User talk:Luk/Archives/2012/01

Previous conversations prior to 1 January 2012 (UTC) are archived there.

User talk:99.90.197.87

Well, it had been reported to AIV, so that was the context in which I evaluated it. I'll keep it in mind if they do it again. (And I can't figure out the "ethnic slur", either). Daniel Case (talk) 13:34, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Despotate of Arta

Hi,

I'm new here but I run my own wiki, www.wappenwiki.org, where my aim is to research the most historical accurate coat of arms of historical states.

I don't want to edit pages myself here yet but I've noticed a few errors here and there. One shield, while accurate, it's assigned to the wrong country/person. It's the coat of arms of the Bua Shpata family, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gjin_Bua_Shpata, this is actually the coat of arms of Pal Engjëlli, http://www.zemrashqiptare.net/article/Speciale/23082/, http://www.ngw.nl/heraldrywiki/index.php?title=File:Al-fdc2005.jpg.

Here is the real coat of arms of the Bua Shpata family,

http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/73653_153145078060877_152920801416638_231444_5753140_a.jpg http://www.ngw.nl/heraldrywiki/index.php?title=File:Al-fdc2002.jpg

Best regards Joakim — Preceding unsigned comment added by WappenWiki (talk • contribs) 14:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 15:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

1 year 35 days 3 hours

?? That beats another admin I know, who frequently does 1001 days. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

hehe :D. I wanted something longer than a year (because kids get usually bored at the same date). I figured what the hell, so I added a bit to all my block times (24h -> 31h, 48h -> 55h, 1M -> 1M 55h, and the infamous creative "1 year 35 days 3 hours" :D). The beauty of scripting the block page :P -- Luk ^talk 15:20, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Btw, I feel that 1001 days is a bit too long, the IP might get reallocated before that, I try not to block for more than 2 years. -- Luk ^talk 15:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, you can try telling that to HJ Mitchell if you like: he's the 1001 days man. Actually I occasionally block a school IP for 3 years if it has a long history of blocks over a long period. I reckon that (1) a school IP is likely to stay static for a long time and (2) many schools produce between 99% and 100% vandalism, and if history shows that is so for a particular school then in the long run it saves trouble to block for a long while. However, I think it is unlikely I would ever do that for anything other than a school, and even then I doubt I would ever go beyond three years. However, today I came across two different cases of indefinite IP blocks, including one admin who indef-blocked two IPs that had only about two months worth of editing between them. I do wonder at that. Anyway, at least 1 year 35 days 3 hours caught my attention and gave me a little amusement. Keep up the good work. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Jim1138

I think you reverted my BLP revert in Rob Parker (sports journalist). I do that from time to time as well. Cheers! Jim1138 (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Many thanks

Captain-n00dle has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Captain n00dle\^Talk 13:31, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem! -- Luk ^talk 13:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: AIV

OK, understood. We still have to keep our tabs on that user, I have a hunch that he might continue on doing so. Blake Gripling (talk) 14:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a good chance of that. Since we usually catch them quickly, it is fair to let them know before. -- Luk ^talk 15:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

And yeah, he did continue on adding copyvio content; it was directly lifted from this page, to be specific. Blake Gripling (talk) 01:32, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:IPvandal

In this edit, it looks like you removed the edit filter log ... was that intentional, or an accidental omission? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:34, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Nope, that was entirely unintentional, sorry!!! I have fixed it. -- Luk ^talk 22:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - I didn't want to restore it myself until I checked with you, in case there was a reason I had overlooked. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:10, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I killed the servers at each revision (despite testing on a sandbox first!) -- Luk ^talk 22:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Soft and Stout

Well, it's pretty obvious to me that the guy's announced intention is disruption. So it's a matter of pay now or pay later. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:53, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Tell Bugs that I am thankful for him

Baseball Bugs just saved me from making an arse out of myself with that well-intentioned whistle blowing of his. The moment that you responded I was in the middle of making another edit to ChristianHistory's page where I was about to give some rather ill-informed advice. The block had prevented me from saving it, but it also gave me time to reflect and look at the site's policies and guidelines. It was then that I found something startling: "....Unblock requests that contain personal attacks or incivility against others will be declined." I was honestly about to suggest to C.H that he should attack R-41 in his next appeal attempt.

Oh, and thank you Luk for doing what Bugs asked. With out your quick re-responces, well, I'd be digging two graves real fast.--Soft and Stout (talk) 15:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 11:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I was a little worried when you first admitted that you made a mistake, as I wasn't sure what you meant by "mistake", whether it was the sentence length or me getting sentenced at all. In other news, I have a gut feeling that I have been lurking around user talk pages and the guidelines for a little too long. But alls well that ends well, toodle-oo. --Soft and Stout (talk) 13:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

What is the policy for repeated new puppet accounts?

Hi, regarding User talk:98.148.213.201 what is the policy for repeated new puppet accounts. Any remedy at all? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 23:23, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 12:06, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. As it turned out the user (or an alter ego) actually responded. In the past the other user had been 99% silent. So the new account was given the benefit of the doubt and hopefully it will end now. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 14:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

IP Address has reached beyond the last warning

I believe that on the IP Address 24.236.168.140 talk page, you gave a level 4 warning to before for violating Wikipedia's no original research policy has created more orignal research edits. I may be mistaken, so could you please review this IP Address again? Thanks! --Michaelzeng7 (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

80.79.208.20

You gave a warning to 80.79.208.20 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) but since then he's done the same edit twice more. He obviously doesn't understand the concepts of WP:OWN and WP:COI, so I fear that it is going to need the application of your administrative clout to make him understand. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but I can't really block them without making sure they know about the specific policies involved, otherwise they might come back later making the same mistakes. If they continue, you won't have trouble having them blocked at AIV, now that they are blocked. -- Luk ^talk 15:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

You gave him a link to Wikipedia:Edit warring, and he'd been given that link in one of his earlier warnings, and despite that he's violated WP:3RR today, so I would have thought that it's getting to the stage where you could reasonably block? - David Biddulph (talk) 15:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

They were at 2 reverts when I checked. They are now blocked for 31 hours. -- Luk ^talk 15:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. A shame that it's been necessary, but I hope that it might make him heed the numerous warnings and read the policies. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually I have told him/her several times about the policies involved but he/she either doesn't read what is written or doesn't care. I don't think a block of 31 hours will solve the problem. This has been going on for many weeks: I first got into a revert war with him/her over it on 16 September last (at one point he/she sent me an E-mail protesting that, as I did not work for LUL and he/she did, I could not get question his edits!!) and he/she is very determined. This has been discussed on and on at the article's talk page and also at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_Railways#London_Underground. -- Alarics (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Next time, we'll escalate the block length, but 31 hours is pretty much standard for a first admin intervention (it's even harsher than the usual 24 hours). As I said, with some luck we will be able to talk some sense into them. -- Luk ^talk 16:40, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

That being said, I understand your frustration :/. However, we can't overlook the possibility to turn them into a positive contributor. -- Luk ^talk 16:43, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

As a matter of idle curiosity, would I be right in guessing that in this case there would be no difference between 24 hours and 31 hours, as both would expire during tomorrow's 24 hour closedown? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Woops. I still haven't gotten my mind around the fact that we're closed tomorrow... -- Luk^talk 17:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

That IP

Now what (in response to this which was a response to this)?—Ryulong (竜龙) 11:22, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

The guy took the bait and got blocked (I commented before he left you a message) but in all seriousness, edit warring over block templates is silly. The block log is much more accurate. -- Luk ^talk 11:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

User:92.13.24.90 is in the same IP-range as recently blocked vandal User:92.5.146.129

And it's the same type of vandalism; changing heights of well known mountains. Please block, and thanks in advance. Qwrk (talk) 13:28, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't hesitate to report them to WP:AIV if they start again. Unfortunately, a rangeblock won't be feasible. -- Luk ^talk 14:08, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Huggle and illegal(I mean disallowed) moves

Please that's the reason I had the note on my talk page (I am talking about Huggle and newbies). And would you do something about this. This guy has actually accepted his own submission. (I wanted to do it myself but I am not a admin sadly.sob......sob......sob.)--Ankit Maity ^{Talk • contribs} 16:15, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 17:11, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Your rangeblock - too short?

• 87.220.0.0/16 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

I believe 3 hours is too short given that these socks have been spamming for longer than that, unless these aren't related to this range.Jasper Deng (talk) 23:49, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I admit this is a first shot (there are other people editing there) after a quick look on 3 accounts. I'll look again. Thanks for pointing me to the category! -- Luk ^talk 23:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll respect your judgement on your final decision on this. Cheers, and thanks!Jasper Deng (talk) 23:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

That should deal with him in a more permanent way. Is late where I live, but don't hesitate to reblock if they find a workaround. -- Luk ^talk 00:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but I wholly agree. Thanks!Jasper Deng (talk) 00:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

hY LUK

Hello it is vnukovo2801 i was very angry and i took it out on my articles i do not want to delete them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vnukovo2801 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 17:24, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

File talk:Trumbo and Cleo 1947 HUAC hearings.png

Hi. WP:CSD#G8 does not apply to talk pages for Commons files. Please undelete this. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Transfer of images to Commons - checking license

Also, please remember to verify that the license is correct on Commons; File:Spg columns iso.jpg is cc-by-3.0, but Commons improperly lists it as cc-zero. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

LOL!

Thanks for the proper welcome! I was starting to think I would never get one! ;) --RazorEyeEdits (talk) 13:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

File:William-Thomas-Best.jpg

This was created by me in 2010 on en.wikipedia.org. It was uploaded with a full record of where it appeared. A Russian wikipedian copied that image to Commons in 2011 from en.wikipedia.org without any reference to the initial uploading by me in 2010. Please could you restore this image on en.wikipedia.org so that the copy on Commons can be properly referenced? This is not the first time that somebody has dishonestly uploaded an image to Commons from en.wikipedia.org without proper attribution or sourcing. The sourcing was carefully given in the file I uploaded with dates. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 19:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 19:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm Mathsci on fr.wiki, commons and de.wiki. The source on commons says it comes from en.wiki and the labelling is the one I invented (I still have the original on my computer). I created this with a large number of other files (image and audio) for Clavier-Übung III in 2010. If we can restore the version here then a clean move of that version with the attributions and sources can be made to commons. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 19:27, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for adding that. (It must have taken me a long time to find that on flickr.) What is still missing is the creative commons license from flickr which must have been there on the original version on en.wikipedia.org. I'll add that on commons. Mathsci (talk)

I found the correct Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 license and have added it on Commons. If you see a file on Commons where it says it's been copied from here it's probably worth checking that the sourcing, permissions and attribution have been added over, particularly if as here it was uploaded from flickr. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 19:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi !

Hello, For a months i have an edit wars with one person that opens alot of users and try to open an edit wars against me. He never gave his proof, He always tried to block me and tell alot of lies on me. Now, alot of users understans my situation and they help me but he continues to vadalize pages in Wikipedia. We are trying all the time to explain to him but he doesn't understand or listen to us. He he gets blocked he get for a week or 2 days, but i think that he need to get more,like 3-5 month (i'm not kidding... he's really annoying and i think he does it this on purpose.--Friends147 (talk) 14:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Meta note

Please see meta:User talk:Puffin Thanks. MBisanz ^talk 23:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Grmbl, that's the first time someone asks me for this... Thanks, I wouldn't have noticed the problem! -- Luk ^contrib 08:05, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry for the inconvenience. MBisanz ^talk 14:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I was a bit bored so I've updated my userpage: [1]. They'll have no excuses next time :P. -- Luk ^contrib 14:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

page Jim Mitteager

I am Wendy Mitteager, the daughter of Jim Mitteager. I know for a fact, that the information in this page is incorrect. I tried to change it and a user keeps changing it back and has now reported me. I owe it to my father to correct the false information about him. What should I do to correct it, or at least indicate that the Los Angeles magazine article is based on false information from an interview?

Just because information is published in a magazine, doesn't make it true. Thanks Wendy Mitteager wendyhop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendyhop (talk • contribs) 23:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 23:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Get Crunk

Just out of curiosity, those alcohol bottles are made to be a joke, right? Jarrod D. Johnson 05:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjj1987 (talk • contribs)

Obviously :P I never edit under the influence ;) -- Luk ^contrib 08:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Varghesejacob

I'm be mindful to decline this request given the similarity between the reply to my question and this statement by User:Vrghs jacob over on commons. I'll also ask User:Moonriddengirl to take a look as I notice you're not very active at the moment. Dpmuk (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Madone17

Hi Luk, this user, Madone 17 has been creating trouble for past few days. He has been creating inappropriate pages with no content or duplicating other articles, besides adding unsourced claims and original research. And he is continuing to do so despite multiple warnings. What to do now? Johannes003 (talk) 14:03, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleting F8

Hi! You deleted some ogg-files as F8. If you check the information on Commons on File:Hurricane Grace (1991).ogg and File:Epimetheus (moon).ogg you will notice that a lot of the information was not transfered when the file was moved to Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 19:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh damn!! I use a tool and manually checked the license, I did not expect the special information template... huho... -- Luk ^contrib 22:53, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I think I have fixed all the corresponding files... Ouch, that hurt... -- Luk ^contrib 00:00, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Cool :-) --MGA73 (talk) 07:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Commons licensing

Thanks for letting me know, I think it was a bug. I'll keep a closer eye on things in future. Cloudbound (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

hi

just so you know, i was not trying to vandalize war. i was just trying to insert my viewpoint which i think only about 500 people have in this world. i am trying to be informational. sorry about any difficulties i may have caused.

thank you, lynn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.69.96.202 (talk) 22:01, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 22:06, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Serbs

You deleted my change and returned to previous version that also hasn't any reference. In former Yougoslavia about 1 milion people died during WW2. About 500 000 were Serbs and 230 000 were Croats. About 300 000 Serbs died in Independent state of Croatia. So can you tell me how on earth number of Serbian victims of genocide in Croatia are placed at 500,000 people (whole of Croatia) and just in one camp Jasenovac 700 000? Does this make ony sense? And please with this formal messages. You are promoting nationalist lie which is also illogical. And "is not consistent with our policy of verifiability" and doesn't "cite a reliable source". --Pp.zg.hr (talk) 22:43, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 22:53, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Serbs

Then how about that you delete previous version also? I'm not that into truth to try find any reference but this numbers are clearly a lie. I know that in the middle of 80s Serbian mathematician Bogoljub Kočović and Croatian demography expert Vladimir Žerjavić both made independent studies and came to more or less the same numbers. The number of dead Serbs in entire Yugoslavia was about 500 000. Died in combat or in camps. As you introduced yourself as authority the burden of veriability should be on your shoulders. At least remove this ludicrous numbers. --Pp.zg.hr (talk) 23:04, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Abuse Filter on the Article Feedback Tool

Hey there :). You're being contacted because you're an edit filter manager, At the moment, we're developing Version 5 of the Article Feedback Tool, which you may or may not have heard about. If you haven't; for the first time, this will involve a free-text box where readers can submit comments :). Obviously, there's going to be junk, and we want to minimise that junk. To do so, we're working the Abuse Filter into the tool.

For this to work, we need people to write and maintain filters. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look at the discussion here and the attached docs, and comment and contribute! Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hardblock

I have posted a request for help at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Requests about a range block you placed on 213.251.128.0/18 back in 2009. I don't know whether you can help. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice! Replied there. -- Luk ^contrib 12:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

File source problem with File:PZL P7 (2).jpg

Thank you for uploading File:PZL P7 (2).jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:28, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Happy 7th Wikipedia Anniversary to you :)

Hi Luk :) Greetings on your (belated) 7th Wikipedia Anniversary since your joining of Wikipedia on 7 September, 2005! Best Wishes. Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:53, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

EPiServer

Hi Luk!

I am trying to set up a new page for the cms EPiServer. It's quite big now in several countries (for example Sweden, Norway, Great Britain and growing in for example USA). I saw you have deleted it back in the days (2007) but I will give it a new try now.

Best regards

Joshuasan Joshuasan (talk) 07:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Fine by me! (Sorry for the delay answering that) -- Luk ^contrib 12:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Removal of CheckUser access

Well, it's been a fun ride, but since I'm mostly inactive nowadays and there are plenty of active checkusers on en.wp, I don't really need the flag anymore. I'll probably reconsider when I come back, but I don't feel comfortable having the CheckUser flag on my account at the moment. -- Luk ^contrib 09:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Uw-vandalism4im

Template:Uw-vandalism4im has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Fish^Barking? 02:01, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Copying the message to the project talk page, I'm not much in a position to comment at the moment. -- Luk ^contrib 08:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)