User talk:Galobtter

Daily page views of User and User talk pages

User

User Talk

This is Galobtter's talk page, where you can send her 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

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Please look into this

User:Eleanor De Cruzem is engaging in sockpuppetry and he's the sock-puppet of all those Users which were blocked in a Admins RfA election (not going to get disclosed for obvious reasons).. If possible please delete all Yeh revisions and block all the sock-puppets.. Too much for now, something has to be done regarding this.. I find this really insulting. Please do something as you know everything about it and it's quite obvious (by his contributions).. I think it is a Long term abuse case.. But I can't connect it properly, can't connect the dots.. But it started from that (not to be disclosed) RfA to target a specific User (not to be disclosed).. Just do something for God's sake! 182.58.167.124 (talk) 16:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Has

anyone, over ORCP, assigned a negative score prior to your's ? :-) ∯WBG^converse 11:01, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. Breaking new ground! Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:07, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

logging normal admin actions

Hey, I was wondering if you might reconsider logging things like this. As I understand it, the logging is only required for discretionary sanctions that a single admin wouldn't be ordinarily be able to place outside the topic area. So you're required to log special page restrictions or topic bans, but not ordinary page protections and blocks. The only effect of logging something like a page protection is to make it so no other admin is allowed to reduce the protection level for any reason without explicit permission from you. In my mind it makes more sense to just have it be a regular admin action that can be changed through normal process in the future if any change is needed. ~Awilley (talk) 03:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Awilley, the way the WP:A/I/PIA restriction works, is that irregardless of whether an admin has actually applied protection, the restriction still applies. So unless the committee rescinds the remedy, there would be no point in removing the protections I applied anyhow. (also, per Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/2018#Extended confirmed protections it is pretty normal to log this sort of thing; I just happened to be the first this year). Additionally, in the process of applying ECP I also added the 1RR page restriction template, since they go hand-in-hand.

I suppose I could technically do the protections not as "Arbitration enforcement", but considering they are arbitration enforcement..it would just confuse things in my view. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see now. I didn't realize they had actually passed a 500/30 remedy. I suppose the logging doesn't matter either way. ~Awilley (talk) 13:43, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Iran squad 2014 Asian Games

Shouldn't this template and a batch of other Asian Games templates you closed as "delete" be substituted rather than orphaned as they have quite a few transclusions and as they are navboxes; wouldn't it be better to substitute them? Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:14, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pkbwcgs, the point of the discussion was that the navboxes were unnecessary and so should be removed from the articles they are on. Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:15, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, I will start up AWB to orphan all of these templates. Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:33, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brother housemates sandbox use?

Hey Galobtter I'm just wanting to make sure I'm doing this right. I reviewed all of the what links here for {{Big Brother housemates}} and found most are just normal mentions in discussions that should not be changed. I removed the template from this draft, this sandbox and from this user page. I also tagged several sandboxes and user page under CSD U5 as the template was being used for personal/webhosting purposes. The use of this template at Talk:Big Brother Canada (season 3) is part of edit requests that are archived. Should I edit archived requests to remove the template? Also should I remove it from Template talk:Big Brother endgame even though this template will be deleted later on down the road? Sorry if I'm being a pest here just unsure about some things. Thanks for the help! Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 10:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Thrill of It All (Sam Smith album)

Can you semi-protect the page to persistent original research? 2402:1980:8243:1642:C860:EE31:BC93:1E29 (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is only one editor, so what should be done is discussing with them and blocking if necessary, and how do you know it is original research and not simply unsourced content? Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted template refund to user space

Hi Galbtter, I was wondering if I could ask for two deleted templates to be moved to my user space for tinkering? They are {{Anatomists}} and {{Anatomy resources}}. I won't be redeploying these templates into main space without building consensus first. --Tom (LT) (talk) 02:22, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tom (LT),

Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:03, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :). --Tom (LT) (talk) 11:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chandra Automobile India Private Limited

Many apologies for the unintended removal of the block notice. It was neither intended, not did I have any intention of changing anything. I try to avoid mobile devices because of the risk of fat-finger syndrome. I will stick to conventional keyboards as much as possible in future. Apologies again. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 09:47, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Velella, Ha, I figured, no worries. Try using User:MusikAnimal/confirmationRollback-mobile or User:Mr. Stradivarius/gadgets/ConfirmRollback - the latter has saved me quite a few times from misclicks. Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:50, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Euro international school

While the block notice is on the talk page, I don't believe the account is actually blocked.--Cahk (talk) 09:59, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cahk, Oops! I've done the block. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:00, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) It feels so good to see admins do that! (Because I've done it 100 times.) More, more! Bishonen | talk 16:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC).[reply]

You don't even need to ask, I'm certain I'll do more of my own accord from idiocy. This and #Trouted below basically represent "let me just slam that script button" and everything will work out just fine. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trouted

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for this block with the following reason: {{uw-spamublock}} , but this is an IP... 216.25.187.5 (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trout accepted, get even the slightest distracted when you're blocking and bad things happen, apparently. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:17, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

you are a sysop and i would like to report a vandal [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.44.21 (talk) 18:09, 7 January 2019 (UTC) thank you[reply]

About the sources for Lucky Patcher

Those sources are meant to show that it works (kind of obvious if you used one braincell :D) Mosaicberry (talk) 20:24, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mosaicberry, the question at a deletion discussion is mainly notability, which requires multiple independant indepth reliable sources, which is why I discussed the reliability of the sources at the AfD. What you'd want to do to save Lucky Patcher from deletion is search for those sources as it doesn't matter why there aren't those type of sources, because those good quality sources are needed to write an article that is neutral and verifiable. Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I added those sources so people could see that it worked, not in intention of it being a 'reliable source'. Mosaicberry (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Declined block of Shubham 7787

Hello, I noticed you declined my report. No I don't think you would be blocked for using this username on other sites. But what Shubham 7787 is doing is using Wikipedia to advertise social media accounts. A 10 fireplane ^{Imform me} 19:48, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A 10 fireplane, no part of their username violates the username policy, and using wikipedia to advertise social media accounts is a problem with their edits rather than with their username. They aren't even linking to their other social media accounts so they aren't doing too much advertising either. Galobtter (pingó mió) 03:30, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you for clarifying

A 10 fireplane ^{Imform me} 05:54, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]