User talk:Malinaccier/December 2011

Orphaned non-free image File:Barberton HS logo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Barberton HS logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:53, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I re-added it to the article; someone must have removed it inadvertently. Thanks again, Malinaccier (talk) 04:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I removed it because it isn't the school's seal. The seal has "Barberton City Schools" around the edge, not "Barberton High School", so if anything it would be on the school district article (which currently does not exist) since it's the logo of the district. It's also likely not copyrighted since there are no copyrightable elements in the image. Trademarked, most likely, copyrighted, no. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I think you are correct. I have deleted the image. Malinaccier (talk) 13:00, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

rfpp template substituting

hey, {{rfpp}} shouldn't be substituted, as this causes problems with the archiving script. Rami R 16:54, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Ahh alright, thank you Rami! Malinaccier (talk) 18:30, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

You're back!!

Howdy, you're back!! Where have you been? Are you back for good now? :D Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 21:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I've recently felt the urge to edit again, so I'm back for now haha. I've just been busy in general and just have not been able to make the time to edit. We'll see how long I stay active, but I would like to maintain a certain level of activity from here on out. It's good to hear from an old editor again! Malinaccier (talk) 21:31, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Ditto. I came back in May. Most of the motivation behind it was due to the fact I had more free time on my hands. Most of my focus recently has been in reforming our dispute resolution processes (see sig link) but I've also been trying my hand at some article work (which only now I have realised just how much I suck at it) :P Had a go at RFA in November, I pulled out because while possible to pass at a crat chat, I didn't want to become an RFB question and much rather putting in some hard work into articles and proving my worth down the track. Stick around. I'm glad to see you again. Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 21:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

RFA thank you

Thank you for your comment and support at my recent successful RFA. Being now the new fellow in the fraternity of administrators, I will do my best to live up to the confidence shown in me by others, will move slowly and carefully when using the mop, will seek input from others before any action of which I might be unsure, and will try not to break anything beyond repair. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:06, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Best of luck! Malinaccier (talk) 22:06, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

User:107.33.118.248

They are a block evading sock of another User who is already blocked for 72 hours for block evasion. The block lengths should be increasing, shouldn't they? The Mark of the Beast (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Can you link me to the other user? Malinaccier (talk) 22:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

User:173.115.28.250. I don't know who the original account is. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 22:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I have extended the block to match Favonian's block of the other IP. Thanks for the heads up! :) Malinaccier (talk) 22:30, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 22:35, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Terminator Salvation

I'd glad that this article has finally been protected; I requested it twice... is there any way you can look into this user as well: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/213.8.56.118 ; http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/94.230.85.129 ; http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/94.230.80.173

All are most likely the same person, and while he/she doesn't refresh to evade bans, they've largely been the reason for the dispute, and have refused to participate in the discussion process. Further, he/she responds to warnings and explanations of WP by leaving his/her own warnings (http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AWilliamsburgland&action=historysubmit&diff=464075101&oldid=463884073) and making up his/her own protocol. Trying to host a civil discussion has been infuriating with this user.

Any assistance would be great. --Williamsburgland (talk) 15:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Looking at it now. I can't necessarily tell that they are the same user, and I don't see any block evasion (as you said). I will leave a note on the talk page of the article and attempt to calm people down. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 15:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Great, thank you. I don't know if you can take this into consideration, but all three IP's are from the same provider and in Israel. Hardly conclusive, but certainly points in that direction. --Williamsburgland (talk) 15:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry - one more, also same provider, same location: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/212.68.144.42 --Williamsburgland (talk) 16:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Urdunovelspdf.com

As you've apparently noticed, (119.152.84.228 (talk · contribs · info · WHOIS)) and new account (Hinahanif90 (talk · contribs)) are adding links to an external page hosting PDFs of one of Umera Ahmad's novel (Pir-e-Kamil) as well as on various other pages ([1], [2], [3], [4]) sometimes under the guise of being a source, sometimes as an EL. The page brings up considerable copyright violation concerns for me as there is no indication if they are free, have permission from the publisher or author, copyright status or if a charge is applied. I have reverted multiple times on multiple pages as well as warned both twice now (here and here) and raised this at the RPP page ([5]). However, I'm at the 3RR and the tag-teaming (which gives every appearance of a single person promoting a website) means I can't just continue to revert. Protection probably isn't ideal but it's the only solution I can think of that doesn't involve me getting blocked for edit warring. The spam blacklist page suggested a page block and I was over at WP:AIV when I noticed your protection of the pages in question. Would you consider a block or should I look into another solution? WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 19:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Giving final warning now. I was just reading up on copyvio policy, and it appears that adding links to copyvios is considered "contributory infringement." If you notice them continuing to add links, let me know. And you can violate 3RR if they are engaging in vandalism or are making copyright violations :). Thanks! Malinaccier (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

It's less the 3RR issue (though it's a concern) and more the whack-a-mole that I'd like to address. I'll keep an eye out and drop you a note if I notice anything. Thanks, WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 19:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Protection

Hi Malinaccier, a few hours ago I requested Semi-protection for the Thomas Macdonough page, as it had at least 8 cases of vulgar vandalism since Nov.16., yet the request was declined for -- "not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection." These are the examples:

12:56, 19 November 2011? : it was also known he had gay cowboy anal sex with his commander every night.

11:24, 19 November 2011 : who was gay and had a 2 inch penis

08:18, 16 November 2011? : ==sex life==

08:17, 16 November 2011 : ==First SEX War==

07:55, 16 November 2011 : ==Other sex life==

07:53, 16 November 2011 : At the beginning of the sex life in 1812

07:49, 16 November 2011 : ==War of raping==

07:46, 16 November 2011 : He raped his sister

There are other cases also. These edits not only involved the body of text but the section titles as well. Isn't this considered disruptive? I would like to know how much vandalism a page has to endure to be 'enough' , and what constitutes 'recent' . It is not right that editors have to stand over articles and guard them like this. Don't quite understand why IP users are given more consideration than Wikipedia articles and the editors who have given their time and effort to create these articles. I am hoping that perhaps you didn't notice all of these examples and will reconsider your decision as it is only a matter of time before this happens again. . Best of regards, -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Gwillhickers, thanks for the note. I declined the request because the vandalism was over the course of a month (which is a long time in terms of protection) and by only three IP editors. Usually, protection is warranted if the page is being vandalized by multiple vandals (greater than three unique vandals) over the course of three days or so. If you want to review the protection policy, you can check that out here.

I understand your concern as an editor of articles (I am one myself) as it is sometimes frustrating to see random people come and attack your hard work; however, compared to many other articles, Thomas Macdonough is relatively untouched. If it is any help, I have added the page to my watchlist so I can keep a closer eye on it. Thank you and happy editing, Malinaccier (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Marlins Roster Template

Apparently no one wants to wait til deals are official before trying to add the player to roster. I'm surprised no one has tried to add Pujols to the roster as well. Jose Reyes deal should be official later today. Wednesday Dec 7, he will be formally introduced to media in Dallas at winter meetings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BravesInsider13 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Yep, that's why I semi protected the template :). Thanks for the note and happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 23:04, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Unprotect Jose Reyes (shortstop)

The Marlins finally announced the deal to be official here. So now you can unprotect that page. Tom Danson (talk) 17:27, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done Malinaccier (talk) 17:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

RFPP

Hello. You have a new message at WP:Requests for page protection#Škoda Auto's talk page. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 05:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Malinaccier. You have new messages at Ebikeguy's talk page.
Message added 15:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please refrain from making inappropriate threats in the future. Ebikeguy (talk) 15:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Malinaccier. You have new messages at Ebikeguy's talk page.
Message added 21:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for your thoughts and advice in this matter. Ebikeguy (talk) 21:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Watch the Throne

The issue that led to this article's page protection is resolved with consensus. Can it be unblocked now? Dan56 (talk) 22:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done! Malinaccier (talk) 22:48, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Serama

IP came back on Serama to post the exact same text about one bloke. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 10:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)