Jump to content

User talk:Favonian: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Is it wrong by close discussion?: Move to end and reply
No edit summary
Line 55: Line 55:
([[Special:Contributions/223.182.109.123|223.182.109.123]] ([[User talk:223.182.109.123|talk]]) 18:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC))
([[Special:Contributions/223.182.109.123|223.182.109.123]] ([[User talk:223.182.109.123|talk]]) 18:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC))
:I assume you are [[Special:Contributions/Kraker234|Kraker234]] and that [[Special:Diff/765108523|this closure]] is what we're talking about. Discussions should be closed by an experienced, uninvolved editor, and as this was your first edit, at least under that name, we have no way of ascertaining if you meet these criteria. [[User:Favonian|Favonian]] ([[User talk:Favonian#top|talk]]) 18:28, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
:I assume you are [[Special:Contributions/Kraker234|Kraker234]] and that [[Special:Diff/765108523|this closure]] is what we're talking about. Discussions should be closed by an experienced, uninvolved editor, and as this was your first edit, at least under that name, we have no way of ascertaining if you meet these criteria. [[User:Favonian|Favonian]] ([[User talk:Favonian#top|talk]]) 18:28, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

==Reviewed==
{{unblock reviewed}}

Revision as of 20:39, 12 February 2017

copyvio

[1] take care, O Fortuna!...Imperatrix mundi. 14:52, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we can't have that, can we? Normally, what happens in the sandbox stays in the sandbox, but just to show off my awesome tools, I have rev-del'ed the egregious violation. Favonian (talk) 14:57, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hah! Sorry about that- didn't realise the sandbox was exempt from THE CODE. Sorry to trouble you OH MIGHTY THOR, you can get back to your giants! O Fortuna!...Imperatrix mundi. 15:03, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Doing recent change patrol and I see that you tagged the IP 50.225.39.60 as being the same as a blocked user. They're at it again, and the bot reverted it. Home Lander (talk) 16:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that, I see you already got him. Home Lander (talk) 16:31, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa, sort of

Technically I shouldn't have done this per WP:TPO. Hope you don't mind. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are forgiven, my son, and I shall trout myself for the typo. Favonian (talk) 19:28, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He's baaaaaack...

You've been doing a great job of identifying Kingshowman and swatting him down. Just so you know, he's been on a tear this weekend. I have blocked six seven IPv6's in the past 24 hours and not sure how many others he has up his sleeve. You and I are on different time zones so we can tag-team. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 08:29, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good heavens! You have been busy, Melanie. I'll take it from here. Favonian (talk) 11:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confused

This has got me scratching my head a bit. Am I missing something? –xenotalk 18:23, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can't blame you, xeno. Somebody should create an LTA, assuming a more civil name could be found than "The Neostrada Nuisance". For some months now, a highly disruptive IP from Poland has been trolling assorted math-related articles and most of the recent RfAs. It gets blocked routinely by assorted admins, including myself. Admittedly, the edits to the header page don't appear particularly disruptive, but the bigger picture is. Have a look at this listing. Several rather busy ranges from the same ISP are used, so range blocks probably aren't feasible. Favonian (talk) 18:31, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, this the one with the CAPTCHA on RFA questions. Thanks for filling me in. –xenotalk 18:42, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Abusive editor

Is there some sanction that can be applied against User:TenPoundHammer for his foul-mouthed outburst here? Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 23:05, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can gauge current practice wrt. civility, throwing the F-bomb is not sufficient cause for a block if the user in question has contributed to FAs or GAs. Favonian (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user, whom you recently blocked, has now apparently resorted to a sockpuppet: Davideianari. - Biruitorul Talk 21:47, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly looks that way. Both are now blocked indefinitely. Favonian (talk) 21:57, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aus dynamic IP

Hi Favonian, looks like the Australian dynamic IP is at it again with 49.196.1.176 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) vandalising previous talk pages and AFL pages [2], [3], [4]. Thanks, Flickerd (talk) 06:15, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked by esteemed colleague. Favonian (talk) 11:48, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is it wrong by close discussion?

(223.182.109.123 (talk) 18:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I assume you are Kraker234 and that this closure is what we're talking about. Discussions should be closed by an experienced, uninvolved editor, and as this was your first edit, at least under that name, we have no way of ascertaining if you meet these criteria. Favonian (talk) 18:28, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Favonian (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Please include the original unblock request.


Please include a decline or accept reason.


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.