User talk:Plasticwonder: Difference between revisions

Line 134: Line 134:

*Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more [[IP address]]es (using the [[Classless_Inter-Domain_Routing#CIDR_notation|CIDR notation]] format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting [[Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal|Special:Preferences]]. Happy editing! <!– Template:Temporary account IP viewer granted –>[[User:Extraordinary Writ|Extraordinary Writ]] ([[User talk:Extraordinary Writ|talk]]) 07:53, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

==New message from Plasticwonder==

{{talkback|User talk:Cat|random|ts=16:05, 24 November 2025 (UTC)}}

[[User:Plasticwonder|Plasticwonder]] ([[User talk:Plasticwonder#top|talk]]) 16:05, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

I am the firmest believer in calling a spade a spade, and telling the emperor that he has no clothes.<>

Vandalism on this page will be reverted without question, and you will be reprimanded. Don’t even try it. (Or do, its up to you)

While I never make mistakes (because I am secretly an android sent from WikiPlanet-42b to destroy vandals). If in the off chance I revert you and you disagree, feel free to discuss.

Also, “AntiVandal” is one of the many tools I use. Unless you are an obvious bad actor, you don’t need to worry.

Good show reverting your revert. I cannot tell you how rarely that happens. It warms the cockles of my heart to see such a sincere Wikipedian with such demonstrative integrity. 2601:196:180:DC0:45F5:3EF7:390B:49C3 (talk) 00:18, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, and thanks! Plasticwonder (talk) 00:27, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate your anti-vandal work. I can’t stand those vandals! 2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:3156:1DC4:AF14:D226 (talk) 01:16, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome! Plasticwonder (talk) 01:18, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I apologize for saying you lied in the edit summary; I then recognized you meant the source article, not ours. —Golbez (talk) 13:23, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Plasticwonder, do you speak Burmese? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:52, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ToBeFree,

I do not speak Burmese. I checked the history of the article you linked, as I don’t remember editing a Burmese themed page, and realized I undid a content removal from an IP that I thought was disruptive. Plasticwonder (talk) 19:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Why did you think so? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:08, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In AntiVandal, I see large chunks of text being removed, I usually revert, especially if there isn’t a proper reason for it, or even worse, no reason at all. In this case, the user stated that “justice is served”, which didn’t seem encyclopedic to me, and perhaps the editor had a bias. Plasticwonder (talk) 19:12, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, “justice is served” doesn’t even question the accuracy of the content, so I agree that the edit summary combined with a large removal of text is a pretty good indicator of disruption with a conflict of interest.

So that’s okay, no worries and thanks for the clarification. However, please be careful with such restorations. Whichever reason you had for restoring the content, you clicked a button and suddenly became legally responsible for the content you restored. If the user had stopped reverting there and sought a lawyer, and the content turned out to be defamatory, you could have been sued for defamation. 17 seconds between a removal and someone who doesn’t speak the language of the references restoring the content are very likely far less time than should have been taken in this case. Allegations are just allegations; WP:BLPPRIMARY applies about court records et cetera et cetera. If you could take at least a minute of reading and thinking as a matter of principle before restoring BLP content, that would be great.

Special:Diff/1317139564 had a far better edit summary that shows good faith (even if there’s a strong conflict of interest). Skywatcher68 reverted that one, which is the actual main problem in this dispute, but at least they sought advice afterwards. I found the page because they asked on my talk page.

And that all said, thanks a million for the recent changes patrolling you do. Especially for being brave enough to deal with such subjects and to oppose the introduction of bias. All the best! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the best comment I have had on my talk page. This was a tremendous heads up. I never knew you could be litigated for stuff like this, so this probably just saved me from a whole lot of trouble.

And as for the patrolling, it is the least I could do! Plasticwonder (talk) 19:30, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(It’s extremely unlikely and the recent situation with Caesar DePaço was an extremely rare case where the WMF actually had to reveal users’ IP address information. It went through the press and Wikipedia noticeboards because it is so extremely rare. I think this is mostly about morals, honor, reputation and not getting blocked rather than actual legal risk; even if we both used anonymizing proxies all the time and noone could sue us, we’d still be interested in not doing something illegal. It’s mostly something to keep in mind, not something to be afraid of.)

~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:39, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you LuniZunie!!!!!

Nearly 2 years being here and you are the first person to give me a barnstar! I couldn’t ask for a better person to award me one honestly. Salute! Plasticwonder (talk) 16:25, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

REALLY??? I am honestly so surprised!! So glad you finally got one, VERY much deserved.

Happy editing =) – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 16:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolutely unreal. Thank you so much TonySt!!!

Now I have two of the best patrollers giving me praise. I really appreciate it! Plasticwonder (talk) 16:48, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The articles on military dictatorship and military juntas also use the loose (i.e., including both autocracies and oligarchies) definition of “dictatorship”. The former should probably be renamed to “military regime”. ZFT (talk) 03:28, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I’ll begin work on it soon, thanks! 🙂 Plasticwonder (talk) 03:48, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The names of previous executive directors are completely incorrect. Have no idea who came up with them, TBH. I have been a member (and state director) of DECA since 2014. I tried correcting this, but you reverted it back. Look back into the old history of the page and you’ll see that I was correct. ~2025-32115-80 (talk) 06:12, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well why didn’t you write this as an edit summary instead of on my talk page? I wouldn’t have reverted you as your removal would have been explained (and thus I have no reason to revert you). Plasticwonder (talk) 06:18, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Regicide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Calippus.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 22:26, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 00:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Its the least I could do. Plasticwonder (talk) 00:47, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have reverted a talk page edit I made. I read over the wikipedia:vandalism page and could not determine how I was a vandal. Please let me know. ~2025-34405-08 (talk) 02:36, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you are not a vandal, “AntiVandal” is the tool I use.

Wikipedia is not a forum where you can discuss normal topics as you would on another site. Talk pages are for article improvement, not for getting others to contact you.

Plus I don’t exactly think the person will respond to you on a wikipedia talk page. Plasticwonder (talk) 02:40, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I must concur with the truth of your statement. Every crazy person will claim the same, but Iain has known me most of his life. Thank you for the reply. ~2025-34405-08 (talk) 02:48, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does it have a 1 year warranty?…………….🤔 (lol jk) Plasticwonder (talk) 02:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no hidden fees! – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 02:57, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deal! Plasticwonder (talk) 02:57, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Plasticwonder. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more IP addresses (using the CIDR notation format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:53, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment