User talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2018/April

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Hiranandani Upscale School

Hi there, I noticed you removed the section "controversy" from this article for alledged BLP violation. While I agree that the name of the director does not belong in this section (this has been added by another editor), the event as such should not notable given it has been reported widely in national media at the time. If a school closes down for a week with (as one source reported) 500 parents protesting, which could be as much as 1/4 in comparison to the student population, this should be notable for the article. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 11:52, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Do what you will, there are other news reports suggesting this was all not right, so any naming or other identification of individuals is not on; obviously this article was created as a soapbox for one group. —SpacemanSpiff 03:05, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
I had a feeling that may be the case. Do you have some links to articles reporting about the other side? When I searched English language media, none came up. Would be good to put that section into perspective. Cheers. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 07:12, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
"Meanwhile, a statement by another section .... the Indian leaders on purpose.". Also, this incident is from Nov 2016, and there's nothing at all in terms of sexual harassment etc etc since then, so obviously, no charges were ever filed. —SpacemanSpiff 07:36, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
good point. Included some wording to portray this. Well, one of the sources said some staff felt uncomfortable being called "darling". That's probably all it was. It's quite common in british english to use those terms just as term of endearment without sexual connotation. The lady at the check-out of my usual supermarket calls me "darling" or "my dear" each time. She calls everyone that - male, female, child. However, without having been there, the truth is probably somewhere in between the positions - we just don't know. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 08:33, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Query

What happens to a page after it is deleted? Is it still kept on the servers? Or gets permanently deleted after a year or two? Or never deleted at all but just hidden from access of non-admins? I asked because deleted article can still be revived and was wondering just when they are actually deleted. 🤔 Harsh Rathod Poke me! 17:31, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Deleted pages are only not visible to non-admins. They are retained on the server, unless a developer removes it. —SpacemanSpiff 03:01, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Please elaborate. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 09:54, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

...? Harsh Rathod Poke me! 10:34, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Contest delete of Indian Pharmaceutical Association

I had deleted the objected (copyright violation) part of the article. Still the full article (the infobox) has been deleted by you. It was by no means a copyright violation. The site that had been given as the reference for deleting is/maybe itself the copy from the original site i.e [1] I have emailed the necessary authorities of the original site awaiting answer. I earnestly request you to revive the deleted infobox. SoloKnowHow83 (talk) 08:58, 2 April 2018 (UTC) 

 SoloKnowHow83 (talk) 08:58, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Your articles can be kept if there aren't any copyvios, you can't copy paste stuff from elsewhere and then when it's tagged for deletion, just remove that and expect that it'll be kept. In addition, Wikipedia isn't an advertising venue for you either. —SpacemanSpiff 09:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  • So that means you can decide to delete something even when it does not violate wiki standards? To my knowledge that is not a power vested to even an administrator.-SoloKnowHow83 (talk) 09:11, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I have no COI regarding anything except my educational institution.SoloKnowHow83 (talk) 09:14, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
    • It means that you can't just add copyvios and advertorials here and you will be blocked if you repeat it. —SpacemanSpiff 09:18, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  • If you can not understand why the brochure you were trying to pass off as an article wasn't advertorial in nature then you shouldn't be editing here! —SpacemanSpiff 10:19, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
    • I never meant it to be an advertisement. The information there is in jist and appropriate. I would really take care from next time not to copyvios. But the infobox was not by any means a brochure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SoloKnowHow83 (talk • contribs) 10:48, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Meat(s)

  • Any good reason(s) behind not blocking N1197L as a meat-puppet of SPJaiswal?! Both are NOTHERE and by a mile or so.....~ Winged BladesGodric 15:49, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
  • And, I guess John Carter Lambert shall be blocked as an impersonation of Johnpacklambert.Best,~ Winged BladesGodric 15:52, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
    • I'm the one who identified this stockpile of bovine excrement first and have attempted to cleanse it multiple times, making me WP:INVOLVED. —SpacemanSpiff 16:31, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
      • Hmm...that's a fact but, after seeing the last line of his t/p reply, involved and all ought be straight-away IAR-ed.But, still......~ Winged BladesGodric 06:05, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
        • If this happened with someone else and the user was blocked by the admin in question, I would say INVOLVED be damned, it's a correct block, but invariably this kind of stuff wastes a lot of people's time, so I'm going to avoid it, and hoping that some other admin sees the nonsense and blocks. I've already wasted far too much of my time on these two articles. Anyway, I did suspected earlier on that this one is connected to Shivamevolution, see if you can come to the same conclusion, then there might be far more socks involved and an SPI might be warranted, that chap's most recent thing was promoting random people as poets. cheers —SpacemanSpiff 06:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
          • Yep! I seem to concur with your findings, based on my own involvement with the sock-farm and given, that Bearian confirmed it to precisely same geo-location of the group, it would be highly interesting to run a check on SPJ, for me thinks it will definitely pull up something!~ Winged BladesGodric 07:41, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Kumhar

If you're around, Kumhar could probably use some ministration. Anon repeatedly fiddling with it. - Sitush (talk) 12:17, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Sudhanshu6454

Can you please take a look at newly registered user Alkak recreated Pradeep K Sharma‎ earlier created by SudhanshuKumar1 (talk · contribs) you blocked a few days back. Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 17:41, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Looks like RP has taken care of it. —SpacemanSpiff 00:09, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

About Anusha Rai, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anusha Rai, and Draft:Anusha Rai.

Hi Spiff. (I thought about titling this post "Oh dear, Shirt58 has f*cked up things again, part 817", but that might have underestimated how many times I've f*ucked up stuff.)

Timeline:

Do you think Draft:Anusha Rai should be restored? And if so, what revisions?

Pere AU aku --Shirt58 (talk) 12:31, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

  • @Shirt58:, I just came to the conclusion that this is one big UPE sock farm, I've blocked three accounts related to it now, likely more floating around that I didn't catch. I don't think it needs undeletion, the draft was a word for word copy of the deleted article. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:43, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Unjustified removal of Suraiya's title 'Mallika-e-Tarranum' in India.

@@SpacemanSpiff:

I don't see any reason why you have been removing the non-official title give to Suraiya between 1947 and 1952 by film circle and film magazines. The same title was given to Noor Jehan in Pakistan, after 1947. Since Suraiya did not sing much after 1954 and abandoned singing in 1963, this fact was forgotten that she was called the 'Queen of Melody' ( 'Mallika-e-tarranum'), while the same title was used for Noor Jehan in Pakistan. Many references have been given to this fact already, regarding Suraiya. Newer generations do not know this fact and attribute it to Noor Jehan only. If you have any reason and references to the contrary, please defend your removal of the same. Please do not give mocking title as you have 'Wikipedia is not a fansite'. You have also not given any details about yourself in your biodata. Please restore the removed content. Vkjoshi123 (talk) 12:34, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

  • @Vkjoshi123: Go open a blog if you want, but this is not the place for you to edit like this, and I will not restore it, more of this kind needs to be culled from that article and I hope other editors do that.—SpacemanSpiff 13:30, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Nair ceremonies and customs

I don't know if it is the old sockfarm but anon(s) are posting screeds of irrelevant stuff at Talk:Nair ceremonies and customs. They were also doing it to a lesser extent at Talk:Ambalavasi, where I simply reverted. - Sitush (talk) 10:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Could be, but I've blocked for a few days as they are here only to promote an agenda and the posts on the ceremonies talk page was sufficient evidence of that. I see another static ip is involved in this too. —SpacemanSpiff 12:19, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gaurav456

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gaurav456. ~ Winged BladesGodric 13:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

User talk:संदेश हिवाळे

At User talk:संदेश हिवाळे I've offered tentative support for a WP:Standard Offer unblock. Do you have any objections? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:04, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

tpw: I thought that person was a Dalit activist? Can they really edit neutrally? I notice Tiven is supporting them, which isn't a particularly good sign as I am having to do a major clean up of their edits, too. - Sitush (talk) 11:23, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Please remain civil and welcome new editors to edit Wikipedia. False Allegations and personal attacks like Dalit activists dosent suits made by experienced editors. I believe Wikipedia to have encyclopedia content. I strongly support Boing! said Zebedee opinion and I think administrators on enwp will work as per the prescribed guidelines. Thanking you --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 11:36, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)Hmm....Given the history of acute POV-pushing and disruption by Sandesh and the editing-area, I guess Sitush's un-parliamentary speak is more than welcome. ~ Winged BladesGodric 12:02, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
  • @Boing! said Zebedee:, I had offered to unblock earlier (in October 2017), subject to retaining a topic ban re Ambedkar/Dalits, broadly construed, via discussions with Mahitgar who came to me regarding this, but to be quite honest, I felt very uncomfortable with Tiven2240 poking his nose into it back then (on a block of Dagduba lokhande who was editing similarly) as well as now (especially the response to Dlohcierekim), and that's why I left the issue completely as I'm beginning to have doubts again. Also see User talk:Sitush/Archive_27#The issue at hand. —SpacemanSpiff 12:01, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks SpacemanSpiff and others. With the doubts aired here, I would not feel comfortable unblocking unconditionally at this point. I'll decline the request and will offer a couple of suggestions. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:52, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Janhitaila

Janhitaila was been created this month and was a real mess, including on the talk page. I've tidied it up but I notice at least three redlinked contributors who seem to be using a firstname+numbers format for their username. Are you aware of any school project currently runnning that might affect articles such as this? - Sitush (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Praja Mandal movement

I am not happy. - Sitush (talk) 02:44, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Praja Mandal

Note that the older article is specifically and only about Orissa Praja Mandals. Please read the article. The new article is about Praja Mandals in general. I think the older article needs to be renamed Orissa Praja Mandal Movement. Or if you prefer, feel free to merge the articles. Malaiya (talk) 02:35, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
  • In which case re-scope the older article, you can't just go about copy pasting things without attribution and expecting it to stay. I hope this is an isolated incident and you haven't done this elsewhere as you are an autoreviewer. —SpacemanSpiff 02:49, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I am not sure what you mean by "attribution". Do you mean a citation? Malaiya (talk) 03:01, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I will rescope the older article as you suggested, and use attribution in the edit summary for the sentence used in the new article. It was a widespread movement impacting several parts of India. Malaiya (talk) 23:02, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
1. You told me to "rescope the re-scope the older article". 2. The other editor agreed with my suggestion that the older article is all about Orissa. 3. I informed you about what I was planning to do, as you can see above.Malaiya (talk) 04:01, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Sigh, what does re-scope mean? It means to change the scope of the article, that's not what you did, you moved it to a different title and restored something else. —SpacemanSpiff 04:04, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

You might be expert.

Shuerly not an expert here please ignore or improve the editing done by me.

India is still in explored especially the remote ones. Mansukhsurin (talk) 15:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

E to the Pi times i

Regarding the close here - I take it that you mean discussing changing policies/guidelines? Since as it's worded it could be interpreted as preventing them from, say, discussing whether or not WP:N is met in a deletion discussion, which would be a bit harsh. Either way, thanks for the close. ansh666 19:24, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Right, I'll fix that. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 23:22, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks! ansh666 01:02, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Just saying I thought that was an excellent close. There were a couple of possible variations there which I thought could have been tricky for the closer to resolve, but I think you got the consensus just about spot on. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

User:Chittorgarh02

Hi Spiff. I see you have tagged this user as a suspected sock, but I think you forgot to block them? — LeoFrank  Talk 07:36, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

I purposely left the original account just a warning. —SpacemanSpiff 11:42, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Socking at Sengunthar etc?

Per this, I think we have someone who is socking on Sengunthar-related articles, perhaps unintentionally. Should one of the accounts be blocked? - Sitush (talk) 11:44, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #21234

A user you have blocked has opened UTRS appeal #21234 on the Unblock Ticket Request System. The reviewing administrator, Just Chilling (talk · contribs), has requested your input:

Chittorgarh02 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Time: Apr 16, 2018 14:38:56

Message: Please see my comment on this appeal - may I have your views, please?

Notes:

  • If you do not have an account on UTRS, you may create one at the administrator registration interface.
  • Alternatively, you can respond here and indicate whether you are supportive or opposed to an unblock for this user and your rationale, if applicable.

--UTRSBot (talk) 14:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry

sorry sir, i felt very bad for what i did. It would not happen in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrsinghparmar (talk • contribs) 03:39, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

  • And just before posting here, you went ahead with repeating said behavior that you're supposedly sorry for! —SpacemanSpiff 04:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Mehra related stuff

Tatichat removed a PROD from Mehra (caste) but is belatedly now discussing at that article, which they created. However, they're fairly new, not showing much understanding and in their last posts to that talk page are heading towards big NPA problems etc. Worse, I think Hindu knows may well be connected, having just turned up to remove the AfD template that I placed after the PROD was removed.

Tatichat's problems aren't limited to the article, either. They've got similar issues at Mehra and Dhai Ghar. Probably could do with a word from someone they might listen to, which now clearly is not me. - Sitush (talk) 10:40, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Deletion review for Kesari Tours

Gadgetsgigs has asked for a deletion review of Kesari Tours. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 11:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Message

Not interested in helping out with paid adverts or arguing on the merits of it
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

SpacemanSpiff Sir, It's my real account. My account is not sockpuppet or fake account of Muhammed Zafwan, Intact, I don't know who he is. And why my account got associated with him. However, I know Mr. Mansoor Shaikh, who was heading the Digital Marketing department of Vascon, but he no longer working in Vascon.

I am newly appointed, is now part of Digital Marketing team of Vascon Engineers. It is my 100% real account.

My contributions are disappeared from Wikipedia, as you have removed it. I'll request you to please restore my contributions and unblock me. Sir, Kindly respond to my messages. Thank you. - Signing Fyomancho — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.68.17.246 (talk) 09:54, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Even on the off chance that you aren't directly related to that account, it's obvious from the above post that you're here to just promote the company and in violation of our terms of service, so I'm not going to unblock. —SpacemanSpiff 10:00, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Sir, I want to raise some of my points please do consider;

(1) It's okay if you are not interested to unblock me. But do no block me under the sockpupet accounts of Mr. Muhammed Zafwan. Because It's my own, firs-time registered Wikipedia account. It's not a fake profile of Mr. Zafwan and other listed profiles.

Though I do not think that I deserved to be blocked for creating a Wikipedia page, because Wikipedia itself says "It is the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." So I am using my own rights.

(2) Sir, It is your assumption that I am here to only promote our company, but I want to clarify that I or We do not have any intention to use Wikipedia as a PR outlet and we are not doing it. I (or We) only wanted to have Wikipedia page about our company just like other real estate companies do have.

Initially after doing some research on Google and YouTube about how to create a Wikipedia page, and knowing some important Wikipedia rules, I attempted it.

I copied the format of The Wadhwa Group and referred Wikipedia pages of some other real estate companies. My first attempt was failed and article was deleted, reason was given Unambiguous advertising or promotion; even though content of article was not promotional. The article looked like same as The Wadhwa Group.

I recreated it after reworking on article and removing the content which was not verifiable. Again it was deleted and I was blocked, reason was given G5, G11.

[G11 stands for Unambiguous advertising or promotion & G5 stands for Creations by banned or blocked users, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion]. Even though article wasn't sounding promotional. If you think, I am biased, why can't you help me to make the article unbiased, deleting the article of a notable company was not a good idea.

(3) Vascon Engineers is a publicly traded real estate company, meets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies), an important Wikipedia policy, then why can't a Wikipedia article created for Vascon? Sir, Any advise or guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you..! - Signing Fyomancho — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.68.17.38 (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Dhedh

Rudhr.rudhr.54 (talk · contribs) was blocked several times last year by the likes of Vanamonde93 and Yunshui. They had an insistence on "truth" rather than "verifiability" and came up with some very poor sourcing when they bothered at all.

Do you think there might be a connection with recent activity at Dhedh or it is more likely to be meatpuppetry via some off-wiki discussion forum/Facebook etc? There is something odd going on and no-one has responded to my comment on the article talk page late last month. - Sitush (talk) 13:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I've semi protected for now, will take a look at the sock vs meat aspects later. —SpacemanSpiff 13:31, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Christ University

I have posted a proposed move here. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:19, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

COI editing and ToS violation

Hello SpacemanSpiff,

I don't use another account. I just have this account that I am using for editing and adding a new article on wikipedia.

I have written on number of Subject on wikipedia by myself learning wikipedia guideline and different terminology. I think now I should more care about the article that I create on wikipedia.

I have joined wikipedia on 14 June 2012, starting learning wikipedia terminology to create and edit article to improve wikipedia.

As you have pointed out issue in my edit, I will goes through documentation regarding CIO and ToS and follow it.

I hope you will not revoked me from editing wikipedia as I love improving and adding new article on wikipedia.


Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujit.jha3 (talk • contribs) 05:58, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Jadaun

Jadaun may need some ministration. The usual anons and newly-registereds. - Sitush (talk) 07:36, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Divya Bharti

How is that a nonsense! Go do a research! Everyone know Divya converted and took a new name Sana even Sajid Nadiadwala comfirmed this after her death! He gave proof of there nikkah (marriage certificate) which I have! I know mostly on Divya! Go do a better research and stop yoir nonsense! Because it's the truth she converted and took a new name! Sajid family calls her Sana they never called her Divya! Saradutt (talk) 11:51, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

But of course Wikipedia has its own rules which are hard once her nikkah certificate gets to any tabloid I'll share it with proof as reference Saradutt (talk) 11:56, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I've told you already, Wikipedia is not a place to spam your twitter feed and your original research, if you continue this then you will be blocked. —SpacemanSpiff 11:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

hello this is very bad I am finding more administrator about this issue

Here's the Story - on the day we've created account name Rowrow yo boat we've created two articles and after how many days it was deleted because it was abused by the same person editing article of megafauna and we've remembered that our account was still log in and didn't log out yet, since we're new we don't usually know how to see what we contributed but now i know already and plus after the terrible block soon our account was accussed as sockpuppets on April 22 so we created two accounts on private Ip address on our college to re-create the recently deleted article and now im accussed of sockpuppets what if my classmate re-create article about our school he/she will be accussed as same person also known as sockpuppet? pls, I don't want to vandalize anymore I have many ways to contribute to Wikipedia. Amazing Biologist (talk) 07:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure why you're posting here, I have no recollection of being involved in this. —SpacemanSpiff 11:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Sugh Ancient Mound

Hi, would you be able to do me a favour and revdelete from this diff backwards please? There is a fair amount of copyvio littering the revisions.

I've left at notice at the talk page of the editor in question. They seem to be good faith but I can't shake the feeling I'm getting comprehensively trolled.

Thanks.

Kind regards, Cesdeva (talk) 21:49, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

@Esdeva: Can you tell me where the copyvio started? I'll have to rev delete from there until the point where clean up was done, and this seems too small an article for both of us to spend time to independently evaluate! —SpacemanSpiff 02:57, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • As for getting trolled, it may not be the first time, you may want to check on comparisons with this farm -- Vdhillon. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
diff 12 intermediate revisions contain the copyvio.
It entered in this revision as an addition of +455 text identical to that in a source.
The rest of the articles prose was various copypasta fragments glued together with a little paraphrasing. Passable maybe but I've reworked it a bit more.
I'll compare with that farm.
Thanks, Cesdeva (talk) 14:28, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

sock question

whats the matter why am i blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The king VIC (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) @The king VIC: If you are asking about "Amazing Biologist" then you were blocked for misusing multiple accounts, per Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. GSS (talk|c|em) 16:56, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
You are continuing the same thing that Geocraze got blocked for, and your behavior is no different, so do you accept that you are evading your block? —SpacemanSpiff 07:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Vicky Kadain

Your recent deletion of Vicky Kadain was the right call. But I would like you to look at this page - Vicky_Kadian.

The Kadain page was a misspelled title for the person at the article I just linked. Kadian has been deleted multiple times, and now the spelling variety. Maybe there needs to be some sort of extra layer of protection for this spammer?Fandomuser21 (talk) 11:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Deletion review for Vascon Engineers

183.87.184.139 has asked for a deletion review of Vascon Engineers. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 19:32, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Harshrathod50

Hmm...If his behaviour is really as bad as you say he is (I don't really know), I'd suggest a "warning" block of 24 hours, to let him cool off a bit. Not really sure if this is against policy though, but attacking other editors should be reason enough. Rob3512 chat? what I did 10:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I don't think a temp block will be of any use, he's been doing this passive aggressive bullshit for far too long now, and an indef block is imminent but I hate to do it for something like this, just ask Winged Blades of Godric who has been dealing with him on article space for a while now. —SpacemanSpiff 11:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
    • I concur with Spiff that any temporary block would be of no use. He has been into this passive-agressive pot-stirring for days, in every sphere of his editing activities, but without indulging into something that's clearly blockable.An indef by an uninvolved admin, as a net timesink, is the only worthwhile solution, in the long run.And, somewhere down the line, he will set a fine example of why social competency is a highly necessary skill for even minimally productive output. ~ Winged BladesGodric 11:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
      • Sigh...I have half a mind to raise this at ANI, but I don't have a really pressing issue to base the report on. Rob3512 chat? what I did 07:22, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
          • Rob3512, it's more than likely that we'd just be wasting our time if this went to ANI, so I'd avoid it for now and just let a passing admin (not me, as based on some interactions I'd consider myself WP:INVOLVED for anything more than a warning) take action if and when they see fit. Honestly, I don't think it's worth the time spent, going forward, if anything like this happens I'm just going to revert it. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 07:28, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2018/April&oldid=1139380579"