User talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2021/November
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:SpacemanSpiff. 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. |
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Eight years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Re-protection
Per your message last time[1] I would like to request long semi-protection due to frequent disruption on this page. Thanks. LearnIndology (talk) 06:51, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
You along with @Yamla and David notMD: have already raised concerns regarding the editing and frequent disruption by Itcouldbepossible. Many of their edits are still not useful but now they have gone ahead for advanced WP:ROLLBACK permission at WP:PERM. Please do take a note of their activities so that any future disruption/misuse to Wikipedia by them is avoided. Thank you. 2402:3A80:6D8:8342:191C:AC95:3EBE:F4B3 (talk) 20:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
- Latest example of misunderstanding vandalism is here 2402:3A80:6D8:8342:191C:AC95:3EBE:F4B3 (talk) 20:16, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
- Will do. Obvious problem is an editor who wants to improve Wikipedia via "maintenance" (his word) without having an base of experience. David notMD (talk) 01:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- While the hat collecting does seem problematic, I'm not too concerned about this particular revert. These mistakes happen often and he did self revert within a few minutes and that's good. The editcountitis issue does need to be controlled as he has been making a lot of edits to just pad that up, as long as content space stays free of those problems I think we should be ok. —SpacemanSpiff 03:28, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- @David notMD and SpacemanSpiff: You are right, as long as they are not disruptive they are welcome to contribute and help as per their understanding. But their queries at WP:TEAHOUSE and actions sometimes make me to think that they are pretending to be innocent. For e.g. here Itcouldbepossible asks about "user levels" and he is also advised
it's rarely of interest to anyone else. This essay on WP:HATCOLLECTING could be useful on the mostly harms/some benefits of gamifying your user page with statistics.
. But after that, within few days they applied for WP:ROLLBACK. This led me to think that they may be inclined to WP:HATSHOP. I may have been too much suspicious and wrong here. If they really want to help fight vandalism, they can give it a go at WP:CVSCHOOL. Thanks. 2402:3A80:6C5:CAF9:ED2B:9972:C275:302F (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- @David notMD and SpacemanSpiff: You are right, as long as they are not disruptive they are welcome to contribute and help as per their understanding. But their queries at WP:TEAHOUSE and actions sometimes make me to think that they are pretending to be innocent. For e.g. here Itcouldbepossible asks about "user levels" and he is also advised