User talk:MaxSem/Archives/September 2015

mailzzang+aus

I receive message from mailzzang+aus that he have intention apology about his behavior like legal threats but he can`t appeal because you block his authority Send e-mail and edit his own page. Preferentially, so, Can you release his authority e-mail and edit his page?--Altostratus (talk) 01:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

They have UTRS for appeals in such situations. Max Semenik (talk) 02:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

ko:사용자토론:mailzzang+aus see here

Another user also mentioned me that he will also put his apology about his fault and mistake that destroy Wikipedia's rule and his friend's honor.--Altostratus (talk) 03:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

And, here.--Altostratus (talk) 06:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

TeaLover1996 sock

Hello Max, just thought you would be interested to see this SPI I opened - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TeaLover1996. I believe Sociable Computer (talk · contribs) is being used to circumvent your block on TeaLover1996. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 13:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - I don't consider myself an expert on him to make a judgement, however. But yeah, looks not unlike him:) Max Semenik (talk) 16:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:DotTrace screenshot.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DotTrace screenshot.png. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Unblock Request- User:Psthomas

"Because you keep on posting the same rant in multiple unblock requests, refusing to address others' comments, your talk page access has been withdrawn."

The time when you blocked the access page was while i was editing it properly. Nobody seemed to get to the right point(Failure to communicate) or have suggested anything that was healthy except User:Huon. User:Huon has informed that posting back an article caused the initial block. I will like to clear up the fact that I have quoted the intend in the Edit Summary while posting it back - To re-write and make the article better according to suggestions. But only faced speedy deletions.

Still I feel I have been wronged. You may look at the below links to see the repeated or consistent poor judgments which is also a breach of basic policies. https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Knanaya&action=history

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Knanaya&oldid=677833302 which was partial revert of https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Knanaya&oldid=677809116

After this a series of speedy deletions where posted by the user on my articles. The culmination of events before blocking my talk page access can be seen through vivid actions.

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Knanaya&oldid=678165519 ( 19:17, 27 August 2015) and my block log on 19:19, 27 August 2015 a not satisfied block 19:20, 27 August 2015

I didn't respond to these, considering them as a child play.

Then on 18:24, 28 August 2015, seemingly from a disruptive origin, an indefinite block. This is when I felt I should respond to make a wrong - right.

Even if the second part of my tell-all story doesn't interest you. I request to re-review the indefinite block put based on 3 articles.

I would also like to notice you that a deleted article of mine is now wrongly redirected to a different person Thomas Mar Athanasius, If anything can be done kindly do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.213.16.147 (talk) 18:23, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't quite understand what exactly is the point of this message, but let me explain my position: I have revoked your talk page access because you continuously claimed being bullied in response to valid and polite concerns about copyright violations. That's not how editors are supposed to behave. Also, they're not allowed to evade their blocks so I blocked this IP. Max Semenik (talk) 18:32, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't know any other way to contact with the blocking administrator, this is not an block evasion. I understand their might have been some copyright violations. The most criticized one was Chekottu Ashaan. The source material was available freely on multiple sites as a public short info and deleted as times passes by. Eg. http://www.kuwaitmarthoma.com/links/ep14.pdf, http://www.stthomasmarthomachurch.org/library/chekottu_asan.pdf, http://www.horebmtc.org/hp_wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/chekottu_asan.pdf, http://www.marthomaparishsharjah.com/downloads/chekottu_aasan.pdf Because it was transmitted as a non-regualted material, I used it with citations. Like father, mother, works...etc. I understand to do such was wrong. But only after User:Huon explained it.

The point of this message is to re-review the "indefinite block" and other activities which I feel was from an error, even after acknowledgement of possible copyright violation. Thank you for your time.

I warned you about block evasion, you immediately evaded again. Per WP:OFFER, I'm not considering any unblock requests from you next 6 months. Max Semenik (talk) 07:50, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Ferociouslettuce

Please note block-evading sock- or meatpuppet edits at this IP. Ferociouslettuce claimed on their talk page that this was a "roommate", but the style of writing (i.e. using "[bmk]" to refer to me) and the claim that I outed them (i.e. I warned the IP about socking when it was obviously Ferociouslettuce edited logged out) would seem to argue that it's FL and not a "roommate". BMK (talk) 01:59, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, banhammer applied. Max Semenik (talk) 02:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. BMK (talk) 02:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

It looks like your intention to prevent FL from editing their talk page didnt work. They just made a bunch of edits, including a partial outing and some more qiasi-NPAs. BMK (talk) 14:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

HJ Mitchell took care of it while oversighting the outing. BMK (talk) 14:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Will this person never get a clue - now the IP you blocked is claiming I'm an "admin sockpuppet" - wrong on both accounts, of course. Could TPA be revoked? BMK (talk) 20:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

It is already. Max Semenik (talk) 20:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Socking/block evading again with 208.54.37.156‎. BMK (talk) 20:13, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Blocked. Next time, to to avoid me being unavailable, please report obvious socks to WP:AIV, less obvious to WP:ANI or WP:SPI. Max Semenik (talk) 06:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Will do. In the meantime, thanks. BMK (talk) 06:53, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to subscribe to the edit filter mailing list

Hi, as a user in the edit filter manager user group we wanted to let you know about the new wikipedia-en-editfilters mailing list. As part of our recent efforts to improve the use of edit filters on the English Wikipedia it has been established as a venue for internal discussion by edit filter managers regarding private filters (those only viewable by administrators and edit filter managers) and also as a means by which non-admins can ask questions about hidden filters that wouldn't be appropriate to discuss on-wiki. As an edit filter manager we encourage you to subscribe; the more users we have in the mailing list the more useful it will be to the community. If you subscribe we will send a short email to you through Wikipedia to confirm your subscription, but let us know if you'd prefer another method of verification. I'd also like to take the opportunity to invite you to contribute to the proposed guideline for edit filter use at WP:Edit filter/Draft and the associated talk page. Thank you! Sam Walton (talk) and MusikAnimal ^talk 18:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Responding

Hi Max Semenik, I am responding as you requested. What's the actual issue at stake here because to be honest, I did not get it? (All the texts that I added have a proper citation.) Could you explain it to me using a plain language. Thanks in advance. MaronitePride (talk) 15:59, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

The ANI thread makes it perfectly clear, let's continue there. Max Semenik (talk) 18:47, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

About Recent Block of User:Grammophone

Hello MaxSem

Many thanks for blocking "User:Grammophone" for his Edit warring, disruption, NPOV editing. He has been a menace and a sabotage on the page Galerie Gmurzynska. I reported him earlier yesterday at the "Edit Warring Noticeboard" before he made the final 3 reverts. Earlier in October 2014, he was warned and blocked twice. But the issue is that, he keeps coming back after each block. You set the current block to expire on 10 October 2015. He will still come back as he did before. 95% of his edits are on the page Galerie Gmurzynska. He might also open a new wiki account and change IP to continue editing. I strongly believe he should be blocked or banned indefinite since he has continued to come back to cause havoc on the page. His IP should also be blocked or checked. Finally, is there any possibility to request for "Full or Temporary" Page protection on the page?Xandyxyz (talk) 04:03, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey, I just revoked their talk page access. If they evade their block or otherwise violate WP:SOCK, please report it to WP:SPI. I don't think it would be fair to increase their block right now, but please let me know if they engage in inconstructive behavior in the future. Max Semenik (talk) 18:49, 26 September 2015 (UTC)