Misplaced Pages

User talk:Arcticocean: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:01, 15 April 2008 editIZAK (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers86,943 edits →Rejected Mediation Case← Previous edit Latest revision as of 13:25, 16 January 2025 edit undoTulsi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,368 edits →A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageTag: WikiLove 
Line 1: Line 1:
<div style="padding-bottom: 0.5em;">
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{Usertalk bar}}
|minthreadsleft = 1
</div>
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
{{Message}}
|algo = old(18h)
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archive = User talk:AGK/Archive/28
|archiveprefix=User talk:AGK/Archive_
}}{{User:AGK/Header|talk=yes|datetime=yes|icons=yes|backlog=no}}
|format=Y
<!-- above code from User talk:AGK/Header. -->
|minkeepthreads=0
|age=8760
}}
<div style="float: right" class="infobox">
<div class="toctitle">
<p style="text-align: center">
'''Related pages'''
</p>
</div>
* ]
* ()
* ]
</div>__TOC__


== problems at ] ==


==Hello, stranger!==
I'm kind of in an edit-war over at ], and I was hoping you might be able to help somehow. I've tried taking it up on the ], but to no avail. The other person(s) refuse to discuss their edits and are openly violating NPOV. Thanks. -- ] (]) 18:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Arcticocean,
:Some advice I often issue to those who are edit warring is located ], which I suggest you take a look at; I'm happy to direct other warring parties there, should the disruptive editing resume. I have also looked at implementing a protection on the article, but I don't think its prudent at the moment, due to the lack of recent activity. I do hope that you chose to invite the other parties to some serious dispute resolution, rather than continuing to war: trust me, it helps nobody. In fact, the best thing for you to do right now, is not make another revert to that article: if you do that, you'll be fine ;) Cheers, and thank you for contacting me, ] 01:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
::I don't know what you mean by ''serious dispute resolution.'' I took it to the talk page, and the other person(s) said (in a nutshell), "I don't care about NPOV. I'm not participating in this discussion further." Given the reluctance to discuss, but not to stop reverting, I'm kind of at an impasse. --] (]) 02:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
:::I was indicating that, perhaps as dispute resolution attempts had cumulated in edit warring, that they weren't being treated with a wholly serious attitude? Forgive me if I'm incorrect in stating that; it was simply a logical link between the statements you'd made. With regards to the comments you stated were made by the other party; I'm going to have a look into the matter at hand. I'll get back to you soon. ] 02:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Sorry for the confusion there. Yeah, the edit warring was about to begin/had just begun. As I had tried discussing it, and the other(s) involved stopped responding, so I editted the page. Part of that edit was deleted. I reverted it, inviting them to re-join the discussion; that was then reverted. So I came here instead of continuing in that way.--] (]) 02:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


No, nope, nah, nyet, it's not going to work. Go back to your former name! You know us long-time editors don't adapt well to changes, especially small ones.
== 'talk page clerking' ==


Any way, in case you have indeed transitioned to a new identity, I hope I'll run into you on this project in the future (in a positive way, I mean). Just spend some time working on some subject that brings a smile to your face. And stay away from noticeboards. Take care, <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
hi AGK - I thought I'd let you know that I've dropped a note in at the talk page of ] asking how editors there feel about trying out some possible 'clerking' - the sort of things I was thinking is the unifying of threads making similar points, the creation of either sub pages or sub areas to discuss specific aspects of the proposal (ie. does it conflict with NPOV etc. - and there are many more self-evidently 'groupable' issues) and stuff like that. I don't want to influence you at all in what you might do, because the whole point is to have an independent eye make calls like that - but I do think that a measured, but active hand (ie. fairly large structural shifts in the page) might help loads - and it'd be interesting to try out as a concept... cheers, ] (]) 05:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


:You might want to change the target page for the redirect on ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
== VandalSniper Application ==
::<small>Sorry, the archive bot had buried your message away. I've just restored it.<br/></small>{{xt|And stay away from noticeboards}} – was better advice ever given to a Misplaced Pages editor? :) ] 13:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
== Good article reassessment for ] ==
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 23:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
== Editor experience invitation ==


I have applied for Vandal Sniper. I know I have not had recent activity, but I have been busy this past few months, and will become more free starting Apr. 21, and will monitor a lot more starting then. --]<sup> ]</sup> 03:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Hi Articocean. Have I asked you yet about whether or not you'd be interested in ]? I see you blank your talk page regularly and I'm worried I'm missing my name in the history even though I checked. 😅 I really hope this isn't a duplicate request. ] ] 16:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
==Welcome back==


Hey there! I just wanted to give you a shoutout for nominating this ] for deletion. I’m surprised it’s been hanging around for about five years now and you definitely did the right thing by calling it out! Also, welcome back! I’m glad to see you’re active again and I hope you’ll stick around this time! Thanks for all your good work!<span id="Saqib:1730576685561:User_talkFTTCLNArcticocean" class="FTTCmt"> — ] (] I ]) 19:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)</span>
==Rejected Mediation Case==

Dear Anthony, this note is in reference to mediation case, which you recently rejected. I'd like for you to see Ryan Postlethwaite's note in which he says that this case will in fact be accepted. Curious what happened? ] (]) 03:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the welcome! It's nice to be contributing again. I have been part of the Misplaced Pages community for nearly 20 years, and after so long I was losing my enthusiasm. However, the break has done me some good. ] 10:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
*Hi AGK: For some odd reason, Bstone cannot accept rejection. In spite of the fact that he started a ''still open'' Rf'''C''' against me at ] where the vast majority of editors disagreed with him and where there are still motions that have not been brought to closure, his next complaints were ], and still not able to deal with that he went ahead and started a Rf'''A''' which was , and now after he has been informed that his Rf'''M''' is rejected as well, he comes here to probe why that has happened, but which comes as no big surprise because he cannot accept rejection and is avoidant of any meaningful direct discussions with me either at his or my talk pages or at ] where ] against his nominations to delete synagogue articles/stubs caused him to be outraged enough to keep up the barrage of RfCs, ANIs, RfAs and now RfMs all falling flat and being rejected and he evidently cannot deal with that. He needs to stop his attacks and slander against me and come face to face with me, the sooner the better, and talk to me directly rather than violating ], ] and ] (what else to call it?) and wasting the time of so many editors, admins and committees. If he does not, then I shall consider filing some motions against him on the basis of ''all'' his failed attacks against me as outlined above. Thank you. ] (]) 07:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 10:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

:Thanks for noticing this. We created this template as part of a drive to refresh the WikiProject, but the planned use of the template did not materialise. I have now tagged it for speedy deletion: the deletion is clear-cut and does not necessarily require a TfD. Thanks again, ] 12:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->

== Alt account ==

Hey. Is actually your alt, or is someone messing around? Thanks, ] (]) 21:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Ah nevermind, I see you created it. Should have checked the logs first. ] (]) 21:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
::No problem. Better safe than sorry! ] 08:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

==Happy Birthday!==
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->
{{ombox
|type = notice
|image = ]
|style = background:Darkgreen;border: 1px solid #CC9999;
|text = <span style="font-family:Book Antiqua;color:#FFFF00;">Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the ].</span>--] (]) 02:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
}}

Thanks, {{u|DaniloDaysOfOurLives}}! ] 17:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 20:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry, I don't have any memory now of why such a template would have been needed. It was around 15 years ago. Regards, ] 21:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

== Hello and welcome back ==

Hi there, I hope you’re doing well. I won’t refer by your old username just in case, but it’s good to see you again. I’ve returned to Misplaced Pages in just the last 24 hours after a post on my talk page around a DRN template, which prompted me to look at the state of DRN and I have a few concerns which I believe are shared by others in the community. You’re probably one of the few old guard DR folk around still, and I was reading the RFC from 5 or so years back where MedCom was closed, had a few ideas on improving DR again. Was wondering if you might be willing for a chat some time? <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 11:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hi again ], appreciate you are likely quite busy, just sending a ping as I’d really value your input. Of course if you aren’t interested please let me know and I’ll be on my way :-) <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 19:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello and welcome back to Misplaced Pages :). My old username just felt overdue to be changed, but you're welcome to call me what's easiest. I'm excited by your excitement to discuss the dispute resolution processes, but I don't have much current experience with them, and I have almost none of DRN. I'm probably not the best person to be discussing reform, but I will follow any discussions with interest and contribute where I can… ] 20:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
::Ah, OK good to know re: your name! But alas, DRN is just a small part of the puzzle. It’s re-establishing mediation that I have interest in. I returned because of the state I saw DRN in, and while it really only has one consistent volunteer, I wonder about whether the structure of the noticeboard now (lots of rules and comments only in sections) is off putting for other volunteers to get involved in. Way back when (jeez, DRN is something I created nearly 14 years ago!), I designed it to be sort of a 3o+ but not for massive disputes with many editors - I was actually chatting to ] about my thoughts about what we could look at DR wise and I boiled it down to this:
::*Talk page dispute between two that that need an outside opinion - 3O
::*Simple disputes with a few editors - DRN
::*Complex disputes, or disputes with many involved parties that which need assistance to get to a consensus point / resolve an issue or create a proposal: mediation
::*Disputes where a clear proposal exists and a decision point is needed from outside editors to finalise consensus - RFC
::Some of the concerns around MedCab When it was closed was that it was redundant to DRN and MedCom, I remember discussing at the time the concept that DRN was traffic control/triage, and that the DRN coordinator (a role at the time, which rotated but was often me) could recommend referral of disputes to MedCom when it was judged that was valuable. Mediation could then help resolve the issues (] that I did worked quite well) or boil down issues to a few that could get wider community consensus in an RFC (I did that to some success on an abortion mediation ages ago). I think the concerns around MedCom were when DRN was more successful, but that people felt it was bureaucratic and didn’t accept much cases, and didn’t have teeth. I’d argue the first point can be handled by keeping it sort of like MedCab, but perhaps with the privilege of mediation, and perhaps even community selected mediators (all theoretical), the second point could be addressed by coordination and handover of disputes between volunteers at DRN and whoever coordinates “mediation”, and the teeth component would only be needed in intractable disputes where we could leverage an RFC to create consensus. I think the most common objection I’ve see are that “RFCs work” but they often require a known, agreed on proposal and starting point and this isn’t always there for a content dispute. I’ve also factored in that often, there’s a reluctance for uninvolved editors to wade into controversial content disputes that might be at an RFC. But yeah, those are my rather long winded thoughts. Be keen to get your perspective! <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 01:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I know the above is massively TL;DR and may not be an interest area of yours but would value your thoughts if you have time at some point! <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 12:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

== Unblock-decline ==

{{noping|Renamed user b57b1e6b25176be485b548cf4103dc90}} is a very-L LTA, {{noping|Najaf ali bhayo}} if I recall. One of their patterns is creating an account, making a few of their favorite edits, then playing account-rename games and eventually VANISHing to cover their tracks. ] (]) 22:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for dropping a block on that account, and I'll think of this if I see similar behaviour again. ] 00:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

== Additional sock ==
You just banned ] and ] for being socks, and I believe they instantly created a new account at ]. ] (]) 18:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

: It's almost certainly ] or ], but they are not posting images of the same footballer and violating the copyright policy in the same manner. There is no need to block them for the time being. Please ask an administrator to block them if they become disruptive. By the way, the two accounts were blocked, not banned: see ] for an explanation. Thanks, ] 09:42, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Admin's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I am flattered of your presence on my unblock request. I really am grateful. Means a lot to me. Lots of love. ]&nbsp;] 13:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
|}

Latest revision as of 13:25, 16 January 2025

This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article.
Please leave a new message.

Related pages


Hello, stranger!

Hi, Arcticocean,

No, nope, nah, nyet, it's not going to work. Go back to your former name! You know us long-time editors don't adapt well to changes, especially small ones.

Any way, in case you have indeed transitioned to a new identity, I hope I'll run into you on this project in the future (in a positive way, I mean). Just spend some time working on some subject that brings a smile to your face. And stay away from noticeboards. Take care, Liz 06:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

You might want to change the target page for the redirect on User:Arcticocean. Liz 06:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, the archive bot had buried your message away. I've just restored it.
And stay away from noticeboards – was better advice ever given to a Misplaced Pages editor? :) arcticocean ■ 13:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for 2010 Shanghai fire

2010 Shanghai fire has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Articocean. Have I asked you yet about whether or not you'd be interested in participating here? I see you blank your talk page regularly and I'm worried I'm missing my name in the history even though I checked. 😅 I really hope this isn't a duplicate request. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hey there! I just wanted to give you a shoutout for nominating this PROMO AUTOBIO for deletion. I’m surprised it’s been hanging around for about five years now and you definitely did the right thing by calling it out! Also, welcome back! I’m glad to see you’re active again and I hope you’ll stick around this time! Thanks for all your good work! — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! It's nice to be contributing again. I have been part of the Misplaced Pages community for nearly 20 years, and after so long I was losing my enthusiasm. However, the break has done me some good. arcticocean 10:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WPCGR/Backlog

Template:WPCGR/Backlog has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing this. We created this template as part of a drive to refresh the WikiProject, but the planned use of the template did not materialise. I have now tagged it for speedy deletion: the deletion is clear-cut and does not necessarily require a TfD. Thanks again, arcticocean ■ 12:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Alt account

Hey. Is this actually your alt, or is someone messing around? Thanks, Spicy (talk) 21:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah nevermind, I see you created it. Should have checked the logs first. Spicy (talk) 21:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
No problem. Better safe than sorry! arcticocean ■ 08:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee.--DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 02:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, DaniloDaysOfOurLives! arcticocean ■ 17:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Arbitration clerks chart

Template:Arbitration clerks chart has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any memory now of why such a template would have been needed. It was around 15 years ago. Regards, arcticocean ■ 21:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome back

Hi there, I hope you’re doing well. I won’t refer by your old username just in case, but it’s good to see you again. I’ve returned to Misplaced Pages in just the last 24 hours after a post on my talk page around a DRN template, which prompted me to look at the state of DRN and I have a few concerns which I believe are shared by others in the community. You’re probably one of the few old guard DR folk around still, and I was reading the RFC from 5 or so years back where MedCom was closed, had a few ideas on improving DR again. Was wondering if you might be willing for a chat some time? Steven Crossin 11:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi again User:Arcticocean, appreciate you are likely quite busy, just sending a ping as I’d really value your input. Of course if you aren’t interested please let me know and I’ll be on my way :-) Steven Crossin 19:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello and welcome back to Misplaced Pages :). My old username just felt overdue to be changed, but you're welcome to call me what's easiest. I'm excited by your excitement to discuss the dispute resolution processes, but I don't have much current experience with them, and I have almost none of DRN. I'm probably not the best person to be discussing reform, but I will follow any discussions with interest and contribute where I can… arcticocean ■ 20:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Ah, OK good to know re: your name! But alas, DRN is just a small part of the puzzle. It’s re-establishing mediation that I have interest in. I returned because of the state I saw DRN in, and while it really only has one consistent volunteer, I wonder about whether the structure of the noticeboard now (lots of rules and comments only in sections) is off putting for other volunteers to get involved in. Way back when (jeez, DRN is something I created nearly 14 years ago!), I designed it to be sort of a 3o+ but not for massive disputes with many editors - I was actually chatting to User:Xavexgoem about my thoughts about what we could look at DR wise and I boiled it down to this:
  • Talk page dispute between two that that need an outside opinion - 3O
  • Simple disputes with a few editors - DRN
  • Complex disputes, or disputes with many involved parties that which need assistance to get to a consensus point / resolve an issue or create a proposal: mediation
  • Disputes where a clear proposal exists and a decision point is needed from outside editors to finalise consensus - RFC
Some of the concerns around MedCab When it was closed was that it was redundant to DRN and MedCom, I remember discussing at the time the concept that DRN was traffic control/triage, and that the DRN coordinator (a role at the time, which rotated but was often me) could recommend referral of disputes to MedCom when it was judged that was valuable. Mediation could then help resolve the issues (Talk:William Lane Craig/Mediation that I did worked quite well) or boil down issues to a few that could get wider community consensus in an RFC (I did that to some success on an abortion mediation ages ago). I think the concerns around MedCom were when DRN was more successful, but that people felt it was bureaucratic and didn’t accept much cases, and didn’t have teeth. I’d argue the first point can be handled by keeping it sort of like MedCab, but perhaps with the privilege of mediation, and perhaps even community selected mediators (all theoretical), the second point could be addressed by coordination and handover of disputes between volunteers at DRN and whoever coordinates “mediation”, and the teeth component would only be needed in intractable disputes where we could leverage an RFC to create consensus. I think the most common objection I’ve see are that “RFCs work” but they often require a known, agreed on proposal and starting point and this isn’t always there for a content dispute. I’ve also factored in that often, there’s a reluctance for uninvolved editors to wade into controversial content disputes that might be at an RFC. But yeah, those are my rather long winded thoughts. Be keen to get your perspective! Steven Crossin 01:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
I know the above is massively TL;DR and may not be an interest area of yours but would value your thoughts if you have time at some point! Steven Crossin 12:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Unblock-decline

Renamed user b57b1e6b25176be485b548cf4103dc90 is a very-L LTA, Najaf ali bhayo if I recall. One of their patterns is creating an account, making a few of their favorite edits, then playing account-rename games and eventually VANISHing to cover their tracks. DMacks (talk) 22:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping a block on that account, and I'll think of this if I see similar behaviour again. arcticocean ■ 00:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Additional sock

You just banned User:Giovanni.idn and User:Giovanni.idndutch for being socks, and I believe they instantly created a new account at User:Giovanni.tysm. Anwegmann (talk) 18:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

It's almost certainly the same person or someone connected, but they are not posting images of the same footballer and violating the copyright policy in the same manner. There is no need to block them for the time being. Please ask an administrator to block them if they become disruptive. By the way, the two accounts were blocked, not banned: see WP:BANBLOCKDIFF for an explanation. Thanks, arcticocean ■ 09:42, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
I am flattered of your presence on my unblock request. I really am grateful. Means a lot to me. Lots of love. Tulsi 24x7 13:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)