Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:49, 1 March 2020

| Berean Hunter | Talk Page | Sandbox | Sandbox2 | Leave me a message |

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This user believes in equal pay for women and doesn't understand why it should be any other way.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Plausible "switch to mobile" BE

Hello. Last month you blocked 142.116.165.244 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). That IP made this edit, among others, to Human genetic clustering in Dec., and is (obviously) the same editor as 142.118.184.153 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). A couple of IP6s in the same location have been repeating this edit: etc. and . Normally this would be a minor thing, but edits like this are a warning sign of more disruptive behavior. I thought you might want to take a closer look. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 02:31, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

This was already addressed.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Cannot edit

Hi I’ve never attempted to edit a Misplaced Pages page before but I saw an inaccuracy on the “Ann Glanville” page, I attempted to edit but couldn’t. I don’t even understand why but it appears to have something to do with you. I have no idea how this all works so here’s my email address and perhaps you’ll contact me and let me know Chrisbakerstairman@yahoo.co.uk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.194.55 (talk) 16:23, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

I didn't find any blocks on your range and you were able to edit the next day.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, kindly tell what kind of wrongdoing hasbeen done from my IP Address.

Whenever I am attempting to edit I am getting a message like

You are currently unable to edit Misplaced Pages.

You are still able to view pages, but you are not currently able to edit, move, or create them.

Editing from 2409:4061:0:0:0:0:0:0/36 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪Berean Hunter‬ for the following reason(s):

I never do vandalism and I never share my device with anybody else. I want to know that how can I become again edit without logging in?

Notably my gadgets change their ip time to time idk why (maybe geographic location change???) At far past I got notification even without logging in, about edits that i never made.

regards.

RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 18:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

You can still edit while logged in and you were helped at the Teahouse.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Details of ban

Why did you ban me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.152.191.140 (talk) 17:12, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Show me where I banned you.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Angelique Rockas

I was wondering if you could maybe drop the protection level to Extended Confirmed protection because Full protection stops editors like me from making helpful edits such as fixing typos or adding sources. I recognize sockpuppetry is a problem on this article, but since you protected that article indefinitely, no change has ever been made to it. Aasim 20:26, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I see you haven't edited since 2 February. I reduced it to 5 years ECP. The editors will be on the look out for sockpuppets now. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 04:41, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I hope that you are correct CambridgeBayWeather but the sockmaster has been successful at getting other editors to proxy for them which led to the full protection to prevent it from happening again. This was the last time. Other blocked accounts have tried on talkpages of established accounts as well as IPs that I cannot point out. I was trying to get the sockmaster to stop trying to manipulate others.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 05:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

New sockpuppet investigation: WorldCreatorFighter

Hello BH, Please see the new investigation linked below. I noticed you blocked a few WorldCreatorFighter alts so I thought I should contact you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/WorldCreatorFighter

Yours, - Hunan201p (talk) 20:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

•  Done.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:58, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: IssueICLXVI, February 2020

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at a failed German counterattack in the Battle of Normandy

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

A beer for you!

for giving me an inspiration on signature. I have copied a part of your old signature. here is how it looks now. regards. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:54, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

• Cheers, DBigXray. Have you seen your signature on Windows IE? I use Ubuntu and the arrows look right on Chrome and Firefox but when I was shown what my sig looked like on IE, the arrows were out of position...the long dashes were too high up and didn't look right. That was several years ago so maybe they have improved and of course you might not care. :) I don't know if it looks right on a phone or not.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 05:14, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

oh it looks even better, if not as good on phone. IE might have fixed it. If they didn't, then probably they know it doesn't matter as people have shifted.--⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 05:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Block

Why have I been blocked please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:9C12:EB00:98B6:5390:19F:5B (talk) 21:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Why have I been blocked please?--2A00:23C5:9C07:B300:B92C:32B5:E4C9:EA80 (talk) 07:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

You would have to link to the block for me to know what you are talking about.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 05:06, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Assistance Requested on Kentucky Colonel Article

I noticed your comments on the Misplaced Pages article Kentucky Colonel and know you understand the commission and the honor well. I am one of the editors for the page and a commissioner for Kentucky Colonels International, we started in Berea in 1998. There has been a lawsuit filed against us for using the term "Kentucky Colonels" as part of our name, the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels has trademarked the term as their own and are making its use exclusive for their commercial use and profit (the purpose of trademarks right?). There is more information about this on our website Kentucky Colonels International and information can also be found in the Google news headlines. You may also like to know we uncovered more history about Kentucky Colonels that discredits current understanding based on research of the Courier Journal and the State Archives. The information is also on our website. I cannot edit the page because I have been enjoined in the lawsuit and mentioned in the Herald Leader as being responsible for removal of their information, which I did not. We will appreciate your objective perspectives and vigilance, I have also notified BarrelProof about this. Problemsmith (talk) 02:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Problemsmith, I've sent you an email.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

March Madness 2020

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Krish!

Hi, the recently unblocked user Krish! seems to be back to his old ways of whitewashing the page of his favourite subject Priyanka Chopra by adding unsourced puffery which I removed in this edit and removing negative critical notices of her performance. When reverted and asked to maintain stasquo, he resorted to his usual edit-warring instead of starting a talk page discussion, as he was advised to do. Also pinging Cyphoidbomb -- do you condone such reverts mere hours after the person has been back on the standard offer? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Looks to me like you're both edit-warring.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

This is what this editor wanted. See Cyphoidbomb's page. I have been discussing with him about Krimuk 2.0's constant revert of my edits. This editor has been constantly reverting my edits and provoking me to edit war but I have been avoiding as I don't want to be blocked again. I tried to extend olive branch to this editor but he shut me down and has been constantly reverting my edits. He has violated NPOV as I have posted about that on Cyphoidbomb's page. Now what should I do now? I cannot even edit because I fear of being blocked. Krish | Talk 18:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The puffery that Krimuk 2.0 claims was there in Chopra's article since 2014 to 2018 supported by strong sources until he revomed positive stuff and added a lot of negative stuff after I got blocked. Cyphoidbomb Note how Krimuk has portrayed this to make me look as the aggressor and culprit. I have not reverted the above two links he has given. In fact i respected his reverts and his POV and left the way he wanted. Read below how he has completely tried to show me as the bad person as he accepts below that he reverted my edit to prove that only he is right.Krish | Talk 19:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

"as he accepts below that he reverted my edit to prove that only he is right." Same old WP:CIR and Misplaced Pages:Conspiracy theory accusations. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 19:35, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

What I did was revert to WP:STATUSQUO when negative critical notices were removed in an attempt to whitewash the subject. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

All you're saying is you're right and Krish! is wrong, unfortunately a stereotypical response from an edit warrior.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry if I am being misunderstood but what I'm asking for is a discussion on talk page for why negative critical notices should be removed. Until consensus can be gained, the article should remain at the WP:STATUSQUO. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Bbb23 See this. He din't just revert my edit of critical notice BUT reverted my last 5 edits at once and that is why I reverted him. If he wanted to revert my critical notice edit then he should have reverted this one. BUT no he UNDID all my last 5 to 6 edit at once. Yes, all my edits without any explaination but made it look like he was just undoing my "critical review removal" edit. Also read what I have been telling Cyphoid on his talk page.Krish | Talk 18:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

What I did was restore to the trimmed version of the lead, that summarised the info (which the lead should do), which you first undid. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Are you telling me I undid your edit in a way that I had to undo your one edit twice? I didn't undid your edit. I RE-WROTE the way it was earlier. I did not revert. Then I saw you have changed the below line and re-wrote that too. How is that revert? A REVERT is called what you did here. I did not revert you.Krish | Talk 18:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

"I RE-WROTE the way it was earlier" ==> that's precisely what a revert is. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

NO. This is called revert. You have reverted me three times in last 24 hourd directly and undid several of my edits. What I meant by re-wrote is present in the edit summary. Your edit says Chopra is national and global ambassador but she is not the current ambassador. Chopra was promoted from national to global ambassador duties in 2016 and that's why the text was written that way. Your edit was contradictory so I re-wrote that line BUT never Undid your edit. You are clearly trying to present everything differently so that I will be blocked again. When you started reverting me I went to Cyphoidbomb to ask why it was happening as I myself fearful of my block. Bbb23 You need to see that article's history and Cyphoidbom's page. I have updated the article and added several things that were missing.Krish | Talk 18:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

If she is not currently the national and global ambassador, then I accept my mistake in that particular edit, because the text seemed to suggest otherwise. I have restorted that bit. Thanks for clearing it up. The rest, however, should remain at WP:STATUSQUO unless the community decides that certain negative critical notices should be removed. If they do, then I'll be the first to revert myself. As for the rest, I did not undo any of your well-sourced additions. What I found problematic, I did, and requested that you gain consensus on the talk page first. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

But that doesn't change the fact that you reverted me more than 3 times in last 24 hours and removed a lot of my edits and came here to show me as the aggressor. I had explained all of my edits with long summaries so that I won't be misunderstood yet you have been reverting my edits. You had reverted many of my edits which I later understood was right such as the NFA and then I went to your page to discuss and let those reverts be the way you wanted. I agreed with your reverts as I respected your POV. Like this I did not revert even though Chopra's performance was not negatively received as your edit made it seem. I have been preparing a discussion with reviews about Chopra's performance in DDD so I did not revert your edit. Plus why did I remove this negative review of Jai Gangajal, you ask? Well, it's in the explaination. But the point is you reverted all my "good edits" (as you know claim} without looking at them as you thought I was trying to whitewash. It should be noted that all those negative reviews you added in Chopra's article without discussion in 2018 After my block. These reviews were in the article since 2015 but you only tried to balance after 2018. Would you like to explain?Krish | Talk 19:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I was not reverted by anyone for my well-sourced additions to the article in the past year. If you disagree with them, open a neutrally-worded talk page discussion and ask the community to gain consensus on whether they should remain or not. That's how this encyclopedia works. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 19:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

You were not reverted because other editors are not ready to challenge your edits or just don't care. Only I would have challenged it but I was blocked. You behave as if you WP:OWN the articles on wikipedia. Could you explain why you significantly changed Bajirao Mastani article that was decided after several days of grueling discussions on its talk page? You removed the version of the article that was the consensus of the same[REDACTED] community that you are talking about. But you reverted it without discussing with any editor forget community, why? As per WP: I Don't Like It or WP: OWN? Could you care to explain? Isn't this a violation of[REDACTED] rules to remove something from article that was reached after consensus by the community or you just do it as you please?Krish | Talk 19:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)