User talk:Dragon24

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yakudza19 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. DAJF (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been cleared. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Soke Kubota Takayuki

Thanks (Infobox martial artist).--Sensei 2105 (talk) 14:31, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, dragon24, I've declined your report of User:DAJF, he is not a vandal. AIV is for dealing with vandalism only. if you have a content dispute, then discuss it calmly with the editor, on their talk page, on the article talk page, or using one of the methods listed at WP:DR. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well if it was only content dispute I could discuss it calmly. User:DAJF changed intewiki (thanks bot improoved it) so it didn't work (example article always was SOKE Kubota Takayuki, but he changed it in interwiki into Kubota Takayuki, also was not renamed in that time, other languages also). He deleted a lot of facts (4example the birth date of Soke Kubota Takayuki) (en-Wiki) and said that it was copyvio from magazine. He wrote wrong comments on photo Takayuki Kubota.

DAJF's vandalism was cause of blocking indefenetly Yakudza19(talk). He said Yakudza is vandal because of unfair use of sources. DAJF didn't prooved it, although he was warned many times that he must cite - acording to rules (he was told User talk:Yakudza19#January 2010, Talk:Takayuki Kubota#Close paraphrasing and so on), then admin read only comments of User:DAJF and blocked Yakudza. Now it is trouble to work on article. Yakudza was asked to copy the entire article, then edit it, so that reviewing admins can see what he changed. He did it and added some new facts: Hollywood,Instructional and documentary video, Ranks,photo on his page, but thanks to DAJF it cannot be on the main article until Yakudza will not be unblocked. --Dragon24 (talk) 13:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking Floquenbeam to participate in discussion User talk:Yakudza19 for unblocking. I suppose you will read the posts carefully.--Dragon24 (talk) 13:34, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon24,

Per your request, I've read the recent history of the article, its talk page, and User talk:Yakudza19. My comments:

The comment about DAJF changing interwiki links does not make sense. The diff you provide is not a diff of DAJF doing anything. It is a diff of VolkovBot fixing some interwiki links.
DAJF is not vandalizing, he appears to be fixing up the article and removing copyrighted material. I have not compared the original to the paraphrase, but Yakudza19 is not denying it, instead saying that facts can't be copyrighted. I agree with the other editors on Yakudza19's talk page that he should remain blocked until there is an indication that he understands what he was doing is wrong, accepts responsibility for it, and convinces the reviewing admin that it won't happen again.
The name of an article in other languages does not determine its name here. A move discussion was had, a consensus reached.
Vandalism does not mean "makes the article worse in my opinion". It means intentionally damaging things. DAJF is not intentionally damaging anything. If you disagree with his edits, then it is a content dispute.
DAJF is not an admin, so it is not his "fault" that Yakudza19 is blocked; an admin has done that.

In short, I have to say that of the things I've looked into, it appears DAJF is doing good work. The faulty evidence you've presented, and what I've seen so far, does not incline me to look into the actual close paraphrasing in greater detail; if Yakudza does not deny it, it makes little sense for me to look into it further. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note,

I just thought you should know, after some research, I found some interesting information, and as you are involved, I want to make sure that you know, just in case my reply is deleted by the blockee or some other user. Here is my reply. Yak was the one that added the copyrighted line, not other users as they belay. I shall be posting this message to all involved users.— Dæ dαlus^Contribs 02:16, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Paul Vunak

An article that you have been involved in editing, Paul Vunak, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Vunak. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. jmcw (talk) 10:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Martialinfo

Template:Martialinfo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:57, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:CMA master

Template:CMA master has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]