User talk:Cabayi

Short URL

w.wiki/4Gpo

Helping you warn the violators

Hi, I’m Starfall2015 and I would like to help you warn people about violations. You up? Starfall2015 chat 09:26, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Slow down and think about what you're doing. Does a noticeboard for administrators to enforce the username policy really need to be told to look at the username policy? Watch what happens for a while before stepping in. I commend the advice in the editnotice on this page, Proverbs 17:28. Happy editing, Cabayi (talk) 10:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Account Rename

Thank you very much; I really am very grateful. —sardonism · t · c 13:47, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Cabayi (talk) 13:50, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recent vanished user rename

Hi there, yesterday you renamed a user who wished to vanish to User:Renamed user b01a528d7f4e225a6c30730b82a79101. It turns out this account has been CU-confirmed as a sockpuppet of User:Theofunny. Given this indicates the user was not in good standing, I believe it would be appropriate to request that the vanishing be undone? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:01, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The new style vanishing is still less than a year old so these issues aren't yet (imo) 100% cast in stone, but I don't see the point of reverting the rename in this case.

The user was still in good standing at the time of the vanishing. (vanished 08:29, 7 June 2025, not blocked until 16:46, 8 June 2025).
There is no SPI case linking to the user's original name. If there were, creating redirects from old username to vanished username might be the preferable option.
The only record I see of the socking (no SPI page?) is Moneytrees's comment on the master's talk page which links to the vanished username, not the original. Reverting the renaming will only help obfuscate the connection which is contrary to the global rename policy.
Vanishing was, until July 2024, just a rename without any redirects. Since then the vanishing process also locks the account and removes the user's email address. AFAIK stewards have adopted a policy of not reverting the lock or renaming of new-style vanishings. The account is not coming back.

I'm happy to be swayed, and to take the discussion to other renamers, if you have reasons that undoing the rename aspect of the vanishing would benefit the project. Cabayi (talk) 06:35, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The socking's also mentioned on ANI here, in relation to the account having made personal attacks on another user before vanishing. Basically to me it's a case of feeling that "the user, being a sockpuppet apparently created for the purpose of attacking other users, was never in good standing", but if you don't think it suits being reverted back, then there's no big deal from my end - thanks for the quick response! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:38, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ANI permalink.

That's a reasonable view of "in good standing" at this end of the kaleidoscope. However at the other end, when renaming, it boils down to "Is the user blocked anywhere?". I don't think that any renamer looks further than that, nor would I expect them to. If they have personal knowledge of an ongoing ANI or SPI they may refuse to vanish, but it's a random chance.

Non-trivial exercise for illustration: check whether I'm in good standing as well as unblocked on ALL 844 projects where I've been "active".

Creating redirects at User:FantasyElect and User talk:FantasyElect would resolve all the problems, would it not? Cabayi (talk) 07:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's a good idea - I'll do that, in fact. Thanks for explaining things, it's appreciated. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia technical issues and templates request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Lee Jae-myung series on a "Wikipedia technical issues and templates" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:39, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help requested

Hi, can you please help semi-protect Wikipedia:Teahouse? A certain LTA just won't stop finding new IPs/proxies to post threats there no matter how many times we revert their edits. ~SG 5536B 07:12, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SG5536B, I don't like placing page protection on a page for which the principal audience is made up of unregistered and new users. I'm also aware that much of the clean-up has been done by an IP user. ... 2 hours semi may do. Cabayi (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I understand how new accounts and IPs may have a harder time requesting assistance when both the Wikipedia:Help desk and Teahouse are frequently semi-protected due to persistent disruption by a banned user. At least there are still ways for legitimate newcomers to ask experienced editors for help even if such desperate measures have to take place as shown in this assistance thread (found in both help forums). ~SG 5536B 08:13, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

harassment block

fyi, I've blocked and RD'd [1] for harassment. Given that their presumed target has a history of reverting changes to that article, I really don't think it's a coincidence. Cheers. -- asilvering (talk) 19:19, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Asilvering. It was reported (and handled) as a disruptive username issue rather than a harassment or impersonation issue. If there was more to it than that (and there was) I am more than happy that you stepped in. Cabayi (talk) 07:08, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]