User talk:Pibx

Just wanted to give you a heads up - your second 'undo' on Cranbrook School, Sydney put the vandalism back in. I reverted it back to the good state. —Northern Muriqui 05:59, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Thanks for letting me know. Pibx (talk) 06:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Here ya' go. Keep up the good work! Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 00:25, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for that. This the first Barnstar that I'm receiving. Hope to contribute to Wikipedia for years to come. And thanks for the motivation as well. It keeps me going Pibx (talk) 00:37, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to welcome you to Wikipedia! I want to talk about the edit on President of the Togolese Republic. Can you please move the page name to President to Togo? Thanks! Richie1509 (talk) 04:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I just want to know why you are asking me to do it? Pibx (talk) 04:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I'm asking if you don't mind if I can change the redirect page to an official page? Richie1509 (talk) 05:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

I also understand that you're new, so once again, welcome! Richie1509 (talk) 05:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I am new, so thanks for the welcome. As for whether or not I mind, I just want to say that it is not my job to OK/not OK your edits. If there is a problem with an edit, such as Violation of BLP, I will revert the edit. Thanks however for bringing this to my attention. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. And, once again, thanks for the welcome. Pibx (talk) 05:10, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

No problem! Richie1509 (talk) 05:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Instone Air Line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	You've been really working hard reverting vandalism and the whole shebang so you certainly deserve this. Remember: Editors, like you, made positive impacts to Wikipedia. Keep up the good work. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 05:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for that. The Special Barnstar. Appreciate it. Just want to make sure that Wikipedia continues to be a useful encyclopedia. That's all. But I guess I also like being recognized?. Anyway, thanks again. Pibx (talk) 06:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed you reverted some vandalic edits at Cabra Dominican College. Thank you for that :). However, I noticed you individually reverted each of the vandal's edits. In case you didn't know, you can revert multiple contiguous edits by using the little circles just to the right of (cur | prev). There's two columns of circles. For the left column, click the circle of the last pre-vandalism version of the page. For the right column, click the circle of the last vandalic edit. Then press the button "Compare selected revisions" just above the circle columns. That will take you to a diff, where on the right revision there will be an (undo) button. Pressing that will allow you to revert all the edits between the selected revisions.

Thank you for your efforts. See you around ;) –The Sophocrat (talk) 05:43, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Pibx (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Since you have apparently missed me pointing this out to you on WP:COIN:

Simple spam such as the three recent cases you have reported to the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard (WP:COIN) should not be reported there.

Such notifications should go to WP:AIV (for which you may use Twinkle as a convenient tool, though that is not required). There, they will be dealt with more promptly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:18, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Your edits to Draft:Dr. Prasoon Pootheri were disruptive. First, you blanked the draft. Why? Second, after blanking the article, you tagged it as WP:A7, despite the fact that A7 is applicable only to articles. At a minimum I suggest you avoid speedy tagging any pages until you gain more experience.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I do apologize for that. I did not realize that A7 applies only to Articles. I attempted to find a way to speedy tag a Draft, but found no way. Still, I understand what you're saying. I ought to have not blanked the page, and ought to have not tagged it as A7. Will keep that in mind in the future. Pibx (talk) 18:34, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The speedy deletion criteria are coded intentionally so that those with A apply to articles, R applies to redirects, U applies to userspace, etc. Drafts do not have a particular letter, but can be tagged with the G series, which applies to all pages. I have tagged the draft as WP:G11.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Will keep G11 in mind. Again, I do apologize for being disruptive. Didn't mean to do that. Pibx (talk) 18:40, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Please do not delete or alter legitimate talk page comments from other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Worgisbor (congregate) 19:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Won't do again. Pibx (talk) 19:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the report at WP:UAA but please note that user accounts are global. Except for the most offensive usernames, please don't report users at WP:UAA if they haven't edited on this wiki. Cabayi (talk) 09:47, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks you. The username you're referring, ልጥብስስየው showed up as a bunch of portrait mode rectangles. Thought that if it is ASCII, or Unicode, it would have loaded correctly. But now it makes sense. When I Googled the first letter, it showed up as a Ethiopian. Going forward, will if it [the Username] shows up as a a bunch of retangles, before doing anything else, will Google the first letter. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Pibx (talk) 16:15, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Your first check should be whether they have edited the English Wikipedia. If not then, unless the username is offensive, UAA has no interest. Cabayi (talk) 17:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:37, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pibx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I am not a Sockpuppet. However, I don't have an easy way to prove it. All I can say is that I've only tried to make Wikipedia better. Some of my first edits were reverted, because I didn't fully understand Wikipedia Policies. But whenever it was pointed out, I acknoledged it, and didn't do it again. I don't know how to be convincing that I am not a Sockpuppet. Simply saying that I am not one doesn't prove too much. I am, respectfully, asking for the Technical data to be looked at again. I believe it will show that I am not the other account mentioned. Pibx (talk) 01:10, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. Unambiguous. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:12, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pibx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Exactly twice have I been warned about being potentially disruptive. The first was for failure to use G11 to propose deletion of a draft that consisted of Spam. I used instead A7. The second was for making an edit to Administrators Noticeboard. In both cases, I promised not to do it again, and then did not do it again. There has been no abuse by me at all of Wikipedia since I started editing earlier in May. Please, if possible, review the technical data again. I am not abusing multiple accounts. Please unblock me if possible.Pibx (talk) 03:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is not relevant to your block. Yamla (talk) 12:06, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You are wasting our time. I have revoked Talk page access. If you wish to be unblocked, you will have to make an unblock request with your master account. However, if you continue to be dishonest about the socking (two different CheckUsers have now conclusively found that you have two accounts), it is highly unlikely that you will ever be unblocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:19, 31 May 2025 (UTC)