User talk:Lofty abyss

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Mentifisto)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
logscontribs
/Archive

Please block[change source]

Please block User talk:108.181.69.155‎. It's vandalizing continuously.--Pratyya (Hello!) 06:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done. -- Mentifisto 06:30, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. It was not only vandalizing WP also abusing me and Curtaintoad.--Pratyya (Hello!) 06:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Also please block the ip if vandalism continues again. curtaintoad | chat me! 06:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Admin Activity[change source]

This is just notice to let you know your account was below the inactivity requirement of 100 edits and/or actions on October 1st. Should you still be below 100 on January 1st your admin tools will be removed per WP:Inactive administrators. If you know you will not be active in the next couple of months feel free to let us know and we can just remove them now otherwise it will be done automatically at the beginning of the new year. -DJSasso (talk) 13:38, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks[change source]

Thanks for the warm welcome! Unschool (talk) 15:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Abuse of admin mailing system[change source]

farid awwad [mail@gollgi.com] is persistently abusing the admin mailing system on Simple wiki by sending commercial messages. Is there anything which can be done about this? Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Block[change source]

Hello. May I ask why you blocked Special:Contribs/164.166.223.23? Thanks, Vermont (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Nearly fifty vandal edits this year alone, schools rarely edit constructively. -- Mentifisto 16:57, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes. They rarely edit constructively. Regardless, I'm in opposition of blocking that IP for 6 months. Their last block is in February, and their vandalism is spread out over a long period of time. To quote Djsasso (which I strongly agree with in this case), "Anything publicly accessible will often appear to be a vandalism-only range, but those are also the kinds of locations we really want to encourage people to edit from. It is a catch 22. Something like a school sometimes I will slowly build up to a school year block and hope that after the summer the kid forgets about us. But generally that is only if we are constantly getting hit from that IP, like every time their block expires." I believe Djsasso's sentiment is reflective of current community consensus, and thus I request your support in unblocking the IP. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 19:33, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
School year recently started, though? I think it's a waste of time dealing with them, account creation could also be enabled if you want to encourage edits, but you can change it to whatever you think is appropriate. -- Mentifisto 18:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism[change source]

Hello! I noticed you reverted an instance of vandalism about 20 minutes ago without leaving a warning. If possible, please try to leave warnings or notices on the user's talk page after reverting. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 18:16, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Please try to leave warnings or notices on userpages after reverting vandalism, as is consistent with community consensus. You are continuing to only revert. Vermont (talk) 18:57, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, if it's hours or days old it's usually useless, IP might even have changed hands if it's dynamic. -- Mentifisto 19:17, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Of 11 reverts today, you have left messages for none of them. Please do so in the future. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 19:31, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm trying to get TW to do that automatically, but still, if it was done hours ago and they haven't edited since and they'll probably never edit in the near future it's not entirely helpful, I assumed. -- Mentifisto 19:33, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Please see current policy. To clarify, are you arguing we should not warn users, or that you don't have to because it isn't automatic? Vermont (talk) 19:39, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
No, you misrepresent what I said... I'm merely questioning the viability of the message even getting to the same person if it's hours later and the edit not just made a minute prior, IPs can be very dynamic. And no, I'm merely trying to make it easier since that is what automated tools do, now there is an option in the interface but it's greyed out, I tried to check its preferences but still can't find specifically what enables the option... would you know what that is, by any chance? -- Mentifisto 19:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
My apologies. I'd be glad to help; if you have Twinkle enabled, there should be a TW link on talk pages, which has a Warn menu under it. Unfortunately, Twinkle is presently unable to automatically warn people after a revert. (although it would be nice if it did) The TW link is probably the fastest means to warn people save for Huggle's automatic warnings. Vermont (talk) 19:58, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Opps[change source]

I didn't see that part of the vandalism. --Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

It's tricky when there are two edits from different sources one after another. -- Lofty abyss 20:51, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for blocking that vandal[change source]

--Dreamlover8 (talk) 21:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

The IP you just protected[change source]

That’s my other IP address please unprotected it

I have asked you nicely to please unprotect the IP address

Just a heads up[change source]

Be careful reverting as you put vandalism back into a page with your revert. They were fixing some vandalism and reverting their own mistake that reverted the Archive bot. -DJSasso (talk) 12:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I noticed that; was about to fix the type when it was done... in the end, I thought blanking should be reverted first. -- Lofty abyss 14:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
You could use the "restore this version" button in Twinkle. Vermont (talk) 15:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Sure, just wasn't sure which version and thought it's easier to do it manually. -- Lofty abyss 15:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

opps[change source]

did not see that. --Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:50, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Filters[change source]

I wouldn't want to be building a filter for one word, especially with it being an acceptable word on wikis ... article on enWP, and in lists built at meta, eg. [1] [2] [3]. So it means combination searches, and that one term makes it difficult on its own, so it needs to be hooked with other things, either the range of the contribution, other keywords, etc. If they are using English words in non-English wikipedias that gives us an element of control, especially as we don't have to fuss enWP for global filters. Billinghurst (talk) 11:03, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Combinations and the latter suggestion sound reasonable. -- Lofty abyss 14:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)