| Revision as of 20:56, 1 June 2007 editGogo Dodo (talk | contribs)Administrators197,922 edits Re: Mudaliar | Latest revision as of 19:13, 5 June 2007 edit undoIsotope23 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users16,870 edits →Re: Mudaliar: comment | ||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| Re : Since I don't know much about the topic (only that it's a very heated topic), I would recommend that you post your request for page protection at ]. The two vulgar trolls from today were blocked by another admin. {{User|203.101.45.171}} appears to have stopped for the day. Since the vandalism and edit warring are very complex and the topic rather heated, I would recommend that you leave a note on ] explaining the situation should the person return. -- ] 20:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | Re : Since I don't know much about the topic (only that it's a very heated topic), I would recommend that you post your request for page protection at ]. The two vulgar trolls from today were blocked by another admin. {{User|203.101.45.171}} appears to have stopped for the day. Since the vandalism and edit warring are very complex and the topic rather heated, I would recommend that you leave a note on ] explaining the situation should the person return. -- ] 20:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :yes... it is fine to just cite the book.--] 00:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I don't want to protect the article because the edits are not happening there and I am loathe to protect a talkpage unless it is absolutely necessary; given the fact that this is one IP being disruptive I don't think protection is warranted. I've warned the IP and if it continues I will block the IP to prevent continued vandalism.--] 19:03, 5 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I've watchlisted the article. If it becomes a situation where protection is warranted I will protect the article, but I'd rather not follow the ] here in regards to article protection. Right now I think blocking disruptive editors and IPs is the better course of action.--] 19:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:13, 5 June 2007
Re: Mudaliar
Re your message: Since I don't know much about the topic (only that it's a very heated topic), I would recommend that you post your request for page protection at WP:RFPP. The two vulgar trolls from today were blocked by another admin. 203.101.45.171 (talk · contribs) appears to have stopped for the day. Since the vandalism and edit warring are very complex and the topic rather heated, I would recommend that you leave a note on WP:ANI explaining the situation should the person return. -- Gogo Dodo 20:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- yes... it is fine to just cite the book.--Isotope23 00:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't want to protect the article because the edits are not happening there and I am loathe to protect a talkpage unless it is absolutely necessary; given the fact that this is one IP being disruptive I don't think protection is warranted. I've warned the IP and if it continues I will block the IP to prevent continued vandalism.--Isotope23 19:03, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- I've watchlisted the article. If it becomes a situation where protection is warranted I will protect the article, but I'd rather not follow the Bush Doctrine here in regards to article protection. Right now I think blocking disruptive editors and IPs is the better course of action.--Isotope23 19:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)