User talk:Favonian: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:15, 4 April 2019

This is Favonian's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

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

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

RevDel reason for "School shooting" article?

While I was browsing the revision history of the School shooting article, I noticed a revision deleted entry. (I like to check revisions sometimes) I tried to figure out why it was revision deleted, but the reason given was RD5. I reviewed the revision deletion policy for this criterion, but could not figure out why the revision was deleted. (Logs: [1])

The criterion additionally says that the underlying reason for deletion should be stated in the RevDel log under the entry. No offense is meant, I'm simply wondering why the revision was deleted. Thanks, EggRoll97 ^(talk) 08:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guess I didn't read the RevDel small print. I reported the deleted edit to the Foundation and further action is in their hands. I could elaborate, but then I'd probably have to revdel my response. Favonian (talk) 08:55, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. I appreciate the quick response. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 13:06, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sockpuppet is back

I thought I'd let you know that a suspected sockpuppet Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/G.-M. Cupertino has returned. I don't know how to go through the process, but I noticed you reverted edits from the individual, so I figured I'd notify you. The sockpuppet [2] is making similar edits as before. Here's an example: [3][4] Again, I don't know how to deal with the person, other than reverting the edits, but I'll let you decide on how to open another case, if need be. TMF2020 (talk) 09:47, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TMF2020: Looks like a sock, but the IP was only active, briefly, 10 days ago, so blocking is most likely futile. Favonian (talk) 09:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Several pages edited by User:TheVicarsCat need protecting

User TheVicarsCat is switching IPs rapidly and just will not stop. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 08:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It also looks like ths is a new sock of theirs NettoTax (talk · contribs). MarnetteD|Talk 09:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 :{{ping|TMF2020}} Looks like a sock, but the IP was only active, briefly, 10 days ago, so blocking is most likely futile. [[User:Favonian|Favonian]] ([[User talk:Favonian#top|talk]]) 09:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
-== [[Keeping Up Appearances]] needs protecting ==
+== Several pages edited by User:TheVicarsCat need protecting ==
-Dopenguins is switching IPs rapidly and just will not stop. [[User:Paul Benjamin Austin|Paul Benjamin Austin]] ([[User talk:Paul Benjamin Austin|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
+User TheVicarsCat is switching IPs rapidly and just will not stop. [[User:Paul Benjamin Austin|Paul Benjamin Austin]] ([[User talk:Paul Benjamin Austin|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 :It also looks like ths is a new sock of theirs {{user|NettoTax}}. [[User:MarnetteD|MarnetteD]]&#124;[[User talk:MarnetteD|Talk]] 09:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)