User talk:Herbythyme/Arc6

Re:

Eheheh, I got it from Tiptoey's talkpage history ^^ --Vituzzu (talk) 10:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, don't make me blush :p --Vituzzu (talk) 10:25, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I was about to answer but I had some wikiemergencies in the meanwhile...can you email me the ip of this idiot? --Vituzzu (talk) 11:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Well, I commented the entry on global blacklist (actually you should do it by yourself) unfortunately username/titleblacklist prevents also automatic account creation from sul...it's definitely useless since bad username cannot "start" the unification process so it should prevent account creation only but...the list of needed fixes to mediawiki is sooooooooooo long, have a nice day! --Vituzzu (talk) 11:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Scope query

Sorry, I am french and new user of Wikimedia. On the model of the "Swatch Group", I began to create a page about one of their competitors : Winjah Corp. I noticed that you delete the page I created. Would you be kind and tell me what I did wrong, please? Have a nice day and sorry in advance if I made some mistake. BgfLux — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bgflux (talk)

Abusefilter on hi.wiki

Hello, I don't know if you've seen Requests_for_comment/Userrights_on_Hindi_Wikipedia#Draft_for_a_solution_by_Vituzzu. In short, one of the things to do is to verify the dozens of filters activer there, make them public and restore normal functioning of the wiki by disabling/deleting (or fixing?) them. I see that you're active as an abusefilter manager here, and I believe that stewards would give you the local flag to do this job, if you were so kind to offer yourself. Thanks, Nemo 11:36, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I know this user is away for a couple of days, just for info. Regards. —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 16:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations

You are now a global sysop :) -- Please add yourself to the Template:List of global sysops. You may subscribe mail:global-sysops if you want to too. Best regards. —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 10:37, 18 March 2012 (UTC) PS: as you requested.

Many thanks :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

WM:OM

Do you remember it? :) Regards. —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 19:54, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I do remember tho it was a while ago - will look as soon as possible. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Congrats

Hey Herby, I saw on my watchlist that you were a global sysop (didn't know there was such a thing!), just wanted to say congrats and I'm glad you're still around. Mattb112885 (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Wow - good to hear from you and good to know you are still around kinda! Hope things are good - best --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:04, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Email

Sorry but it was caught by google's spamfilter while my thunderbird was crashing down...the results is that I have an empty email from you :|

--Vituzzu (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Sent again! --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:13, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Clear conflict of interest

Herby, you have a very clear conflict of interest with that block and it is only proof that my original request to have you stripped of admin privileges was correct. Why do you think rules do not apply to you in any form? If you honestly believed that other people would agree with you, then you would have absolutely nothing to do. Instead, you jump because you know you are clearly wrong and no one else would agree with you. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I realise that you think that however I am supremely indifferent to the situation. An unblock request that has "Yeah" as a reason is frankly laughable - I thought far better of you than that. You will always see the world through your eyes won't you. However I always strive to be reasonable however I must ask you to attempt to be the same - block change will be my next action - we will leave it to others. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 20:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I was blocked because you complained that I nominated you for admin removal. It doesn't matter what you claim, there is no ability to claim that you are impartial or should be allowed to violate the basic, primal rule of admining. My unblock request, if you bothered to read the block, was merely to state that I was ready for the process. My block was for one month followed by restrictions. It has been 4 months. Everyone knows that. You only verified that you should have been desysopped on Commons and that you will never be fit to be trusted with any admin privileges. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:37, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

You really can be a pain Ottava - I change the block and you cannot be bothered to do anything about it now - that is just drama. Putting "Yeah" in the unblock reason is not an attempt at dialogue for me - it is a joke and I imagine at least 90% of admins reviewing such a block would agree.

As to you attempt to desysop me I confess I considered it so ludicrous I had actually forgotten it. I am glad you have made your opinion so plain I am sure it will influence people some where. Feel free to seek desysop here anyway won't you - we realised a long time ago that we would have to agree to disagree. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 06:31, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

What you fail to understand is that it doesn't matter what it is to you because you are ethically prohibited from having any involvement because the original dispute was between me and you. You don't get to be the complaining party and the judge. The fact that you can't understand that is reason why you should have no ability to edit any WMF wiki let alone have any admin ability here. You are completely unfit for any interaction with others because you lack the basics for knowing what is right and wrong. It isn't a coincidence that the only person supporting you is Mattbuck, who is finally going to be cast out now that people are done with people like you utterly trolling, disrupting, and doing whatever you can to cause problems. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:02, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid your views on my ethics are out of order not mitigated by the fact that you are calling me a troll. Further interaction ends here. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 06:58, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Pattern bot

Hi Herby. I blocked the IP globally for one day, but I saw you blocked it here for a month. Would it be useful to extend the block globally as well or not? Trijnstel_talk 17:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Mailed you just before you posted :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:24, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Commons

Hi. One of those listed at SRCU#Request for es.wikibooks has some copyvio at commons too [1]. Regards. —Marco Aurelio (audiencia) 11:58, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - only the one account as far as I can see. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Notice

Hi Herby, just to inform you that GOYETE FABRICE 1 who has just been blocked, has spammed also on mediawiki, here. So, could you block him over there too please? :) --Frigotoni ...i'm here; 12:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Done and thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:35, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Uriasjfs21 @ commons

spambot. Locked, after detail. Maybe also the Lamaraqga(nn) series. Thx. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:11, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Been busy - mailed results --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:37, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Massive spambot creations on Commons

Could you deal with the accounts I have locked? See my lock log. One registers on Commons and then on English Wikipedia. --Bsadowski1 (talk) 07:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Jeeeez - currently blocking more on Commons and will post to list then - thanks for the info :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:17, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

BenUkb, CandiceFqk et cetera

Hi Herby, I see you've checked and blocked some accounts today, which might be related to this collection that Trijnstel investigated yesterday. Could you see if those two groups are related? Mathonius (talk) 12:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

No direct connection that I can see however the relevant IP has been posted to the CU list and blocked here & Commons (where there were also accounts) :) Re-reading the posting on the list about the nl wb accounts - not connected in an IP sense (though that posting also led me to some on Commons! --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Same old and good spam

Hi, Herby. Can you handle this account, please? It is locked already.
About your message, I'm not the best on global range blocks, so I would rather to leave that for another one.

Thanks.‴ Teles «Talk ˱_{@ L C S}˲» 06:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Done - dynamic .cn IPs used. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 06:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Three things

Hello. First of all welcome back. I hope you've enjoyed your Wikibreak. Secondly, I was working on an update of the CU template which can be seen here and would appreciate comments on it if at all possible. Third, I was updating too this page on which I'd appreciate input too. If not possible, don't worry! :) Regards, — MA (audiencia) 07:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Tenplate looks fine - the vandalbot one I'll look at some more when i get the time. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:07, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

True :)

I just missed the link initially :) And there is no sense to unblock those couple of accounts, as they've been already locked. --Millosh (talk) 10:13, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the additions! Actually, I didn't read well your first message. I thought that you commented my Meta-only blocks, which I did initially by mistake :) --Millosh (talk)

After the second reading I've realized what's the content of your [first] message :) --Millosh (talk) 10:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Global lock for МИКИЦЗВ02

Herbythyme this user is in the time of opening another account, it opens with the IP address 178.148.245.30, which is more blocked Wikipedia. Whether you can check this address 178.148.245.30? Greeting! --Kolega2357 (talk) 18:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I have local rights only here so you would need to request any cross wiki checks here. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 06:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

There is only the user accounts there is nowhere for the IP address. If you check the IP address of the local logging on to the Meta with several accounts. Greeting! --Kolega2357 (talk) 15:10, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't really understand and you should make a CU request if you believe there is abuse of multiple accounts. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Why?

Hi Herbythyme. I realize Mbz1 was not extremely helpful in your attempt to help her, but didn't you write " I have not yet seen any very convincing reason for the block." and then "This concerns me to. The actions (including the rejection of the unblock requests) seemed at best rather hasty."?

It is my understanding that you believe that the blocking administrator did not present convincing reason for the block, and that "the actions (including the rejection of the unblock requests) seemed at best rather hasty". Then why did you request Mbz1 to state what she is going to do on Meta like the block had any validity? Right now she's blocked improperly with no "any very convincing reason for the block" according to you. Besides, isn't there a consensus for her unblock? Thank you. Broccoli • talk page 15:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I dislike the entire situation if I am totally honest. However, in trying to seek something that will resolve the situation, I think it is essential that we have some clarity about what Mbz1 will and will not do on Meta in the future - the lack of that clarity is what (it seems to me) led to the block. Simply unblocking strikes me as merely setting up the situation for the next block.

Throw in the fact that Mbz1's edits in respect of this have generally been unhelpful at best and you have a situation I simply do not have the time to deal with.

Your concerns about the block and the original decline of the unblock request really should be taken up with those who took the actions. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

You write: "I think it is essential that we have some clarity about what Mbz1 will and will not do on Meta in the future - the lack of that clarity is what (it seems to me) led to the block. " . I respectably disagree. Herbythyme, I am an admin on he.wikiquote, and the fewer times that I blocked someone I didn't do it for "the lack of that clarity" of what they will or will not do. The users get blocked for an inappropriate behavior. In this particular situation there was no inappropriate behavior on Mbz1 side. She did not make a personal attack. She was not disruptive in any way. The block is totally wrong IMO. The unblock request was declined inappropriately. There's consensus for an unblock.

As you probably know, me and other users took concerns about the block and the original decline of the unblock request up with those who took the actions, and as you probably know they refused to admit any wrongdoing although the blocking administrator requested a few times to review the block. The community did, and you did too.

I agree Mbz1 response to your post was not very helpful, but please put yourself in her shoes. She was unfairly blocked for 1.5 month (and getting blocked for a user like her is very hard), and now you're requesting some kind of explanation.

You say, you have no time to deal with the situation. There's no time involved. It has been dealt with already, dealt by the community that supported the unblock. The only thing that is needed now is the Administrator with a capital "A" to unblock the editor. Thank you for your time and for your listening. Broccoli • talk page 06:43, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

With all respect to you and your friends, I have been on Meta (and an admin) for longer than most so I understand the project quite well by now. When I say that an unblock without clarity simply means another block will occur that is what I believe and so would be a complete waste of time. It is quite common on projects to consider editing restrictions with an unblock and that would have been my approach here.

I tend to be fairly tolerant of most things and would prefer to deal with all people and their approaches in as even handed a fashion as I can however your comment (& the implications of it) on that fact that there are admins with an upper case a and those with a lower case a is unacceptable to me so this will be my last response to you. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:00, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Temporary administrator

What should I be temporary adminstrator? Greeting! --Kolega2357 (talk) 09:23, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry I do not understand your posting and I cannot grant adminship - I am not a steward or 'crat. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Note

When looking for cross-wiki blocks please note this bug that I've discovered today. Cheers. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:46, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - appreciated --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:47, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back

Here and on Commons (hopefully). You were missed. :) Trijnstel_talk 16:26, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not - I am an illusion...;) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:30, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Spambots

Hi, I noticed that you deleted a page that said "I've read some good stuff here. Definitely worth bookmarking for revisiting." I've seen spambots add this sort of comment to many wikis. I don't understand the motive, since it doesn't contain an external link or advertisement. What do you think they are trying to accomplish? Thanks, Leucosticte (talk) 21:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

It is weird isn't it! Go back a few years and it was referred to as the "nice site" vandal based on the fact that that was both the page and the edit summary quite often and that we saw it as a form of vandalism. With rather more experience here and elsewhere my guess is that the script/program is aimed at sites other than wikis. There will be a number of fields that it will attempt to fill in automatically - if we don't have the right field we don't get the right spam. Often there is something in the edit summary that indicates the type of spam (cialis, ugg etc etc) but either way the behaviour is pointless in a wiki world. That is my best guess - the short version :). Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Account locked

Hi, Herbythyme. That account you just requested to be locked... is it really needed to hide its name here? Maybe the summary is enough. Regards.—Teles «Talk to me ˱_{@ L C S}˲» 11:59, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure - feel free to change it - I simply ticked the boxes without a lot of thought. I hate that kind of spammer...! Thanks for the lock. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:02, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks!—Teles «Talk to me ˱_{@ L C S}˲» 13:36, 7 December 2012 (UTC)