User talk:Favonian

Dansk Wiki

Hejsa. Vil lige høre om du også er aktiv på den danske Wikipedia? --90.184.201.211 (talk) 00:56, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Hej selv. Med skam at melde er det meget sjældent, at jeg redigerer den danske Wikipedia. Favonian (talk) 09:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Bless your country for its beer and its bacon-wrapped hot-dogs.

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Ah, the Danish weapons of mass destruction. Personally, I prefer the pickled herring, and they are certainly in season right now. Favonian (talk) 22:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Werner Fenchel needs some work.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Hard to contradict you. Somebody really should be doing something about it. Favonian (talk) 22:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

St John Plessington Catholic College

Hello, I think St John Plessington Catholic College might need some updates including the school's logo and a few picturesalong with some more relevant information about the college. I'm a student of this school and I had a chat aboutthis with the school's management. They agreed to give me the copyright free images so do you mind in me updatingthat? I'm also asking a few more opinions in this task, hope you won't mind. I have also read this (Schools, Article_guidelines, What_not_to_include) so I hope I can proceed, or may I? If you have any concern about it them could you please contact me on my talk page. --Njavallil ...Talk 2 Me 20:09, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey Favonian: There's some divine intervention required here. I'm not familiar with the case except for a couple of socks, so I figured I'll bring this to you after a post on my tp too. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Took a while to dig through the archives, but it's him alright. Have submitted evidence and requested CU at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Divineabraham and blocked the latest sock per WP:DUCK. Favonian (talk) 20:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

It looked like him, but I wasn't familiar enough to do a duck; did you see the new main page proposal? —SpacemanSpiff 21:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Yep, rather "inspired" by French Wikipedia as another editor pointed out. Favonian (talk) 21:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Answered a "help" request as they were on my wtah list due to previous issues. As you left talk page access, I switched it to the main account. M Hope you don't mind. --Tikiwont (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

That's just the way it should be. Thanks! If he makes an unblock request, he should be told about WP:OFFER. Six sock-free months should be an absolute minimum. Favonian (talk) 21:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Roman Catholic vandal...

...is back, at 209.33.105.12. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

...and gone ;) Blocked for 6 months by an admin in a more convenient time zone. Favonian (talk) 10:17, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Article Deletion

I nominated an article for deletion. Please review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omair00 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Not a good idea, I'm afraid. The correct procedure is to make a request at WP:Requested moves, which was also suggested in the message I posted to your talk page. The AfD is bound to get closed, in fact I might do it. Favonian (talk) 23:30, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

new user indef block

Thanks for blocking User:USALady. But why indef? Don't new users that start out as vandals often reform after a block? Dicklyon (talk) 00:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Users like this one whose only contributions have been clear cases of vandalism are typically sent off indefinitely as "vandalism only accounts". In this case she had ample warnings, but according to WP:Blocking policy#Disruption-only it can happen without prior warning. I suspect that the person in question is rather immature, and if she improves with age, she'll be better off with a fresh start. Favonian (talk) 09:35, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Requesting your input on an unblock request

In March, you (quite correctly) blocked User:08murtaghkc for vandalism. The user is requesting to be unblocked, and states that they've realized their error. I was hoping you could give your input into the situation since you made the original block. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:19, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

If you're willing to unblock him, that's OK with me. After all, Saint Jimbo teaches us to welcome a repentant sinner. A travelers' advisory regarding the unhealthy climate of Papua New Guinea would probably be in order. Favonian (talk) 19:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I've gone ahead with it—they meet the standard offer criteria, and if they were bent on disruption, they could've always gone on a sock spree instead of asking nicely. So here's hoping. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for agreeing with my unblock

Hello, first of all I would like to give you my sincerest apology for all the damage I have caused over the last two years; I assure I have found my new place on Wikipedia and my monent(s) of immaturity have ended. Thank you for agreeing with the unblocking administrator, and I thought it was only right to put my first proper post on my banning admins talk page. Once again I am sorry for what I did, it will never happen again and I thank you for allowing me a final chance.

Yours truly, 08murtaghkc (talk) 07:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Not a very good start - copyright violation at Bradley Stoke Community School, badly formatted or broken references, and bad spelling. I question the competence of this editor and believe it would have been better if the block had stayed in place. --Bob Re-born (talk) 08:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Homophobia Vandalised

by User talk:194.83.24.17 after already receiving a final warning, can you sort out a block since i don't know how? Thanks Jenova20 16:18, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Favonian (talk) 16:21, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks , have a nice evening Jenova20 16:22, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

You too, when your timezone gets around to it ;) When I'm not around to swing the ax, WP:AIV is the right place to report miscreants. Favonian (talk) 16:25, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that, i've made a note of it!

If i don't see you, have a good morning, evening and night! Jenova20 17:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Recurring sockpuppetry problem

Further to your protection of William Hope (actor): a Hope-related article, Submerged, has also been hit by the recent disruption (dubious, unsourced production information added here; now removed). Much of this recurring vandalism seems to stem from the 187.77... and 187.124... ranges (both apparently Brazilian-based; possibly a single, IP-hopping, anonymous contributor is responsible).

To prevent further disruption, would one or more rangeblocks be something to consider? I've checked the revision histories of some of the affected articles as far back as March and the rangeblock calculator produces the ranges 187.77.192.0/18 (talk · contribs) (for 187.77...) and 187.124.0.0/18 (talk · contribs) (for 187.124...). Unfortunately, this is one dedicated inserter of misinformation, whose edits are highly problematic with regard to WP:BLP. SuperMarioMan 17:17, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Pretty big ranges. There will have to be some more disruption before we turn off the Wiki lights in Brazil. I have the other article on my watch list, in case the problem escalates. Favonian (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you.

Sorry, I didn't realised I appealed in the wrong way; Also, I must not of logged into my account in school. Yours truly, 08murtaghkc. 16:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 08murtaghkc (talk • contribs)

Thanks!

Thanks for the revert! Cheers, Sindinero (talk) 14:47, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure. Surprisingly, the warning was enough to make him stop. Favonian (talk) 16:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Brady Campaign

Greetings and salutations! I'm writing to ask that the Brady Campaign article be semi-protected due to the fact that people insist on trying to add the original research that it is a "Hate Group". I am a Second Ammendment supporter, in fact IRL I am a firearms instructor, but that kind of unsourced material has no business in an encyclopedia. Thanks! SeanNovack (talk) 15:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

At least we can agree in that respect ;) I have semi'd the article for a month. If the nonsense resumes in January, a longer protection will be forthcoming. Favonian (talk) 16:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! SeanNovack (talk) 01:05, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism

Could you possibly remove from view the latest personal attacks on my Talk page. Thanks Vrenator ^talk 16:59, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Favonian (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

User: Jasonfitz

I noticed you reverted an edit by user:Jasonfitz and left a warning on his page about vandalism. I thought I would let you know that he committed several other acts of vandalism. I believe I have reverted all of his bad edits and left the few productive edits. Happy Editing. Daffydavid (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick WP:SEMI for Molly Meldrum

Thanks, Favonian. And I'm 100% sure I also write on behalf of the other editors who asked for the semi. --Shirt58 (talk) 13:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

That's what we're here for. Hope they poor guy pulls through! Favonian (talk) 13:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I mentioned one of your recent IP blocks in a relevant ANI discussion

See WP:ANI#Anon Talk Page blanking by another Anon. Hans Adler 17:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Unblocked the IP and replied at ANI. Favonian (talk) 18:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't asking for immediate action, but obviously I am happy with it. I don't like the IP's attitude either, but much of it appears to be reaction. Hans Adler 18:10, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

al qassim ibn hasan page

can u make a fresh page of al qassim ibn hasan with the same content because my friend acedientally undid a edit and his ip is recorded

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.26.229 (talk) 17:14, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you want. You corrected the other IP's edit; what more needs to be done? Favonian (talk) 17:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

i mean delete the page and start it again with the same old content

my friend accedientally undid a edit in the page and now his ip is recorded so start a fresh page so no one sees it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.26.229 (talk) 17:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've used a slightly less drastic measure, namely removed the IP from the edit history. Favonian (talk) 18:07, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

can you remove the reason that says i undid him

the part that says

Undid revision 466542956 by (his ip) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.26.229 (talk) 18:16, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

That was rather remiss of me. Now all traces of your friend's IP address should be gone. Favonian (talk) 18:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

St. John/Ivan of Rila

Favonian,

Thank you for helping out with the “St. Ivan of Rila” article. I noticed that the WP:RM page has been backlogged, so I’m bringing forth my grievance to you first.

“Ivan” is the transliteration, and in this case the only acceptable translation of the Cyrillic “Ивaн”, pron. [ee’van] in Bulgarian. (“Evan” would be an even closer representation, but it wouldn’t yield nearly as many search engine hits.) “John of Rila” is a crude, ignorant, and highly arbitrary rendition of “Ивaн Рилски”. If that was an agreeable interpretation, “Kaloyan” should be anglicized as “Handsome John”, or rather “Pretty John”. That of course, would be silly. This is about a proper name of a person of great historic (and historical) significance; about the Cuthbert of that part of Europe. Let’s not make a mockery out of it. Let’s change all the “Johns” in the article to “Ivan”.

Thank you again for your help, Vkarastoyanov (talk) 22:55, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I am not arguing against the correctness of the saint's original name, but Wikipedia articles are named according to another criterion, namely "the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources (for example other encyclopedias and reference works, scholarly journals and major news sources)". Doing a couple of Google book/scholar searches it becomes clear that John is used much more often than Ivan. Many editors find it hard to accept, but Wikipedia doesn't attempt to enforce correctness (by whatever definition), it reports on what is already written in reliable sources.

Regarding WP:RM, the backlog is not nearly as bad as is sometimes appears. The vast majority of requests are decided upon after the week set aside for discussion. Only a few controversial cases take longer before an admin works up the courage to make a decision and reap the fallout. Favonian (talk) 10:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Favonian, I don’t want to argue with you, especially about the so called “reliable sources”, but John is not the direct equivalent of Ivan, not in Bulgarian, nor in any of the other Slavic languages, not in Scandinavia. John is related to Ivan, Jan, Johannes, Ioan, Yoan, Jean, etc., but it’s far removed. This is like calling JFK “Jean Kennedy” in French, or naming King Arthur “King Ahmed” on the Arabic Wikipedia. Sometimes, mind you, errors are self-fueled and self-perpetuated, as in the case of a few Bulgarian sites translating “St. Ivan of Rila” as “St. John” because they looked it up on Wikipedia — it is the first thing that comes up on Google. And Wikipedia (in this case you), is quoting them as reliable sources.

Re: Wikipedia names: If that is the system you follow, then you need to change “Johannes Brahms” to “John Brahms” (and so forth). Vkarastoyanov (talk) 14:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, here we are, arguing ;) Starting from the end: no, that is precisely what "our system" does not imply. John is the English equivalent of Johannes (as Ivan is the Slavic one according to Ivan (name)), but since every serious book about classical music lists the composer's name as Johannes, so does Wikipedia. Referring to the saint as John is not something we do, because we think his name should be translated (witness Ivan the Terrible and lots of other Ivans); we do it because the translated name has become established in the literature. Your beef is with the authors of said literature, but the original culprits are probably long dead. Favonian (talk) 15:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

New user on a vandalism spree

There's a new user on a vandalism spree, including an attack page, who could use an administrator's intervention (or blocking), if you have a moment. Thanks, Sindinero (talk) 11:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I've speedied the attack page and issued a stern warning. The editor seems at best ill-informed. Favonian (talk) 11:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Blocked following persistent addition of unsourced information. Favonian (talk) 11:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for Sierra McCormick

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sierra McCormick. 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. The-Pope (talk) 16:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Daniel sugden

Daniel sugden (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is due for a first block. While some small portion of his edits are valid, most have been vandalism, including changing the names of spouses of celebrities and messing with templates. He has been warned well past the usual series of warnings and has not responded to warnings or requests to discuss in any way. Please review his edit history. He's only avoided being taken to AIV because he's been doing it in a rather slow and drawn-out manner. Yworo (talk) 16:17, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I am keeping an eye on him, but there needs to be at least one more transgression before I unsheathe the clue bat. His latest edit suggests a connection with 94.171.166.129 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), which may have to be taken into account. Favonian (talk) 20:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Exemplary block: PA "cunt" directed at woman editor

Well done!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Bit difficult to decipher his lingo, but I fully expect to be at ANI and ArbCom before the end of the year. Favonian (talk) 22:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

heh...

Taking into account the nature of the vandalism and their promise to stop vandalising, perhaps that indef block could be turned into a seven-days block :-)

Happy holidays and a fine 2012! - DVdm (talk) 21:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Nice suggestion and very much in the spirit of the season. I would like to see the editor provide a slightly better explanation, though. Best wishes to you too! Favonian (talk) 21:14, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

IP at it again

99.63.24.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) (previously blocked five times as 99.63.26.63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) for the same) has carried on the same way straight after the latest three month block expired. Four edits, all additions of religious categories, all violations of WP:BLPCAT. Could you do the necessary please? Thanks. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 14:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Blocked for six months. Such wasted perseverance. Favonian (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. Thanks for the help. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 14:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I had forgotten all about them. Good grief! - DVdm (talk) 16:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For your quick word at my talk page - someone's sock obviously. Dougweller (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure. Does indeed look like a returning customer. Favonian (talk) 20:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Block of User:173.214.235.201

Hi! Just to let you know that this anon user you just blocked has started vandalising their talk page. So to stop it, I've altered your block settings to prevent any edits of their talk page. As one of the targets of their recent vandalism (I had previously blocked them), if you think I am too involved and made the wrong decision, feel free to change the block back. Stephen! ^Coming... 21:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

It was certainly called for, and as may be seen from this block log, I'm not overly fastidious with regard to such actions ;) Favonian (talk) 21:06, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I made an RPP request, looks like it wasn't needed.Jasper Deng (talk) 21:07, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I usually allow them to edit their talk page, and revoke it later if required. Just on the off-chance that I made an error, I always like to leave a right to reply. Clearly this person didn't need it LOL! Stephen! ^Coming... 21:21, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Macedonian language

Since removing words of propaganda is now called vandalism, could you explain when Macedonian was a language? Have you ever studied history? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.134.215 (talk) 11:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I am quite aware of the controversial nature of this subject, and it has been discussed numerous times on various article talk pages. However, voicing your personal opinion on this subject by dismantling the article is decidedly disruptive. Changes are accomplished through discussion. Favonian (talk) 11:38, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Protection request

Please semi-protect Talk:Rango (2011 film) and Talk:Claudia Black to a length equal to the respective articles' semi-protection. I raised this issue yesterday at RFPP but it was ignored. The issue is that the poster is an IP-hopper who portrays himself as being the boyfriend of the actress. Whether it's a truly obsessed fan or just a garden-variety troll, either way it's a BLP violation and should be stifled. Thank you! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Protecting talk pages is very controversial, frowned upon, etc., etc. As a wimpy compromise, I have semi'd the Rango talk page for a week. The other one hasn't had any recent activity, so I'll just add it to my (hideously bloated) watch list. Favonian (talk) 13:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I know. But as much as it's frowned upon, BLP violations are frowned upon more. Thank you for adding them to your watch list. :) I don't know if there's an IP range block that could be applied. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:26, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Offhand, I doubt that a range block is feasible. The addresses are too scattered. Favonian (talk) 13:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeh. We'll just have to see if this fizzles on its own, or if it takes on the absurd dimensions of some other long-term trolling I can think of. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

It's not fizzling. You need to protect the talk pages of Claudia Black and also of an article called Name-dropping. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

It's being discussed now at ANI, if you'd care to join. Another admin short-term protected the two other talk pages. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:39, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I've added my DKK 0.02 worth. What a mess! Favonian (talk) 11:21, 3 January 2012 (UTC)