Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Faustian (talk | contribs) at 14:02, 8 May 2013 (→Nationalist editing issues). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: ].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Valyrian language

Thank you for spotting all the bits I've been stupidly overlooking ;o) — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:14, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to you for adding all the complicated-looking linguistic content, I wouldn't know where to begin :-)  Sandstein  19:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem; the constructed languages are one (well, three) of the many things I like about Game of Thrones, so I follow the blogs and articles about them. Were I to spend more time getting my head round the languages, I could probably expand the language samples better too, but that's not something I can do whilst watching TV at the same time ;o)

I'm not entirely convinced that the speculation I put into the article would fall foul of WP:NOR or WP:V, though, given David J. Peterson has effectively endorsed the speculation, which is why I added it; d'you not think that's verification enough, given the wording of my addition? — OwenBlacker (Talk) 10:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

PS: Could you throw a {{Talkback}} link onto my Talk: page when you reply, please? I'm not very good at keeping on top of my watchlist ;o) Thanks!

Sure. I'm copying this to the article talk page and am replying there.  Sandstein  13:04, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Good plan; you're right: it makes more sense to keep the conversation there, rather than here. I've replied there. —OwenBlacker (Talk) 13:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

This is just to express a wealth of gratitude. Never again will I post a word that may remotely seem hurtful either to a fellow editor or to a subject. I'd like to discuss the topic ban too however I am in no rush. I am busy in my non-editing life at the moment!!! Cheers Sandstein. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 12:15, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

User:John sffs and IP:177.85.242.4

It would appear that user:John sffs is using IP:177.85.242.4 to revert other editors, thus avoiding 3rr. I will be posting warnings on "both" editors talk pages. Perhaps these "editors" should be watched by an Admin. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

That looks like a matter for WP:SPI.  Sandstein  17:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

RfC Close?

Hey Sand,

I'm fishing for an admin to close an RfC. If you've got time, take a gander. If not, no biggie. I'll look elsewhere. Thanks in advance for the time and attention. NickCT (talk) 13:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I recommend that you list that in the appropriate section at WP:AN. I'm unlikely to have time for it though, and it does not help that I find the subject matter very uninteresting. Sorry.  Sandstein  17:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Completely understand. NickCT (talk) 18:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

SPI

There is an SPI case that I would like you to review . It concerns Evlekis, and considering the full of circumstances, you might be better suited to determine the necessity and duration of a block. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:43, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• This was a unique situation, and your handling of the blocks just made sense. I appreciate your timely and thoughtful response there. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Stopped by to say the same thing - thanks for offering your perspective. Not that SPI clerks aren't capable enough, but there was a lot on the table there. WilliamH (talk) 17:24, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Keep up the good work at SPI - not having a great deal of antisock expertise, I've often had to refer people there, and I'm glad to see that it works.  Sandstein  19:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Copy of Gigablast article

Gigablast was a well-known alternative search engine back in the days. I think its a pity that we don't not have an article on it.

Looks like the article was deleted by you back in 2008 after a short afd. I beeliv them to be notably and there are reliable sources around Google Books search for 'gigablast', List of Gigablast in the News and .

I want to write an article about them. Can I have a copy of what was there before copied to userspace? I'm not a big fan of doing duplicate work, so if the afd was just about missing references I can add thus now. Runarb (talk) 12:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, userfied at User:Runarb/Gigablast.  Sandstein  21:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Nationalist editing issues

An anon has gotten active on a single article, being disruptive. I've caught him blatently misreprsenting a source. Perhaps the article needs partial protection form anons? I'll copy what I wrote on the article's talk page:

Here, pg. 230: . The original source stated ""In Czestochowa, on May 27, after an unknown assailant wounded one of their comrades, Haller's troops joined a furious crowd in a three hour rampage..." An anon editor changed the wording to "In Czestochowa, after one of their comrades was wounded by a Jewsih (sic) extrimist supporting the Bolshevik cause: from the original "In Czestochowa, after one of their comrades was wounded, Haller's troops..." This is an obvious falsification of what was written in the original source, not to mention the usual excuse for antisemtic violence being the Jews' fault for being Communists. This falsification is the work of an anon editor with a single purpose (could be a blocked sockpuppet, who knows?), as seen by the edit history: . He started by removing referenced info, then adding info that wasn't in the sources or unreferenced claims, etc. Faustian (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, that's a bit too unstructured for me, you need at least to link to the article this is about. Please see WP:GRA and retry.  Sandstein  21:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry! Here is the article: . The anon began by removing referenced information: . Since then he has been changing what the referenced info is, as proven in the above example when he simply falsified what had been written in the referenced source. He has also been adding unreferenced "excuses" and such as seen here: . He also seems to be getting increasingly angry and rude on the talk page: .Faustian (talk) 01:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Update: and here he is again - adding info that is completely not in the source: . Here is another example of this anon blatantly claiming that a source states the opposite of what it actually states: .I'm not editing there now in order to avoid 3R restrictions. Faustian (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2013 (UTC)