| Revision as of 21:02, 30 August 2012 editJohnCD (talk | contribs)130,355 edits →Senkaku Islands discretionary sanctions request: add← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:39, 31 August 2012 edit undoEdJohnston (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators71,206 edits →Senkaku Islands discretionary sanctions request: Blocked User talk:OYCH1961Next edit → | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
| ::::No edits from the registered account since 21 August. Unless he returns to the fray, I don't see an urgent need for a block. If OYCH1961 comes back with more of the same, an indef may be considered. ] (]) 14:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC) | ::::No edits from the registered account since 21 August. Unless he returns to the fray, I don't see an urgent need for a block. If OYCH1961 comes back with more of the same, an indef may be considered. ] (]) 14:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :::::After I closed ] as ''delete'', OYCH1961 has today come back with , and re-created his sub-page like ]. I have no idea what he's on about. ] (]) 20:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC) | :::::After I closed ] as ''delete'', OYCH1961 has today come back with , and re-created his sub-page like ]. I have no idea what he's on about. ] (]) 20:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::] is now blocked one month per the Senkaku Islands case. ] (]) 04:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == American Vision == | == American Vision == | ||
Revision as of 04:39, 31 August 2012
| This is NuclearWarfare's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
 Archives | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Senkaku Islands discretionary sanctions request
I would like to request that you review the contributions of User:OYCH1961. I've just nominated a subpage of his (essentially, a POVFORK of Senkaku Islands telling only the China side) for deletion, and note his last two contributions to Talk:Senkaku Islands, which came after I warned him about the sanctions in this edit. This editor very much seems to be WP:NOTHERE to build a neutral encyclopedia. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Note that if you do decide to take action, the editor has also been editing without logging in (to remove the MfD tag); see the history on User:OYCH1961/Fishing islets; there may be a range that's blockable. 13:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
- Seeing this discussion, I have blocked 119.133.96.0/20 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) for one week. Here are the recent contributions from that range. EdJohnston (talk) 14:42, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
- Is this now resolved? NW (Talk) 23:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't notice the comments here. I think the registered user him/herself also needs to be blocked, but perhaps we can leave it since the disruptions seems to have stopped. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- OYCH1961 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- No edits from the registered account since 21 August. Unless he returns to the fray, I don't see an urgent need for a block. If OYCH1961 comes back with more of the same, an indef may be considered. EdJohnston (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
- After I closed Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:OYCH1961/Fishing islets as delete, OYCH1961 has today come back with this, and re-created his sub-page like this. I have no idea what he's on about. JohnCD (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- User talk:OYCH1961 is now blocked one month per the Senkaku Islands case. EdJohnston (talk) 04:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- After I closed Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:OYCH1961/Fishing islets as delete, OYCH1961 has today come back with this, and re-created his sub-page like this. I have no idea what he's on about. JohnCD (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't notice the comments here. I think the registered user him/herself also needs to be blocked, but perhaps we can leave it since the disruptions seems to have stopped. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
American Vision
Yes, I have problems with your edits and think that it is very wrong to edit while it is protected like this. You have removed what I thought was a good summary of AV's view of homosexuality. Now the rationale sounds more dubious - that the reason for the hate group listing is that the death penalty for gays would "serve society well". I realise that the quotes are from the same source, but putting them together like that hints of original synthesis. Why would you make controversial edits to a protected page like that? StAnselm (talk) 11:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
- I figured it wouldn't be controversial, but I guess I was wrong. I have self-reverted. As I don't care about the issue all that much (which is why I edited instead of discussing), I'll leave the rest up to you. NW (Talk) 04:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)