|This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.|
Thanks for your intervention. But, looking ahead 48 hours, not just "trivia", I think. I wonder did you look at each of the contributions there from that IP? I'd suggest that a connection with Columbo is not exactly likely. Many thanks. 13:24, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Martinevans123: Hi! I saw that they have been editing this article for 2 days, yes. To be honest, I did not check whether the claim was true (I assumed this was probably a hoax, at best not very interesting) though.
- Since it is my experience that blocking someone for 1-2 days often makes them drop their disruptive editing, I blocked them for "Edit warring" (they broke 3RR) for 48 hours instead of the usual "good faith" 24 hours. Obviously if the matter continues we'll have to protect the page or block for a longer period. Cheers! -- Luk contrib 15:33, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Luk. Yes, I can see the good logic there. I think they started off trying to make a joke about the tedious nature of Smith's "factoids". Let's hope they lose interest. I certainly did. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
- The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).
- A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.