User talk:AlexiusHoratius/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions about User:AlexiusHoratius. 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.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Will you remove semi-protection on David Cameron if he isn't the next PM? Pickuptha'Musket (talk • contribs) 14:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I won't be opposed to trying unprotection if that happens. But we have to keep in mind that's it's still a BLP and will likely be a vandalism target no matter the outcome. AlexiusHoratius 22:09, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks like we both tried to take care of Bar Professional Training Course at the same time. I protected but then removed it as you had already closed the section. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 14:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

If you want to protect go ahead - it's fine for me either way. AlexiusHoratius 14:04, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

It's fine. I never like to second guess someone else. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 14:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi dearest Alexius, how are you?

I just opened this new page page talking about a sad moment of our Italian history, and I ask you some minute of your time to correct my mistakes, please.

Thank you a lot for your precious help!

Rei Momo (talk) 09:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorryyyyyy, I was still thinking to the French page, made just yesterday: sur means on. Corrected!!! And thanks again!!! Rei Momo (talk) 22:55, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, dearest Alexius, how are you?

I opened this new page about an Italian film, and I ask 5 minutes to you to read it and to correct my mistakes please. Just 5 minutes.

Thanks a lot for your precious help!!!

Rei Momo (talk) 09:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Grazie mille for your precious help!!! Rei Momo (talk) 07:19, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Dearest AlexiusHoratius, how are you?

I've opened now this page and I ask some minute of your time to read it and to correct my mistakes, please. Thanks a lot for your precious help!

Rei Momo (talk) 22:05, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, dearest Alexius how are you?

After the film, I've opened this new page, concierning a district of Rome. Please, I ask some minute of your precious time to read the page and correct the mistakes of my poor English!

Thanks a lot for your precious help, and see you soon

Rei Momo (talk) 09:28, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi dearest Alexius, how are you?

Here it's still hot :-).

I opened this new page now and I ask some minute of your time, plese, to read it and to correct my mistakes. Thanks a lot for your precious help!

Rei Momo (talk) 18:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm "tooting my own horn", which is not my intent, but based on this I thought you might find User:MusikAnimal/responseHelper useful. Cheers! — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:18, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll take a look at it. AlexiusHoratius 16:32, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry the editing was an honest mistake. I like your talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5CA:C300:1DBE:65D4:A387:271D:724E (talk) 23:20, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like you to take a look at this article. Here its stated that "The 'hard left' is a pejorative used by conservative elements in the media".However this statement is not properly backed up. There are two sources to support it: one is a rather obscure book which doesn't appear to be a reliable source, the other is http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6637987/Jeremy-Corbyn-appoints-left-wingers-to-his-first-Shadow-Cabinet.html?CMP=spklr-_-Editorial-_-TWITTER-_-TheSunNewspaper-_-20150914-_-Politics-_-235200826, which states absolutely noting about the term hard left and simply uses it to describe several politicians. Presumably whoever placed it in the article has decided that it somehow proves that the term 'hard left' is a perforative used by the conservative media. This would of course breach WP:NOR.

Thanks

--Reaganomics88 (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I've just noticed that you are on vacation so I will contact another admin. If you are happy to contribute then let me know. Reaganomics88 (talk) 17:58, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, AlexiusHoratius. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Zoe_Sugg.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nik thestunned 14:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I previously requested for the above, but you declined. It's again under attack - can you give it temporary protection? Thanks Denisarona (talk) 12:04, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I semiprotected it for three days and it's on my watchlist as well now so I'll be able to keep an eye on it after that. AlexiusHoratius 15:18, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks - Enjoy!! Denisarona (talk) 16:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! AlexiusHoratius 17:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Greetings, I thank you for semi-protecting the Hall of Game Awards article. I would like to send you this note of appreciation for doing so, and that I was getting annoyed by those four people who kept adding in the 2015 info, when there was NO word of such an edition happening. Keep up the good work. Cheers. :D 2601:601:4000:987F:2D22:DC04:C242:3A87 (talk) 03:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 03:46, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Would you mind looking at this since you semi-protected articles from a Grand Theft Auto film hoax? Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:35, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure you're right about it and I don't think you left anything out of your request but since I protected all those articles I'm going to hold off on blocking the accounts as well. I don't have that much experience investigating/blocking socks. Whoever usually handles cases on that page will get to it before too long. AlexiusHoratius 00:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

The user StealthForce re-added the 2015 section of the Hall of Game Awards. I don't post that much to warrant me opening my own account here, and I would like it deleted. Can you please take care of this? Thank you.2601:601:4000:987F:F986:615C:9577:85E5 (talk) 19:24, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Same issue there. Semi-protect if possible. - Cwobeel (talk) 18:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

That one has been protected as well. I think I got all of the articles that were being hit. (I think...) AlexiusHoratius 18:22, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

The IP vandal has moved on to my talk page archives. Would you mind protecting them too? DeCausa (talk) 18:29, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I think I got all eight. Let me know if I missed something or if you want the periods extended. AlexiusHoratius 18:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

You did. Thanks very much. DeCausa (talk) 18:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Might it be possible to semi-protect Ocala, Florida for a bit please? The mayor was one of those listed in the Anonymous KKK thing, and that info is being added. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Attract and Repel ‖ 21:48, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I've semiprotected it for one week. AlexiusHoratius 22:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that. Cheers! --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Welfare State ‖ 04:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, dearest Alexius, how are you? Here it's a little cold: Autumn is arrived!

I've opened this page now, and I ask you please 5 minutes to read it and correct my mistakes. I'll be pleased to help you in Italian and Portuguese.

Thanks a lot for your precious help!

Rei Momo (talk) 16:10, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank youuuuu!!! Rei Momo (talk) 19:28, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Greetings once again; the said page in this subject line should be semi-protected for a little bit longer; StealthForce still believes they took place, but didn't air...... there is NOTHING on the internet, AT ALL, that says that the awards have taken place. I get this feeling he is delusional about this. Thank you.2601:601:4000:987F:3CEC:7D08:1811:BE1A (talk) 23:05, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to wait and see what happens after the protection expires - nobody has edited that article in a couple weeks. If the issues resume we can deal with it then. AlexiusHoratius 23:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay. Again, thank you for your help on this. :)2601:601:4000:987F:3CEC:7D08:1811:BE1A (talk) 23:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Dear Alexius,

Why did you lock the Mosaic (church) page in such a way as to favor the pro-Mosaic side of the equation with so much information from inside and outside sources calling its credibility into question? It's an organization with a history of controlling people according to legit-looking and recognized religious sources.

Are you siding in favor of suppressing information about the group's widespread alleged cult activity? 4.15.244.235 (talk) 10:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm not siding in anyone's favor. You need to discuss the changes you want on the article's talk page - a couple sections have already been opened on the topic there. There you can get a consensus regarding the change you want to make. People showing up at the article several times a day and reverting it to their version is disruptive. AlexiusHoratius 17:01, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Dearest Alexius, how are you? Here it's ttoo cold!

I opened this new page now, just a little more than a stub. Please, I ask some minute 5 of your time to read it and correct my mistakes. Thanks a lot for your precious help!

See you soon

Rei Momo (talk) 13:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank youuuu, see you soon! Rei Momo (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Did you mean to re-add pending changes? I had removed it as I felt the edit rate was too high — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:23, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

No - just semi is fine I think (I agree that the rate was too high for just pc). I left the pc as it was going to expire in a few days - I assumed it wouldn't affect the semiprotection. AlexiusHoratius 17:26, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed pc - still protected for a month. AlexiusHoratius 17:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! You weren't using Twinkle were you? I think you may have inadvertently set it to indefinite PC . Also, super duper nitpick not important observation... your signature may throw off syntax highlighters due to the ordering of the markup. If you change it to:

[[User:AlexiusHoratius|<span style="font-size:14px;font-family:times new roman;color:navy;">'''Alexius'''</span>]][[User talk:AlexiusHoratius|<span style="font-size:14px;font-family:times new roman;color:darkred;">'''Horatius'''</span>]]

it will appear the same as it does now, but be syntactically correct (just moving the closing span tag). Cheers — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the signature tip - I think I fixed it. As for the article - it's fine now, right? As in just semi? AlexiusHoratius 17:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Signature looks good :) And yep the article is only semi now. Thanks again! — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:52, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi AlexiusHoratius,

It seems you removed my changes I made for UEFA_Euro_2016 page. If it wasn't you, please accept my apology. If it was, I'd like to know the reasons of what you did. The page adds Czechoslovakia history to "Czech" but not to "Slovakia", and adds USSR history to "Russia" but not to "Ukraine". Also, "Croatia" does not contain Yugoslavia history. Don't you think it's a bit inconsistent?

Thank you,

Olsstoleg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olsstoleg (talk • contribs) 01:06, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I didn't edit the article; I semiprotected it as it had been edited over one hundred times in the last day and that level of activity is difficult to stay on top of. The article's talk page is the best place to discuss the specific issues you brought up. There are likely editors there who know more about the issue than I do. (I'm not sure how issues of independent countries or successor states are dealt with in cases like this.) AlexiusHoratius 01:18, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

You're the author of that map, could I know what is the source you used to generate the trip way? Do you still have the lists of points in some numerical formats?

Thanks.

Thomasked69 (talk) 07:21, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

All the sources I used are listed on the image's page; I don't have coordinate points as it was drawn freehand. AlexiusHoratius 22:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Would it be at all possible if I could request the pages List of fictional wolves and List of fictional cats in animation's protection level be raised to "semi-protected"? The current level of edit-review is not discouraging the IP-hopping vandal. Thank you very much for your time.--Mr Fink (talk) 01:59, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I semiprotected both articles for 3 months. AlexiusHoratius 02:03, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the SP of those pages. I think a semi protection of Killings and massacres during the 1948 Palestine war may be helpful as well, theres 2 guys edit warring, one IP address with aggressive attitude, using bad naming in the edits.Dan Koehl (talk) 02:10, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It looks like another admin already semiprotected it for 3 days. AlexiusHoratius 02:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks,anyway Dan Koehl (talk) 02:59, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, also.--Mr Fink (talk) 02:37, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, AlexiusHoratius, and may your holidays be merry and bright . . . . Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! - Merry Christmas to you too. AlexiusHoratius 22:35, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:15, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't mean to jump the queue, but we are in desperate need of help at Militia occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. All work on the article has halted due to the sheer volume of IP and newly created SPAs making destructive edits. LavaBaron (talk) 23:10, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

I think I'm going to wait for now - the page certainly is active, but most of the edits (nearly all) appear to be good faith edits. Not really much vandalism and plenty of editors are working on/watching the page to keep an eye on it. However, if you want to make a request at RfPP for another admin to look at that'd be fine. AlexiusHoratius 23:51, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Can you please reference the relentless efforts many editors are having to undertake to revert, every few minutes, nuisance edits by 66.152.115.226, KK Metscher, etc.? Reverts that are simply being undone by these disposable accounts as soon as they're applied? LavaBaron (talk) 00:12, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, dearest Alexius, how are you?

I opened this new page now, it speaks about this interessant Russian Painter, and I ask some minute of your time to read it and to correct my mistakes.

Thanks a lot for your precious help!

Rei Momo (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, I think he painted White Night as theme to graduate. Thanks a lot for your precious help! Rei Momo (talk) 07:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello. You protected this article a little while ago, and it ran out today. Vandalism of the article has started up again right away. Can you keep an eye on the article in case protection is needed again? Thank you. Daphne Lantier 00:21, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Sure - if the vandalism gets bad again and I'm not around just re-list it at requestion for page protection. AlexiusHoratius 02:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Just when the semi came off the article, the IP editor was back with the same edit. Perhaps another semi for a time? Thanks, Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 16:04, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I protected it for a couple more weeks. AlexiusHoratius 21:06, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for protecting the page. Would you be kind enough to put at least 5 days of protection. Due to timezone differences people will not be able to discuss anything during 48 hours, and the dispute in question has been discussed multiple times on the talkpage, but every time the protection ends an edit war erupts and the discussion comes to a halt without anything having been accomplished. So if you give us at least 5 days, we may be able to work to some consensus. Regards FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I was going to revisit the article anyway near the end of the current protection (as semiprotection will have to be re-added at a minimum); I'll take a look at whether the protection needs to be extended or not then. AlexiusHoratius 04:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I found this particularly bad form and made a comment about it in the ongoing discussion about the disruptions FreeatlastChitchat keeps causing . Jeppiz (talk) 09:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The current version is actually your version. here is the diff showing that. Please stop this drama. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 19:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

You wrote it a mad while the right is ahmed "assuf" sura. Correct it because it's important

I haven't edited the article - I only protected it from editing for a few days. The article's talk page is the best place to discuss any issues with other editor's. AlexiusHoratius 23:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, You protected The Gabbie Show on 4 January. Please delete the page as a week has passed since it was db'd and notability has not been established. Curro2 (talk) 04:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Can you indefinitely protect or semi protect this article? I made two requests, both denied for no reason; reason for protection obvious if you peek to the history... --Obsuser (talk) 06:39, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm going to wait for now - there has been a bit of an uptick in unhelpful stuff recently but it's still fairly slow and it looks like a number of people watch the page. AlexiusHoratius 11:40, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

OK. --Obsuser (talk) 23:27, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

|:THERE ARE AT LEAST 37 STATES THAT ARE NO LONGER PROTECTED BY THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:|

Is South Dakota ever going to be one of them? Obama did away with this. Why? What made him so special over all the other presidents...we had great presidents and in my opinion he's main agenda from day one was to bring the US down. Now that, he's doing an awesome job at. He has successfully brought our country down to its knees in more than one way. And we the ppl...voted for him...thinking it was time for a black president and he's NOT EVEN BLACK. Think of his name and you may become confused with one of our terrorists...Osama Bin laden. I don't know if I spelled that correctly , but I'm sure you get my drift. I just wish we had a president who thinks for himself and makes the best decisions in the best interests of our country. I used to be proud to say I was an American... What does it mean now? "184.180.47.152 (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2016 (UTC)"

Thanks for the semi-protect! Can't believe I didn't notice the Google Doodle today - but that explains the otherwise unexplainable activity. Cheers, Garchy (talk) 20:17, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 20:19, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

So you edited the Sage Northcutt UFC page, yet kept my old citations with CORRECT info. How does the info match up to the citations now???

Learn to read and cite correctly.

Freshly picked and washed just for you! Thank you for protecting Wilbur Scoville and Scoville test... again! Regards, -- Bananasoldier (talk) 07:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Some questions which I hope you can answer. I have been doing a research of late singer Laura Branigan. After 2 years of research finding many news about her. Her right birth year, 1952, her right birth place, Mount Kisco, etc. In my view her early days are as good it can be. Some days ago an anonymous person changed it back to 1957, Brewster, etc, which I undid and set things back in order. I have asked people how to protect the new information, but no answers. So now when I look I found this from you. What is semiprotected? Do I understand this right that you have managed to protect Laura's wiki by this? If you have, I am very grateful for your help. Maybe Laura's wiki can be left alone now, and no more damages. (cur | prev) 03:01, 25 January 2016‎ AlexiusHoratius (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (32,001 bytes) (+28)‎ . . (semiprotected) (cur | prev) 03:01, 25 January 2016‎ AlexiusHoratius (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (31,973 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Protected "Laura Branigan": Persistent disruptive editing ([Edit=Allow only autoconfirmed users] (expires 03:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)) [Move=Allow only autoconfirmed users] (expires 03:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)))) Thanks for your help. I hope you don't mind, but I prefer having my name in my messages. Laura has been a part of my life since spring 2014. In some way I think I knew her. Stig-Åke Persson, Sweden --2.69.3.79 (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Although everyone can edit articles and content is decided largely by coming to a consensus with others, one of the best ways to 'protect your version' is to have reliable sources to back up what you're saying. If there are statements in the article you know to be wrong, get a good secondary source to back up your claim. Also, if there are statements in the article that are incorrect, if they lack reliable sources then they can be removed. In either case, personal knowledge and nothing more isn't really enough. (See WP:No original research). The best place to discuss this is on the article's talk page with other editors interested in the topic.

To answer one of your questions, semiprotection is an action that prohibits unregistered editors and very new accounts from editing an article. I protected the article in this case as there was quite a lot of reverting going on and little discussion. AlexiusHoratius 18:19, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

First, I apologize I wasn't logged in when I wrote my first comment. Is it possible that you can help me with protecting Laura's early information. I have reliable sources after 2 years of research, and hopefully I will have a copy of Laura's birth certificate before summer. I have a contact in New York working with genealogy and she has put an order of Laura's SS-no. It has been a long journey, but it warms when Laura's brother Billy said he was very impressed of my research. He was the one who gave me my last piece about Laura, Mount Kisco. Greetings from Sweden Stig-Åke Persson--Born53 swe (talk) 19:00, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Just one questionable picture change liekly by another admin left at the article top intead the vanderingsman As he moves slowly away, Odin turns and looks sorrowfully back at Brünnhilde. also like own added picture from Rhinegold&Vakyries... Picture at end with Brunhilde (1892) wrong placed as modern influence and much pictures just deleted instead left in gallery also the full picture legend explanining that the woman in background are german goddesses and link to source merseburg incarnations...

Missed also with link to (Vafþrúðnismál) showing Odin right not only as stupid war god.

Very common is the picture "Enthroned" and pictures showing him as creator god like JHWH also missed long time in article !

Missed also link to Odins Raven article showing that that are special ravens and all the symbolic or Hain and mountain... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.221.253.114 (talk) 13:41, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting the article. I think there is enough indication 2601:547:C302:3709:98C4:8B8B:D75D:2F2B is a sockpuppet of 104.128.209.1. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 20:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh I'm sure they're the same person - so far it has only been a few accounts, so semiprotecting the article is probably sufficient. AlexiusHoratius 21:51, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Please check and investigage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Talk:Iglesia_ni_Cristo and this right after you put semi-protected page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Iglesia_ni_Cristo&action=history the conclusion yours. thank you

Also you can see that the user which request for the protection of the page RickinBaltimore, suppress my comment by deleting it: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&action=history

My comment was: "Im creating new accounts because of the authoritarian users that block my accounts. I make some edits in the page Iglesia ni Cristo, and they remove it, then i go to talk page and i state clearly the facts, references and sources. However those users does not provide with sources or any references and keep reverting and blocking my account at a time. At the Talk page, i clearly state facts and references which they dont like and delete. I think Talk Page is for that reason, to put the information and discuss, what's the reason to delete my contribution to the Talk Page? Please check their edits and no presence in the Talk Page. Authoritarian users. RickinBaltimore and Wiae. Wikkiae (talk) 19:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)"

Wikelonee (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

DearestAlexiusHoratius, how are you? Here the wheather seems to be already Spring!

I opened now this new short page, and I ask, please, some minutes of your time to read it and correct my mistakes. Thanks a lot for your precious help and have a nice week end!

Rei Momo (talk) 16:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks again and have a nice Sunday! Rei Momo (talk) 00:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 18:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Reverts are happening lately. Extend PC? --George Ho (talk) 04:52, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I extended it another three months. AlexiusHoratius 18:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

You fucking idiot it should be somalian not somali according to somalian goverment

If you feel the article should be renamed, please discuss it with other editors on the article's talk page. AlexiusHoratius 08:39, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Rock star 2001 film is not mentioned in his profile? Joyjoykaufman (talk) 02:10, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Although it might not appear on the Mark Wahlberg article, it appears on a complete list at Mark Wahlberg filmography. The first is a more general article about the actor, and the second is devoted to giving a complete list of things he's done. If you feel it merits a mention in the actor's article as well, you can discuss it with other editors at Talk:Mark Wahlberg. AlexiusHoratius 03:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. You attemptedly semiprotected this page a few days ago, but it seems not to work properly, because the page is still (disruptively) edited by a dynamic ip despite the protection. Could you have a look please?--Phso2 (talk) 17:07, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Someone moved the article a few days ago and protection was lost when this occurred - I've re-added it with basically the same expiration as before. AlexiusHoratius 18:39, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

User:5.228.176.139 keeps editing where it says "please leave this line alone" is WP:Sandbox after final warning. In addition, he keeps deleting my report in WP:AIV. You will have to look into his talk page history to find my warnings for he deleted all of them. CLCStudent (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Looks like they were just blocked. AlexiusHoratius 17:28, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I just noticed that. CLCStudent (talk) 17:28, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Your contributions is a vandalism, Kosovo is NOT Serbia! Please, read:
USA: http://2001-2009.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/02/100973.htm
UK: http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-kosovo-serbia-britain-idUKL1824693920080218
AUS: http://foreignminister.gov.au/releases/2008/fa-s034_08.html ... --85.92.241.30 (talk) 10:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

It's not that I disagree, and I probably shouldn't have called it vandalism, but you need to discuss the edits you want to make on the talk page instead of edit warring with other editors over the map. AlexiusHoratius 11:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Hereby I acknowledge that the article about "Paraiyar", a community of South india is a sensitive information.Some Users are potraying the community as slaves.Mentioning of "Slave" or Using any defamatory words against any community or particular section is an punishable offence.There may be a chance for particular section of people were treated as slaves,but mentioning a community as slaves is unconstituional since slavery is abolished by the constitution of India.Degrading a community status is a punishable offence under India law (Promoting enmity between different classes and endangering Integrity of India.Some times some truths cannot be exposed in public.(India was once a slave nation to british,for this single reason India cannot be introduced as former slave of british).I Hope all the admins can understand well.I welcome more research and discussions about the article.I am not against removing unreliable information(without sources).But I am against discrimination in the name of religion,caste,culture,language.I Hope wikipedia will protect the true spirit of knowledge and human freedom. User:AntanO is promoting discrimination against particular group or section of people.

I'm not really following what you want. Do you have a particular question or concern? I don't really know anything about the article and only protected it as the number of reverts by new or logged-out editors was getting disruptive. (Concerns about the content of articles are best dealt with on the article's talk page.) AlexiusHoratius 13:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Reverts have been happening, though there have been also good edits. Extend PC? --George Ho (talk) 17:17, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I think I'm going to hold off for now. The article has been pretty quiet lately and hardly any are obvious vandalism. AlexiusHoratius 15:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

There have been reverts, including one self-revert. Extend PC? --George Ho (talk) 03:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Only a couple of reverts - not really enough in my opinion for long-term protection of a non-BLP article. AlexiusHoratius 21:02, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I think Echota Cherokee Tribe of Alabama needs to be semi'ed again, for the same reasons (deletions of sourced material by driveby IPs). Figured I'd ask you as you did it before. Personally, I'd make it indef., as this is a chronic problem on that article. Thanks! - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 22:02, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Although the page is semi-protected for a short time, bad edits have been happening for a long time. Shall you add pending changes protection? --George Ho (talk) 03:23, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I'll take a look after the current period ends. If it's heavy enough we can do a longer period of semiprotection, but if it's slower I'll do pending changes for a while. AlexiusHoratius 00:26, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Deares Alexius, how are you?

I've opened this short page, and I'm asking if you have some minute to read it and correct my mistakes, plese.

Thanks a lot for your precious help

Rei Momo (talk) 12:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank youuuu and have a nice week!!! Rei Momo (talk) 09:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

There have been reverts. Extend PC? --George Ho (talk) 21:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

I am interested why additional links from blogs are not allowed here?1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arshileus (talk • contribs) 10:54, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Once in a while a blog is allowed (see #11 here) but it's rare that they are. In this case the link being added didn't really add anything substantive that wasn't already in the article. Certain external links are fine to use - say a link to a government site - but a rather informal list of 'fun facts' in mangled English doesn't do much to help the article. AlexiusHoratius 11:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

ahnd who do you think you are — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.88.35.31 (talk) 16:14, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Lilimar Hernandez, a recreation of Lilimar, was retained per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lilimar Hernandez and appropriate redirects and headers need to be added to the protected page, Lilimar. Per instructions at WP:RPP, as you are the protecting admin, it is required that you be requested to unprotect it. Thanks. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:26, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Restored and redirected. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:59, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm fine with the protection, but can you revert his changes please? The article should be locked down to what it was pre-edit war.

Thanks. --Tarage (talk) 04:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I reverted to the older version (often I won't but WP:Fullprotect says either reverting or not is okay if it's clearly an edit war.) In any case it looks like the user has been blocked for edit warring. AlexiusHoratius 04:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Appreciated. --Tarage (talk) 04:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not noticed that you had protected the article and blocked the user. I feel he is guilty of edit warring against a number of users without providing any meaningful contribution to the discussion. I am not sure if it makes sense to keep the article protected while the only proponent of the change is blocked but the decision is yours. Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

It's fine - I thought I had reverted it before I wrote the message here until I saw the edit missing from by contribs and noticed you had gotten it instead. You're probably right about the protection - I'll remove it. AlexiusHoratius 04:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Put it back. The editor is back as an IP... --Tarage (talk) 05:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Semiprotected one week. AlexiusHoratius 05:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Since you put the semi-protect on teh page I'll direct this question to you.

I somehow can't figure out what I did to the info bxo to make the headings pad left rather than center. Can you help?

Thanks

AnthroMimus (talk) 21:30, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Do you mean how some of the entries are indented? I think that's how all of the NFL player infoboxes are. (If you wanted to change it you'd have to edit the template.) AlexiusHoratius 02:57, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

While you have every right to fully protect any page especially one that has had a editor request full protect a page I must disagree with the protection of Incidents at SeaWorld parks. Not that it was protected I don't really care about that. What I care about is the editor who requested the full protection did so under false pretenses. The editor made false statements about me and another editor vandalizing the page in their edit summaries. By protecting the page without further comment as to the reason why, I believe you inadvertently gave legitimacy to the claims that the page was being vandalized.

I request this inadvertent action be corrected. My suggestion is to either add a better summary as to why the page was protected, which is a content dispute between three editors and not vandalism as claimed. Or the page be unprotected with an edit summary providing information as to why it was unprotected. I appreciate your time supporting wikipedia and know it is a thankless job. VViking_TalkEdits 19:02, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

I think you're granting too much weight to the importance of the edit summary in this case. The protection, and its reason of "edit warring/content dispute" doesn't really have anything to do with the legitimacy of anyone's argument (beyond implying that neither side was vandalizing, which is true here.) I'm not really sure what you're asking for. That the page be re-protected with a new edit summary? AlexiusHoratius 20:36, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks for looking into this. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:31, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 10:32, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Since you locked the page could you go to the talk page and respond there please? The last reverting editor appears it could be a sock. Thanks.2606:6000:610A:9000:7565:1FA4:77F0:832A (talk) 15:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

1995 is widely accepted as the start of generation z. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woodworker87rrrrty54 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Then find reliable sources to back up the statement and discuss it with other editors on the talk page first. AlexiusHoratius 18:23, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello. I've left a comment on the situation at Talk:Back to Sleep (song). The source does not state what User:Mario Maraschi claims it says. It might be useful if you (or someone you might know) could check it and help settle the dispute. Thanks. Maestro2016 (talk) 14:44, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

My protection of the article was in response to the request at WP:RFPP and I don't really know that much about the topic, so I'm not sure that I would be of much use in this discussion. The best way to handle this is to discuss what the sources say with the other editors on the talk page (see dispute resolution for more on this). AlexiusHoratius 20:28, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

It appears that the other editor, User:Mario Maraschi, has now been blocked indefinitely. If the other editor has been blocked, would that mean the dispute has ended? Or would I need to wait until the protection expires? Maestro2016 (talk) 22:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

The article is just semiprotected now, so you should be able to edit it. AlexiusHoratius 16:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

I noticed you protected this article and I've been looking through the changes contained within a recent edit there and am somewhat puzzled. I know the article is under "Pending changes" but am hesitant to revert the entire edit back to the previous version, but some of the changes - removing the protection & its icon, the removal of the bolding of the victim's names (which makes the article very difficult to read), the content-change from "The solution to Zodiac's 408-symbol cipher. Graysmith stated in 1976 that the..." to "The solution to Zodiac's 408-symbol cipher. The meaning, if any,..." - are troubling to me. Some of the changes aren't wrong or bad, like altering the headings from "[place name only] to "[Place name] attack", so it's not a clear-cut case of vandalism/etc but... I hate to have to comb through the edits one-by one and pick out the erroneous content from the apparently-ok content...would welcome you taking a look. I don't know quite what to do here. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:17, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I see what you mean by some of it being fine, some not really needed and some should probably be reverted. I guess two options would be to either revert it and go back and manually add back the good edits, or keep it and manually remove/change the newer edits that shouldn't have been made. If you did want to revert it I think you could do so even though it isn't vandalism. I've seen editors go either way in cases like this, when faced with one edit that makes forty changes of varying quality. I mean it was a good faith edit but probably not the best way to go about doing it. AlexiusHoratius 21:12, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Could you please have another look at this article and consider some stricter protection. The same edit warring is continuing over whether the group is finished or not. Those who want to assert as a fact that they are now finished are doing so only on the basis of some speculative comments by one of the band members in a recent interview. It is getting very tiresome.It also seems to border on WP:CRYSTAL. Thanks. Afterwriting (talk) 11:29, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm going to wait for now I think - you're not wrong about it looking annoying but I'd like to see more disruption before fully protecting an article like that for a week or so. I'll check it periodically to see the level of activity. (Obviously feel free to make another request at RfPP as well if it keeps up.) AlexiusHoratius 20:10, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

You should not have removed the protection from Young Dolph. They're continuously vandalizing the article. --Eurofan88 (talk) 19:08, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I semiprotected it for a week. AlexiusHoratius 20:07, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Could you shorten the semi protection? A month is too long. Editors have and will continue to argue over the birth dates. It's a discussion taking place in the wider media as well. It would be better to just sanction the person who was edit warring rather than reducing editing rights. Thanks. 2606:6000:610A:9000:2530:3E71:7218:4815 (talk) 17:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

I already tried a shorter period on March 13 - it was semiprotected for one week. Immediately upon unprotection the situation was out of hand again. On the 21st there were over a dozen edits that were simply undiscussed changes to years or reverts of those edits, which is too many. Arguing over birth dates is fine - on the talk page. Arguing by way of dropping an edit with no edit summary every couple hours and simply changing the year to whatever they feel like is disruptive. I'll shorten it to two weeks but that's as far as I'll go. AlexiusHoratius 17:31, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay thanks. 2606:6000:610A:9000:2530:3E71:7218:4815 (talk) 17:45, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Could you reduce the protection level so that registered users can make edits please? Wwwma (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately with semiprotection simply being registered is not enough - an account needs to be WP:Autoconfirmed. Until that happens with your account, which should happen in a few days, you can use the 'editsemiprotected' template on the talk page if you feel a particular edit should be make. AlexiusHoratius 01:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Greetings, AlexiusHoratius. About your response to my article protection request: I see what you mean, but, could you keep an eye on that article for a while? I've provided a longer explanation for the IP editor, here, but I'm not too sure that's going to do the trick. Sometimes new editors don't really understand about reliable references, and sometimes people get very stubborn about articles related to guns or gun laws, it's a pretty controversial topic. As far as dispute resolution, there was an RfC, and a consensus was reached, but as sometimes happens the new editor coming along either doesn't see that or doesn't care about it. Anyway, I've added this page to my watch list but if you reply I'd encourage you to ping me by including {{Re|Mudwater}} in your post. Thanks. — Mudwater^(Talk) 02:09, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Sure - I'll watch it. You're not wrong on this - but often if there's a content dispute between one editor and one IP, I'll hold off on semiprotecting - at least until other methods are tried. If there's an RfC and a consensus in place I don't see a problem with reverting edits that go against that. Like I said I'll keep an eye on it and protect it if the reverts start again. AlexiusHoratius 11:05, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

(Forgot - sorry.) @Mudwater: AlexiusHoratius 16:55, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Why have you blocked the page? I have talked with DVdm (see his talk page) and provided reliable sources. 89.110.8.55 (talk) 12:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

It's good that there's discussion taking place but at the same time you've been edit warring on the article with three different IPs (at least) over the last few days and it's disruptive. If you know someone has a problem with the edits you want made (and it's clear in this case that other editors oppose what you're trying to do), talk it over with them first and arrive at a consensus. AlexiusHoratius 13:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I wanted to know if, for the plot summary of "Batman v Superman", if you wanted to enter the following additions with links. I will only quote the sentences and links I suggested putting in...

While decrypting the drive, he receives a vision of a dystopian future, where he leads a force of rebels against Superman, who has destroyed and taken over Earth with the help of mysterious alien creatures (parademons) under the control of an even more mysterious alien figure (Darkseid). Wayne is snapped out of the vision by a mysterious time traveler (Barry Allen, aka "The Flash"), who warns him that Lois Lane has a crucial role to an impending threat, and that he must quickly find "the others", and that he was right about "him".

Upon learning of Luthor's plan, Batman leaves to rescue Martha, and manages to save her from being burned alive, while Superman confronts Luthor who unleashes a monstrous genetically-engineered creature made with Kryptonian technology, whom Luthor dubs "Doomsday".

Luthor is arrested after Lane exposes his numerous crimes; when he is visited by Batman in prison, he gloats that Superman's death has made the world vulnerable to powerful threats (a la Bruce Wayne's earlier vision), which he became privy to while manipulating the Kryptonian ship's technology, and Batman tells Luthor he will always be watching him and punches the wall with his bat brand before leaving the cell.

Thank you. Btw, SUPER sorry earlier for not using 4 tildes to sign my post! Tyler V. Tman418 (talk) 04:28, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know that much about the topic and wouldn't be much help as to what the plot summary should say. The article's talk page is the best place to discuss this with other editors interested in the article. AlexiusHoratius 10:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions about User:AlexiusHoratius. 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.

←

David Cameron

RFPP

Gli angeli di Borsellino

Pietralata

Film Ein Sommer in Paris

Pietralata (Rome)

St. Joseph the Worker Church (Macau)

User script

sorry

Hard Left

Talkback

Griffith Park

A beer for you!

Greetings, and thanks

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dani de santa

Hall of Game Awards edit

Thom Tillis‎

Thanks for protecting my user page

Ocala, Florida

Palazzo Comunale, Piacenza

Hall of Game Awards, revisited

Mosaic cult/church "edit war"

ArbCom elections are now open!

San Antonio de Ibarra

The Challenge: Battle of the Bloodlines

UEFA_Euro_2016

Source of Cook's voyages map

Request Concerning Two Pages You Recently Protected

Wishing you all the best . . .

Season's Greetings

protection help

Viktor Alexandrovič Lyapkalo

Lilly Singh

Miracle Whip

Page Protection

it was written a mad in ( the names of muhammed peace be upon him that allah named him in the quran "asuff") while the right was ahmed. please correct it and show it right

The Gabbie Show

Prison Break

Is South Dakota In Jeopardy Of Losing The U.S. Constitution Too?

Scoville scale

editing Sage Northcutt UFC page

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Laura Branigan

Disruptive blocking of Odin article by administrator AlexiusHoratius etc. (everbody can be administror under fantasy names doing nonsense)

Internet of Things

Authoritarian users at Talk Page, cornering normal users and hide information

San Dalmazio

Mohammad Amir

Somalis

Mark Wahlberg 2001 film

Failed semiprotection

user:5.228.176.139

Kosovo is NOT SERBIA!

Paraiyar Article

Amy Poehler

1+1

Need uninvolved admin

Miss Universe 2014

Alberto Soresina

Rowan Blanchard

Links

who are u

Request unprotect of Lilimar and related talk page

Sukhumi

Ladarius Green

Incidents at SeaWorld parks Page protection

2016 ICC World Twenty20

Generation Z

Generation Z begins in 1995

Back to Sleep

A recent Zodiac Killer edit

Eagles (band)

Young Dolph

Generation Z

Gun laws in Illinois

Minimum total potential energy principle

Batman v. Superman plot summary edit suggestions?