Jump to content

User talk:The Anome: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by 182.239.66.149 (talk) to last version by Oshwah
Line 187: Line 187:


:Thanks for the notice. I see you're having fun with this. -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] ([[User talk:The Anome#top|talk]]) 09:33, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks for the notice. I see you're having fun with this. -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] ([[User talk:The Anome#top|talk]]) 09:33, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrwallace05|Mrwallace05]] new users ==

New users, [[Special:Contributions/NickiMinaj4life|NickiMinaj4life]] and [[Special:Contributions/86.133.178.209|86.133.178.209]] are obviously abusing accounts of [[User:Mrwallace05|Mrwallace05]]. [[Special:Contributions/123.136.111.59|123.136.111.59]] ([[User talk:123.136.111.59|talk]]) 11:27, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:27, 7 December 2015


Quick, eat it before it passes into my timecone:

Support request with team editing experiment project

Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Research_team_editing), I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.

Apologies

Sorry about the other day. --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 21:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'm glad you're back. Regards, -- The Anome (talk) 12:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that, thanks. --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 18:58, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Coord missing: Second Battle of the Hook

Hi, how was this determined? --Redrose64 (talk) 11:12, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. With the categories currently given for the article, it should not have been tagged. The bot does not consider "involving" to be the same thing as "in", and even if it did, it would see both the UK and China listed, and would have rejected a direct association of the article with either. I will have to investigate further. -- The Anome (talk) 12:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I wondered if it was an uninitialised string, left holding a value from an earlier edit - but the previous one was United States, so that's not it. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:44, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I now remember what it was -- alas, it was my error; an earlier version of the code didn't properly check for word boundaries, and did confuse "involved" with "in", because it started with the letters "in". A change to the relevant regexp fixed this some time ago, and I then tracked down what I believed to be all the incorrect edits and fixed them by hand. It seems I missed at least one. -- The Anome (talk) 19:05, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

The IP is obviously same pattern as Special:Contributions/71.166.99.78 (who has been blocked in 31 hours). 123.136.112.56 (talk) 13:31, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking 71.166.96.0/20 to cover both of these. -- The Anome (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Insulated glazing

I just wanted to let you know that I removed the nomination you just made to RFD. It's actually a duplicate of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 November 10#Sextupleglazed glasses. I felt bad because I'm sure you put some effort into it, but please leave your comments there! Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:58, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doppelganger

Wow, I just blocked a new user who I thought was you... [8] -- Fuzheado | Talk 20:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Fuzheado: I just spotted them: they seem to have done this just a moment earlier on the same article with the same MO: a near-miss copy of another editor's name, together with a copy of the user's user and talk pages. Thanks for blocking them. I've extended their block to cover editing their talk page. -- The Anome (talk) 20:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the vandal's username and thought the same thing. :) ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:06, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Recent comments

I hope you don't mind, but I've moved your comments at Talk:Skyfall#Straw poll: billion vs millions to a better location where it will be seen when consensus is later determined. --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ebola/west africa

thanks for the help/edits,,,its incredible, every time one thinks its over it (Ebola) pops up again, I doubt west Africa will get its "42 days countdown" (all countries included) for another 6 months...IMO--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

16:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


Noticeboard Religious harassment, Bias, and Violating NPOV Censorship by Admins

Information icon There is currently a discussion at noticeboard of discussion regarding Religious harassment, Bias, and Violating NPOV Censorship by Admins. The thread is Censorship of religious phrases and words in usernames and abuse by administrators.The discussion is about the topic Topic. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ILOVESATAN666 (talkcontribs) 05:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I see you're having fun with this. -- The Anome (talk) 09:33, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mrwallace05 new users

New users, NickiMinaj4life and 86.133.178.209 are obviously abusing accounts of Mrwallace05. 123.136.111.59 (talk) 11:27, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]