Wikiversity/User:Abd/Wikipedia/List of self-reverted edits

From CFC
Jump to: navigation, search

Except to correct errors or policy violations, this page should only be edited by Abd, please discuss on Talk.

w:User:PJHaseldine

The user is w:Patrick Haseldine, notable former British diplomat.

PJHaseldine was eventually blocked for creating an article that was considered to also violate his community sanction. In the discussion of the block, Abd raises problems with the closure of the community sanction. PJH was advised (by me and others) not to rely on self-reversion. Around this time his cooperation disappeared, he may have begun socking.[1]

User:Thekohser

(as User:Ethical accountability), see Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action/Archive/8#Ethical_Accountability.2C_aka_Thekohser.2C_request_unblock. which explains the history and shows the ultimate disposition. See also User_talk:Ethical_Accountability#Edits_of_this_user_as_IP.2C_for_review.. Because Thekohser was globally locked, a new account was established as an acknowledged sock, and immediately blocked, by pre-arrangement; however, Talk page access was allowed. This set up known and verified communication with the user, who was then able to make self-reverted edits in cooperation with the community. All edits were accepted.

  • Thekohser was unblocked as a result, remains unblocked, and these events were cited at Wikibooks, where Thekohser was also unblocked.

w:User:Abd

some non-self-reverted edits are shown for history, as well as community response such as blocks, page protection, or revision deletion. Community response is shown with indented diffs. Unusual responses (revision deletion, range blocks) are bolded.

Early self-reversions under ban (not block)

Self-reversions under block and ban

  • In April, 2011, Abd was blocked for two weeks for edits considered ban violations.[3]

list of first 7 IP edits after block, below copied and edited from [4]:

  • [5] Since there had been no response to my request, and since this may have been considered a ban violation, I have reverted it. --Abd (talk) 01:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
    • I wanted to cancel this request anyway, because blacklisting was reverted. --Abd 19:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
  • [6] No response from user. Self-reverted. --Abd 02:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Ignored.
  • [7] No response from user (to latest post). Self-reverted. --Abd 02:17, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Ignored.
  • [8] No response from user. Self-reverted. --Abd 02:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
  • [9] No response from user. Self-reverted. -Abd 02:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC).
    • Ignored, user inactive.
    • Above edits need no attention; users will likely see them in any case, if they had not already seen them.
  • [10][11]. Found Miszabot archive failure due to site blacklisting during discussion before archive. Self reverted "per block." No ban violation. Check and revert back, anyone? --Abd 19:42, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Accepted by [12], exact.
  • null pair diff to undo to restore. Unintelligible text in w:Cold fusion, checked source, quote source to make it clear. Self-reverted per ban. --Abd (talk) 20:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Accepted by [13]. Further editing improved it.
    • 21:06, 1 May 2011 Future Perfect at Sunrise changed block settings for Abd with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked) ‎ (systematic ongoing provocation through block and ban evasion (74.106.77.23))
    • 22:14, 1 May 2011 Timotheus Canens changed block settings for Abd with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked, cannot edit own talk page) ‎ (Revoking talk page access: inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked: systematic ongoing provocation through block and ban evasion (74.106.77.23))
    • 22:24, 1 May 2011 Timotheus Canens blocked 108.8.197.195 (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 24 hours ‎ (Block evasion)
      • Sole edit of that IP: 19:42, 1 May 2011, edit to own Talk page before access had been cut off. Not block evasion. Actual block evading edits (all those documented above) were ignored, no blocks.
  • 22:48, 1 May 2011 My defiant edits to talk page by IP, pointing out the obvious. IP not blocked. Hey, what if it wasn't me? But it was.
    • 23:05, 1 May 2011 Jpgordon (Protected User talk:Abd: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked ([edit=autoconfirmed] (indefinite) [move=autoconfirmed] (indefinite)))
    • 07:38, 2 May 2011 Request for arbitration/Clarification had become an "Amendment," and was here "archived" as moot given that editor is now indef'd. Clarification was re two issues: extension of ban by admin, and scope of ban. Neither was reviewed, except, before archiving, all comments from arbs had affirmed ban as being needed, without addressing specifics. "Archived" apparently means "deleted."
  • 15:26, 4 May 2011. w:Cold fusion: Hew to source, add review of the topic by that source, specifically on-point of the section, review of publication data.
    • No evaluation yet.
    • 16:56, 4 May 2011. w:Cold fusion semi-protected for one month due to two self-reverted IP edits, one already accepted, one not reviewed. IP not blocked.
  • 22:32, 5 May 2011. w:Talk:Energy Catalyzer self-revert per ban.
    • No evaluation yet.
  • 22:32, 5 May 2011 w:Energy Catalyzer self-revert per ban.
    • Accepted (in effect.) Edit led to: [14][15], and finally, [16], which accomplished removal of the incorrect information.
  • 01:38, 6 May 2011 w:Talk:Cold fusion self-revert per ban.
    • 02:01, 6 May 2011 Kww (talk | contribs) changed revision visibility of "Talk:Cold fusion": removed content, edit summary, username for 2 revisions ‎ (ban evasion)
    • 02:02, 6 May 2011 blocked one week for ban evasion. IP contributions empty because of RevDel.
the text of the above Revision Deleted edit

Edit summary by 96.236.118.249: (→lenr-canr.org link in article: on why I emailed links, and on a striking proof of non-copyvio.)
inserted after: "Since he chose off-wiki communication and I do not wish to proxy for anyone I'll simply pass those links along without further comment at this time." by User:LeadSongDog 13:26, 28 April 2011

  • I thank LSD for passing this on. I was under a topic ban on cold fusion, or I'd have put the information up directly. I'm now not only topic banned, but indef blocked, so it doesn't matter any more. I'll self-revert, because I do recognize the right of a community to exclude editors from direct contribution of content, but not, for Wikipedia with its fundamental neutrality mission, to censor. Any editor may, on their own responsibility, bring back an SR (self-reverted) edit; bans are of editors, not content. My first SR edit was accepted, but the article was semiprotected as a result of the second. I won't normally mention these on Talk unless SR under ban is accepted.

inserted after: "I'm not sure what this means with linking to the site as a whole, but I think there is some cause for considering the correct position." by User:Bilby 00:36, 30 April 2011

  • See [17], a recent CF paper, published by Springer-Verlag, the second largest scientific publisher in the world. In the free preview, see the blue link to lenr-canr.org as a place to read the papers cited. This is the lenr-canr.org preprint of that paper. Is it plausible that SV is linking to a copyvio site? A for-profit publisher has legal exposure far higher than WP! Bilby's comment is generally true about copyright; however, however, authors frequently have the right to put up preprints, and publishers may allow other usage as well. There is no problem with linking to the site itself. Cf. YouTube! It's a page-by-page decision. --Abd 01:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Then the above edit was self-reverted with comment: (self-revert per ban, any editor may restore in whole or in part, or cite, on own responsibility for value of the contribution.)

  • 14:16, 6 May 2011. Off2riorob's talk page is semipro'd, this is his unpro'd page. Not self-reverted for that reason.
  • 14:30, 6 May 2011, self-revert per block. Edit included Please let me know if comments from me are unwelcome; harassment has nothing to do with my plans.
    • No response.
    • 00:00, 7 May 2011 (See block log). Timotheus Canens blocked 74.106.87.34 (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 week ‎ (Block evasion)
    • 00:12, 7 May 2011 Abuse filter created to prohibit "Abd" in edit summaries. Probably combined with anon edit. (Filter is hidden. Section headers with "Abd" -- Arabic for "slave" -- in them cannot be edited by IP.)
  • 13:39, 7 May 2011 archived request, correcting arbitration clerk error. reverted per block.
  • 13:51, 7 May 2011 added contact information to User talk:Abd.
    • Attempted to self revert per block, but was distracted and waited too long, account was blocked during edit.
    • contributions of Abd_sock, 14:00, 7 May 2011 Future Perfect at Sunrise blocked Abd sock (account creation blocked, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (block evasion)
    • 14:00, 7 May 2011 (rv block evasion) Edit reverted, no restoration expected.
    • 14:50, 7 May 2011 (tag with blocked sockpuppet template, account was used for block evasion which is not a legitimate use of an alternate account)
    • 14:53, 7 May 2011 Hut 8.5 changed protection level of User:Abd [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite) ‎ (upgrade to full protection, no need to edit and blocked user is abusing it)
  • 16:42, 7 May 2011 Notice to clerk who erred in archiving.
    • Self reverted as unnecessary, another user had swiftly noticed the self-reverted edit above, see ref. there.
    • 17:29, 7 May 2011 Hut 8.5 blocked 96.236.125.125 (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 week ‎ (Block evasion: User:Abd)
  • 17:55, 7 May 2011
    • Expected welcome from history above, not self-reverted.
  • 19:47, 7 May 2011 Suggestion to admin to only block 24 hours to avoid collateral damage, instead of one week.
    • 19:47, 7 May 2011Reverted by admin before I could self-revert. However, succeeding blocks were only 48 hours. (See log of actions for 14:53, 7 May 2011 to 19:47, 7 May 2011.)
    • Thus, apparent positive response. (Reverting and blocking while apparently ignoring, for block evasion, is a common response on Wikipedia, see w:WP:RBI, though that was intended for vandals.)
  • 04:29, 8 May 2011 Notice to clerk that attention was no longer needed due to actions of other editors. (not self-reverted due to difficulties with edit filter. Self-identified.
    • 06:59, 8 May 2011 Timotheus Canens blocked 74.106.64.0/19 (expires on 8 June 2011 at 06:59, anon. only, account creation blocked) (Block evasion: Nothing but block evasion recently from this range). Range contributions, 8192 IP#s blocked, shows roughly one edit per day for March and April from this range (not Abd). 3 edits May 1-8 were not Abd. Other edits May 1-8 were Abd, identified and self-reverted if outside w:User talk:Abd and Sandbox, except for [18] and [19], which were still obvious.
    • 07:08, 8 May 2011 Timotheus Canens (Reverted edits by 74.106.84.240 (talk) to last version by Lonelydarksky)
    • No response from user.

Non self-reversion period begins

As enforcement escalated, and anything naming Abd in the edit or edit summary is blocked by the edit filter, and range blocks have begun, Abd abandons self-reversion, and begins making direct edits. Edits were still self-disclosed, but not reverted.

  • 74.106.68.181. (signed old comment with IP that made it. This was partly to test the edit filter. See Edit filter for the log of edit filter 407. This was the edit summary: "Shirik DOES NOT mean slave: add sig" (One meaning of 'abd' is slave, and Shirik was an admin who made a change to the edit filter.
    • 07:17, 8 May 2011 Timotheus Canens (talk | contribs) changed revision visibility of "Talk:Abd (Arabic)": removed edit summary for 1 revision ‎ (RD3: Purely disruptive material)
    • 10:19, 8 May 2011 reverted.
  • 22:10, 8 May 2011 Family name (→Slavic countries: make edit attempted by 178.77.20.122, caught by edit filter 407. Edit by Him Who Shall Not Be Named in edit summaries. the filter caught a b d, "and" mispelled.) IP editor abandoned effort after two attempts to save.
    • 22:20 8 May 2011] Kww reverts.
  • 22:12, 8 May 2011 Talk:Energy Catalyzer' '(→Undue weight on 'demonstrations': edit violates topic ban. If reverted, any editor may revert it back in, or refer to it, on own responsibility.)
  • 22:12, 8 May 2011 User talk:Tnxman307 ‎ (→User:Panichappy1| definitely not me: new section)
    • 22:21, 8 May 2011 Kww reverts.
    • 22:21, 8 May 2011 Kww blocked 96.236.125.170 (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 week ‎ (Block evasion)
    • 22:26, 8 May 2011 (Reverted to revision 428150131 by 96.236.125.170; thanks for the revert, kww. i do want to respond though, i think it's warranted. Using Twinkle) (nice response --Abd)
    • 02:55, 9 May 2011 02:55, 9 May 2011 Timotheus Canens (talk | contribs) blocked 96.236.125.0/24 (talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 month ‎ (Block evasion) range contributions
  • 06:15, 9 May 2011
    • 06:21, 9 May 2011 Timotheus Canens blocked 96.236.121.17 (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ‎ (Block evasion)
    • 06:21, 9 May 2011 Timotheus Canens changed revision visibility of "Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports": removed content, edit summary, username for 1 revision ‎ (RD3: Purely disruptive material)
    • 06:28, 9 May 2011 Timotheus Canens modified Special:AbuseFilter/407 ‎[20]
the text of the above edit

Edit filter 407 see log for this filter. The filter was designed to prevent me from mentioning my user name in edits or edit summaries, but my user name is an extremely common Muslim name. None of the log entries after 04:27, 8 May 2011 were me, and I'm not about to trigger the filter again, so it's useless. A word to the wise. No, I'm not bothering with a template, because I DGAF. Want to ask me to do something or stop doing something? I have a Wikiversity user page that's open. Be nice. --He Whose Name Shall Not Be Mentioned. or (whisper) A b d. --96.236.121.17 (talk) 06:15, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


(The edit summary called attention to the last edit in the filter log, which was an attempt to report a false positive on this filter, which triggered the filter because the editor tried to copy the text of the change.)

Sequelae

What happened later? See the subpage.