User talk:AssistantWikifag/2016

Old conversations from the year 2016.

Banning 74.131.194.223

Hey I found another timeless troll here. Shall we request permabanning him? His name is 74.131.194.223. Derpysaurus

He's gotten a time-out. Thanks for the heads-up.

For future reference, it's easier for me if you link to the contributions page of an anonymous user, like so: Special:Contributions/74.131.194.223. --AssistantWikifag (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Spambots creating Spampages

Hey its Derpysaurus again, now the Spambots are creating Spampages. Here are the bots responsible:

• Special:Contributions/182.75.176.202
• Special:Contributions/Jakins, Jakins
• Special:Contributions/Tgtjy, Tgtjy
• Special:Contributions/Anurag01, Anurag01
• Special:Contributions/Dineshdinesh1, Dineshdinesh1
• Special:Contributions/Prakash44, Prakash44
• Special:Contributions/Vipinkumar, Vipinkumar

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the heads-up. They're blocked, and I'll delete their pages over today and tomorrow (so as not to fill the recent changes with delete messages). --AssistantWikifag (talk) 22:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Heh, I don't see what the problem is with flooding the Recent Changes pages with delete logs. The way I see it, any day is a good day when your name is plastered across the entire Recent Changes Page. You're doing the God Emperor's work, keep it up!Evil Executive, CEO of Evil Incorporated (talk) 06:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

You don't need to worry about filling up the recent changes, since the update all similar updates are collapsed automatically so your edits will only take up one line if you do them all in one day, and will actually take up more space if done over multiple days. -- Triacom (talk) 07:46, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up on that feature (I usually just monitor the RSS feed, which is not so advanced). Deletions are all done! --AssistantWikifag (talk) 14:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Another spambot

Hi, I just found this spambot and undid its edits.

• Special:Contributions/46.39.231.84

Hope it helps. -- The Hat That Was

You missed a couple. ;)

Thanks! --AssistantWikifag (talk) 20:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Spambots attacking another page again

Here's a spambot attacking several pages.

• Special:Contributions/46.39.231.76

From. Derpysaurus

Archaon

There's a jackass defacing the Archaon page. Redmaw (talk) 21:08, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Some of that is just the usual churn, but the taco bell nonsense was over the line. --AssistantWikifag (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Current editwar

There is currently an edit war going on at the Ollanius Pius page, which has lasted since the past 3 or so days. Evil Executive, CEO of Evil Incorporated (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Permaban 2602:306:36DA:52F0:48CD:952:B247:3EB5

Hey. Found this idiot (Special:Contributions/2602:306:36DA:52F0:48CD:952:B247:3EB5) vandalizing both Biggus Berrus and my user page. Says he is not a bot, but his actions speak louder than words. Request banning his sorry ass permanently. Derpysaurus

We have a mass deleting asshat

Found another mass deleting bot called Special:Contributions/206.176.100.14 who have vandalized a couple of pages now. Derpysaurus

Board-tans pages being vandalized again

Looks like the Board-tans pages are being vandalized by this bot. Special:Contributions/89.178.207.116, do we need to have the page protected again? Derpysaurus

God-Emperor of Mankind talk page dispute

Since November, there's been a growing flamewar on the talk page of the God-Emperor of Mankind article regarding making references to Donald Trump as a previous identity of the Emperor. Nobody's willing to give it a rest, and it's led to at least a couple of edit wars that I think might be motivated at least in part by real world politics. Would you mind stepping in to defuse the whole thing (or at least locking the page so people can cool off)?--Newerfag (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I haven't even touched the Emperor page at all since november. The only thing I've done is undoing edits that REMOVE content from the talk pages, since that violates rules of the wiki. People don't get to censor other stuff on the talk pages. Evil Executive, CEO of Evil Incorporated (talk) 19:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

You (Evilexecutive) are correct, but why did you feel the need to proclaim your innocence when Newerfag made no mention of you? (That's a rhetorical question.)

As for this and any future disputes over the modern-day secret identities of the God-Emperor of Mankind: he will reveal himself when and how he chooses. It is futile to speculate what he might be up to right now, and while surely he is leaving his stamp on history, such is the subtlety of his actions that his impacts cannot be noticed with less than a thousand years of hindsight. (inb4 flame-war over whether Muhammad was the Emps if Jesus was. inb4 flame-war over whether I'm the Emps.)

There doesn't seem to be an active flame war now, but I'll keep an eye on it going forward. --AssistantWikifag (talk) 04:57, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Cute, now you're banning random anons over your own political views. That one person had precisely 1 edit, and probably came here to make the same joke that 20~ other people have wanted to make since 2015. No warnings of any kind, just up and ban for a few hours. You could easily just post on his talk page like a normal person. Evil Executive, CEO of Evil Incorporated (talk) 18:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I did not ban the anon, I blocked him (from editing) for two hours. My intention was not to punish but to enforce a cooling-off period, so as to break the "feedback loop" that drives edit wars. (I may have been a bit hasty in doing so, that's a fair criticism.) I only bothered blocking at all because I noticed the edit very shortly after it happened -- I wouldn't have bothered if I'd noticed e.g. two days later, because there would be no need to enforce any cooling-off. Looking at the timestamps with the benefit of hindsight, I probably shouldn't have blocked him at all -- it was more than a few hours after his edit, and clearly no edit war had broken out.

Thanks for your feedback. --AssistantWikifag (talk) 14:47, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

2a02:fe0:c100:3:34cb:4d9c:5570:db1b‎

Special:Contributions/2a02:fe0:c100:3:34cb:4d9c:5570:db1b‎ has launched a campaign of purging slang and jokes from several pages, like replacing every occurences of "vidya" by video game. Some jokes may be bad but they are long timers. I've already reverted what he'd done on the Blood Raven page, but since he edited a few page, I'm not sure if I'm supposed to revert in bulk his edits. 185.42.28.68 07:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

If there were productive elements to those edits, I would say you're probably not supposed to simply undo them, but simply changing the tone (when informality is kind of the order of the day here) is not what I'd call productive. Some of 2A02's edits (e.g. on The Last Church) are more-or-less productive, so I'm not inclined to block him for any length of time, but I've left a note on his talk page that if he wants to change the wiki's style, he should talk about it on the main talk page to get consensus first. --AssistantWikifag (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Repeat Offender is repeating their offense

Special:Contributions/97.86.158.22 is once more blanking pages and engaging in behaviours befitting a jackass. Judging by his/her history, they have done this before.--Naeondaemon (talk) 07:39, 31 December 2016 (UTC)