Jump to content

User talk:EdJohnston: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 119: Line 119:
I left a message on the edit warring page for you, but wasnt sure if that was the correct place to address this. In any event [[user:Mark Miller]] is pretty much the only user at Alt-Left causing problems (see talk page). While there have been disagreements, everyone else is behaving like adults and making valuable contributions. Is there a reason why the article was locked down as opposed to [[user:Mark Miller]] being blocked? [[Special:Contributions/23.114.214.45|23.114.214.45]] ([[User talk:23.114.214.45|talk]]) 03:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
I left a message on the edit warring page for you, but wasnt sure if that was the correct place to address this. In any event [[user:Mark Miller]] is pretty much the only user at Alt-Left causing problems (see talk page). While there have been disagreements, everyone else is behaving like adults and making valuable contributions. Is there a reason why the article was locked down as opposed to [[user:Mark Miller]] being blocked? [[Special:Contributions/23.114.214.45|23.114.214.45]] ([[User talk:23.114.214.45|talk]]) 03:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
:There was a distant rumbling of BLP issues and I didn't think either side was exercising a lot of care. When I block one side of an edit war I like to verify that the non-blocked side is editing much better than the other. It was more of a tie in this case. It is good there is an AfD because that should bring in more people to the discussion. It appears it may be hard to determine the true origin of the phrase 'Alt-Left'. Careful phrasing seems to be needed if the article is to be kept. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston#top|talk]]) 03:26, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
:There was a distant rumbling of BLP issues and I didn't think either side was exercising a lot of care. When I block one side of an edit war I like to verify that the non-blocked side is editing much better than the other. It was more of a tie in this case. It is good there is an AfD because that should bring in more people to the discussion. It appears it may be hard to determine the true origin of the phrase 'Alt-Left'. Careful phrasing seems to be needed if the article is to be kept. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston#top|talk]]) 03:26, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
::I agree with everything you say, however if you look at the Talk page for alt-left,you will see there are three separate sections, all from unrelated editors, all complaining about [[user:Mark Miller]]'s persistent edit warring and disregard for policy. While I understand this is a sensitive subject, there were no major problems with the exception of the aforementioned used. Could I humbly request a reconsideration of the lockdown, or ('''much''' more important) a block of [[user:Mark Miller]] at least from this article, so when it becomes unprotected he doesn't pull the same stunt again. As it stands, he made the edits he wanted right before the article was locked down. This was not simple 3rr - this was major, major edit warring and battleground behavior since creation of the article. Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter.
::I agree with everything you say, however if you look at the Talk page for alt-left,you will see there are three separate sections, all from unrelated editors, all complaining about [[user:Mark Miller]]'s persistent edit warring and disregard for policy. While I understand this is a sensitive subject, there were no major problems with the exception of the aforementioned user. Could I humbly request a reconsideration of the lockdown, or ('''much''' more important) a block of [[user:Mark Miller]] at least from this article, so when it becomes unprotected he doesn't pull the same stunt again. As it stands, he made the edits he wanted right before the article was locked down. This was not simple 3rr - this was major, major edit warring and battleground behavior since creation of the article. Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter.

Revision as of 03:32, 17 August 2017


User:TheNewSMG

Would you be interested in taking care of this harassing editor?[1] --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:22, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've put this article on my watchlist and added some links to top of this thread. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:23, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am not trying to harass anyone all I did was kindly request a change in an article and User:Kansas Bear responded rudely to me. I am sorry if Kansas Bear feels harrassed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNewSMG (talk • contribs) 16:53, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ed, TheNewSMG's idea of "rudeness" must run one way....
After being told the discussion was finished, TheNewSMG posted:
Then TheNewSMG started edit warring on another editor's talk page:[2][3][4]
All the while TheNewSMG, was sending "thanks"(for a total of five times), clearly as some form of childish harassment, since their attempt to intimidate me had failed miserably.
As stated before this editor is not here to build an encyclopedia, after refusing to understand how Wikipedia articles are written, and instead regressed to what undoubtedly they think works in the real world. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:51, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Useless IP edits

Hello again. As you may remember, about two months ago, we had a discussion about this on my talk page. Well, they were quite rampant with their useless edits/spamming recently. The IPs they used were: 124.239.251.0, 124.239.251.3, 124.239.251.38... I'm quite sure they used some more IPs as well. As you can see, I'm reverting their nonsensical edits and I plan to continue with that whenever I see them, but some other solution should be found for this issue. --Sundostund (talk) 16:28, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After checking 124.239.251.0/24 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)), I've issued a /24 rangeblock for 4 days. As you may recall, 124.239.251.55 was globally blocked for six months back in June for cross-wiki abuse. Let me know if you see any continuation of this pattern. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:58, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your prompt reaction. Of course, I'll notify you if I see that some other IPs are used for this useless edits. --Sundostund (talk) 18:35, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing by IP hopper

Hi Ed,

An IP hopper who appears to be obsessed with changing the text of certain articles related to East Florida and the Republic of East Florida, as well as articles only peripherally related to the subject, is engaging in disruptive behavior to bring them in line with his particular viewpoint, which is extreme, to say the least. For example, here is an edit made a few days ago to Fernandina Beach, Florida with the nonsensical edit summary, "Fixed racist error", and here is the diff for his latest disruption. He has a penchant for labeling the text he changes as "racist" in edit summaries, which is patently ridiculous. His obsessive editing behavior is remarkably similar to edits made by EastFloridaHistorian. Carlstak (talk) 03:15, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you list all the IPs you think are involved? If they are not part of a range, these users may have to be dealt with one at a time, for instance by reporting at WP:AIV. EdJohnston (talk) 04:42, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply, Ed. I will try to get to this tonight. Thanks. Carlstak (talk) 11:10, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-governmental sources cited at Brandon, Vermont

...this web site is personal rather than governmental. EdJohnston (talk) 00:50, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

reported by User:Khutchins10[1]

Several non-governmental sources are cited at Brandon, Vermont.

http://brandon.org/

http://brandonartistsguild.org/

http://brandonprojects.com/

http://brandonvt.org/

http://www.historicvermont.org/

http://ovuhs.org/

http://quarriesandbeyond.org/

http://www.stephenadouglas.org/


ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bvt-05733&section=2


(Bvt-05733 (talk) 13:35, 7 August 2017 (UTC))[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Bvt-05733_reported_by_User:Khutchins10_.28Result:_.29

User:AllahuAkbar321

Hi Ed, there was a user called User talk:AllahuAkbar321 who made ridiculous edits to the article Maharana Pratap (Check the history). He got blocked for persistently making disruptive edits. The next day he made a second account called User talk:ALLAHU321BOOM and repeated the same thing. Due to all of this, I am requesting that you block Maharana Pratap from very new editors due to the vandalism caused by this editor. Thanks. TheNewSMG (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The second account is now indef blocked as well. I hope this is the end of the problem. EdJohnston (talk) 02:02, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tolkien family page

An IP is re-adding contetious material from the past to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolkien_family, despite the talk page and concensus in the past. Could the page by semi-protected? Tonyinman (talk) 15:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon, Vermont

Several IPs from Vermont keeps adding the very unreliable source brandonvt.org after Bvt-05733 was blocked for edit warring. ArcticDragonfly (talk) 17:51, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotected two months. I would be surprised if all of these IPs are the same as the editor previously blocked. But we don't need to put up with a steady stream of undiscussed changes. These editors ought to use the talk page. Thanks for your report. EdJohnston (talk) 20:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
we'll be back ;) (70.20.40.142 (talk) 23:28, 9 August 2017 (UTC)).[reply]
It looks like you are able to use talk pages, so that's the approach I would recommend. I wonder how the disagreement originates -- there must be some civic dispute about the future of Brandon. EdJohnston (talk) 01:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


User:Snowsleeping

Hi Ed, would you please take care of this rude editor? Mean comments can be found at User talk:Snowsleeping. Thanks. TheNewSMG (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ed, could you please do something about User:Snowsleeping? He has made the same unconstructive edit to the article Chandra Nandini (check the history) 3 times and I keep having to revert them. Thanks. TheNewSMG (talk) 19:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting creation for article Umar Khalid

Respected Administrator, this is my request for creating the article Umar Khalid. It is quite important in contemporary Indian politics. You can find many newspaper articles regarding him. Che12PM 18:39, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Alt Left

I left a message on the edit warring page for you, but wasnt sure if that was the correct place to address this. In any event user:Mark Miller is pretty much the only user at Alt-Left causing problems (see talk page). While there have been disagreements, everyone else is behaving like adults and making valuable contributions. Is there a reason why the article was locked down as opposed to user:Mark Miller being blocked? 23.114.214.45 (talk) 03:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There was a distant rumbling of BLP issues and I didn't think either side was exercising a lot of care. When I block one side of an edit war I like to verify that the non-blocked side is editing much better than the other. It was more of a tie in this case. It is good there is an AfD because that should bring in more people to the discussion. It appears it may be hard to determine the true origin of the phrase 'Alt-Left'. Careful phrasing seems to be needed if the article is to be kept. EdJohnston (talk) 03:26, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with everything you say, however if you look at the Talk page for alt-left,you will see there are three separate sections, all from unrelated editors, all complaining about user:Mark Miller's persistent edit warring and disregard for policy. While I understand this is a sensitive subject, there were no major problems with the exception of the aforementioned user. Could I humbly request a reconsideration of the lockdown, or (much more important) a block of user:Mark Miller at least from this article, so when it becomes unprotected he doesn't pull the same stunt again. As it stands, he made the edits he wanted right before the article was locked down. This was not simple 3rr - this was major, major edit warring and battleground behavior since creation of the article. Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EdJohnston&oldid=795887070"