Misplaced Pages

User talk:Wifione: 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 22:07, 10 October 2014 edit173.67.162.239 (talk) →Abuse of Power Conspiracy: ~~~~← Previous edit Latest revision as of 11:01, 10 April 2024 edit undoGerda Arendt (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers380,443 edits Undid revision 1218203234 by User4edits (talk) seenTag: Undo 
(260 intermediate revisions by 71 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{banned user|time=indef|by=the ]|link=]}}
{{nobots}}]
*
*You can also ] to send me an email. Although I shall not be able to assist you editorially or administratively, I shall be following both my talk page and email, and shall reply in case there is any query where I can be of assistance. Thanks. ] ]
<br><small>(This user operates an ] on Misplaced Pages; any other same named accounts outside of Wikimedia/Wikipedia are not this user's)</small></br> <br><small>(This user operates an ] on Misplaced Pages; any other same named accounts outside of Wikimedia/Wikipedia are not this user's)</small></br>
<div style="color:#636467">
<div style="padding:10px 0 15px 0;font-size:280%;font-weight:bold">This user is an <span style="color:#800;">abuse filter manager.</span></div>''Please feel free to contact me for any administrative assistance on the English Misplaced Pages.''] ]
] ]
{{User:Wifione/userboxes}}
{{talkheader}} {{talkheader}}
{{hat|X's RfA report for the week|Updated every half an hour only; for latest status, kindly go directly to the ]}} {{hat|X's RfA report for the week|Updated every half an hour only; for latest status, kindly go directly to the ]}}
{{User:X!/RfX Report}} {{User:X!/RfX Report}}
]
]
{{hab}} {{hab}}
{{hat|Talk archives for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012|] ] 05:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)}} {{hat|Talk archives|] ] 05:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)}}
<hiero>W1-I1-F1-I1-O1-N1-E1</hiero> <hiero>W1-I1-F1-I1-O1-N1-E1</hiero>
*] *]
Line 27: Line 25:
*] *]
*] *]
*]
*]
*]
{{hab}} {{hab}}
<div style="height: {{{h|{{{height|400px}}}}}}; width: {{{w|{{{width|220px}}}}}}; overflow:auto; margin-bottom: 0.5em; float: {{{a|{{{alignment|right}}}}}}; margin-right: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em 1.0em 0.8em 0; background-color: transparent; font-family: 'Garamond';">__TOC__</div> <div style="height: {{{h|{{{height|400px}}}}}}; width: {{{w|{{{width|220px}}}}}}; overflow:auto; margin-bottom: 0.5em; float: {{{a|{{{alignment|right}}}}}}; margin-right: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em 1.0em 0.8em 0; background-color: transparent; font-family: 'Garamond';">__TOC__</div>
Leave your messages below this. Thanks.] ] 10:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC) Leave your messages below this. Thanks. ] ]


== ] closed ==
== afshin (singer) article ==
hello
Can you help me, To defend my article ?
] (]) 14:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
*Let me go through it and then comment. Thanks.] ] 10:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
*Saeed, your article seems to be saved already going by the comments on its deletion discussion. Take care and best.] ] 11:56, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
==You've got mail!==
{{you've got mail|subject=|ts=09:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC)}}
] (]) 09:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
:Thanks a ton.] ] 09:48, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


:1) {{user|Wifione}} is indefinitely topic-banned from editing any pages relating to or making any edit about: <ol type=i><li>any ]n commercial organisation founded after 1915;<li>any ]n educational institution founded after 1915;<li>biographies of any living or recently deceased person associated with (i) or (ii)</ol>and is restricted to one account.
== ''The Signpost'': 06 August 2014 ==


:2.1) Wifione may only regain administrative tools via a successful ].
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-08-06}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 30-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 12:52, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=620294222 -->


:3) {{user|Wifione}} is indefinitely banned from the English Misplaced Pages. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
== ] and ] ==
Unfortunately, I think did not learn much during their blocking period. I susspect another edit war is in the offing. Not by me, I'm staying out this time. But just thought I'd let you know. Cheers. :) --<font color="#111111">‖ ] <sup>]</sup> - <small>]</font> ‖ 00:41, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
*Thanks for the note. I think the editors are somehow managing to keep their cool. Will keep a watch.] ] 16:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


For the Arbitration Committee, --''']''' (]) <span style="border:1px solid #ffa500;background:#ffce7b;font-size: 40%;">]</span> 17:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
== "Revert last undo" on "Pogrom" article ==

I'm a bit unclear on what exactly you're prescribing as per . I understand 3RR, and I realize that I did in fact make a 4th revert in the past 24 hours. If you look at the , you'll notice that my initial revert was to re-integrate sourced content that had been discussed and revised on the talk page since 2008. Altenmann was the first in this latest round of attempts to remove this relevant and properly-sourced content, and did so without giving any reason whatsoever. Altenmann (who, I believe, has been warned before on Arab-Israeli conflict issues) was reverted by Oncenawhile. Monochrome Monitor, who on articles relating to this topic, then removed the content again, and I reinstated it (my first "undo"). ] then appeared to yet again delete the content, this time for "no consensus for inclusion" which you'll note, as per ], is not close to being a valid reason for removing properly-cited content. Galassi has tried to do this several times before (see ]) and generally refuses to discuss the issue rationally. At the time, Galassi was aided by ], who has been from editing Arab-Israeli conflict articles in the past. I reinstated the content yet again, and Galassi reverted it yet again, for "no consensus for inclusion". Altenmann then removed it again, and I reinstated it, asking him to take the issue to the talk page. He eventually agreed, but reported me for 3RR violation before even giving me a chance to contribute to (yet another) rehashing of the same, years-old spurious objections and arguments to the Olmert content being in the article. You'll note, from my contrib history, that whenever I make any major edit, I discuss it on the corresponding talk page, even if no one prompted me to defend my edit. He reverted again, and this time an anonymous IP reinstated the content, in a more appropriate section of the article,

I know what 3RR is, and I'm aware I violated it in this instance, but I did so in order to keep, in the article, properly-sourced and relevant content upon which I and other editors worked with each other for a long period to establish consensus vis à vis an agreeable version of the content (in short, the actual quotes were snipped and embedded in the references rather than written out in the article itself). What is an editor supposed to do when multiple people remove solid content for POV reasons that have nothing to do with the content or the article? When this happens 3, 4, or 5 times in a day? I'm not allowed to attempt to stop POV-pushing and vandalism because I'm only one person and can only revert vandalism 3 times in a day?

You write that you'll block me if I don't revert my last undo. Literally, this would mean moving the content back a paragraph, as the last edit I made was just about arrangement. Or am I to understand that you want me to remove the sourced content, effecting the POV bias of the aforementioned users who want the content gone because ], returning the article to state immediately after it was first vandalized, making that vandalism a fait accompli?

Thanks for your response,
Direct Action

*The ever-vigilant ] has reverted my last content reinstatement via Twinkle. I'm assuming that means it's not longer incumbent upon me to revert. That said, I would still appreciate a response to my questions if you can manage the time. ] (]) 14:10, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
*:I've responded on the edit warring noticeboard. Thanks for your note here. Regards.] ] 15:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

== Report User:Iñaki LL ==
*<small>(I have copied this conversation to the . Feel free to respond there. Thanks.] ])</small>
::I just wanted to let you know that Inaki LL is the one who is edit warring, not me. The evidence is on the page itself. Inaki LL deleted my contribution to the status box because he claims France did not exist until the 11th century. Such a claim is ridiculous and contradicts information already used on Misplaced Pages. Furthermore, unlike Iñaki LL, I presented my case on the articles talk page. Another obvious sign of guilt is the fact that he reported me only after I threatened to report him. This was going to be first time I'd ever had to report someone, so I was still trying to work out how to do it when he beat me to the punch, reporting me before I could report him. I've been a user for a number of years, but there are some things I'm still don't know how to do, a fact which this user clearly took advantage of. I can't help but feel bullied by this more experienced user, and I want my side of the story known. I've dedicated myself to ensuring factual accuracy on this website, and I always do my research before I add anything. If I don't use a source, it usually means that the info was added based on sources already on Misplaced Pages or in another article on this page. I did extensive research before I added the info to the status box of the Duchy of Aquitaine, including researching each individual Duke and Duchess who ruled the duchy. It took me days before I was finally able to add that info, and then Iñaki LL goes and deletes it based on his ridiculous claim that France didn't exist until the 11th century, something that anyone familiar with the history of France can tell you is not true. When it became apparent that this user would not stop reverting, I presented my case on the articles talk page. The other user did not respond, and when he reverted my edit again, I warned him in the summary of my subsequent edit that I was going to report him. That was when he reported me before I could even act upon my threat. My apologies for rambling on for so long. I just wanted you to know the full story. The evidence is there on the articles talk page and in the edit history. The user may have added something to the talk page since then, but if so, he didn't add it until after he reported me. Thank you for taking the time to read this. ] (]) 00:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
::*Thanks Toolen for the note here. It doesn't matter how well you researched some information. Unless you add ] that confirm your statement, you are going the wrong way by adding unreferenced information. ] has asked for verifiability of your claim; and you don't seem to be providing that within the article. I'm going to advise you to revert your addition to the article at the soonest and and the same back ''only after'' you've discussed your reliable source on the talk page of the article. Else, if you continue adding unsourced claims, you will end up getting blocked very soon. Please read up ], ], ] and ] properly before adding back contentious material that is being challenged. Hope this clarifies your issue. ] ] 01:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
::::Hi Wifione, I left ]. Thank you ] (]) 10:43, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
:::::Warned.] ] 17:33, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

== IP has returned ==
I was told to report back to you if the IP I reported for edit warring on the ] page came back. He's come back, so can you semi-protect the page and block the IP? ] 19:45, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
*Hi jcm. Sorry for asking you this right now instead of at the outset itself. What is wrong with the edit that the IP is doing? I notice the IP is attempting to add a merchandise named "Spongebob's Robotic Adventures". Why do you think that should not be added? ] ] 10:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
**As I said in the edit warring report, it's because Spongebob's Robotic Adventure is a fan game and not an official one. If you google the title, you'll only see a couple of youtube videos and a page on the SpongeBob Fanon Wiki. Due to Misplaced Pages's rules again self-promotion, I don't think we should allow that. ] 03:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
***Ok, I understand. Would you therefore take up the discussion on the talk page of the article? If the IP doesn't respond there and continues to revert. I'll block the IP after one final warning.] ] 17:21, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 13 August 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-08-13}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 31-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 01:56, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=621471796 -->

== GOCE July drive and August blitz ==

{| style="position: relative; margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; padding: 0.5em 1em; background-color: #dfeff3; border: 2px solid #bddff2; border-color: rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 ); {{border-radius}} {{box-shadow|8px|8px|12px|rgba( 0, 0, 0, 0.7 )}}"

| <span style="font-size: 110%;">'''] ] wrap-up'''</span>

<div style="float:right; width: 75px; height: 60px;"></div>
<div style="position: absolute; top: -20px; right: -12px;">]</div>
<hr style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 );" />
'''Participation:''' Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available ].

'''Progress report:''' We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone!

'''Blitz''': The ] will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's ''']'''. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. ]!

Cheers from your GOCE coordinators {{noping|Jonesey95}}, {{noping|Baffle gab1978}}, and {{noping|Miniapolis}}.

{{center
| <small>To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from ]. Newsletter delivered by ] (]) 15:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)</small>
}}
|}
<!-- Message sent by User:Diannaa@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Mailing_List&oldid=621414960 -->

== ] block ==

I disagree with your block of Luke, as you have to revert more than three times to break the ] and he had reverted three times while Andrze reverted four. Is there an edit war going on? I definitely think so, but I think it's inappropriate to label his block incorrectly. <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 18:35, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
:Unless you're going by previous reverts from prior days to show a pattern, which I could understand - however, Andrze should receive just as long of a block, considering this would be his third 3RR block. <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 18:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
*:Hi Dusti. In the past 24 hours, Luke's reverted 5 times. This is strange, since he's already gone through a block this year and I would have expected him to be more careful. I've gone by the last block period of Luke's block - which was 2 weeks. I had the option of increasing it to a month, but chose 2 weeks as the last time, Luke had taken some corrective action. With respect to Andrze, given that he was blocked for 24 hours in February this year, 48 hours seems reasonable to prevent disruption. Hope this answers your queries. Do write back for any other clarification. Thanks. ] ] 18:57, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
*::I apologize, I was looking at the +21 bit reversions, I didn't really notice the others until I looked closer and saw those reversions as well. Luke is claiming that the 2 week block was a mistake as he actually reverted himself which caused him to go into the 3RR status and was subsequently blocked (though the edit summary suggests that he was given a 0RR restriction (perhaps voluntary?)) - I've left him guidance. Should he agree to a 0RR restriction with you, could the block be reduced to 48 hours (I agree that he deserves some forced cooling off time). <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 19:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
*:::No apologies required. You're assuming good faith and that's how it should be. About Luke's block, if you notice his block log, the reason that Luke is forwarding is not exactly what the blocking administrator has written in his block log summary. Furthermore, even before the 2 week block, was a 1 week block. In other words, even if I were to consider the 1 week block, Luke would be up for a 2 week block. Unfortunately, given Luke's arguments on his talk page, it is quite clear that he doesn't still realise where the mistake is primarily focused on. I would not be reducing his block period, as I'm not convinced he realises what's going on out here. Do write back for any other clarification. Thanks. ] ] 19:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

== Warning response ==
Hello again, Wifione. My sincerest apologies for the unsourced info. I'll add the sources as soon as I can. I've been quite busy lately. It will take some time, but I will find the sources. Most, if not all of them are already on other Misplaced Pages articles related to Aquitaine. As a user on Misplaced Pages, I understand the importance of sources on articles. I've just been so busy with other projects that some of my latest edits have been rushed. Don't worry, though, the sources will be added. ] (]) 18:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
*Okay. Do please be careful. Not every administrator would be so patient. Thanks for taking the effort to understand our sourcing policies.] ] 18:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

==You've got mail!==
{{you've got mail|subject=|ts=19:21, 22 August 2014 (UTC)}}
<font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 19:21, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

== ] Block reduction ==
I just found out that he was blocked and that it was later reduced. I think this was a result of poor research into the user. If you go above on his talk page, you'll see that he also violated ] at ] 6 times and when I called it out on him, he self-reverted, although he was fully aware that his posts wouldn't count against 3RR. He promised to drop the issue, which he did, and that's why I never went to 3RR. But I am very disappointed at the fact that he got into an edit war immediately after on another article. The fact of the matter is that he broke 3RR more than once on various articles, so having his block reduced was not a wise decision. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.1em 0.1em 0.2em; class=texhtml">]] <big><sup>]</sup></big></span> 16:03, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
:Thanks for leaving the note. Let me look at Luke's case given his past few days edits and see what can be done. ] ] 08:39, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 20 August 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-08-20}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 32-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 20:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=622395093 -->

== ] ==
Wifione, two things:
* is a revert.
*Luke agreed to post his restrictions at the top of this talk page. Instead, he removed everything from his talk page.
I know that based on the terms of the unblock, I can indefinitely block Luke, but I thought it would be more prudent to consult with you first. Just so it's clear, I'm ''not'' in favor of showing any leniency.--] (]) 05:16, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
:I'm not going through all of his edits, but and are also reverts. As a courtesy, I'm pinging {{U|Dusti}}.--] (]) 05:24, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
::{{ping|Bbb23}} please indefinitely block Luke as per the terms of his unblock. {{ping|Wifione}}, I apologize. I was away today picking up my in-laws and bringing them here for a visit. <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 06:04, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
:::I disagree with the last one being a ''revert'' under his editing sanctions. It's not an "undo" or a rollback, it's removal of text that's done during the course of editing. He's allowed to delete items from articles to help improve them, whereas the first and last are clear and simple reverts - of which piss me off after I went out of my way to be clear as day what the difference between blatant vandalism is and what a content dispute revert would be classified as. <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 06:24, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
:::: {{U|Dusti}}, please clarify two things. First, where in his editing sanctions does it say that a revert is not defined in same manner it is at ]? Second, you didn't address the issue of his removing the restrictions from his talk page. Thanks.--] (]) 14:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
::::: {{U|Bbb23}} let me be clear in saying that I already asked for him to be blocked, because regardless whether I disagree with the definition of one of his edits, there are still two others that violated his editing restrictions. When I was assisting in laying out the editing restrictions for Luke, my definition of a revert would have been the sole removal of text that one editor had added to the article. This was stemming from his constant reverts of the addition of a genre to the ] article. You are right that the removal of text from the one mentioned above is, in fact, a revert as outlined in ], but I wouldn't have been as concerned with that edit as I am with the other two. In any sense, I will be formally withdrawing my offer to Mentor Luke, and I am still in support of him being indefinitely blocked as outlined in his editing restrictions. <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 13:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
::It want apart of the deal that I must keep the restrictions mentioned on my talk page. ] (]) 14:30, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
:Hi, please don't block me i am a very useful editor and the two links above where it says here and here are also reverts wasn't honestly, the Judas Priest album I removed a genre I seen had been added without a source and hadn't even checked the history of the page and the one on the 2014 Heavy metal page wasn't a revert at all, I was sorting the page adding albums and columning the upcoming albums and checking/adding sources when I come to the album I searched for ages to try and fine a source with that name and couldn't so I removed i. ] (]) 09:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
The first edit was also Vandalism as it is easily known by looking on Google or looking at sports site/newspaper that the deal hasn't gone through so by adding that to the page needed to be removed, if I hadn't someone else would of. ] (]) 09:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
:I would like to discuss things with you Dusti and Wifione, please. ] (]) 09:51, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
::{{ping|Luke}}, I'll take up the issue on your talk page. But the fact is that you should have been so very careful rather than assuming what revert can be done and what cannot be done. You are simply riding on pure luck that {{ping|Bbb23}} did not indefinitely block you when I was away over the weekend.His call, if he had blocked you, would have been absolutely right; and I don't think you would have had a chance to continue editing here. {{ping|Dusti}} took so much effort on your behalf. What in heavens are you doing? We editors really do not have the time to keep a watch over you on a daily basis to mollycoddle you to edit properly... Anyway, I'll continue on your talk page.
::@Bbb23, thanks for keeping a close watch. I would agree with you firstly that I shouldn't have reduced the block, and secondly that Luke is displaying little value and adherence for editing restrictions that were chalked out with such effort. Let's see how this can be salvaged. ] ] 08:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
::@Dusti, I'm sure Luke's going to be more trouble sooner than later. Thanks for taking the effort any way to mentor him. ] ] 08:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
:::We had no way of knowing how it would go - so reducing the block ''should'' have been done as we were ]. At this point, he has been given rope and used it to his detriment. <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 14:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
*Wifione and {{U|Dusti}}, all I can say is the two of you have the patience of saints. I have read the discussion on Luke's talk page, and it's not clear to me why Luke hasn't been indefinitely blocked, not just because of his violations of the editing restrictions but also because of what he's said in the discussion. I seriously don't think he merits the time the two of you have put into this in trying to help him, and I don't think he'll ever "get it". However, just as before, I will take no administrative action as long as you feel that you want to continue with your endeavors.--] (]) 22:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
:* One can only assume so much good faith before you can no longer in good conscience. I have hope Luke will come around, but {{ping|Bbb23}} when/if the time comes will you hit that block button for me? <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 23:02, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
::*Sounds like assisted suicide. :-) I take my cues from both of you, but Wifione will do what he thinks best.--] (]) 23:05, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

== Arthur Kemp ==
Hm. You've blocked the editor and now an IP, ] comes along to remove exactly the same text. I think I'm at 3RR which I try to avoid. Hard to edit when this sort of thing occurs. ] (]) 12:44, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
:Did an auto confirmed protection on the page for a week. Hope that works to stop the IP hopping. Thanks. ] ] 13:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

== Autopatrolled Request ==

Hi. Per your request , I have now provide sources for '''all''' the articles I created. (if you don't believe me, check ). In addition, I have created even more articles today, and now I have created 57 articles (also according to ), exceeding the standard minimum requirement of 50 articles. Therefore, I request a "re-review" on my application for autopatrolled rights. Thanks and have a nice day :) (P.S. If you want me to create a list of all the sourced articles I created, please reply and I'd be happy to do that.) --] (]) 17:52, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

== TheFallenCrowd ==
Shortly after the 24 hour block for editwarring, he's doing it again. I also think he is the IP who did the same edit, but he tells me I'm lying. Interesting that he keeps adding Kemp's claim that he emigrated to the UK in 2007 (see "Furthermore, Kemp pointed out" when he was clearly in the UK for some time before that, eg in 2004. My guess is that he'd been in the UK for some time and finally made it permanent via right of ancestry. ] (]) 15:56, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
:Hm, he's taken me to ANI. ] (]) 16:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
:{{ping|Dougweller}} Sorry I had logged off by the time you left this report. I guess ANI is taking care of this issue pretty fast. Ping me if you need any other administrative assistance on the article (I don't have it on my watch). Thanks.] ] 12:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
:::No problem. I didn't even notice it until there had already been a big response. I love it when editors react like that. Makes it all so easy to see what they are like. ] (]) 15:54, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

== Lukejordan02's editing ==
Hello Wifione,
I've checked the ] article which was edited by Lukejordan02 after I added a reference to the film's score music in the infobox.

Reference was about ], whose song "éblouie par la nuit" is played both during the film and during the credits and if you check imdb site ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2101341/soundtrack?ref_=tt_ql_trv_7 ), you'll see that this is true, unlike Lukejordan02 wrote when he edited. I thought it was interesting to insert that link since ] is a foreign artist who is already part of the en.wikipedia project.

Since I'm new here, that I'm not native in english, I can admit that a contribution can be edited if there are misspelling, mistakes or anykind of disrespect of the way one is supposed to contribute on the project.

However deleting a contribution which is actually acurate is somehow disturbing for me. I wrote him that my contribution was correct and sent him the imdb link but I was left without answer and I don't see my comments anymore on the talk page.
Since I've read that there is some kind of dispute over Luke's behavior, I'd like you to tell me:
1/ did I misplace, misspelled or did anything unexpected with my contribution?
2/ my contribution being in fact reliable is it possible for me to put it back without that being a hassle

Please excuse the way I write in english,

Yours truly,

Marc
--] (]) 18:14, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
*Luke had reverted the edit perhaps because you did not provide a source that Luke could ]. I am not sure how good IMDB is considered as a source. If you have verifiable sources that confirm that Zaz did contribute to Dead Man Down, just add back your claim to the article. You would have no problems. Read ] to understand how to add sources to articles. You could give sources like , , or . Am sure there should be no problem. Write back if you need any other assistance. Thanks. ] ] 08:40, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

== Response to warning ==
Why are you doing this to me? I didn't give you any lip for blocking me, I took it in stride, and my appeal attempts were done in accordance with the guide on appealing blocks. I did exactly what you asked. I provided a source to back up my edit. This was even discussed on the talk page. Yet, despite what I've done to avoid making the same mistake again, you're taking the side of this Garzakh fellow or whatever he calls himself? I was on the side of the majority, this time. The same user tried to do the exact same thing months ago. The issue was discussed on the talk page, and me and the majority of the other editors were in agreement that the 2014 date was the correct date. I even added the reference. I'm sorry if this sounds rude. I don't mean to offend you, but this time I knew what I was doing. I was even thanked by one of the other editors. There is no reason for me to be blocked again. My edit was in accordance with the consensus agreement that had been reached. Is that not what I was supposed to do? Did I not do what was asked of me? If so, then why the warning? Do you just not like me? Please explain. ] (]) 03:00, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
*Thanks for replying. I'll continue the discussions on your talk page to ensure we don't jump back and forth. I'm copying your discussion to your talk page for reading ease.] ] 07:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

== Bmicomp returns! ==

Thanks! ] 12:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

== RfA ==
Thank you for the offer. I appreciate it, but first I should make a general disclaimer: I've been an admin (]). I lost in in the aftermath of an ArbCom case (]) about which we can chat more if you'd like, through I'd prefer to do it in a more private forum. Since then I've not been successful in regaining adminship, due to reasons I describe at ] and some other mini-essays I've written on that page (see ]) for a recent case study. If after reading those you are still willing to retain your offer, I may take you up on it, through probably not before next year. I think one attempt a year is all I can take; those things are somewhat stressful :> --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]&#124;]</sub> 14:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
:{{ping|Piotrus}} Thanks for the reply and for sharing the links. If you wish, I can communicate on this over email. Best regards. ] ] 11:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 27 August 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-08-27}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 33-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 10:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=623352396 -->

== Precious ==

<div style="margin: auto; max-width: 60em; {{box-shadow|0.1em|0.1em|0.5em|rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 )}} {{border-radius|1em}} border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix">
<div>
<div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; background-color: #ddd; border: 5px solid #ddd; {{box-shadow|0.1em|0.1em|0.5em|rgba(0,0,0,0.75)}} {{border-radius|0.5em}}">]</div>
'''Let sleeping dogs lie'''<br />
Thank you for articles starting with ], dealing with articles for deletion, proposing candidates for admin, contributions tp policy and ], - you are an ]!

--] (]) 06:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
*What a pleasant surprise! Thanks much for cheering up the morning :) ] ] 15:47, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

== ] ==
Can you please block this editor indefinitely. He has not learned his lessons at all after you blocked him 3 years ago. His actions have proven that he clearly has no intention of contributing to Misplaced Pages at all: <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 06:34, 5 September 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Hi there. What's wrong in his edits? I'm not able to see anything wrong. I might be missing what you're alluding to. And why are you edit warring with him without giving explanations? ] ] 07:20, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 03 September 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-09-03}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 34-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 08:03, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=624185220 -->

== Thanks for Rollback rights ==
H! Wifione, Thanks for giving me rollbacker rights that you thought me worthy for this. It would be help to improve wikipedia and fight against vandal. I will try my best. <font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#000000 0em 0em 0.8em,#FF4500 -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#90EE90 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#696969"><b>] ]</b></font> 05:41, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
:{{reply|Babitaarora}} You're welcome... Write back for any assistance you may need in the future. Thanks. ] ] 16:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

== Expired PROD's ==
Could you cause a couple of ] ] to vanish into ]? :) <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 17:40, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
:{{reply|Dusti}} Hi :) With respect to the book, there are too many book reviews in reliable sources for the book, thus proving the notability of the book. So I don't think the book should be deleted. With respect to the BLP, if this prod is a BLP prod, then again the article cannot be deleted purely on the basis of the BLP prod as there are multiple reliable sources quoted within the article, mainly three interviews of the individual. Do tell me if I'm reading this wrong. Good to see you around. Thanks. ] ] 18:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

== Freshly Squeezed Music ==
Hello - you were one of two mods who deleted the above page. I was hoping to get it reinstated so I could add notability citations... not an expert at WP but would appreciate your help or advice... now the article has gone, obviously there's nothing to fix!
Thanks <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
*You could perhaps list out here the references you plan to add, and I might be able to guide you better. Please read ] to understand the notability guidelines for bands and stuff related to music. Write back for further assistance. Thanks. ] ] 14:26, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

== What do you do when -- wikibullies vs consensus ==

Hi i read your comments and I have a problem i don't know how to solve. Which is for the page ] I did BRD even though I had no idea what it was.

1. I put it on the talk page, and I waited 2 days.
2. I made the edit, and people started putting it back immediately.
3. I was 3RRd (didn't know that existed when it happened)
4. Then I put on the talk page proof, I had no desire to reach a consensus as I didn't know I needed to.
5. Then I found better data.
6. Now people come a long randomly like the last change and say, "there is no proof on the talk page" there is, and put it back.

7. The people putting it back won't engage in any form of discussion, and I don't know how to tell them, "come to the talk page and discuss it, or leave the article alone"

The people reverting are currently NOT discussing the changes. The Gallup pole on the page has to do with Young Human Creationism and not Young Earth Creationism. It is contained within the same article further down that these are two different beliefs.

Exasperated, at people putting back the edit and not participating in the discussion. There ought to be some form of rule that says, if you are putting back reverts you either need to put up or shut up.

What to do?

] (]) 15:33, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
*My suggestion remains the same. If somebody reverts you, and you see that they are not agreeing to your edit, keep discussing on the talk page. You've not read ] apparently. Please read it to understand what to do in editing disputes. In this particular case, there is more than one editor reverting you, and you need to really curb your tendency to revert them. Like I said, read up ] before warring. Thanks, ] ] 10:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

== Dealing with EW ==
Hi Wifione. I'm writing because I see you've been patrolling the 3RR noticeboard and I need some advice. What's best practice for when another editor keeps edit warring (but hasn't violated 3RR) and refuses to engage in any sort of discussion? In this case I've left messages on the talk page, their user talk, in my edit summaries, and even in hidden comments in the article itself but they simply aren't responding to my requests that they discuss. The only resolution I can think of at this point is to goad them into a 3RR violation but that doesn't seem nice and I suspect it wouldn't be viewed favorably by admins. Especially because this editor is a newbie, DNB and all that. --] (]) 16:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
*] please. Thanks.] ] 16:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
::I'm asking for advice, not action, but I'll gather the diffs. --] (]) 16:50, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

::'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Constitutional challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act}} <br />
::'''User:''' {{userlinks|173.67.158.36}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

::Previous version reverted to:

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
::Diffs of the user's reverts:
::#
::#
::#

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->
<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
::Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
::Diffs of attempts to resolve dispute on article talk page: ,
::Diffs of attempts to get user's attention in edit summaries: , ,
::Diffs of attempt to get user's attention in article hidden comments:
::Diff of attempt to get user's attention on my own talk page: (talkback: )
::--] (]) 17:05, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
*I've warned the user. If he reverts again without participating in talk page discussions, write back here and I'll block the user. ] ] 17:13, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
::Thanks. Have I taken the right approach so far? If something like this happens again with a different editor do I take it to an admin or to ANEW, or is there something else I could have done first? And, I'm currently at 3RR myself. Am I correct in my guess that my attempts to get this editor to discuss do not "exempt" me from 3RR? Meaning, if he reverts again without discussion I have to wait until my own 24-hour period has elapsed? --] (]) 17:29, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
:::You're welcome. Yes. Read ] to understand what to do in future issues. You're not exempted from ]. Drop back for any future assistance. ] ] 17:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
::::DR isn't available if one side isn't discussing, am I mistaken? --] (]) 18:11, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
:::::If one side isn't discussing and simply reverting, go to ]. ] ] 18:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, Wifione. The anon editor appears to have hopped IPs and is continuing to without discussion. Your assistance please. --] (]) 20:08, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Two more reverts without discussion: , . The second of these is from a third IP from the same region. --] (]) 21:48, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

from a new IP. I've temporary semi-protection. --] (]) 07:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

== Delta Fast Passenger ==
Hi, wifione, I've by mistake reverted an edit on ] just before reading your aummary on ], I haven't done it wantedly but only to restore the content by Aaron-Tripel, which was removed by the blocked user. I restored it but later saw your message on the notice page. So, what shall I do, if you can consider it I'll not touch that page for a while.--] (]) 17:27, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
*Self-revert your own edit, and leave a note on the edit warring noticeboard in the relevant thread that you've self-reverted your own edit, so that no other administrator blocks you. And immediately please. ] ] 17:34, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
::Thanks. I've have added the statement below your comment . Is that ok?--] (]) 17:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
:::Yeah. Should save you from getting blocked. ] ] 17:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

==Any Suggestion==
The ] reverts on ] was normal, but some of these activities happened after my warnings on his page, and the following articles are created by me, which he targetted like ]], , , . If you can give suggestion how to handle them?--] (]) 17:51, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
*Read ]. But start by discussing issues on the talk page of every article in question. Finally, if dispute resolution doesn't work, come to ] and we'll help. ] ] 18:02, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
::Thank you.--] (]) 18:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

==False entry==
*Hello there, I need help to delete a false entry (] being a duplicate of ]) by a seemingly troublesome user (user name seems to be pointing to being a "brother of shit" in our part of the world). Any help would be appreciated, thanks~! --<small>] <sup><span style="font-family:Italic;color:black">]</span></sup></small> 17:51, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
::{{done}} ] ] 18:02, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
::*Thanks~! ], should I bring him to the username chopping board? --<small>] <sup><span style="font-family:Italic;color:black">]</span></sup></small> 18:06, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
:::I guess so.] ] 18:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
:::*Rogereeny~! --<small>] <sup><span style="font-family:Italic;color:black">]</span></sup></small> 18:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

== Can I draw your attention... ==
....] please? <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 12:42, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
*Sad... I don't think 0RR will work for Luke. I'll change the restriction to 1RR when his block expires. ] ] 18:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
:*I disagree with making Luke's restrictions easier for him to be disruptive. First, remember these restrictions were in exchange for unblocking him after his not learning from repeated blocks. Second, it's mollycoddling him and refusing to accept the fact that this is a waste of a lot of editors' time. Think of the ordinary editor who breaches 3RR and is blocked. Then, they go back and do it again. So, you give them special dispensation that they can't be blocked for breaching 3RR unless they revert more than four times. I really think we need to be more realistic. There's only so much rope we should give any editor. He's out of rope. Indeed, in my view, he was out of rope a while ago.--] (]) 20:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
::*Bbb23, how are you doing? Yes, I'm ok with blocking Luke indefinitely. ] ] 20:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
:::*Hehe, it doesn't matter whether I disagree with you. It doesn't matter if I express myself somewhat, uh, forcefully. You're still unfailingly nice and civil, Wifione. Anyway, as I mentioned on my talk page, I wasn't advocating blocking Luke indefinitely now. I was simply opposed to changing his restrictions. Regards, as always.--] (]) 20:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
::::*That's because for me, you'll always be the most respected editor on Misplaced Pages purely because of your commitment to BLPs. ] ] 20:17, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
:::::*It's kind of you to say so, but I'm not sure I want that burden. Before I became an administrator, I spent a ton of time at ]. However, since becoming an admin, I spend very little time there, mainly because if I get involved in content disputes, I can't act administratively. Nonetheless, I spent so much time there before that until recently, it was still at the top of my stats for Misplaced Pages pages. It's now been barely exceeded by ].--] (]) 20:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
::::::* :) I was referring to not only the time you spent at BLPN, but also to BLPCRIME, the burden of which you will have to carry forever :) Irrespective, always good to see you around. Take care and see you around. ] ] 20:31, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

==You've got mail!==
{{you've got mail|subject=|ts=22:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)}}
<font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 22:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

== Note ==

] This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:AN-notice--> ] (]) 18:40, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 10 September 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-09-10}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 35-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 21:57, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=625385134 -->

== Assuming ==
That DarkLiberty is not going to stop. Please check the bottom area of the talk page of ] since you blocked him and he came back. I do think he is editing under a variety of alias's which I mention on the talk page of Scientific Outlook on Development. I do not think he is going to change and will continue doing what he is doing, trash talking on talk pages and making edits as a variety of sock puppets and not furthering cooperation in editing for a good encyclopedia. Thanks. ] (]) 04:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
:Earl, don't accuse editors of being sock puppets unless you're ready to report the editors at ]. Thanks. ] ] 16:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

::Alright. ] (]) 23:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

== DISPUTE WITH DrFleischman OVER EDITS HE NEVER READ! ==

I attempted to update http://en.wikipedia.org/Constitutional_challenges_to_the_Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

and ran into a dispute with a user called DrFleischman that seeks to control history

I was trying to add about 450 characters to update the case status. APROXIMATELY 300 of which were about a new case from the STATE OF WV. SOMEONE THAT EDITS AND DELETES WITHOUT READING IT SHOULD NOT CONTROL CONTENT OR BE AN EDITOR!! The original stuff he decided to cutout appears to be inserted by a user named Famspear. Sylvia Burwell has been making speeches that OBAMACARE IS "settled law" and his edits make it appear this is true. The number of edits made by DrFleischman is quite staggering and seems to "show an agenda". DrFleischman appears to make about 250-300 edits a month. This appears to show an agenda, or ?? You can check history, but below is what I was trying to add.

Notice of Appeal was filed on July 25, 2014. Case 14-5183. On August 11, 2014 a notice of related case was filed for the case of State of West Virginia v United States HHS,et al (1:14-cv-01287-RBW). Lawyers from the American Freedom Law Center are handling the appeal.

On July 29, 2014, the State of West Virginia v United States HHS,et al (1:14-cv-01287-RBW) was filed which challenges the "Administrative Fix" and other constitutional violations of the law.

Also, why is there no page for Legal Challenges to the ACT such as:

en.wikipedia.org/Legal_challenges_to_the_Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

] (]) 23:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
:First thing is first, please check your caps lock - it seems to be broken. <font face="MV Boli">]]</font> 00:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

==Could you comment on this discussion concerning changing of citation for entire article==

Hi Wifione, could you provide your comments about the policy ] and ] in ] section, one party believes it abides by it and I hold a contrary opinion. Note: I will not be editing that article. {{small|Disclosure: I am an involved party and I was blocked by you for 24h for violating 3RR rule on this page, and this is the concerned discussion.}} --]<sup>]</sup> 05:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

== Spam and sock puppet issue ==
Could you see and ] page, he is adding repetitive links and also has sock account ]. I filled a sock investigation .--] (]) 06:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

== Gumpwert1978 Revert ==

Hello, and thank you for your assistance on ] with the Richard O'Dwyer article. It appears that ] (]) has reverted the ] article without discussion again, in spite of your talk page warning. I would like the opportunity to collaborate and discuss this article, but this disruptive editing has made any progress impossible. Any assistance you could render would be greatly appreciated. ] (]) 21:19, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 17 September 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-09-17}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 36-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 05:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=625813780 -->

== ''The Signpost'': 24 September 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-09-24}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 37-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 05:51, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=627251169 -->

== ''The Signpost'': 01 October 2014 ==

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2014-10-01}}
</div><!--Volume 10, Issue 38-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* ''']'''
* ]
* ]
* ] (]) 19:26, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=628117353 -->

== Abuse of Power Conspiracy ==

I tried to create a new page http://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Legal_Challenges_to_the_Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act to contain an unbiased list of all challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. I started the page and hoped it would be completed by others. It was rejected because it was FICTION!!! Either your editors are idiots or in a conspiracy to limit AND REWRITE HISTORY!!! User:Cutest Penguin AND User:DrFleischman SEEM TO BE WORKING TOGETHER. PLEASE INVESTIGATE!!! PLEASE SUSPEND THEIR ACTIVITIES!!!

The stated reason for rejection "The proposed article is not suitable for Misplaced Pages. Because Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, articles on fictional subjects should cover their real-world context and contain sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance—not just a summary of the plot. You may wish to add this content to an existing article. As anyone can edit Misplaced Pages, you are free to do so yourself."

This subject is encyclopedia in nature AND NOT A FICTIONAL SUBJECT!! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 22:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Latest revision as of 11:01, 10 April 2024

  • CLICK HERE TO LEAVE A NEW MESSAGE
  • You can also click here to send me an email. Although I shall not be able to assist you editorially or administratively, I shall be following both my talk page and email, and shall reply in case there is any query where I can be of assistance. Thanks. Wifione


(This user operates an alternate account on Misplaced Pages; any other same named accounts outside of Wikimedia/Wikipedia are not this user's)

This is Wifione's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Archives: 1, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2015
X's RfA report for the week
Updated every half an hour only; for latest status, kindly go directly to the RFA page


RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 17:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC).—Talk to my owner:Online

Talk archives
Wifione ....... 05:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
W1I1F1I1O1N1E1

Leave your messages below this. Thanks. Wifione

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wifione closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1) Wifione (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from editing any pages relating to or making any edit about:
  1. any Indian commercial organisation founded after 1915;
  2. any Indian educational institution founded after 1915;
  3. biographies of any living or recently deceased person associated with (i) or (ii)
and is restricted to one account.
2.1) Wifione may only regain administrative tools via a successful request for adminship.
3) Wifione (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from the English Misplaced Pages. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

For the Arbitration Committee, --L235 (talk) As a courtesy, please ping me when replying. 17:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Category: