User talk:SQL/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:SQL. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 22:17, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back! ;) Acalamari 11:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back! You were before my time! :) Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:49, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Guys, great to be back! SQL^{Query me!} 20:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

:) Prodego ^talk 23:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back, looks like you've hit the ground running. SPhilbrickT 19:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Gurch, regarding your BRFA request here, we were wondering if you have any updates to add to this request? Thanks! SQL^{Query me!} 08:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I am currently too busy with other things. You should probably archive the request. Thanks Gurch (talk) 09:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Can do, thank you! SQL^{Query me!} 10:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Breaking my long wikibreak to welcome you back from your long wikibreak! :D (X! · talk)  · @167  ·  03:00, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate the welcome back :) SQL^{Query me!} 03:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I never saw you on Wikipedia before (as I am rather new), but I just came across your page and just wanted to welcome you back! ℥^nding·start 03:20, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back SQL! I used to be called Fridae'sDoom, I'm sure you might remember me from a BRFA of mine 4 years ago. —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 9:46am • 23:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I think I recall moving your BRFA due to typo? :) It's been a really long time! Great to be back! SQL^{Query me!} 08:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Haha, yes I remember that :P the only coding I knew then was HTML! It's great to see another familiar face at RfPP :) —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 8:59pm • 10:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I have requested change in username as directed by you. Sorry to bother you, but just wanted your help in this area. On wikipedia we find writeups and articles about many companies but wikipedia directed me not to do so. is there a special way or condition to do so. I do not intend to write anything that violates the principles so thought of asking you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ungems (talk • contribs) 09:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Companies must be notable in order to be included in the encyclopedia. A guideline specific to companies can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), and there is a noticeboard where you can ask specific questions or double-check with a larger group of editors at Wikipedia:Notability/Noticeboard. SQL^{Query me!} 12:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Greetings SQL-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a graduate student at the University of Oregon, currently collecting data for my dissertation on Wikipedia editors who create and use bots and assisted editing tools, as well as editors involved in the initial and/or ongoing creation of bot policies on Wikipedia. As a member of BAG and the bot community, I would very much like to interview you for the project at a time and in a method that is most convenient for you (Gchat, another IM client, Skype, email, telephone, etc.). I am completely flexible and can work with your schedule. The interview will take approximately 30-45 minutes.

My dissertation project has been approved both by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Oregon, and by the Research Committee at the Wikimedia Foundation. You can find more information on the project on my meta page.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and I look forward to hearing from you to set up a time to chat. Thank you very much.

Randall Livingstone, School of Journalism & Communication, University of Oregon

UOJComm (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for your help with Hunting license. Bearian (talk) 00:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear SQL,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.9.115.210 (talk) 20:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey :). You're being contacted because you are involved in the ACC process, or participated in the original discussion in '08 about the ConfirmAccount extension. This is a note to let you know that we are seeking opinions on switching this extension on, effectively making the ACC process via the Toolserver redundant. You can read all the details here; I would be very grateful if people would indicate how they feel about the idea :). Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, SQL, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Faizan 05:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

HAH! I haven't gotten a welcome message in nearly a decade! Thanks :) SQL^{Query me!} 06:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Keep your contributions coming. Faizan 07:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't sure if you knew, but we can now block editors from editing their own talk pages, so we don't have to fullprotect like the old days. --Rschen7754 08:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Crap, it has been a loooooooong time. SQL^{Query me!} 08:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries :) You may want to unprotect the page though so that people don't complain, though non-admins aren't likely to edit that page. --Rschen7754 09:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Got it, thanks for the heads up! SQL^{Query me!} 09:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey welcome back! As far as I know we've ever met, but I've seen your name around various toolserver pages and I'm glad to see you back to full time life. —Soap— 00:41, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I had a feeling that would be taken down immediately. Yet, I apologize for nothing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.158.5.204 (talk) 01:59, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you believe that informing the public that a pseudo celebrity(Sharon Needles) is using racial slurs to refer to audience members and on autographs as well as posting videos mocking Asians is not "constructive," but I assure you that it is important to many queer people of color to know who hates us so we can avoid them. Please stop deleting this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.252.133.131 (talk) 06:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

You must be extremely careful when writing about living people. Please see: Wikipedia:Libel, and Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Avoid_self-published_sources regarding adding non-sourced potentially harmful material // items sourced only by a tumblr blog. SQL^{Query me!} 06:25, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The autograph was given to a friend of mine by Sharon, and I posted it online. I met with her in July in Atlanta and our meeting was taped and reported on by local gay papers. She does not deny that she signed the autograph. The video of her being anti Asian is on youtube. Everything I wrote is verified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.252.133.131 (talk) 04:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You speedy deleted Zaban Thaaher Zaban Al Shamaree as WP:CSD#R1. Could you please tell me where it used to point?

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 21:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi SQL, nice to see you sort-of-back; we can use your help. I happened to catch an earlier exchange between you and Dr.K. about some socks. Please help him any way you can if he signals what he did then: he's rarely wrong, and he's the primary target of a particularly nasty vandal (I'm just the secondary target). Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I was very surprised to see this edit and this one. It is a fundamental principle that an unblocked editor has the right to have his or her unblock request reviewed by an independent administrator, and any odd editor coming along and removing the unreviewed request from the pending unblock review list would be depriving the blocked editor of that right. Likewise, the blocking administrator declining an unblock request on his or her own block would deprive the blocked editor of the right to an independent review. Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Unblocking says "An uninvolved administrator acting independently reviews the circumstances of the block, the editor's prior conduct, and other relevant evidence, along with any additional information provided by the user and others, to determine if the unblock request should be accepted." (My emphasis.) That someone who has been an administrator for several years should be so much out of touch with the blocking policy as to think that any editor may decline an unblock request astonished me. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

User:Jennavecia/Bathrobe Cabal, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jennavecia/Bathrobe Cabal and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Jennavecia/Bathrobe Cabal during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ColinFine (talk) 15:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, SQL. You have new messages at GainsboroughFoundation's talk page.
Message added 20:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—cyberpower _Online^{Happy 2015} 20:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

As the last person to edit ANI (where I am unable to post :@) you will be the lucky one to hear me out.... I am not at all pleased with the banner at the top of this page begging for money. Who the hell does Jimbo think he is - he's probably got enough cash to fund this himself! Makes my blood boil. Unimpressed by begging (talk) 08:31, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Yep, it annoys the hell out of me as well. It used to be much more unobtrusive, when I think back to the almost 10 years I've been here. Now it's pretty damn obnoxious. Not sure where Jimbo figures into this. I do donate, and I think it's a good cause - obnoxious ads suck... But I don't think it's his responsibility to fund it a project like this. I wish we could step back a few years where they weren't so bad. SQL^{Query me!} 04:44, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Can you please block him/her. Because of disruptive editing against another admin Tomica on Russian Roulette (song).115.164.189.113 (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

For one, Please explain to me how that's disruptive. For two - I don't think that user is an admin - and even if they were, that wouldn't add any weight to your argument. For three - what's your real account? SQL^{Query me!} 12:37, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh, hi again Sockpuppet! I can't even remember your "real name" or the original IP you are using because for some reason you always come again and start adding "R&B" as a genre to every single Rihanna song or album, for which on Wikipedia we usually provide third party reliable source for such statements. To be honest, I still don't believe in the German book that you added for "Russian Roulette" and an admin is really needed to check on you again... but seriously, I just reverted you once, and there is no open space for me to get blocked. Cheers! — Tom^(T2ME) 16:07, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Been a long day, and I'm going to bed. Got another long day tomorrow, so I'll likely be out for 24h+! SQL^{Query me!} 09:15, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

"AGF disease" is when someone holds on to WP:AGF well past the point where evidence shows that the assumption of good faith is no longer appropriate. Generally, they end up going over the cliff still hanging on to what is intended to be an intitial condition, not a permanent state of being. Happy New Year. BMK (talk) 23:16, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello. The above editor seems to be the same guy as User:JiSteele, who had been making the same kind of disruptive edit and was recently blocked by User:JamesBWatson. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@BeenAroundAWhile: I noticed him making weird changes to population %'s, and reverted all of them so far.

Reference: Moumou102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The username JiSteele has not been registered - A typo maybe? If you can get me the original name that you suspect this user to be socking for, I'd be happy to look into it. SQL^{Query me!} 20:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind! I found him.

Jisteele (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Looks pretty similar, timeframes match up as well. I've blocked Moumou102. SQL^{Query me!} 20:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. SQL^{Query me!}

Hello. The above editor seems to be the same guy as User:JiSteele, who had been making the same kind of disruptive edit and was recently blocked by User:JamesBWatson. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@BeenAroundAWhile: I noticed him making weird changes to population %'s, and reverted all of them so far.

Reference: Moumou102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The username JiSteele has not been registered - A typo maybe? If you can get me the original name that you suspect this user to be socking for, I'd be happy to look into it. SQL^{Query me!} 20:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind! I found him.

Jisteele (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Looks pretty similar, timeframes match up as well. I've blocked Moumou102. SQL^{Query me!} 20:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Regarding this, the user actually had been notified - they had removed the notice (without venturing ANI-ward). - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:08, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

@The Bushranger: - must have missed that in the history, good catch! SQL^{Query me!} 17:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello there. Regarding this [1], there has been a single disruptive edit because the IP had been blocked for two weeks. Immediately after the block expired they came back to the article to make exactly the same edits they've been blocked for. I've requested admin intervention at WP:AIV. Just to let you know. Regards.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

As promised: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/David_Adam_Kess. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: Nice! Good work digging that up. I deleted one of their userpages, it was about the art forgery article as well. SQL^{Query me!} 04:43, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 01:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

		The WikiJaguar Award for Excellence
		I see you creepin' in my talk pages shadow. Thanks for the help. :) Boomer VialHolla 10:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for checking, but I really don't care one way or the other. I'm taking the day to decide if I even want to remain on Wikipedia with the level of harassment and bullying and a block-shopping (to use the term Lavabaron described it as) attempt by two bullies I've been on the receiving end of, especially since it's pretty obvious the administrators on this site stand on the side of the bullies for the most part. Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Given that either Bondezegou or NewsAndEventsGuy have now repeatedly left things like this [2] on my talk page and no action has been taken against them, the needle is about 80% on my quitting wikipedia entirely. This kind of bullying, harassment and gaslighting isn't worth dealing with. Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 18:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Per your comments, Zachlita barely escaped a block for violating 3RR. The request for page protection for Harley-Davidson XR-750 was declined because it is being handled at 3RRN. Zachlita has ignored every warning, and proceeded to continue Wikihound me to yet another article today. First he tracked me to here[3] and then to Harley-Davidson XR-750 and then to Honda SS125A and then to User talk:Blackcatmotorcycles. Now today, he tracked me to Motorcycle.

This guy -- not a noob but an experienced Wikipedian who recently created a new account -- is emboldend by the fact that he keeps violating rules like 3RR and WP:HOUND and gets away with it. I seek help at ANI, RPP, and 3RR and he keeps getting a warning and sent on his way to do more damage. Unless I'm mistaken, @KrakatoaKatie: kicked this over to you to handle. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:29, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi mate, Something went wrong with my computer and suddenly I accidentally pressed the rollback button. I do like to sincerely apologise for that and promise not to do it again. I hope you have a good day :D --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 10:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

To whom it may concern: I'm quitting Wikipedia due to misbehavior, bullying, gaslighting and other harassment by NewsAndEventsGuy and Bondegezou (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LavaBaron#80.25_likely_I_just_quit._Make_that_90.25. for details, noting they filed a bad-faith ANI action trying to get me blocked out of spite as well as their IP vandalism to my talk page). Today the only thing I'm doing is closing down my involvement with one or two pages so nobody expects me to respond to anything.

So long, and thanks for all the fish! Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 13:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

	Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

	Brianhe RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated even if I did get a bit scorched. Brianhe (talk) 02:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

	Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:25, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

The archiving started as I was editing, looks like the whole entry is now gone. [4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damianmx (talk • contribs)

I didn't, @Zppix: did. Link. SQL^{Query me!} 23:17, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

my mistake i think the archive script chose the wrong article the way i meant to archive was closed... Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 23:19, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Looks like we both archived the topic at the exact same time! @Damianmx: I'll fix it. SQL^{Query me!} 23:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I was confused for a moment as to what had happened, its back up now.--Damianmx (talk) 23:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for your strong and unwavering defense of content at the Barack Obama article. However, unfortunately the conversation doesn't really seem to be going anywhere. Can you or thewolfchild think of any relevant noticeboard that we might take this thing to? Display name 99 (talk) 05:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

@Thewolfchild:, @Display name 99:: Frankly, I've dealt with these sort of partisan, POV-pushing editors before in my time here (nearly 10 years as an administrator), and I'm just not interested in the stress of arguing / fighting over it. I wish you the best of luck, but frankly I'd advise walking away from it - it just isn't worth the aggrivation. You might try WP:NPOVN as far as noticeboards go - or if the edit warring continues, WP:AN3. Or, as a very last resort after trying everything else, there's WP:ANI. You guys are trying to talk to them - I see that. It seems like they refuse to give a single inch, or listen to reason. SQL^{Query me!} 00:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

We are in the need of publishing an article for our organization. Our previous attempts had failed due to the advertising nature of our article. After continued revisions for complying with the Wikipedia guidelines, attached PSATRI Wiki Article is the article we have come up with for our organization PSATRI.

We earnestly request you to proofread the article to let us know if it is valid for publishing. Your efforts to help us improve are highly appreciated.

Thank you.

Hnhusain (talk) 06:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

These guys kept tag-teaming after I left and have now filed an 3RR against me. - ^theWOLFchild 15:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

@Thewolfchild: Looks like you came out of it alright. I'm honestly not surprised, that it happened - they kept throwing around veiled threats regarding edit warring. I would suggest you fully disengage and ignore them going forth. I've ignored a few - probably actionable - personal attacks against me at this point. Honestly, no one would have even known I had disengaged if I hadn't said something to you guys suggesting you do as well. Based on my past experiences, if you choose not to disengage you'll probably look forward to WP:ANI, Arbitration, etc being filed to tie you up / keep you busy. Political articles are the worst to mess with, and I usually try to stay far away from them. SQL^{Query me!} 23:48, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't think anything was accomplished, to be perfectly honest, but it's apparent no admin was gonna say anything so... may as well go away for now and... can (and will) always be brought back again later if/when need be. Thanks, though. Cebr1979 (talk) 22:12, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Your last statement seemed like you felt otherwise was all - no worries. SQL^{Query me!} 22:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Just FYI, he seems to have decided to engage in a periodic harassment campaign trying to get editors to leave the Oath Keepers page. Multiple times he's dropped inappropriate templates and/or has tried to "report" me to various messageboards with threats of having me blocked if I don't automatically accede to his edits. It's highly incivil behavior and I am doing my best not to let him troll me into breaking civility rules, but I feel I need some assistance as his behavior appears deliberately designed to be as irritating and harassing as possible. Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Was in the process of making a report. It's also a block-evader (see PhiveSidedPhistagon I (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), for example). Numbers I-VII alongside XIII are now blocked, but as far as I can tell, the variations VIII-XII aren't yet (unless I'm overlooking something or they're caught in a throttle somewhere I can't see?). ([5]) Any chance you could check if those accounts are indeed unblocked and if so, block those before they become active? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:57, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Great catch! There were about 5 that needed blocked still. SQL^{Query me!} 04:03, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt action! AddWittyNameHere (talk) 04:04, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	thank you!! Lulu1984123 (talk) 07:37, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to send you the details of the page under question and the vandalism through a private message? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lulu1984123 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

@Lulu1984123: you can use the "Email this user" link on the left hand side of the page, or Click here. Sorry for the delay in my response. SQL^{Query me!} 11:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Howdy. Sorry to bother on a Sunday but do you think you could cast an eye on this IP who refuses to accept that his genre additions need sources. Many thanks! Robvanvee 09:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't know a lot about music genres. It's always best to report vandalism-in-progress to WP:AIV with as many details as possible. Sorry for the delay - had to work an overnight CCP on easter of all times. SQL^{Query me!} 11:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Cheers, appreciate the tip! Rather you than me :) Robvanvee 12:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm a pussy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.18.247.151 (talk • contribs)

At least I'm not blocked. Enjoy your week off, I guess. SQL^{Query me!} 05:17, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi SQL, I saw your warning about my "gaming the system". I was wondering if you could help me understand why you thought that was the case? (I feel like a hardly understand the system well enough to "game" it!)

My perspective was that, after a long hiatus from active editing, I tried to make some good faith edits to an article, tried to build consensus on the talk page when I encountered resistance, and encountered threats and intimidation from Doc James, who seemed to be adept at making fancy scary icons appear on my talk page, but not at actively participating in the article's talk page.

I'm sure Doc James has an entirely different perspective from this, which presumably is closer to yours. But since you are a third party, it would help me to understand why you perceive things in this case as you do. (And you blocked further discussion on the admin page, so maybe I can ask you here?)

Thanks for any comments! Wpegden (talk) 16:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

(Note: I have put in a request to change my username to RandomVariable. I just want to head off any confusion if it has changed by the time you reply.) Wpegden (talk) 17:48, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for blocking 67.44.209.77. This IP-hopper persistently damages Western film articles and your action should slow him down for a while. Certes (talk) 18:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

You missed the {{ for the {[archive top}} on the discussion you just closed I fixed it I hope thats okay. --Cameron11598 (Converse) 21:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

@Cameron11698: Long day! Thank you!! SQL^{Query me!} 21:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

No problem although my username is Cameron11598 :-) Have a good day --Cameron11598 (Converse) 21:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

@Cameron11598: Long day is long, and filled with many typos! Sorry about that. SQL^{Query me!} 22:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

	The Surreal Barnstar
	that was an excellent block a+ Frood 03:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

How did you block someone with an expiry set in 1975??? Did that block even work?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: I set the block for "3.14159265359 seconds". To the user it appeared to expire in 2021.. Seems like it'd be a bug. SQL^{Query me!} 03:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

So abusive :( Ajraddatz (talk) 03:56, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm wondering if we're expecting a disturbance in the time-space continuum and that 18 January 1975 will be coming around again. It was good year the first time around ... General Ization ^Talk 03:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn't know. I'm not old enough. :p I'm opening a phab ticket and condemning SQL to the Village Stocks.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm old enough to have teenage children, and I'm not old enough either o_O SQL^{Query me!} 04:00, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

You have quite the hefty block log. You really hate yourself don't you? :p Are you going to sit out this 5 year block?—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 04:11, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Or 41-year block, if you regress. General Ization ^Talk 04:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

In the case of the 5-year break, I've probably taken longer! SQL^{Query me!} 04:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I saw the other side....... the side that nobody wants to ever see. I saw into the world..... of having no editing privileges or the ability to collaborate with anyone outside my talk page. It was... so traumatizing. Is this what it's like when you get blocked? Is this the world..... the world of the twisted and the damned? Where the violators of Wikipedia policy must go? It's so... so lonely there.... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:12, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I've been there 3 times. 2 far in my past, and one only recently where I got caught in a rather hard autoblock. No talk page, no email, nothing. Fortunately the blocking admin/CU lifted it for me when I asked him to.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 04:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

• Tracked in
  Tracked in Phabricator
  Task T133438
  
  phabricator.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 04:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Link please @Cyberpower678: SQL^{Query me!} 04:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
    • umm...Look to your right. :P—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 04:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
      • @Cyberpower678:: 0.99999999999 seconds == 00:26, April 23, 2016 SQL (talk | contribs | block) blocked SQL (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of 12:55, November 20, 2286 (autoblock disabled) (test) (unblock | change block) SQL^{Query me!} 04:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
        • Unblock my account. --188.32.110.251 (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
          • What's the name? SQL^{Query me!} 04:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
            • Error block unblock. --188.32.110.251 (talk) 04:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

	The Pointless Barnstar
	For the block. Nuff said. Peter Sam Fan 14:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

LOL ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Some fuzzy kittens to distract you from the whippings.. :)

Chrisw80 (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations, because of your little mishap with the block tool, you have now have your own stocks entry.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 04:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I undid this archiving because it was done to the wrong archive page. I moved it to Archive 2, here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

TYVM, I don't know why it chose that archive. SQL^{Query me!} 12:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, edit summaries that mentions were done by a script and not by me, the other thing is that me and report on policies here, I come from the Wikipedia in Spanish and here there are different policies to there. I apologize for having done such actions do not happen again. Regards. --File:Alvaro Molina.png Alvaro Molina (Let's Talk) 15:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi - I'm dealing with this appeal from a guy who's got exactly one contribution and wants to log in now and can't because he's under a {{webhostblock}} you placed (replaced?) on 168.1.0.0/16 a couple of weeks ago. He says he can use a VPN with this IP but that it's currently off.

I looked at WHOIS and I see that the ISP is SoftLayer, but this /16 range is registered to Credit Suisse in Sydney, so I'm wondering if this really is a webhost situation. OTOH, the block message he got only gave the range and not the single IP, and if the software isn't showing him his IP that must mean it's anonymized and it is a webhost. Therefore, I'm confused and I'm looking for guidance from someone who must be wise because he named himself for database software. ;-) Can you help? Katie^talk 01:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: I actually re-blocked that range because I accidentally unblocked it. @Elockid: (A checkuser) placed the original block. I'm looking into it now - I'll try to get back to you in 15-20 mins. SQL^{Query me!} 03:07, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: Looking into this more - Most of the IP's in this range resolve to xyz-static.reverse.softlayer.com. Credit Suisse advised Softlayer on their sale to IBM, so it's possible that there is some sort of involvement there. Googling seems to indicate that Credit Suisse does in fact do some hosting as well. And softlayer DEFINITELY is a webhost. All in all, I feel like it's an appropriate range block.

Okay - I'll decline it. Thanks for the quick response. Katie^talk 03:28, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Is full protection really needed for this page? I'd say Semi is enough as vandalism is a normal habit with these events and semi usually ends the problem.--WillC 02:47, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

It was pretty much immediately evident that it was - yes. I do apologize for the inconvenience, but an edit request on the talkpage will get your edit in eventually if there is consensus to make it. SQL^{Query me!} 02:54, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

I was just concerned. I've been around for 8 years now and rarely are PPVs full protection. When I saw that change I was confused. Usually semi is done way before full.--WillC 02:58, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

As an aside - I have absolutely no objection to the protection being lifted earlier if any admin thinks that it is appropriate. No need to contact me, just do it. SQL^{Query me!} 03:38, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

SQL, How dare you put it on upcoming? It already happened! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.174.138.220 (talk) 12:24, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

See meta:The wrong version. SQL^{Query me!} 14:38, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Can you please lift the protection on Payback (2016) as it already happened last night and the results are not posted on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.124.133.89 (talk) 14:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For the deathstar manual comment! Made me laugh out loud. More humour is needed on Wiki. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

I'm basically here to know your view, as an administrator concerning the disambiguation page Aristo. The user removing content is yet to provide a valid guideline based reason why the definition should be removed. You advised that none of us should resume edit-warring, but I'm not sure what I am supposed to do if a user disputing a content is unwilling to engage in a meaningful discussion, and wants no other resolution than what he has always wanted. Thanks.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 21:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

There are only a few exemptions to 3RR, and a content dispute isn't one of them. One avenue you could take (from the page dispute resolution) would be to ask for help at the dispute resolution noticeboard. These is a lot of good advice at the dispute resolution page. Basically - unless it fits one of the 3RR exemptions, edit warring is not going to end well. SQL^{Query me!} 12:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks for the reply. Can you kindly look into the matter as a third party, go through the discussion on the article's talkpage, and comment? I want to make sure I try to resolve the dispute amicably in every way that is possible, before taking it to the DRN. Regards.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

I see that in an "unblock request on hold" at User talk:The Newspaper you tried to ping the blocking administrator. However, pings made inside unblock requests in that way don't work. I discovered that some time ago, when I did the same thing, and then, when the blocking admin had not replied after a while, I proceeded with unblocking on the assumption that he had seen my ping and chosen not to respond, only to be told "I never got the ping." I don't know exactly what prevents the ping from working, but from what I was told on that occasion I think it's safest to assume that pings work only if they are not inside anything else, such as a template being substed or transcluded, or an existing edit which is being modified. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:01, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

One other thought. The unblock request has been on hold for several weeks now. I think it's best to make sure that you always go back to a request "on hold" fairly soon, as otherwise the editor requesting an unblock can be left wondering whether anything is ever going to happen. That is not a criticism of you, as I have forgotten such "on hold" requests and left them for ages myself, but I thought it might be helpful to draw your attention to the issue. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Son of a gun! I had no idea - thank you! SQL^{Query me!} 04:34, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I see you removed the PROD templates on Ekopedia. The user (Salter212) who originally moved the tag has been indefinitely blocked for removing around three dozen PROD templates without explanation. I thought consensus is a PROD tag can be replaced where it was removed by a banned user? Does it really need to be taken to AfD? FuriouslySerene (talk) 13:33, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

It wasn't that - I came across it while I was deleting expired PROD's. I disagree - and feel that the subject may pass GNG, as well better sources may be available. I'm afraid that AfD would be the most appropriate venue if you wish to continue pursuing deletion. SQL^{Query me!} 04:34, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, can you restore this page (I Found a Reason) with redirect to Loaded (The Velvet Underground album). This is used on many other Velvet Undergrounds songs (eg. Some Kinda Love). Thanks. --Marek Koudelka (talk) 13:15, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Are you here? --Marek Koudelka (talk) 10:38, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

You can actually do this yourself. No admin intervention is required. SQL^{Query me!} 03:34, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I cannot restore it, I only can create it. But you can restore it with history and then redirect it. --Marek Koudelka (talk) 06:30, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

OK, you are an administrator. I had to look it up, since your user page just says "WEEEEE". That is not a helpful page for not having to take to the time and effort to find where the list is and look you up.

Anyway, no, I'm sorry, but "We're done here" is probably not going to cut it for this particular situation and this particular user. See for instance here which is probably a better approach to this sort of user -- and by someone who has been an admin longer than you.

Here is what WP:NOSHARE says (emphasis added):

Sharing an account – or the password to an account – with others is not permitted, and evidence of doing so will result in the account being blocked.

Either this is operative or not. If it's not operative lets change it to "evidence of doing so will result in the account holder being asked to stop doing that and change her password". Until that change is made you are supposed to be bound to enforce it, paisan.

This particularly frosts me because I was indeffed, summarily and without notice, when it was mistakenly thought that I was sharing my account (in a less egregious manner than this user has been). And I was an admin at the time too. And I have seen other good users --- really good users -- get in a lot of trouble over this.

So what's the deal? Do nazis get special consideration that admins don't? Or has the application of the rule changed? Or are you just blowing smoke? Or what? Gee I guess we didn't have much time to discuss these issues did we...

At any rate, as I said this issue is not going to go away. I'll presently take up the whole question of how we are going to enforce, or not enforce, WP:NOSHARE, and your name is going to come up, and not necessarily in the most pleasant manner. You had better be prepared to defend your action.

Or you could just do the right thing now. Herostratus (talk) 22:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

What's this nazi stuff about? How does my userpage figure into this? How does it even matter if I am an administrator or not? I went to his talkpage - it was explained there about account sharing. He/she apologized, promised to change the password, and not to share the account. I don't see the problem here, crisis averted. If or if not the user is a nazi is really beyond the scope of WP:NOSHARE, as they agreed / promised to no longer share the account. I would happily re-open the topic if you are unhappy with the closure I provided. SQL^{Query me!} 23:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Just to make sure that this discussion runs it's course - I have re-opened it for you here. SQL^{Query me!} 23:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Additionally, per your request, I have changed my userpage to make it less nazi-friendly. I am plainly marked as an admin. Sorry for the confusion. SQL^{Query me!} 23:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, I mean its not a huge deal, but yeah its better if you have a userpage that says you're an admin. And yeah it matters, because when we go to the admin notice board we want to be sure that we're being heard by admins and not just a random mook with 5 edits.

As the rest, enh. I gave you the pointer to a thread about this guy before, and now I've broken out excerpts to make it easier. And whileI have a functional sense of humor myself, it doesn't include nazis and fascists. There are a lot of good and very serious reasons why we don't want nazis here, but I'm not going to explain them now, except that the principle of "No. Just... no" applies. And it's asking a lot of our editors to have to put up with this person. You should just dump him while you have the chance, and which if I read the rule correctly your required to do, because dumped he is eventually going to be, but with a lot more work and suffering first. But your call. Herostratus (talk) 06:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

@Herostratus: I was going to leave this buried - but reading it, and what you're posting elsewhere - no, let's continue. Do you understand how ridiculous it is that you had to dig as far as Jimbo for someone that's been an admin longer than me? Of course he is - he was de facto the FIRST admin, and project founder (I've only been an admin for around 9 years now). You didn't list ANY diffs at ANI, just ranted on about how he was sharing accounts, without even discussing it with the user first, and then went on a rant about how he/she was a nazi. And threatening me when I closed the thread? Seriously? I wasn't even the first, or only admin to agree that the issue had been handled at the time. You need to learn to interact with people, badly. SQL^{Query me!} 01:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

What I'm posting elsewhere? What elsewhere? I'm not posting anything anywhere. You mean Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes/Nat Soc? I'm allowed to state my opinion and make my case. Or is it Wikipedia talk:Username policy#RfC: Is it time to relax a bit on WP:NOSHARE? where I'm just trying to clarify what the rule is. It's a neutrally-worded RfC, reasonably well constructed, and I myself am neutral in respect to the question, and I am allowed to do that. I'm not the one who is applying the rule in a wildly inconsistent manner. It may well be that the rule is too harsh, and if people feel so the proposal will win through. In the meantime, while "Regardless of what the rule says, mods have discretion" is reasonable position, its not a slam-dunk irrefutable position, possibly for copyright reasons (I'm not sure of that, but possibly), so lets see how the discussion plays out.

As far as discussing with the user first, one of the very many reason we don't want nazis here is that people will not talk to nazis and I'm one of them. It's beyond what can be expected of normal people. I dont know if this guy is a nazi or "just" a fascist or nazi sympathizer but it's all close enough to me. We had to... enh I can't teach 20th century history here. You know why or you don't.

Yeah, calling Jimbo an administrator longer than you was a deliberate understatement. He's hella more than that. Jimbo is the founder. He's been on the cover of Time for his contributions to the project. You haven't. That ought to engender a certain amount of humility IMO. A lot of people respect Jimbo a lot, both as the founder and driver of the project. My personal opinion is that he also has good instincts for a lot of things, including a "No.... just no" approach to obvious and deliberate destructive nonsense and/or trolling, rather than hand-wringing over whether a person has free-speech right to troll the project or a human right to engage in deliberately destructive nonsense and or whether we can prove that Hitler was any worse than George Washington or whatever. I'm just saying.

It's not clear to me (still) whether the person in question had a userbox that said "this person is nazi" or "this person is a fascist" or what (since the person had it removed from sight... which makes me have to assume the worst) or even how much the difference matters. This is a person who needs to be gone, period, end of sentence. The the extent that you don't realize it, that does not reflect well on you IMO. Or would you rather we lose our Jewish editors and many others? Would that be better?

As to the rest, yeah you have some points. You're entirely correct that I'm being entirely too abrupt and too cross at times. I'm working on it and that's all I'm prepared to say about that. Fine, I didn't provide diffs right off. I provided a link to a thread with hella diffs. Later I posted individual diffs of quotes. Quotes, but from reasonable people. I'm not equipped to make a 30-man-hour (or whatever it'll take) combing through this individual's entire corpus edit by edit. It's not my job. I'm just not up to it. It's an administrative function and if nobody in the admin corps is up to it then I suppose it'll have to ride. Herostratus (talk) 06:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I hope you realize, Herostratus, that repeatedly calling a fellow editor a "Nazi" is a clear personal attack that could earn you a block. I think your rants have been tolerated up to this point but that time is nearing an end. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I re-read WP:NOSHARE again, and can't find mention of Nazis there. That was the problem you raised at AN/I. That's the problem I was trying to help address, since you've got a whole passive-aggressive "I won't talk to you, but I'll complain to everyone about you" thing going on. At the end of the day - the user addressed the account sharing problem - which was the issue you raised, since you refuse to talk to them.

To address your other point - I am not immediately aware of any rules limiting editing to editors of certain faiths or beliefs. SQL^{Query me!} 04:58, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

I am. Herostratus (talk) 02:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Premature_archiving_of_collapsed_ANI_discussions

Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:47, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey, do you think that DicksonRidingDicks could potentially be a sockpuppet of FAMASFREENODE? There's been some question about whether or not FAMASFREENODE ‎is a troll, likely one evading a block. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

• My rationale for this was that the editor's first action was to post on the user's talk page, then on ANI. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:40, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Not really sure. Could be a frame-job / troll attempt as well. Either way - both are blocked now. SQL^{Query me!} 03:41, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I found your funny block history while looking at the history of Oshwah, who's currently up for RFA, and whom you blocked humorously a few years ago. This led me to your own yet funnier block log :-) Have you ever encountered ThisIsaTest? Nyttend (talk) 02:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Re this which I selfreverted I apologize. Your full comment to Scott was probably adequate for this specific complaint.
On an FYI basis I'd like to explain what was on my mind. The impetus for my ill-considered followup was that I had forgotten the full comment you left, and was only remembering the heading result "content dispute which somewhat irks and embarrasses me.... only asses run to drama boards over mere content disputes, and so it makes me look like an ass incapable of meaningful WP:Dispute resolution, of which I have done plenty here and in real life. But then again, I'm probably being overly sensitive in the imaginary audience sense.
Getting back to substantive business, I'm hopeful there can be some discussion about the proper role of BRRD (if any) at the WP:BRD page, and more on how to elaborate (if at all) on the EW policy's text about EWing "without even coming close" to 3RR. As I try to generate discussion on those points your comments will be welcome. There is already a thread at the BRD essay talk page.
For clarity, I'm not asking for any reply but if you're inspired, please do. Just wanted to explain why I first posted a followup at EW board and then thought twice about it. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:36, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

I have a feeling that Meganesia and previous user Lionhead99 (who has been blocked indefinitely on 29 June 2013) may possibly all be the same user. More or less passes the duck test. 123.136.106.237 (talk) 07:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Could I request a lock on a page?Resourcer1 (talk) 15:42, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

I started a discussion on WP:ANI on a matter which you are peripherally involved. The direct link is: [6]. This concerns Peterstrempel (talk · contribs). --Yamla (talk) 11:15, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

So you don't mind if I Close It Down Than? — God's Godzilla 06:24, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

I just wanted to leave you a message and say hello. I hope you're doing well. <3 ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@Oshwah: I've been great - but busy IRL! How's adminship treating you? SQL^{Query me!} 03:26, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Treating me fine. It's honestly like what many admins say... "not a big deal"... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The user is similar to Beyonce's as Special:Contributions/Musicloverforev1234, Special:Contributions/Musiceditor123456, Special:Contributions/Jlittle222. 123.136.107.241 (talk) 03:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

The fastest way to get this dealt with is likely going to be to file a report at WP:SSP. SQL^{Query me!} 03:54, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

	The 12 Days of Wikipedia On the 12th day of Christmas Jimbo sent to me 12 BLPs 11 RFAs 10 New Users 9 Barn Stars 8 Admins Blocking 7 Socks Socking 6 Clerks Clerking 5. Check Users Checking 4 Over Sighters Hiding 3 GAs 2. Did You Knows and an ARB in a pear tree. -May your holiday season be filled with joy, laughter and good health. --Cameron11598

Happy New Year!

SQL,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 05:47, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Please enjoy! Waggie (talk) 06:20, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

The discussion regarding the edit summaries of Magic links bot has been moved to WP:BOTN#Concern about Magic links bot. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Saw that, thanks for the heads up! SQL^{Query me!} 02:55, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

I recently raised a discussion on general fixes and bots. The main idea behind was that we can't force bot owners to turn on general fixes but on the other hand Headbomb and others said that they use general fixes when they operate their bot. The problem here is that I claim that the community wants minor tasks to be done as part of bigger tasks. And this task is huge since it covers 800,000 pages so it's the biggest opportunity to make hundreds of minor tasks at the same time.

In the past we missed two other big opportunities. It was the day we added Persondata in all biographies and the day we removed Persondat fro all biographies. Recall that after Persondata became obsolete, the last bot run did not affect the visual outcome and nothing at the page at all. It was clearly a bot run to clear wikicode.

The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_156#Proposal_for_new_requirement_for_AWB_bots adnd the proposal is at Wikipedia_talk:Bot_policy#Should_bots_perform_multiple_edits_in_a_page.3F.-- Magioladitis (talk) 07:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The requested function is to correct magic links. I would prefer to get the primary function right, then we can discuss ancillary fixes / tasks performed along the way. I am very concerned at this time that your focus is far more towards the general fixes than it is getting the primary function you asked to perform right. SQL^{Query me!} 08:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

To get the primary funciton right is fairly easy. We have skip conditions, we have trackng cateegories and the procedure will go just fine :) I already did some thouand of edits by main account adn there were only few problems reported. In fact, if the discussion about all the related bots running on the same set of settings was completed we would have done that already. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

When you're ready for another run - please indicate this at the BRFA. SQL^{Query me!} 08:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I can run from my bot account manually to avoid these problems till I get a proper regex. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's a wise course of action. SQL^{Query me!} 08:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

BRFAs provide 3 options: "Automatic, Supervised, or Manual". One is to run manually from the bot account. Running bot tasks manually in order to have 100% supervision of edits is an option provided. It was not a "threat". I accept your apologies. :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:57, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I apologise if there was a misunderstanding: a) Ofcourse adding the regex is the better solution b) Having a 100% bugs free automated version is not possible. Even Magic bots and PrimeBOT produced errors. I have reported some by myself. c) The are trcking categories to help fix any problem produced d) In case you want a 100% error free run I am offerring to spend several hours daily in front of my laptop and check every sinlge diff before saving till we find a better solution. I am used in spending many hours in front of my laptop. So it is something possibel for me evn not 1005 plausible because I really like to spend my time reading Wikipedia articles and wikicode insetad of clicking Ctrl+S. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:13, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Main problem solved thanks to Primefak. I did 25 test edits without general fixes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:46, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. This is a heads up since it's been a week form the last time we contacted. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:11, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes, two editors made two bold edits to this controversial page (a summary of the whole page via nutshell and a new section on churches). Both edits were challenged. In both cases, the text was restored without finding consensus on the talk page or overcoming the objections. You protected the page with these bold changes in place, with nothing resembling consensus to add them on the talk page. Can I presume that you will not object to restoring the consensus version of the page once protection is removed? (It would probably be least controversial for you to do this yourself, of course). Thanks. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:51, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Yeah no problem. SQL^{Query me!} 21:39, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for cutting that vandalism off so quickly and protecting the page National Finals Rodeo. Tonight is the first night of the National Finals Rodeo so that probably has something to do with it. But then they vandalized some other rodeo pages too. I am an editor in the rodeo area. Anyway, it is much appreciated, I didn't want to babysit it all night! :) dawnleelynn^(talk) 00:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

No problem, I also added that link they were spamming to the spam blacklist. Hopefully it helps cut down on some of that crap. SQL^{Query me!} 00:37, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Awesome! Didn't know about the spam blacklist, good to know. dawnleelynn^(talk) 02:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I saw this. Interesting report! Is there a publicly accessible version? Run me? :) --Hammersoft (talk) 20:51, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Here ya go, [7]. I'm going to make it a webtool once I get my access sorted. SQL^{Query me!} 20:56, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

• A tool would be quite useful.

I found some issues, but perhaps there's nothing that can be done about them.

• This report resulted in a block of the account. I don't know why your tool didn't pick it up.
• This report resulted in this block. Again, I don't know why your tool didn't pick it up. There was a global lock too; maybe that threw it?
• This report resulted in block. I don't know why your tool didn't find it.
• This report contained a typo; it was corrected a moment later by me, and the account was blocked a few minutes later. It's understandable why your tool didn't pick it up, but maybe a check against case sensitivity if the account tagged at AIV isn't registered?
• This one is a special case; I made this request when that account was already blocked; I was asking for a change in the block settings. The bot immediately removed the request, so I then made this request with an intentionally wrong username (adding 'NNN' to the end) so the bot wouldn't immediately remove it. The change in block settings I requested was done [8].
• This one was just a typo done by accidentally copy/pasting {{Vandal|username}} per the instructions and not changing "username". Maybe it could ignore "username" as an account name as that is obviously in error. This request immediately preceded the above request, and was done in error. The same text for a request appeared in the next AIV report I made, albeit with the proper username put in.
• This one shows as a never been blocked, but was again a typo. The actual account name was corrected by another editor. This time, I inadvertently left the "e" on the end of "username" in when I selected "usernam" (minus the trailing 'e') for replacing the username. No idea how to account for a typo like that :/ Leave it to a human to really mess things up.

So, with those out of the way I'm batting a thousand :) 100% --Hammersoft (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed feedback, I'll start on those bugs! SQL^{Query me!} 21:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: I've fixed a few of those now. I'll likely do more typo checking once it becomes a webtool. SQL^{Query me!} 22:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Not quite sure how I stumbled upon this section, and I can't compete with the extensive feedback above, but as someone who sporadically makes a large number of AIV reports I'd really look forward to a webtool of this! I'm unaware if Hammersoft has run into this (fairly sure I have), but sometimes a small number of IPs reported are subsequently range blocked instead (from memory, usually /64 on IPv6 addresses). This may have been already accounted for (apologies if so), but I thought I'd give it a mention if this is something that could cause errors if the IP directly reported is not blocked along with the range. –72 (talk) 21:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@72: That's an excellent idea! I added it to the talkpage that I'm using to track bugs temporarily. SQL^{Query me!} 22:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Just out of curiousity, does it discern between blocks that were a direct result of the AIV report, or just notes that an account has been blocked subsequently? (-i.e., but possibly for a reason unrelated to the original report). Cool beans though :) Serial Number54129^{...speculates} 22:53, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

At the moment, just "has the account been blocked". I am planning on narrowing it down to ~24 hours. SQL^{Query me!} 22:56, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Regarding counting certain keywords in reports, I feel that if it's not limited to presets, the possibility of self configuring a desired keyword would be helpful. For example, a large number of reports I make reference the edit filter (variations of "filter log" "edit filter" "abuse filter"), especially on school IPs that are typically blocked for long periods of time. I have seen little to no-one using similar keywords. Out of curiosity, does the script check who the blocking admin is, or just whether the account is blocked? I wonder if the possibility of an AIV style "(blocked 31 hours by Example Admin (AO ACB))" would be of any interest. Maybe it's overkill. (Could you run a report on me? :)) –72 (talk) 23:29, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

That's a good idea - once I have it up as a webapp it should be easy enough to allow 5-10 fields for keyword counting. I've got yours running at the moment, but you've made ~1600 edits to AIV (second only to Oshwah's ~3000! Which is running now), so it'll take a little bit. SQL^{Query me!} 23:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@72: Here ya go! [9] - Looks like the oversight bug hit a couple of yours. SQL^{Query me!} 23:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! It seems the range block issue did too (the eight IPs 121.1.190.27 (talk · contribs) through 110.54.171.167 (talk · contribs) and a few others). This one was definitely what came to mind earlier. –72 (talk) 00:09, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@72: Seems like I've found a way around the Oversight bug at least. [10] SQL^{Query me!} 01:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Exactly[11] what I mean by unable to take any criticisms. Not a temperament for a administrator-hopeful. Especially considering how they've already removed my comments once, in the hopes that removing them would make the questions asked go away. They also did so after they already withdrew the RfA, and closed the discussion. Boomer Vial^{Happy Holidays! • Contribs} 06:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

I think that message perhaps would have been better off left here, if you wanted to discuss it with me. Between the tone of the message, and the timing (mere minutes after that RFA went spectacularly sideways), I can kinda see where removing it might be the most civil way a person could respond given the circumstances. That being said, I think it would have been wiser to address your comment (and those like it - there were other comments in this vein at RFA) after some time to cool off. I'm older-school perhaps - I passed my own RFA at 44/13/7 @ 4 months, and 3200 edits. From the "adminship is no big deal" era. I've always had the same RFA test "Do I think this editor will deliberately abuse the tools?" as I had 10 years ago. You can / have possibly seen this stated in many of my responses over the years. SQL^{Query me!} 03:11, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello SQL, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018. May you and your family have a Happy, Safe and Prosperous New Year!
Happy editing, --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 05:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Appreciated SQL:

In your message you ask if I'm running a bot or script.

Well, my answer is I'm not running a bot nor a script.

Out of curiosity, why do you ask that?

Greetings from Colombia and may God bless you.

--Universalis (talk) 13:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@Universalis:Because you were creating ~4 pages a min for ~10 mins. It looked botlike to me, so I figured I'd ask (I'm a member of the Bot Approvals Group on enwiki). SQL^{Query me!} 02:55, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

I answer your question with another question: Is anything in the rules of Wikipedia that forbids to archive other users' talkpage? Personally, I don't see any problem on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Babelia (talk • contribs) 15:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Would it not make it difficult for that user to receive messages intended for them? SQL^{Query me!} 22:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not to mention, you're doing the exact same rapid-fire page creations as the account you archived was. Again, around 4 pages per min. SQL^{Query me!} 22:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited .380 ACP, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CCI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

These are WIP, but I figured someone would be amused. CAT:RFU History, CAT:CSD History, CAT:AFD History. They should go on forever - only about 24h of data right now. Not sure how use google charts to display the data in a more usable way once it gets out to ~6 mos+. I'd welcome any suggestions from anyone with charts experience. SQL^{Query me!} 02:14, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Also wouldn't mind doing this for other categories (or maybe groups of categories) if genuinely useful. SQL^{Query me!} 02:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey, you looked at the unblock request by User:Mike in il; CU confirms they're also User:Maoler. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! SQL^{Query me!} 16:33, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Do you think you could review that unblock request... as it only falls under general sanctions any administrator is allowed to overturn it if they see fit, or decline it in like manner. Just thought I'd say that so you knew it wasn't one of those block appeals that has to make it to AE or some such... and because I trust your judgement. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 01:08, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I think I'd like to wait for more opinions on the block. My opinion is that it's a good block. I've already been back and forth (haven't gotten much sleep today, long workday)... I think it would be best if someone else reviews it. SQL^{Query me!} 01:53, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Rank editors by length of average edit summary length. Limit to editors with at least 1000 edits. Exclude bots. Perhaps generated weekly? Something something

select count(user_id) from user join user_groups on ( ug_user = user_id ) where user_editcount > 1000 AND ug_group != "bot";

(~30s query, returns 44276 editors) I'll flesh it out tomorrow. Shouldn't be too hard. SQL^{Query me!} 03:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Related:

select avg( char_length( rev_comment ) ) from revision WHERE rev_user_text = "SQL";

SQL^{Query me!} 03:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Ohboy, maybe not such a good idea.

+-----------------------------------+
| avg( char_length( rev_comment ) ) |
+-----------------------------------+
| 67.7912 |
+-----------------------------------+
1 row in set (39 min 5.81 sec)SQL^{Query me!} 04:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi! It looks like your rangeblocks of Linode IPs yesterday inadvertently included the Wiki Education Dashboard, which needs to make OAuth edits on behalf of users. The IP for the server is 45.56.98.206. Could you modify the block to exclude that? Thanks! --Sage (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:49, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh no! Per our testing / conversation off-wiki, I've unblocked this range. It's very strange since this range is globally locked as well. SQL^{Query me!} 15:19, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks like User:2600:3C03:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 was also blocking. Unblocked as well. SQL^{Query me!} 15:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi!

I'm following up on this block: the WHOIS information says that this is supposed to be OVH's DSL range (and not hosting range). However, I was wondering how you stumbled upon it, was there a suspected proxy? -- Luk ^talk 13:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Unblocked, I had gone thru OVH's ranges. I had recently learned a seperate OVH unit offers DSL, and was waiting for an answer from them regrading which ranges are DSL. SQL^{Query me!} 13:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello, SQL. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Rentier (talk) 15:38, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Replied SQL^{Query me!} 21:33, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

User:SQL/Sandbox 2 is requesting an unblock! Or at least, it's in the Requests_for_unblock category. I suggest prefixing all Categories there with a : to stop that page showing up, but didn't want to make the edit myself in case you are testing something specific. :) --Yamla (talk) 14:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

@Yamla: D'oh! I was messing with a query, and didn't think about the category namespace. Thanks for the heads up! SQL^{Query me!} 22:45, 6 March 2018 (UTC)