User talk:Yamla: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Content deleted Content added


Line 116: Line 116:

:::In that case, no, sorry. Let me or another admin know if this ends up becoming necessary, though! –[[User:Yamla|Yamla]] ([[User talk:Yamla#top|talk]]) 11:25, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

:::In that case, no, sorry. Let me or another admin know if this ends up becoming necessary, though! –[[User:Yamla|Yamla]] ([[User talk:Yamla#top|talk]]) 11:25, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks, Yamla. You deserved a [[star]] for replying to this message! [[User:ChutokuNewSTAR|ChutokuNewSTAR]] ([[User talk:ChutokuNewSTAR|talk]]) 12:48, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks, Yamla. You deserved a [[star]] for replying to this message! [[User:ChutokuNewSTAR|ChutokuNewSTAR]] ([[User talk:ChutokuNewSTAR|talk]]) 12:48, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

file:///Cscr-featured.png


Revision as of 14:51, 27 November 2025

Piotr Kamler page

Hi, Yamla. I just created a stub for Polish film director Piotr Kamler. The page name came with a warning that another page under that name had been removed by you in 2015 because it was created by a banned user in 2015. I couldn’t find a reference to it in your logs so I proceeded, but thought it best to check and see if there is any issue I am missing. I believe my stub is all original content. Wrightjack talk

Hello, I wanted to ask you about the Kosovo talk page, which you extended protected on 22 July. The ECP duration is for one year, meaning the protection period will expire on 22 July 2026. The reason you gave for the protection increase is “Persistent block evasion”. Before this protection increase, the talk page had continuously been at the semi-protected level since 2011. However, it seems that this level of protection is no longer necessary. There hasn’t been any block evasion or trolling by blocked accounts (or sock puppets of said accounts), and activity in general on the page is pretty low. For me, ECP on a talk page is a barrier to improving the content of the article, and shouldn’t be used unless absolutely necessary. I fully understand the use of semi-protection on a talk page of a contentious topic like Kosovo
Maybe you or someone else know something I don’t, and there is a good reason to keep the talk page ECP, but it seems unnecessary to me. KraljLavova97 (talk) 07:09, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What other accounts have you used here? Now is the time to be completely honest. —Yamla (talk) 10:59, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t have other accounts. I also have never edited the Kosovo page. The rule is to talk with the admin before requesting a deprotection so that’s why I came here. I found the info by looking at the talk page history. KraljLavova97 (talk) 15:28, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the case that you have no other accounts. I’ll go block you now. —Yamla (talk) 15:36, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i had created a page about the Kosovo war last week, Yugoslav offensive in Drenica (1999). And there is a user named Wikicommonsfan134, reverting my edits, added an unrelated source that claims “Yugoslav victory in Drenica” (the quote of the source doesn‘t mention anything about drenica), he also accuses me of using wp:or, and he is threatening to delete my article. He is just an example of wp:just. Can you revert his current revisions of my article and protect it please? He also might be a sockpuppet of User:Hungarianhistorian97 since he only created his account to vandalize my article. AverageSkiptar (talk) 10:33, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sorry, I cannot. Nothing personal at all, I’m just about to head to the airport for a vacation. —Yamla (talk) 10:41, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It‘s okay, take your time. Anyway have fun with your vacation. AverageSkiptar (talk) 10:47, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a petition at Wikipedia:Administrator recall/Yamla for you to initiate a re-request for adminship (RRfA).

You can provide a statement by editing the page’s code and removing the comment markup around the Response section above the Discussion section. Should the petition reach 25 extended confirmed signatories within 30 days, you may initiate an RRfA during the next 30 days, and if you do not initiate an RRfA within a reasonable time frame, bureaucrats will have the discretion to remove your administrator privileges.

An RRfA has a threshold of 60% for an automatic reconfirmation and 50% for a bureaucrat discussion. Before the RRfA begins, you may opt to run in an administrator election with a 55% threshold if one is occurring within 30 days. For further information, please consult the administrator recall process page.

Paserb (talk) 13:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

G5’d as apparent creation by a block evader. —SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss you. — Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:07, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’m back! But sick with the flu. Great vacation. Interesting that someone deliberately waited until I was away on vacation to start a recall. —Yamla (talk) 12:06, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you have a very good vacation. However, could you please help me change the settings for editing my talk page to: Only autoconfirmed users can edit it? Thanks! ChutokuNewSTAR (talk) 07:10, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not normally done unless your talk page is relentlessly targeted by vandals. Is that the case? —Yamla (talk) 10:50, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Just for protection. ChutokuNewSTAR (talk) 11:23, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, no, sorry. Let me or another admin know if this ends up becoming necessary, though! —Yamla (talk) 11:25, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Yamla. You deserved a star for replying to this message! ChutokuNewSTAR (talk) 12:48, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

file:///Cscr-featured.png

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top