Misplaced Pages

@Milonica: Revdeleted. If the IPs come back, please let me know. --NeilN 14:51, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

User:Hussein saaed sonic

You blocked this user indefinitely and also blocked one of their IP socks 45.247.224.123 (talk · contribs). However, they are now continuing to make the same disruptive edits on a new IP address: 45.247.73.231 (talk · contribs). --The1337gamer (talk) 16:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@The1337gamer: Blocked IP and closed the AFD. --NeilN 17:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Still continuing after block expiration: --The1337gamer (talk) 08:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@The1337gamer: Blocked again and page protected. --NeilN 12:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Input please

Hi NeilN and talk page stalkers!

I have a quandary... over at List of terrorist incidents in April 2017 a few editors repeatedly include entries that fail WP:V. The sources given do not call the incidents "terrorism". I've tried engaging with folks on their user talk pages, on the article talk page, and through edit summaries. But to no avail (and even got a "final warning" from a user over it). Is this something I should take to ANI? I don't want to get dragged to AN3, but these edits clearly violate the policy of WP:V and are WP:OR. I worry ANI would just say "content dispute" and dismiss it. I can't just go to AIV either as it's not clearly vandalism. Any advice would be appreciated. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Also see 2017 Aleppo suicide car bombing and List of terrorist incidents in 2017. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:20, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: I've protected List of terrorist incidents in April 2017 to slow down the ongoing shenanigans. While I try to notify any new editor I notice making major edits to pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, you can help yourself by making and logging notifications to editors editing problematically (see WP:GS/ISIL). Draw attention to "This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies" and emphasize that verifiability is policy. --NeilN 20:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you NeilN. The 1RR that comes along with the GS/ISIL applies to me too, though, right? Reverting unverified material is not in WP:3RRNO. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: Yes, 1RR applies to you too. So you'll have to wait a bit for non-BLP issues, hope that someone else notices and agrees, or post a neutral note at an appropriate location (maybe the talk page of a "main" article) asking for more eyes. And for the record, I have zero issues sanctioning editors edit warring back in uncited/unverified material in this area. --NeilN 20:35, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

FYI, List of terrorist incidents in April 2017 is just as bad if not worse... EvergreenFir (talk) 22:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

User:Mark612

Hi NeilN,

As you know, this editor has professed a professional interest in Solon, Ohio. Today, once again, he has reverted my deletion of his poorly sourced puffery and original research at that article. His edit summary: "The city of Solon Commerce Committee sees that this version is best, and most accurately represents the city's retail and dining scene."

Needless to say, the Solon City Council and its Commerce Committee don't have veto power at Misplaced Pages, and the encyclopedia's policies and guidelines apply to the article about Solon, even if they're not happy with the resulting article. (As you can see from the article's lead, reliable sources have very nice things to say about the city, but editors can't make up their own sources if none have written about the local stores and shopping plazas.)

I have tried to reason with this editor, but the result was the edit summary cited above. As somebody who hasn't been revert warring with him, maybe he'll see you as a neutral party (which you are). Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you. — MShabazz /_Stalk 20:16, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

@MShabazz: Hopefully this will get their attention. You would think mentioning "conflict of interest" would give any elected official pause but I guess not. --NeilN 20:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry it came to that, but thank you. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 20:56, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Christy Clark Page

Hello NeilN

I want to clarify that the "Controversies" section which is being warred now is the result of political interference. The copy and edits which are being deleted in entirety, with no negotiation, by questionable editors, and it is vandalism. I am only trying to restore the legitimate copy that resides under "Controversies" for this political subject.

jAnd fyi I just posted the following on the Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents:

Hello-- Christy Clark is currently engaged in an election campaign, seeking reelection as Premier of British Columbia on May 9, 2017 . Over the last week, since the election campaign began, my edits and copy under "Controversies" on Ms. Clark's page have been repeatedly vandalized. I can testify that my copy is well-cited and the references are sourced according to WIkipedia guidelines. I am happy to debate tone and neutrality, and I am also happy to comply with reasonable requests for edits and adjustments when warranted, and I do. In this case the section is "Controversies" and it so happens there are many. The sense or suggestion of non-neutrality called for in one dispute (perhaps the only legitimate editor?) is odd--sensing perhaps that a scandal should not be referred to as a scandal? Even when the news sources cited refers to it as such? When an Ombudsperson or an Attorney-General calls it such? I suggest that the sudden interest in disrupting my copy is not actually questions of neutrality, but may actually be a politically motivated attempt to eliminate from the public record this politician's long list of actual, verifiable, scandals. A clue as to the latest episode of vandalism, to note: The editors tracked from a time zone +7 hours from our Pacific Time Zone, which puts them just off the coast of Africa and Europe in the Atlantic Ocean. I think only a few remote islands lay claim to this time zone. Again, whole passages of copy just wiped out clean. I have referred to the WIkipedia Dispute Resolution for your protocol and I find this: "When you find a passage in an article that is biased or inaccurate, improve it if you can; don't delete salvageable text. For example, if an article appears biased, add balancing material or make the wording more neutral. Include citations for any material you add."Italic text

In all of the cases of vandalism--and there have been now several, from varied editors--there has been no attempt to improve or balance any of my copy. In all cases the editors have simply stripped the copy outright to eliminate the majority of the content under "Controversies", as far as the Wiki will allow, I suspect. I hope an impartial Misplaced Pages Administrator might review the recent week's history on this page. I am bringing this also to the attention of media because I am certain this amounts to political interference. I also wish to grow and maintain good standing as a WIkipedia editor, in the public service, and I hope we might favourably resolve this matter for the sake of integrity and the public record. Sincerely, Theadjuster (talk) 04:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I am hoping to settle this asap. But I can not let the vandalism undermine the purpose of this Misplaced Pages record.

Sincerely,

Theadjuster (talk) 04:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Theadjuster: See my reply at ANI and also please read WP:AGF. --NeilN 04:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

[User:NeilN| ANI? Also, I appreciate the AGF guideline but to clarify, again, my copy is being deleted completely. These are legitimate, substantiated records which I have put in their proper place, under "Controversies". Hard to maintain reasonable doubt and AGF given the repeated vandalism. Theadjuster (talk) 05:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Theadjuster: ANI = Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. And you've been told why other editors are objecting to your content. Persisting in calling their edits vandalism instead of participating on the article's talk page is going to end badly for you. --NeilN 05:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Rollback privileges of Beyond my Ken

So User:Beyond my Ken put me on the Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Cs_california for putting in maps on buildings which I am ok with since an admin can review the points made by both me and him and give guidance on proper edits that are best for wikipedia. But what I have a problem with is this guy is abusing his rollback privileges (see my Admin Noticeboard comments) and removing edits that have nothing to do with the subject at hand these include complete infoboxes boxes, updated to maps with better resolution, updated images, and inclusion of gis coordinate. Not sure if it counts as vandalism but he remove content reviewing it this seems like a good case to put his privileges on hold. --Cs california (talk) 05:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Forgot to add that he previously had been blocked for edit waring but I did not engage him. I think he is just trying to stir the pot because I accidentally added #USA to some maps he regularly patrols and he disagrees. --Cs california (talk) 09:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cs california. The matter is already at WP:ANI so there's no need to open a second conversation here. --NeilN 12:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Ok cool sorry to bother you on the issue -Cs california (talk) 12:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Urgent deletion

Hello. Could you please delete Talk:FA_Women's_Super_League because a page needs to be moved there, and since I do not yet have the page mover rights yet, I cannot complete it, so it will otherwise be a mess. I do not know why system allowed me to perform just the one deletion. Thank you ----Kostas20142 (talk) 13:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Kostas20142: I've moved the talk page. --NeilN 13:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!--Kostas20142 (talk) 13:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Possible drafts on user talk pages

Hi NeilN. You were helpful in sorting out WP:AN#User talk:Best of Luck Nikki, so I'm wondering if you wouldn't also mind taking a look at User talk:Mohammad Shahid, User talk:Benjamin Thonggh, User:Dj Futurustic and User:Dj Futuristic. The first two appear to be articles copied and pasted onto user talk pages. I'm not sure if they are intended to be drafts or if the editor simply mistook their talk page for their sandbox. The last two appear to be the same draft and were possibly being edited at the same time by the same user. It's possible the spelling of the name was incorrect in one of them so the editor just created a new account. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC) 　

@Marchjuly: All four have been deleted as copy-pastes of existing articles. One had an introductory paragraph for a new article which I saved to a sandbox. --NeilN 13:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for checking on these. I htink I may have found another one at User:DRONACHARYA partially taken from Dronacharya College of Engineering. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Okay, I think that one was started as a draft and then was redone in article space. G6'd the user page and soft-blocked the user because of their name. --NeilN 21:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for checking. I thought about the name as well, but then I tried Dronacharya which redirects to Drona, so it might not be simply due to the school's name. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi again NeilN. I came across User talk:Kenricklenno2001 before, but couldn't remeber the username until it just popped up again on my watchlist. I have no idea what this editor is doing. Part of the page does include posts form other, but they also seem to be copying a pasting article content on to their user talk page. Any idea what might be going on here? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Kaspersky Lab/draft is another strange one. It appears some made added a draft as a subpage to Talk:Kaspersky Lab. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: It turns out that neither of these needed admin tools. Kenricklenno2001 was hosting his fictional writings on his talk page. Removed that and told him about WP:NOTWEBHOST. Talk:Kaspersky Lab/draft was a draft discussed at Talk:Kaspersky_Lab#Draft. I blanked the content but the page needs to be kept for attribution purposes as its content replaced the live article. --NeilN 14:40, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at these. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Arbitration restrictions

Thanks for this. Please ping me when you put in the request, as I'd like to follow the discussion. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@DrFleischman: Assuming Arbcom members start replying to my request and assuming there's an opening for this related request (if not, I will open a new one) here's what I plan to say.

WP:ACDS has instructions for admins placing editing restrictions. To wit, "Any uninvolved administrator may impose on any page or set of pages relating to the area of conflict semi-protection, full protection, move protection, revert restrictions, and prohibitions on the addition or removal of certain content (except when consensus for the edit exists)." It has no instructions for admins wishing to modify restrictions placed by other admins. Being the cockeyed optimist that I am, I have to believe that not all restrictions will be needed in the future, especially ones custom tailored to address a current controversy. I'd like Arbcom to clarify the process of getting restrictions removed. I suggest copying the process laid out for modifying sanctions. Briefly, fresh disruption can be met with new restrictions placed by any admin. Restrictions may be lifted only with the agreement of the admin who placed the restrictions. If they are unavailable or disagreement occurs then a request for review may be made at WP:AN or WP:ARCA.

Does this address your question? --NeilN 01:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

It would, although I disagree somewhat with your proposed solution, specifically the part about restrictions only being lifted with the agreement of the admin who placed the restrictions. To cut to the chase, there have been some admins who have been placing restrictions on pages that have seen no disruption at all in order to preempt disruption that they predict will occur in the future. I think that approach is detrimental to the project and I think it merits discussion by the admin community, at least on an article-by-article basis. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 04:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

One more thing I was thinking about today: article restrictions and editor sanctions are really quite different. Sanctions affect one editor and are usually temporary. Article restrictions affect whole articles (many editors) and are usually permanent. A single admin should not be able to keep an article under restriction indefinitely without any opportunity for community oversight. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:15, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

DrFleischman, if you're talking about WP:ARBPIA3, throw your brickbats at Arbcom :-) They're the ones who mandated preemptive protection for that area. In other areas, discretionary sanctions give individual admins a great deal of power and there's nothing in WP:ACDS I can see that keeps that in check. I quite firmly dislike preemptive restrictions so you're not going to get an argument from me that admin actions need some boundaries. --NeilN 23:01, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Not ARBPIA3. I understand there's nothing in ACDS. It seems to me that the lack of anything about page restrictions in WP:ACDS#Appeals and modifications is probably just an oversight and wasn't intended to silently give admins completely unfettered discretion for page restrictions while creating avenues for review of sanctions. Something should be added there or there needs to some less formal avenue for review, such as just going to WP:AN. I will patiently wait while your clarification request is on hold. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

User violating topic ban

Sashko1999 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

• Editing Macedonians (ethnic group) (diff in clear violation of their topic ban (a one-year topic-ban imposed by you in July of last year), in addition to doing mass POV changes, including mass removal of content and replacing reliable sources with a non-RS source (joshuatree.net), on articles about virtually all Slavic nationalities/ethnicities (see their contributions) right after coming back from a two-week block for POV edit-warring. - Tom | Thomas.W 17:23, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I believe that the topic ban was placed on 1 April 2017, but may have included an erroneous time-tag. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:31, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

You are correct, David Biddulph. Fixed that. @Thomas.W: Blocked one year, TBAN is now indefinite. --NeilN 17:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Formerly productive editor

Hello,
I saw your post at User talk:Laurelpeter122. There's something amiss with this account. Seems to have suddenly become disruptive and filled up their user page with a 'raw' link to a Wiki article repeated over and over. Something odd happened when I tried to scroll down or otherwise navigate and I was crashed out of Wiki. I reverted it (perhaps I should not have?). Does the account need investigating? Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 19:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh! Blocked whilst I was typing! Eagleash (talk) 19:04, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey Widr, I'm wondering if this is a compromised account? --NeilN 19:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Seems so. I've extended the block to indef until they explain their recent edits. Widr (talk) 19:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

another User:GR.no sock

See Meters (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Meters: Blocked. --NeilN 19:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

And another . Persistent. Meters (talk) 20:41, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Meters: Ha! Already blocked. --NeilN 20:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

You're quick, sir. Meters (talk) 20:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Pahela Baishakh

may need a 48 hour extension to the pp-dispute. We are making progress, but it seems fair to give Akib.H some more time to draft something or suggest revisions to the two proposals on Talk:Pahela Baishakh. I would be okay, in case you decide otherwise. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:08, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Ms Sarah Welch: I don't think there's any need to extend full protection. All of you can edit responsibly. --NeilN 23:52, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you very much for approving my unblock request. I will edit responsibly from now on! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaniemaster (talk • contribs) 20:38, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Oxford redux

Hoggardhigh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)—another editor who insists on the serial comma (and has been known to both revert and rewrite to subtly reinclude them), has been warned before, and has never engaged anyone. TIA. —ATS 🖖 talk 21:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Now invoking WP:MYWAY. —ATS 🖖 talk 23:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Your warning didn't work, I'm afraid. —ATS 🖖 talk 01:37, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

You around? It's now belligerent. —ATS 🖖 talk 03:50, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Jimmy Fallon

Hi NeilN. The IP has again begun making major changes in the article without discussion or consensus. He/she is doing it with multiple IP addresses, so I'm sure how to proceed. But I thought I'd let you know. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 22:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Sundayclose: They've been reverted. Let's see what happens next. --NeilN 23:57, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk

Hi NeilN,

Thank you for your message. I am not in any way affiliated with the Yale School of Drama, simply a fan of the school and just trying to improve the page. thanks!TheKingLives (talk) 00:09, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi TheKingLives. Will you help clean up the copyright and WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE violations? --NeilN 00:17, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'd be happy to, I'm just not sure where exactly these violations are. If you can help out with that i'd like to do so and help get these violations removed.TheKingLives (talk) 00:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheKingLives: The second paragraph of the History section is one I spotted. The entire article could use a check. --NeilN 00:22, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

FYI

I sent you an email. --David Tornheim (talk) 08:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

IP block

Hi NeilN. Could this IP please be given a timeout. They have ignored all warnings on their talk page, including a final warning. They are persisting on vandalizing McKenzie Moore. Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Blocked. --NeilN 13:53, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages has slowed. Do you see it?

Is it just me or does it seem like Misplaced Pages has significantly slowed? You know how on Sundays it's like there is barely anyone on Misplaced Pages? Well, I'm feeling that to a small degree on weekdays too. Seems like significantly less people are editing. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Objectively speaking - because right :-) - for the number of edits, it's slower than it was ten years ago but busier than it was a few years ago: Misplaced Pages:Time Between Edits. For the number of editors, look at columns C and D on this chart. What would be interesting is if the WMF ran these stats based on major article categories to see if subject focus has changed. My guess is that we're getting more editing on BLPs and company/organization articles and less on general knowledge topics. --NeilN 00:25, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd already noticed that it's not nearly as active as it was back when I was a newbie. Back in 2007, for example, it was very, very active. But I mean that it seems slower lately; this is noticeable when I'm all caught up on my watchlist and it changes a little for the rest of the day; this usually happens on Sundays, but it's been happening a little on weekdays as well. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Reborn: Be careful what you wish for. Gender role --NeilN 18:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Not what I wished for. I like Misplaced Pages not being as busy; it means less vandalism, less corrupt editing, less faulty editing with no bad intentions as a motive, and less time focused on those irritating aspects of this site. Sure, it can also mean less good work is getting done. But in my experience, the long-term editors are the main ones doing the good work. The drive-by and newbie editors? Not so much. This is obviously because they have much to learn. Anyway, I've weighed in on the Gender role matter. Thanks for keeping a lookout at that article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I figured as soon as you saw those edits your reaction would be something like, "well, that's no good" :-) I think it's some kind of school assignment. --NeilN 23:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Ping

Mario shabow edit

Hi, regarding user simone001 he keeps adding the youth caps on the page of the footballers senior caps in the info box... that should not be there but hes arrogant and does that on heaps of other footballers pages. i removed it yet he still keeps putting it back on .can you please advise him from doing that or get someone to look at the issue?

(user talk:Manunited20) 19 April 2017, 14.20 (UTC)

This issue has already been discussed on numerous occasions with the same result every time. Simione001 (talk) 22:25, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@Simione001: Discussed where, please? --NeilN 22:33, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

There is a fair bit here: . Simione001 (talk) 22:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Simione001. Manunited20, you can add your thoughts to that discussion or start a new one. --NeilN 22:40, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

FYI, you can find the ladder here . Simione001 (talk) 22:45, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

You Deleted My Post?

Please i dont know where the advert is located, i have removed so many writeup you keep deleting my post, please tell me the points i will remove let me remove and rest — Preceding unsigned comment added by BirialaGday (talk • contribs) 14:48, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi BirialaGday. Promotional text is just one issue. The main problem is that you are writing an article about yourself. This isn't Facebook. We only have articles on people meeting our notability guidelines. --NeilN 14:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

its not the only thing that i have done i want to promote my culture it is not just bcuz of me, know my ethnic group far way behind civilization am trying to use this medium to let the world know that Ijaw is a language in Nigeria, expecially my town i hardly see anything about it online, so please just help me remove anything that is removeable and Post it for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BirialaGday (talk • contribs) 15:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@BirialaGday: No, sorry, Misplaced Pages is not here for you to promote things and people. --NeilN 15:12, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

So I Cant even write what i know?

one more finall question before make my decision, cant i write what i know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BirialaGday (talk • contribs) 15:21, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@BirialaGday: The answer is in our verifiability policy. "In Misplaced Pages, verifiability means that other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Misplaced Pages does not publish original research. Its content is determined by published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it." --NeilN 15:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I am new do not understand what I did wrong :(

Please explain what this is about (cream colored box on bottom half) due to my complete bewilderment: https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Sinsearach I don't understand. I just dont get it Ive been so very very very careful..... and it says I edited that Article, which i cant because it is protected, I just put a thought on the article's talk page. I made a proposal..... and I have then contacted 7 or 8 frequent editors of that article for their feedback regarding my proposal.......as due diligence on what I clearly could see what a supremely controversial articleSinsearach (talk) 21:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

PS ok sorry I just noticed this"It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date." so then that notice on my talk page is just a heads up?Sinsearach (talk) 21:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Sinsearach: Yes, it's just a heads up. --NeilN 21:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Edit

Vanamonde93 warned me to not edit without giving an edit summary, I gave an edit summary, what is the problem now Abhishek0831996 (talk) 18:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@Abhishek0831996: Only partially correct. Vanamonde93 said, "You've received a number of warnings for a number of different disruptive tendencies: unsourced content, not leaving edit summaries, and disruptive editing. Please consider this a final warning for all of those issues..." What is the source for this change? --NeilN 18:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Please don't block me from editing Abhishek0831996 (talk) 18:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@Abhishek0831996: I'm not going to block you but I would like an answer to my question. --NeilN 18:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

http://m.timesofindia.com/india/Narendra-Modi-gets-clean-chit-in-SIT-report-on-Gujarat-riots-Zakia-Jafri-vows-to-continue-her-fight/articleshow/12612345.cms Abhishek0831996 (talk) 18:37, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@Abhishek0831996: First, that source was not provided. Second, please read sources more carefully. As stated, "The Ahmedabad Metropolitan Magistrate on Tuesday declared that the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team had not found any evidence..." The Supreme Court appointed a team to investigate. A lower court was presented with the findings and judged there was no evidence. --NeilN 18:45, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I am sorry, I will read the sources more carefully Abhishek0831996 (talk) 18:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

RevDel request

I accidentally edited my CSD log while logged out here. Can you revdel the IP on that edit? —MRD2014 📞 contribs 12:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

@MRD2014: Done. --NeilN 14:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Information needed

Hi, I'm new to Misplaced Pages and Just learning how it work

Well, you can share with what actually issue with page which is reported so next time I will not do such mistake

and also how new pages notified for review and where we can check all new pages which is created on Misplaced Pages ?

Hope I'll get your reply

Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rnsharma1993 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

@Rnsharma1993: Please see WP:WEBCRIT for notability guidelines that determine if a website should have an article or not. To create a new article for review use WP:AFC. New page creations are listed here: Special:NewPagesFeed --NeilN 15:56, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Typical abuse of non-PC users and its consequences.

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 97.120.54.196 (talk) 17:51, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Removed before you even got here, amusingly. --NeilN 17:53, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Bengali calendar

Needs a watch. A new editor, already cautioned, warring with Kautilya3 and I, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Nsmutte back at it again

Another obvious sock. Boomer Vial 06:13, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

@Boomer Vial: Boom. --NeilN 06:15, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll let you know if i dig up any more. Boomer Vial 06:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

@Boomer Vial: Basically keep an eye on every noticeboard like this. --NeilN 06:21, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I'll keep that in mind. Their three favorite editors to harass are Bonadea, Oshwah, and BethNaught right? Boomer Vial 06:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

@Boomer Vial: Yes. --NeilN 06:34, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Funny name, indeed!

:p but thanks for dealing with that- I admit I wasn't sure whether user pages could be 'salted,' or the equivalent. Cheers, — O Fortuna 07:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Unblock of user: Maleidys Perez

Hello. please, nobody is using the account of user named Maleidys Perez. can you please unblock. I am not using the account, so the user can edit his/her own talk page, and re-enable account creation and email. I am sooooo sad about this, but Neither vandalism. Now that the block is indefinite, unblock the account or decrease the block time to a definite (minutes, hours, days, weeks, etc.) one because indefinite blocks look too permanent. Will not make disruptive editing and vandalism. Ask the one who blocked the account to unblock. and add the unblock request accept notification to the user's talk page . Thanks!!! 2600:387:9:3:0:0:0:AE (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

And sock blocked. --NeilN 17:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

RFC closure

FYI, I closed this RFC, and endorsed your warnings in the close. Revent

IP hopping harasser

83.46.137.248 who you blocked for disruption is now IP hopping to harass both Mlpearc and I. So far they have used 213.143.51.33, 213.143.50.194, 213.143.50.198 and 190.39.118.224. Can anything be done to stop or at least slow them down? Justeditingtoday (talk) 22:35, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

@Justeditingtoday: Page protections and rangeblocks put in place by Barek and myself. --NeilN 22:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I don't know why that person decided to go so militant all of the sudden but thanks for putting a stop to it. I imagine that protecting user talk pages is a last resort so I'm sorry everything escalated to that so quickly. Justeditingtoday (talk) 22:41, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

question

Can you please do something about this? It's beginning to feel like harrassment. I've disengaged from that thread as I have had my question there answered. I've had several pings to that page. Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 13:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@SW3 5DL: You can do that yourself by stating something like, "I have said all I want to say here". --NeilN 14:04, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

It will continue if I do that. If he wants to start an issue on ANI he can open a thread. I've said all I have to say on that thread and my disengagement shows that. I've had my question answered. If nothing is done, he will continue there and on the article talk page. Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 14:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

A different queestion

Hello N. Are these a candidate for rev/del? I know the attack on Acroterion is unfounded nonsense but the content is an insult to all those who lived and died in that event. I know that I am letting my personal feelings get in the way so I thought I would ask for your opinion. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 15:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey Writ Keeper, while you're here, what do you think about this? --NeilN 16:42, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Mmm, all in all, I'd probably say yes, but it wouldn't surprise or alarm me if someone else said no. Stronger case for revdel for the edit in mainspace, I think, though all of them are within the boundaries of admin discretion. What I'd do is probably revdel the edit in mainspace and then let Acroterion decide what they want to do with the ones in their userspace. What do you think? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:48, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper: I was on the fence. Good advice - thanks. --NeilN 16:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look N and @Writ Keeper:. That is one sturdy fence because I was on it as well and that is why I appreciate your input. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 18:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

RevDel plz?

The edit I just undid at Qamar Javed Bajwa contains what looks like a personal phone number and several other bits of information. It looks like this user is trying to dox either Bajwa or a member of his family. CityOfSilver 16:38, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) done. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:40, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

carl cowl

hello, not sure why i have been directed to this page or why my comments on Carl Cowls page were considered partisan. can you please explain

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rickblackman1917 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rickblackman1917. C.Fred and another editor undid your changes but I'll explain why here. First, article content needs to be verifiable. You need to provide citations to published sources that back up the material you're adding. Second, text like Always an anti-war activist, I saw Carl speak in Chicago, just as the first Gulf war was coming to a close 1991. He received a standing ovation after he spoke to a massive audience, laying out his anti-war position, explaining he had been campaigning against imperialist wars since the age of fourteen, and he was "getting a little tired of it". A generous and extremely witty man, a great pianist and mischievous to the end. Much Missed has an unencyclopedic tone. You wouldn't expect to see that in the Encyclopedia Britannica, right? --NeilN 01:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Madhesi people

Hi, you protected Madhesi people on 21 April when I requested that the article be locked due to a content dispute. One disputant has provided what appear to be rock-solid sources on the talk page but the other (an anon whom I suspect has been hopping for months) has not responded. I doubt that they will respond because the article at present reflects their POV. The protection does not expire until 5 May, at which point I would be inclined to reinstate the earlier version per the sources provided on the talk page. Doubtless, some anon will then return to war. Is it worth delaying things in these circumstances? Somehow, we've got to get the anons into the discussion and that doesn't seem likely to happen while the article shows their preferred version. (Yes, I do know about WP:WRONGVERSION.) - Sitush (talk) 11:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Sitush: General sanctions gives me more leeway. What specific version would you recommend? --NeilN 14:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't realise that, sorry. I'd go for this version and then see if anyone of good standing objects. As I understand it, the IP was pushing a secessionist POV, to achieve which they needed the article to reflect a position that is not well sourced. I'd be happy to show both "sides" (NPOV) but only if the anons can come up with sources of an equal standing to the academic ones that have been given in the article and on the talk page, ie: not agenda-driven news sources etc. - Sitush (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Sitush: Sorry, that's a diff so it shows me two versions. This is what you recommend? --NeilN 14:52, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

The next one along, ie: as at 13:27 on 21 April. - Sitush (talk)

Thanks for doing that. - Sitush (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Administrator or not?

Hi - at the op of your talk page it says "NeilN is not an administrator or an account creator", yet elsewhere on the talk page you link through to claim the category of an administrator. Can you clarify your status please? Thanks. Contaldo80 (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Template:Adminstats is generating that error message. The template appears to be broken at the moment. You can confirm that NeilN is an administrator here. Ivanvector (/_Edits) 12:45, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Since Contaldo80 has been here nearly twelve years, it is hard to imagine that they don't actually know that already?! — O Fortuna 13:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

I have little interest in how administrators organise their work (don't believe that all editors breathlessly keep track of internal house-keeping discussions), so no I didn't know. Perhaps worth taking a less patronising tone - thanks! Contaldo80 (talk) 10:16, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I have the same problem. So does Ivanvector. So does every admin I checked except User:Drmies; his template still works! Did he bribe somebody? Or is he the only active admin left on the wiki? What's your secret, Doc? --MelanieN (talk) 14:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@MelanieN: Look at the date. He's checked out a long time ago :) --NeilN 14:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

So the bot works, but only for actions before October 23, 2015? But hey - I was an admin then! So were you! I checked a couple of admins who have been admins since the beginning of time!! I still think he did something nefarious to get HIS stats to work when ours don't. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@MelanieN: The bot creates a new version of each admin's page every day for admins who actually use the template. It's been erroring out on the daily runs lately. Drmies stopped using the template so the bot doesn't run for them. --NeilN 14:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Ha, what a funny history! So some days I have adminstats, and some days I'm a fraud pretending to be an admin. It all depends which day you look at. Timing is everything. --MelanieN (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

I really have no idea what y'all are talking about, so perhaps I don't deserve to be an admin... Drmies (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

MelanieN is not an administrator or an account creator.

Therefore they have been disallowed the use of adminstats.

Apparently your adminstats still work because you modestly stopped having them updated. Clever decision on your part. Sorry to ping you away from your day! --MelanieN (talk) 14:52, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

It was no problem, he wasn't busy; just whiling away the hours pretending to be an admin ;) — O Fortuna 15:15, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Pretending? Whaddaya mean? According to Adminstats he's the only admin in the place; he must be busier than a whole hivefull of bees! --MelanieN (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

So, today I have adminstats. Tomorrow I'll probably be a fraud again. --MelanieN (talk) 23:24, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Highest-grossing Kannada films

Hi Neil, hope all is well with you. I'm curious if you think Highest-grossing Kannada films could be speedied under A10: Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic. There are a number of issues I'm mulling over in my head, but the most important one is that the content already exists at List of highest-grossing Indian films#Highest-grossing Kannada films and there has been no attempt to expand. (They didn't even include the references found in that parent article--so technically, it's a DE-expansion.)

Secondary considerations are:

• I've been dealing with a lot of financial vandalism surrounding Kannada-language films lately. There's been a push to inflate the gross values of the film Raajakumara.
• Article was created by an SPA.
• When article was created, it included fabricated data, for instance the ₹75 crore claim for Raajakumara is unsubstantiated, and it's not even consistent with the parent article, which shows a ₹40 crore gross.
• "Highest-grossing Kannada films" is not the proper article title. It should be "List of highest-grossing Kannada films" to be parallel with similar artilces. Buuuuut,
• List of highest-grossing Kannada films was already created by a user/sock operator that I have indeffed. He fabricated the entire thing as I've detailed quite thoroughly at Talk:List of highest-grossing Kannada films and I have since turned that into a redirect for being a den of lies.

So in my expert opinion, I suspect the recent creation of Highest-grossing Kannada films was an attempt to circumvent community scrutiny, and to continue the same campaign to fabricate data about Kannada-language films. A10 criterion seems like it could work, but I also think maybe G3 for vandalism could fly? What do you think? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: There's actually a simpler solution. The article was obviously an unattributed copy-paste of the existing article. Revdeleted the offending versions and semied the redirect. --NeilN 15:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Ah, there you go. Thanks for the brain power! I'll keep this in mind for the future. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:54, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Re. discussion at ANI

Our discussion at ANI has now been closed. I added a note immediately following the closed discussion:

"In the discussion above, I said 'going to the talk page within ten minutes of the revert'. On both my iphone and laptop, this link goes where I intended, but then jumps forward for reasons I do not understand. Here is a diff in case anyone else encounters the same problem."

@Anythingyouwant: The "link jumping" problem has existed on Misplaced Pages for years. No idea why the devs haven't put more effort into mitigating the behavior. But MastCell had a good close - why not just move on? --NeilN 03:59, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I still have no idea whether you looked at what I was pointing you to. That's apparently by design. Let's both move on now, me to continued honorable editing, and you to whatever it is you do. Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Madhesi people

Dear sir, Madhesi people are the indigenous Nepalis originated from Madhesh plains of Southern Nepal. Please correct the false statement sponsered by Bhagymani on that article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.34.48.253 (talk)

Hi 27.34.48.253. Please continue the discussion at the talk page of the article where Sitush has replied to your post. --NeilN 12:48, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

References

1. "Indigenous Madheshis of Nepal".

Thanks for blocking Catsarebad12397

Thanks for blocking Catsarebad12397, saved me from making an AIV report. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:34, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: You're welcome! --NeilN 04:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Happy editing and thanks for helping take care of vandalous accounts. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Repetitive page blanking

Please take a look at this , they have ignored a 4im notice (forgot to include that in AIV report - oops) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:53, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done By Materialscientist in the time it took me to type this - that was fast! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:53, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: That's a sockpuppet. Any time you see a new account causing disruption like that with regards to "zeitgeist" just report to AIV referring to ShantaePirate --NeilN 05:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know as I did not know and I shall, is it the same (different user of course) for edits regarding changing anything saying Taiwan to the Republic of China? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: Probably not as that change is constantly done by many people. Kind of the constant changes from "England" to the "U.K." and vice versa. --NeilN 05:07, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I was asking as accounts that I have come across changing it have all been blocked for vandalism because of it (I think there was a sock investigation at some point regarding this that blocked like 20+ accounts doing it but not sure on specifics). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:09, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Self tests

I have come across this user who is repeatedly doing editing tests in articles and then self reverting despite a warning for it. Any ideas? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:12, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: Basically warn and then report. I would do a test1, test2, disrupt3, disrupt4 and then report. If they have hundreds of edits like that no one has caught (like in a sandbox) then it's likely they're trying to game 30/500. In that case, grab a friendly neighborhood admin. --NeilN 05:19, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

self-revert is a single issue notice though? And what do you mean by gaming 30/500? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: If they keep doing it after a warning they need to be warned again (and so on). Gaming 30/500 means trying to get extended confirmed status illegitimately. --NeilN 05:25, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I did not see test2 in Twinkle so thanks for telling me about it (I have since found it) and giving the proper route to follow in dealing with cases like this :D --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

cyrfaw (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

User:Theadjuster

Hi NeilN. I am wondering whether the link Theadjuster added to his last talk page post needs to be removed. It links to an external website where he basically makes the same claims he tried to include in the article. In fact, it seems to also include a downloadable file of his preferred version of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: The external page hosted a version of the article that had copyright violations (since revdeleted by another admin). We don't link to copyvios so, poof... --NeilN 02:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for checking. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

A concern

I recently warned user:Shahrizal shahanshah for edit-warring on Qutb al-Din Aibak, which they have been edit warring since 11 March. Now appears user:Malika Sultana making the exact same edits on Qutb al-Din Aibak and Nasir ad-Din Qabacha. Also, Malika Sultana created Shazia Begum which Shahrizal has edited four times. I suspect sockpuppetry. Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

And Malika Sultana restored user:Shahrizal shahanshah's unsourced edit again. --Kansas Bear (talk) 07:24, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: I've asked for an explanation here. --NeilN 13:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Of Pandas and People

I submitted what I thought were legitimate edits to the Of Pandas and People Page

I felt that using to term pseudoscience to describe Intelligent Design was a little too inflammatory to be included in the first sentence of the first paragraph of the introduction. It seems reasonable to move that particular description to the main body of the article where it could be presented in a better context.

I suppose that if you want your post on Of Pandas and People to appear liked a biased hack-job then by all means keep that phrase in the introduction.

But I think it is rich that I am being accused of starting an edit war when all I am trying to do is make the article appear a little more balanced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathezar (talk • contribs) 19:04, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Mathezar: Obviously more than one editor disagrees with your assessment. That's why you need to use the article's talk page to discuss your concerns. --NeilN 19:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I just read his talk page. He either doesn't understand or strongly disagrees with our policies and I doubt he'll ever be happy here. Doug Weller talk 07:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

New names

We went from being clowns to morons... Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Corkythehornetfan: I'm just happy they haven't found the span or font tags to give their posts that extra multi-colored oomph. --NeilN 19:37, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

haha, I know! Give them time, I'm sure they'll figure it out eventually... especially if you keep posting on their talk page! Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 20:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Validity of proposed deletion in question

The account that nominated the article for deletion has blanked it numerous times. I do not believe this nomination to be valid and am tempted to remove it myself but thought I better double check, is this valid? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: That reason is not a valid reason for deletion. If it cannot be speedied then it needs to be taken to WP:AFD. --NeilN 06:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the confirmation, I reverted the edit with the reason/edit summary of that it is not a valid delete reason. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

IP 77.101.6.102

Hello, you blocked the IP address 77.101.6.102 some time ago for persistently making the same (wrong) edits to Scottish independence opinion poll articles. It came off block a few days ago and has immediately started doing the same edit again. It hasn't broken WP:3RR, but clearly has no intention of discussing the issue and just wants to impose its point of view. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 05:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@Jmorrison230582: Blocked for a month again. --NeilN 06:36, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Please apply ARBAP2 DS on new article

Greetings, NeilN. Pertaining to a talk page discussion, I have created a new article Timeline of the Trump presidency, 2017 Q2 split from Timeline of the presidency of Donald Trump. Could you kindly place the new article under the same standard DS/1RR restrictions as the original one? I have already added the relevant messages on the talk page and the edit notice but I suppose this needs to be logged by an admin somewhere. Also, the source article will be moved to Timeline of the Trump presidency, 2017 Q1 shortly, so you may need to add this title to the list of sanctioned articles as well. Thanks! — JFG 09:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi JFG. I don't see a lot of disruptive editing on the article or heated discussion on the talk page. Do you know why the editing restrictions were put in place? --NeilN 15:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't remember when or why DS/1RR was applied here; I took the restrictions as standard practice in this topic area. It's hard to know whether the refreshing lack of drama is natural or thanks to the preventive notice. — JFG 15:37, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@JFG: Seems like a knee-jerk application of restrictions. I've been wanting to ask Arbcom to clarify the process of lifting restrictions placed by another admin. Guess this is a good push to do that. --NeilN 15:42, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes. For my own part, I'd be fine with a lower level of protection, in line with WP philosophy. — JFG 15:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Dan Barker

The editor who made the libelous edits to Dan Barker has also made such edits to the Freedom from Religion article. Can you help with a revdel? 32.218.33.26 (talk) 04:42, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Done and blocked. Thanks for reporting. --NeilN 04:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

What is the deal

...erasing a request for clarification for an action taken, by another editor? "Not here" (your edit summary) hardly moves the matter along. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 04:47, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Look at where you're posting. --NeilN 04:49, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Then address any issue with the where, via a Talk reply. I began an edit, and was informed of a block to an IP address. That block had the attendant name "Ivanvector", an editor and an accountant (?!). I see no issue with asking him where the discussion is to be found, that led to his action. What policy have I violated? And are you violating any in your involvement and actions here? Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 04:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@Leprof 7272: Oh my god. How about opening your eyes and looking at where you posted (twice). Hint: It's not the talk page. I even said I moved it from the user page! --NeilN 05:00, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I am not your "god", and am unclear what any deity has to do with this. Stop playing games. Your hint is just as time-wasting as all previous posts. I have no idea what you are on about. Please reply at Ivanvector's Talk page, to put all of this in one place. There, I have already explained myself fully. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 05:03, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@Leprof 7272: Do you know the difference between a user page and a user talk page? --NeilN 05:06, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Not discussing further here, and not replying to condescension that does not clarify matters. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 05:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

At least talk page watchers will get a chuckle out of this and Ivanvector's user page and talk page history. --NeilN 05:14, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Not discussing further here, and not replying to condescension that does not clarify matters. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 05:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Given your continued inability to see you posted to Ivanvector's user page instead of his talk page and your inability to understand that "Moved from your user page" was not a reply to you despite your subsequent refactoring I thought it was a fair question. --NeilN 05:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

• It is worth noting that Ivanvector, in his administrator's note on your talkpage , linked directly to the specific discussion in question, as well as stating very clearly that "If you have questions about these actions you may ask here and/or appeal at the administrators' noticeboard". -- Softlavender (talk) 05:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Neil, you're right, I did get a good chuckle out of this. :D CrashUnderride 05:27, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Even the newest editors understand "moved from user page". And yes, posting to a user page is an understandable mistake but you would think they would have checked their contrib history before wasting time on two talk pages. This is the second time in a month on this talk page that they would have been much better off looking at the situation with more than a cursory glance. --NeilN 05:39, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Well we did learn something in this conversation: Ivanvector is an accountant, which is apparently cause for incredulity and alarm "(?!)". Apparently however the fact that he is an admin does not merit mentioning. Softlavender (talk) 06:04, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@Softlavender: And rightly so. NeilN can only block; Ivanvector will block and start a SEC investigation ;) — O Fortuna 07:19, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Most of accounting is just showing up places unexpectedly and demanding to see the records. Ivanvector (/_Edits) 13:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

• I am responding to the various places this issue has spilled over by attempting to consolidate them all on the user's talk page. Please see User talk:Leprof 7272#Tagging acknowledged, tag-bombing and other misrepresentations belatedly denied; reply to the foregoing, on learning of it. Ivanvector (/_Edits) 13:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

172.58.171.175 == 172.56.5.179

Just a note, in case it's of interest. —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR░ 06:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@PaleoNeonate: They're hopping around. Hopefully the semi will stop the disruption. --NeilN 06:44, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

F0rmation122

Can you explain your blocking of F0rmation122? nihlus kryik (talk) 08:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@Nihlus Kryik: Trivial edits to get autoconfirmed and then straight to making edits that helped caused the articles to be semi-protected in the first place. --NeilN 08:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

So you indef them without any warning? Not all of his edits were meaningless or trivial, so this is an egregious abuse of admin privileges and a piss-poor way of assuming good faith. nihlus kryik (talk) 12:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@Nihlus Kryik: I do not think they're a "new" editor. And to be honest, your editing history seems pretty odd too. If you edited as an IP before, welcome aboard as a registered editor. --NeilN 15:20, 30 April 2017 (UTC)