Jump to content

User talk:Mfield/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13


Special:Contributions/64.18.8.0/22

Please revoke the ip talk page access, it appears that this is miss using it's talk page, and talk page needs revdel as well. very offensive Untamed1910 (talk) 04:05, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

User talk:ShermanDuArthur/Header

Since you blocked the IP that was spamming with this, could you delete the page as well? I added db-vandalism but another IP reverted it with no summary. ⫷doozy (talk▮contribs)⫸ 07:26, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

You're the WP:OWNer of my userpage. You removed all of it, where it showed my interest in developing the article space which is scant beyond the textuality and interfaith dialogue articles

By abusing given authority in such a way you suppressed the means of awareness of homotextual sects as a field of inquiry & discussion: and that's disgraceful

Latitude is given for editors to show their personal flair, if they're that way inclined, particular on their own home pages. It's why this wiki hosts lots of ridiculous userboxes

So it's known that userspace is permitted to host "Non-article Wikipedia material such as reasonable Wikipedia humor, essays and perspectives, personal philosophy" but that doesn't matter to you

Return back what you censored. Homotextual Sects (talk) 07:56, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

The content of that userpage would have merited and indefinite block for the homophobic references contained within alone. Now that i re-read it am somewhat re-thinking my decision. You have also jumped directly in as a new account to editing contentious topics and clearly are not new user based on your use of policy references. I strongly suggest you refrain from any posting any further such comments either in any space including userspace. You are entitled your have your opinions but you are not entitled to post them on a community site where clear community consensus exists about what is considered acceptable speech and what is offensive. Further Wikipedia is not a webhost, and if you want to publish opinions that the community considers unacceptable, and that are not relevant to this project, you should start your own website to do that. Mfield (Oi!) 17:59, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
I'm beginning to think we have a NOTHERE editor. Doug Weller talk 07:44, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
And you'd be right! It was only a matter of time before they removed all doubt. Mfield (Oi!) 17:57, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
True. I don’t understand the odd “signatures” nelow. Doug Weller talk 18:02, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
The phenomenon of Homotextual sects demands some level of coverage in any thorough encyclopedia Unable to detect username01:12, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
There's no integrity in someone that removes the whole essay in preference to the censoring out the subset smeared as 'homophobic'Unable to detect username


YodelandEcho

I think your block was hasty. As an admin myself, I wouldn't have considered a block at this point. This is an elderly, technically unskilled, inexperienced editor, likely with limited memory about the few edits she made Wikipedia 2 years ago, trying in good faith to make corrections about her personally, and doesn't know how. I'm willing to work with her, and she seems willing to engage. She isn't going to know how to appeal the block. I find it unfortunate that she wasn't even told until today about how to make edit requests on a talk page. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:51, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Your points are well taken, i will revert the block if you are going to help her though it Mfield (Oi!) 23:54, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Thanks! She isn't trying to be disruptive. I don't even believe she knows she's been disruptive. So I'm trying to explain things. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:59, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
No problem, the block was really to prevent her disclosing further PI, as she had posted her cell number already in edit summaries that i revdel'd Mfield (Oi!) 00:01, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

User:Inoxzent.in

Hi,

Is there a reason why you soft-blocked this user instead of the typical {{uw-spamublock}}? ConnerTT (talk) 05:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi yes sure, they went through a community AfC process and didn't just jump on here and start spamming their company or adding links to it to other articles, they also haven't made other edits outside of that process. If they read all the policies and request a change of username, which will involve them committing to not promote their company, and they then continue to promotionally edit, that can be addressed separately. I know there's some divergence between the way different people handle promotional usernames, but i tend to side with the group that thinks a promotional username without bad faith promotional edits doesn't merit an immediate hardblock. Mfield (Oi!) 05:24, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Moderator of anime section always delete my edits, is this normal?

The moderator constantly deletes my edits, this is unfair, you represent an encyclopedia for truthful information. Let it be proven by Xexerss that Akito Tokunaga was fired not for stealing someone else's music. Why should I prove to him the sources of the theft if it is already audible? 194.107.178.246 (talk) 06:31, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

"I can hear the similarity with my own ears" is not a source. Also, I suggest you stop with the personal attacks; this isn't 4chan. Xexerss (talk) 07:04, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, and whoa!

Thank you for protecting Minecraft: The Story of Mojang after the efforts of a platoon of editors to curtail that weird bunch of "Ghosts & The Afterlife ... Phantom_Matter & Dark_Matter, Scientific Fact ... Scientific Evidence". Like what? Of all places for a loony vandal to target, they settle on the Wikipedia page for some obscure indie documentary film about some Swedes who made Cave Game... I swear, some of the most whack shit happens here! Thank you again for putting a cap on all that. Have a great one! BarntToust 06:47, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello

Regarding the extended confirmed protections to Minecraft Live, Minecraft: The Story of Mojang, and Minecraft speedrunning, please downgrade to semi-protections as the vandalism came from IPs, not autoconfirmed accounts. See WP:ECP. F13 enwikis (talk) 14:42, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks!

Wow, you're a superstar! You took care of that so fast. Thank you for ensuring wikipedia is a safe and informative place! EllieDellie (talk) 19:53, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

ANI close

You cut me off mid-post. Can you unclose that? I hadn't, in fact, agreed to move on - I said that I'd like to, but made clear that the other party's behaviour was making that difficult, and I think Dan Leonard's point deserves to be heard. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 04:01, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I was not intending to, or trying to, cut you off sorry, it read to me like there was something of a conclusion and a desire to move on. I have re-opened it. Mfield (Oi!) 04:03, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
What? You couldn't psychically tell I was typing? How dare you! [FBDB] Nah, just joking. Thanks for re-opening it. :) GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 04:07, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for undoing the vandalism on LEAP Legal Software and blocking the account. I had a look at the history and it looks like their marketing team has made more edits under their IP Address 59.100.128.1, are you able to block that as well. ~~~~ Aussieaussieoioi (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Revdel

@Mfield I understand this may be an unorthodox request- please revdel my sandbox. The existed revisions can be tied to my real-life identity which I hadn't realized until just now. Thanks! Electricmemory (talk) 04:01, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

OK have just deleted the page instead per user request instead Mfield (Oi!) 04:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Proxies

There's definitely something weird going on with the proxies that add hoax death info to articles. Should I report this to ANI? Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 05:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Am in convo on Discord about it Mfield (Oi!) 05:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)
Alright. Hope this gets resolved soon, considering that some of it managed to stick around for a while. Thanks so much for blocking them and taking a look at this! Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 05:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

G6 deletion of talk page only

Mfield, I noticed you deleted the talk page Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Continental Classic (2024) but did not delete the actual editnotice page Template:Editnotices/Page/Continental Classic (2024) – can you go back in and delete the accompanying page? Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 16:53, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Done, strange not sure how I missed that Mfield (Oi!) 17:02, 5 October 2025 (UTC) Mfield (Oi!) 17:02, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Promo hard/soft blocks

Hi there! While working the unblock queue, I noticed you recently soft-blocked Thearena.lab for a promotional username. Looking at their edits, they created a promotional page tied to their username. In this case, a hard block may be more appropriate so they’re required to address the payment disclosure policy before being unblocked. The current block doesn't need to be updated, but I wanted to bring this to your attention in case you come across a similar situation in the future. Let me know if you have any questions, comments, and/or concerns regarding this. More than happy to hear your perspective! Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:32, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, ah yes I hadn't noticed that the latest hardblock warning templates contain that extra language about the paid editing disclosures. Habit from the beforetimes. I have been adding those as an admin comment often manually alongside the softblock for marginal cases where edits aren't super promotional. But noting that additional language I will switch to just hardblocking them instead. Mfield (Oi!) 03:02, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
Thanks! As a note, the other problem is that the soft block template tells editors they can simply create a new account because the only issue is their new username. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 13:21, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Spam page deletion

Thank you for your deletion of User:Blakk Boii/sandbox. My tagging of this page was reverted by Anachronist. I reverted it back and then you deleted it. All the user's edits were self-promotion. I think my tagging was right and your deletion was right. This user was here 100% to promote himself. He had no other contributions on Commons or here. I don't understand why Anachronist would revert a long-term contributor to protect a spam page of a drive-by spammer? I've told him I won't tag spam userpages here again. I hope that avoids a problem. Thanks again. Geoffroi 22:35, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

I reverted it because, among that editor's three contributions, the sandbox was the only contribution that could conceivably be considered a start of an AFC draft, and the sandbox included no links and few words, so it wasn't unambiguously promotional, which is a requirement of G11. The situation resembled those I've seen many times in the past, where a new editor creates a userpage and sandbox with identical content in good faith. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 23:04, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) I perhaps have a higher standard than some, but IMO that was not WP:G11. I agree with Anachronist that it conceivably looked like the start of a draft. Also, once a G11 is declined by an admin, it should not be retagged. Best, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:54, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
Ah, stepped away right after I was working through those CSDs and just came back online. I actually agree with both Anachronist and Deepfriedokra that the tag should not have been re-added. I hadn't noticed that the page had the tag had been removed and re-added which is my bad, and wouldn't have deleted it at the time had I seen that. I remember thinking that the userpage had been an obvious vio and the sandbox was marginal. Regardless, with the Userpage gone i am going to revert the sandbox deletion and remove the tag. Mfield (Oi!) 00:10, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
Cool beans. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
I could not help but notice that @Geoffroi: also retagged User talk:Blakk Boii after it had been detagged by Anachronist. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:16, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
I removed that tag along with the spam, rather than deleting the whole talk page, due to the presence of commentary on the page other than the spam. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 04:45, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
Quite. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
Agreed also, I am going to undelete the original talk page and merge in the new content, if there is a better way to do that then I am all ears. Mfield (Oi!) 06:12, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
Just restore Anachronist's version sans spam. 😉 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:34, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
That's what i did and then re-included my autobio welcome and your message also, as i think the editor would benefit from the extra information. Mfield (Oi!) 06:38, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
yes -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:44, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase

Heads up, User:LasVegasGirl91 is Edit Warring at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase Untamed1910 (talk) 04:03, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

...and she's outta here Mfield (Oi!) 04:07, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

For blocking that person who kept talking shit to me, additionally can you remove this edit summary and remove visibility for this .. thanks Lil Happy Lil Sad :): 22:42, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Apparent rangeblock fail

I recently brought an IP to ANI in a follow-up to an earlier discussion you closed with the result intended to be a rangeblock. The short version: you ended up blocking 2600:6C50:57F:BA33:0:0:0:0 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and not 2600:6C50:57F:BA33:0:0:0:0/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)). I figured I'd give you a heads up as to why the block, which as always is supposed to be preventative, hasn't really prevented anything. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:51, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

You are correct, i must have missed off the bit mask somehow, it is fixed now. Mfield (Oi!) 19:03, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Kvsdance

Do you mind revdelling Special:Diff/451855683 and Special:Diff/451855722? Because the edits are in the sandbox, the {{copyvio-revdel}} template will only be removed by a bot, and I can't pull the kill switch for the bot. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 13:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

OK, done Mfield (Oi!) 16:58, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

RM closure summary

Can I request that you add a boldface basic summary of the outcome at the top of your explanation at Talk:Palestinian genocide accusation#Requested move 26 September 2025 – e.g., "No consensus." —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:04, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Likewise was thinking the same per WP:THREEOUTCOMES. CNC (talk) 15:07, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Sorry yes it was bolded correctly in my original summary but when I expanded it as requested, it got removed. Adding it back now. Mfield (Oi!) 15:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

That IP was nasty, and here's a kitten to comfort you! (That was straight up harassment.)

HwyNerd Mike (tokk) 05:14, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for you concern/thoughts ;) but tbh it's water off a duck's back with those types. I don't merit them a second thought. Mfield (Oi!) 05:23, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Recent IP block

Just letting you know that an IP you blocked recently for making personal attacks via edit summaries also claimed to be Jerzy, who was indefinitely blocked by the Arbitration Committee. Judging by their behaviour, I believe them. Yue🌙 06:01, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Interesting OK i have silently increased the block time on that IP accordingly. Mfield (Oi!) 06:04, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your block and cleanup!

I appreciate your lickety-split action regarding my AIV report from a few minutes ago! I don't negotiate with trolls: I go straight to the metaphorical "principal's office".

To echo, coincidentally, Yue immediately above, query whether the IP (75.117.229.134) whose vandalism the blocked user repeated, particularly at Somerset, Kentucky, should receive an extension of prior blocks given such block history and a declared intent at that IP talk page to continue vandalizing. Dude didn't register the new account you blocked until I reverted him earlier today and tonight (you and I are in the same time zone), but they're exactly the same edits, like repeating the same misspelling in one caption in the Somerset article to render "Goldenberg" (which I assure you is correct) as "Goldenburg". I didn't leave warnings for the IP because I can't get Twinkle to work on my phone and I was out watching the end of the miserable baseball game, but I think it's a moot point.

Anyway, many thanks again! Take care! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 07:22, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Categorization of AE protection actions needed (30 October 2025)

Hello Mfield,

I'm a bot that helps log arbitration enforcement (AE) protection actions on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. As a result of a September 2025 motion by the Arbitration Committee, administrators are no longer required to manually log AE protection actions. Instead, this bot is responsible for logging AE protections to the AE protection log.

While logging AE protections, this bot detected that you recently took the following page protection actions. These action(s) seemed to be AE actions based on the edit summaries, but the bot wasn't able to tell which arbitration case they related to:

If these were AE actions, please take a moment to log the appropriate topic code at the AE protection log. If they were not, feel free to remove the actions from the AE protection log, and optionally let the bot operator know about the false positives.

Going forward, in order to help this bot categorize AE actions, please include a link to the contentious topic under which the action was taken in the protection edit summary (for example, [[WP:CT/BLP]] or [[Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Biographies of Living Persons]]).

If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to the bot operator or to the arbitration clerks at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard.

Thank you! ClerkBot (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Guide to temporary accounts

Hello, Mfield. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

Editing from a temporary account
  • When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
  • All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
  • A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
  • As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
    • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
    • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

How to enable IP Reveal

Impact for administrators

  • It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
  • It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
  • Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

  • Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
  • Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
  • See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

  • It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Tick Enable the user info card
    • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
  • Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
  • Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
  • The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

  • How to use Special:IPContributions
  • How automatic IP reveal works
  • How to use IP Info
  • How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

UAA

Thanks for your quick reaction to my UAA report. It disappeared so quickly I almost purged the cache because I thought it didn't load! Chess enjoyer (talk) 06:21, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Yeah FCK:NZS Mfield (Oi!) Mfield (Oi!) 06:29, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

New WP:DISCORD message!

Hi @Mfield, I've sent you a new DM over on Discord. Feel free to take a look when you've got a chance! Thanks, Staraction (talk | contribs) 07:00, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Comment

Hello, Mfield,

If you close a discussion, could you remember to add your signature? Many thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 07:03, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Yoiks, my bad, i find myself typing four tildes all the time in emails and text messages so i hope that was an oversight! Mfield (Oi!) 07:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Energy in the Middle East

Hello Mfield. I saw you banned a user that was editing the page I had worked on in the past. I was making changes to polish up the article and figured you'd be the best admin to ask since you saw it recently.

There's a part in the carbon dioxide section where I believe the referenced data and stated numbers don't match the citation at all. I think it's possible the editor's citation should be different as well. Rather than flat out deleting that part, as a normal user, I figured I'd ask an admin first since I'm not sure I'm allowed to go and delete someone else's work like that (even if it's incorrect).

~~~~ NotMars (talk) 05:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, if it needs correcting, and the references support your changes, then go ahead and correct it, you don't need to worry about it being "someone else's work", this is a community project and all edits are subject to being re-edited by anyone else. Mfield (Oi!) 05:58, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Question re. blocked user

Hi @Mfield, I had a question about your block of (R20NHB) as WP:NOTHERE. It looked like their edits to their userpage were primarily in wikivoice, and was intended to be informational. Is there something I'm missing here regarding their editing patterns? Thanks, Staraction (talk | contribs) 08:21, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Another block I was a little confused about was that of Gmediat450, blocked as a vandalism-only account. However, it looked like some of their contributions (diff 1, which you reverted; diff 2; diff 3) were constructive/looked like they were trying to contribute. Of course, it looked like some of their edits could've been improved, but was there something else that led you to block? Thanks, Staraction (talk | contribs) 08:31, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for asking. The first one actually should have been a promotional username block, it was based on a UAA report, i must have inadvertently selected the wrong template, so i have corrected that now. The second one looking at it again, the few edits must have seemed to me far less constructive than on a second look so I have reversed it and am going to watch that user for a while. Mfield (Oi!) 17:59, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Mfield, thanks for your response. I'm still a little confused about the (R20NHB) block; even if we consider gangs an organization, it doesn't really feel like their edits were "promotional" to me; they seemed in wikivoice instead. Am I missing something here?
I appreciate your time, since I'd love to get to know the username policy regarding promotional edits a little better. Thanks, Staraction (talk | contribs) 00:01, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Username policy is that usernames should be individual and should not appear to represent a group or organization, or imply shared use. As such the username is an issue right away, then the question becomes is it promotional also, so does it get soft or hardblocked. Whilst this is open to discretion, the general feeling is that a company/group username by itself would merit a promo softblock. So if this user had that username, but never mentioned the group aside from in their username then I would have softblocked. But a group username, accompanied by other edits that mention the group generally indicates the user is promoting that group. (In the case of companies that is done specifically to force the editor to make any required paid editing disclosures before continued editing.) So those two factors together are the reason for my spamublock. If a memeber of a club or gang joins the project and their username is the name of the group and their first edit is about that group, then it is highly likely they are here primarily to promote that group. Mfield (Oi!) 17:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, Mfield, for explaining this to me; this makes sense! Best, Staraction (talk | contribs) 20:35, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

FYI

I re-indeffed Baangla this morning after a two-week mentorship with LordCollaboration didn't seem to help Baangla's demeanor or willingness. I appreciate your leadership in recommending the indef at the ANI discussion. Many of us (myself and LordC included) were too optimistic about the situation. Your hard call was ultimately the correct one. BusterD (talk) 11:14, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

It's a shame that it had to come to this either way around, I heartily commend your time and effort spent in mentoring. Mfield (Oi!) 16:54, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Commend the former LordDiscord, now User:LordCollaboration, who was doing the heavy lifting during the mentoring. A frequent side effect of asking someone to help is the shocking discovery they turn out to be a standup person. Our sort of wikipedian. LordC and I will embark on some mentoring side adventures of our own. When I discover such a teammate, I inevitably want to show them places they'd be truly useful. BusterD (talk) 18:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Indeed, commendations to the both of you, @LordCollaboration Mfield (Oi!) 20:29, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Thank you Mfield, BusterD, I really appreciate it :) LordCollaboration (talk) 20:34, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

JaredMcKenzie

Can I bother you to take a look at this guys talk page and try to officially dissuade him from doing something that’ll get him indef blocked for sure? I tried a little diplomacy here, but it didn’t seem to take, and logging into my admin equipped account on the iPad is a pain in the butt. I’m hoping if the same wisdom comes from someone with an account that has teeth he make actually tune up his hearing aid and pay attention this time (though I’m not holding out much hope). ~2025-32314-37 (talk) 14:17, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Sorry been off wiki for a day or two, but seems like this has got back on track, will be keeping an eye on the user anyway. Mfield (Oi!) 00:53, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hello Mfield. You blocked the account Guru Nanak Food Bank, and the account DeltaSurreyEditor was created about 30 minutes later. It has continued to write about the same topic as the blocked account... pretty clear block evasion, wouldn't you say? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:16, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Yep indeed thanks Mfield (Oi!) 04:21, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mfield/Archive_13&oldid=1323621388"