Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:50, 7 June 2013

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 Archive 39 Archive 40 Archive 41 Archive 42 Archive 43 Archive 44 Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48 Archive 49 Archive 50 Archive 51 Archive 52 Archive 53 Archive 54 Archive 55 Archive 56 Archive 57 Archive 58 Archive 59 Archive 60 Archive 61 Archive 62 Archive 63

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on this page. Please include links to pertinent page(s). Click New section on the top right to start a new topic.

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution.

Howard for Admin!

Hey I just wanted to let you know you beat me by a second. By the time I hit revert I edit conflicted with yours. And with pretty much the same edit summary no less.:-) Kumioko (talk) 23:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

What do you think? Is he just clueless or something more sinister?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I assume its someone just screwing around but not really sure. At the very least they showed a lot of courage...I guess they didn't see what happened to mine. Rofl Kumioko (talk) 23:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiki HQ Bbb23 only wants to post bad stuff not good stuff on people. I am teaching social media for philanthropy. I will recommend to philanthropy organizations to stay away from Wiki else their brand and economic value gets destroyed. If Wiki can't create economic value attaching yourselves at the top of folks' and organizations' Google searches, then what good societal value are you. Wiki attaches itself at the top of folks' and organizations' Google searches, saying in technological arrogance and narcissism, "it is our way or the highway'! Out here on Main Street, nobody I am talking to likes this at all but you guys. That's the essence of technological arrogance and narcissism in this age nowadays. We users are very upset at Wiki about this notion. And you're not listening to user satisfaction of your existence. This is a classic prescription of becoming "non-existent and irrelevant soon" by another possibility of a better way. Encyclopedia Britannica 1911 Eleventh Edition, Wiki is definitely NOT! I will definitely teach this to my students in my classroom.

I have read your "plain and simple" guide. The blocked edits added only 4-5 awards and an extensive list of sourcing references, as you Wiki HQ Bbb23 requested of us. Since it looked more truthful and credible, still remaining as "plain and simple", Wiki HQ Bbb23 got mad and rejected everything actually requested. Is this "plain and simple request then rejection" policy guidance of Wiki HQ now. Rewrite your policy and rename it. Wiki Users are totally confused by Wiki Policies of technological arrogances and narcissism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 01:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

For the moment, I'm going to let your rant remain on this page, but you need to settle down. Who are you? You and the various IPs who have been editing the article keep talking in the plural ("we" and "us"). Are you claiming to be McGee or some group of people associated with him or what?--Bbb23 (talk) 01:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I am a legitimate Wiki user with a legitimate user compliant and dispute with Wiki HQ Bbb23 taking my presence on Wiki so personally. No Fair! And minimizing my legitimate user compliant in the spirit of freedom and independence of this country as an insulting mere ranting justifies my above compliant of Wiki HQ arrogance and narcissism culture. My article is NOT the rantings of a misrepresentation of misrepresentations and I absolutely don't appreciate it as a legitimate Wiki user being implied as such. The blocking of me imposed by Wiki HQ is an insulting smack in my face as a legitimate Wiki user. No Fair! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 04:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The encyclopedia does not have an economic agenda. We don't charge for our services and we don't even take advertisement money, everything is done on a donation basis only. I would urge you to move on to other more productive things because at this point, you are upset and will only lead to another block for disrupting the encyclopedia to prove a WP:POINT. can you show us how BBB23 has been inappropriate with diffs. You can easily find this in the history pages. If you can post them here maybe I can help explain why it wasn't allowed or attempt to help you get it included. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:51, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I was productive until Bbb23 order me to do work which I did. Encyclopedia Britannica 1911 Eleventh Edition is an encyclopedia. I have several. And I am a potential donor being insulted. I teach and partner with hundreds of other potential donors across philanthropy. Yes we agree. I have been insulted here. My life is not a misrepresentation of misrepresentation on Wiki. I am not trying to prove a point on Wiki. I did the work of the point of my life's facts third-party sources as instructed my editor Bbb23 at Wiki HQ. I have worked through the history page. I can't post anything on the history page because Bbb23 Wiki HQ has blocked me from participation in the "free" Wiki park. I can't even make a donation?

You can certainly make a donation and you haven't been blocked from editing or you wouldn't be able to post here. I don't see where he is insulting you? Also what do you mean when you say misrepresentation of misrepresentation? Can you phrase that differently? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Responder please read history and assist to correct the injustice here:

(cur | prev) 20:59, 21 May 2013‎ Bbb23(talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,782 bytes) (-6,246)‎ . .(Undid revision 556068065 by 198.228.216.160 (talk) - proxy server) (undo) (cur | prev) 20:58, 21 May 2013‎ Bbb23(talk | contribs)‎ m . . (11,028 bytes) (0)‎ . .(Protected Oliver McGee: edits by IPs using proxy servers ( (expires 20:58, 31 May 2013 (UTC)) (expires 20:58, 31 May 2013 (UTC)))) (undo) (cur | prev) 07:35, 21 May 2013‎ 198.228.216.160(talk)‎ . . (11,028 bytes) (+6,246)‎ . .(Undid revision 556028294 by Bbb23 (talk) we must respectfully strongly disagree did huge amt of research to legitimately ref. all aspects of the article to Wiki norms of education career awards pls stop) (undo) (cur | prev) 00:23, 21 May 2013‎ Bbb23(talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,782 bytes) (-6,246)‎ . .(Reverted to revision 555305801 by Donner60: so much puffery, resume, non-notable awards, no secondary sourcing. (TW)) (undo) (cur | prev) 14:51, 20 May 2013‎ 198.228.216.28(talk)‎ . . (11,028 bytes) (+8)‎ . .(documented & substantiated all statements of Oliver McGee article with Wiki HQ directed & required third party sources, citations, and references to Wiki article standards & requirements) (undo) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs)

Responder a largest majority of the size of the "plain and simple" Oliver McGee article is the "Reference" section, containing the required third-party sourcing, which Wiki HQ Editor Bbb23 required two references on every statement to be found and posted. When we did the entire work was delete and access blocked. No Fair!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 05:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The problems I see involve that all the things being added isn't nec. notable awards. Having a Misplaced Pages page does not we will report every minor thing they do. Now if he won a Pulitzer instead of being listed as an influential individual we would definitely document that but the additions I'm seeing is more the type we'd see inside a job interview or resume. We strive very hard to promote a NPOV on all things and the flavor is just a bit off with what you were trying to accomplish. I recognize it took a lot of work cause that was a lot of references you tried to add. I don't think BBB23 is picking on you. I think he's doing what is in the best interest of the encyclopedia. If you are still concerned try the BLP Noticeboard it will get more editors to look it over and help expand or make it more balanced. Take care with editing in this subject though because it would appear you have a conflict of interest and while this doesn't preclude your involvement it will be met with scrutiny. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely wrong about the notable nature of all the awards. Google or Wiki the National Science Foundation Presidential Young Investigator Award, or the USA Professors of the Year Awards, or simply read the third-party sourcing provided and you will see how notable the awards are. Plus, top-ranked university articles discussing the awards inside their publications have been provided. If there was a misrepresentation on anyone's part, that would constitute academic misconduct. This is not legitimate in higher education circles. So, I can't make misreprsentations on Wiki online for open public consumption, else that constitutes academic misconduct. I am paying full respect to Wiki standards here of just the "plain and simple" facts, using the highest protocols of academic standards of publication here. Instead, Wiki HQ Bbb23 says to these stiff standards of archival journal publications and editorship, reject this, delete it, and block it. No Fair!! And asking me to be GIVEN a Nobel Peace Prize or win a Pulitzer Prize smacks of Wiki IRS blocking nonsense not justifying further comment or response back. So let's try to respect legitimate Wiki users giving you guys respect as Wiki HQ Editors. We all know there is an injustice going on here that needs to be corrected somehow to a compromise. No Fair!! I am a legitimate Wiki user and a potential donor here!

Ok so you should should try the BLPN board it is a board that deals with Biographies of Living People, it's your best avenue to see what the site consensus is. And btw we don't have a Wiki IRS or Wiki HQ, not sure what you mean there. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:11, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I am going to stay with my legitimate Wiki user complaint about this injustice to be corrected as a legitmate Wiki user and potental donor harmed here. Wiki has a philanthropic stewardship obligation here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 06:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok that's your choice, but the place to do that is the BLP noticeboard, not here. You can make the complaint there, and if any action against BBB23 needs to be done it will be. Given the situation I don't think it's going to happen but you never know. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:20, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Bbb23 your revision and blockage is wrong and unjustifiable here with all due respect. I have provided in my "plain and simple" revision the other night (at your specific instructions and request of me as a legitimate Wiki user) twenty-five "verifiable or even reliable" third-party sourcing not just ten as you are forcing here. "It's not that I doubt you," but "Misplaced Pages has rules that material must be sourced to something authoritative that someone else can check", which I have provided in all 25 references that you have blocked Bbb23. "If you have access to a library with newspapers that go back that far , ... that could work." Sometimes ones own words Bbb23 can be quite persuasive! Are your own words Bbb23 persuasive here for you please? Let's find a path to compromise here Bbb23 please please please. I am an honest man. I am not interested in misrepresenting anything or anyone here. I am an accurate man. It's my vocation. I am a legitimate Wiki user respecting the "Wiki park" and you Editor Bbb23. Aren't your own words Bbb23 persuasive here for you please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 06:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't wish to have my name placed on BLP Noticeboard, please remove my name from there please - I did not ask for this my God. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 07:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Did you add it there? The notice board is just to ensure that the BLP's are presented fairly and gives you an avenue to protest if you think the article is slanted one way or another. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The protection of the "article" was because a number of anonymous IP's were adding material that violated our biography of living persons requirements for sourcing, and were therefore quite possibly hazardous to the subject of the article. In other words, it was protected to protect the subject from possibly false or embarassing additions. Please remove the chip from your shoulder as you move forward and recognize how difficult it already is dealing with vandals, let alone when the subject of an article tries to take creative control (✉→BWilkins←✎) 09:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Oliver, thank you for bringing your tone down a couple of notches. I'm puzzled, though, by a couple of things you've said. First, as far as I can tell, your name is not at WP:BLPN, so there's nothing to remove. Second, you appear to be quoting me and I don't know what you're referring to. Can you point to where I said these things? I think you're talking about things I said to another editor about a completely different article. As for the the McGee article, some of the things Hell in a Bucket says above are very helpful. You should pay attention. Putting aside the conflict of interest you have editing your own article (I'm assuming the IPs are you but you've never confirmed that), the article has problems the way it is now, and it had even more problems the way you were editing it. I just removed a copyright violation from the article because you or someone else copied and pasted material from a website. That is a very serious violation at Misplaced Pages.

But even if the copyright violation were fixed, the article reads like a resume, not like an encyclopedia article. In the version before the current version when a great deal of new material was added, it was worse. It was more like a resume, but now including a bunch of awards. All of the awards were sourced to primary sources, and many of them are non-notable. Sometimes an award is inherently notable. For example, if an actor gets an Oscar, that's automatically notable, and you can source it to the Oscar website (primary source), but for awards that are not inherently notable (usually ones that we don't even have an article about), you have to at least cite to a secondary source so that its importance is recognized.

That brings up another major defect in the article. It lacks secondary sourcing. It needs more major publications (newspapers, magazines, books) that talk about McGee, as opposed to things that are press releases from colleges or organizations that promote a particular agenda. For example, the first two references in the article (Fox News and CNN) are a little better. The Fox News broadcast isn't great because it seems like an opportunity for you to tout your book, but at least it's a major media outlet, and just that they had you on the show means something. The CNN piece also isn't great because it's a CNN blog, it's short, and it doesn't say a whole lot, but, again, it's a blog from a major media outlet, which helps a bit. By contrast, the History Makers website and the Howard University press release are probably both acceptable sources, but they just help with your resume, not with coverage about you and your work that has any depth.

The reality is that you simply can't be trusted to edit the article neutrally and within Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. It would be SO much better if you followed the advice of WP:AB and restricted yourself to the talk page. Then, you could propose additions to the article and other more experienced editors (without conflict) could review them and decide whether they should be added. If they object, you would be able to discuss why and hopefully come up with something that is acceptable. You'd have to be more civil with everyone though. This is a collaborative project and yelling at people and accusing them of agendas is unconstructive and will get you nowhere. You probably won't believe me, but I have nothing against you personally or what you do or your politics. I don't even pay attention to those aspects of an article unless policy issues are raised by the language. I'm just interested in making sure Misplaced Pages's policies are not violated and that people who edit here abide by those policies.--Bbb23 (talk) 10:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• I've left another message on Oliver's talk page as well. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 11:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks we are done. Please remove my copyrighted name associated with you in respect to your stated Wiki copyright policies above, as you've requested.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 20:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you mean.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hamid Algar

According to WP:BLPN (here) there is consensus about NOT using "spat" in this article. I wonder I can revert this edit that violates that consensus given the message you had left in my talk page. By the way, how come the other party did not receive this warning?--Kazemita1 (talk) 00:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd be careful about reverting. I noticed the change to the article but haven't had a chance to review it. Until and if I do, I suggest the talk page. The reason you received the warning is you've never been warned before; the other editor was warned in 2009; a second warning is unnecessary.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I reviewed Marshall's and blocked him for it.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:05, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Following your sugestion

Hi, just telling you that I created a new section in the talkpage of the article about mestizos on wikipedia let's see how this turns out, however, if Theryx7 ignores it like he did with my comments on his talk page I will add the image next week, is that ok? Angelicality (talk) 03:51, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

What you might also want to do is to invite Theryx7 to comment at the talk page. They may not be aware you posted the comment.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:06, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Mattythewhite 2

Can you restore the indenting on the SPA votes please, since you put it there originally? There's an IP insistent on removing them, and I'm not willing to get blocked over this. However, the IP needs blocking: they've opened a WP:POINTy DRN against me, they've tried indenting out my vote, and they've also claimed I have a COI on my talk page (which I removed). Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:41, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the block, looks like GB fan beat you to the reverting. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:49, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, if I'm going to block, I usually block first before reverting as that prevents another revert by the about-to-be-blocked user.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• That makes sense. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Please block User:Daredevil7

Hi, please block User:Daredevil7 with no expiry set (indefinite), because the user may contributing with no common sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.178.162 (talk) 00:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Who are you?--Bbb23 (talk) 01:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

First Australian Imperial Force dental units

Hi, I am trying to understand the removal or large content on here. Can you please let me know if this was a mistake or intentional? Thanks. Amit (talk) 01:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Intentional. The article had only one "source", an external link that was dead, which I removed. Otherwise, it had zero sourcing. I might add that it has no other articles that link to it and hadn't been edited in over a year and a half since I edited it, which was a year ago (kind of weird your asking about it a year later). The article has only 4 page watchers (one of whom is me). I'm not sure what your interest is in it, but perhaps you could improve it and give it some reason to even exist. Not that you're required to, of course.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Sandom and associated Talk Page". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Nbound (talk) 01:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Userspace to Mainspace

Hello. Wanted help regarding moving an article from my userspace to the mainspace. Will it work? Or will it be acceptable? And would it move the edits performed there to mainspace too? Thanks for your support. Faizan 07:51, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just move the page....and it works.... :) TheStrike Σagle 07:55, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Strike. I will move it later on. Faizan 07:59, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

If you're talking about Persecution of Biharis in Bangladesh, the move looks okay, but the article needs a lot of work. I edited the article, mainly from a stylistic and MOS perspective. I know nothing about the subject matter, but the article strikes me as non-neutral. I also get the feeling there are copyright violations, although I haven't actually checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your improvements there, I would improve it. Faizan 13:03, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Shekhar Suman

hello, where i've used wiki as a source? Shivamsetu (talk) 17:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Cinebasti.com is a user-editable wiki (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

AN3 and twinkle

As you might have noticed I added AN3 reporting to twinkle some time ago now. Haven't got a lot of feedback though, so I don't know if it's function as needed (was difficult for me to interpret the AN3 procedures), thus I ask you if you could validate it's correctness? _→AzaToth 18:02, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Can't say I noticed. Where exactly is it?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:08, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

It's accessible from Twinkle on the ARV module under "Edit warring". Many texts/tooltips might been to be worked on though. It looks like following: http://imgur.com/K4oyNS0 _→AzaToth 20:05, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm still lost. I don't know what an "ARV module" is. When I go to WP:TW, I see nothing about edit warring. I even went to Twinkle preferences and saw nothing about edit warring, at least nothing that jumped out at me or showed up when I did a "find" on "warring". The image you uploaded is too small for me to make out. Maybe if you go more slowly and in itty bitty steps (I'm very literal).--Bbb23 (talk) 20:30, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Hehe, I'm sorry for being unclear. Twinkle is a gadget which needs to be enabled under Preferences → Gadgets. After activation, there will be a "TW" menu next to the search box. On a user page or a user talk page (of the person you are reporting), you hover over TW and click on ARV, there under report type, you select "Edit warring", you input the page in question where the edit warring took place and click in "load". Now you select the edits that are relevant, enter a optional comment, and click on "Send". For the screenshot, try http://imgur.com/K4oyNS0.jpg for a full screen version. _→AzaToth 20:42, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah, okay, now I've found it, and I can see the image better as well. How am I supposed to "validate" it, though?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Have I understood the procedure correct? Is the template I made to use (Template:An3-notice) ok? _→AzaToth 23:02, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Okay, this is a bit tough to do in the abstract, but here goes:

• There should be a place in the Twinkle dialog to indicate "the previous version reverted to". That's the first thing one is supposed to fill out at AN3.
  • I'm trying to access that automatically, taking the selected reverts, grabbing the first one, recording the parentid, grabbing the 100 previous revisions, grab the sha1 from the first revision, look through the older revisions to find a revision with the same sha1, if non found, use the first one as the original, otherwise use the one we found. Other than that, I have no idea what "the previous version reverted to" actually implies. _→AzaToth 00:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
    • I can't follow your technical explanation. However, I understand the issue, I think. I find this part of an EW report to be the least useful of any of the items a reporter is supposed to complete. That said, I can't change or eliminate it without discussion and consensus. I pretty much ignore it. The reporter is supposed to pick a version that shows that the first diff in the list of reverts is in fact a revert. Usually, that would simply be the version just before the first revert. Generally, a change or a deletion is considered a revert, whereas a pure addition is not. However, sometimes an addition is adding something that was previously deleted, in which case the addition does count as a revert. That kind of explanation usually is found in the comments if the reporter is savvy. I don't think it's what's intended to be placed in this spot. That's all I can tell you. I've never consulted with another admin about this.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:16, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
• The question mark for Page in the dialog should say "The page being reported".
• I would change the language in the Twinkle dialog from "Edits which constitute edit warring" to "User's reverts".
• The question mark for the reverts should say "Select the edits you believe are reverts".
• You can simplify the next part from "Indications of warnings given to subject" to "Warnings given to user".

As for the template, I can see you made some edits to {{An3-notice}}, but my knowledge of how templates work is piss-poor, so I don't know whether it is okay.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:53, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the laugh :)

"Try not to shout" on Karl Rove made me laugh. Thanks for the levity. Safehaven86 (talk) 19:47, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Karl Rove and levity - now, there's an interesting combination.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:51, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Haha, now you've done it again! Safehaven86 (talk) 19:53, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

American Idol (season 12) protection expiry

Could you extend protection for American Idol (season 12) for one year as the protection is going to expire by 19 hours time? The IP editor has going to continuously remove the controversy section. ApprenticeFan 06:21, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Administrators noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Mean as custard reported by User:Bhtpbank

I do not agree with your review and have taken this issue to the Village Pump . Bhtpbank (talk) 09:40, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

William Jockush

I was about to say something about him, and when I got to a computer you had already blocked him. Do you mind adding your block to the list of sanctions on the sanction page? --Kyohyi (talk) 16:49, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the belated rely. I reverted your changes to the probation page because there was no warning (you added it to the list of warnings). I have now added it to the sanctions list. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:32, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

re: adriana ferreyr

Why have you undone what I wrote for Adriana Ferreyr's occupation?74.101.128.155 (talk) 18:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Blocked: June 2013

For your attack on the administrative staff of Misplaced Pages (" I know a few admins who would no doubt feign sleep to avoid having to use their tools."), I have decided to block you for a period of ... zzzzzzz :) — Ched :  ?  21:25, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

• Where did Bbb23 make this shocking personal attack? This is an outrage! :D Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:28, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Careful guys, are we sure Cluebot doesn't parse joke blocks as well as joke warnings? :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:30, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Hence the lack of a template. :) — Ched :  ?  21:52, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

• Has Bbb23 gone rouge? Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:39, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

ANd what did I do

And what EXCATLY did I do wrong?— Preceding unsigned comment added by David-golota (talk • contribs) 16:32, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

If you don't know what you did wrong, you have serious problems. You massively refactored WP:ANI, which, unless it was accidental (hard to believe), was vandalism.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:46, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Protection needed

The IP sock of Shaushka came right back again, I see you correctly identified him as a sock and rv'd him, but did not block and so he is edit warring again. We urgently need protection on Cyaxares, Gutian people, and elsewhere to limit this disruption and edit warring. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I've now blocked them and semi-protected both articles. So far, in addition to the above two articles, which I have on my watchlist, I also have Template:Yazdânism and Yazdânism. Are there others? A range block may be the best way to go, but I haven't looked at how many addresses it would block, which is a major consideration. They appear to be editing from two different ranges. And the blocks imposed by the other admin and since by me will only last 48 hours, although the semi-protection is for 10 days.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:32, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Shared IP templates

While I do have several issues with the long-term behavior of 68.50.128.91 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), I wanted to point out that they are correct, nothing in WP:BLANKING currently prevents the removal of shared IP templates. I have brought up at Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#WP:BLANKING that I feel the templates for educational institutions such at {{Shared IP edu}} should be re-added as a template which should not be removed (and in fact I am late on restoring it). A few other shared IP templates have been brought up; but those discussions fizzled out before a consensus could be determined. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:45, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Update: It appears that all IP headers have just been re-added to WP:BLANKING by Toddst1. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:47, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Heh, I thought it was already there. Are you saying that it used to be there and was removed and has now been restored by Todd? I could swear I remember seeing it at one time.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:50, 7 June 2013 (UTC)