User talk:Magog the Ogre/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

→

Archive 25

Content blanking

First of all, I have no intention to involve myself in other people's disputes and at most times, I normally mind my own business. However, I've been looking recently into some of the editing patterns and behaviors in the edit wars (and bickering) between Darkness Shines and TopGun. A lot of the times, the edit wars are over content. One thing I've noticed in relation to this is that Darkness Shines has the habit of blanking (yes, literally blanking) entire sections from articles. To cite some examples, take a look at this set of edits which dates as far back as November 2011 in Pakistan's role in the War on Terror. A whole chunk of information was removed and no discussion was started on the talk page. Two days later, TopGun reverted the blatant removal (that's what it technically was) as seen here. Then here's another recent example at Pakistan Movement: [1], whole sections removed from an important article without discussion on the talk page. The most latest example is at Fatima Jinnah, where again chunks of content has been [2], and again, TopGun reverts it [3]. These edits are ofcourse just tip of the iceberg, there's likely to be more examples.

But coming to the point: should articles be blatantly blanked on the basis of two or three-letter acronyms, when there is no convincing evidence of discussion on the talk page, and also when it is highly possible that alot of the unsourced and OR information may in fact be easy to source? Shouldn't "citation needed" tags be used more often than direct removals? And lastly, would you agree that this sort of blatant blanking can be disruptive? Mar4d (talk) 13:46, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing I can do to help you. Perhaps you'd like to have a word with the admin who unblocked him: User talk:Salvio giuliano. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

It's not a big deal. It's just that the tendency to blank articles could become a bad habit and that's when it can get disruptive. Sometimes, an article with heaps of WP:OR (but nevertheless OR that can possibly be verified by reliable sources) is better than an article in a blanked out state. That's the point I was trying to make. Mar4d (talk) 12:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Alright, just when I mention the word "habit", here's another diff dated 11 Feb. where again, heaps of chunks have been removed. And this time, the reverting editor is not TopGun. You might want to do something about this habit of blatant blanking. It's getting rather ugly. PS: And from what I see, I do think there's been some discussion over this edit at Salvio's talk page. Mar4d (talk) 13:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Aleppo greek mar elias.jpg

Do you know anything about FOP in Syria? --MGA73 (talk) 19:26, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I say mark it as FoP-USonly and decline the NowCommons tag. Can't do it myself because I'm on my phone. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The reason I ask is that Commons:Commons:Freedom of panorama has no text about Syria. So if you know about the law in Syria it would be nice if you could leave a note on Commons once you are back online :-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Many countries in the Middle East seem to lack freedom of panorama per commons:COM:FOP, so it may make sense to assume that no freedom exists unless we have any source of the opposite. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello, edit warrior!

Hello, Ogre

Abusing your admin privileges to do edit warring, right? If I remember correctly, you once blocked me for disrespecting BRD and now you are doing it yourself? Fleet Command (talk) 07:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm upholding basic image policy. I don't begrudge you the fact that you're too dim to understand our policy; I do begrudge you the fact that you're stupid enough to revert war over it. And no, abusing my authority would be to block you for being too dimwitted to understand image policy. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for insulting me. Fleet Command (talk) 07:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry for any hurt feelings, but you could try not revert warring against someone who actually knows what he's doing. In this case, this is me. I have about 60000 edits between the projects (including nearly 30000 to the file namespace, including deleted edits), and about 25000 deletions for English Wikipedia files now on Commons. It's the same reason you got blocked three times previously. You revert first and ask questions later. And for the record the last "three" reverts by me were actually two edits, one of which was a self-revert, and thus none of them count. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

When did I say three reverts? And yes, I know these numbers are more than enough to allow you to openly defy WP:NPA (as you are doing it) and elude justice. After all, it is for the same reason that I am blocked three times in the past: I run afoul of the people who had edited more than me. My last block shows that my reverting had never had anything to do with the reason I am blocked. Fleet Command (talk) 07:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

• File:Webreep-Model.png (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello. Can you please not delete the Webreep-Model Image? I have permission to use it. Can you please put it back? Thanks ! -Trisony. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trisony (talk • contribs) 01:42, 16 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Advice

If I look into the contributions of an IP who was reverted [4] on a talk page with no edit summary (looks like minor vandalism) and then end up on a page TG has edited[5], will I be accused again of hounding? I ask because that text that he restored is terrible. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:10, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

If you're not directly or indirectly reverting TG, then no. If you are reverting him directly, then probably. If you're reverting him indirectly, then probably not. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Darkness Shines (talk) 08:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Arellano University

Since you performed an F8 deletion of one of the images discussed Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sports in the Philippines, I thought that you might have an opinion. It may also be necessary to undelete the images on English Wikipedia as {{FoP-USonly|the Philippines}}. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:23, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I like your fine map of the Republican primaries by county. I would like to use this in the Philadelphia Jewish Voice. Please tell me whenever it is updating. publisher@pjvoice.com Thanks. Loeb (talk) 01:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Any time there is a new vote, rest assured I or someone else will update it in the matter of a few days. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:25, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

RFC/U

I looked in on TG's page to see it he had been unblocked yet and saw your comment on an RFC/U. See [6] here please. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I assume you will get JCAla or another user to sign it, so it shouldn't be necessary for me to do so. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I had posted on their talk pages a while ago, they do not seem interested. Can you let me know if it is filled in correctly? Perhaps given your statement on TG's talk someone will take interest. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I will take a look at it; it will take me quite a bit of time to sift through the diffs and try to figure things out on my own though. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

As the interaction ban is going ahead can you please delete the RFC/U page as it would be a breach of the IBAN policy if I retain it. 10:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkness Shines (talk • contribs)

Y Done Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Is it blocked?

Hi, Magog. About this, I'm agreed with your closure reasons. I just think you might want to check if this IP is really blocked. I couldn't find a current block on block log. Regards.” T_eLeS (T _{@ L C S}) 04:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

My fault that the block was already expired: I've extended it by 6 months. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Great. Thank you.” T_eLeS (T _{@ L C S}) 10:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Source

Hi! Perhaps we could use this as a source? Do not know why it was removed. --MGA73 (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Y Deleted and description updated on Commons Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Bot cleanup on Commons

Hi! I have cleaned up a lot of junk on en-wiki. So I suggest you update your script/tool/data before you work on the NowCommons files. Hope you find it much easier to check files now :-) --MGA73 (talk) 16:34, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Y Done. If nightshade ever goes back up, then it should be updated daily at 00:30 UTC. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Cool. I found some more junk to remove. My bot is working on it at the moment. What about codes like:

<!-- Templates "Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons", "Template:File other", "Template:Main other", "Template:Orphan image" were used in the original description page as well , but do not appear to exist on commons. -->

Do you find that usefull? I can remove that also. What do you think? --MGA73 (talk) 21:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

It can be useful for informing the uploader if there were templates on en.wp that might have had important content in them, and the bot didn't transfer it. This used to happen more often; now, it only seems to happen in the following scenarios:

• A logo used to be marked fair use, and it is converted into PD-textlogo, but the description remains as fair use. When the bot transfers the image over, it does not pick up the summary or sourcing information from the fair use rationale templates; it must be transferred by hand (there might be a fix at m:CommonsHelper2/Data en.wikipedia, but I haven't figured it out yet).
• The uploader marks the description with the {{en}} template, mimicking the same language template at Commons. CommonsHelper ignores all the text within.

Personally, I set my widely-used cleanup script (commons:User:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js) to remove that comment, as I think anyone reviewing the page will be looking closely enough to pick up that problem, or any others. So maybe you could remove the text when inside, the templates contain a set of templates we know are otherwise useless (the ones you listed above are good examples). Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah... That is however the problem. It is easy to remove always but harder to remove when it "only contain" :-) --MGA73 (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Not at all! Here is some pseudocode:

@dumb_templates = array{"Copy to Wikimedia Commons", "File Other", "Main other", "Orphan image"};

foreach (@dumb_templates as $dumb_template)

{text = text.replace("/(<\!\-\- Templates.+?)\"Template".$dumb_template."\"(.+?were used in the original description page as well\s*\, but do not appear to exist on commons. \-\-\>)/", "$1$2");}

text = text.replace("/<\!\-\- Templates\s+were used in the original description page as well\s*\, but do not appear to exist on commons. \-\-\>/", "");

Voila - it removes the dumb templates if it lists multiple (so it's not plugging up the history), and if it ends up removing all the templates, then no more comment! Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you... I removed a lot of code now. Did it semi manuel and there was about 10 that did not look 100 % junk. It should look much nicer when you update. :-) Hope it makes it easier. --MGA73 (talk) 22:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
I think it looks much nicer now after the update. If you find other things that could be fixed with a bot just let me know and I'll see if can do something about it. --MGA73 (talk) 11:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Special request

File:Bardor Tulku Wiki.jpg - the uploader granted OTRS permission for the current version, which I copied to Commons. We don't have permission for the previous versions of the file. Kelly ^hi! 00:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Y Done - I'm not going to bother restoring the old versions because they already had no permission tags on them, so I figure it's time for them to be deleted anyway. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks, as always. Kelly ^hi! 01:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Reply

Just wanted to point you to my reply here in case you missed it: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Fama_Clamosa_reported_by_User:Taylornate_.28Result:_declined.29--Taylornate (talk) 01:27, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

More new replies: [7]--Taylornate (talk) 21:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

More: [8]--Taylornate (talk) 08:40, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Four Tracks Paired by Direction - Platforms in Centre.jpg

There are several "File'Four Tracks Paired..." pics, created by myself. You might help cross reference them and indicate authorship.

• File:Four Tracks Paired by Direction - Platforms in Centre.jpg

Tabletop (talk) 04:33, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

OK; yes, I will mark them. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:36, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

See Quadruple track#Gallery.

Tabletop (talk) 04:53, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Y Done Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

BTW, you might want to take a look at {{ShouldBePNG}}. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:17, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Gregory Herd Shadrac.JPG

Can you help me with why this file doesn't actually show up on the Gregory Herd article? Please make the edit to that article if I made a small mistake or let me know what I need to do to fix the file so it will display properly. Thank you. Spidey104 21:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Y Done [9] Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Can you please give a statement

Hello and I wish you a good day, there is an argumentation right now on the topic Arabs in Turkey. There is an user who claims the figure of Arabic people in Turkey as 8 million with a non reliable and official source. Some users and me put him sources from the United States and Europe, but he everytime rejects these sources. What can we do now to slove this problem, because this user was warned many times before because of vandalizm? I hope you can help us. Sero1988 16:47, 2 March 2012

Done

re [10]The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 20:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: Signature

If you had taken the trouble to read my user page, you'd know that "Quicksilver" = "Hydrargyrum" = "Mercury" = "Quecksilber" = "Dzīvsudrabs" = "Ερμής", etc., etc. No, I would not consider amending my signature for you. It has worked satisfactorily for nearly eight years and the hyperlinks in my signature are unambiguous. — Quicksilver^{T @} 00:27, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry to see that my polite request, which wasn't on my own behalf, but on the community's, has turned you into a raging asshole. I wonder how you'd have responded if I'd been rude about it; probably about the same, seeing as you're apparently tone deaf. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:50, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Note that I didn't resort to calling you names. If the shoe fits, wear it. — Quicksilver^{T @} 13:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

The only thing I note that I asked you a polite question, and you responded like a unnecessarily confrontational and rude fashion. I don't respond to polite requests by being an asshole - ever. It's not a matter of me calling anyone a name; it's a matter of me calling a spade a spade. If you were wise about things, you'd ask yourself how to avoid such behavior in the future - instead of blaming the person who pointed it out for you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Patrick Stewart and Star Wars

While your meaning is clear in "Cherry picking of facts to make a subject look bad" at WP:AN, I was slightly confused by your example — Patrick Stewart says nothing about Star Wars, and I don't remember seeing the guy in any of the movies. What part(s) did he play? Talkback, please. Nyttend backup (talk) 13:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

You're kidding me? ST TNG. Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans usually don't intersect, so there can be a minor rivalry between them. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I know nothing of Star Trek, so I didn't understand that his Star Trek connexion was relevant. Thanks! Nyttend backup (talk) 20:27, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Think a hand is needed

As an uninvolved admin, would you mind having a look at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_February_25#File:Mouli_Cohen.jpg. There's a very "itchy" uploader. ;-) We hope (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, but you might not like my close though. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:29, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Let's just get it done either way it goes. :-) We hope (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Was getting tired of tagging and retagging this one. ;-) We hope (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Blocking me

What I reverted here was vandalism, not a contribution. The two other reverts I had in the past 2 days were reverting vandalism by an IP user, who was changing numbers taken from a reference, without adding another source to their numbers. PLEASE check the history of the article. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 21:59, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

While you're correct that the user was changing the figures, this seems like an extension of your conflict with User:Sero1988. You're correct, the user did not give a new source for the numbers, but your source, from what I can see, doesn't even exist. Thus, this strikes me more as a content dispute than reversion of vandalism. This factored into my reasoning for the block. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

This is the user who added the source the first time, so it's not my source. I just checked it again, and it seems the webpage expired or something (I have no explanation, but it was there and I had checked it a few times before). Still, the issue here is that we are a couple of users, including user:Jim1138 and myself, trying to protect the page against unknown IP edits and users like this one who kept sabotaging the article, and when you intervened you punished the wrong person. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
BTW, user Serro is new to the article, and s/he has been reverting edits without reading or referring to the talk page (until a week ago), despite inviting him to do that. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 23:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Alright; if you'd like, I'll notate your block log to make a notice that you were reverting possible vandalism and that the block was in error (just as I did with Jim1138). Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

It sounds good. Thanks for your understanding. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 04:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

File:First Avenue-7th St Entry.jpg

Hello, Magog the Ogre. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 March 4.
You can remove this notice at any time.

-SusanLesch (talk) 05:06, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Your Blocking of editor Kevorkmail

I noticed this person's name as an uploader of an image that was proposed to be deleted so I went to his user page. I noticed what seemed on the surface to be an inexplicable note stating that this uses was blocked by you on 22 october because of "Disruptive editing: constant edit warring, battleground mentality, and refusal to discuss issues. showing no desire to shape up". But there is no indiction of any of those things happening on that user's recent edit history. Can you cite some examples to back up your blocking explanation? You say something about Syria, but just link to Kevorkmail's talk page, to a post not made by him! And Kevorkmail's edits on 2010 Sytian uprising were all made the previous month. Meowy 18:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The user was on probation according to Template:Armenia-Azerbaijan enforcement, and yet consistently was breaking his 1RR/week enforcement. As soon as his previous block expired (and after which he had received a last warning), he returned to edit warring at the same article over numbers and figures at Yerevan in a way that fit his pro-Armenia or pro-Azerbaijan agenda (I don't even know which, nor do I care). He also exhibited a battleground mentality in everything he did, and socked to get around the block, which was part of the reason his unblock was declined.[11] The quotation I gave about Syria was that the user so wore his heart on his sleeve in his namespace edits that other users were able to pick it up ("I noticed you have been really pro-bashar [sic].") - and that was about a national dispute that isn't even in his country. Worse, his response to "please try not to be biased in your edits" was not "this is why the edits were OK" or "I'll try to fix this up"- rather it was "Bashar Al-Assad and Muamar Gaddhafi are great and enjoy their people's support" - as if that had anything to do with neutrality (and a completely untrue statement, BTW, which exhibits the wishful us-vs.-them thinking common in edit warriors). It was abundantly clear to me that this user was here to push an agenda (or, I should say, a few agendas) and lacked WP:COMPETENCE either by shortness of intellect or by choice. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The guy was given a warning on 13 october, and a 7-day block. Then, just over a week later, he was given a lifetime block. I see nothing that merited that. He gets that sanction for making two absolutely trivial edits to the Yerevan article. Is reducing the population of Yerevan by 10,000 and its area by 32km really disruptive enough for such an extreme sanction? How can you really call such a trivial edit aim an agenda at all (I'm not surprised you can't say if it is a pro-Armenia or pro-Azerbaijan agenda)? Meowy 23:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Well take it to WP:ANI then. See how many people there think he should be unblocked. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

That is not an answer. Sanctions are imposed on editors to prevent disruption to Wikipedia. Do you agree? Please explain why you think those two trivial edits were disruptive enough to ban an editor for life? Meowy 00:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I already did, immediately above. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:02, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

PNC footprint

Hey as of today, the RBC Bank branches are now with PNC. The Flagstar Bank branches in Atlanta became PNC in December. Do you want to update the map? Jgera5 (talk) 21:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I have it on my to-do list. However, I'm on wikibreak, and there is a 95% chance I'll have a new position in a few weeks, a position that requires like 60 hours a week (so I won't have much time to edit). However I'll make it a priority. A question first: were all of the branches taken by PNC, or were some divested to another bank, or were any branches closed as redundant (e.g., in the DC/Florida markets)? Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:58, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I think they are closing a couple in Florida, but none are being divested, like when they divested some National City branches in Pittsburgh to First Niagara. I'm in PNC's home base of Pittsburgh, so unlike, say, the NatCity merger, the RBC deal didn't really affect us up here. And hey, it's understandable. I took a wikibreak last summer due to real-world commitments as well. Jgera5 (talk) 23:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I really do plan on getting to this. It's complicated why I haven't. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:58, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Revs_Sculpture_In_Brooklyn.jpg undel

Hi Magog, please undel File:Revs_Sculpture_In_Brooklyn.jpg - Isarra asked me to del the image at COM (accidental transfer). Please tag the image no source (for the photo) + derivative work (work shown) after restoring. Thanks. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:14, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Y Done - I tagged it with {{subst:dw-nsd}} (derivative work) and {{subst:npd}} (photo). Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, mon. — Isarra (talk) 02:26, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Magog, photo source has been found out: [12]. Derivative work is still a problem. --Saibo (Δ) 02:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure that sculpture is copyrightable in the US anyway? {{PD-text}} and all. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:56, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Being a 3D object, that one is apparently less applicable, but something else might apply to the thing allowing for free use. I really have no idea what, though. On the other hand, should that not be the case, would we even still need permission to use the thing, anyway, or might fair use apply in that case, as it does illustrate something the article specifically talks about? Have to put it back on the article first, but that's what the efficiency of bots gets one. — Isarra (talk) 04:39, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Correct; fair use would apply (IMO). However, Commons specifically has a page dedicated to the fact that we don't care very much about infringing on the copyright of an anonymous graffiti artist: commons:Commons:CB#Graffiti. Given that the author is unknown and may never be known, this seems reasonable to me. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

For your information, there was a recent discussion on graffiti where it was mentioned that a graffiti artist had sent a cease and desist letter to a Commons photographer, so it might be necessary to reconsider the policy. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Err ("Given that the author is unknown and may never be known") - the author is known and mentioned on the file page, isn't he/she?! ;-) --Saibo (Δ) 20:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Insofar as an anonymous author can be known. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:47, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Mmm, and from the interviews it seems he rather valued that anonymity (and probably still does), although for those interviews to have happened at all it's not like folks haven't been able to track him down... eh. — Isarra (talk) 21:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Topic ban proposal at ANI

Hi Magog! There is currently a proposal at ANI about topic ban on TopGun and Darkness Shines. I see many editors (including some admins, it's a pity!) responding without analyzing the complete history of the issue. I see you as one of the admins who is fully aware of the issue probably from day one and it was regretful that you left this (though I understand it). I would like you to share your views at this discussion. Thanks! --SMS ^Talk 12:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty busy at the moment; not sure I'm going to make it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:43, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Messed up

Hi Magog sorry to be harbinger of more vandalism and socking but I let Darkness Shine get the better of me (with his abusive comments on other talk pages and his blatant battleground mentality) and I started removing his POV by creating accounts :/ and thus broke that 6 month thingy of second chance so basically I majorly f+ked up and I'm not sure what's going to happen now I hope you provide some advice but I understand if you have had enough of me 86.171.110.2 (talk) 19:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you only admitting this because you got caught? What will happen is your 6 month timer will now be reset. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Well I actually admitted it was me as some legitimate users were being blamed for being my sock so I thought I might as well own up and prevent them taking the shit for my socking if it is reset I would be happy and even though you probably cannot totally believe me on it I agree if I sock again I should permanently be blocked of Wikipedia my first step from now on will be to stop monitoring articles relating to Kashmir and DS I guess I will give it another go 86.171.110.2 (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

That's probably a good idea. It seems like you have trouble stopping yourself from posting (no offense; it's something we all struggle with sometimes), so maybe not looking at all is a good idea. I realize Darkness shines has issues (I've told him that, and he's been sanctioned), but sometimes, it isn't worth jeopardizing your chance to respond. If you feel the need to sock again, just email me and I'll help talk you out of it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the second chance I agree I got some obsessive issues with certain articles which I have either created or edited and I monitor them every other day or so which needs to stop I think my energy will be better spent editing as a registered user rather then putting all that effort into socking and eventually getting my edits removed again your advice is very much appreciated I will message you on septemberish time wish me luck! 86.171.110.2 (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Editing War

Hi Magog, could you please look into the contributions of this user here and in many earlier instances. S/he has been repeatedly reverting well-referenced edits by other users and myself with no intention to reach any compromise. Thanks. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 15:25, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Warned - user had not been warned previously about edit warring. If the disruptive behavior persists (i.e., removing information with no relevant discussion), by all means report it again here or at WP:AN3. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the action. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 05:13, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Magog, the user reported here is back to the same actions. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 17:59, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Blocked for a period of 31 hours. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Magog for the action, but the same user is using two IP's from Kermanshah (same city where they live) to revert edits on the same article. Could you please look into that? Thanks again and sorry for keeping you busy with this.عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 14:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Update of tool

It seems that it is some days ago that http://toolserver.org/~magog/commons_images.htm was updated. Have you been away from F8 since then?

Anyway I have been away from en-wiki a few days but I have been cleaning up on the Commons side of the mtc for some days (you know the bot cleanup discussion above). I just wanted to hear if you came up with any new ideas.

I deleted about 200 files today just to see if I could still find the button :-D --MGA73 (talk) 21:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes; see the note at the top of my talk page. Anyway; I'm running the tool right now, and it will be updated within ~2-3 minutes. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the update. That made me realise that there was a few hundred files I had not cleaned yet :-) But not it is time for me to zzzZZzz --MGA73 (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I updated a lot of images and I tried your tool. It looks handy once you get to know it :-) Sadly many files need to be edited before they can be deleted but I hope that all my cleanup is starting to pay off :-) --MGA73 (talk) 17:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

If you can help me figure out how to run SSH off of my Windows client, then I will update the tool. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:55, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

(and do it with no input from me, as I probably won't respond to you much here for lack of time). Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

What happend to the daily update? :-D My cron tab is working.

Anyway I was thinking that instead of sorting in 1-500 etc. perhaps it could be interessting to sort in "Own work", "PD-US-Whatever", "Files with a deletion notice".

That way I can avoid the PD-US files and leave them to someone who knows the rules better than I. --MGA73 (talk) 21:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Cron tab: I have a cron tab on nightshade, but (obnoxiously) I can't get a firm answer on if nightshade is ever coming back. So I haven't set one up on willow; and now I have no internet except on my laptop (Windows), so I can't tunnel in to run it.

The PD-US rules are mostly very simple. If it was published before 1923 (not created; many files have this wrong), then it is in the public domain. For other situations involving copyright formalities: well just ignore those and let someone like me handle them. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Emergency

sorry for continually harassing you but [13] IS NOT ME I was monitoring though I have overcome to some extent my urge to edit by talking to my university counselling service (im revealing allot of personal crap because I trust you)! and I DS should know that I do not live up north I live in London sorry I had to comment as I don't want my ban extended by another month or 2 apologies once again from the real nangparbat 86.171.110.2 (talk) 20:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Last thing/question

I created this article as a sock [14] and DS wants its deleted I have shown it is a very notable issue its not one rape but in the thousands compared to his article [Human rights abuses in Azad Kashmir][15] which has serious notability and reliability problems and was tagged before hand by another user I provided many reliable sources for it does the fact that it was made by a sock mean it will be removed without discussion or vote? as DS seems hell bent on deleting it 86.171.110.2 (talk) 22:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

He clearly made that article in retaliation of jammu and kashmir rights abuse page he is struggling to find sources as you can see due to non notability of the subject 86.171.110.2 (talk) 22:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

And that article was the reason I broke my ban on editing (I know crap excuse but what the hey) 86.171.110.2 (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The very fact that you're continuing to post to my talk page about the issue is a violation of your ban. Please just let it go. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I am willing to recreate the article, is that OK? But I want to do it from scratch, not have it associated with the sock. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:59, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, you can do it however you'd like; I deleted it because it was created by a banned user in violation of said ban, and was causing all of the drama that the ban was trying to alleviate. If someone asks me, I will userfy the older versions for them though. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:01, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, no need to userfy, he had a sandbox[16] Darkness Shines (talk) 00:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I remember making constructive edits to it (after he backed it up in his own userspace). Please do it to my userspace. Thanks. --lTopGunl (talk) 00:25, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Y Done (User:TopGun/Rape in Indian-administered Kashmir). Please make sure that if you rely upon any content originally written by another user, you give proper attribution in your edit summary in order to comply with GFDL/CC-BY-SA. If absolutely necessary (shouldn't be though), we can do a history merge. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Magog, why have you restored the sock version and deleted the one I was working on? Darkness Shines (talk) 01:51, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I see you were moving it to user space. Please ensure there is not another merger from user space to article space as what happened previously leaving me unable to edit an article I had created. Darkness Shines (talk) 01:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

There may be another merge, but unless the administrator makes a mistake, you will be able to edit it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the restore. There was no mistake last time btw, just that the original article was a single section while mine was all the rest. --lTopGunl (talk) 01:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

• So this was not going to happen then?[17] It even doubles up on content I had written. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

If I am blocked for asking you about this you can drop the topic ban thread as I will be done here. I am surly allowed to ask about it given you said this would never be an issue? Darkness Shines (talk) 19:19, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

• I am going to ask you for a favor here Magog, please look at the article as it is now, as opposed to the content I had written[18] Just tell me honestly which is neutral, which is using academic sources, which version at least has a semblance of being an encyclopedic article. I hope you will do this and revert back to were the article should be. Darkness Shines (talk) 01:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Magog, the above comment is an IBAN violation which I've reported (not violating here myself since I'm referring to a violation). From this thread I see that you would revert banned users outright. --lTopGunl (talk) 19:16, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

• I must say I am bitterly disappointed in you. You said there would not be an issue, it of course happened and you have allowed it to happen. I also ran a little experiment today [19] Created an article at 17:46, it is AFD'd at 18:00 (figure my edits are being watched ) Look at the time stamps at the AFD[20] A suspicious man might think, off wiki communication? Darkness Shines (talk) 18:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary section break

Hey... some further IBAN vio comments on me from within the block. Reporting to you since you took the first action, [21] and then [22]. I hope you will count this in your comments at the ANI proposals going on too, nothing near a topic related conflict, you see? Btw, feel free to clarify from me if you have doubts about my edits to the restored article or AFD... maybe I'm learning not to respond to everything put up against me (though slowly). --lTopGunl (talk) 20:52, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what this has to do with an IBAN violation. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:08, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It was a comment rather taunt on me talking about static IPs in the given diff... pretty much clear to me, but what do you mean? --lTopGunl (talk) 21:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow; that was an obscenely stupid thing for him to say. Is he just not getting this? Stop talking about or to TopGun, period. (You cannot answer this question, of course, so don't). Anyway, no, you have not stopped responding, just as your constant back-and-forth at the SPI case reveals. And this is what I warned you about before, and it's what got you in further trouble last time. Because the community is sick and tired of listening to you argue. What good are your responses on that SPI page going to do? Nothing - it's not like the clerk is going to close it any differently; it just confuses uninvolved editors and (correctly) makes it look like you can't shut up. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:31, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, I don't see the proposal at ANI anymore anyway. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It died when it was moved off the main page... no consensus for anything as of yet. --lTopGunl (talk) 21:52, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

TopGun once again

I have reported User:TopGun for edit-warring over Folland Gnat. FYI he also faces a topic ban. It is hard for me to correct his defective edits (imho) without falling into his edit-warring trap. AshLin (talk) 10:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop admin shopping, I think Magog recused him self from this drama... and two reverts second being well in the mid of next aren't 1RR vio or even gaming. And stop trying to bait me into violating too. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:29, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

TopGun, please assume good faith. AshLin, though it may not be your intention, to TopGun and other editors it may seem look like you're canvassing. By the way, Magog, I've left a message on Salvio's talk page that reads as follows:

I've been keeping an eye on this dispute as I've been the main "mediator", for a lack of better words, with this dispute. To get the load off of you a little bit, I'll continue to keep an eye on the ANI thread and the ongoing RfC on the content. Should anything go awry, I'll bring it to the proper forum and bring it to your attention.

—Regards, Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 00:37, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

@TopGun - what is the point in your response above? Just more bickering. If I'm as capable as you claim, then I don't need to read your response claiming I'm capable. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Question

Can discretionary sanctions be held against the editors involved above with the India-Afghanistan-Pakistan-Bangladesh dispute by using this sanction: WP:GS#Caste? Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 00:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

No. Try proposing other sanctions. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:22, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:PUFresolved

related to Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_February_28#Template:PUFresolved; I was thinking to do this, but I recognized that there are many problems. Old deletion discussions/PUFs were added to the talkpage (example: File talk:Les Demoiselles d'Avignon.jpg; and the corresponding pages seem to be gone) and many underlying/former pages were moved and/or deleted. Should the {{Oldffdfull}} get a new parameter for the correct link? (if it can be found? e.g. File:WhiteSwirl.jpg is after my change also incorrectly linked)

Until now I found following structures:

• Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/
• Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/ (redlinks, moved to ^ without redirect)
• Wikipedia:Files for deletion/
• Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/ (bluelinks, moved to ^ with redirects)

and the section linking using Image/File prefixes mixed. I would go through "by hand" and trying to fix the linking, if you help me to modify the Oldffdfull template with the parameter/naming. mabdul 23:49, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry; I don't even understand the question. I thought that PUFresolved should just get fixed with AWB to point to {{Oldpuffull}}; in fact, your edit to WhiteSwirl.jpg was wrong for exactly that reason. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:46, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I know, that was the reason I stopped and recognized that the template need a completely rewrite to get a merge. This has also nothing to do with AWB since this needs a job done by hand since there are simply too many different ways and moved pages and (nearly) all description pages/templates are broken.

So would you help me to propose a new text of the template? I still think that this is not that easy and the existing text wouldn't fit in a DR/FFD/PUF/etc (as i said: many different names with different section headlines) mabdul 23:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure about that? Are you sure it shouldn't always point to PUF? Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

That's the problem! {{Oldffdfull}} redirects to FFD; puf should be merged (per outcome) and there is also the old variants which are linked incorrectly at the moment. (possible that I missed a variant) So what and how to do? mabdul 22:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Well then it was probably a mistake by the editor who tagged the page to begin with (accidentally tagged PUF instead of FFD). I say just AWB replace it all to oldpuffull. You can then go back and check each one by hand to make sure an admin didn't goof it up (seeing as there are a grand total of 54). Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm confused now. Who changed the templates then (and how many were using the old template)? How can I find that out? I did only changed two file pages and recognized that the template needs a change. This seems to be a big mess... mabdul 01:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I just did it myself. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Magog the Ogre. Please check your e-mail – you've got mail!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the template.

Darkness Shines (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Enough is enough

• Previous comment removed. (waste of time) JCAla (talk) 12:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

If you disagree, then ANI is thataway. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:31, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I am going to tell you only one thing: Darkness Shines self-reverted seconds after he made the alleged IBAN violation.[23] I witnessed several admins dealing with the TopGun-Darkness Shines dispute, and I witnessed Salvio giving TopGun the time to self-revert an IBAN violation instead of simply blocking him to avoid drama. You blocked an editor from even commenting on his talk page who himself had already self-reverted supposed violation said seconds after he had posted it. JCAla (talk) 12:52, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Where did TopGun commit a violation and was not blocked for self-reverting? Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:46, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Because if TopGun committed a violation and was forgiven under the same circumstances, then he is a dolt to report another user. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:57, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I made no such personal comment (or comment for that matter) on which I was told that self revert would be fine. A complex content situation as modified by some one else and previously not clarified, yes... but that was as good as a few mistaken rollback self reverts (and a direct blanking and then commenting out my addition) that were excused to him (to clarify the allegations by JCAla on interactions here). So you should tone down your responses maybe. --lTopGunl (talk) 21:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, is anyone going to show me the diff, or are you both holding back on me? Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Here are the diffs where he was reported and excused: [24] [25] (Salvio just reverted his vio). This is the one where Salvio advised me to go to ANI as it was a clear violation where admins instead blamed me for WP:BATTLE for going there [26] turning it into a topic ban thread. This discussion is about where DS was excused of rollbacks and I was clarified and told to self revert a complex violation that was not a violation in letter (and I reverted) [27]. There have been no instances of me making comments and then self reverting. These however have more occurrences on DS's side which I initially ignored and don't care about the diffs (would be in the same discussion may be) since I was preventing the drama. I reported when this one was an unambiguous taunt. --lTopGunl (talk) 22:13, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I see. Yes, Darkness shines is more at fault than you; yours was accidental, his was on purpose, and he had already been flirting with the ban. If I have the chance, I will be going to ANI to ask for JCAla to be outright banned from these topics, or to receive an interaction ban with you, or possibly filing an RFC (hell of a lot of good it will do) because he has done nothing but engage in battleground editing. The fact that he changed his story (which he speciously tried to cover up[28]), and then provided me with only half the story while ironically accusing you of doing the same - this is totally unkosher. He regularly excuses faults of editors whose views he likes while at the same time being quick to accuse other editors for such faults. Mind you, he is entirely correct that your failure to include this piece of information speaks poorly of you (and shame on you for it, whether I'd seen it or not); it just so happens that he sees no irony in the fact that he is guilty of the very thing for which he is reporting you. Either that, or he is mentally incapable of seeing his own faults where he commits them (as I've said before, it's part of the human condition for many people; take Sean Hannity, for instance, or the lady friend I knew who called other girls a slut for sleeping with guys despite the fact she did so herself). For some people, this type of introspection isn't even possible. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Why would I need to bring up the resolved matters when they have no context in here. None of those included comments and taunts which have no complexities unlike content additions. Maybe I've had too much of the ANI. I have no respect for them after they set me up for a topic ban for being sent there by one of them. IBAN with JCAla will only bring more trouble by using it to bait me into interactions. There's been a lot of IBAN gaming... this comment and the four comments above will clarify more [29]. I'm 100% sure about this, this has nothing to do with my editing in topics and a topic ban is a completely inappropriate way. This is about hounding which IBAN couldn't stop. --lTopGunl (talk) 22:40, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm more upset with the fact that you failed to mention his self-revert. I am and have been aware of it, but it speaks poorly of you that you didn't mention it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

That's because I couldn't see how the previous was related here... and the fact he self reverted in this case was while I was typing the report, I saw it after everything was done. --lTopGunl (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

This is the last interaction on your talk between you and me, Magog, because you completely fail to understand anything I write or do and you have again repeated what I had pointed out earlier to you was considered a personal attack where I come from. I was not reporting TopGun here and I don't see where you can get this from my above response. I was directing my criticism at you. (And yes, I removed my first reply because I somehow had thought it was SMS who had mentioned the static IP thing and because I consider this whole thing generally a waste of time.) There were just two things I wanted to point out to you and that were 1) Darkness Shines had already self-reverted merely seconds after he posted supposed violation, and 2) I like an approach as done by Salvio better who gave TopGun in situation of an IBAN violation the time to self-revert instead of outright blocking him or worse revoking him access to his own talk. And by this I was referring to this administrative action (Salvio: "... they are a violation. At least, in spirit of the interaction ban. Assuming good faith, I want to give you a little time to self-revert.")[30] As for you and me, thank you for being a teacher. I have learnt a lot through our communication. Don't expect me to comment any further on your talk when the above statements are your reply. JCAla (talk) 07:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

So you saw I had self reverted and still you blocked me? Nice. Is it a violation of the IBAN to ask other editors on an article talk page to remove content I had written?[31] I add a few lines on the Taliban as it had been raised at the FAC page. [32] This is then discussed as having NPOV issues by the person with whom I have the IBAN. Also, Sal has said that adding a rs tag as I had done here[33] is probably a violation. So is this also a violation[34][35]. I should also like to know if commenting on an article talk page saying the article fails NPOV (bearing in mind I wrote the entire article) is a violation? such as here and here Just clarify these for me so I know were to thread in future. Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:04, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

@DS: I do not personally plan on enforcing anything relating to which pages you should or should not be on (aside from obvious following of contributions). I am more concerned with the subtle ways of speaking to TopGun or making comments about him. I've already gone over what is a violation there and what isn't. And no, I had not seen your revert; I said that I have been aware (this was a ridiculously poor choice of wording and context on my part; I should have said "I have been aware for the past few hours but was not aware before I blocked"); apologies for the confusion. In retrospect, I would not have blocked you had I seen you'd removed the content; however, I didn't undo the block because I still think it was a poor decision on your part to add it in the first place the save button can't undo things like that, sadly). Also, given the history that TopGun showed above of you flirting with the boundary, according to Salvio (i.e., not committing a technical breach but commiting one in the spirit of the rule), I thought the block still appropriate. Anyway, that is what's most important - stay away from speaking to TopGun, directly or indirectly, and stay away from comments which are about TopGun, directly or indirectly (unless you are quite obviously referring to an entire group of people, and he is a member of that group of people; or unless you are asking for administrator correction/intervention concerning the matter). The same obviously goes for him.

@JCAla and TopGun - I am currently of the impression that both of you have been too quick to give facts that support your own side, while conveniently leaving out other ones. TopGun - as soon as you saw he self-reverted, it would have been helpful to add another note to my page stating that. JCAla - it would have been helpful to give context regarding the original leniency from Salvio, which was primarily extended not just because he self-reverted, but because it was a technical violation but not a violation in spirit. I'm sorry that I've used some over the top rhetoric towards you, JCAla, but the points I've made remain relevant. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I wish I were allowed to provide the diffs to show you what had actually occurred on Sals talk page. There had been no violation at all. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

• Do copy vios supercede IBAN? This content was suggested at the talk page and I added it to a separate section, it was once moved by JCAla to another section as he didn't agree with it (which was reverted by another user). Now DS claiming it to be a copy vio (given that a list of facts can not be copy-righted as once explained before in a pre IBAN dispute by an uninvolved), removed the whole section and then added a line to the section where JCAla previously moved it [36]. Assuming that there actually were some copy vios in the phrases, those could have been simply modified leaving the inline list alone... this all was still changed and moved which was not a part of copy vio rewrite like the list blanking either. (for full disclosure, he asked Moonriddengirl if he could rephrase the copy vio as he explains at the article talk, but did not tell her about the IBAN) [37]. Also his comment on talk page right before this one was asking for removal on another basis claiming it as a primary source. How do I edit this content now given that I was the original contributor and non copyvios have also been removed along with a section change and was it DS's responsibility to fix that? --lTopGunl (talk) 10:12, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
• Copied over from Sals talk page But, then again, I'll say so now: since you were removing a copyvio, your actions were justified. You should have asked one of the many uninvolved admins who are following this entire charlie foxtrot, who would have certainly acted, but let's not be nitpicky... Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC) I asked an admin, she said it was a copyvio. The previous time this happened was not a IBAN vio nor the time before that. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:24, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I will also point out there is now more content on the Mukti Bahini than there had been so as to address Mar4d concerns, which I also added yesterday with these edits.[38][39] so there are that along with the copyright content rewritten and moved to the appropriate section. It cannot be said I have not tried my best to cover all the bases here. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:53, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

For Chrissake, can't either of you give me a summary without drowning me in mountains of text? Besides, are you sure you want me deciding this?, Because if I do start deciding minutiae like what is a copyright violation and what is a good faith removal of a copyright violation and what is someone using a technicality to skirt the spirit of the interaction ban, one or both of you is going to get banned from the page altogether. And given the history on ANI, I seriously doubt anyone would overturn my decision. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I tried a summary... I think the appropriate thing will be that I rephrase the text myself and put it back and future (suspected or not) copyvios should be dealt by someone else (isn't that simple?). What I don't understand is... if my edits are outright reverted in violation of the interaction ban in one way or the other... what am I supposed to do if not report? Because I know I'll be reported for reverting back which seems to me as the aim of this given its repeated occurrences. This is turning into a one sided interaction ban where I'm the only one who can not revert edits and further rebutted for reporting the violations (vide ANI). I have no summary or explanation for this one [40] [41] (just the diffs which speak more than words). Now how on earth am I supposed to go about blatant vios like this where my edits are sneaked out and I can do nothing since that would make my vio more 'recent'? You should have realized by now atleast, this is not about any single page or topic. The IBAN is a fail... if blocks are not issued for vios, then it should be lifted so that I can atleast revert. --lTopGunl (talk) 09:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Whoa whoa, wait a second here. Before we look at anything else, what are you doing copy/pasting material from other sites into Wikipedia? That alone is a blockable offense. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:58, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

No, I'm not. I added content suggested at talk page. As soon I was made aware about its similarities, I rephrased the objectionable parts. The rest was a list of names of towns, which can actually not be copyrighted. Now what am I to do about my reverted edits? --lTopGunl (talk) 14:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

• Magog, I have responded to your e-mail. Regarding the copyright issue, the content was pasted onto the article talk page by Mar4d in blockquotes here[42] Darkness Shines (talk) 14:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)