User talk:KrakatoaKatie/Archive 35

Archive 30

←

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

→

Archive 40

Suspected sockpuppet

Hi, I have noticed that a user, GWiliams123 has created a page, VergeArmy, that has been deleted before. I noticed that the user who created this page before, VergeArmy was a sockpuppet of Amkhariya, so I suspect that this user may also be a sockpuppet. I'm not sure of the proper procedure for this, so I thought I'd notify you here since you were the admin to comment on the previous investigation. Thanks LoudLizard (📞 | contribs | ✉) 17:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@LoudLizard: The place for that quickly, when it's clear, is AIV. The place for investigation is WP:SPI, in this case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amkhariya. Your guy was blocked for socking about an hour ago, and I'll tag it shortly. :-) Katie^talk 19:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Request for comment: Lead sentence for train or railway stations

In what way should the lead sentence of articles dealing with railway stations or train stations be fashioned? See discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#Request for comment: Identification of train or railway stations in the lead. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 22:19, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Request

Hi Katie, I've been handling a lot of vandalism lately, (along with test edits, new users who just didn't know better and all manner of miscues). I've seen you at WP:AIV (where I'm currently 'batting a 1000'), you've blocked quite a few of my entries there. Anyway, I thought I'd like to give Rollback a try and you're listed as an admin who handles such requests. So... I'm requesting. Please & thank you. Cheers - ^theWOLFchild 14:30, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Cool beans! That was quick. Thanks. - ^theWOLFchild 14:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Requests_for_page_protection#Anonymous_.28group.29

Hey Katie, what is the process to appeal your decision ?--ChristopheT (talk) 01:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@ChristophThomas: I see you're discussing it there, and that's the way to go. Pinging you so you wouldn't think I was ignoring you. :-) Katie^talk 14:46, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

thank you for elaborating --ChristopheT (talk) 15:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For semi-protecting my user page. Thanks, I appreciate that. Ches (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Help

@KrakatoaKatie: Katie, I need your help. An anonymous user using several IPs is engaged in edit warring on my Talk page, as changed the official language on the article The Gambia, without credible sources, and against the consensus of the community. And has shown same kind of disruptive behaviour on pt-wiki. See Talk:The Gambia#English or Arabic. But since I never reported anybody for edit warring, I feel like I am strained, and the same user has been slandering me. --B.Lameira (talk) 17:32, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@B.Lameira: I can't do anything about pt.wiki, but I semi-protected your talk page for 48 hours. The article itself is semi'd indefinitely; I don't see the need to protect the article talk page right now, but if it gets bad, RFPP is over there. :-) Katie^talk 17:56, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: I did not mean that when speaking of the article's talk page. I requested page protection on The Gambia, because the anonymous user did that to the article The Gambia. One, more question, can you do anything about addressing other people on other wikis? --B.Lameira (talk) 18:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Nope. Sorry. :-( Katie^talk 18:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I might want to report user for edit warring, but it is like too complicated for me, as I never done it before. :( --B.Lameira (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Go to WP:AN3 - it walks you through it. Katie^talk 18:11, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Unwatchlistable Article

Hi Katie, in action [1]. That must be one of the few un-watchlistable or unwikilinkable articles of WP ;-) ? I guess it does not matter right, as it is a redirect anyway. It was confusing at first but there are various insertions of non-relevant stuff made by IP. Reported to AIV using a diff instead of a usual wikilink. Cheers, Horseless Headman (talk) 18:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC).

@Horseless Headman: Try asking at WP:VPT. It's weird, for sure. Katie^talk 18:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Katie, I will. Horseless Headman (talk) 18:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC).

Redlink-removing dynamic IP aka User:Cnslrken2

Can anything be done to stop this person? I'm getting tired of repeatedly reverting their edits, and I'm sure you're getting tired of repeatedly blocking them and protecting the pages. I don't understand techie stuff, but is it not possible to block all their addresses for longer periods? Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ghmyrtle: Do you have a list of IPs? I can't rangeblock based on the limited info I can see in the article histories. If he keeps at it with more addresses, he gives us more rope but we'll have to put up with some disruption in the interim. Also, is there a long-term abuse case on this guy yet? It seems to have been happening for a while. Katie^talk 19:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I have a list. Where should I take it? Never been to WP:LTA, never knew it existed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I took a look. The 50.153.108.0/22 range is >1K addresses; sometimes we block that big a range, but in this case there's too much collateral damage. The IPv6 addresses are all from the same ISP, but again, way too big a range (>250K addresses). We may just have to protect the pages and wait him out. It happens. *shrug* I know it's a PITA but sometimes we just have to deal. :-/ Report the IPs to AIV with a note about block evasion for the registered user. If it persists much longer, I'll start an LTA case myself. Katie^talk 23:28, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Now added 2607:FB90:1D14:D43B:6C92:FB3E:B3E6:2E2C as well. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:49, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Bow Group

Hello Katie, It appears that we have yet another sockpuppet on the Bow Group article. I think there is a case for another block and possibly page protection on the page for edits by autoconfirmed editors only? Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 12:35, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Redaction on Lennart Poettering

When you are available again, you may want to further redact edits at Lennart Poettering which mirror other edits (from an IP-blocked vandal) that you previously redacted per RD3. The article is now under semi-protection. Thanks. LjL (talk) 17:35, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

telephone

what was the type of  telephonevandalisim that made you protect  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smitty12344 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 24 February 2016 (UTC) 

Request closure

After ten days, this discussion seems conclusive, and is not generating new insights. Would you mind closing? —swpb^T 17:00, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Swpb: He posted another response less than an hour ago, and I think the pinged users should have a chance to respond. If they don't by tonight and there's no other discussion, I'll close it. Katie^talk 17:11, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Should RS be notified on his talk page? I'd do it, but I don't want it to come across as rubbing salt in the wound. —swpb^T 20:49, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, and I'll do that shortly. Should have done it at the time but got busy. Thanks for reminding me. Katie^talk 20:53, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Questions about deletions

1. Why did you delete File:Competency-architecture.png? WP:F8 states that you must ensure that The image's license and source status is beyond reasonable doubt, and the license is undoubtedly accepted at Commons. On Commons, the file has a copyright tag which requires attributing the author, but it doesn't say who the author is, so it is impossible to comply with the licensing conditions, so I'm not sure why you think that the claims being made on Commons are valid.

This was a tough one, and I almost didn't do it. I'll restore it if that's what you want. There's a problem: the original image isn't found at the URL listed either. Personally, I think the entire article to which it's linked should be sent to AFD as an essay.

1. Why did you delete File:Einat Amir.jpg per WP:F8? There is a note on Commons that English Wikipedia has conflicting copyright information, and the licence and source status therefore don't seem to be "beyond reasonable doubt". --Stefan2 (talk) 21:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

There's an OTRS tag on the Commons image indicating permission; the metadata is identical and the original attribution is copied over by FastilyBot along with the original image. F8 says to not delete if there are two authors at en, not if there are two authors at Commons. It's the same image. Again, I'll restore it if you like, but it's not used in any articles and I'm sure it's the same file. Katie^talk 21:25, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Stefan2: Just to add that I've got to step away for a while, so let me know if you would like those files restored and I'll do it when I get back. Katie^talk 21:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I need to retrieve my deleted page named Roy Palatty

I need to retrieve my deleted page named Roy PalattySasi jithin (talk) 12:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) What's your reason for why you want it to be restored? It was deleted for failing WP:GNG. Class455fan1 (talk) 13:03, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Rahul Nath

Hi There

You recently deleted the page RAHUL NATH that was made in draft

We are having trouble understanding why this page keeps getting deleted and rejected

We initially created a page a few months ago that had no references and no pictures and was deleted (it says 5 times, but I think it was only twice)

However on our most recent draft (the one deleted by yourself), we had ample references and photos

We are not trying to use WIKIPEDIA for advertising purposes which is what is the complaint that keeps coming up

Could you please restore the page and let us know what we can do so that it is not deleted and that it is accepted to Wikipedia?

Please if you can guide us as we would really like to get this page on Wikipedia as we spent so much time on the last draft

Thank you in advance Blakeksm (talk) 07:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@Blakeksm: I've restored the page to your userspace at User:Blakeksm/Rahul Nath. I've given it a serious edit for spam links, removed the images (completely unnecessary for an encyclopedia article), removed the HTML (we don't use it in articles), and did a cursory copyedit. Do NOT add back those images or the multiple headings I removed. You also need to remove IMDB as an inline reference, because it is not considered a reliable source. It's okay for the external links section, but not as a reference.

The guy might be notable, but you've got to understand that those images and the Amazon links made it seem like an advertisement for him and his stuff, and that's not what we're about. I'll take another look at it before you resubmit it to AFC, if you'd like. Just reply here. Katie^talk 17:51, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Christina Hoff Sommers

No disrespect, but the requester for that semi protection has been attempting to put unsourced and undue statements into the article for a while. Those edits were reverted per brd. No consensus had been reached yet. 128.4.140.76 (talk) 20:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Christina Hoff

Regarding the restriction to autoconfirmed, is that really the source of the problem here? In a couple instances here it is IPs removing uncited claims by named accounts. Or is this just to keep better track of the back and forth during high activity? 184.145.18.50 (talk) 20:31, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

This is to both IPs who left messages here - it's not just you. It's the history of that page since the last semi-protection expired a couple of weeks ago. We have to be very careful with biographies of living persons. You're welcome to propose edits on the article talk page - just use {{editsemiprotected}} and say what specific edit you have in mind. Or you could register for an account and get some other benefits as well. Katie^talk 20:35, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

"it's not just you" thank you. Your right on both parts.128.4.140.76 (talk) 20:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

UTRS Appeal

Hi Katie,

First, thank you for helping out at UTRS! I just wanted to note that there was a minor mix-up with the granting of IPBE to an account. The editor in question had requested it multiple times and it was declined as they don't meet the policy requirements for granting it. While admins can grant IPBE to users who are caught in regular blocks that are not intended for them , the granting of IPBE for editing through Proxies/VPNs is much more strict and needs to be reviewed by a member of the Functionaries or Checkuser. I don't think many are aware of the distinction, so I thought I would mention it in case you see similar requests at UTRS in thr future. Cheers, --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ponyo: Okay - thanks! :-) Katie^talk 22:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Christina Hoff Sommers

Some editors criticize the request rationale by Binksternet. Shall you lower the setting to PC to see whether IPs are trustworthy? --George Ho (talk) 22:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

See my response above. Katie^talk 22:40, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Katie, I support the indefinite semiprotection. Sommers' name is mentioned in the Gamergate controversy article, and Talk:Christina Hoff Sommers has the Gamergate sanctions banner on it. If problems continue then discretionary sanctions would allow for further action. EdJohnston (talk) 22:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@EdJohnston and Lectonar: I looked it all over (and boy, is my headache worse now) and fully locked it for three days. Let them gnash it all on the talk page for a while, but after that we should look at DS for it. I had BLP issues with some of the stuff the IPs wanted to add but let's see what happens. If they can't come to consensus we'll have to step in. Katie^talk 23:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Sam6432

User has threatened to sock more, and has made personal attacks. Thanks for blocking in the first place; I'd really appreciate it if you could please revoke TPA. Thanks, GAB^Hello! 01:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

• I did, but really, there wasn't much need to revert there. Drmies (talk) 01:40, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Rahul Nath

Hi Katie

Thank you so much for restoring the page So what I will do is read over and remove the IMDB as a reliable source and look through other sources that need to be removed Instagram was one source that we used, does this need to be removed as well? I will take a look tomorrow and resubmit and then let you know when I have done so Again we want to get the page up and running so please let us know if anything is inappropriate from us The page as it looks right now looks good, but I will look through and send you a message tomorrow to let you know that I am ready to resubmit Thanks again for helping us out BlakeBlakeksm (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blakeksm (talk • contribs) 08:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@Blakeksm: Yes, take out Instagram. Don't put it on there at all - same with Twitter or Snapchat or Facebook or other social media. No links to them. Just the home page as an external link. Katie^talk 12:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Rahul Nath

Hi Katie

Thanks again We are all done on our side The page looks fine to us. We have not edited anything on our side If you could please have a last look and give it a thumbs up (if you feel it is okay and good to be published) Also if I could ask if you could submit to AFC please? If not could you let me know how to do that please Lastly do I need to change the name from Userblakeksm.. to RAHUL NATH? Thanks again for your help it has been very valuable. Blakeksm (talk) 05:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@Blakeksm: It's now an article at Rahul Nath. Remember - it's not your article and anybody can edit it now at any time for any reason. I believe he's a notable actor, but there's a possibility someone will nominate it for deletion, and if that happens, it happens. Good luck, and I hope you continue to contribute to Wikipedia. :-) Katie^talk 13:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Rahul Nath

Thank you Katie for helping us out on this. The WIKI page looks great and thank you for your additional notes. We have taken note of all of them. Yes we will continue to contribute to Wikipedia as well. Thanks Blakeksm (talk) 16:42, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Surely you made a mistake

Please tell me it was a mistake when you granted Thewolfchild (talk · contribs) rollback privileges. The guy's last block was 21:23, 21 January 2016 by @Swarm: for edit warring. Toddst1 (talk) 13:42, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Toddst1: Yes, it was a mistake to do, and I've removed the privilege. I do not know why that block log didn't smack me in the face, but thanks for being a good substitute. Katie^talk 14:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Katie. Of course I've made plenty of mistakes myself. Toddst1 (talk) 14:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I would ask; how is it a "mistake"? Surely AGF applies here. I was given the right, I haven't abused it, but you're taking it away anyway? I could understand if you had advised waiting before granting, but right now you're essentially punishing me even though I've done nothing wrong. Yes... I have a block log, I made mistakes and they were addressed. (I paid the price, unlike some editors here who instead if owning up to their screw-ups, just disappear for a year thinking that makes everything magically 'ok'). It's only fair that you re-add the right and give me the opportunity I deserve. Thanks - ^theWOLFchild 20:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not punishing you. Rollback is a privilege, not a right, and I screwed up and let you have it though I shouldn't have. @Toddst1 and Swarm: Would you pitch in here? I left a message on his talk page explaining that I erred and didn't consider the recent 3RR block, but he wants more input. Katie^talk 20:35, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I understand it's a privilege. It can be taken away anytime and if I were to somehow misuse it, I expect that is just what would happen. But I haven't misused it. Like I said, how about showing a little good faith and give me an opportunity to demonstrate my intentions? - ^theWOLFchild 20:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: - Hello? - ^theWOLFchild 06:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

If you're waiting for me to add the user right back, you're wasting your time. As Toddst1 said below, you should go to WP:PERM/R where the other admins who grant rollback can take a look. Katie^talk 13:05, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Fine... I went to PERM/R as you requested. If you feel the need the to comment there, can I ask that you remain neutral? And in if you're going to go shopping for admins to comment on this, can you try and find some that aren't WP:INVOLVED? Thanks. - ^theWOLFchild 22:08, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Glad to pitch in: Wolfchild, granting privileges is a discretionary action that administrators may take and like all administrative actions are subject to examination. In this case, I asked Katie to take another look at her action and figure out if it was done in the context of examining your behavior. She took a look and realized that your behavior as characterized by your block log doesn't merit granting such privileges and reversed her administrative action as I think was correct to do. It's just like an admin unblocking someone or reducing a the length of a block that they've issued after being asked if it was too harsh. Without commenting on your behavior, Katie did the right thing here.

If you want to pursue this, I recommend opening up a discussion at Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Rollback where an open discussion about your behavior can give you a broader perspective. Toddst1 (talk) 14:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Ah, yes... my block log. Well, Todd, I'm glad you brought that up. You see, sometimes editors make mistakes. Sometimes admins make mistakes. Mine are all accounted for. Where I violated a policy, I was blocked. As of now, I am a editor in good standing. I have no sanctions hanging over me; no topic bans, no 1R restrictions and the like. So to taking away Rollback assuming I will somehow misuse it is an appalling display of a lack of good faith. Which you know all about, you have a history of unjustly taking away Rollback from users only to have the community criticize you for it. And where I stuck around and paid for my mistakes, you made several bad decisions as an admin and then disappeared for over a year, instead of answering for them. Now you come back, acting like an admin, even though your not, and you're criticizing others when really you should be looking to yourself. I had Rollback. I didn't do anything wrong with it. There is no reason to remove it. It's a simple as that. Thanks for pitching in. - ^theWOLFchild 15:07, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I gave Thewolfchild a bit of friendly advice on his talk page. He has removed it, whether or not he has acknowledged it is another matter. My personal, non-admin viewpoint is that he is not ready to use it. Regarding the revocation, mistakes happen here. Nobody is to blame, and nobody should feel bad. Best, --Ches (talk) 18:45, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I tried reasoning as well and strangely enough it turned out about as well as I expcected . Kinda like when a famous umpire called a runner "safe" at home plate while signalling "out". Runner asked, "Well which is it?" Ump said "You heard me call safe, but 50,000 fans saw me signal out. You're out." OR we can go with the Miss Universe/Steve Harvey thing. (I'll get my coat...) Regards,   Aloha27  talk  04:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

There's a discussion between TWC and I on my user talk page. Feel free to comment if you wish to do so. Apart from that, as I've said on the permissions page, I think now would be a good time to just move on. --Ches (talk) 20:21, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, and I agree. Let us (admins) know if there are behavioral issues to address. Katie^talk 20:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation page ban

Hello, Katie. I'm concerned that after the disambiguation page ban for Roman Spinner at ANI, he has now started a discussion at Talk:Charles Fredericks (actor) to move the actor's page to overwrite the dab Charles Fredericks. Roman is right in this case, but I still think it's a violation and further proof of Roman just not being able to leave well alone. I may be too personally involved though, so was hoping you could give a third opinion. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:42, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@Boleyn: Nah. Let this one go. If he spins off into orbit, we'll deal, but it looks like he's trying to do the right thing here. Katie^talk 07:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it, Boleyn (talk) 07:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Martimc123

Hi Katie, I've noticed you've been blocking accounts at SPI, which, speaking for myself, I deeply appreciate as it's a great help to the SPI team. Just a heads up that even though you're not an SPI administrator, you can close a case after you block and tag accounts. You're not permitted to archive cases, but closing is just fine. If you have a reason to leave it open, that's another story, but otherwise just close it so it can be archived. Thanks again.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:14, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

User:The Reptilian Agenda

The editor has 3 other accounts which I blocked recently as socks. If you look at this version of the talk page for Nevets20[2] you'll see ". I then put in a change name "request" [ACC #164445]". When I blocked I knew nothing about this, and he/she still hasn't mentioned the other 2 accounts User:Nevets3 and User:Nevets4. Doug Weller talk 16:32, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Oh, good grief. All I could see was a username hardblock. I didn't know anything about this either. Do you want to reblock or should I? Katie^talk 16:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Never mind - I reblocked as the sock master since you tagged the others that way. Katie^talk 17:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm still confused. If he did ask for a request and got it, there's no indication and I don't know where to look, but if that was all I'd unblock. It's the other 2 accounts. Anyway, he's deleted his appeals, etc. Doug Weller talk 17:43, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I put it in the unblock log - UTRS #15326. He claimed he was making an article about a film of the same name and that he was inexperienced, so he simply named himself after the film. I AGF'd and all that but I didn't know he was a sockmaster. Katie^talk 17:52, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Don Knotts

I found an error (rather important one) on Don Knotts under 'death'. It stated Andy Griffith was at his bed side before Knott's death. Sadly, Griffith passed away in 2012. Impossible unless there is proof otherise.

Stephanie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.43.209 (talk) 23:48, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Admin's barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		for doing the right thing, taking responsibility and defending the standards of the wiki even though it meant a bit of acrimony. Toddst1 (talk) 16:44, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Toddst1: Many thanks. :-) Katie^talk 17:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk page threats

The blocked User:67.238.62.230 is starting to make threats on his talk page. CLCStudent (talk) 18:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:European Graduate School

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:European Graduate School. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

One of Adam Cuerden’s several quality restorations during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.

Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by Cyclonebiskit (submissions), and two each by MPJ-DK (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), and Cas Liber (submissions). Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by Adam Cuerden (submissions) (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with J Milburn (submissions) completing nine.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 March newsletter (update)

Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that Cas Liber (submissions) claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

tna one night only (shown\aired)

originally the word was aired why you changed it to shown ? and who the hell are you to block me i didnot vandalize nothing i just returned the original page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.8.204.24 (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, KrakatoaKatie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Disruptive editor

There is an unregistered editor who keeps adding a useless tag to the Superman ownership disputes section without justifying himself on the Talk page. Please stop him. BaronBifford (talk) 13:01, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, KrakatoaKatie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

46.99.0.0/17 block

Hi, this range seems a bit overly broad. Organizing a Wikipedia training tomorrow and next Saturday and receiving complaints from people unable to register. Thanks! --Arianit (talk) 16:02, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@Arianit: I'm on vacation, but I dug through my block log to find this one, which is due to block evasion from Blendi111. We had very few good contributions from that range and the disruption justifies the rangeblock. For the duration of your event, you can request the account creator permission at WP:PERM, or you can have them register through ACC. I suggest the account creator option, because if they register through ACC that SPI investigation is going to pop and they might get declined. The block is anon-only so once registered, your people should be able to edit. I'm sorry I don't have time to help further but I'm traveling until Sunday. :-) Katie^talk 18:28, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll see how it goes and use the option you suggested if needed. Cheers! --Arianit (talk) 08:00, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Whaaaaat?

Regarding this. You must respect my Authoritah :-) I am trying to brighten your day KK but if this joke has fallen flat (which happens from time to time) please feel free to remove it. MarnetteD|Talk 21:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: Cartman is my love child and Matt Damon is the baby daddy. ssshhhhhhhh Katie^talk 21:32, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Yours must be a lively household!! MarnetteD|Talk 22:06, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Katie

You have frozen/protected the entry about me on Wikipedia (sorry I don't use Wikipedia and don't know the terminology).

Evidently your choice, but I want you to know that it is not true, as Philip Cross claimed on the talk comment to which you replied, that I created my own entry or that I said so in blog comments. Until today I had never touched Wikipedia. All I was trying to do was undo the effects of some highly tendentious recent editing on my entry by the politically motivated and extremely hostile Mr Cross. I openly acknowledged it was me doing this reverting

I should hope that, if you are genuine, the fact of Mr Cross's entirely false claim that I created my own blog entry will give you pause about the honesty of his extensive revisions about me.

I should be particularly pleased if you might kindly at least make one change. My wife was not a lap dancer, she was a belly dancer. There is an important distinction. I did not meet her in a lap dancing club, I met her in a belly dancing club. I should be grateful if, in common decency, you would make that change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.232.251 (talk) 22:12, 15 March 2016 (UTC)