User talk:Wizzito/Archive 2

April 2022
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Cabayi (talk) 12:53, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Hang in there, Wizzito. Sometimes the wiki machine throws a rod. Laugh it off, learn whatever lesson from it, stay objective. Binksternet (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Just woke up after a long sleep and saw all of this. I didn't sock. I believe that my use was legit under policy. I would happily disclose it if I needed to and I just did. I did not use it to gain any advantage in an argument. I'll be back in some time, I just have one, non-related request: A range of WP:LTA/WKHF is being unblocked in some hours and considering the LTA's history, I feel as if they are going to repeat behavior. A lot of their target pages are semi-protected, but some still aren't as they haven't been targeted recently by them. Appreciate an admin looking into it further. thx wizzito  &#124;  say hello!  05:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * p.s. thanks for your talk page message. I would thank you but I can't  wizzito  &#124;  say hello!  05:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * also thx    . would not mind my /64 being blocked for some time as I probably need it and nobody else in this house has a WP editing interest anyways. also wish to sort out the debate on 3G instead of getting into a sock discussion.  wizzito  &#124;  say hello!  05:35, 20 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Sockpuppetry gives the example "Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address". I don't think your edits were 'problematic'. The block is unjustified.  Tewdar   09:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * , that is not the only example given. Unless you've checked all 800+ edits made by the IP it seems rash to make such a blanket statement.
 * Wizzito, I'm genuinely sorry to see you ragequit. I hoped you'd use the time to reframe your perspective and see that, despite your presumably good intentions, you were flipping into and out of IP editing in contravention of policy. Three days is, in my experience, the starting block for someone who has veered into sockpuppetry. That is the most AGF spin I can put on what I saw. Cabayi (talk) 11:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ?!?! Sheesh. Levivich 14:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Chin up, this'll get overturned shortly. Sometimes admins make strange blocks, not the first time, not the last, but it'll straighten out. Levivich 14:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Chiming in. You are valued. Everyone makes errors, even trusted and respected admins; it's how we get better at every single thing. I look forward to your return when you are ready. Please read my essay WP:PACE for my full position on breaks and even retirement (which I did once myself). Your contributions are valued and your absence, noticed. Be aware. BusterD (talk) 18:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Nil illegitimi carborundum. Hope to see you back, but of course do take time off if you feel you need it. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Chiming in just to say, WTF, Cabayi? Schierbecker (talk) 19:51, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

IP editing
Wizzito, please confirm that you will edit only from your account (and that if you accidentally make a logged-out edit you will try to correct it). If you do, I would hope everyone would agree this block can be lifted.

Separately, I saw your retirement notice. It goes without saying that whether you are blocked or not, you should only edit to the extent you want to and that it isn't interfering with other activities in your life. I hope you will feel comfortable resuming editing, but perhaps at a more relaxed pace. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Unblocked
Per the discussion here and at ANI, I've unblocked you. This, of course, does not require you to return, if you're stressed out or have IRL reasons to stay away for a while. But it's now your choice. I've tried to thread the needle and make the unblock rationale clear that this block shouldn't have been made, without coming down too hard on the blocking admin, who (as most of us are) was trying to do the right thing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:42, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * +1 -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Sometimes the punishment seems excessive...

 * #Wipe_Wizzito's_Block_Log_Clean 😁👍  Tewdar   10:21, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Unforunately, for technical reasons this is not possible. The unblock notation notes that there was a consensus to overturn the block and the ANi discussion speaks for itself. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:39, 22 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Things that happened, stay happened, huh? What a shame.  Tewdar   15:32, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I am sympathetic and disagreed with the block as I think I made clear in the ANI discussion. Unfortunately the technical aspects of this are what they are and my own command of tech probably peaked with the advent of the electric pencil sharpener. FWIW of the near 7k blocks I've issued, there are a handful that I later retracted for one reason or another and would very much liked to have been able to erase from the logs. All of which said, the logs serve multiple purposes. It doesn't just act as a record of the editor being blocked, but also the actions of the administrator. While we all make mistakes, an admin who starts piling up dubious blocks is eventually going to have their judgement questioned. So I think a good argument could be made for the status quo when it comes to the block log. IMHO Wizzito's reputation has not suffered any serious damage in this unfortunate incident. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:44, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Damn...
That's how you lose a productive editor. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to see that you're leaving Wikipedia, Wizzito. I am glad that we managed to find solutions for some of the COVID-19 pages getting too big. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:06, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Farewell
I often saw you around. I am sorry to see you retire. I hope you will change your mind one day. Peace. Scorpions13256 (talk) 04:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:George Lee (chef)
Hello, Wizzito. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:George Lee (chef), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:01, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 May newsletter
The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:


 * 1) Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
 * 2) 🇨🇽 AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
 * 3) Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
 * 4) Transgender Pride flag.svg Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
 * 5) Vexilloid of the Roman Empire.svg Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
 * 6) Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
 * 7) 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Martha Izquierdo
Hello, Wizzito. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Martha Izquierdo, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)