User talk:Paflidy

From Test Wiki
Latest comment: Thursday at 13:41 by Test Wiki message delivery in topic Administrators' newsletter – April 2025
Jump to navigation Jump to search

welcome2[edit source]

Welcome![edit source]

Welcome to the Test Wiki!
We're glad to have you here, Paflidy! The Test Wiki is a giant wiki which anyone including you can contribute to and edit. With 67 articles, 4,613 users, 42 active users, 63,428 edits and 36 files, the Test Wiki has been thriving!

Make sure to always assume good faith.

Remember to sign your posts with ~~~~.

If you would like to test Administrator/Bureaucrat tools, please make a request for permission!

Do you have any questions? Don't hesitate to inquire on the community portal!

We hope you'll make great edits!

Paflidy (talk) 13:46, 21 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

welcome[edit source]

Hi, Paflidy.

Welcome to Test Wiki!

How do I start?
  • First, Go to the request rights page.
  • Click the request rights button and fill the automatically generated template out.
  • Please add a little information at User:Paflidy, your user page, so we can know about yourself.

-- Welcomer (talk) 12:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yeah Paflidy (talk) 08:43, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Permission[edit source]

Paflidy, Hi there, You're eligible for sysop privileges, if you curious to testing with sysop permission, then please request for Administrator rights on TW:RfP. Happy testing! --- Bhairava7(@píng mє-tαlk mє) 12:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Roger that, I will request sysop later 👍 Paflidy (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Hi there, you're now eligible for bureaucrat's right If you feel to need with testing crat's privileges, then please request at TW:RfP and ping me for faster response on permission page. :) Happy testing! --- Bhairava7(@píng mє-tαlk mє) 05:41, 18 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

1[edit source]

0 Paflidy (talk) 12:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

:|[edit source]

1 Paflidy (talk) 12:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

a[edit source]

a Paflidy (talk) 12:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

q Paflidy (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to test again.
During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, read Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, and then you can appeal on this discussion page by adding {{unblock|reason=reason}}.
Paflidy (talk) 00:49, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to test again.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, read Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, and then you can appeal on this discussion page by adding {{unblock|reason=reason}}.
Paflidy (talk) 00:52, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from creating accounts for misuse of multiple accounts. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Paflidy (talk) 00:50, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing the administrator or bureaucrat tool sets.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, read Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, and then you can appeal on this discussion page by adding {{unblock|reason=reason}}.
Paflidy (talk) 00:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

A[edit source]

A Paflidy (talk) 12:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Blocking spambots when they are already blocked by the abuse filter[edit source]

As the section title says, if the abuse filter blocks obvious spambots, please do not reblock them as they are already blocked. Codename Noreste (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Welp, ok then Paflidy (talk) 23:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Posting questionable links[edit source]

As the title says, please do not post questionable links. Justarandomamerican (talk) 10:51, 27 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

ah okay 😁👍 never meant it to be genuine spam anyways Paflidy (talk) 10:54, 27 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
That's why I didn't block you, I assumed it wasn't genuine spam! Unsure why I deleted it for that reason.. Justarandomamerican (talk) 10:57, 27 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Subject[edit source]

Test😳 Paflidy (talk) 23:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

example[edit source]

@Example You need to see this fact 👉🤯👈 Paflidy (talk) 03:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

c8cufbdu[edit source]

test @Example Paflidy (talk) 05:04, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Blocking suspected spammers[edit source]

Hello! I believe someone informed you of this earlier, but I’d like to bring it up again. Please don’t block suspected spam accounts without any edits. There is always a chance that it is simply a good-faith user. We have an extremely strong abuse filter to automatically block users that attempt to spam, so manual blocks on a hunch are unnecessary. X (talk + contribs) 11:31, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Oh ok sry, next time I will stop blocking accounts anymore 🙏 though I was suspicious of the account being a spam bot since it filled the realName= field with a (first name) (last name) format. Paflidy (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
No worries, we just want to prevent good faith users getting accidentally blocked! X (talk + contribs) 12:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Are you listening to X? Or am I seeing the complete opposite behavior? Faithful (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I just decide to block them earlier before they launch their spam because they are pests Paflidy (talk) 22:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Honestly, though, it is more rational to leave the blocking job up to the abuse filter; it is more capable of doing that job than we'll ever be. Plus, seeing a generic first and last name on a user's talk page doesn't automatically make them a spammer. I have learned that by reading X's message above. And you know, it can always be a good-faith user, so don't make assumptions so quickly nor act on them. Faithful (talk) 23:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

test II[edit source]

@Bhairava7 Paflidy (talk) 11:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

A beer for you![edit source]

A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! A beer for you! Paltflidy (talk) 11:22, 1 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

yesno[edit source]

Paflidy (talk) 04:49, 8 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Alternative Accounts[edit source]

Hey there! I’ve recently noticed an account called Paflidychat was created here on Test Wiki. Are you able to confirm if this account is yours? As per the Test Wiki:Bureaucrat policy you are only allowed to have bureaucrat rights on one account at a time. Additionally that account doesn’t even meet the requirements for this right and as a result the bureaucrat right has been removed. VancityRothaug (talk + contribs) 13:12, 9 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I can make a confirmation edit there if you want Paflidy (talk) 22:46, 9 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Bot[edit source]

Dear Paflidy, I would like to ask you not to place bot right directly on your own account without the permission of a steward. A bot may not be placed directly on a normal account, unless it is for a short period of time for testing. If you continue without permission, I will be forced to revoke your bureaucrat rights. Greetings, Drummingman (talk) 16:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I'll honor your request. Paflidy (talk) 08:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Bureaucrat Policy violation[edit source]

Hello. I have noticed that you have given Paflidycratonlytest, one of your connected accounts, bureaucrat rights. I would like to remind you that as per the Bureaucrat Policy only one connected account may have bureaucrat rights at a time. I have removed the rights from the account. Please be sure not to violate this policy again. Let me know if you have any other questions! VancityRothaug (talk + contribs) 11:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I planned to revoke the alt account's bureaucrat right right after because it was a test, but you have done it anyways. Paflidy (talk) 12:22, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Understandable, but please note you still shouldn’t assign the bureaucract right to your other connected accounts, even if that is just a test. VancityRothaug (talk + contribs) 16:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

i[edit source]

h Paflidy (talk) 13:23, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

suususisid8idididid[edit source]

wi919wksidjcbuvkcnghdi Paflidy (talk) 09:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Bureaucrat revoked[edit source]

Dear, @Paflidy, because you have not heeded the umpteenth warning, I have revoked your bureaucrat rights. You have given this talk page bureaucratic protection, and you have abused your bureaucratic rights before. Enough is enough! You may no longer have bureaucrat rights for an indefinite period, with a minimum of 1 month. After one month, you can request bureaucrat rights again from a steward. It is up to you to convince the stewards that you will no longer abuse the bureaucrat's privilege. Greetings, Drummingman (talk) 16:02, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello Drummingman ! Could I be granted bureaucrat again ? Thanks ! Paflidy (talk) 13:15, 27 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Dear, Paflidy, how do I know you won't abuse your bureaucrat privilege again? I don't think a simple request to "Could I be granted bureaucrat again? Is enough. You have already abused your crat privilege several times, and I don't know if I will trust you enough after one month to give you this privilege back. So, give me a good reason why I should trust you with the crat privilege? Greetings, Drummingman (talk) 14:07, 27 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Withdraw request. I'm going to use this site using only sysop tools. Thanks for the response! Paflidy (talk) 14:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
I find it disappointing that you are not taking responsibility for your actions. Anyway, if you ever apply for crat rights again in the future, you can ask any steward, but at the very least give an explanation as to why you abused your rights, followed by a promise that you will not do it again. Then we can see if we trust you enough? To grant it. Greetings, Drummingman (talk) 15:42, 27 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – March 2025[edit source]

News and updates for administrators, bureaucrats, and stewards from the past month (February 2025).

Administrator changes

Added
Removed
Readded

Bureaucrat changes

Added Faithful
Removed

Interface administrator changes

Removed

Bot changes

Added Faithful-alt


Test Wiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

placeholder[edit source]

placeholder Paflidy (talk) 05:12, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

fijfhxjx8cjjshahah[edit source]

Status:    '
Paflidy (talk) 12:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Revision deletions[edit source]

Hello, Paflidy! Would you mind sharing your reasoning for the continued revision deletions on Test Wiki:Discord and Module:RfP header? Such kind of actions, if used for testing, could be made on Revision and suppression test instead. Thanks, Tester () 15:16, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello Tester. I deleted both of them because keeping them visible doesn't serve any value at all. Paflidy (talk) 23:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
I disagree that simply the revisions not serving enough value is enough to warrant a hiding action. However, please contact a steward for a definitive answer. Additionally, could you give the reasoning for:
  1. The revision deletions on Test Wiki:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe
  2. Removal of User_talk:Luna from the abovementioned page
Thanks, Tester () 09:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Please use the reason field to justify your revision deletions, wherever possible and appropriate. As previously mentioned, if you are testing, please use Revision and suppression test. Thanks, Tester () 10:18, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello[edit source]

world! Paflidy (talk) 13:21, 21 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Admin rights[edit source]

Hello Paflidy,

I have revoked your administrator rights due to improper and even malicious use of them. This includes repeatedly assigning yourself unnecessary user groups and failing to remove them, as well as persistently restoring them after they were removed by other administrators.

I am leaving the rest of the matter to the stewards, should they decide otherwise.

Best regards, BZPN (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Dear, @BZPN I understand your intention and appreciate it. However, in the future, if it is not a clear case of abuse of power, it would be appreciated if you could leave this kind of admin/crat revocation to the stewards. @Paflidy I will reinstate your admin rights, on this account. This means that from now on, you may only have admin rights on your main account. In addition, I do ask that you take responsibility for your actions. Although this is a test wiki, it is important to remember that not all actions are allowed. Do not repeatedly grant yourself unnecessary rights and try to prevent other users from feeling uncomfortable with your test actions. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me or the other stewards. Greetings, Drummingman (talk) 16:29, 27 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Warning[edit source]

This is your final warning. You have again broken the recommendations of others and have not followed the steward's recommendations outlined above, which involves unnecessary assignment of additional permissions to yourself and your secondary account, and failing to remove them. If you again make unnecessary changes to the groups on your account, which already constitutes intentional trolling, you will be reported to the stewards. Best regards, BZPN (talk) 06:19, 1 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I have temporarily revoked your admin permissions to prevent further trolling while awaiting steward intervention, due to your continued addition of unnecessary user groups to your secondary account and the unwarranted protection of your talk page, which hinders normal communication. BZPN (talk) 06:32, 1 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
Dear Paflidy, the bureaucrat @BZPN has revoked your administrative rights. I have decided not to restore your admin rights at this time, as you obviously did not listen to me. You may submit a request for reinstatement to a steward after two months. It will then be incumbent upon you to persuade the steward that you will not abuse your admin rights. In the meantime, you can, of course, request other user rights. However, from now on, you can only get admin, bureaucrat and non-test rights from a steward. Greetings, Drummingman (talk) 15:22, 1 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
I rather get steward-blocked than not having sysop and bureaucrat at all Paflidy (talk) 01:29, 2 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
Paflidy (talk) 23:41, 2 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Blocked[edit source]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for trolling, disruption, or harassment.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, read Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, and then you can appeal on this discussion page by adding {{unblock|reason=reason}}.
Justarandomamerican (talk) 13:10, 3 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – April 2025[edit source]

News and updates for administrators, bureaucrats, and stewards from the past month (March 2025).