User talk:Boomer Vial/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

May need your support

Boomer, when you filed a protection, you weren't aware of the user history I just found in the logs. Did I file this correctly[1], or should someone file a SPI? I would like some of these pages to be cleaned up, and past editors shouldn't have to go through this everytime they want to make a productive edit. I could maybe use your support here. Thanks. JustAGal2 (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

@JustAGal2: I have no idea which revision is correct, honestly. I'm just trying to drop the stick, at this point. I've requested, once again, that the page be protected. Hope this helps. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

By the way, I was the one who helped you this past weekend. I have my reasons for being quiet, because I had problems with a user here before. Actually the material that was reverted also met the requirements of that old Consensus and was a newer compromised version. It is more than sufficient for the section. I wrote about it at the top here: [2]. That IP and user which are the same WP:SOCK has been suppressing editors on those pages for years from what I dug up, which I commented on in my report. Could you take a look at how I filed it? I am good at writing, but not as versed at templates and the redtape. I supported several of your edits because they were also removed. Thank you, Boomer. JustAGal2 (talk) 00:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I understand. And thanks! Am I allowed to add to it? Would my report make a difference? I would like your more compromising version to be restored before it is protected. JustAGal2 (talk) 00:13, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@JustAGal2: Honestly, you should just remove the edit warring report, and file a sock puppet investigation, seeing as he's at it again[3]. He fooled me there. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Did you see what I mean't?!? Tricky sucker. Using the same evidence, think it would make a difference? It says that IP is formerly blocked IP from a computer lab. Would make a checkuser probably useless unless there is enough behavioral evidence. JustAGal2 (talk) 00:32, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Boomer, I want you to get your compromising edit [4] restored before it is locked up. Where can you request that? I tried on the protection page. I don't want that socked version protected after all the chaos. It's there just to degrade. Over or under the administrators comment? JustAGal2 (talk) 00:40, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@JustAGal: Seeing as that IP editor has already been blocked for sockpuppeting for using that account, the behavioral evidence might be credible enough. Might being the keyword. Also, remember to remain WP:CIV. Comment on contributions, not the editor. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@JustAGal2: I think the sock's version might be correct, although there is no harm is asking for a third opinion. Seeing as I'm not too sure myself, that would probably be a better option. Also please remember to add comments in chronological order, as it is easier to see. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:59, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Please go right ahead and file an SPI on me. I've had it done before in attempts to link me with this particular IP, and it was as untrue then as it is today. That address is a USC campus IP address, open to literally tens of thousands of students and staff. I edit Wikipedia as a hobby in the evenings and sometimes on weekends, as I spend my days working in oncology at Palmetto Health Richland hospital, so as you might imagine, my daylight hours are concerned with things a bit more important than maintaining these articles. The person you are being fooled by here is JustAGal2, who fully admitted editing this article without logging in due to these sinister-sounding "problems with a user". Guess what that behavior is defined as? And just how many IPs has this editor been using over the past several days? Be careful that WP:BOOMERANG doesn't hit you, Gal. It's also obvious this editor isn't some brand new user on Wikipedia just by looking at the history of this new account. A few cursory edits to a television show article, and then jump right into tendentious editing of the Clemson Football article, not only attempting to circumvent established consensus, but as the IP editor pointed out, using deceptive edit summaries in a weak attempt to hide the true purpose of the edits. I'm still wondering if there will be any explanation given for that type of behavior. Add to this the report filing and canvassing of editors all day today trying to beg for help to restore their POV edits, and it's pretty obvious that we're dealing with someone with a history here that they don't want anyone to be able to scrutinize. Wonder why that might be? GarnetAndBlack (talk) 01:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@GarnetAndBlack: "Please go right ahead and file an SPI on me. I've had it done before in attempts to link me with this particular IP, and it was as untrue then as it is today" Riiiiight. Which is why the IP editor was blocked for abusing multiple accounts (using your account)[5]? Not only that, but your edits match up closely to the IP editors edits. Boomer Vial^Holla 03:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@GarnetAndBlack: So then it's just coincidence that your contributions[6], and the IP editors contributions[7] are so similar. I guess it's also coincidence the the IP was blocked for 6 months for abusing your multiple accounts using your account?[8][9]. I think it's not a coincidence at all. Seeing as you just decided to abuse multiple accounts recently (in which you succeeded in fooling me), you have no room to talk. Nor do I have any idea how you can say that there are no SPIs that were definitively linked, see as I linked it twice now (once in this comment, once in my above comment.) I do appreciate you helping to maintain the consensus-approved revision of Clemson Tigers football. That does not mean your entitled to free pass to abuse multiple accounts whenever you want. The same goes for User:JustAGal2, who could very well be a sock-puppet of User:ThomasC.Wolfe. Boomer Vial^Holla 08:12, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Ebbisham Sports Centre Copyright

You deleted the information that I created on Ebbisham Sports Club because of copyright material. All the material was original or belonged to Ebbisham Sports club can you explain what section you thought was copyrighted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigDinE (talk • contribs) 09:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@BigDinE: I'm sorry about the confusion. I actually reverted your edits, because the wording you used was non-neutral. Lines such as Ebbisham Sports Club is a friendly, non-profit making racquets club ..." and "the Club has a large bar, lounge and patio, satellite TV, three tennis courts, three squash and racketball courts and three badminton courts." are good examples of sentences that were non-neutral. Again, sorry about the confusion. Boomer Vial^Holla 22:02, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@Boomer Vail: Apologies, OK I have rewritten this and removed the offending wording. Ebbisham Sports Club Is there a tool that I can run the text throught to see if there is additional areas I may have missed that need changing. Thanks for the support. --BigDinE (talk) 23:13, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1881 Courthouse Museum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Custer County. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

YOU ARE PK!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.145.169.249 (talk) 12:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@49.145.169.249: Uh, what? Boomer Vial^Holla 12:27, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Neil Redfearn

He's been sacked you donut — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.112.232.111 (talk) 15:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Get a source, and your revision will not be reverted. Also, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~). Boomer Vial^Holla 15:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I have added a sauce, so stop deleting it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.112.232.111 (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Is http://talksport.com/football/neil-redfearn-sacked-manager-championship-strugglers-rotherham-united-160208184349 not a reliable source for Redfearn's sacking? I don't know, just asking. You ought to stop reverting though, just in case it's true.  —SMALLJIM  15:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

No, that was my mistake. I didn't see that he added a source on the last few reverts. I assumed that it was the same unsourced information since he was reverting my reverts. I apologized to the editor on his talk page. Boomer Vial^Holla 15:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:1881 Courthouse Museum front1.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:1881 Courthouse Museum front1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 04:05, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

The website which I took this photo from is here[10]. Also, here is the direct page in which the photo is from[11]. I looked through the copyright section of the ToS of the website[12], and it only states information about the use of others copyrighted material, not material created and copyrighted by the website, it's self. I'm not sure where to put this information, or what to do next and could use some guidance. This is my first time uploading a photo. Thanks. Boomer Vial^Holla 06:49, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

We need evidence that the image is released under a free license that allows everybody to re-use and modify it for any purpose, including commercial purposes. Since the forum's ToS do not contain such a provision, the content posted on that forum is copyrighted by the creators (ie the photographer) and not freely licensed. Thus it unfortunately is unsuitable for use on Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 09:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, darn. Look's like I'll have to hunt for another picture. Boomer Vial^Holla 09:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

If you happen to live in that area, you could simply take a new photo yourself and release it under a free license. If that's what you want to do, I'd advise you to use the Upload Wizard at the Wikimedia Commons. Huon (talk) 20:52, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Boomer Vial. As I have changed the topic Renggam, I would like you to change it back to my edit. I have taken a long time to edit it so please understand. PS: Where are you from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.143.245.1 (talk) 03:34, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

@175.143.245.1: Seeing as you removed an infobox, and have had yet to explain why, your request is denied. I will review the two +2k contributions you have made to the page, and will restore them if the follow the guidelines. Boomer Vial^Holla 09:56, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

@175.143.245.1: I've reviewed your edits, and I see that you've deleted a perfectly good source here[13], replacing it with your own version. So your request to restore your other edits are declined as well. Please feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits, as well as making edits fall within Wikipedia guidelines. Thanks. Boomer Vial^Holla 10:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Please stop adding the content in Vodafone Events Centre

Hi, I noticed that you kept reverting an IP's edits to Vodafone Events Centre. However, I do not understand this, as the content removed was just a mess of content repeated multiple times, and appeared to be copy-and-pasted. I have reverted your edit, but please respond to this message if you disagree with me. Thanks. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 20:24, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Using photos under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0/Is this photo OK for upload?

Hello there. I want to upload this[14] photo, for the article I created for the [1881 Courthouse Museum. I was wondering what the terms of use were for Creative Commons Attribute 4.0, and if I would be OK to upload this image? Thanks. Boomer Vial^Holla 22:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Unless you are the photographer/copyright holder of this photo, you cannot use it without express permission from the copyright holder/photographer who agrees to release it under a creative commons license. Mkdw^talk 00:42, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Warning of Bryce Fifield

Thanks for the message. I had not thought about sockpuppets so I am sorry I did not realize why a warning 4 was given. I suppose that the previous vandalism was under an IP address because I did see an earlier vandalism to Nadeshot by another user but I did not put the two users together. I did not want to use a standard Huggle AIV report because I think some administrators would have rejected it without the further explanation. I would have been unable to give that explanation so I thought I would scale back the warning level and let the user either give up or hang himself with a couple more vandalisms. Of course, that requires hanging around to see if those vandalisms turn up or hoping that other anti-vandalism editors are on the case. Thanks, again. Donner60 (talk) 05:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Mann Vasanai

Why do you revert my edits in the page Mann Vasanai (TV series) Zain Rudra (talk) 10:56, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Read the warning templates I left. Boomer Vial^Holla 10:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

it is an authorized edit. there is a TV series so i did it to make people more conscious about itZain Rudra (talk) 10:58, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

You are continually removing page redirects, without approval of consensus. This is your last warning to stop. Boomer Vial^Holla 11:00, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I hope you didn't mind

I edited your template warning on that IP vandal's talk page - it is delete4im, rather than blank4im. --Ches (talk) 11:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC) 11:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

@Chesnaught555: No, not at all. Thanks for the heads-up, though. Boomer Vial^Holla 11:04, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

No problem! --Ches (talk) 11:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

User warnings

Eh, 's alright - no skin off my nose. I just tend to be rather unforgiving when dealing with vandals, especially ones who blank large chunks of text like that. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:29, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Same here. How forgiving I am depends on the quality of the edit. If it seems less like a disruptive edit, the more likely that I will leave the editor a level one warning. Boomer Vial^Holla 04:31, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit count userbox

Hey there, fellow Wikipedian. I was wondering if there was a way to make my edit count userbox reflect my amount of edits without me having to edit it. Meaning is there a way to make it automated? If so, I couldn't figure it out, and need a helping hand here. Cheers! Boomer Vial^Holla 13:56, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

We have the {{NUMBEROFEDITS}} magic word, but that's the total number of edits on the English Wikipedia (namely, 1,261,503,793 edits), not a specific user's. I don't think there's an automated way of updating your edit count except possibly by bot, and it seems a waste to use a bot for such trivia. Huon (talk) 16:04, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, good point. I was just curious if there was a way to. I might as well remove that user box, as I can already see it being a pain having to update it. Thanks anyways. Boomer Vial^Holla 16:05, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Stop it

Please stop leaving me messages. Get back to what you were doing beforehand. 2602:306:3357:BA0:383E:3FA3:2868:37E5 (talk) 22:43, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

@2602:306:3357:BA0:383E:3FA3:2868:37E5: Ok, I'm sorry about that whole thing. Boomer Vial^Holla 03:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

FYI

[15] is Link Smurf. Revert him on sight. Thanks for the vigilance. –Fredddie™ 03:32, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

They were already blocked. I reported them to AIV after it became evident the account was vandalism only. Thanks, though! :) Boomer Vial^Holla 03:34, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Go ahead and add them to the SPI page too if you find any more. –Fredddie™ 03:37, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

@Fredddie: Yup, no problem. Boomer Vial^Holla 03:49, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

the sandbox

I'm sorry I thought that was the sandbox77.174.2.139 (talk) 20:56, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

@77.174.2.139: That was the Sandbox. The Sandbox, however, is not a place for you to spam and vandalize. Boomer Vial^Holla 20:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh i'm so sorry it won't happen againPim Jongkind (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Robert lee adams

Hi, I've gone ahead and speedily deleted the Robert lee adams page as you asked at AFD. No need for a week long discussion. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I was planing on redo it with the correct capitalization. Thanks again. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to April 15 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * 1915]] – [[Stanley Adams (actor|Stanley Adams]], American actor and screenwriter (d. 1977)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Why would I want to stop receiving these useful messages? Thanks! :) Boomer Vial^Holla 23:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to November 7 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * 1993 – [[[[Charles Aidman]], American stage, film, and television actor (b. 1925)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:50, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to May 1 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:53, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Sammy Figueroa

Hi, I want to know the specific reasons why you delete all the changes I put on Sammy Figueroa's page and how I can fix it. Do you save the draft? Cause via "view history" I can't see my previous version. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.71.233.229 (talk) 17:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

@75.71.233.239: Your edits, along with edits made by User:Xioadiu were reverted due to "stub due to COPYVIO and lack of sourcing", according to the reverting editor's edit summary. Boomer Vial^Holla 11:13, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

WP:CREATELEAD

Hi Boomer Vial. Re: this edit. The lead is solely intended to repeat statements made in the body of the article. See: WP:CREATELEAD. I would suggest that you restore that edit. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:05, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Done. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Boomer Vial^Holla 11:09, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

86.98.110.57 (talk) 12:49, 19 February 2016 (UTC)I thaught we were aloud to edit sandbox

Sysops

Hello, Boomer Vial. You have new messages at Krj373's talk page.
Message added 20:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Krj373^{*(talk), *(contrib)} 20:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

When I am editing "Wikipedia:Sandbox"

Why do you keep messing my stuff when I am editing "Wikipedia:Sandbox"? Are you trying to be just like those users: lowercase sigmabot II, Hazard-Bot and other kind of users? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.126.117 (talk) 03:16, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi 67.100.126.117, it's a public sandbox that anyone can play with. Please register for an account and use your user sandbox if you'd like to have your own space to test edits. Lowercase sigmabot and Hazard-bot are computer programs designed specifically for cleaning the sandbox after a short period of time. Chrisw80 (talk) 03:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Fixing spacing [User page]

Hello there. I was wondering if there is any way to fix the spacing on my user page isn't so sporadic, and weird looking. I've been tampering with the spacing, but I can't figure it out for the life of me. What I'm mainly looking for is to make the boxes even, and on one side. Cheers. Boomer Vial^Holla 01:10, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Boomer Vial! I'm not particularly experienced, but I use a table on my userpage instead of the boxbox template as I feel I get a little better control over errantly sized userboxes. If you decide switch to tables, you might try using rowspan="2" for the templates that are overly large and combining the overly large templates onto the same lines for balance. In my case, I have one big table with signpost off to the right, spanning 8 rows. Check Help:Table and Wikipedia:Userboxes#Grouping userboxes for more information. I'll leave the helpme ticket open in case someone else has better advice. Chrisw80 (talk) 03:20, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I have evenly aligned the userboxes on the right. You may want to use {{Userboxbreak}} instead of repeatedly using {{Userboxtop}} and {{userboxbottom}}. The {{clear}} template forces the next set of userboxes to be displayed below the previous one(s). The __NOTOC__ magic word however had no effect since there is no table of contents anyway; even if there would be, using the magic word once would suffice; it does not merely move the TOC but abolish it altogether. Huon (talk) 10:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Shari Redstone Article

Thank you for getting involved - please see my comments on that talk page as you suggested. However, it doesn't seem to have helped. I'm happy to discuss it further but it seems that 107etc. has some sort of ax to grind, though I'm not sure what that is, as evident from the fact that he/she doesn't even want to leave the ex-husband's middle initial in there never mind discuss anything. Suggestions?

As I've written repeatedly in my edit summaries, Ira A. Korff is a red link. Ira Korff (no middle initial) is not. You keep reverting me deleting the "A." That is your choice. 107.107.57.156 (talk) 00:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@ChosidFrumBirth: Report them to either WP:ANI, or WP:ANEW. I've requested the page for protection, so which ever comes first. Also, please remember to sigj your posts with fours tildes (~). Boomer Vial^Holla 00:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry - didn't get that, but there should be a way to make the accurate full name into a regular link. But what about your insistence on calling him 'attorney' when it was clear he was 'rabbi', and the bit about the severance package (see my explanation).

Also, stop using headers to separate your comments. As you can see, there are colons before each comment. Those are spacers. Please use those instead. Please sign your posts. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - didn't know (obviously). On the issue of red link what's the difference anyway when it references him with both names and the Ira Korff goes right to the Yitzhak Aharon Korff article? So who cares if Ira A. Korff is a red link when immediately after you have a link? ChosidFrumBirth (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, when I said take it to the talk page, I meant the article talk page, not my user talk page. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

That's what I thought, and what I did - but 107etc commented here so I answered. Sorry. Will go back where I commented before and try to reason with him there. ChosidFrumBirth (talk) 00:46, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

ADVICE please - it doesn't look like user 107.107.57.156 is going to discuss this, but if I correct the article again I assume he'll just revert and we're back in the same back and forth reverting. Any advice? ChosidFrumBirth (talk) 03:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

@ChosidFrumBirth: Sorry about responding so late. This is one of few messages that managed to get past me. Now in regards to the article in question, I've overlooked the revision history, and saw that there are no revisions since the page protection expired. The only advice I can give you is go to WP:ANI for a third opinion on the subject matter if the edit war continues. An administrator will be able to give an non-involved opinion as to which revision is correct. You can also alternatively go to WP:AN3, but only do this if the IP editor violates 3RR. Boomer Vial^Holla 23:11, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much. ChosidFrumBirth (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerking at AIV

Hi Boomer Vial. Just a friendly note: non-admin declines at WP:AIV are strongly discouraged and frowned upon. Please don't do that. Admins will review all reports in due time. Widr (talk) 21:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Widr: Oh, crap. A thousand apologies. I missed that in the AIV templates. Boomer Vial^Holla 21:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

No worries, it's hardly the worst thing you could have done. Keep up the good work dealing with vandals. Widr (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Widr: Am I allowed to remove AIV cases that were declined by Administrators? Boomer Vial^Holla 02:42, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but only after they have been up long enough for the requester to see the response. In short, AIV is well-patrolled and better left for admins to handle. If you see reports left unattended for some time, it's probably because either it's a questionable report to begin with or an admin is tacitly deferring it to other admins. You of course are welcome to comment on any reports, and either way your eagerness to help is noted and appreciated :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: So, like a fifteen minute window from the time the AIV was declined by an Administrator is acceptable? Also, would it acceptable to be use the AIV note template to let the user know that a reported editor was improperly warned? Boomer Vial^Holla 00:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Depends, but more like a few hours. Like I said, this area is well-patrolled, and (speaking for several admins I know) we prefer to handle declining requests ourselves. Sometimes it's not as simple as being improperly warned, or other actions such as protection and deletion would be more appropriate than an outright decline. AIV is for prompt admin attention (hence the name), so closely tied to the admin toolset that clerking isn't really that helpful. Occasional commentary of any insight you might have into a particular report is fine however — MusikAnimal ^talk 04:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the clarification. Boomer Vial^Holla 06:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Signing Vandalism Warnings

As a reasonably experienced wikipedian, I know for a fact that you don't have to sign vandalism warnings. And while I usually do sign vandal warnings, when I am dealing with a particularly bad vandal such as this guy, I know better than to sign as it will get my userpage vandalized. Joel.Miles925 (talk) 22:04, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Joel.Miles925: I'm not even going to address the "experienced Wikipedian" comment. Also, you are incorrect, you must sign all posts. Please read WP:SIGN. Boomer Vial^Holla 22:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Help with vandalism

Hey there. I have a question about vandalism. In cases of vandalism like this[16], what would be an appropriate warning level to give an editor/IP editor that does this, in case I happen to find one that didn't get caught by Cluebot NG, or other editors? Boomer Vial^Holla 22:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I usually go with the sequential warnings. {{uw-vandalism1}} through {{uw-vandalism4}}. I don't think I have ever used the {{uw-vandalism4im}} one before. Nothing I have seen seemed bad enough to use it (and I have seen people replace entire pages with images of penises). To report them to WP:RFPP most admins would want at least a few warnings left on their talk page to show that they are ignoring them before blocking. One or two usually isn't enough. --Majora (talk) 22:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Majora: Ok, thanks for taking the time to reply. Also, some of these vandals make me shake my head and wonder what happened to the world. :l Boomer Vial^Holla 22:19, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Fishy business at AIV

Hi, I noticed there's something strange going on at WP:AIV, namely this revert removes something that was signed in your name, yet it doesn't seem to have been you, but an IP, adding it. I'm confused, so I'm not undoing any edit or doing anything else for now, but maybe you know what's going on. LjL (talk) 00:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@LjL: I added a note that the reporting IP editor has been abusing warning/block templates. I guess they changed their IP (from User:2602:306:3357:BA0:7D97:633A:1EA5:332F to User:2602:306:3357:ba0:a03b:5a60:9642:158a), and began removing it because they didn't like it. Another IP editor stepped in, and restore my comment. I suspect that the editor is changing IPs because there is a third IP that has the same identical abusive edits (User:2602:306:3357:BA0:D535:E2BB:57E4:837D). Boomer Vial^Holla 00:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

It's a confusing headache because these IPv6s have been sending seemingly legitimate warnings to seemingly actual vandals. Everywhere you look, there's a vandal's IP. LjL (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@LjL: A giant headache, indeed. In this instance though, the user was abusing block templates, and impersonating an administrator. So this should be an easy block (hopefully). See the user's talk page[17] if you are curious. Boomer Vial^Holla 00:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Chennai 2 Singapore

Hello, I'm trying to do away with the duplicated pages for the movie's wiki. The original page should be Chennai 2 Singapore. Chennai Singapore is an outdated title for the film.

How can I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.200.121.102 (talk) 07:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@118.200.121.102: Can you explain what duplicate article you are referring too? I've only found one article Chennai Singapore. If you are referring to the title as "Chennai 2 Singapore", there is a redirect in place to Chennai Singapore. Boomer Vial^Holla 07:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)