![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
If you would like to explain to these people why the mudkips meme is not a reasonable addition to the article, then nobody can stop you from doing that on the user's talk page. But the discussion does not belong on the pokemon article page in question, because it is unconstructive. There has already been a lengthy discussion on the issue - as preserved in the talk archives - and there has been a strong consensus against adding such material. The header on the talk page was added to stop this discussion because it is unconstructive, and it was added for a reason. Any further discussion should be deleted, because by continuing it we are simply running around in circles, pointlessly arguging the same points which have no merit TheBilly ( talk) 10:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
No one ever agrees with me though... :) [1] Jmlk 1 7 08:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, A checkuser IP Check case you filled has been completed by a CheckUser, and archived. You can find the results for 7 days at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check/Archive. -- lucasbfr talk, checkuser clerk, 11:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC).
oh, no...Im sorry, i dont know to "images are forbidden in signature"...now, im removing to this image... *** Эɱ®εč¡κ *** and his friend 22:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
You denied semi-protection. You said there were no edits since 2005. That is not true. Just take a look at the history, there was an edit less than 2 hours ago. Footballfan190 ( talk) 02:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your concern regarding my username, "Awesomebitch".
As suggested, I checked out Wikipedia's username policy. It defines an offensive username as one that serves to "make harmonious editing difficult or impossible". "Awesomebitch" seems rather tame to be inflicting the emotional scarring that is necessary for this kind of damage.
I use the term "bitch" as empowering, rather than derogatory. This usage is pretty mainstream these days. (Bitch Magazine and Meredith Brook's song "Bitch" are good examples if you need them.) Used in this way, it can hardly be seen as a vulgarity. However, regardless of how you personally view the term, referring to myself as a bitch does not pose a threat to the community.
Wikipedia's username policy isn't there to censor grade-school style, but rather to prevent deliberate attempts at offense/sabotage, which this clearly isn't. There are countless articles inside Wikipedia itself that are substantially more offensive than the term "bitch". The Wikipedians who use Wikipedia enough to run across my username are resilient enough to not be emotionally disfigured by "Awesomebitch" and her wrath.
I'm sorry if my username hurt your feelings. Will you forgive me?
Let me know if you need any additional clarification.
Awesomebitch ( talk) 03:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, that ain't going to work b/c they are IP address and they are constantly changing and it tends to be the same person -- CatonB ( talk) 05:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Again vandalism in the batesmethod article by IP=address. The same party I assume. ( Ophthalmology ? ). Or an other party is doing everything to keep the quality of the article as low and unclear as possible. Attempts to discuss the changes have been made. Only fake arguments were given as you can read. I do not think semi protection is enough for this page. This article is making clear providing clear objective information about the batesmethod is not about giving clear referenced information it is about politics. Seeyou ( talk) 18:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Even user Mastcell knows how to be a vandal ! :-) But he semi protected the article again so he is ... ? Seeyou ( talk) 18:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
And stop blind-reverting. I am not thrilled with your edits to Bates Method. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 19:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC) Can you explain why you are not thrilled with my edits ? Seeyou (talk) 20:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC) I am not thrilled by the edit of MastCell. Seeyou ( talk) 20:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
He is wrong there is no consensus at all ! If Mastcell says there is consensus I am gone make cabal. Seeyou ( talk) 20:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Horrorshow is right. I'm afraid Seeyou is a single-purpose user. The single purpose being to push his/her POV on the Bates method and smear everybody disagreeing with him/her as a sockpuppet of me (Famousdog/AED/MastCell/etc...). Anything that criticises Seeyou's POV is a "fake argument" (see above) even though there's no such thing as a fake argument, only good arguments and bad arguments. Seeyou is obsessed with petty semantics ("educational program" vs. "system" or "unlearn" vs. "relearn") and any attempt to engage in a debate spirals out of control (see the many versions of "for the objective reader"). Just ignore him/her and edit the article however you see fit. Famousdog ( talk) 21:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't get your obscure cultural reference there !-) Famousdog ( talk) 22:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. I have had constant vandalism for the last month or so and it is getting too hard to handle- I am never able to revert the vandalism due to "conflicting intermediate edits". I have blanked my page as you may have noticed. You will also see the people who have vandalised my page in my page history. Thank you for blocking the impersonator, and please protect my page for me. If I have any further problems, I will request a different username change. Thanks so much. Marnifrances ( talk) 08:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I have been targeted again, please check my history- it's a user called "A World of Our Own". Can I get my page fully protected? Maybe I will have to find another username. This is kind of getting ridiculous. Marnifrances ( talk) 08:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Personal attacks? I do not know what tree you are barking on, but I've only done minor edits to the Batman Returns article. I haven't even been here that much. V-Dash ( talk) 06:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
No he did not. i have been silent as of late until you upped and threatened me for something that hasn't even happened. V-Dash ( talk) 05:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not even going to try to figure out what most of that says as I do not speak l33t or slang English. Good day sir... V-Dash ( talk) 20:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to interject in probably what isn't my business, but this already has been tried on GameFAQs with him. As you an see with his reply, any attempt to 'level down' with him and try to find some peace and understanding has been rejected by his part with such answers. He usually invokes wall of text or 'legible English' reasons (grammar, typing mistakes) to avoid having to answer to the point brought up, claiming innocence in every cast.
You can do a user check on me if you wish, I have no problems with that, I only talked once on V-Dash's page. I only been following his edits for a while, and I may be only stating the obvious here, but it has been useless on all points.
Yet I would be ready to talk with him if he let us the chance to do such. But since he is always right as he states himself, he makes it impossible to hold any sort of conversation with him. He has stated his opinions has facts, denies/ignores any proof against it, and simply states innocence under the guise it's only an opinion, and claiming other's opinions as bait.
There are many examples of this behavior such as here : http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmessage.php?board=925329&topic=40656066 and here : http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmessage.php?board=925329&topic=40571666 which displays his unwillingness to explain his opinion, as if everyone should share it and those that do not are wrong. Taken seperately Dash's messages seem innocent enough indeed, but taken as a whole it is easy to see that he has no desire for middle ground. Celedh ( talk) 20:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
****list? Isn't cussing against Wikipedia rules Jeske? Not a good example to set if the admin's cussing a storm too. Besides, I saw some legible stuff in that, but the rest is in l33t. No one speaks l33t as legible English. Celedh, who are you? V-Dash ( talk) 21:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
No disagreements here.. I'm just wondering why Jeske's trying to pick on me despite me being quiet for a bit....21:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
That was old Jeske, not something recent like you made it out to be. V-Dash ( talk) 21:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
So you'll do anything to have me blocked? Nice try Jeske, but I'm not stupid. You popped onto my talked page and posted a vague warning, and you expect me to be all sugary about it? V-Dash ( talk) 21:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, you mean the one where you posted in another langugage? And any other admin would've realized that someone undid that after I took it down ages ago where I was warned about it too.... V-Dash ( talk) 21:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Mhm, sure.... V-Dash ( talk) 21:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I was confused by your recent message to V-Dash. Yeah, his behavior has been problematic sometimes. But, if you're going to leave a note complaining of something he did, it would be much more clear to include a diff of what exactly concerns you. Friday (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. He just posted it all of a sudden.... V-Dash ( talk) 16:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
-- 07:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
A case has opened in the WP:Mediation Cabal and a user has listed you as an involved party, related to edits/comments at Bates method. The case is located at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-01-07 Bates method, please feel free to comment on the article talk page. Thank you. MBisanz talk 19:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Jéské Couriano. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at WP:ANI#Harassment Notice regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Rjd0060 ( talk) 19:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
i was on lollipop-3's talk page and it said you saw "her" on I love Entei's talk page. Well let me tell you that my name is what she had been trying to change it to because we happen to be sisters. You see she decided that she didnt want her old name so I told her she could use the name I use on all of my accounts on other websites. But when she got banned I took the name for myself. So I just wanted you to know that and not be suspicious of me beng her or anything. k?
PinkXjellocreature (
talk)
08:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The semi-protect period ended for article Raiden Fighters. On January 2, 2008 at 14:12 Pacific Standard Time, this vandal returned to blatantly place the same misleading information he has been putting in this and other similar articles for months. I tried the Admins' noticeboard, but it fell on deaf ears since it was an anonymous dynamic IP. Any suggestions?
This is what I hate most about Wikipedia. Why allow vandalism when it can be prevented in the first place (by allowing only registered users to edit)? JudgeSpear ( talk) 10:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not aware of what is generally considered enough vandalism to warrant full-prot, but four isolated acts of vandalism in four hours? I know of your bias against /b/ but it seems a bit unwarranted. (Not that the article sees much positive contributions lately anyways.) Coreycubed ( talk) 14:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you requested the CU and I'm not really sure what to do, I let you handle it :) -- lucasbfr talk 10:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm becoming more concerned over your handling of the V-Dash matter. By arguing with him, you're becoming part of the problem. Any way I could convince you to just ignore him from now on? Friday (talk) 18:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at it Jeske.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR V-Dash ( talk) 20:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
As is quite evident now no one is placing any input for the opposing side of the "controversy" argument for several weeks. The article should be unprotected to allow it to develop again. Sidar ( talk) 16:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
For the record, though I'm worried about the storm of confirmation/rumor discussion that will result over the Sheik thing, Famitsu reviewing the game this early isn't actually surprising. The game is due out in only two weeks in Japan, and it's pretty common for reviewers to already have the final copy of the game in their hands that early. I know that was the case with Super Mario Galaxy. Arrowned ( talk) 05:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to say that you did a really good job with that Mudkipz FAQ. It's nicely concise and straight to the point. Great job; hopefully that will disuade some of those additions to the article, as well as unnecessary discussions on the talk page every couple of days. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 00:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you protected it a minute after I requested protection, could you note the request please? - Rjd0060 ( talk) 00:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello. This user has created several sock puppets. He has about a half-dozen removing templates from articles. S/he seems to create an account, make a few edits with it, and move on to another. ♦ Ace of Silver♦ 01:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
You might want to take note of the fact that the username change was requested by an anon. IP (presumably the same locked-out younger sibling mentioned on UP1340's page) rather than the actual user. Said IP falsified the user signature that went at the end of the request, and did the same thing on UP1340's talk page. I'm not a clerk or bureaucrat so I wasn't sure I could note that on the username change page myself.
I've been keeping an eye on this user's edits for a while now, ever since he blanked a page that I created. Hellbus ( talk) 05:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Didn't notice that you were online - just trying to fend them off until you got here, when I assumed you'd handle it. Tvoz | talk 05:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for semi on my talk page; not the first time, either. And thanks, too, for a lot of other help with the naughty boy. -- Jack Merridew 05:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You can't make this shit up... :) Jmlk 1 7 06:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it time for full protection already? The editors waited out the last protection and are back to their old ways. I'm on a semi-wikibreak, so don't have time to do much with it myself. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jéské,
I was looking at WP:CHU on an unrelated matter and saw: Wikipedia:Changing username#Chason.deshotel → ChasonDeshotel and User talk:Chason.deshotel. Are you sure, when he said "since we're changing it anyway", he didn't mean "we" as in, "me and you people at WP:CHU"? Frankly, I can easily imagine using exactly that same phrasing to mean that, if I were in his situation. Since he said "I" a sentence earlier, I think it's possible you blocked someone over a misunderstanding. Not trying to make a big deal, but I'm just suggesting you take another look. "Be nice to newbies" and all that. -- barneca ( talk) 02:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Man, you are 'not popular. :P Jmlk 1 7 00:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there anything at all that can be done about that thing? Think we could take it to DRV and stand a chance of getting people to notice that the thing has no sources at all? Kww ( talk) 03:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I accidentally created Smashbrosboy/ssbuserbox. I had meant for it to be my user subpage but I forgot to add the User tag.-- Smashbrosboy ( talk) 22:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you!-- Smashbrosboy ( talk) 00:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi thanks for looking into my request name change. I tried to do it more than once and messed it up. I want it to change from User:Rac fleming to User:Robert Fleming. Thanks for your help. Rac fleming ( talk) 13:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
In the days shortly after V-Dash was blocked there was one user, Wandering Hero (who I'm sure you remember as V-Dash Game FAQs nemesis) who trolled the page (which I removed). With another (different) user endorsing the summary today, I was wondering if that page should be archived? I'm not sure if Request for Comments are generally archived or not, but I do know that generally only admins should close a page as an archived debate. Do you think the discussion should be closed and kept as an archive? MelicansMatkin ( talk) 00:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for fixing the block problem!-- Mr Fink ( talk) 06:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
This seeems to come up quite a bit. HalfShadow ( talk) 21:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I came across Batesmethod of Natural Vision Improvement while patrolling new pages. It appears to be a POV fork (especially in light of this edit), but I'm unfamiliar with the controversy. Would you care to take a look? Thanks! Dchall1 ( talk) 22:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Being an administrator, perhaps you can help with this issue. On the Advance Wars: Days of Ruin article, there is an ongoing a debate over whether or not the game is turn-based tactics or turn-based strategy. Is there anything that can be done to put an end to this relatively soon? Neither side will likely back off, and there have been one or two occasions of 3RR violations and possibly an edit war. I'm just unsure of where to go from here. I was involved with the debate at one point, but upon being warned of violating 3RR I bowed out. At this point, I just want the dispute resolved, no matter the decision. I would greatly appreciate any advice you could give to bring the matter to a speedy resolution. Comandante42 ( talk) 01:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, it's over with at last. You've gotten rid of my headache (for now at least; DeathMark/V-Dash will definitely be back at some point, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's already gotten a new start on some other unfortunate article) and now we can move on to better things, all thanks to you. Comandante42 ( talk) 18:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Hate to seem paranoid, but Axzeuz has turned up on the AW:DoR talk page, and isn't making a whole lot of sense, user page created on 2nd Feb, only edits have been to the AW:DoR talk page. I'm getting a DeathMarkish vibe from him, though I'm probably violating WP:AGF by thinking so. Advice? Geoff B ( talk) 17:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Would you like me to keep on eye on this user's contributions, given the similarities between the user and V-Dash? MelicansMatkin ( talk) 19:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Just a general thanks for defending wiki. It's more appreciated than you think. -- penubag ( talk) 07:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Please explain 2 February allegation of sock attack on this article. Xxanthippe ( talk) 08:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC).
...sorry! Helladios ( talk) 18:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I replied at Wikipedia:Editor review/Solumeiras for you. -- Solumeiras ( talk) 23:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
Barrens of Doom and Despair, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
Barrens of Doom and Despair.
Deb (
talk)
21:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I think you're being framed...or...something. [2] [3]— Loveはドコ? ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for deleting User talk:EGEmedia. Like I said I should have speedied it. But, heck, just in case... :) - Milk's Favorite Cookie 01:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
We've got another one... I've reported it to the RFCU. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 04:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Edit: Looks like Urutapu beat me, actually. I wonder why it's only you that he impersonates? I know that he's targeted Sukecchi's talk page, but there are a lot of other people that dealt with him who he could impersonate too... MelicansMatkin ( talk) 04:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
f I recall correctly, Alison said on the RFCU that these sockpuppets were all from disparate IP addresses, which would explain why no IP block was implemented. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 04:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Add User:EskeFouriano to the list. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 01:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
There is a projetc that is making pages about a videogame, an RPG. The point is that on wikipedia games should not be added on that extreme. There are many pages about mythical and fictional creatures with the dungeons & dragons tag. What i say is that games should only have one page, or maybe two but remarking the general subjects. why do u think you never see a full guide of videogames or lots of articles about a game. Imagine if all the articles had this. The articles on Wikipedia would double and there would be Imp (Dungeons & Dragons), Imp (runescape), Imp(dragonfable etc... about 100 times. and there would be a guide with tricks a guide with full info.Understand my point? I know that ur a sysop but thats what surprised me when i've noticed you were on the project. I consider deleting the project and advertising Wikipedia is NOT a Videogame's Cheat's, guides and trick page. Sinceresly -- Zzubiri ( talk) 15:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
Auril, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
Auril.
Deb (
talk)
20:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
User:EskeFouriano says something you might not like. Maybe its that sockpuppet guy who keeps claiming to be your sockpuppet. Smashbrosboy (talk)
VeskeJouriano ( talk · contribs) Username hard blocked on sight. bibliomaniac 1 5 01:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Apparently he thinks you and I are one and the same.
So, a couple questions to determine our identities:
- Jéské ( Blah v^_^v) 05:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
MelicansMatkin ( talk) 05:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Jéské ( Blah v^_^v) 05:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
How do you know that it is V-Dash making all of these socks? If it is not too personal, umm why does V-Dash hate you so much? Smashbrosboy (talk)
I just learned that the hard way... Smashbrosboy (talk) 02:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Null Persp: A slang expression meaning, "no problem," "all right", or "affirmative." From the archaic expression, "no sweat."
I propose to create a new guideline which will prohibit users making nonsensical userboxes. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 09:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm looking for input from recent Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies users regarding the above template. your input on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject on open proxies would be appreciated, if you have any preferences regarding the TOR link in the template. SkierRMH ( talk) 04:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey dude. You're lucky that you're able to play a game without worrying about t3h dramaz. I kept being called away from TF2 last night to sort out some drama. Will ( talk) 19:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Can you help me do something about Onikiri ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)? He insists on using "Hyouga". He's obviously just being belligerent, because I asked him to stop, only for him to do it again. And it all seems to stem from an exchange on Crateris Suikyō (note he is, for some reason, not pushing "Suikyou" which I find thoroughly confusing, because I'd think he'd be doing this page instead of Hyoga).
— Loveはドコ? ( talk • contribs) 18:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm marginally aware you've had some harrassment recently, and that it had to do with V-dash, Dash Jr, or something. Anyway, this seemed a no-brainer, but I'm not sure if this is being tracked or reported anywhere. -- barneca ( talk) 17:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I've noticed this V-Dash guy popping up a few times recently, messing with you and mass-tinkering with his old sockpuppets' userpages. I created User:V-Dash/protection, which cascade-protects all his old userpages - feel free to add any other you come across. :) krimpet ✽ 18:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Check out the discussion page on Drizzt, left you a comment there. Cheers! Drizzt Ja mo 23:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey-o, just thought I'd let you know, I've been looking at the edits of the sockpuppeteer called User:Grawp, and I'm seeing a lot of similarity between that account's sockpuppet edits and those of User:V-Dash. I suspect they're the same vandal. Just a heads-up, in case you haven't looked in that direction yet. -- Good Damon 18:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
If you still need stuff for the FAQ you posted on my page about, I can fetch the original copypasta that followed the DA group. The picture of the group invite might still exist, but no promises on that. Muramasa itachi ( talk) 03:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I like how ya handle things really well.
~Ya Boi Krakerz~ (
talk) —Preceding
comment was added at
22:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Jeske,
Saedirof ( talk · contribs) has been making disruptive edits to a number of articles, specifically Sengunthar, Mudaliar and Devadasi (all 3 are related articles) by using multiple socks and open proxies. He was initially blocked by JodyB ( talk · contribs), check [6]. MarkPC ( talk · contribs) who was initially confirmed as a sock of Saedirof ( talk · contribs) but later managed to escape by saying that he only edits Devadasi. But the account MarkPC ( talk · contribs) has been created for the sole purpose of edit-warring on the article Devadasi, (check [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] while Saedirof ( talk · contribs) edit-wars on the articles Sengunthar and Mudaliar at the same time. These are all socks of Mudaliar ( talk · contribs) (username same as article name) or Venki123 ( talk · contribs) who were banned by the arbitration committee for heavy trolling and edit-warring on the very same articles, namely Mudaliar, Sengunthar and Devadasi. Check [16]. Request you to take action against Saedirof ( talk · contribs) who has a history of pushing POV using socks. See his latest edits [17], [18], [19] where he has deleted multiple references.
Also note the strong similarity in sentence structure of Saedirof's edit-summary "reverting after vandalism by YouOnlyLiveTwice a master puppetteer and a banned user" [20] and MarkPC ( talk · contribs)'s edit-summaries [21], [22]. Look at the way they both allege that I'm a master puppeteer and sock of a banned user before reverting. MarkPC ( talk · contribs) is definitely a sock of Saedirof ( talk · contribs). This was confirmed but he escaped by saying he never edited anything other than Devadasi. In any case Saedirof ( talk · contribs) must be banned for abusing using socks. See how he keeps blanking his talk page) [23], [24] where the info that he has abused using socks been clearly put by an admin JodyB ( talk · contribs) [25] for using socks.
Thanks, Youonlylivetwice ( talk) 18:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
*
Unlikely Upon review, MarkPC and Saedirof are probably not the same person. I've unblocked MarkPC. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 16:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Please see the most recent evidence(at 00:28, 27 February 2008) by Thatcher ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) here [27] where he confirms both Saedirof ( talk · contribs) and MarkPC ( talk · contribs) edit from the same ip location like a workplace. He very clearly says that Saedirof ( talk · contribs) could very well be MarkPC ( talk · contribs). Thanks, Youonlylivetwice ( talk) 07:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Jeske, may I bring to your kind attention about checkuser on Youonlylivetwice ( talk · contribs). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Mudaliar
He has been a strong supporter of edits from open proxies.
Is it possible to take some action on Youonlylivetwice ( talk · contribs) as he is vandalizing my user page [28] apart from reverting many articles to the the versions which have no relevance and removing valid proofs. [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] Saedirof ( talk) 21:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for asking about this on my talk page. I'm not directly involved with that AfD, but your offer to close it and open a new AfD to have a better shot at getting a consensus not tainted by sockpuppets seems like a good idea. Sadly, though, there seem to be numerous sockpuppet accounts involved with that person, and the more I look, the more I continue to find. -- Dachannien Talk Contrib 06:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
If you would like to explain to these people why the mudkips meme is not a reasonable addition to the article, then nobody can stop you from doing that on the user's talk page. But the discussion does not belong on the pokemon article page in question, because it is unconstructive. There has already been a lengthy discussion on the issue - as preserved in the talk archives - and there has been a strong consensus against adding such material. The header on the talk page was added to stop this discussion because it is unconstructive, and it was added for a reason. Any further discussion should be deleted, because by continuing it we are simply running around in circles, pointlessly arguging the same points which have no merit TheBilly ( talk) 10:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
No one ever agrees with me though... :) [1] Jmlk 1 7 08:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, A checkuser IP Check case you filled has been completed by a CheckUser, and archived. You can find the results for 7 days at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check/Archive. -- lucasbfr talk, checkuser clerk, 11:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC).
oh, no...Im sorry, i dont know to "images are forbidden in signature"...now, im removing to this image... *** Эɱ®εč¡κ *** and his friend 22:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
You denied semi-protection. You said there were no edits since 2005. That is not true. Just take a look at the history, there was an edit less than 2 hours ago. Footballfan190 ( talk) 02:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your concern regarding my username, "Awesomebitch".
As suggested, I checked out Wikipedia's username policy. It defines an offensive username as one that serves to "make harmonious editing difficult or impossible". "Awesomebitch" seems rather tame to be inflicting the emotional scarring that is necessary for this kind of damage.
I use the term "bitch" as empowering, rather than derogatory. This usage is pretty mainstream these days. (Bitch Magazine and Meredith Brook's song "Bitch" are good examples if you need them.) Used in this way, it can hardly be seen as a vulgarity. However, regardless of how you personally view the term, referring to myself as a bitch does not pose a threat to the community.
Wikipedia's username policy isn't there to censor grade-school style, but rather to prevent deliberate attempts at offense/sabotage, which this clearly isn't. There are countless articles inside Wikipedia itself that are substantially more offensive than the term "bitch". The Wikipedians who use Wikipedia enough to run across my username are resilient enough to not be emotionally disfigured by "Awesomebitch" and her wrath.
I'm sorry if my username hurt your feelings. Will you forgive me?
Let me know if you need any additional clarification.
Awesomebitch ( talk) 03:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, that ain't going to work b/c they are IP address and they are constantly changing and it tends to be the same person -- CatonB ( talk) 05:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Again vandalism in the batesmethod article by IP=address. The same party I assume. ( Ophthalmology ? ). Or an other party is doing everything to keep the quality of the article as low and unclear as possible. Attempts to discuss the changes have been made. Only fake arguments were given as you can read. I do not think semi protection is enough for this page. This article is making clear providing clear objective information about the batesmethod is not about giving clear referenced information it is about politics. Seeyou ( talk) 18:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Even user Mastcell knows how to be a vandal ! :-) But he semi protected the article again so he is ... ? Seeyou ( talk) 18:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
And stop blind-reverting. I am not thrilled with your edits to Bates Method. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 19:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC) Can you explain why you are not thrilled with my edits ? Seeyou (talk) 20:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC) I am not thrilled by the edit of MastCell. Seeyou ( talk) 20:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
He is wrong there is no consensus at all ! If Mastcell says there is consensus I am gone make cabal. Seeyou ( talk) 20:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Horrorshow is right. I'm afraid Seeyou is a single-purpose user. The single purpose being to push his/her POV on the Bates method and smear everybody disagreeing with him/her as a sockpuppet of me (Famousdog/AED/MastCell/etc...). Anything that criticises Seeyou's POV is a "fake argument" (see above) even though there's no such thing as a fake argument, only good arguments and bad arguments. Seeyou is obsessed with petty semantics ("educational program" vs. "system" or "unlearn" vs. "relearn") and any attempt to engage in a debate spirals out of control (see the many versions of "for the objective reader"). Just ignore him/her and edit the article however you see fit. Famousdog ( talk) 21:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't get your obscure cultural reference there !-) Famousdog ( talk) 22:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. I have had constant vandalism for the last month or so and it is getting too hard to handle- I am never able to revert the vandalism due to "conflicting intermediate edits". I have blanked my page as you may have noticed. You will also see the people who have vandalised my page in my page history. Thank you for blocking the impersonator, and please protect my page for me. If I have any further problems, I will request a different username change. Thanks so much. Marnifrances ( talk) 08:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I have been targeted again, please check my history- it's a user called "A World of Our Own". Can I get my page fully protected? Maybe I will have to find another username. This is kind of getting ridiculous. Marnifrances ( talk) 08:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Personal attacks? I do not know what tree you are barking on, but I've only done minor edits to the Batman Returns article. I haven't even been here that much. V-Dash ( talk) 06:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
No he did not. i have been silent as of late until you upped and threatened me for something that hasn't even happened. V-Dash ( talk) 05:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not even going to try to figure out what most of that says as I do not speak l33t or slang English. Good day sir... V-Dash ( talk) 20:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to interject in probably what isn't my business, but this already has been tried on GameFAQs with him. As you an see with his reply, any attempt to 'level down' with him and try to find some peace and understanding has been rejected by his part with such answers. He usually invokes wall of text or 'legible English' reasons (grammar, typing mistakes) to avoid having to answer to the point brought up, claiming innocence in every cast.
You can do a user check on me if you wish, I have no problems with that, I only talked once on V-Dash's page. I only been following his edits for a while, and I may be only stating the obvious here, but it has been useless on all points.
Yet I would be ready to talk with him if he let us the chance to do such. But since he is always right as he states himself, he makes it impossible to hold any sort of conversation with him. He has stated his opinions has facts, denies/ignores any proof against it, and simply states innocence under the guise it's only an opinion, and claiming other's opinions as bait.
There are many examples of this behavior such as here : http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmessage.php?board=925329&topic=40656066 and here : http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmessage.php?board=925329&topic=40571666 which displays his unwillingness to explain his opinion, as if everyone should share it and those that do not are wrong. Taken seperately Dash's messages seem innocent enough indeed, but taken as a whole it is easy to see that he has no desire for middle ground. Celedh ( talk) 20:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
****list? Isn't cussing against Wikipedia rules Jeske? Not a good example to set if the admin's cussing a storm too. Besides, I saw some legible stuff in that, but the rest is in l33t. No one speaks l33t as legible English. Celedh, who are you? V-Dash ( talk) 21:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
No disagreements here.. I'm just wondering why Jeske's trying to pick on me despite me being quiet for a bit....21:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
That was old Jeske, not something recent like you made it out to be. V-Dash ( talk) 21:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
So you'll do anything to have me blocked? Nice try Jeske, but I'm not stupid. You popped onto my talked page and posted a vague warning, and you expect me to be all sugary about it? V-Dash ( talk) 21:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, you mean the one where you posted in another langugage? And any other admin would've realized that someone undid that after I took it down ages ago where I was warned about it too.... V-Dash ( talk) 21:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Mhm, sure.... V-Dash ( talk) 21:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I was confused by your recent message to V-Dash. Yeah, his behavior has been problematic sometimes. But, if you're going to leave a note complaining of something he did, it would be much more clear to include a diff of what exactly concerns you. Friday (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. He just posted it all of a sudden.... V-Dash ( talk) 16:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
-- 07:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
A case has opened in the WP:Mediation Cabal and a user has listed you as an involved party, related to edits/comments at Bates method. The case is located at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-01-07 Bates method, please feel free to comment on the article talk page. Thank you. MBisanz talk 19:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Jéské Couriano. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at WP:ANI#Harassment Notice regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Rjd0060 ( talk) 19:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
i was on lollipop-3's talk page and it said you saw "her" on I love Entei's talk page. Well let me tell you that my name is what she had been trying to change it to because we happen to be sisters. You see she decided that she didnt want her old name so I told her she could use the name I use on all of my accounts on other websites. But when she got banned I took the name for myself. So I just wanted you to know that and not be suspicious of me beng her or anything. k?
PinkXjellocreature (
talk)
08:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The semi-protect period ended for article Raiden Fighters. On January 2, 2008 at 14:12 Pacific Standard Time, this vandal returned to blatantly place the same misleading information he has been putting in this and other similar articles for months. I tried the Admins' noticeboard, but it fell on deaf ears since it was an anonymous dynamic IP. Any suggestions?
This is what I hate most about Wikipedia. Why allow vandalism when it can be prevented in the first place (by allowing only registered users to edit)? JudgeSpear ( talk) 10:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not aware of what is generally considered enough vandalism to warrant full-prot, but four isolated acts of vandalism in four hours? I know of your bias against /b/ but it seems a bit unwarranted. (Not that the article sees much positive contributions lately anyways.) Coreycubed ( talk) 14:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you requested the CU and I'm not really sure what to do, I let you handle it :) -- lucasbfr talk 10:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm becoming more concerned over your handling of the V-Dash matter. By arguing with him, you're becoming part of the problem. Any way I could convince you to just ignore him from now on? Friday (talk) 18:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at it Jeske.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR V-Dash ( talk) 20:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
As is quite evident now no one is placing any input for the opposing side of the "controversy" argument for several weeks. The article should be unprotected to allow it to develop again. Sidar ( talk) 16:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
For the record, though I'm worried about the storm of confirmation/rumor discussion that will result over the Sheik thing, Famitsu reviewing the game this early isn't actually surprising. The game is due out in only two weeks in Japan, and it's pretty common for reviewers to already have the final copy of the game in their hands that early. I know that was the case with Super Mario Galaxy. Arrowned ( talk) 05:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to say that you did a really good job with that Mudkipz FAQ. It's nicely concise and straight to the point. Great job; hopefully that will disuade some of those additions to the article, as well as unnecessary discussions on the talk page every couple of days. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 00:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you protected it a minute after I requested protection, could you note the request please? - Rjd0060 ( talk) 00:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello. This user has created several sock puppets. He has about a half-dozen removing templates from articles. S/he seems to create an account, make a few edits with it, and move on to another. ♦ Ace of Silver♦ 01:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
You might want to take note of the fact that the username change was requested by an anon. IP (presumably the same locked-out younger sibling mentioned on UP1340's page) rather than the actual user. Said IP falsified the user signature that went at the end of the request, and did the same thing on UP1340's talk page. I'm not a clerk or bureaucrat so I wasn't sure I could note that on the username change page myself.
I've been keeping an eye on this user's edits for a while now, ever since he blanked a page that I created. Hellbus ( talk) 05:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Didn't notice that you were online - just trying to fend them off until you got here, when I assumed you'd handle it. Tvoz | talk 05:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for semi on my talk page; not the first time, either. And thanks, too, for a lot of other help with the naughty boy. -- Jack Merridew 05:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You can't make this shit up... :) Jmlk 1 7 06:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it time for full protection already? The editors waited out the last protection and are back to their old ways. I'm on a semi-wikibreak, so don't have time to do much with it myself. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jéské,
I was looking at WP:CHU on an unrelated matter and saw: Wikipedia:Changing username#Chason.deshotel → ChasonDeshotel and User talk:Chason.deshotel. Are you sure, when he said "since we're changing it anyway", he didn't mean "we" as in, "me and you people at WP:CHU"? Frankly, I can easily imagine using exactly that same phrasing to mean that, if I were in his situation. Since he said "I" a sentence earlier, I think it's possible you blocked someone over a misunderstanding. Not trying to make a big deal, but I'm just suggesting you take another look. "Be nice to newbies" and all that. -- barneca ( talk) 02:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Man, you are 'not popular. :P Jmlk 1 7 00:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there anything at all that can be done about that thing? Think we could take it to DRV and stand a chance of getting people to notice that the thing has no sources at all? Kww ( talk) 03:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I accidentally created Smashbrosboy/ssbuserbox. I had meant for it to be my user subpage but I forgot to add the User tag.-- Smashbrosboy ( talk) 22:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you!-- Smashbrosboy ( talk) 00:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi thanks for looking into my request name change. I tried to do it more than once and messed it up. I want it to change from User:Rac fleming to User:Robert Fleming. Thanks for your help. Rac fleming ( talk) 13:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
In the days shortly after V-Dash was blocked there was one user, Wandering Hero (who I'm sure you remember as V-Dash Game FAQs nemesis) who trolled the page (which I removed). With another (different) user endorsing the summary today, I was wondering if that page should be archived? I'm not sure if Request for Comments are generally archived or not, but I do know that generally only admins should close a page as an archived debate. Do you think the discussion should be closed and kept as an archive? MelicansMatkin ( talk) 00:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for fixing the block problem!-- Mr Fink ( talk) 06:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
This seeems to come up quite a bit. HalfShadow ( talk) 21:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I came across Batesmethod of Natural Vision Improvement while patrolling new pages. It appears to be a POV fork (especially in light of this edit), but I'm unfamiliar with the controversy. Would you care to take a look? Thanks! Dchall1 ( talk) 22:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Being an administrator, perhaps you can help with this issue. On the Advance Wars: Days of Ruin article, there is an ongoing a debate over whether or not the game is turn-based tactics or turn-based strategy. Is there anything that can be done to put an end to this relatively soon? Neither side will likely back off, and there have been one or two occasions of 3RR violations and possibly an edit war. I'm just unsure of where to go from here. I was involved with the debate at one point, but upon being warned of violating 3RR I bowed out. At this point, I just want the dispute resolved, no matter the decision. I would greatly appreciate any advice you could give to bring the matter to a speedy resolution. Comandante42 ( talk) 01:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, it's over with at last. You've gotten rid of my headache (for now at least; DeathMark/V-Dash will definitely be back at some point, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's already gotten a new start on some other unfortunate article) and now we can move on to better things, all thanks to you. Comandante42 ( talk) 18:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Hate to seem paranoid, but Axzeuz has turned up on the AW:DoR talk page, and isn't making a whole lot of sense, user page created on 2nd Feb, only edits have been to the AW:DoR talk page. I'm getting a DeathMarkish vibe from him, though I'm probably violating WP:AGF by thinking so. Advice? Geoff B ( talk) 17:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Would you like me to keep on eye on this user's contributions, given the similarities between the user and V-Dash? MelicansMatkin ( talk) 19:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Just a general thanks for defending wiki. It's more appreciated than you think. -- penubag ( talk) 07:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Please explain 2 February allegation of sock attack on this article. Xxanthippe ( talk) 08:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC).
...sorry! Helladios ( talk) 18:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I replied at Wikipedia:Editor review/Solumeiras for you. -- Solumeiras ( talk) 23:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
Barrens of Doom and Despair, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
Barrens of Doom and Despair.
Deb (
talk)
21:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I think you're being framed...or...something. [2] [3]— Loveはドコ? ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for deleting User talk:EGEmedia. Like I said I should have speedied it. But, heck, just in case... :) - Milk's Favorite Cookie 01:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
We've got another one... I've reported it to the RFCU. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 04:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Edit: Looks like Urutapu beat me, actually. I wonder why it's only you that he impersonates? I know that he's targeted Sukecchi's talk page, but there are a lot of other people that dealt with him who he could impersonate too... MelicansMatkin ( talk) 04:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
f I recall correctly, Alison said on the RFCU that these sockpuppets were all from disparate IP addresses, which would explain why no IP block was implemented. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 04:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Add User:EskeFouriano to the list. MelicansMatkin ( talk) 01:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
There is a projetc that is making pages about a videogame, an RPG. The point is that on wikipedia games should not be added on that extreme. There are many pages about mythical and fictional creatures with the dungeons & dragons tag. What i say is that games should only have one page, or maybe two but remarking the general subjects. why do u think you never see a full guide of videogames or lots of articles about a game. Imagine if all the articles had this. The articles on Wikipedia would double and there would be Imp (Dungeons & Dragons), Imp (runescape), Imp(dragonfable etc... about 100 times. and there would be a guide with tricks a guide with full info.Understand my point? I know that ur a sysop but thats what surprised me when i've noticed you were on the project. I consider deleting the project and advertising Wikipedia is NOT a Videogame's Cheat's, guides and trick page. Sinceresly -- Zzubiri ( talk) 15:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
Auril, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
Auril.
Deb (
talk)
20:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
User:EskeFouriano says something you might not like. Maybe its that sockpuppet guy who keeps claiming to be your sockpuppet. Smashbrosboy (talk)
VeskeJouriano ( talk · contribs) Username hard blocked on sight. bibliomaniac 1 5 01:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Apparently he thinks you and I are one and the same.
So, a couple questions to determine our identities:
- Jéské ( Blah v^_^v) 05:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
MelicansMatkin ( talk) 05:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Jéské ( Blah v^_^v) 05:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
How do you know that it is V-Dash making all of these socks? If it is not too personal, umm why does V-Dash hate you so much? Smashbrosboy (talk)
I just learned that the hard way... Smashbrosboy (talk) 02:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Null Persp: A slang expression meaning, "no problem," "all right", or "affirmative." From the archaic expression, "no sweat."
I propose to create a new guideline which will prohibit users making nonsensical userboxes. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 09:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm looking for input from recent Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies users regarding the above template. your input on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject on open proxies would be appreciated, if you have any preferences regarding the TOR link in the template. SkierRMH ( talk) 04:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey dude. You're lucky that you're able to play a game without worrying about t3h dramaz. I kept being called away from TF2 last night to sort out some drama. Will ( talk) 19:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Can you help me do something about Onikiri ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)? He insists on using "Hyouga". He's obviously just being belligerent, because I asked him to stop, only for him to do it again. And it all seems to stem from an exchange on Crateris Suikyō (note he is, for some reason, not pushing "Suikyou" which I find thoroughly confusing, because I'd think he'd be doing this page instead of Hyoga).
— Loveはドコ? ( talk • contribs) 18:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm marginally aware you've had some harrassment recently, and that it had to do with V-dash, Dash Jr, or something. Anyway, this seemed a no-brainer, but I'm not sure if this is being tracked or reported anywhere. -- barneca ( talk) 17:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I've noticed this V-Dash guy popping up a few times recently, messing with you and mass-tinkering with his old sockpuppets' userpages. I created User:V-Dash/protection, which cascade-protects all his old userpages - feel free to add any other you come across. :) krimpet ✽ 18:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Check out the discussion page on Drizzt, left you a comment there. Cheers! Drizzt Ja mo 23:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey-o, just thought I'd let you know, I've been looking at the edits of the sockpuppeteer called User:Grawp, and I'm seeing a lot of similarity between that account's sockpuppet edits and those of User:V-Dash. I suspect they're the same vandal. Just a heads-up, in case you haven't looked in that direction yet. -- Good Damon 18:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
If you still need stuff for the FAQ you posted on my page about, I can fetch the original copypasta that followed the DA group. The picture of the group invite might still exist, but no promises on that. Muramasa itachi ( talk) 03:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I like how ya handle things really well.
~Ya Boi Krakerz~ (
talk) —Preceding
comment was added at
22:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Jeske,
Saedirof ( talk · contribs) has been making disruptive edits to a number of articles, specifically Sengunthar, Mudaliar and Devadasi (all 3 are related articles) by using multiple socks and open proxies. He was initially blocked by JodyB ( talk · contribs), check [6]. MarkPC ( talk · contribs) who was initially confirmed as a sock of Saedirof ( talk · contribs) but later managed to escape by saying that he only edits Devadasi. But the account MarkPC ( talk · contribs) has been created for the sole purpose of edit-warring on the article Devadasi, (check [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] while Saedirof ( talk · contribs) edit-wars on the articles Sengunthar and Mudaliar at the same time. These are all socks of Mudaliar ( talk · contribs) (username same as article name) or Venki123 ( talk · contribs) who were banned by the arbitration committee for heavy trolling and edit-warring on the very same articles, namely Mudaliar, Sengunthar and Devadasi. Check [16]. Request you to take action against Saedirof ( talk · contribs) who has a history of pushing POV using socks. See his latest edits [17], [18], [19] where he has deleted multiple references.
Also note the strong similarity in sentence structure of Saedirof's edit-summary "reverting after vandalism by YouOnlyLiveTwice a master puppetteer and a banned user" [20] and MarkPC ( talk · contribs)'s edit-summaries [21], [22]. Look at the way they both allege that I'm a master puppeteer and sock of a banned user before reverting. MarkPC ( talk · contribs) is definitely a sock of Saedirof ( talk · contribs). This was confirmed but he escaped by saying he never edited anything other than Devadasi. In any case Saedirof ( talk · contribs) must be banned for abusing using socks. See how he keeps blanking his talk page) [23], [24] where the info that he has abused using socks been clearly put by an admin JodyB ( talk · contribs) [25] for using socks.
Thanks, Youonlylivetwice ( talk) 18:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
*
Unlikely Upon review, MarkPC and Saedirof are probably not the same person. I've unblocked MarkPC. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 16:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Please see the most recent evidence(at 00:28, 27 February 2008) by Thatcher ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) here [27] where he confirms both Saedirof ( talk · contribs) and MarkPC ( talk · contribs) edit from the same ip location like a workplace. He very clearly says that Saedirof ( talk · contribs) could very well be MarkPC ( talk · contribs). Thanks, Youonlylivetwice ( talk) 07:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Jeske, may I bring to your kind attention about checkuser on Youonlylivetwice ( talk · contribs). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Mudaliar
He has been a strong supporter of edits from open proxies.
Is it possible to take some action on Youonlylivetwice ( talk · contribs) as he is vandalizing my user page [28] apart from reverting many articles to the the versions which have no relevance and removing valid proofs. [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] Saedirof ( talk) 21:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for asking about this on my talk page. I'm not directly involved with that AfD, but your offer to close it and open a new AfD to have a better shot at getting a consensus not tainted by sockpuppets seems like a good idea. Sadly, though, there seem to be numerous sockpuppet accounts involved with that person, and the more I look, the more I continue to find. -- Dachannien Talk Contrib 06:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)