave behind. I'm not sure why you would not investigate. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:39, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No, it was declined by another admin, and I just removed it from sitting there. Such reports should be taken to other boards; AIV is only meant for obvious vandalism. Widr (talk) 22:50, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I used Twinkle to report it because it met the criteria. Would you have a moment to look at that editor's talk page?  Thank you.  Magnolia677 (talk) 23:31, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Or would you advise some other route for dealing with this editor? Thank you.  Magnolia677 (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * ANI would be a better venue for this. Widr (talk) 18:53, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps I can give you a bit more detail. I've spent months deleting unsourced content added by this editor. I've reported it to AIV here and here, and to ANI here. I also painstakingly documented this SPI, which closed without action. Since that SPI was closed, the pattern between the two editors has seemed even more similar; a pattern demonstrated by adding unsourced content, and then when challenged, either quickly adding a source, or telling you to go look for a source yourself. My interaction yesterday at Talk:Ctrl (SZA album) demonstrates this.

A few selections from these editors:

XBOXMANWAR:
 * "Who gives a fuck about the stress on the liner notes, they can deal with it, not us, your just their ass, just leave it, and I know its none of my fucking business that you're making a big deal, its just a pain in the ass as to why you started it." [
 * "Perhaps I can add a source to it, but its listed in the BMI database (even through I didn't mention it in the edit summary) and I've done it on numerous articles and no one seems to have a problem with it, its just Magnolia that keeps whining about it. Plus fans of the type of music articles I edit will know that the info that is put in those articles are true, and I've always put in true info.
 * "I want you to please stop undoing my edits, as you do with JustDoItFettyg, JayPe and other music editors that have been disturbed by your behavior on "removing unsourced content", that is not acceptable, and within those editors mentioned and myself know damn well what we are doing, plus that whole discography has no sources whatsoever, but all the info there is correct, and everything is fine, the credits are available online for you to find, plus with production discographies like Metro Boomin and Boi-1da that have either none or little sources, it really shouldn't really a problem. I wonder why those production discographies still exist even through there isn't any sources, oh yeah because they are correct (being sarcastic here). I suggest if you can respectfully give it a rest, because again, we music editors know what we are doing, and you have fairly little experience in music articles compared to me and the editors mentioned. Thanks."
 * "Its right, can you please stop undoing, music fans will know that this is true" ES
 * "F off" {edit summary)
 * "This is correct" (edit summary)

BLOOMDOOM2:
 * "I hope this is a fucking joke, or your the most ignorant person ever in music".
 * "Pardon me, but how oblivious can you be? The producer credits are literally on the respective single's cover, plus they were released independently before being included on his album, thats what a single is, its done with literally every album, I even added sources." (the sources were not added)
 * "Actually they are, and you have no knowledge of how music works if you think this is how rappers work, you're basically saying that Kodak never wrote any of his lyrics if this was the case, which is really dumbass claim. I suggest you research more about the music business. Also, if you are applying this to Kodak, then why aren't all of the rappers that are featured on the track listing with their writing credit weren't removed, and that you only care about Kodak's credit? "
 * "Yeah well you already know Magnolia677 already made a big deal about it, since they no knowledge of how music credits work. I suggest just to leave the Grateful article as it is so Magnolia677 can stop bitching about it, you and I already know that Kodak wrote his verse, but Magnolia677 always look on the wrong side of things".
 * "This is correct" (edit summary)

Very frustrating. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Shalpley
Needs a talk page block as well, and a revdel. MarkBernstein (talk) 23:21, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

IP you blocked
Went immediately back to its previous behavior:. --JBL (talk) 01:39, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Cocainaenvenenada
I actually think Cocainaenvenanda is in the right here, as far as content is concerned; the other editor, User:Ezilidanto, has been inserting self-promoting stuff into the article, which might or might not be accurate, but there's never been any talk page discussion (which is why I protected the relevant article). Anyway, this user of course should have tried to engage in discussion, or at least justified their actions with edit summaries, but it seems to me anyway that he was trying to help. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 19:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, go ahead and unblock if you see fit. Widr (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Another IP you blocked came back and started up again
After you blocked 2601:805:501:96BA:0:0:0:192F for two weeks on May 28, they came back and started up with their old tricks, changing accurate scores to inaccurate ones, and then doing the same to the average scores. I hope you will give a significantly longer block this time, since neither of the previous blocks have prevented a recurrence. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Kadam Kadam
Kadam Kadam has previously been deleted twice today but Rodeostudio/Ancientluv143 (I'm sure it's the same editor) keeps recreating the page. The last time Ancientluv143 did so 3 minutes after it was deleted. Perhaps it might be prudent to salt the page. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 16:33, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding blocked used Blahblah123888
You recently deleted the pages created by and blocked the account. I have a feeling that the user Special:Contributions/Supppl1234 may be the same person or a friend involved in the vandalism. While at that, you can delete the talk page of the deleted pages as well. Thanks in advance! Jiten Dhandha •  talk  •  contributions  • 16:20, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Blocked user created a new account
Hi,

You blocked User:Eimukas22 on 12 January 2017 and now he came back with a new account. What is my proof? Well, the photos that this new user added to the articles were uploaded by the banned user yesterday and somehow a new user finds them, and adds them to the articles that were extensively edited by the banned user? It is safe to say that this person is avoiding his block again. Should I open a new sockpuppet investigation or is that not necessary? I would add it to Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Eimukas22, but I am not sure if I can do that since I am not an administrator. Thanks in advance. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:33, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks like this account also belongs to this person as it edits the same pages as the banned user. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:31, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 16 June 2017

 * request can be handled by user if they want it done. — xaosflux  Talk 04:08, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

PP?
Would you mind checking out my request here? Or if semi + pc is more appropriate? CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  12:28, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

This is a request for the unblocking of the user Phrustration
You may have forgotten about me, but my user was blocked. At the time, would say that my original ban (1 week ban) was deserved and justified; but I believe that with some of the other contributions that ,I, as my user, would have made before, I think that the indefinite time set for ban was unjustified; because you cited that one of the reasons why I got that ban was because my account was apparently being used for ONLY WRONGDOING I think that my punishment was harsh. I would like to apologize at the same time for my inappropriate responses to the warnings at the time and to the user that I also personally attacked as well, I hope that you would consider my request, as I am eager to continue some of the beneficial contributions that I had made before I did my idiotic acts. I have matured and I can promise to you that I would not be back in this situation the next time if you give me a second chance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.245.58.131 (talk) 21:03, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked this IP for a week - block evasion. SQL Query me!  21:10, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Incidents from Special:Contributions/DeadPi
Hello. I had been reported this form:

Article related vandalism caused by attacking users, please check here below: Please remove these revisions, it's is a vandalism. Thanks. - Prinsipe Ybarro  ( Talk to me ) 08:22, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * diff
 * diff 2
 * diff 3
 * diff 4
 * diff 5
 * diff 6
 * diff 7
 * diff 8
 * diff 9
 * diff 10
 * diff 11
 * diff 12
 * diff 13
 * diff 14
 * diff 15
 * diff 16

Thanks
Thank you for the very swift action here. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 15:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

You may wish to revoke talk page access. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 18:50, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for your help with that vandal on my talk page, and for the page protection. Much appreciated! Marianna251TALK 17:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Help please
European migrant crisis

2 different ips made unexplained changes on a sourced content and i just can't revert them. I don't know why but i mistakenly deleted the content in every attempt. Can you please back the article 20 january revision? 194.187.249.118 (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

I have fixed it manually. I think pending changes settings or semi-protection may be useful for such pages. 194.187.249.118 (talk) 20:31, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Garbage block
This is a garbage block: the IP editor reverted talk-page vandalism, and was rudely an inappropriately reverted by ‎FlightTime, who was too Twinkle-happy to bother actually understanding what was going on! I suggest you unblock the IP; perhaps block FlightTime for edit-warring and abuse of tools; and you and FlightTime should probably apologize to the IP who is now blocked for a week for utterly absurd reasons. (It would be nice if this generated a better response than this assholery.) Thanks for your attention. --JBL (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a long time abuser, as can be seen from their contributions and activity on their talk page. Widr (talk) 06:20, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * That's two personal attacks on me, You're the one that needs a block. -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 10:35, 28 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Whoa, everyone take a deep breath. I'm not certain of this, but I think you may be collectively falling into a troll trap.  This edit by 2a03:b0c0 does not look to me like something a constructive user would / should be doing, and it was repeated after being reverted.  The edit summary here does not seem like something a constructive user would use on that edit.  As a previously uninvolved observer, I suspect there's a good hand / bad hand scenario involved here, or similar; intended to create confusion, mistaken actions, and drama.  The other IP is the bad hand, this IP is the (not entirely) good hand, I think; and some form of sock/meat between them (e.g. it's easy to flip between IPv4 and IPv6 on a dual stack system, if you know what you are doing, and tunnel the IPv6 via a hosting provider).   Murph 9000  (talk) 11:14, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Noticed your recent block of the above. This seems to be an account pretending to be an IP. Perhaps an indef block is in order? —72 talk 14:33, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Good catch, thanks. Widr (talk) 14:34, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Jack & Jack
There appears to be some kind of mass attack on this article at the moment. The RFPP report is sitting stale. Could you take a look? —72 talk 17:46, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Geocites links
Why the geocites links ain't allowed in English Wiki? MSNL is not a forum, even not a user archive. SKULLOSSUS (talk) 18:41, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Geocities sources are not considered reliable. Thank you. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - General Health  ‖ 04:37, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

User talk:BabaSahebAmbedkarPolytechnic
You may wish to revoke talk page access as well.--Cahk (talk) 07:22, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Socking
Hello Widr, and thanks for blocking the abusive ip. Unfortunately, the user in question, Singora, who has openly admitted abusing multiple accounts on Wikipedia Review, is now editing from various IP address', notably on Jeffrey Bernard and Marie Kendall. This has been going on for ages now and has been largely ignored at SPI. Is there anything we can do?  Cassianto Talk   19:02, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I blocked the most recent IP now. It's probably best to report these to WP:AIV and mention who is evading their block, so patrolling admins won't decline actioning. Widr (talk) 19:16, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much.  Cassianto Talk   19:36, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The IP is now stalking me from another address. More so, they are warring on both Jeffrey Bernard and Marie Kendall. Advice?   Cassianto Talk   15:13, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked again. Widr (talk) 15:16, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about IPs but is this possibly the same one as above? Another very similar IP address was blocked on the same article earlier? SagaciousPhil  - Chat 15:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC) Whoops, sorry, wrong link. I meant this IP.  SagaciousPhil  - Chat 15:28, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, clarly the same user, so I blocked that one also. Widr (talk) 15:30, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! SagaciousPhil  - Chat 15:31, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Great work, thanks again!  Cassianto Talk   15:32, 2 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Seems to be back again with another IP address. SagaciousPhil  - Chat 10:02, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Widr (talk) 10:09, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you; no doubt s/he will be back soon. SagaciousPhil  - Chat 10:10, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

162.251.83.104
Thank you for revoking TPA  -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 11:26, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Protected
Please protect the page 2017 cyberattacks on Ukraine from IP vandalism. Thank you. --Flavius1 (talk) 15:19, 3 July 2017 (UTC)


 * No, this user has broke the rules and has reverted the page 8 times from 3 different users including myself.That is a clear violation of the 3RR rule. I am guilty of edit warring as well but I stopped at 3 Reverts--2600:387:A:19:0:0:0:95 (talk) 15:24, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

IP 31.205.66.92
Hi there.

You recently blocked 31.205.66.92 for 6 months - a look at their talk page usage since then suggests that it may be time to revoke talk page access as well? Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:14, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Not warranted just yet. Although the edit summaries could be a bit nicer, they are free to remove almost anything from their talk page, including the warnings. Widr (talk) 20:28, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Unprotection request
Please remove the semi-protection on User talk:StanProg. 12.187.215.34 (talk) 17:58, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Widr (talk) 18:29, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Requests for Blocking
reason= I need to block this Dude, his name is JustDoltFettyg. And he is making chaos to My Page I created, it was fine but I asked him to stop but he ignored me and kept posting stuff on the beautiful Loser and kept saying it's a mixtape but it always said studio album! He is destroying it, that is just my request. AlexWikiIDK (talk) 01:54, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Bug on your userpage
I accidentally opened your userpage by a mis-click, but happened to notice a bug in your userbox section, where it reads:
 * "Widr is not an administrator or an account creator.
 * Therefore they have been disallowed the use of adminstats."

Not sure if it's a bug on your page or if a template or something was broken somewhere. Home Lander (talk) 17:26, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * That's the Cyberbot problem. Happens quite often. Widr (talk) 17:50, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I see. Spotted someone else's page doing the same thing. Home Lander (talk) 17:54, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

I believe I was scrolling down and noticed that the bug on your page, when you blocked me and the bug. If you were never an admin then you can't abuse the power of getting into other people's conversations just like last time you got me banned, You can't if you were never a admin, I was getting into this conversation but last time you got me banned then got in the conversation. @Widr AlexWikiIDK (talk) 01:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

121.54.44.142
I'm curious as to what you saw in the edits of User:121.54.44.142 to lead to a year block on the IP. It's only been warned once (back in 2013) and it's never been blocked. To immediately jump to one year, especially when another admin declined it at AIV for insufficient warning, seems excessive. I'm curious if I'm missing something as to why this kind of block was justified. Is it a sock or LTA that I'm unaware of? Thanks, only (talk) 11:44, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Just to clear my reporting of them up: it was because of a number of IPs that were consistently quickly blanking articles replacing the content with "Spearton". They were all very clearly related and I had already seen a couple of admins blocking on sight. —72 talk 11:48, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, bunch of 121.54.44** IPs. Probably LTA, as I've blocked for this before. Widr (talk) 11:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * A range block might be needed? 121.54.44.149 just vandalised meta. Dat GuyTalkContribs 11:53, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Maybe a steward should have a look if it's cross-wiki. Widr (talk) 11:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * thanks for the insight. Hadn't seen anything like that going on so I'll know what to keep an eye on. only (talk) 12:01, 8 July 2017 (UTC)