User talk:FixDefunktDomain

Welcome![edit]

Hi, FixDefunktDomain. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Grayfell (talk) 06:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop replacing links[edit]

Hello. Please stop replacing links, or at least slow down and discuss it first. Archive.is is blacklisted on Wikipedia, so replacing links with fudged alternatives isn't helpful. See Wikipedia:Using archive.is, MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/December 2013#archive.is, and Wikipedia:Archive.is RFC if you haven't already. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 06:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

archive.is is as blacklisted as archive.today. They both are blacklisted and from this perspective no one of them is better than another.

Please consider that one of the domains is working while another is not.

Isn't better to have working links than dead?

I would also recommend to temporarily lift the block to perform this Search&Replace operation, this would allow me to avoid solving CAPTCHA each time. FixDefunktDomain (talk) 12:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Despite what you're trying to do, you are breaking a number of external links that have nothing to do with archive.is – see my correction here for example. It's probably best if you give it up and do something else instead, or at least get a consensus for what you're doing first. Are you associated with archive.is in any way? —SMALL JIM 12:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —SMALL JIM 12:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, please, go to WP:ANI and say that my edits are not constructive. I hope there we would find someone with ready S&R bot to do this job. FixDefunktDomain (talk) 13:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to resolve this as amicably as possible. I know that the situation regarding archive.is is not ideal, but sidestepping the blacklisting as you are doing is contrary to the consensus expressed by the community (see the links provided above by Grayfell). There's not going to be any quick fix for this - it needs more discussion first. You could try to reignite interest in the issue by posting at one of the Village Pumps, maybe WP:VPR if you can come up with a definite proposal. I hope this helps, —SMALL JIM

...and it will not be done for the next 3 years, as the task to replace blacklisted archive.is links with the links to the allowed archives. This task is much more trivial and less in scale, even if there could be bugs, I will fix them by reediting. FixDefunktDomain (talk) 13:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You've incurred the interest of three editors with the few changes that you've already made. I don't think you'll get very far if you continue without consensus: it's a principle we take very seriously. —SMALL JIM 13:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They said: "if you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go with someone". I have no plans to go far, rather fast. Aside of User:Jetstreamer protected pages with thousands links to archive.today, there are only few dozens of such pages. FixDefunktDomain (talk) 13:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All this attention is only because it alerts the archive.is link addition trigger. Would it be any another website no one would blame me. FixDefunktDomain (talk) 13:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. Your edits have been or will be reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. OK. I tried to help, but... —SMALL JIM 13:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do not vandalize, it is that you do by undoing without looking what you do. You reverts of my edit have been reverted again by two editors: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3A2009_RR&type=revision&diff=705107652&oldid=705099802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ATomwsulcer&type=revision&diff=705101608&oldid=705099607 and as time passes all your edits will be reverted by them. FixDefunktDomain (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HEY[edit]

Stop that.

I acknowledge that you're not vandalizing. You're not doing this out of ill intent. Your intention is to improve things. I realize that, and I apologize for any hurt feelings that may have been caused by the careless use of the 'V'-word.

But you must stop doing what you've been repeatedly advised to stop. As you have experienced, this particular form of what you are doing is controversial enough to cause disputes. Fixing dead links so that they point to archive.org -- sure. Changing .is to .today (or vice versa), however, is not currently acceptable. Stop it, or I'll have to block you.

Got it? DS (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

archive.today itself is dead. I do not mind blocking, it is special account for the only task as you can see from its name. I just need to make the editors who has been using archive.today aware about the domain change. They will fix the rest. It is their pages and they care about them. If they used archives to fix the dead links they will fix the dead link to the archive. Either by S&R to archive.is or by archive.org or by something.

Do you realize that archive.today IS LOST and in few days there could be a domain parking page with malware and other evil?

It is not good/bad intentions, it is red alarm.

What you do by reverting my edits is inserting links to a potentially malware site (potentially not as "archive.is is worst than archive.org" but as a lost domain could be).

FixDefunktDomain (talk) 16:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — foxj 16:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]