User talk:84.73.134.206

March 2017

Any chance you could figure out how to properly write an edit summary? You're suspiciously capable for a novice so the least you could do is explain yourself better. City Of Silver 15:23, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you focus your suspicions on your wife. My summaries are as eloquent as it gets.84.73.134.206 (talk) 15:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not married. And re-read my original message since I never said you weren't eloquent. City Of Silver 15:40, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

There is no problem with CityOfSilver removing my comments from their talk page. He hasn't liked my comments when I have told him in the past he was wrong. He didn't revert my restoration of the citation needed tags, he just removed the portions that he perceived as attacks. If you feel there should be comments in those citation needed tags you can add some back in. ~ GB fan 17:26, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Good to read some decent common sense.84.73.134.206 (talk) 17:32, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 84.73.134.206. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khallet-el-Khazen.
Message added 06:34, 23 April 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 06:34, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Hi everyone. My IP has been blocked by User:Bbb23 for Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Evasion_of_blocks. Since I've never been blocked before (I mean me, not just the IP), it was impossible for me to evade a block, whether intentionally or unintentionally. It's clear to me thar the block is based on a mistake. Moreover almost all my recent contributions, mostly to AfD, but also a reference I added to Danton_(1983_film), have been reverted. They seem reasonable to me, mostly setting forth and discussing useful new sources, so I wonder why they were reverted. In a nutshell: on what basis was my IP blocked and my edits reverted? 84.73.134.206 (talk) 15:07, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I have tried to retrace the steps I took before I blocked you, and I suspect I know what happened but am not sure. That said, I cannot find a valid basis now to have you blocked in the first instance. Therefore, I am unblocking you with my apologies. You can feel free to restore any of your edits I reverted. Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

I've converted your {{admin help}} request into an {{unblock}} request. Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:20, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Can you help? Which block is being evaded here? Vanjagenije (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: I can't tell you that. I should've made this a CU block and will change it if that makes it easier for admins to review.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Well I guess it's impossible for me to review if I am not allowed to know the facts (regardless of whether it's marked as a CU block or not). I've been thinking for a while that we need a special class of unblock requests (like this one) that would require Checkuser to review it. There is no point for ordinary admins to review such requests that need CU permission. Checkuser needed. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the block to a checkuser block and declined the request. Although it is infrequent for an IP to challenge such a block, be it for block evasion or a CU block, another CheckUser can always run a check on their own.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:06, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: That is why I posted the "Checkuser needed" request, so that another CU can take a look. You say that another CheckUser can always run a check on their own, buy then, why did you declined the request? Vanjagenije (talk) 23:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Thanks for your apologies, which I gladly accept. Let me suggest that you might well have reverted your unwarranted reverts (next time with another user perhaps ...). I'm having some trouble reverting your reverts (see [1]), which could have been avoided had you provided instead. Still, no serious harm done and I appreciate the civilized response. 84.73.134.206 (talk) 06:47, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mir Zakah has been accepted

Mir Zakah, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 18:50, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Carne y Arena has been accepted

Carne y Arena, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 12:12, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@KGirlTrucker81: @Lugnuts: Hi. I did not do my homework properly before creating Carne y Arena. The article Flesh and Sand already exists, but it lacks a redirect from Carne y Arena. In order to remedy the snafu I could integrate the current Carne y Arena into Flesh and Sand. Carne y Arena should then be deleted and replaced by a redirect to Flesh and Sand. I don't know how to delete and redirect, so maybe someone else could/should take care of that. OK? 84.73.134.206 (talk) 15:16, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@KGirlTrucker81: @Lugnuts: I am done editing Flesh and Sand. Now Carne y Arena should be deleted and replaced by a redirect to Flesh and Sand. Actually renaming Flesh and Sand to "Carne y Arena" and then redirecting "Flesh and Sand" would be better, since the original title is "Carne y Arena". However this is a detail. 84.73.134.206 (talk) 15:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP. Please see WP:NCF for more about titles for films in other languages. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.