22 Mar

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

← Older revision
Revision as of 19:18, 22 March 2013
Line 229:
Line 229:

:Sorry, but you'll have to make your point a bit clearer if you want people to understand you. Are you implying that most of Foroa's contributions are reverted? The contribution list you link to does not support that claim at all. --[[User:Dschwen|Dschwen]] ([[User talk:Dschwen|talk]]) 16:48, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

:Sorry, but you'll have to make your point a bit clearer if you want people to understand you. Are you implying that most of Foroa's contributions are reverted? The contribution list you link to does not support that claim at all. --[[User:Dschwen|Dschwen]] ([[User talk:Dschwen|talk]]) 16:48, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

::Yes, of course, the account in question is regularly monitored to brake incorrect edits and it's safe to say that most records are eventually either rolled-back (directly or indirectly) or are a subject of multiple-editors' contest. At the ground of my point, is the callout for our administrative-level functions to identify the ill situation brought about by what seems to be an abusive account focused at making the life of prolific, good-faith editors unbearably tough; Countless examples have been given previously throughout the year or so, please attend my links [[User talk:Orrling#The edit war on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands is not acceptable|here]] for a start. [[User:Orrling|Orrling]][[User talk:Orrling|talk]] 17:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

::Yes, of course, the account in question is regularly monitored to brake incorrect edits and it's safe to say that most records are eventually either rolled-back (directly or indirectly) or are a subject of multiple-editors' contest. At the ground of my point, is the callout for our administrative-level functions to identify the ill situation brought about by what seems to be an abusive account focused at making the life of prolific, good-faith editors unbearably tough; Countless examples have been given previously throughout the year or so, please attend my links [[User talk:Orrling#The edit war on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands is not acceptable|here]] for a start. [[User:Orrling|Orrling]][[User talk:Orrling|talk]] 17:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

+

+
== Lock category please ==

+
Hey guyz. Please see if it's OK to apply a lock to the page of [[:Category:Archaeological sites on the Golan Heights]] now that it turned out that the principle of preferring a discussion on editfight was rejected by my counterpart on this theme leaving the category subject to unilateral recat ignoring many explanations. The [[:Category talk:Archaeological sites on the Golan Heights|category talk page]] can show you what's on. From my own side, it's about an insistence to incorrectly overparent this geographical category. Thankz! [[User:Orrling|Orrling]][[User talk:Orrling|talk]] 19:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=93102586&oldid=93097364