User talk:Go Phightins!/Archive 38

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

→

Archive 45

Boredom struck again!

So, earlier I was tinkering around with team-specific signatures for myself (to swap to depending on the sports season) because... that's what I do when I'm bored at 4am apparently... and I quite enjoyed it so when I was done with my teams I just kept on going and wound up making a few for your teams, and then made alternates lol.

phillies colors

Go Phightins!

• 252characters, userpage✓, talkpage✓, contribs✓

phillies away colors

Go Phightins!

• 254characters, userpage✓, talkpage✓, contribs✓

eagles colors

Go Phightins!

• 254characters, userpage✓, talkpage✓, contribs✓

alt eagles colors

Go Phightins!

• 252characters, userpage✓, talkpage✓, contribs✓

penn state colors

Go Phightins!

• 225characters, userpage✓, talkpage✓, contribs✓

alt penn state colors (i know grey isnt a PSU color but there's only so much you can do with navy blue and white )

Go Phightins!

• 255characters, userpage✓, talkpage✓, contribs✓

Of course I'm not saying you have to use one or any of them, I just thought I would share them with you. I hope you're enjoying the new mop. —  dainomite   10:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Dainomite. I will look into a new signature. Thanks! Go Phightins! 21:39, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

A bunch of those would violate WP:SIGAPP for reasons of accessibility, however. Yes, we have rules for everything. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 18:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

In what way would they violate SIGAPP Dennis? Just genuinely curious because I don't see it (not trying to make a pun here). And if I don't see it I'd like to know. Cheers, —  dainomite   18:42, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Your current sig does, although we don't push the policy that hard except for admin. Contrast. Signatures are supposed to have enough contrast so that anyone that is visually impaired can still read it. Same with articles and textboxes, etc. which are covered by WP:Accessibility. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 18:45, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Roger dodger! I spose I can just go back to my black and white signature. After perusing WP:ACCESS I realize there's a shitload of articles and templates that don't even meet WP:ACCESS... Oh boy. —  dainomite   19:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

O.o my orange and black one is fine though, at least according to this thing I found linked to WP:COLOR[1]. The blue one... not so much. —  dainomite   19:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

You are correct, many don't. I've worked on a few but it often turns into a big war because some thinks blue on red is "kewl", so every little change is a two week trip to WP:DRN. We need firmer rules on it, mainly for articles. People forget, we aren't here to be cool, we are here to build an encyclopedia that anyone can read, regardless of disability. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 19:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) A good (or horrible) case in point, Florida–Florida State football rivalry. I appreciate you taking the time to explain this Dennis and I'm working on a fix for my signature. The grey "omite" in my signature needs to be a touch lighter as well and then it's "green across the board". Interestingly enough I'm finding that most of the compliant colors with a black background would be described as "hot ____" like they were described as in elementary school... for the "high contrast" value against the black background. I'll put my newfound knowledge to good use (and I don't mean for signatures), well, yes the new knowledge will be applied to signatures but I meant that it won't only be used in that capacity but also in article/template space. Thanks again, I appreciate it. —  dainomite   19:30, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Wow, that article clearly shows why the policy exists. It should use all black text and lightly coded backgrounds. Sounds like you have a plan. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 19:38, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yessir, although I imagine it won't make me a popular person since most editors of those articles are fans of the teams. For "Lightly coded backgrounds" you're referring to a light pastel-esque background correct? I like that because it would allow for the retention of a visual distinction for how many years in a row a team has won. As you can see on Iron Bowl, scrolling down 80 rows of that table line by line with little variation in content is also eye-numbing, or atleast it hurts my eyes. —  dainomite   19:58, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

As an example of a different way to make use of team colours, the ice hockey WikiProject decided to change the navboxes for hockey teams to use colour borders instead of modifying the foreground and background colours in the navboxes. There are some editors who dislike it and the changes were even reverted for one template that I know of, but on the whole it seems to have worked out. isaacl (talk) 22:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Very good example. People have to remember that our goal is to have a degree of consistency, not promote team spirit. That hockey example is an excellent compromise. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

PONY!

Pony!
Congratulations! For your help with California Chrome, you have received a pony! Ponies are cute, intelligent, cuddly, friendly (most of the time, though with notable exceptions), promote good will, encourage patience, and enjoy carrots. Treat your pony with respect and he will be your faithful friend! Montanabw^(talk) 06:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

To send a pony or a treat to other wonderful and responsible editors, click here.

Thanks a million Montanabw. Let me know if you need any help with reviews in the forthcoming FAC. I have some experience with image and source spotchecks and/or reviews. Go Phightins! 17:22, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Do you prefer peer review prior to a FAC or being a FAC reviewer? I could use both. If you are curious as to the FAC standard as applied to horse articles, my last FAC "biography" was Mucho Macho Man. Montanabw^(talk) 18:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I would probably prefer just reviewing at the FAC, but if you have a need for a PR, I could help with that too. Go Phightins! 18:21, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

The Cal Chome article needs about a week or so for the Belmont to cool, and then I need to take an axe to the material I added that is now subject to recentism. After that, it's off to FAC land. But in the meantime, do you ever do GANs? User:Dana boomer and I have had Lipizzaner languishing in the GA queue for well over a month now, I think, and I for one am still alive in the wikicup and could really use the points. Montanabw^(talk) 21:42, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I do GA reviews on occasion. I have four languishing in the queue now, and pretty much have given up on the WikiCup because of lack of reviews for now. Oh well. Yeah, give me a few days ... I'll add that to my to-do list. Go Phightins! 21:44, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd be glad to trade reviews; I tend to be pretty rigorous, but I try not to ask for FA level or anything unfair. Let me know if I can do one for you. Montanabw^(talk) 23:36, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

That'd be great. My current nominees are, in order of best to worst (in my opinion), Carlos Ruiz (baseball), 2014 GoDaddy Bowl, and Jake Diekman (the first and third are baseball players, and the middle is a CFB bowl game. No worries on rigor; I wrote these a while ago, and was doing a ton of real life stuff at the time, so I may well have missed some stuff. Go Phightins! 23:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll start Ruiz if you'll take the Lipizzans. Given I know little about baseball (aside from being born in the USA) we're probably equally objective! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 00:38, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Mejía

In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Mejía you wrote " however if Nfitz is able to compile significant non-English sources that would confer notability per one of the aforementioned guidelines, s/he is encouraged to do so".

In what way is this not already compiled at de:Henry Mejía? Nfitz (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't have sufficient knowledge of the German language (only a few years in high school) to evaluate those sources. However, if we can find another editor with German knowledge to evaluate those sources, I will consider either relisting or reinstating the article. However, other editors involved in that AfD discussion did not appear to think those sources conferred notability. Go Phightins! 23:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Note that while the article at de:Henry Mejía is in German, the sources are in Spanish. I am looking at the sources now, but my spanish is severely limited as well. Tazerdadog (talk) 04:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Why not simply right-click and translate? Nfitz (talk) 03:10, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:BLP1E applies here, the majority of those sources relate to one event only i.e. his death at a young age. No evidence that GNG is met. GiantSnowman 19:20, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

At least two of those sources that only relate to his death at a young age, were written a year before his death! As such, I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think you are correct about those sources; but perhaps it's all timey-wimey. Nfitz (talk) 03:10, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• No response to my question of why you didn't simply right-click and translate? Nfitz (talk) 17:29, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Google Translate has worked pretty horribly for me with German/Spanish in the past ... I tried, and still can't really make out enough to determine whether we'd consider them appropriate sources towards meeting GNG or FOOTBALL/N (I am not really familiar with association football and what sort of coverage generally is accepted there). Pinging GiantSnowman for help on that, perhaps. Go Phightins! 17:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Right so of the 8 sources present in the current version of the German article, 5 relate solely to his death (#1, #4, #6, #7, #8). Of the remaining 3 articles, #2 and #3 both relate to his preceding kidney problems/illness, while #5 does not mention him at all. Is that evidence of "significant coverage" - no, not in my opinion. GiantSnowman 17:38, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• I really don't care for your opinion given your past bias and gaming the system, and I'd kindly ask that you refrain from wikistalking me!. I was asking User:Go Phightins!. Yes, two relate to his prior illness; but surely that there are major media about the illness of a player, that wasn't at the time mortal (his death occurred over a year later) is evidence that the player is notable. I might well see articles in local papers about the death of a non-notable player; but I don't see articles that they are ill enough to stop playing)! Nfitz (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
  • GiantSnowman is hardly stalking you; I invited him to the discussion, as he was a key commentator in the discussion. Look, I have nothing more to say on the subject. You are welcome to open a deletion review, but I believe I read consensus correctly. Best, Go Phightins! 23:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Ah, my apologies. Given his history with me, and other similar impromptu appearances, I leapt to an incorrect conclusion. Still, I can't see how you read the consensus correctly, if you never actually read the references! Nfitz (talk) 00:51, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Nfitz, GP beat me to it, but I would remind you that GSM was talking only about the merits and backing up each claim with research. You were mainly talking about him and guessing that other sources may exist. This isn't the way to have a substantive discussion. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:06, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Where did I ever guess that other sources may exist?!? It's unfortunate that GSM's frequent violations in the past of WP:FAITH now lead me to do the same. Nfitz (talk) 00:51, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Carlos Ruiz (baseball)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Carlos Ruiz (baseball) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Montanabw -- Montanabw (talk) 01:00, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hard Block

Would you mind hardblocking the IP that you blocked for a week? See this diff; https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A124.9.91.102&diff=612138152&oldid=611325506 Thanks. Tutelary (talk) 00:41, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hard blocking is something with which I am unfamiliar. Pinging a few other admins for advice: Dennis Brown TParis Drmies Go Phightins! 01:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't elaborate, it's basically when you revoke their talk page, and generally their ability to send emails to editors. In this case, I referred to a hardblock just in the case of revoking their talk page access for the duration of their block. See WP:HARDBLOCK as well. Tutelary (talk) 01:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I took away talk page access. Normally a "hard block" is just that, no talk, no creation, no email. IPs can't send email anyway. Just as a "softer block" is where you allow account creation (uncheck that box), such as for innocent user name violation, so they can just create a new account instead of a rename if they choose. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, I'd heard the term, and sort of had the idea that it prevented account creation and the like, but was unsure as to whether there were other technical processes. I will read that policy page. Thanks to both of you. Go Phightins! 01:23, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

You live and learn. Didn't know that "hard" meant no TPA. Writ Keeper knows of a gadget to allow you to customize "standard" block settings--for instance, my old setting (I think) had "account creation" disabled for a softerblock. Keep it up Go Phightins! Drmies (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Honestly, I think that "hardblock" means any number of things to any number of people; I've certainly seen it used in contexts that don't include "no TPA", and such is actually how I use it myself. To my ear, it usually means the other possible functions of a block (e.g. disable account creation from this IP and disallow logged-in editors on this IP from editing for an IP block), which is what WP:HARDBLOCK suggests (in the last paragraph in that section). So, if anyone ever asks about hardblocks, it's probably best to clarify what they mean by it, to see what they're really asking about. And as Drmies alluded, I have written a Javascript gadget to allow for customized default settings for blocks based on the pre-formatted block reasons; it can be found here and installed in the usual way for a JS gadget; once installed, the settings can be configured by going to Special:MyPage/defaultBlockSettings (there's also a link to it from the block screen itself). Lemme know if you're interested and/or have any questions. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 01:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks WK. Now, all of you, please expand John Niles (scholar) and put him up at DYK--I'm tired. Drmies (talk) 03:16, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Writ, you rookie.....WP:HARDBLOCK. ;) Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 13:02, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Need a small favor with uncontroversial housekeeping

Congratulations on your shiny new buttons. May you use them with compassion and trust. If you'd be so kind, I need some simple admin stuff done in my user space. In 2011, I'd asked somebody to delete some of my sandboxes (I can't seem to locate my request). If you wouldn't mind practicing undeleting, the locations are User:BusterD/sandbox, User:BusterD/sandbox2, User:BusterD/sandbox3, User:BusterD/sandbox4, and User:BusterD/sandbox5. No rush. Thanks. BusterD (talk) 21:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done. All revisions should be restored, so you should have everything that once was there. Go Phightins! 21:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! At least one of those boxes contained info I was considering for a new (as yet uncreated) article. Again, congrats. If I can ever be of help, please feel free to call. BusterD (talk) 21:30, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

One more thing: one of the things I was looking for was transcluded from a now banned user: User:Kumioko/Articles to create (later User:KumiokoCleanStart/Articles to create). I see User:Writ Keeper deleted the work as U1 just today. Whose ring would I have to kiss to get the last version of that page userfied to my similar location? Would that even be possible? Do the contents reside elsewhere? I worked with the user for several years and despite that user's many failings, Medal of Honor pagespaces very much benefited from his efforts. His checklist of redlinks was a truly useful tool, now almost entirely bluelinked. Starting from scratch would take a very long time indeed. BusterD (talk) 22:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I would start by pinging Writ Keeper. Go Phightins! 22:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Was thinking the same thing... BusterD (talk) 22:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, I sort of did what you wanted, BusterD. I simply restored the page; after consulting Writ Keeper, he noted that technically, there is somewhat of a copyright concern with simply taking Kumioko's page and moving it to your userspace (the nuances of said concern, I don't understand, but it's apparently better just to restore it). Anyway,  Done. Go Phightins! 00:42, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for helping. As you can see, the page isn't designed for public viewing; instead it's intended to help complete an enormous body of inherently notable subjects but as yet uncreated set of pages. It's a worksheet, a checklist. So long as Kumioko can't work on completing the list, somebody else should be doing so. BusterD (talk) 02:26, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

The problem wasn't moving the page to Buster's talk page; the problem was your suggestion to copy and paste it, which would lose the edit history and thus the attribution. Moving it with the pagemove is no problem, and in fact preferred. I've moved the page to User:BusterD/Articles to create. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 02:39, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense. When I said userfy, I didn't intend attribution would be lost, so moving makes much better sense. Thank you both. BusterD (talk) 03:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Granting rights

Good morning Go Phightins!. I see that you chose to use your newly granted admin powers to give Rollback permission to one User:Umais Bin Sajjad. Before doing so, had you reviewed their history, including their block for disruptive editing? Were you aware of the comments made, and the decision made, by an experienced administrator at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled today? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:05, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

It's afternoon here, Demiurge1000, and in answer to your question, yes, I was aware of his previous block, and I thoroughly reviewed his recent vandalism reverts, which I found generally to be appropriate, and demonstrative of good judgment (obviously all editors make mistakes, myself and probably yourself included, but his mistakes were at a sufficiently low rate, that I found them not warranting consideration as an inhibiting factor towards being granted rollback). My review had nothing to do with autopatrolled, so those concerns are not necessarily relevant to rollback (although obviously are valid). In regards to my weighing of his block, it was nearly one year ago, and since then, he had been granted reviewer, so between that, and consultation with a more experienced administrator, I also did not weigh that as an inhibiting factor in his request. Do you have any specific concerns with his ability to handle the rollback permission? Go Phightins! 21:37, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

It is always morning here, Mr Phightins. It is often September, too. It is my opinion that an editor who has recently created copyvio content, and as far as we know may continue to do so, should not hold the rollback permission. Do you disagree? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:56, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

You don't need to call me Mr. Phightins; I am not some far-off distant figure (at least I hope not ). I decided to give the editor a chance, as rollback has little to do with article creation, and everything to do with how to recognize and revert vandalism, the latter skill of which he demonstrated satisfactorily, in my opinion. However, fellow administrators who disagree are always more than welcome to revert my actions with no hard feelings whatsoever. Concurrently, if the user demonstrates he is unfit to use rollback (e.g., he abuses it), any administrator (including myself) has the right to remove it without prejudice - rollback is no big deal. For now, I am content to see how he handles it. Thanks. Go Phightins! 22:16, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I may not need to call you Mr. Phightins; but it seems I shall certainly need to keep my eye on you. à bientôt. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:06, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I thought I was the mentor round here. Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (babble) @ 21:42, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Here is something non-controversial needing admin attention.

I had an article nominated for deletion. I thought it was a more notable subject and had considered a merge/delete but another editor reviewedd it and felt about the same and nominated it to be deleted but, it doesn't need to be discussed for a week. It can be deleted quicker. So I have decided to request speedy deletion as G7.

The article in question is Samuel Kalimahana Miller. The content has already been merged to one article. I blanked the article and left the template for page blanking as the only only significant author as a good faith request to delete the article. I left a message on the nominating editor's talk page and on the AFD. A bot replaced the AFD template so it is on the article.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks like this has been taken care of? Go Phightins! 18:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2014

• News and notes: PR agencies commit to ethical interactions with Wikipedia

• Traffic report: The week the wired went weird

• Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Moderator: William Beutler

• Special report: Questions raised over secret voting for WMF trustees

• Featured content: Politics, ships, art, and cyclones

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

FLC review request

Hey Phightins! Could I trouble you to please help review my current FLC nom? A month has past since I first nominated it and only three reviews have trickled in, so I'd really appreciated it. Cheers!. —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey Bloom6132. I will try to take a look after church tomorrow. God bless. Go Phightins! 02:10, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Phightins! God bless you too. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:11, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carlos Ruiz (baseball), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Batting order (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Update

Should I update the template with this week's Editor of the Week infobox?? Jim Carter ^(talk) 17:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Lo que la vida me robó

First off, I think we should be substantially easier on the other guy; he made lots of edits, but several of them were different. I understand that this edit purely restores this edit, but every other time, he made a new edit, only to see Jorge hit "undo" every time. It's definitely not something I'd call edit-warring on his part. Jorge's actions are completely different; I would have been inclined to block him without further warning (we can do that in 3RR cases anyway), and you saw my warning and the one from ElNiñoMonstruo, but it would definitely be inappropriate to block him now without further editwarring. However, I agree with your "The next time" mandate. Nyttend (talk) 05:29, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

First of all, my edits are correct. Since this user is eliminating the main villain of the soap opera and getting everything to their liking. Definitely these 2 users do what they want and that I am doing wrong?.--Jorge Horan (talk) 19:01, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

And if I was going to block, do it. Total user that does what you want and no one says anything. Whether the user ElNiñoMonstruo and Mario, they are always making bad edits and nobody says anything.--Jorge Horan (talk) 19:15, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Extra set of eyes needed

Given your experience with facilitating adoptions and the acquisition of your newly acquired tools, would you mind taking a look at User_talk:T23tran#Kind_reminder:_use_preview? The user has a habit of making lots of small consecutive edits, and has been requested multiple times to reduce the footprint on file histories through use of the preview button to combine edits. See User_talk:T23tran#May_2014, User_talk:T23tran#Second_reminder:_Use_the_preview_button (by myself and another editor later at 06:02, 16 May 2014). Recent examples are with Kawhi Leonard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Stephen Curry (basketball) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 09:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Vandal at French Revolutionary Wars

Hi, user LeHappiste had twice by now added the same unsorced info that the many ips on French Revolutionary Wars had added. I took a look on his talk page and hi has already many blocks on record. Do you know what could be done? Ruddah (talk) 16:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Carlos Ruiz (baseball)

The article Carlos Ruiz (baseball) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Carlos Ruiz (baseball) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Montanabw -- Montanabw (talk) 19:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/Hardscrabble (album)

Hello Go Phightins! Re your note on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hardscrabble (album) page: The draft above was declined stating that info should be added to the Benn Jordan article. It would look a little out of place, though, since most of the other albums have their own articles. Also, at the time it had very little in the way of sources, but I have added several more. It's still a little weak, but much better than the deleted one which was basically unsourced and had little information. I'm wondering if maybe it should just be moved to mainspace with a suggestion on the talk page that it could possibly be redirected. If someone agrees and does so, so be it. What do you think? —Anne Delong (talk) 07:44, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Jonathan Pettibone

Materialscientist (talk) 05:59, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Lhs970317

Thanks for blocking this user's vandalism. This user appeared soon after 210.180.188.2 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) was blocked. This address belongs to a school, so it would seem the editor is now vandalizing from home in what can only be described as block evasion. Would it not be reasonable for the editor's block to match the anon IP block, especially when the vandalism matches, too? Thanks again! --McDoobAU93 13:32, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, in America, school recently let out, but I don't know about South Korea. I am hesitant to slap a new editor with a 60-day block, regardless of whether it's block evasion. Technically, I guess you are correct, but I am also mindful that we can always use more editors, so if he shows interest in becoming a productive contributor, I don't want to discourage that. I am inclined to leave the block at two days, and see what happens from there, cognizant that an extended block will be warranted if vandalism resumes from this account. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Go Phightins! 13:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree with your point, but after reviewing the edit histories of both the IP and Lhs970317 ... I wouldn't get my hopes up about the editor turning over a new leaf. --McDoobAU93 13:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Meh. As mentioned, re-blocking takes 2 seconds and rollback takes less than that. Worth a shot. Go Phightins! 13:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Anthony Hewitt

I don't know if anybody told you, but the hook for this article was pulled from DYK Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Pulled_hook_.28ii.29. The hook is actually correct, but the article is wrong - at least according to the cited source he received funding for the course in addition to the signing bonus. Belle (talk) 16:08, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Mario252

Hello, I want to ask your support, because the user Mario252, still the same. The protagonist of the telenovela La Malquerida is 4 players no 3 players. And Lo que la vida me robó is 4 players no 3 players. I already explain in their discussion and did not seem important. They no longer do with this problem. And if you need some proof of what I say, I can give them. I hope you understand me because I do not speak very good English.--Jorge Horan (talk) 10:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jorge. Is your first language Spanish? I can try to get a "translator/interpreter" if it would be easier for you to communicate that way. In regards to the edit war, basically, it doesn't matter to me who is right. I am concerned with the process ... don't keep reverting each other, take it to the talk page and hash it out. Seek a third opinion, but continually reverting is not helpful. Mario252 should not keep reintroducing content either. Please discuss this on the article's talk page. Go Phightins! 12:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I only speak Spanish. If this problem persists with this user will have to reverse it. Well I have references to what I'm saying. You will leave a message in discussion and did not answer me. So I have no idea what to do.--Jorge Horan (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2014 (UTC)--Jorge Horan (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Pinging a few Spanish speakers ... @Secret:, @Hahc21:, @Gamaliel:. Go Phightins! 15:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks like the problema here is not a language barrier, but that Mario252 is making a lot of edits on his phone or other device and not using talk space or even his user talk page at all. I'm not sure how to get a user's attention who doesn't realize people are trying to get his attention. Gamaliel (talk) 17:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

(Ok I try to write in Spanish). Pero el usuario si lee los resúmenes de ediciones. como lo hizo en el artículo de Lo que la vida me robó y en La Malquerida. Así que no se que hacer con este asunto. Porque las ediciones de este usuario no son correctas.--Jorge Horan (talk) 19:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

@Gamaliel: Go Phightins! 19:34, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Jorge, creo que el problema es que Mario no entiende cómo comunicarse con otros editores de Wikipedia utilizando la página de discusión. Voy a dejar un mensaje bilingüe en su página de discusión en otro intento de comunicarse con Mario. Si continúa, voy a considerar la protección del artículo para obligarlo a utilizar la página de discusión. Mientras tanto, por favor, utilice el resumen de edición cada vez de manera Mario entiende por qué va a quitar sus cambios. Gracias. Gamaliel (talk) 20:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

For everyone playing along at home he gist of it is that Jorge doesn't know what do to because Mario's edits are inaccurate, so I said I'd leave a message for Mario to ask him to use the talk page and maybe protect the page if he keeps it up. Gamaliel (talk) 20:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the help then both. I think the user has not insisted more.--Jorge Horan (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2014 (UTC)