User talk:Callanecc/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

202.137.22.114

Why was not it indef blocked? It has been vandalising since 2010 and it's obvious they can't be trusted. Luxure (talk) 07:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

See WP:IPBLENGTH. As IPs are used by various users and can be reassigned to completely different people we almost never block them indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks anyway. Luxure (talk) 08:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Banning Policy case

This should be ready to unhat. Let me know if there's anything more I need to do. Thank you for your patience. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 09:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Workshop Page

Can you please go and review the accusations Neotarf is making on this page, literally most of it is completely unrelated to this case and damn near all of it is without any diffs and is accusing people not even involved with this case of misconduct. I feel the need to defend myself but I also think it's something that is going to cloud the issue too. Can you please review and moderate, I'm going to log out a while because I really don't want to pop off but a lot of the shit they are posting is so misrepresented it's not funny. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:18, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you also close this down [[1]] there are no diffs, no one has linked to naked women, called anyone any names, etc. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I will need to be able to go through and explain the context of the recently added material. How long will I have to respond? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:38, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

You'll need to ask that on the workshop talk page and ping the drafting arbitrators (listed in the header). They're in charge of the deadlines for the case. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Reopened SPI?

I noticed you reopened the PiCo SPI. Thanks for doing that, but I'm not sure if/how to proceed. I do think there is a good chance someone is socking right now on WP:DRN. "First century" is too vague.... (PiCo) -- I agree with PiCo - "first century" is far too vague. (StAnselm) However it's hard to show conclusive evidence for long-time contributors -- simply agreeing with each other on something oddly specific. Since the IP activity was stale, do I have a path forward here? Andrevan@ 20:14, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Having gone through the evidence I don't think that there is a strong case for abusive sockpuppetry and as there isn't a policy against editing while logged out I don't think there is a case for sanctions regarding that either (I can't see an attempt to "actively try to deceive other editors"). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:15, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

TheTimesAreAChanging, warned for edit warring, using specious analysis to block rebuttal to imbalanced article POV

Hello. You warned this person for his/her behavior in the Dreamcast topic in February, and I feel this person, with the backing of two others, is blocking the addition of useful content in the Atari Jaguar page. Moreover, an editor in 2011 found fault with the same thing I have been trying to correct, as is indicated in Talk.

TheTimesAreAChanging created an entry in Talk called "Recent IP edit" just recently. The convolution of demands now includes that a directly relevant appraisal of the worst video game console controllers ever made specifically include the Atari Jaguar in order to be cited, even though, by not being included, it is clear that other designs were considered worse by the article's author, a fact that is directly relevant as a rebuttal to the complaint included in the Wikipedia Atari Jaguar article. Moreover, the article also supports the rebuttal that the phone keypad design feature was used on other prior systems, which casts doubt upon relying heavily upon the Jaguar controller's inclusion of that feature as evidence of it being "the worst ever".

Three editors seem intent on maintaining the current imbalance on the page, characterized by the inclusion of three separate criticisms of the controller (one of which is a photo of a controller with a critical caption). The IGN editor's analysis is simply faulty. There have been worse designs, such as the controller of the Mattel Intellivision and the controller of the Atari 5200, both of which are included in the critical article "The Worst Video Game Controllers Ever Designed" that I cited and which TheTimesAreAChanging and others are refusing to allow, after I removed three other sources that received other complaints.

The other article is by Ronald Diemicke and one of the three editors said the source, due to it being MobyGames can't be used. Despite that, the article does include the Jaguar controller (thus satisfying the three editors' -- in my view obstructionist -- objection to the Gerry article) and yet ranks three other controllers higher in the list of "worst ever" designs. His choice for the worst controller ever is a very logical one.

I fail to see why so much energy is being put into blocking even the smallest attempt to correct the imbalance in the Jaguar's controller criticism, but I suspect it is a similar case vis-a-vis the aforementioned Dreamcast edit war. Comments critical of the controller criticism imbalance from 2012 on the Talk page were on the flaming side. However, an editor named Andrew1718 removed the IGN editor's complaint about the controller in 2011, arguing that the analysis was not well-supported ("I removed the bunk about the Jaguar having the 'worst controller' ever". So, I am hardly the only person who has found fault with the exaggerated criticism of the controller. The inclusion of the flawed appraisal of the IGN editor with no counterpoint is bad enough, but then there are two more criticisms of the controller in the same Wikipedia article!

Thank you for reading this. I am sorry to both you with what should not be something that has taken so many hours of time already. I really would appreciate it if you could look into this, since it is a longstanding unresolved problem with a Wikipedia page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.12.52 (talk) 22:18, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you merge 2 SPI reports for me?

Okay starting here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mjnichols, then there seems to be one though that seems to be connected to that user though as he did the same pages Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HaroldSalasI/Archive. So yeah it just got confusing and I need someone to merge these, thanks! Wgolf (talk) 03:02, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done. @Wgolf: Could you please supply some diffs of similar behaviour between the accounts. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:43, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Callanecc. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 14:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Yunshui ^雲_水 14:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey dude...

Thought you might want to take a look at this proposal on Malusia, given how much of a persistent nuisance he is. I'm not sure if it's absolutely necessary to just hand out bans for those who have only been a problem user for just a year or two, but I guess enough is enough for someone who has confused and deceived users for quite some time. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

DS question

I DS-BLP templated this user, but wanted to make sure this was correct. It doesn't look like the user actually edited the BLP subject articles or talk pages, but they did engage in an ANI discussion about the BLPs and they made a BLP-violating edit to another users talk page, which was revdeleted and user was blocked. Just making sure the template was the right thing to do in this case. Dreadstar ☥ 22:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Sounds right to me. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:25, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 01:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

User:Thedevilini

The user page contains clearly as "River Stumpf" that was familiar. Can you sockpuppet him/her? 183.171.168.48 (talk) 07:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

SPI for User:Showitwew

Any thoughts on adding Emikhan9999? Looks remarkably suspicious to me... Yunshui ^雲_水 08:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I've got to go, but I've left a comment at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Showitwew. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Duplicate SPIs

I redirected Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khursheed Khan Pictures to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Showitwew then saw your note, and rollbacked my edit. /Khursheed_Khan_Pictures didn't have any valuable case information, and the same socks were reported at /SHowitwew. Why then would we need a merge? Do we typically always merge duplicate cases, as opposed to using redirects? Thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

We normally don't I just didn't have time to look at what needed to happen so I used that word. Khursheed Khan Pictures is the older account so it needed to go there. It can be helpful to keep all of the evidence together, but generally when there is only user reporting we can just redirect, no harm in histmerging though (and good practice for trainee clerks). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Question about discretionary sanctions - BLP

Re: Gamergate controversy. Is it ok if I ask you to clarify how the article involves a BLP issue? I'm just trying to learn the ropes, and acquire a better understanding of policy. Thx. Atsme☯^Consult 14:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

If you have a look at the wording of the discretionary sanctions and WP:BLP both apply to edits and articles which have biographical content which is what Gamergate controversy is about at it's base level. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:07, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Atsme☯^Consult 14:05, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

John P. Galea

Thanks for that! Might want to put a page protection on that variation too. But yep thanks! Wgolf (talk) 04:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I'd rather just keep it watchlisted, they're going to keep coming back so this way I might catch an account. You might like to consider creating a long term abuse page which you can refer to if you need to request speedy deletion in the future. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:25, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Malusia

I think we might want to revdel the edits he made on the Syndicate page and several others to keep him from linking to those on other articles. I can provide you with diffs if you want to, too. This guy and his crazy antics is really getting in my nerves. Blake Gripling (talk) 14:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Diffs would be helpful, just make sure that one of the RevDel criteria apply. I've taken adding something to the edit filter which will hopefully slow them down. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I posted some on the LTA page for him, though there could be more to which I'll link to tomorrow as I'm on my tablet and it's getting late here on my end. Blake Gripling (talk) 14:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

DS BLP

Would you mind responding to this?. Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 22:17, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Callanecc. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Blake Gripling (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

List of Piggy Tales episodes

Hi. Please restore List of Piggy Tales episodes. Yes, the article was started by a banned user, but I've improved it and added sources, so the original reason for delete is not valid any more. Thanks.--Carniolus (talk) 16:16, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello

The rotating-circle-within-rotating-circle view of Chakravyuha has been promoted without any military basis or even without consultation with any military officers.

Most of the historical battles, fought from the days of bows and arrows, are studied even today. Not only Napoleon but also right up to Romes war with Hannibal - the time when the weaponry was similar to that used in Mahabharata.

I request you to study these battles and battle formations.

Also, if you are interested in factual assessment, please try making such formations with toy weapons. If you are further interested, please add a horse or two and see how impracticable it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.70.20.14 (talk) 16:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

You need to go to the talk page and explain the change you want to make, making sure that you cite reliable sources which support the change you want to make. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 16:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protect

Hey, would you be able to semi-protect Ray Allen again? Since the last semi-protection expired, there have been no useful or constructive edits by IPs or new users. There is also a reported sports transaction involving him that has not been made official, and IPs and new users are constantly editing that i.e. further violations of BLP. DaHuzyBru (talk) 18:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Help - rules interpretation?

Hey there - a question for you pertaining to Module:Iraqi insurgency detailed map: One user, 83.117.189.21, has made 11 unsourced edits this afternoon, seen here. I reverted the initial batch, and summarized "unsourced edit - please provide sources for this edit". The unsourced edits continue, and actually have increased in volume. If I revert again, I break 1RR, but the edits don't even have summaries, let alone sources. I don't know how to proceed. Obviously I don't want to break 1RR, but it's just irking me to sit back and watch a mess be made. Any feedback or assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:59, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

@Boredwhytekid: The 1RR (in this instance) doesn't apply to IPs, see WP:GS/SCW. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:03, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Karis_McLarty

Hello, please can you delete the comment of nha trang at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Karis_McLarty

the comment is offensive to me. he said karis is an energatic self promoter. that means karis wrote all the source and the wiki article? It is not true. Warn that user to be civil while commenting. The wiki article and the discussion can be seen by people from all over the world. It is harasment for us. Delete the whole article or such comments please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.47.231 (talk) 10:32, 8 October 2014‎ (UTC)

Your Instant Reversion of My Edits to "Portuguese Profanity"

Callanecc,

I am amazed at your almost instant rejection of the entire edit I made to the relevant section of the "Portuguese profanity" article, particularly because the only reason you give is "because it didn’t appear constructive to me". I would very much like you to let me know in what specific ways was my edit not "constructive".

As a native English speaker, and a professional English teacher, it was clear to me that some, at least, of the section was written by people whose English is not especially fluent, and I was editing the section to ensure that the expression was more fluent and accurate, as well as clearing up some imprecise information. My entire edit was constructive in purpose.

I look forward to your response.

211.31.213.200 (talk) 13:27, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

There are a few problems as far as I can see:

• We generally try and avoid subjective terms such as "slur" as it has multiple meanings, instead we use the words which you replaced
• We try and use internal links (for example with Casper the Friendly Ghost) so that people who aren't familiar with it can read about it
• The names of Countries are almost always capitalised (that is American people)
• Changing how "Chinese or Asian" were referred to changed the meaning (that is removing the word descent)
• No offense intended, but there are other areas of the expression used which don't make as much sense as what was there before (such as "a very curse word") and where you've changed a word to an incorrect spelling (eg associated to associeted).

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:44, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Callanecc,

I am absolutely bewildered by your comments above. All the weaknesses you list are those of the *original* version which I edited out! If you actually look at what I did, you will see that I removed most of the uses of the word "slur" (for the reason you mention, as well as unnecessary repetition) and replaced it with "insulting", "derogatory", "pejorative" and "offensive".

I also corrected the existing spelling in numerous places and certainly did not introduce any new misspellings. (It's possible I missed one or two.)

I was the one who included a number of internal links, including the one to Casper the Friendly Ghost, for the very reason you mention.

I am very annoyed by your apparent misreading of what I did, and I strongly request that your revert to my edit, which fixes the very problems you've identified in your dot points.

Tullyvallin (talk) 00:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I sincerely apologise I don't know what I was looking at. I've reverted my edit on the page. Again my apologies. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Theodore bikel

I strongly believe your block of Theodore bikel is mistaken. The POV tag has been discussed quite a bit on Twitter and other parts of social media. A Twitter user that tweeted several times about the POV tag edit-war as it was happening has the exact account name there as the Wikipedia account. Seems this person saw the edit war as it was happening and jumped into the dispute using the exact same account name. It may be the editor's real name as well, in which case a false accusation of sock-puppetry should be withdrawn promptly.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 18:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey, are you gonna look into that block?--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 05:35, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Was on Special:Unblock/Theodorebikel when I got your message just then. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:36, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thank you.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 05:43, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

School asking students to add incorrect information

Susie0susie (talk · contribs) has said she has been asked to add incorrect information, as have another 100 students at her school. I'm guessing that CU's can't check to see if she is using a school account in order to identify and contact the school, but no harm in asking. Dougweller (talk) 09:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Possibly a justifiable reason to check, but personally I'd rather wait to see if there is another account or it was just an overstatement. Having said that I wouldn't mind if you wanted to make a quick CU request at WP:SPI for another opinion. In any case might be worth leaving a message on the user's talk page asking their teacher to contact us. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:47, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Quick CU request done, will add note to talk page. Dougweller (talk) 11:45, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

FYI, trying to break the new DS alert coding

Hi, FYI please see some testing I did and if you agree there's an issue, to whom should we address the matter? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:34, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Restoring User:Exec8's image uploads?

On behalf of the Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines, may I request the restoration of User:Exec8's image uploads now that their account as been cleared of sockpuppet issues? I can do the restoration as an admin myself but I think it would be a bit conflict of interest as Exec8 and I have collaborated with each other in the wiki for years. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:35, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll go ahead and notify the Tambayan. --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the aid dude, as always! I trust him too, so it's a shame he got caught up in a sockpuppetry case which he wouldn't honestly do. Blake Gripling (talk) 07:09, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah the evidence was there but on another look there are some aspects which didn't fit. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:12, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the change. Honestly, I haven't done any edits for a month now and just read these comments only today. --Exec8 (talk) 12:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Adnarkey case is missing the archive link

Hi Callanecc. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adnarkey which you closed recently. It's missing the usual link to the case's archive. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it's there now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Iselilja (talk) 17:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Scholarlyarticles SPI case

[2] You what this without action? Think you missed a word. Also, I think this edit is a clear violation of WP:SCRUTINY given the RFC/U. As is, "A number of editors have raised the question as to which version of the these two versions are libelous" (i.e., her) --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

My understanding of the RFC/U (please correct me if I'm wrong as it's not an area I'm familar with) is that it wasn't closed with a statement that Scholarlyarticles should avoid the article and was mainly about their actions overall. So they weren't under any restrictions or current discussion so they haven't violated the requirements of WP:Clean start. The only thing they haven't done is disclosed the previous account, which we can ask them to do with a talk page message. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

WP:CLEANSTART says, "...new account must avoid editing patterns or behaviors that would allow other users to recognize and identify the account." But disclosing and editing with only one account is good enough however she won't really get the benefits of a clean start. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:33, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I've tagged both accounts as alternates of each other which is the practice once a clean start has been identified. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Language on the GG article

Just went through the talk page, ALL mentions of the word fuck are by Ryulong haha, oh there's one by TaraInDC telling someone to fuck off Loganmac (talk) 11:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

And I asked him to stop, what's your point? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:23, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

An issue at BLPN needs the attention of an admin

A BLPN was closed prior to 7 days of review, and the consensus so far was that it was a BLP violation. Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Investigative_Project_on_Terrorism I notified the closer User_talk:Lithistman on his talk page. I'm not sure what else to do. This issue must be resolved - the controversy has gone on for nearly 7 months. Thank you. Atsme☯^Consult 19:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

DS alert

Could you please look at this edit? As I recall, the last time I alerted an editor to WP:ARBPIA, before I committed my edit, it allowed me to check if any alerts had previously been left. Here, that didn't happen. Also, when I looked at the edit filter log with this user name, I didn't see my alert added to the log. Could you explain what's going on and if I did something wrong? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I reverted my alert because Dougweller advised me he'd already had one. I should've seen it as it was very close to mine, but my technical questions still remain when you have a moment.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:26, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I had a similar problem when I left this one, it let me save on first try. I thought maybe it was because the user had several earlier DS warnings in different areas. Dreadstar ☥ 21:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Discussing the same issue with NewsAndEventsGuy here at the moment. Since AGK is away I'll bring it up on the clerks mailing list to check it'll do what I want it to do. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:41, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

FYI for anyone, Callanec linked to a midpoint in my debug testing notes, which begin here. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:13, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

More recently, I used the template again, and the familiar pink box came up as it used to do. FWIW, I was using the topic code blp. However, it reported that another user had alerted twice, but the two entries were identical (date and time), and the other user had alerted only once.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

What are the names of the users so I can have a look at the page histories? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:00, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Europefan / GLGerman

Hi Callanecc,

we have currently high acticity of this troll in German Wikipedia. I have checked the IP addresses that he used during the past six months and calculated these ranges:

• 92.72.100.0/22 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) – rarely
• 178.3.16.0/20 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) – frequently
• 178.11.184.0/21 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) – frequently
• 188.96.176.0/20 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) – frequently
• 188.96.228.0/22 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) – frequently

It looks like the provider (Vodafone) arbitrarily assigns addresses from these five ranges, so to mute this user, I think you need to block them all, or at least No 2 to 5. Currently only the second and third are blocked. No 4 and 5 have been blocked in the past. --PM3 (talk) 00:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info PM3, I'll keep it in mind. Europefan hasn't used any of those ranges (apart from the two which are currently blocked) for a couple months so I'm going to hold off on blocking them and wait to see what happens next. But thank you for calculating them! Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Look at this: [3] I am sure that this is an Eurofan block, but it's way too large. You may reduce it to the two ranges that I calculated, that will set free 27,648 unneccessarily blocked IPs. --PM3 (talk) 06:37, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Well that explains why there are no recent edits. I'll have a closer look and check with Salvio giuliano in case there is someone else he's targeting. Thanks again, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

TheTruth

TheTruth200 now has a sock. User:Thetruth300. Can you please indef them both as Vandalism only? VViking_TalkEdits 09:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Cathal Pendred

Hi Just wondering why you deleted the Wikipedia entry for Cathal Pendred? Cathal is a huge star in Ireland, a current UFC star on a 2-0 run and former Cage Warriors Welterweight champion and I feel With the growth of MMA in Ireland there is a considerable interest in this fighter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard-88 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Leonard-88 and welcome to Wikipedia! The page was deleted as the result of a deletion discussion which you can view here if you'd like to re-create the article you need to start a discussion at deletion review. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration case request

Hello again! First, thank you for making sure that things "work" at ArbCom. Second, it looks like this edit by Lithistman, while well intentioned, moved the response to an incorrect location (DaveApter's, where it should have been moved to Zambelo's response section, I believe). I am reluctant to edit other's responses. As clerk, would you move it to the correct location? Thank you for looking, Tgeairn (talk) 02:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

• My apologies for that. I noticed Zambelo's angry response to the topic ban improperly threaded, and tried to move it to his section. No clue how it ended up in DaveApter's section. Thanks for cleaning up the mess I helped make. LHM^{ask me a question} 02:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

• I saw your note to Zambelo, and just to clarify, Zambelo added his reply to TParis's note on Zambelo's topic banning. In trying to fix this obvious mistake, I actually MOVED it to DaveApter's section by mistake, instead of into Zambelo's. I have no idea how I managed to screw it up that bad, but I did. Again, my apologies, and my brief stint as a self-appointed substitute clerk are over... LHM^{ask me a question} 03:39, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification Lithistman. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Protection request

Can you please put registered users protection in place for Indian Super League and 2014 Indian Super League season pages? The league is new and the inaugural season has just started and as you can note from the history, there is a lot of vandalism (like adding spam links, removing sourced content) and the regular editors have a tough time while keep removing such content. And most of this vandalism comes from unregistered useres. Coderzombie (talk) 13:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

I can't see enough on either of those pages to warrant semi at a quick look, but feel free to make a request at WP:RFPP. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Accounting

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 05:47, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm happy for it to run out, feel free to go to WP:RFPP though. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:50, 16 October 2014 (UTC)