Archives

1

He has been unresponsive. I have been trying to contact him since January 1, (note that on December 31 the stats stop after TNZ in the alphabet for EN WP). They work for January 1 and then the stop entirely since.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:50, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not realize that I had created an attack page. I was merely trying to create a report from this page: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse--Akhooha (talk) 23:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I've also just now removed it from the "Reports" list on Wikipedia:Long-term abuse--Akhooha (talk) 23:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This really doesn't classify as LTA, and it is so far away that I've been essentially forced to tag it under CSD G10. There is no evidence presented of the editor using sockpuppets, the editor has never been blocked, and the "abuse" is both questionable, and definitely not long-term. Please be a lot more careful in future. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:51, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will be more careful in the future. It looks like I didn't fully understand what is meant by "Long-Term Abuse". Looking again at the guidelines for reporting abuse (Wikipedia:Long-term abuse), I see that indeed she has not previously been blocked (she has only received warnings about her disruptive editing), so I shouldn't have used the "Create Report" form on that page. I am, however, curious about the phrase "a long duration of time" --- how long a period is that? I'd be grateful also if you could explain what you mean when you say that you've tagged it under "CSD G10". I've been unable to find an explanation of "CSD G10". Thank you for your attention and for your help.--Akhooha (talk) 23:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can help you with your second question. CSD mean Criteria for Speedy Deletion and G10 is the code placed on your page to justify it receiving a speedy delete. If a questionable page doesn't meet one of the criteria, it needs to go to WP:AfD (Articles for Deletion) where there will be a more involved discussion on the merits of the article. For more on CSD codes, go to Wikipedia:CSD. Hope this helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)@Liz: Actually that page cannot go to AfD, as it's not an article in the main namespace. It's actually in the Wikipedia Project: namespace, which means it would have to go through MfD. (And judging from this user's behavior, he is probably new to the process, so please avoid using three-letter acronyms when conversing with such.) TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 00:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? I spelled out the meaning of the terms CSD and AFD while you mention MfD without any explanation and it is by far a more confusing process. Please take your own advice, TeleComNasSprVen. I was trying to be of assistance, you don't need to be so snippy to both me and Luke. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Liz, I think you've been a little unfair to TeleCom with regards to what they said to you; using three-letter acronyms was a bit silly when they had already confused this user. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 01:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Are you serious, Lukeno94? I explained what acronyms stood for...YOU used "CSD G10" and I told him what it stood for, something you neglected to do yourself. I'm really sorry that I took the time to answer this new user's question. I didn't know that trying to be friendly and help someone was going to open me to criticism. Lesson learned. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:31, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I may have missed the hatnote, if it was located there at the time of my post, then I apologize (it was very late when I made my comment). 11:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Sorry about the template warning above. Don't be too intimidated by Luke's knee-jerk reaction, but in any case he is right about the long-term abuse page. That page should normally be clerked by Administrators and CheckUsers only; the latter user grohp CheckUsers are special people given tools to be able to track down and block the underlying IP addresses behind a person's account, if it's being abused. (Because IP addresses could potentially expose a real life identity, the intrusive use of CU data is constantly monitored by the Wikimedia Foundation.) This category for example is representative of a long-term abuse case where a single user has operated over three hundred different accounts abusively to try to undermine Wikipedia processes. The history page for that same category page show the reports originating from at least 2006, and ending only recently at around 2011, so I'd say a user has to have demonstrably abused Wikipedia for quite a long time.

The last point regarding "CSD G10": The wikilink from the template {{db-g10}} which is used on that page references section G10 of one of Wikipedia's policy pages, here called the Criteria for speedy deletion policy. Under this policy, pages may be deleted in clear instances of attack or libel. For example, if User:John Doe was a famous public figure and someone created an article disparaging him with swear words, as is often the case of school vandalism, it can be quickly deleted. That is often the use case. Anyway, don't mean to ramble on but I hope my information has helped. Cheers, TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 00:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I did not deliberately leave a templated warning, so before accusing me of a "knee-jerk reaction", TeleComNasSprVen, actually bother to look at the editing history. You'll see that Twinkle dropped that in when I tagged the page under G10. The edit summary explicitly states "Notification: speedy deletion nomination of an attack page. (TW)" Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 01:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apologies for not doing so earlier; perhaps the checkbox at the top of the Twinkle form for preventing notification to the affected user's talkpage should be displayed more prominently, a working flaw in the software I might try to correct later. But anyway, I did not intend to carry any disputes here, merely to try to have the new user learn the ropes. I'm off this page for the time being, but I wish to part with a welcome for this user to contribute constructively elsewhere for the time being. There's lots of things to do! TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 01:35, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• If I had known exactly which template the CSD G10 tagging used, then I would've disabled the notification. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]