Many thanks for the GA review.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 17:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
In case you didn't notice, we have resolved the dispute [1] Thanks Aigest ( talk) 20:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I just blocked User talk:Huttselovesmillie as vandalism-only because they created another attack article after being warned about the first one. Feel free to unblock if you think that that would be more productive. Regards, - 2/0 ( cont.) 03:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Biting, assumptions of bad faith, and other assorted nonsense at AfD. Thank you. — Farix ( t | c) 21:07, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, MuZemike. I fixed your closure of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 April 21#Songs from the Tainted Cherry Tree here. The correct template is {{ subst:DRV bottom}}, not {{ subst:DRV close}}. Cheers, Cunard ( talk) 06:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey! I just wanted to thank you for finishing up the review I started at Bad Romance. I've been having computer problems and haven't been able to get on, so it was a huge relief to see that somebody else had taken care of it by the time I got back. Thanks! Annalise ( talk) 14:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok, so I get that it's a problem, but...
Why can't we AO/no account create rangeblock the whole Blackberry IP range sets he's coming from?
We've done whole provider ranges before.
Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 23:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group)
this page has been compiled. Congratulations to
Hunter Kahn (
submissions), our clear overall round winner, and to
ThinkBlue (
submissions) and
Arsenikk (
submissions), who were solidly second and third respectively. There were a good number of high scorers this round- competition was certainly tough! Round three begins tomorrow, but anything promoted after the end of round two is eligible for points. 16 contestants (eight pool leaders and eight wildcards) will progress to round four in two months- things are really starting to get competitive. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the
WikiCup talk page.
Judge iMatthew has retired from Wikipedia, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants
Stone (
submissions) and
White Shadows (
submissions) for their help in preparing for round three. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn,
Fox and
The ed17
17:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I went through blocking and tagging those accounts, but when I came back to update the page, it was closed! Just a heads up on what I had done, please let me know if anything needs to be corrected. TN X Man 19:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that. It really needs a bit of work, I was going to try and buff it myself as I reviewed it but not having studied CF since med school I was pretty rusty. On the up side, I am sure it will be reviewed promptly if resubmitted after improvements. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 01:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
There were two tricky ones - the other is a real challenge too, and I want to try and help the nominator pass it. After some discussion on scope, I have decided to take Illegal logging in Madagascar as is and help Visionholder get it through while reviewing it. For me the issue is making the prose more succinct and hence encyclopedic. My main concern is that its intense detail in of itself leads it into soapboxing territory. This is hard as I do feel it is an important subject to educate readers about and I would dearly like to see it promoted too. I have done a bit but it is draining work, so if a few of us are involved it might give all involved a boost. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 01:11, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Isn't this an inappropiate username? And if I linked it wrong, I'm sorry. I'm still learning. I love me! ( talk) 23:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, 82.1.157.16 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS), previously blocked by you (probable FootballPhil sock) is back and carrying on much as before. DuncanHill ( talk) 13:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. You moved the ANI discussion to a sub-page and, while this is standard practice, and I know you mean well, I think it worth noting that the previous discussion, which also was moved by you, died down inconclusively once it was moved off ANI. My guess is that the same thing will happen to this one. Leaving discussions unsettled is not healthy for the encyclopedia. -- RegentsPark ( talk) 01:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
[ [2]] Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I think both of them have been failed, but due to disagreement between me and the nominator, I asked for another reviewer. Seyyed( t- c) 02:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike, regarding Sgaran as a possible sock, could you please take another look? In particular, check this and this, wherein the 64.85.252.225 ip manually signs posts as Sgaran, and this post by Sgaran in which he explains that he started using his user account after his ip access was blocked. My talk page has a fairly long conversation Sgaran or 64.85.252.225 or both depending on how you look at it.
If you look at the content and scope of the posts, they do all appear to have the same source, and I think meet the basic duck test. Compare the user contributions of 64.85.252.225, Special:Contributions/12.149.202.41, and Special:Contributions/Sgaran.
I'm curious as to what tool you're using to find geographical location of the ip. As a net admin, I know how difficult it is to do, especially if you are relying on whois data, but according to [3] and [4], 12.149.202.41 and 64.85.252.225 terminate in the bay area. 64.85.252.225 belongs to Astound Broadband, centered in Concord, CA, and the 12.149.202.41 address is assigned, I believe to Apple under ATT's auspices. My initial thought is that the 12.149.202.41 is an iPhone, and the 64.85.252.225 is the user's home ip address.
Finally, I traced all this bruhaha, I think, back to it's origin. If you look at the history of Phenome, here, users Crusio and Pfjoseph were engaged in a serious dispute over a redirect to phenotype. That ends in December 09 with the Pfjoseph not reverting Crusio's redirect. Then at the end of April, the redirect is reverted by 128.32.252.41 (which also points to the bay area by the graphical traceroutes above, and belongs to bekerley), see this. Then 64.85.252.225 starts the same pattern, see [5] as an example. Phenomics is a related term, note that Sgaran authored that article claiming to have originated the term. [6]
On April 29th, Crusio nominated Steven A. Garan, Automated Imaging Microscope System and Aging Research Centre, then things started getting a bit crazy.
Anyway, just thought I'd bring you up to speed. I honestly don't know what to think of all of this, really, and don't care much what the outcome of the SPI is. I'm going to try to mediate a bit over on Phenome and work on the articles related to this. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 20:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this section on ANI if you aren't busy? The user is seeking an admin and I have done all in my power to help. User is getting a little heated and my help isn't, well, helping. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For reviewing 16 good article nominations during the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive, I hereby present you The Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Good work! Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC) |
![]() |
Wikipedia Motivation Award | |
On behalf of those who participated in the April 2010 GAN Backlog Elimination Drive, I hereby award you this Motivation Award, for your efforts in rallying the troops to clear the backlog, improve the encyclopedia, and even inspire another backlog elimination drive, which is ongoing now. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 12:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC) |
Hello. You were involved in a sockpuppetry investigation of this user a couple months ago, and since he's increased his ridiculous behavior to epic levels [7], it might be helpful if you took a look at the current report. -- Splatterhouse5 ( talk) 00:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for giving me rollback ability.
There is an administrator, Crum375, who did not use rollback according to Wikipedia instructions. The edit rolled back was neither vandalism or unconstructive. Actually, it was a grammar related point. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3ACrum375&action=historysubmit&diff=360534337&oldid=359674756
I think this is violating rollback rules. However, I am not for draconian punishment or any punishment at all. I am curious to whether Wikipedia rules should be followed to by the letter, especially for long time editors and admins. I can see giving new users leeway so we don't chase them away. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 16:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Administrator immunity goes against Wikipedia customs. In practice, this should happen very, very rarely but will give administrators an incentive not to violate rollback rules. Sample idea...
![]() | THIS IS A SAMPLE TEMPLATE - MUZEMIKE HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG. This administrator no longer has rollback rights. Due to software limitations that cannot separate rollback rights from administrative (sysop) rights, enforcement is manually performed. In the event that this administrator uses rollback, the user must be immediately blocked for repetitive 7 days until the subject no longer violates rollback rules. (Account information: block log · suspected sockpuppets · confirmed socks) |
In short, I will suggest this only if I see a problem, not before. So far, I don't see a widespread problem.
Suomi Finland 2009 (
talk)
18:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Sorry to involve you but the editing I did was entangled with yours. This is just about the block and in no way about the merits of our debate on Vera Baker. Thanks Onefinalstep ( talk) 05:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
This may be of some interest to you. -- RegentsPark ( talk) 19:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike,
I know you've undone the indefinite block on user:FunkMonk that you performed, but I would urge you to use caution when indefinitely blocking in the future. A quick glance at the user's contributions would have shown a long history of edits dating back to 2007, with more than 17,000 live edits. There's no way that could be mistaken for a vandalism-only account. Anyway, thanks for reversing the block. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester 09:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
If one is blocked, then how can a revert be "editing while logged out"? It can only be block evasion, and intentional, since the IP will be blocked too. Jayjg (talk) 04:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
This just got a sock's talk page access revoked. Admirer of yours? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey man, thanks for lifting that block. I just logged on in school and tried to edit this, but some dumbass got me blocked. Thanks again. I owe ya one. :) qö₮$@37 ( talk) 19:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Per this edit @ User talk:Dave1185/unprotected talk page#Welcome to Georgie's Italian Restaurant, I'm sure this was not done by you but hey... I still got to inform you, right? BTW, I'm going for a 2 week vacation starting today... how do I let these bozos know that? Thoughts? -- Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 00:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just added some evidence to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zinbarg. Since you seem to be handling the case, I thought it might be best to notify you of it. Cheers, Jakew ( talk) 15:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Per checkuser results at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DavidYork71/Archive, can you please indef block Superfalse ( talk · contribs) as a sock of DavidYork71 ( talk · contribs)? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt ( talk) 22:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Is this an open proxy? The block reason doesn't say so (at least not the only one I can see, which says "Hardening block", but I can't see what block it is being hardened from). Peter 22:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I see you've deleted Untitled Flatout game for copyright infringement from this this GDN article. However, what they've posted is a word-for-word press release. I attained that press release from GamesPress.com and re-wrote it so it didn't sound so much like a press release (as press releases should be). I merely used GDN as a referrence to confirm what I wrote. Is this not allowed on wikipedia? EvanVolm ( talk) 17:46, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi there. I was reading the CU elections and found that you are from Wisconsin. Are there many editors from around there? If so, I'm wondering if there is any chance of organizing a meetup. Seeing as I am a Yooper, one held in Wisconsin would be one I might actually have a chance at making. :) — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 09:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi again MuZemike. I have had to reblock several open proxies [9] where you have made comment that "Tor block extension has been fixed". I'd encourage you not to unblock any more like this. But mainly I'm looking for some background to this comment, as I don't think it has. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MuZemike. I would like to become an SPI trainee. Could you coach me? Thanks. ~ NerdyScienceDude ( ✉ • ✐) 23:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
User talk:122.102.100.14 has been vandalising for more than a year without a block. 03:05, 21 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SwordsmanRyan ( talk • contribs)
Is there likely to be any movement on this before my liver gives out? -- Ibn ( talk) 07:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi ther; you have blocked this user as being a sockpuppet of user:Tony254trill. I am not saying you are wrong, but the SPI does not seem to confirm your conclusion. Do you know something I do not?-- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 17:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Might a suggest a checkuser and once that is done a range block. Would give you time to do other things. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 18:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you were involved with Neutralhomer ( User_talk:Neutralhomer/Archive6#Consequences) not too long ago for marking non-vandalism as vandalism. He is continuing this behavior (see User_talk:Bwilkins#Neutralhomer_continuing_to_edit-war_and_mark_non-vandalism_as_vandalism for a summary), which I am very concerned about. I have no direct involvement but I don't think it is good for us to allow this kind of thing to go unchecked. II | ( t - c) 01:28, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I know it is not you fault that SPI has got backlogged, but is it possiable someone could have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Catface1965 it has been a week now since anyone has commented on it. Codf1977 ( talk) 15:57, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The entry on "Duperrault" was deleted by you allegedly for lack of significance about the person (A7). Terry Jo Duperrault was the sole survivor of a mass murder that took place on the ocean, which left her entire nuclear family dead. She was found adrift in the ocean on a cork flotation device after 4 days at sea. She has just published a book about her experience, so people (like me) who want to read about her story will be searching Wiki. And you have deleted the entry. Research should be done before entries are deleted for "lack of significance". If I can read about celebutantes on Wiki, surely I should be able to read about this. Akimberleyew ( talk) 00:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you -- that is a totally satisfactory solution. Appreciate the prompt response and redress. Akimberleyew ( talk) 01:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MuZemike. I just noticed that you forgot to block User:Root7, one of the sockpuppets of Callmarcus. RG ( talk) 23:59, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello! You were involved in the sockpuppet investigations of a number of editors involved with the deleted article Kobi Arad, now archived at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Knoblauch129/Archive. I suspect the new user Editor2100 ( talk · contribs) may be another sockpuppet. This editor has recreated the article at Yaakob Arad to circumvent the WP:SALT. I'm not sure how to re-open this archived case. Hoping you can help or advise! -- Deskford ( talk) 15:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
See here, thanks. Please protect the page.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 04:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Might want to reopen the SPI on Garrysmith10. I suck at doing SPIs or I would myself. If he has two so far, there are more....there always is. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 08:12, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I had to go out of town on an extended wikibreak, so I wasn't able to respond to your comments in time. I was disappointed to see the article summarily FAILed, since it appeared to be close to GA quality. Anyway, I've responded to your comments. Don't know if I can renominate it at this point, since it will probably be summarily quick-FAILed for not being out long enough, or somesuch excuse?
Cheers! WTF? ( talk) 03:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Pilif 12 p 16:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you clarify something for me? The SPI on this user has decided that WP:SOCK#LEGIT applies. You appear to have made this judgement. But he is still blocked as a sockpuppet. This confuses me; could you explain, please? -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 17:56, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is
Sasata (
submissions), who has 570 points. He leads pool C. Pools A, B and D are led by
Hunter Kahn (
submissions),
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) and
White Shadows (
submissions) respectively. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the
WikiCup talk page.
Two of last year's final 8,
Theleftorium (
submissions) and
Scorpion0422 (
submissions), have dropped out of the competition, saying they would rather their place went to someone who will have more time on their hands than them next round. On a related note, a special thank you goes to
White Shadows (
submissions) for his help behind the scenes once again. There is currently a problem with the poster, perhaps caused by the new skin- take a look at
this discussion and see if you can help. The competition has continued to tick over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. Good luck to all! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn,
Fox and
The ed17
20:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Was looking at the contribs to see if you were online (ah, the power of Popups) and see the Happy Birthday post. Was like "oh, it is MuZemike's birthday. Then I seen the "lolsocks" post. Then I got confused...is Dr Seeds User:SGGH? At present, the userpage for Dr Seeds redirects to SGGH. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 20:56, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I am awaiting an official peer review, but was told by a FAC delegate to get as many people looking at the page as possible. The page just received GA status today. At your earliest convenience, could you take a look at the Stephens City, Virginia page and review it (placing it on the page's talk page or mine is fine) independent of the official peer review. I would open to any and all requests during the review. Thanks... NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
You speedied and salted (I believe) the page on Eric Violette -- way back in January, I think. (I don't get around here much anymore.) Violette is, of all things, the singing pirate in the FreeCreditReport.com commercials -- and I believe there are reliable sources reporting on him because of it. (A Google search turns up a few -- including the Washington Post.) It's the sort of trivia that's perhaps marginal -- I don't think we're going to see him as the next James Bond or anything -- but he's probably famous enough to make an article about him worthy of discussion. Trouble is, the people creating the page seem to be newbies -- so it's created badly, speedied, and then (because it's been deleted multiple times) salted for long periods without anyone ever talking about it. I looked at taking it to deletion review (which I think is the right approach -- it's been a long time since I did much Wiki stuff)...but I've been kinda busy with work lately, so I thought I'd ask you first to get your thoughts. Should we unsalt? Undelete? Other? Best, -- TheOther Bob 16:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for delaying the investigation, the mediation has nearly concluded, and I see no evidence of socking. Ronk01 ( talk) 00:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I was looking at this sockpuppet investigation because it related to a block I made recently (more on that in a moment) and I think, being unaware of the background, you have made some errors in your statement here.
I think these two users are unrelated to all the others; there is no similarity apart from having edited the same article:
These five acccounts are obviously the same user:
However, if you look at the contribs of the five users listed above, you'll see that there is no overlap in their periods of use. I think that the individual has created a new account from time to time, unaware of how this might be viewed thought our jaded administrators' spectacles.
Now, back to that block I mentioned earlier..... Here's a different user:
The two above accounts are obviously the same person, but again, I don't think the sockpuppetry is necessarily abusive. However, I blocked the second account for persistent BLP violations in Peter Holmes à Court ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and JzG reblocked him a few days later for the same thing. You'll notice from the talk page and contribs of the first account that this had been going on for some time. You may also have seen that this is the editor who opened the SPI in question.
The subject of the SPI has only edited to remove the problematic material inserted by Everton Dasent/Edasent, even going so far as to report the problem at WP:BLPN and solicit aid from other editors. It is thus unfortunate that you have described his edits as "POV-style edit-warring involving removal of sourced content and entire sections of text", a characterization that I (and, I think a number of other editors who have been involved with Edasent) might take not agree with.
I hope that you will review your comments at the SPI and consider that it may be appropriate to unblock the most recent of the accounts on the basis that this is a good faith, if naive, editor.
CIreland ( talk) 01:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Need some help with a user. User:ImperfectlyInformed seems to be obsessed with me to the point of WikiStalking (always wanted a stalker). But it is becoming boring. Could you take a look at this thread through the "courtesy break" and possibly do something with II to keep him away from my edits and away from me. If needed, I will provide a list of the places he has popped up via email. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 04:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
From the last SPI two range blocks were initiated to try to deal with this guy. Both have since expired, and he's back again, with 59.96.28.138 ( talk · contribs) and then as soon as it was tagged, he jumped to 59.96.140.215 ( talk · contribs) to continue his campaign of harassing me, including trying to impersonate me on my own talk page [15]. Would it be possible to reapply the range blocks? -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 08:25, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I have some comments and questions posted here when you have some free time. I am still working on the other areas that haven't been checked. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you go back and take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KingOfTheLynn? It looks like another sockpuppet has been uncovered which I believe throws doubt on your AGF conclusion. Thanks. -- Simple Bob ( talk) 07:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You have been canvassed by another editor/admin regarding my contributions to the Peter Holmes a Court entry. This page has become contentious again and there are now some editors banning contributors for posting referenced material, not the other way around. Many of the recent edits replaced verified links and referenced material. Some of the most recent deleted material is the most up to date available about the subject. I would like to be able to contribute to this entry and others without the threat of being banned by contributors with greater powers, however at the moment I risk banning even if I touch the entry. Please have a look at the entry and the edit history if you have the time. Edasent ( talk) 15:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I noticed you added the small GA icon to the upper right corner. Did GA start adding those? I seem to recall the "Great Green Dot Debate" was pretty contentious,. . . WTF? ( talk) 16:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
May I respectfully say that the edit-war on AN was over the deletion of a discussion. If you protect the page without that discussion visible you may be taken (by myself for a start!) to endorse its removal.
I know that generally, protecting admins try to do The Wrong Version for propriety etc., but I am outraged at how inappropriate the removals of the section were, and I would urge you to replace it or invite another neutral admin to replace it. Best, ╟─ Treasury Tag► sheriff─╢ 22:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I agree that AN needed to be protected, but I think you protected the wrong version. IMO one should not be able to remove a complaint from AN. Now, the person who raised the complaint can be slapped down and heck if necessary get a warning him/herself, but I think the complaint should remain... and let those who want to remove it criticize the person who is raising the subject. AN is supposed to be a place where people can go to raise issues/concerns/complaints. Where do they go if they that gets reverted repeatedly? I won't wheel war with ya, but think you should restore the complaint. I also think when the protection is removed, that a comment warning that removing the section will result in a block.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey MuZe. Can you use your bot to alert Wikiproject Futurama's participants? I'm planning to revive the Wikiproject. GamerPro64 ( talk) 20:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
It should be done, now. I delivered to all talk pages on that list except the indefinitely blocked ones, of course. – MuZemike 07:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following is a summary of the remedies enacted:
For and on behalf of the Arbitration Committee Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) ( talk) 18:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
The arbitration is now closed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-05-11/Sodalitium_Christianae_Vitae . Can the SPI be reopened? Jorgecatolica1 ( talk) 22:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike,
I reverted the SPI page. Jorgecatolica1 ( talk) 03:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. The anonymous user 66.227.196.207, whom you have blocked is vandalizing again, Sir Lothar ( talk) 07:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Think there's enough to go on to block Inniverse as an Asziz sock? I'd go ahead, but I'm confused as to why it hasn't already been done.— Kww( talk) 05:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
oh please open my bot. my speed was very very low :( Abraham ( talk) 21:23, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you have a look at the relationship between JzG and Guy ? They seem to be hell bent on blocking people who try to edit Peter Holmes a Court which was the focus of a sockpuppet case involving Berkinstock who complained to JzG to get their edits backed up by blocking users. Thanks. Edasent ( talk) 13:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
No I think Greg Barry is separate. He has added referenced material and used what I thought was quite neutral language to the entry but was recently blocked indefinitely. I left a note on his talk page but I don't think he has logged on since then. I don't really understand why he was blocked. I can understand the issues with warring which I fell into, but I then became aware of the sockpuppetry so it made a bit more sense. Thanks for having a look at this, it has become quite frustrating. Edasent ( talk) 00:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey MuZemike, Given as you falsely implicated me in a SP investigation I figure you owe me one! (but seriously, no hard feelings) I'm curious if you would cast your experienced eye on Special:Contributions/DePiep and Special:Contributions/Urgenine for me. Thanks, NickCT ( talk) 17:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Anthony ( talk) 20:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for letting the bot post that interesting note about the GA elimination drive on my talk. I saw you're an eligible voter for Picture of the Year 2009, so please support the one you like best. I think by participating we can show how we value the free content contributed. Best Hekerui ( talk) 17:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
User Schrandit has been a POV edit-warrior, in my opinion, for a long time and I met him when he started edit warring on several pages including Equality Mississippi to keep removing sources while asking for citations at the same time! Recently on Heteronormativity, a subject he apparently also disapproves of, two socks have shown up that only agree with him and also try to remove content and mitigate the subject's impact. I tried to open a case but could only see the source code page. The two socks are Badtoaster and Paperbeatsrock, before my posting here they have only been editing on this one article and all to dismiss critical comments on the tendentious editing of Schrandit. Can you help open a case? 71.139.29.193 ( talk) 10:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you MuZemike. Schrandit is a sneaky POV-pusher I've recently caught removing sources or deleting content he apparently doesn't like on many articles. He's likely smart enough not to blatantly sock but the three of them together just as Schrandit was being shut down on this one article was too compelling not to look into. It won't restore any credibility to POV-pushers but if there is an obvious sock it would help clear up some of the gameplaying. Schrandit's interpretation of events of me "inserting" myself into conversations is completely false. I caught him deleting LGBT category off this article and he edit-warred on it even after multiple sources supported it's inclusion. Now he's trying to get another category removed, again, even after sourced content has made it clear it belongs. 71.139.29.193 ( talk) 17:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, MZM. I'm contacting you because an uninvolved admin who's familiar with DRV.
I'm a bit worried about Spartaz' closure of the Norway Spiral.jpg DRV. It doesn't seem to me that the DRV was closed in accordance with the consensus, but I'm reluctant to go to Spartaz' talk page again unless I'm sure he's wrong, because I've already challenged Spartaz over another recent DRV and I don't want to come across as harassing the poor guy. (Normally I'd go to Stifle, but Stifle !voted in that DRV.) Would you mind taking a look and letting me know what you think?— S Marshall T/ C 16:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. monosock 04:04, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Why am I getting this message? Mono's delivery method is random, so you probably showed up somewhere Mono went. :)
Not noticing that you had already taken issue with this close I added another section on Spartaz's talk page. I would recommend that you take up their invitation and make a reclose. __ meco ( talk) 07:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
If you're just tuning in, here's some good news for you and your FAC. Well done. -- an odd name 23:29, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
An Arbitration request in which you are involved has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Workshop.
Additionally, please note that for this case specific procedural guidelines have been stipulated; if you have any questions please ask. The full outline is listed on the Evidence and Workshop pages, but please adhere to the basics:
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 00:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Congrats on Ninja Gaiden being a Featured Article. Also, what kind of drinks? GamerPro64 ( talk) 02:44, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Seen this on my watchlist. Congrats Dude! :) Nicely done! Do you know when it will be featured on the main page? - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:42, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I will also note that, not counting Marble Madness (which was originally an arcade game and was merely ported to the NES), Ninja Gaiden is currently the only NES title that is a featured article. – MuZemike 03:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, but what does a reviewer do, or have rights to do? Blake ( Talk· Edits) 22:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Ryan berg has been deleted four times... any chance of WP:SALTing it? — Timneu22 · talk 16:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm confused MuZe. I asked for permission for reviewer user rights and Xeno told me you gave me permission yesterday. GamerPro64 ( talk) 19:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
II wanted to leave you a note to ensure that you see the latest at User talk:Berkinstock; it took so long for the user to come up with it that I thought you might overlook it. It's in your hands. Accounting4Taste: talk 02:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
What on earth was that all about? Half Shadow 07:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks for granting my request for reviewer permissions. I'll do my best to keep our protected articles high-quality and up to date. Robofish ( talk) 01:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
MuZe, I'm irritated. I'm trying to review the Solar System and I have no idea what to do to review it. GamerPro64 ( talk) 01:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi -- could you give me an idea whether or not this "reviewer-right" is in any way useful during vandal-patrol or will simply reverting reverting do the trick as well? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 02:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
(very explicit, didn't expect you to go through the trouble of a screenshot and all that) yeah, I've seen that. all trial articles are on my watchlist, and I've been observing what it looks like. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 02:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Just noticed that this edit by an anonymous editor was marked as "automatically accepted". I thought that one had to have reviewer rights (and obviously an account) for something to be auto-accepted? Perhaps this is a bug? WTF? ( talk) 03:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello MuZemike, first, you did the right thing in blocking me, second, should I remove the block tag, or is that an admins duty? I ask as a means to prevent further problems. Thanks! Victor9876 ( talk) 14:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
Have been looking for details on the criteria for the "Reviewer" user right - I am almost sure that I read someware about +2,500 edits and 1+ years of edits - is this the case ?
Thanks
Codf1977 ( talk) 15:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Could you delete User:TheRighteousFleshDevil, as the revision history is less than desirable, and replace it with the indef notice — mono 01:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the CU followup and prompt response. I have apologized to the IP for the mistake. Have a good night! Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 08:31, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
The anon has become disruptive and slightly stalking. Coming onto an article I frequent often and removing information from it ( 1, 2). When directed to the page where the term came from, he deleted it too. This is clear disruptive editing and stalking, since you don't just popup on the Stephens City, Virginia article out of the 3 million+. Since you removed his block previously, I will leave this one to you. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 04:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike, I understand your concern; please see the post that I made on NeutralHomer's talk page. I think it will make my intentions very clear, and, I hope and trust, acceptable. 98.82.3.81 ( talk) 04:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
How would one go about adding the above user to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mario96? 69.181.249.92 ( talk) 22:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
*{{checkip|Shiverting101}} at the bottom of the list of suspected socks on that page.
–
MuZemike
22:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
So I was looking at my preferences, and what-do-you-know, I saw somebody had made me a reviewer. I hadn't even noticed. AND it was on my three-year, to the day. So I conjured up a little something on my own for you. diff ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 08:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure where to mention this, (saw your name on this page) but Keifer Thompson ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) is leaving very similar edit summaries as the one left by Kittychem ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki). APK whisper in my ear 06:31, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
For animated film projects, when is "filming" considered to have begun? Is it with the commencement of character design and actual animation creation involving particpation of director, artists, and animators? Or is it only considered to have "begun" once the animators finish their work and voice actors begin their own contributions to the final product? Thanks Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Consensus was clearly delete not redirect. LibStar ( talk) 01:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I see that you just blocked User talk:FetchFan21. I have knon him for awhile and he is not a sock of that account. I think you made a mistake. Can you explain what made you think he was a sock. Checker Fred ( talk) 15:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I see that you have deleted Amanda Knox. I see you have done it because of policy. Applying the same policy, would you delete John Katehis, Ronald Ebens, and/or Philip Markoff? I see that Amanda Knox is more worthy of an article than these 3 not so notable people. Do not say "go ahead and nominate". I seek understanding of the policy foremost, not nomination. Could Ebens be redirected to Vincent Chin and the two Craigslist (alleged) killers redirected to those murder articles? Thank you. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 01:55, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
G'day from Oz. While I am quite glad you have blocked Ryan kirkpatrick, I feel that there is little likelihood that he is a sock of Jersay. Ryan kirkpatrick's edits are universally extremely bad, which IMO brings his role on WP into question on the basis of WP:CIR - he clearly isn't competent. However, looking at Jersay's edits s/he is clearly competent: good spelling and grammar, able to articulate her/his ideas clearly. Furthermore, Ryan kirkpatrick's interest has been almost exclusively with aircraft crashes. He has created over 100 articles related to aircraft crashes in the last five months, about a dozen to do with earthquakes (or earthqaukes as he tends to spell it) and one about a car bombing ( 2010 Newry car bombing); his list of created articles is much shorter than this, as over 20% of the articles he has created have been deleted due to notability issues or to being copyright violations.
Ryan kirkpatrick's first edit to a terrorism-related article wasn't until two weeks after his account was created. His style is very distinctive, for example his contribution to an AfD discussion. Based on his edits it is my belief that he lives in the Wolverhampton area of England, and that he has a connection with Northern Ireland. It appears to me then that there is one of two possibilities: he is being really clever and his edits are deliberately appallingly bad in order to disguise that he is a sock of Jersay, or his and Jersay's interests in terrorism are purely coincidental. As I said at the beginning I am quite glad that he is blocked, but I think it is for the wrong reason. I am also concerned that, given his refusal to engage or deal with any of the issues raised on his talk page, he will just keep on editing as an IP. When he wasn't blocked, people could keep an eye on him and his edits. YSSYguy ( talk) 06:56, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much for blocking the socks of User:Taztouzi. Susfele ( talk) 16:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
As above, I am really grateful that Taztouzi's socks have been blocked. I am somewhat uncomfortable that User:TiffanyTran got blocked, too. Could you take a look at the info I added at User talk:TiffanyTran#Might not be a sock. I initiated the SPI that got her blocked. I didn't include her, and I think there is a good chance she's not a sock. I pointed the admin who refused her unblock request over there, too. Thanks very much. Susfele ( talk) 21:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Seen this edit and I could sense that things weren't going well in your day....so!
Hope this makes your day better. Take Care.... NeutralHomer • Talk • 08:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
I have submitted a new sockpuppet investigation regarding new users and ip addresses related to the James1168 investigation you previously handled. Edasent ( talk) 15:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you / could you give me a second opinion on this close http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Missing_You_%28The_Saturdays_song%29 Off2riorob ( talk) 05:54, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. GregJackP Boomer! 19:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this G8, I think you deleted the wrong talk page! It was Chester F.C. not Chester F.C. (2010) that was deleted at AfD. Alzarian16 ( talk) 11:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
You have new Messages. wiooiw ( talk) 06:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I think I may have made a mistake on this, as new evidence has just come up. While it reasonable that we both assumed that due to the terrorism-focused editing and account creation date that Ryan kirkpatrick was Jersay, I now believe they are in fact different editors. Jersay was in Canada, whereas the edits of 109.154.73.126 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) (Great Britain based IP) carry on editing the same articles as Ryan kirkpatrick, in most cases ones started by him. So as you will hopefully naturally conclude that the IP editor is Ryan kirkpatrick, that would tend to suggest he is not Jersay (unless he happens to have moved several thousand miles).
Although understandable, it would seem somewhat harsh to keep Ryan indefinitely blocked for block evasion given the initial block was in fact in error, but there is also the unresolved matter of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ryan kirkpatrick where significant concerns have been raised about Ryan's editing. Please let me know what should be done about this, as then I know what action to take with future IP sockpuppets of Ryan. Thank you. O Fenian ( talk) 09:22, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Hiya. I'm not in the habit of complaining about closures, but I was a bit surprised to see this one as no consensus. In terms of numbers it was pretty close but I thought the keep arguments were pretty weak. Looking at the keeps in turn:
In comparison, the delete votes were grounded in policy, but I would say that since I voted delete! Anyway, I'd be grateful if you could have another look and let me know what you think. Quantpole ( talk) 15:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I know from recollection that most if not all of the info that guy is adding to WGN-TV is correct. However, he needs sourcing, and is obviously trying to "own" the article, which isn't permitted. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
He rubbed out his previous unblock requests just before making his final one and triggering semi-protection of the page for the duration. Is it worth trying to restore the others back, or does it really matter? Also, I notice he used the old sock ploy of claiming someone else was doing it. Is there a barnstar for dredging up lame excuses? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I saw some of those, but for some reason, the system is telling me that some of these accounts don't exist when I try and block them. Don't know if the glitch is on this end or over at WP. What is it with weirdos like this? Add to that a Bambifan101 sock (which I suspect is from those jackasses at ED) and whee, the fun I'm having here at work during a bit of downtime. I'll log on at home and clobber those "template" accounts. -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 00:12, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Correct! - Alison ❤ 04:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
We need more people to comment on this case. Your help would greatly be appreciated. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 15:54, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
On some level, I do find this somewhat funny as the idiot who was accusing me edit-warring and promoting Indian nationalism engages in sockpuppetry, edit-warring, and fails to adhere to WP:NPOV. Atleast in his SPI case against me, he could have gotten the CONTINENT right (for one, I don't live in Uttar Pradesh, India). I suspect however that this was just an attempt to defame me or shut me up because I contested his ridiculous edits. Suffice it to say, I am happy to put this chapter behind me. Vedant ( talk) 18:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. In case you haven't already seen it, the IP socks of
Sovietia (
talk ·
contribs) are disgruntled:
[21] and
[22]. Care to negotiate?
Favonian (
talk)
12:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I have just nominated via PROD Prestige Management (created in Nov 2006) only to be warned about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prestige Management dateing back to 2004 so a two part question :
Codf1977 (
talk)
16:26, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thanks for the advice. i am new to wikipedia and was promptly edit attacked by others without any explanation or warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatimamadar ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I'm scanning through ship articles with NPOV tags. Looking at the current article and your diff from 2008, I see nothing particularly controversial. As there's nothing on the article's talk page, I'm stumped. Do you see any remaining NPOV problems on the page? Thanks. Haus Talk 06:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Split was a destroyer built for the Yugoslav Navy in 1938. She was built by Yarrow Shipbuilders and was named after the city of the same name. She was aquired in 1950 and was commissioned in July 1958 and was decommissioned in 1980.
Hi. This qualified for deletion as a stand alone but in the discussion I made a strong case that a short list of agencies involved with casualty figures should be incorporated into a parent article such as China Martyrs of 1900. but- since this was deleted without any effort expended to amend the article - we lost the simple list for the count. Can you please put a restored copy into my talk page or something? It would save the time of having to look all of this up again in an out-of-print book. Thanks. Brian0324 ( talk) 13:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I seen your quote about edit wars being two users kicking each other in the shins. It reminded me of this (don't worry, the video is from ABC News. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
What a can-o-worms. Might I ask for an expansion and opinion toward the multiple arguments toward guideline and policy... and that you address User:S Marshall's point-by-point refutation of the nominator's reasons for nomination, and the number of !votes that simply echoed the nominator even after his points were proven invalid? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I share Schmidt's concerns about the deletion of Brian Quintana. Rather than restore I am happy to submit a new page though frankly I expect it to be removed as a re-post no matter how different. Can you provide a copy of this more balanced page so I may work on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Brian_Quintana&oldid=315643392 Since this version the same group of editors (Hairhorn, Cameron Scott, Ttonyb1, Tabercil, Nightscream, Jayron32, Malo, and Geniac) have removed the substance little by little, before moving for deletion. I find their actions dismissive, racists, classist and in total violation of Wikipedia's policies. For example, "Oprah Winfrey's A Better Chance recruited him at age fifteen to attend the prestigious Hotchkiss School in Lakeville, Connecticut" was changed to "an organization that helps underprivileged youths." The program provides scholarships to gifted youth not underprivileged. References to his 2009 Congressional exploratory committee, his notable supporter, and work as a VIP facilitator were also removed. The deleted version is intentionally demeaning. I was more involved in years past, but every time I sought to improve the page with sourced material, I was blocked as a sockpuppet for Quintana or flagged for edit wars. My home and work computers were also blocked. I had planned to chime in on deletion debate, but was waiting for the California Secretary of State to certify the 2010 election results next Friday, July 16, 2010. I figure it will be harder to argue with 400,000 voters (more votes than the Governor of Nevada, New Mexico and most smaller States). Most experts deemed his run a success:
Sacramento Bee - "But the news of the day is that Hollywood producer Brian Quintana, who didn't get any publicity, garnered nearly three times as many votes as Kaus." http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/06/kaus-gets-just.html
KQED Public Media - "The surprise runner-up: Hollywood producer Brian Quintana, who snatched almost 15% of the vote." http://blogs.kqed.org/capitalnotes/2010/06/09/last-call-for-primary-2010/
San Gabriel Valley Tribune - "Quintana's showing was surprising. Kaus got some press. Quintana came out of nowhere," said Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College. "Quintana ran a good e-mail campaign," according to Republican political consultant Matt Klink, of Cerrell Associates. http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_15282486
I see no one bashing on the third place candidate Chuck DeVore: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_devore —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleverclaus ( talk • contribs) 00:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Ahoy there. Is it a shortage of Clerks that has been slowing SPI down recently? Or is it checkusers? I doubt I would ever get to be a checkuser but I could volunteer for clerkage if that is what is required. S.G.(GH) ping! 11:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick work in blocking the User:TVFAN24 sock. I thought the behavioral evidence was pretty strong, and I almost blocked the account per the duck test, but it was good to get a second opinion. Best, IronGargoyle ( talk) 21:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there Please can you help me userfy the page that you have put under speedy delete. Aquabatics is a name many do not understand and we often have to explain who we are and what we do. It would be much simpler if the definition was out there. I will take your advice on how best to get it reinstated. 09:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Katyaqua ( talk)
Need an admin's opinion on something. The above named user edited en masse after not editing since August 2009. The user created several very poor redirects, an article for a television company exec, blanked and redirected several pages and then...gone. All the edits center around the West Virginia television station group West Virginia Media Holdings. I am not sure if the user is an employee or not, but the edits strike me as part vandalism and part COI. What do you make of it? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Based on your comment here Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Melonbarmonster2#Clerk.2C_CheckUser.2C_and.2For_patrolling_admin_comments would you be willing to block based on duck? Melonbarmonster is clearly being disruptive (4RR on July 5th which got the page locked, but a report on him wasn't filed in time) and he seemingly maintains they are separate individuals thus trying to give his position and disruption more weight. A clear violation of WP:SOCK.-- Crossmr ( talk) 23:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, a while back I saw an editor create David c kernell who is the guy who hacked Palin's email account. It was redirected to an article on that subject. Today, another editor wrote a terrible (IMHO) about Kernell and eliminated the redirect. Kernell is not IMO WP:N because his deed was 1BLPE. What do you think? ---- moreno oso ( talk) 17:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
As a support to the "Sarah Palin email hack" several articles entitled with different versions of David Kernell's name were created and redirected to that article. Additionally an article with Mike Kernell name, his father, was as similarly created and redirected. This is in direct violation of Wiki policy. It essentially brands David Kernell with a one time incident. I attempted to delete these redirects sighting these concerns previously, only to have the changes reversed. The additional information included on the present David Kernell article will develop various constitutional issues that surround the incident, subsequent trial and up coming appeals. Lack of proper support, has prevented this in the past as the main stream media frequently inadequately reports testimony. Court documents will be available next week along with various legal opinions to help fill out this article. Currently, when one Googles David Kernell, the only article to appear is the "Sarah Palin email hack" which slanted approach barks of political enhancement. If you choose to delete the article you must delete all articles related to the David Kernell name, such as David C Kernell, david kernell and others. And prevent any future redirects of his name to the sarah palin email hack article. I suppose an new article entitled the "Constitutional Challenges of the David Kernell Prosecution" may be a better title for the present article. Constitutionguard ( talk)
Sorry to bug you again but it appears the dubious sockmaster has returned with (yet again...) another sockpuppet. He appears to have gained some intelligence though as this time after creating the sock, the moron didn't make any userspace related edits. He just went straight to accusing me of supporting Indian nationalism. Vedant ( talk) 01:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. There's an issue with new users copying text from websites at McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and also at Orbis International. I used twinkle to add a sock report but got an error during the process. It added the report page and notified the users, but didn't add the report to the main list at WP:SPI. The stand-alone report is at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MD-10 Project. I'm unsure about how to complete listing and finish whatever twinkle stumbled on. Thanks. Dawnseeker2000 21:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
SPI|casename}}
.
Jarkeld (
talk)
22:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)Deconstructhis brought this user to my attention. With the edits already to a couple Chicago stations and them being a new editor/account, my sock-o-meter is going off on this one. What do you think? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:36, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to disturb you, but remember the Indonesian misinformation vandal. He seems to be popping up all over again. Right now, he is using 114.57.11.7 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Same MO. WP:AIV is currently backlogged, BTW. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (3rd nomination) as no consensus.
I'd like to ask your advice about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (4th nomination). Were you aware that less than an hour after you left your concluding statement the wiki-id User:Iqinn renominated the article for deletion? The wiki-id User:Iqinn has kept the article Al Fand training camp at {{ afd}}, continuously, for almost eight weeks.
I am on record, that the articles on camps that are only known from the Guantanamo allegation memos, and had a relatively low number of attendees identified, should be merged into a larger article.
Correct me if I am mistaken, if this article were not nominated for deletion, taking steps to merge and redirect it to a more broad, more referenced article would be well with the options open following a "no consensus" conclusion?
Correct me if I am mistaken, while contributors are allowed to renominate articles for additional {{ afd}}, aren't they supposed to only do so if they thought that there was some important point missed during the earlier {{ afd}}, or if enough times (several months at least) had passed, so they could reasonably suggest the consensus had changed?
Correct me if I am mistaken, but if the wiki-id User:Iqinn thought you had made a mistake in your closure, shouldn't they have contacted you, to request a fuller explanation? Sometimes administrators reverse their closures when a good faith contributor makes good points about their closures. Sometimes administrators address the concerns good faith contributors had about a closure, and convince them it was a good closure. Correct me if I am mistaken, if the wiki-id User:Iqinn continued to have concerns over your closure, after asking for a fuller explanation, you would probably have told them they had the option of initiating a review at {{ drv}}?
As I see it, my options include:
FWIW, I feel the portion of this comment at User talk:Jimbo Wales "but continues pushing against policy makes a deletion impossible..." improperly implies bad faith on my part.
FWIW the wiki-id User:Iqinn did not inform me of the {{ afd}}.
Thanks! Geo Swan ( talk) 18:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt response. I've had much more evident WP:DUCK cases declined based on behavioral evidence before, so I just file them at WP:SPI now everytime. I'll run 'em by you first next time if you don't mind. I do find filing these reports something of a hassle.-- Atlan ( talk) 23:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
An additional account was just registered and made the same edit ( here). If you could save me the trouble of making another SPI case page that would be appreciated. Also, could that article be semi-protected? nableezy - 02:58, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:BanditKingsOfAncientChinaNESBoxart.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (4th nomination) is being reviewed at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_July_15#Al_Fand_training_camp.
Your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (3rd nomination) has been commented upon there. I thought I should let you know....
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 16:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there! Could you please do me a favour and move Shefqet Bej Vërlaci to Shefqet Vërlaci. It's not moving now. There is an agreement and consensus on this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albania#Article_names_with_no_titles. Thanks much! -- Sulmues ( talk) 18:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Greetings!
You recently blocked 64.255.164.0/25 three weeks ago, for disruptive behavior at WP:ANI. I wasn't aware of their comments, at the time they were made.
The IP represented themselves as defending me against Jimbo Wales. But I believe that the real intent of the comments was to use mockery to attack me, and their mention of Jimbo was merely a ploy to attract more attention to their mockery of my position. I probably don't need to say I did not regard Jimbo Wales comments on the {{ afd}} on Houston McCoy as abusive.
I write on controversial topics. This routinely triggers the attention of bad-faith challengers. About a dozen of my most persistent bad-faith challengers have ended up being permanently banned from the wikipedia -- but not for their personal attacks against me, but for simlar bad-faith behavior, elsewhere.
I have a long term challenger who I suspect drafted these repeated bad-faith comments.
If I am not mistaken, you are authorized to perform checkusers and sockpuppet investigations. Can I ask you what would happen to a named contributor if an investigation showed they had used 64.255.164.0/25 to try to avoid the consequences of personal attacks?
Is my suspicions that I recognize the style sufficient to justifiy a sockpuppet investigation? If so, how would you recommend I proceed?
Thanks! Geo Swan ( talk) 03:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
User:People bios suggests in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dr._Kenneth_K._Kim that he/she and another user are voting in the same AFD using the same computer. That sounds suspicious. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 15:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. I want to express my thanks for your help, on many occasions, with problem socks. I really appreciate your prompt and diligent effort and hard work. I am personally very reassured to know that admins like you are around. Take care and thanks again. Dr.K. λogos πraxis 15:47, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm wondering how I'd go about volunteering to assist as a clerk at SPI. Yworo ( talk) 13:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
You have it. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks
![]() | This user helped promote Jon Scheyer to good article status. |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 07:55, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
User:Jrfoldes seems to be getting ready to start his reverting again on the various You Can't Do That on Television articles. [24] I have left him a sternly worded warning, [25] but as he claimed in his unblocked that I was "harassing" him by not letting him do what he wants, I thought it might be helpful if someone else also tried having a word with him. He seems to be capable of good editing when he stays away from those articles, but he also does not seek to be capable of keeping himself away.-- AnmaFinotera ( talk ~ contribs) 22:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
-- Cailil talk 23:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rolando 2 logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
If this editor protests about the Sockpuppet block, I think it should be given pretty high consideration. While User:PtAuAg certainly passed my Duck test [I was the original person to file the report], the "Camel" guy doesn't share any discernible behavioral pattern, IMO. Thanks for any consideration. BigK HeX ( talk) 22:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering, could you undelete the page I created for "Treasury of New England Short Stories" and help me bring it up to standards? I feel that it need be included in Wikipedia because the collection itself is unique and is virtually unknown online. If you still disagree, would you at least send me the page in an email so I can print it off for my own use? I foolishly did not think to save a copy of the typed words and so would have to retype for use in my classroom. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jan293 ( talk • contribs) 00:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
CU doesn't reveal anything about the above, but [27] is interesting. If you or another clerk wants to look into it, there is probably enough there for a DUCK block. KnightLago ( talk) 02:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Could you speedy close the above AfD? Apparently this was nom'd previously 5 days ago and I just nom'd it again about an hour ago...my goof. Just need an admin closure. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
My experience is that any sort of web "show" or YouTube channel is A7-able, like Elevator filming (hobby). I worry about giving this thing seven days. (I am watching this page, so please reply here.) — Timneu22 · talk 19:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
He's continuing to add the content to Dragon Quest VI, or if not him, an IP address with a similar editing history is. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 12:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if you could spare time to take a look at this article, which is somewhat stalled at FAC. A few comments would be helpful, to get discussion going again. Brianboulton ( talk) 14:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Would it be possible to restore File:UnionManilaFC.png to replace a similar of lower quality. I was the creator and I also requested for it's deletion. I thought there was a problem with the file itself when I used it to edit Union F.C. when another user reverted my "good faith" edits even though I didn't vandalize or do anything wrong in my edits. So I went ahead and requested for its deletion. Thanks. Banana Fingers ( talk) 15:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Opened a new about him: [28] -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 16:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
hello, i have only one short qestion about this part, can i ad my post on the artikel what is in german? ( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexa_Internet)
this i think is also ok for me then when i can not post my artikel Olaf1969 ( talk) 16:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Earlier today, I received a
Google Alert that someone had created a page about me,
Blake Farenthold and you deleted it citing notability (A7). While I am uncomfortable arguing my own importance or significance, I _am_ the Republican nominee for United States Congress (see
Farenthold prevails in Republican runoff for U.S. House District 27 nomination). This nomination should qualify me for a page under the Politicians category (
Category:Politicians) as someone "associated with a party that has recently won elections, or is widely regarded as about to, as a candidate".
Obviously, as a person seeking public office, I would like to see an accurate Wikipeda page with my background and qualifications posted, but out of respect for established rules and objectivity considerations, I have not done one myself.
At the very least, I'd be interested in what the author was saying about me.
R. Blake Farenthold
Candidate, United States Congress
27th District of Texas
Could you check this edit and see if the links I put down at reliable and are FA quality, please? Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Enjoy your break, see ya on the other side of it. We will keep the Wiki chair warm for ya until you get back. :) Good luck with the move. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I saw in my watchlist that you had deleted an RFA of a user who has been blocked, User:Premier Shawn. That user has also participated in another RFA. I didn't want to revert it without checking if that is the right thing to do. Could you please advise? Thanks. Loves Macs (talk) 03:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello MuZemike. Premier Shawn ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, - Vianello ( Talk) 04:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I think we may have the same user here. Perhaps a checkuser is warranted? Enigma msg 01:56, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
I Write Like at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
MBelgrano (
talk)
17:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike – During this review you blocked YouAndMeBabyAintNothingButCamels ( talk · contribs) based on behavior. As the user has had an unblock request up for a good period of time, I've tried to look into this. The CU returned “possible/unclear” in relation to the main abusive sockpuppeter, and I can’t seem to find anything in common with any of the other socks. I can see that you’re offline, but if you happen to be lurking about, it would be helpful to get some more input here. I’ll send a poke to a few of the other people involved as well. Kuru (talk) 20:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by
Sasata (
submissions) has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants (
Sasata (
submissions),
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) and
TonyTheTiger (
submissions)) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by
Casliber (
submissions), who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the
WikiCup talk page.
Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.
Earlier this round, we said goodbye to
Hunter Kahn (
submissions), who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by
Suomi Finland 2009 (
submissions). We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn,
Fox and
The ed17
22:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rise2SaturnBoxart.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}
to your talk page.
Thank you.
DASHBot (
talk)
05:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
See you are all settled in enough to update Wikipedia. Hope you are all unpacked and moved into your new place and you have cable and internet a-workin'. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Our 2nd annual Wiki-Conference NYC has been confirmed for the weekend of August 28-29 at New York University.
There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session.
Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up
here for on-wiki notification. All are invited!
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
15:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
This ZjarriRrethues fellow reminds me very much of Sarandioti. SPI is here [29]. Cheers, Athenean ( talk) 23:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Can you take a look at the unblock request please? Based on the CU evidence not being 100%, I might suggest an unblock. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 08:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Another admin overturned Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Quintana (2nd nomination) by restoring Brian Quintana in less than a month with no noticeable appreciation. Could you take a look at the situation? ---- moreno oso ( talk) 20:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
An article that I created earlier today, The Paging Game, was just deleted by MuZemike as "Unambiguous copyright infringement". There was the start of a discussion about this on the Discussion page for the article, but that is now gone too. I don't agree that this page was "unambiguous copyright infringement" and presented my reasons as part of the discussion. I understand that the matter wasn't resolved, but I was surprised to see the article deleted without any further discussion or comment. I expected to have a little time to come to an agreement. Can I get an explanation for what happened here? Jeff Ogden ( talk) 22:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike: I saw on this page that you proposed a lightning talk about the Statipedia proposal. I'm the main author of the proposal. I submitted to NYC meetup as a possible talk topic, though I'm not sure it suits. Is your lightning talk proposal a response to my submission? Or were you thinking independently of having a discussion about that? I'd love to discuss it whatever your thoughts are. Econterms ( talk) 00:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
It looks like the SPI has exonerated this user. There is currently an open unblock request on the user's talk page - perhaps you could take a look? Cheers. TN X Man 18:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
You closed this AfD last month but you only deleted one of the two nominated articles ? was this an oversight or dilibrate ?
Thanks
Codf1977 ( talk) 08:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. I found your name on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HAl/Archive. I have tried pinging User:Hersfold but I see a note on their talk page that they are not very active at the moment, and have heard nothing back anyway. Problems seem to be re-occurring at Moonlight (runtime) involving some of the same IP addresses that were identified as socks of User:hAl back in January. Looking at the histories, I see that the IPs were blocked for two weeks then, and since then have resumed editing following the same interests and patterns as the original banned user. Is that normal practice when a user is indefinitely blocked, that they just continue as normal (but using their IP address) after a couple of weeks? I don't want to maintain an indefinite vendetta, but it appears that their controversial and unreasonable deletions are causing edit wars and bad feeling on that page, and possibly elsewhere if old habits are as expected. I'm trying to stem the edit wars and request some discussion, but this does seem wearisome after all the old hassles that led up to hAl's final block. Maybe you could have a look. -- Nigelj ( talk) 17:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi again. Sorry to go on, but try as I have to get them to discuss, both 130.57.22.201 and 70.226.165.186 have gone way beyond WP:3RR at Moonlight (runtime). I'm now sure neither of these are actually hAl, but they both need some action I think at the moment. -- Nigelj ( talk) 21:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
On a side note, there seems to be a smaller edit war over at Mono (software). Can you come and resovle this little dispute? Willimm ( talk) 15:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Brought up at SPI. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HAl. – MuZemike 17:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I got an e-mail from User:2007apm asking me to take a look at the block carried out following this SPI (February 2010). The initial e-mail was back in February 2010 and nothing was done then, but the user e-mailed again recently (August 2010) and I'd like to try and sort this out. Would you be able to take another look and see if you can double-check how strong the evidence is connecting the accounts? The dates of editing don't quite seem to match the usual pattern here as far as I can tell. I've asked User:Future Perfect at Sunrise to have a look as well (as he blocked most of the Emperordarius socks). You could both comment on his talk page where he has filed several unblock requests that were declined without considering whether the initial identification as a sock was correct or not. If there is evidence that shouldn't be discussed on-wiki (to avoid revealing how certain behavioural identifications are made) please feel free to e-mail me. Thanks. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Please note that this article was a spin off from Charismatic authority. It was originally very well sourced to reputable sources. Logically speaking any example that was not used by Weber himself cannot be used anymore in the article charismatic authority. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_charismatic_leaders_as_defined_by_Max_Weber's_classification_of_authority_(2nd_nomination) Andries ( talk) 20:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
You are mentioned (in a nice way). Keep up the good work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Toddst1_misconduct RIPGC ( talk) 04:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike, I'm hoping to be able to talk about what happened with the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teach_For_Us . I was working with Cirt ( talk) and improving the article during the past week. I guess someone that wasn't supposed to edit things moved it around. I don't know that person. Is there anything else that you think needs to be improved on the page before it is restored? I'm relatively novice at this and need some direction if you think something should change. Thanks. Ageller ( talk) 01:03, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just wondering why you deleted my welcome page? -- MaxwellEdisonPhD ( talk) 00:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
I would consider, since you seem to be accumulating alot of talk page protections due to sockpuppetry, creating a talk page for anons and others and and leave this one permanently semi-protected. J.Delanoy (I do believe) does that and a couple other users, and it seems to work out well for them. If anyone breaks through, they are easy to fish out. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
As an admin, why don't you just protect your user page? I can't think of a time that even a confirmed editor has any business editing your user page.— Kww( talk) 19:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey Muze. Can you deleted {{ Futurama Barnstar}}? I replaced it with anotherone that actually has a picture on it. GamerPro64 ( talk) 19:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
It appears this user has made a reasonable unblock request. I would like to unblock them, but wanted to check with you (as the blocking admin) first. TN X Man 18:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Could you possibly have a look at this please? In addition to terrorism edits, he is now creating air crash articles, meaning the duck is quacking rather loudly. Thank you. O Fenian ( talk) 15:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I wanted to use the excellent early sourcing of this list to improve the article charismatic authority
I understand that there are problems with the subjective criteria for this list , but I continue to disagree completely that this was a synthesis of sources: we took great care to stay close to the sources, because the initial editor and I did not agree on anything.
It is not my intention to copy or merge the list into the article, but to provide attributed examples. Andries ( talk) 18:51, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I believe before protecting it, you should have removed PA. Thanks.-- Mbz1 ( talk) 20:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks for the GA review.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 17:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
In case you didn't notice, we have resolved the dispute [1] Thanks Aigest ( talk) 20:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I just blocked User talk:Huttselovesmillie as vandalism-only because they created another attack article after being warned about the first one. Feel free to unblock if you think that that would be more productive. Regards, - 2/0 ( cont.) 03:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Biting, assumptions of bad faith, and other assorted nonsense at AfD. Thank you. — Farix ( t | c) 21:07, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, MuZemike. I fixed your closure of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 April 21#Songs from the Tainted Cherry Tree here. The correct template is {{ subst:DRV bottom}}, not {{ subst:DRV close}}. Cheers, Cunard ( talk) 06:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey! I just wanted to thank you for finishing up the review I started at Bad Romance. I've been having computer problems and haven't been able to get on, so it was a huge relief to see that somebody else had taken care of it by the time I got back. Thanks! Annalise ( talk) 14:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok, so I get that it's a problem, but...
Why can't we AO/no account create rangeblock the whole Blackberry IP range sets he's coming from?
We've done whole provider ranges before.
Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 23:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group)
this page has been compiled. Congratulations to
Hunter Kahn (
submissions), our clear overall round winner, and to
ThinkBlue (
submissions) and
Arsenikk (
submissions), who were solidly second and third respectively. There were a good number of high scorers this round- competition was certainly tough! Round three begins tomorrow, but anything promoted after the end of round two is eligible for points. 16 contestants (eight pool leaders and eight wildcards) will progress to round four in two months- things are really starting to get competitive. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the
WikiCup talk page.
Judge iMatthew has retired from Wikipedia, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants
Stone (
submissions) and
White Shadows (
submissions) for their help in preparing for round three. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn,
Fox and
The ed17
17:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I went through blocking and tagging those accounts, but when I came back to update the page, it was closed! Just a heads up on what I had done, please let me know if anything needs to be corrected. TN X Man 19:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that. It really needs a bit of work, I was going to try and buff it myself as I reviewed it but not having studied CF since med school I was pretty rusty. On the up side, I am sure it will be reviewed promptly if resubmitted after improvements. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 01:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
There were two tricky ones - the other is a real challenge too, and I want to try and help the nominator pass it. After some discussion on scope, I have decided to take Illegal logging in Madagascar as is and help Visionholder get it through while reviewing it. For me the issue is making the prose more succinct and hence encyclopedic. My main concern is that its intense detail in of itself leads it into soapboxing territory. This is hard as I do feel it is an important subject to educate readers about and I would dearly like to see it promoted too. I have done a bit but it is draining work, so if a few of us are involved it might give all involved a boost. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 01:11, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Isn't this an inappropiate username? And if I linked it wrong, I'm sorry. I'm still learning. I love me! ( talk) 23:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, 82.1.157.16 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS), previously blocked by you (probable FootballPhil sock) is back and carrying on much as before. DuncanHill ( talk) 13:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. You moved the ANI discussion to a sub-page and, while this is standard practice, and I know you mean well, I think it worth noting that the previous discussion, which also was moved by you, died down inconclusively once it was moved off ANI. My guess is that the same thing will happen to this one. Leaving discussions unsettled is not healthy for the encyclopedia. -- RegentsPark ( talk) 01:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
[ [2]] Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I think both of them have been failed, but due to disagreement between me and the nominator, I asked for another reviewer. Seyyed( t- c) 02:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike, regarding Sgaran as a possible sock, could you please take another look? In particular, check this and this, wherein the 64.85.252.225 ip manually signs posts as Sgaran, and this post by Sgaran in which he explains that he started using his user account after his ip access was blocked. My talk page has a fairly long conversation Sgaran or 64.85.252.225 or both depending on how you look at it.
If you look at the content and scope of the posts, they do all appear to have the same source, and I think meet the basic duck test. Compare the user contributions of 64.85.252.225, Special:Contributions/12.149.202.41, and Special:Contributions/Sgaran.
I'm curious as to what tool you're using to find geographical location of the ip. As a net admin, I know how difficult it is to do, especially if you are relying on whois data, but according to [3] and [4], 12.149.202.41 and 64.85.252.225 terminate in the bay area. 64.85.252.225 belongs to Astound Broadband, centered in Concord, CA, and the 12.149.202.41 address is assigned, I believe to Apple under ATT's auspices. My initial thought is that the 12.149.202.41 is an iPhone, and the 64.85.252.225 is the user's home ip address.
Finally, I traced all this bruhaha, I think, back to it's origin. If you look at the history of Phenome, here, users Crusio and Pfjoseph were engaged in a serious dispute over a redirect to phenotype. That ends in December 09 with the Pfjoseph not reverting Crusio's redirect. Then at the end of April, the redirect is reverted by 128.32.252.41 (which also points to the bay area by the graphical traceroutes above, and belongs to bekerley), see this. Then 64.85.252.225 starts the same pattern, see [5] as an example. Phenomics is a related term, note that Sgaran authored that article claiming to have originated the term. [6]
On April 29th, Crusio nominated Steven A. Garan, Automated Imaging Microscope System and Aging Research Centre, then things started getting a bit crazy.
Anyway, just thought I'd bring you up to speed. I honestly don't know what to think of all of this, really, and don't care much what the outcome of the SPI is. I'm going to try to mediate a bit over on Phenome and work on the articles related to this. -- Nuujinn ( talk) 20:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this section on ANI if you aren't busy? The user is seeking an admin and I have done all in my power to help. User is getting a little heated and my help isn't, well, helping. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For reviewing 16 good article nominations during the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive, I hereby present you The Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Good work! Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC) |
![]() |
Wikipedia Motivation Award | |
On behalf of those who participated in the April 2010 GAN Backlog Elimination Drive, I hereby award you this Motivation Award, for your efforts in rallying the troops to clear the backlog, improve the encyclopedia, and even inspire another backlog elimination drive, which is ongoing now. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 12:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC) |
Hello. You were involved in a sockpuppetry investigation of this user a couple months ago, and since he's increased his ridiculous behavior to epic levels [7], it might be helpful if you took a look at the current report. -- Splatterhouse5 ( talk) 00:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for giving me rollback ability.
There is an administrator, Crum375, who did not use rollback according to Wikipedia instructions. The edit rolled back was neither vandalism or unconstructive. Actually, it was a grammar related point. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3ACrum375&action=historysubmit&diff=360534337&oldid=359674756
I think this is violating rollback rules. However, I am not for draconian punishment or any punishment at all. I am curious to whether Wikipedia rules should be followed to by the letter, especially for long time editors and admins. I can see giving new users leeway so we don't chase them away. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 16:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Administrator immunity goes against Wikipedia customs. In practice, this should happen very, very rarely but will give administrators an incentive not to violate rollback rules. Sample idea...
![]() | THIS IS A SAMPLE TEMPLATE - MUZEMIKE HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG. This administrator no longer has rollback rights. Due to software limitations that cannot separate rollback rights from administrative (sysop) rights, enforcement is manually performed. In the event that this administrator uses rollback, the user must be immediately blocked for repetitive 7 days until the subject no longer violates rollback rules. (Account information: block log · suspected sockpuppets · confirmed socks) |
In short, I will suggest this only if I see a problem, not before. So far, I don't see a widespread problem.
Suomi Finland 2009 (
talk)
18:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Sorry to involve you but the editing I did was entangled with yours. This is just about the block and in no way about the merits of our debate on Vera Baker. Thanks Onefinalstep ( talk) 05:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
This may be of some interest to you. -- RegentsPark ( talk) 19:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike,
I know you've undone the indefinite block on user:FunkMonk that you performed, but I would urge you to use caution when indefinitely blocking in the future. A quick glance at the user's contributions would have shown a long history of edits dating back to 2007, with more than 17,000 live edits. There's no way that could be mistaken for a vandalism-only account. Anyway, thanks for reversing the block. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester 09:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
If one is blocked, then how can a revert be "editing while logged out"? It can only be block evasion, and intentional, since the IP will be blocked too. Jayjg (talk) 04:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
This just got a sock's talk page access revoked. Admirer of yours? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey man, thanks for lifting that block. I just logged on in school and tried to edit this, but some dumbass got me blocked. Thanks again. I owe ya one. :) qö₮$@37 ( talk) 19:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Per this edit @ User talk:Dave1185/unprotected talk page#Welcome to Georgie's Italian Restaurant, I'm sure this was not done by you but hey... I still got to inform you, right? BTW, I'm going for a 2 week vacation starting today... how do I let these bozos know that? Thoughts? -- Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 00:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just added some evidence to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zinbarg. Since you seem to be handling the case, I thought it might be best to notify you of it. Cheers, Jakew ( talk) 15:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Per checkuser results at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DavidYork71/Archive, can you please indef block Superfalse ( talk · contribs) as a sock of DavidYork71 ( talk · contribs)? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt ( talk) 22:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Is this an open proxy? The block reason doesn't say so (at least not the only one I can see, which says "Hardening block", but I can't see what block it is being hardened from). Peter 22:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I see you've deleted Untitled Flatout game for copyright infringement from this this GDN article. However, what they've posted is a word-for-word press release. I attained that press release from GamesPress.com and re-wrote it so it didn't sound so much like a press release (as press releases should be). I merely used GDN as a referrence to confirm what I wrote. Is this not allowed on wikipedia? EvanVolm ( talk) 17:46, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi there. I was reading the CU elections and found that you are from Wisconsin. Are there many editors from around there? If so, I'm wondering if there is any chance of organizing a meetup. Seeing as I am a Yooper, one held in Wisconsin would be one I might actually have a chance at making. :) — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 09:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi again MuZemike. I have had to reblock several open proxies [9] where you have made comment that "Tor block extension has been fixed". I'd encourage you not to unblock any more like this. But mainly I'm looking for some background to this comment, as I don't think it has. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MuZemike. I would like to become an SPI trainee. Could you coach me? Thanks. ~ NerdyScienceDude ( ✉ • ✐) 23:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
User talk:122.102.100.14 has been vandalising for more than a year without a block. 03:05, 21 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SwordsmanRyan ( talk • contribs)
Is there likely to be any movement on this before my liver gives out? -- Ibn ( talk) 07:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi ther; you have blocked this user as being a sockpuppet of user:Tony254trill. I am not saying you are wrong, but the SPI does not seem to confirm your conclusion. Do you know something I do not?-- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 17:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Might a suggest a checkuser and once that is done a range block. Would give you time to do other things. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 18:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you were involved with Neutralhomer ( User_talk:Neutralhomer/Archive6#Consequences) not too long ago for marking non-vandalism as vandalism. He is continuing this behavior (see User_talk:Bwilkins#Neutralhomer_continuing_to_edit-war_and_mark_non-vandalism_as_vandalism for a summary), which I am very concerned about. I have no direct involvement but I don't think it is good for us to allow this kind of thing to go unchecked. II | ( t - c) 01:28, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I know it is not you fault that SPI has got backlogged, but is it possiable someone could have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Catface1965 it has been a week now since anyone has commented on it. Codf1977 ( talk) 15:57, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The entry on "Duperrault" was deleted by you allegedly for lack of significance about the person (A7). Terry Jo Duperrault was the sole survivor of a mass murder that took place on the ocean, which left her entire nuclear family dead. She was found adrift in the ocean on a cork flotation device after 4 days at sea. She has just published a book about her experience, so people (like me) who want to read about her story will be searching Wiki. And you have deleted the entry. Research should be done before entries are deleted for "lack of significance". If I can read about celebutantes on Wiki, surely I should be able to read about this. Akimberleyew ( talk) 00:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you -- that is a totally satisfactory solution. Appreciate the prompt response and redress. Akimberleyew ( talk) 01:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MuZemike. I just noticed that you forgot to block User:Root7, one of the sockpuppets of Callmarcus. RG ( talk) 23:59, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello! You were involved in the sockpuppet investigations of a number of editors involved with the deleted article Kobi Arad, now archived at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Knoblauch129/Archive. I suspect the new user Editor2100 ( talk · contribs) may be another sockpuppet. This editor has recreated the article at Yaakob Arad to circumvent the WP:SALT. I'm not sure how to re-open this archived case. Hoping you can help or advise! -- Deskford ( talk) 15:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
See here, thanks. Please protect the page.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 04:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Might want to reopen the SPI on Garrysmith10. I suck at doing SPIs or I would myself. If he has two so far, there are more....there always is. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 08:12, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I had to go out of town on an extended wikibreak, so I wasn't able to respond to your comments in time. I was disappointed to see the article summarily FAILed, since it appeared to be close to GA quality. Anyway, I've responded to your comments. Don't know if I can renominate it at this point, since it will probably be summarily quick-FAILed for not being out long enough, or somesuch excuse?
Cheers! WTF? ( talk) 03:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Pilif 12 p 16:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you clarify something for me? The SPI on this user has decided that WP:SOCK#LEGIT applies. You appear to have made this judgement. But he is still blocked as a sockpuppet. This confuses me; could you explain, please? -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 17:56, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is
Sasata (
submissions), who has 570 points. He leads pool C. Pools A, B and D are led by
Hunter Kahn (
submissions),
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) and
White Shadows (
submissions) respectively. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the
WikiCup talk page.
Two of last year's final 8,
Theleftorium (
submissions) and
Scorpion0422 (
submissions), have dropped out of the competition, saying they would rather their place went to someone who will have more time on their hands than them next round. On a related note, a special thank you goes to
White Shadows (
submissions) for his help behind the scenes once again. There is currently a problem with the poster, perhaps caused by the new skin- take a look at
this discussion and see if you can help. The competition has continued to tick over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. Good luck to all! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn,
Fox and
The ed17
20:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Was looking at the contribs to see if you were online (ah, the power of Popups) and see the Happy Birthday post. Was like "oh, it is MuZemike's birthday. Then I seen the "lolsocks" post. Then I got confused...is Dr Seeds User:SGGH? At present, the userpage for Dr Seeds redirects to SGGH. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 20:56, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I am awaiting an official peer review, but was told by a FAC delegate to get as many people looking at the page as possible. The page just received GA status today. At your earliest convenience, could you take a look at the Stephens City, Virginia page and review it (placing it on the page's talk page or mine is fine) independent of the official peer review. I would open to any and all requests during the review. Thanks... NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
You speedied and salted (I believe) the page on Eric Violette -- way back in January, I think. (I don't get around here much anymore.) Violette is, of all things, the singing pirate in the FreeCreditReport.com commercials -- and I believe there are reliable sources reporting on him because of it. (A Google search turns up a few -- including the Washington Post.) It's the sort of trivia that's perhaps marginal -- I don't think we're going to see him as the next James Bond or anything -- but he's probably famous enough to make an article about him worthy of discussion. Trouble is, the people creating the page seem to be newbies -- so it's created badly, speedied, and then (because it's been deleted multiple times) salted for long periods without anyone ever talking about it. I looked at taking it to deletion review (which I think is the right approach -- it's been a long time since I did much Wiki stuff)...but I've been kinda busy with work lately, so I thought I'd ask you first to get your thoughts. Should we unsalt? Undelete? Other? Best, -- TheOther Bob 16:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for delaying the investigation, the mediation has nearly concluded, and I see no evidence of socking. Ronk01 ( talk) 00:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I was looking at this sockpuppet investigation because it related to a block I made recently (more on that in a moment) and I think, being unaware of the background, you have made some errors in your statement here.
I think these two users are unrelated to all the others; there is no similarity apart from having edited the same article:
These five acccounts are obviously the same user:
However, if you look at the contribs of the five users listed above, you'll see that there is no overlap in their periods of use. I think that the individual has created a new account from time to time, unaware of how this might be viewed thought our jaded administrators' spectacles.
Now, back to that block I mentioned earlier..... Here's a different user:
The two above accounts are obviously the same person, but again, I don't think the sockpuppetry is necessarily abusive. However, I blocked the second account for persistent BLP violations in Peter Holmes à Court ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and JzG reblocked him a few days later for the same thing. You'll notice from the talk page and contribs of the first account that this had been going on for some time. You may also have seen that this is the editor who opened the SPI in question.
The subject of the SPI has only edited to remove the problematic material inserted by Everton Dasent/Edasent, even going so far as to report the problem at WP:BLPN and solicit aid from other editors. It is thus unfortunate that you have described his edits as "POV-style edit-warring involving removal of sourced content and entire sections of text", a characterization that I (and, I think a number of other editors who have been involved with Edasent) might take not agree with.
I hope that you will review your comments at the SPI and consider that it may be appropriate to unblock the most recent of the accounts on the basis that this is a good faith, if naive, editor.
CIreland ( talk) 01:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Need some help with a user. User:ImperfectlyInformed seems to be obsessed with me to the point of WikiStalking (always wanted a stalker). But it is becoming boring. Could you take a look at this thread through the "courtesy break" and possibly do something with II to keep him away from my edits and away from me. If needed, I will provide a list of the places he has popped up via email. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 04:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
From the last SPI two range blocks were initiated to try to deal with this guy. Both have since expired, and he's back again, with 59.96.28.138 ( talk · contribs) and then as soon as it was tagged, he jumped to 59.96.140.215 ( talk · contribs) to continue his campaign of harassing me, including trying to impersonate me on my own talk page [15]. Would it be possible to reapply the range blocks? -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 08:25, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I have some comments and questions posted here when you have some free time. I am still working on the other areas that haven't been checked. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you go back and take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KingOfTheLynn? It looks like another sockpuppet has been uncovered which I believe throws doubt on your AGF conclusion. Thanks. -- Simple Bob ( talk) 07:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You have been canvassed by another editor/admin regarding my contributions to the Peter Holmes a Court entry. This page has become contentious again and there are now some editors banning contributors for posting referenced material, not the other way around. Many of the recent edits replaced verified links and referenced material. Some of the most recent deleted material is the most up to date available about the subject. I would like to be able to contribute to this entry and others without the threat of being banned by contributors with greater powers, however at the moment I risk banning even if I touch the entry. Please have a look at the entry and the edit history if you have the time. Edasent ( talk) 15:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I noticed you added the small GA icon to the upper right corner. Did GA start adding those? I seem to recall the "Great Green Dot Debate" was pretty contentious,. . . WTF? ( talk) 16:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
May I respectfully say that the edit-war on AN was over the deletion of a discussion. If you protect the page without that discussion visible you may be taken (by myself for a start!) to endorse its removal.
I know that generally, protecting admins try to do The Wrong Version for propriety etc., but I am outraged at how inappropriate the removals of the section were, and I would urge you to replace it or invite another neutral admin to replace it. Best, ╟─ Treasury Tag► sheriff─╢ 22:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I agree that AN needed to be protected, but I think you protected the wrong version. IMO one should not be able to remove a complaint from AN. Now, the person who raised the complaint can be slapped down and heck if necessary get a warning him/herself, but I think the complaint should remain... and let those who want to remove it criticize the person who is raising the subject. AN is supposed to be a place where people can go to raise issues/concerns/complaints. Where do they go if they that gets reverted repeatedly? I won't wheel war with ya, but think you should restore the complaint. I also think when the protection is removed, that a comment warning that removing the section will result in a block.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey MuZe. Can you use your bot to alert Wikiproject Futurama's participants? I'm planning to revive the Wikiproject. GamerPro64 ( talk) 20:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
It should be done, now. I delivered to all talk pages on that list except the indefinitely blocked ones, of course. – MuZemike 07:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following is a summary of the remedies enacted:
For and on behalf of the Arbitration Committee Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) ( talk) 18:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
The arbitration is now closed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-05-11/Sodalitium_Christianae_Vitae . Can the SPI be reopened? Jorgecatolica1 ( talk) 22:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike,
I reverted the SPI page. Jorgecatolica1 ( talk) 03:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. The anonymous user 66.227.196.207, whom you have blocked is vandalizing again, Sir Lothar ( talk) 07:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Think there's enough to go on to block Inniverse as an Asziz sock? I'd go ahead, but I'm confused as to why it hasn't already been done.— Kww( talk) 05:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
oh please open my bot. my speed was very very low :( Abraham ( talk) 21:23, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you have a look at the relationship between JzG and Guy ? They seem to be hell bent on blocking people who try to edit Peter Holmes a Court which was the focus of a sockpuppet case involving Berkinstock who complained to JzG to get their edits backed up by blocking users. Thanks. Edasent ( talk) 13:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
No I think Greg Barry is separate. He has added referenced material and used what I thought was quite neutral language to the entry but was recently blocked indefinitely. I left a note on his talk page but I don't think he has logged on since then. I don't really understand why he was blocked. I can understand the issues with warring which I fell into, but I then became aware of the sockpuppetry so it made a bit more sense. Thanks for having a look at this, it has become quite frustrating. Edasent ( talk) 00:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey MuZemike, Given as you falsely implicated me in a SP investigation I figure you owe me one! (but seriously, no hard feelings) I'm curious if you would cast your experienced eye on Special:Contributions/DePiep and Special:Contributions/Urgenine for me. Thanks, NickCT ( talk) 17:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Anthony ( talk) 20:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for letting the bot post that interesting note about the GA elimination drive on my talk. I saw you're an eligible voter for Picture of the Year 2009, so please support the one you like best. I think by participating we can show how we value the free content contributed. Best Hekerui ( talk) 17:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
User Schrandit has been a POV edit-warrior, in my opinion, for a long time and I met him when he started edit warring on several pages including Equality Mississippi to keep removing sources while asking for citations at the same time! Recently on Heteronormativity, a subject he apparently also disapproves of, two socks have shown up that only agree with him and also try to remove content and mitigate the subject's impact. I tried to open a case but could only see the source code page. The two socks are Badtoaster and Paperbeatsrock, before my posting here they have only been editing on this one article and all to dismiss critical comments on the tendentious editing of Schrandit. Can you help open a case? 71.139.29.193 ( talk) 10:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you MuZemike. Schrandit is a sneaky POV-pusher I've recently caught removing sources or deleting content he apparently doesn't like on many articles. He's likely smart enough not to blatantly sock but the three of them together just as Schrandit was being shut down on this one article was too compelling not to look into. It won't restore any credibility to POV-pushers but if there is an obvious sock it would help clear up some of the gameplaying. Schrandit's interpretation of events of me "inserting" myself into conversations is completely false. I caught him deleting LGBT category off this article and he edit-warred on it even after multiple sources supported it's inclusion. Now he's trying to get another category removed, again, even after sourced content has made it clear it belongs. 71.139.29.193 ( talk) 17:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, MZM. I'm contacting you because an uninvolved admin who's familiar with DRV.
I'm a bit worried about Spartaz' closure of the Norway Spiral.jpg DRV. It doesn't seem to me that the DRV was closed in accordance with the consensus, but I'm reluctant to go to Spartaz' talk page again unless I'm sure he's wrong, because I've already challenged Spartaz over another recent DRV and I don't want to come across as harassing the poor guy. (Normally I'd go to Stifle, but Stifle !voted in that DRV.) Would you mind taking a look and letting me know what you think?— S Marshall T/ C 16:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. monosock 04:04, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Why am I getting this message? Mono's delivery method is random, so you probably showed up somewhere Mono went. :)
Not noticing that you had already taken issue with this close I added another section on Spartaz's talk page. I would recommend that you take up their invitation and make a reclose. __ meco ( talk) 07:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
If you're just tuning in, here's some good news for you and your FAC. Well done. -- an odd name 23:29, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
An Arbitration request in which you are involved has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Workshop.
Additionally, please note that for this case specific procedural guidelines have been stipulated; if you have any questions please ask. The full outline is listed on the Evidence and Workshop pages, but please adhere to the basics:
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 00:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Congrats on Ninja Gaiden being a Featured Article. Also, what kind of drinks? GamerPro64 ( talk) 02:44, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Seen this on my watchlist. Congrats Dude! :) Nicely done! Do you know when it will be featured on the main page? - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:42, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I will also note that, not counting Marble Madness (which was originally an arcade game and was merely ported to the NES), Ninja Gaiden is currently the only NES title that is a featured article. – MuZemike 03:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, but what does a reviewer do, or have rights to do? Blake ( Talk· Edits) 22:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Ryan berg has been deleted four times... any chance of WP:SALTing it? — Timneu22 · talk 16:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm confused MuZe. I asked for permission for reviewer user rights and Xeno told me you gave me permission yesterday. GamerPro64 ( talk) 19:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
II wanted to leave you a note to ensure that you see the latest at User talk:Berkinstock; it took so long for the user to come up with it that I thought you might overlook it. It's in your hands. Accounting4Taste: talk 02:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
What on earth was that all about? Half Shadow 07:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks for granting my request for reviewer permissions. I'll do my best to keep our protected articles high-quality and up to date. Robofish ( talk) 01:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
MuZe, I'm irritated. I'm trying to review the Solar System and I have no idea what to do to review it. GamerPro64 ( talk) 01:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi -- could you give me an idea whether or not this "reviewer-right" is in any way useful during vandal-patrol or will simply reverting reverting do the trick as well? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 02:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
(very explicit, didn't expect you to go through the trouble of a screenshot and all that) yeah, I've seen that. all trial articles are on my watchlist, and I've been observing what it looks like. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 02:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Just noticed that this edit by an anonymous editor was marked as "automatically accepted". I thought that one had to have reviewer rights (and obviously an account) for something to be auto-accepted? Perhaps this is a bug? WTF? ( talk) 03:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello MuZemike, first, you did the right thing in blocking me, second, should I remove the block tag, or is that an admins duty? I ask as a means to prevent further problems. Thanks! Victor9876 ( talk) 14:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
Have been looking for details on the criteria for the "Reviewer" user right - I am almost sure that I read someware about +2,500 edits and 1+ years of edits - is this the case ?
Thanks
Codf1977 ( talk) 15:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Could you delete User:TheRighteousFleshDevil, as the revision history is less than desirable, and replace it with the indef notice — mono 01:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the CU followup and prompt response. I have apologized to the IP for the mistake. Have a good night! Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 08:31, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
The anon has become disruptive and slightly stalking. Coming onto an article I frequent often and removing information from it ( 1, 2). When directed to the page where the term came from, he deleted it too. This is clear disruptive editing and stalking, since you don't just popup on the Stephens City, Virginia article out of the 3 million+. Since you removed his block previously, I will leave this one to you. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 04:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike, I understand your concern; please see the post that I made on NeutralHomer's talk page. I think it will make my intentions very clear, and, I hope and trust, acceptable. 98.82.3.81 ( talk) 04:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
How would one go about adding the above user to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mario96? 69.181.249.92 ( talk) 22:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
*{{checkip|Shiverting101}} at the bottom of the list of suspected socks on that page.
–
MuZemike
22:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
So I was looking at my preferences, and what-do-you-know, I saw somebody had made me a reviewer. I hadn't even noticed. AND it was on my three-year, to the day. So I conjured up a little something on my own for you. diff ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 08:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure where to mention this, (saw your name on this page) but Keifer Thompson ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) is leaving very similar edit summaries as the one left by Kittychem ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki). APK whisper in my ear 06:31, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
For animated film projects, when is "filming" considered to have begun? Is it with the commencement of character design and actual animation creation involving particpation of director, artists, and animators? Or is it only considered to have "begun" once the animators finish their work and voice actors begin their own contributions to the final product? Thanks Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Consensus was clearly delete not redirect. LibStar ( talk) 01:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I see that you just blocked User talk:FetchFan21. I have knon him for awhile and he is not a sock of that account. I think you made a mistake. Can you explain what made you think he was a sock. Checker Fred ( talk) 15:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I see that you have deleted Amanda Knox. I see you have done it because of policy. Applying the same policy, would you delete John Katehis, Ronald Ebens, and/or Philip Markoff? I see that Amanda Knox is more worthy of an article than these 3 not so notable people. Do not say "go ahead and nominate". I seek understanding of the policy foremost, not nomination. Could Ebens be redirected to Vincent Chin and the two Craigslist (alleged) killers redirected to those murder articles? Thank you. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 01:55, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
G'day from Oz. While I am quite glad you have blocked Ryan kirkpatrick, I feel that there is little likelihood that he is a sock of Jersay. Ryan kirkpatrick's edits are universally extremely bad, which IMO brings his role on WP into question on the basis of WP:CIR - he clearly isn't competent. However, looking at Jersay's edits s/he is clearly competent: good spelling and grammar, able to articulate her/his ideas clearly. Furthermore, Ryan kirkpatrick's interest has been almost exclusively with aircraft crashes. He has created over 100 articles related to aircraft crashes in the last five months, about a dozen to do with earthquakes (or earthqaukes as he tends to spell it) and one about a car bombing ( 2010 Newry car bombing); his list of created articles is much shorter than this, as over 20% of the articles he has created have been deleted due to notability issues or to being copyright violations.
Ryan kirkpatrick's first edit to a terrorism-related article wasn't until two weeks after his account was created. His style is very distinctive, for example his contribution to an AfD discussion. Based on his edits it is my belief that he lives in the Wolverhampton area of England, and that he has a connection with Northern Ireland. It appears to me then that there is one of two possibilities: he is being really clever and his edits are deliberately appallingly bad in order to disguise that he is a sock of Jersay, or his and Jersay's interests in terrorism are purely coincidental. As I said at the beginning I am quite glad that he is blocked, but I think it is for the wrong reason. I am also concerned that, given his refusal to engage or deal with any of the issues raised on his talk page, he will just keep on editing as an IP. When he wasn't blocked, people could keep an eye on him and his edits. YSSYguy ( talk) 06:56, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much for blocking the socks of User:Taztouzi. Susfele ( talk) 16:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
As above, I am really grateful that Taztouzi's socks have been blocked. I am somewhat uncomfortable that User:TiffanyTran got blocked, too. Could you take a look at the info I added at User talk:TiffanyTran#Might not be a sock. I initiated the SPI that got her blocked. I didn't include her, and I think there is a good chance she's not a sock. I pointed the admin who refused her unblock request over there, too. Thanks very much. Susfele ( talk) 21:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Seen this edit and I could sense that things weren't going well in your day....so!
Hope this makes your day better. Take Care.... NeutralHomer • Talk • 08:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
I have submitted a new sockpuppet investigation regarding new users and ip addresses related to the James1168 investigation you previously handled. Edasent ( talk) 15:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Would you / could you give me a second opinion on this close http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Missing_You_%28The_Saturdays_song%29 Off2riorob ( talk) 05:54, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. GregJackP Boomer! 19:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this G8, I think you deleted the wrong talk page! It was Chester F.C. not Chester F.C. (2010) that was deleted at AfD. Alzarian16 ( talk) 11:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
You have new Messages. wiooiw ( talk) 06:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I think I may have made a mistake on this, as new evidence has just come up. While it reasonable that we both assumed that due to the terrorism-focused editing and account creation date that Ryan kirkpatrick was Jersay, I now believe they are in fact different editors. Jersay was in Canada, whereas the edits of 109.154.73.126 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) (Great Britain based IP) carry on editing the same articles as Ryan kirkpatrick, in most cases ones started by him. So as you will hopefully naturally conclude that the IP editor is Ryan kirkpatrick, that would tend to suggest he is not Jersay (unless he happens to have moved several thousand miles).
Although understandable, it would seem somewhat harsh to keep Ryan indefinitely blocked for block evasion given the initial block was in fact in error, but there is also the unresolved matter of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ryan kirkpatrick where significant concerns have been raised about Ryan's editing. Please let me know what should be done about this, as then I know what action to take with future IP sockpuppets of Ryan. Thank you. O Fenian ( talk) 09:22, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Hiya. I'm not in the habit of complaining about closures, but I was a bit surprised to see this one as no consensus. In terms of numbers it was pretty close but I thought the keep arguments were pretty weak. Looking at the keeps in turn:
In comparison, the delete votes were grounded in policy, but I would say that since I voted delete! Anyway, I'd be grateful if you could have another look and let me know what you think. Quantpole ( talk) 15:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I know from recollection that most if not all of the info that guy is adding to WGN-TV is correct. However, he needs sourcing, and is obviously trying to "own" the article, which isn't permitted. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
He rubbed out his previous unblock requests just before making his final one and triggering semi-protection of the page for the duration. Is it worth trying to restore the others back, or does it really matter? Also, I notice he used the old sock ploy of claiming someone else was doing it. Is there a barnstar for dredging up lame excuses? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I saw some of those, but for some reason, the system is telling me that some of these accounts don't exist when I try and block them. Don't know if the glitch is on this end or over at WP. What is it with weirdos like this? Add to that a Bambifan101 sock (which I suspect is from those jackasses at ED) and whee, the fun I'm having here at work during a bit of downtime. I'll log on at home and clobber those "template" accounts. -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 00:12, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Correct! - Alison ❤ 04:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
We need more people to comment on this case. Your help would greatly be appreciated. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 15:54, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
On some level, I do find this somewhat funny as the idiot who was accusing me edit-warring and promoting Indian nationalism engages in sockpuppetry, edit-warring, and fails to adhere to WP:NPOV. Atleast in his SPI case against me, he could have gotten the CONTINENT right (for one, I don't live in Uttar Pradesh, India). I suspect however that this was just an attempt to defame me or shut me up because I contested his ridiculous edits. Suffice it to say, I am happy to put this chapter behind me. Vedant ( talk) 18:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. In case you haven't already seen it, the IP socks of
Sovietia (
talk ·
contribs) are disgruntled:
[21] and
[22]. Care to negotiate?
Favonian (
talk)
12:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I have just nominated via PROD Prestige Management (created in Nov 2006) only to be warned about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prestige Management dateing back to 2004 so a two part question :
Codf1977 (
talk)
16:26, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thanks for the advice. i am new to wikipedia and was promptly edit attacked by others without any explanation or warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatimamadar ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I'm scanning through ship articles with NPOV tags. Looking at the current article and your diff from 2008, I see nothing particularly controversial. As there's nothing on the article's talk page, I'm stumped. Do you see any remaining NPOV problems on the page? Thanks. Haus Talk 06:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Split was a destroyer built for the Yugoslav Navy in 1938. She was built by Yarrow Shipbuilders and was named after the city of the same name. She was aquired in 1950 and was commissioned in July 1958 and was decommissioned in 1980.
Hi. This qualified for deletion as a stand alone but in the discussion I made a strong case that a short list of agencies involved with casualty figures should be incorporated into a parent article such as China Martyrs of 1900. but- since this was deleted without any effort expended to amend the article - we lost the simple list for the count. Can you please put a restored copy into my talk page or something? It would save the time of having to look all of this up again in an out-of-print book. Thanks. Brian0324 ( talk) 13:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I seen your quote about edit wars being two users kicking each other in the shins. It reminded me of this (don't worry, the video is from ABC News. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
What a can-o-worms. Might I ask for an expansion and opinion toward the multiple arguments toward guideline and policy... and that you address User:S Marshall's point-by-point refutation of the nominator's reasons for nomination, and the number of !votes that simply echoed the nominator even after his points were proven invalid? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I share Schmidt's concerns about the deletion of Brian Quintana. Rather than restore I am happy to submit a new page though frankly I expect it to be removed as a re-post no matter how different. Can you provide a copy of this more balanced page so I may work on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Brian_Quintana&oldid=315643392 Since this version the same group of editors (Hairhorn, Cameron Scott, Ttonyb1, Tabercil, Nightscream, Jayron32, Malo, and Geniac) have removed the substance little by little, before moving for deletion. I find their actions dismissive, racists, classist and in total violation of Wikipedia's policies. For example, "Oprah Winfrey's A Better Chance recruited him at age fifteen to attend the prestigious Hotchkiss School in Lakeville, Connecticut" was changed to "an organization that helps underprivileged youths." The program provides scholarships to gifted youth not underprivileged. References to his 2009 Congressional exploratory committee, his notable supporter, and work as a VIP facilitator were also removed. The deleted version is intentionally demeaning. I was more involved in years past, but every time I sought to improve the page with sourced material, I was blocked as a sockpuppet for Quintana or flagged for edit wars. My home and work computers were also blocked. I had planned to chime in on deletion debate, but was waiting for the California Secretary of State to certify the 2010 election results next Friday, July 16, 2010. I figure it will be harder to argue with 400,000 voters (more votes than the Governor of Nevada, New Mexico and most smaller States). Most experts deemed his run a success:
Sacramento Bee - "But the news of the day is that Hollywood producer Brian Quintana, who didn't get any publicity, garnered nearly three times as many votes as Kaus." http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/06/kaus-gets-just.html
KQED Public Media - "The surprise runner-up: Hollywood producer Brian Quintana, who snatched almost 15% of the vote." http://blogs.kqed.org/capitalnotes/2010/06/09/last-call-for-primary-2010/
San Gabriel Valley Tribune - "Quintana's showing was surprising. Kaus got some press. Quintana came out of nowhere," said Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College. "Quintana ran a good e-mail campaign," according to Republican political consultant Matt Klink, of Cerrell Associates. http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_15282486
I see no one bashing on the third place candidate Chuck DeVore: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_devore —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleverclaus ( talk • contribs) 00:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Ahoy there. Is it a shortage of Clerks that has been slowing SPI down recently? Or is it checkusers? I doubt I would ever get to be a checkuser but I could volunteer for clerkage if that is what is required. S.G.(GH) ping! 11:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick work in blocking the User:TVFAN24 sock. I thought the behavioral evidence was pretty strong, and I almost blocked the account per the duck test, but it was good to get a second opinion. Best, IronGargoyle ( talk) 21:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there Please can you help me userfy the page that you have put under speedy delete. Aquabatics is a name many do not understand and we often have to explain who we are and what we do. It would be much simpler if the definition was out there. I will take your advice on how best to get it reinstated. 09:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Katyaqua ( talk)
Need an admin's opinion on something. The above named user edited en masse after not editing since August 2009. The user created several very poor redirects, an article for a television company exec, blanked and redirected several pages and then...gone. All the edits center around the West Virginia television station group West Virginia Media Holdings. I am not sure if the user is an employee or not, but the edits strike me as part vandalism and part COI. What do you make of it? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Based on your comment here Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Melonbarmonster2#Clerk.2C_CheckUser.2C_and.2For_patrolling_admin_comments would you be willing to block based on duck? Melonbarmonster is clearly being disruptive (4RR on July 5th which got the page locked, but a report on him wasn't filed in time) and he seemingly maintains they are separate individuals thus trying to give his position and disruption more weight. A clear violation of WP:SOCK.-- Crossmr ( talk) 23:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, a while back I saw an editor create David c kernell who is the guy who hacked Palin's email account. It was redirected to an article on that subject. Today, another editor wrote a terrible (IMHO) about Kernell and eliminated the redirect. Kernell is not IMO WP:N because his deed was 1BLPE. What do you think? ---- moreno oso ( talk) 17:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
As a support to the "Sarah Palin email hack" several articles entitled with different versions of David Kernell's name were created and redirected to that article. Additionally an article with Mike Kernell name, his father, was as similarly created and redirected. This is in direct violation of Wiki policy. It essentially brands David Kernell with a one time incident. I attempted to delete these redirects sighting these concerns previously, only to have the changes reversed. The additional information included on the present David Kernell article will develop various constitutional issues that surround the incident, subsequent trial and up coming appeals. Lack of proper support, has prevented this in the past as the main stream media frequently inadequately reports testimony. Court documents will be available next week along with various legal opinions to help fill out this article. Currently, when one Googles David Kernell, the only article to appear is the "Sarah Palin email hack" which slanted approach barks of political enhancement. If you choose to delete the article you must delete all articles related to the David Kernell name, such as David C Kernell, david kernell and others. And prevent any future redirects of his name to the sarah palin email hack article. I suppose an new article entitled the "Constitutional Challenges of the David Kernell Prosecution" may be a better title for the present article. Constitutionguard ( talk)
Sorry to bug you again but it appears the dubious sockmaster has returned with (yet again...) another sockpuppet. He appears to have gained some intelligence though as this time after creating the sock, the moron didn't make any userspace related edits. He just went straight to accusing me of supporting Indian nationalism. Vedant ( talk) 01:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. There's an issue with new users copying text from websites at McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and also at Orbis International. I used twinkle to add a sock report but got an error during the process. It added the report page and notified the users, but didn't add the report to the main list at WP:SPI. The stand-alone report is at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MD-10 Project. I'm unsure about how to complete listing and finish whatever twinkle stumbled on. Thanks. Dawnseeker2000 21:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
SPI|casename}}
.
Jarkeld (
talk)
22:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)Deconstructhis brought this user to my attention. With the edits already to a couple Chicago stations and them being a new editor/account, my sock-o-meter is going off on this one. What do you think? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:36, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to disturb you, but remember the Indonesian misinformation vandal. He seems to be popping up all over again. Right now, he is using 114.57.11.7 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Same MO. WP:AIV is currently backlogged, BTW. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (3rd nomination) as no consensus.
I'd like to ask your advice about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (4th nomination). Were you aware that less than an hour after you left your concluding statement the wiki-id User:Iqinn renominated the article for deletion? The wiki-id User:Iqinn has kept the article Al Fand training camp at {{ afd}}, continuously, for almost eight weeks.
I am on record, that the articles on camps that are only known from the Guantanamo allegation memos, and had a relatively low number of attendees identified, should be merged into a larger article.
Correct me if I am mistaken, if this article were not nominated for deletion, taking steps to merge and redirect it to a more broad, more referenced article would be well with the options open following a "no consensus" conclusion?
Correct me if I am mistaken, while contributors are allowed to renominate articles for additional {{ afd}}, aren't they supposed to only do so if they thought that there was some important point missed during the earlier {{ afd}}, or if enough times (several months at least) had passed, so they could reasonably suggest the consensus had changed?
Correct me if I am mistaken, but if the wiki-id User:Iqinn thought you had made a mistake in your closure, shouldn't they have contacted you, to request a fuller explanation? Sometimes administrators reverse their closures when a good faith contributor makes good points about their closures. Sometimes administrators address the concerns good faith contributors had about a closure, and convince them it was a good closure. Correct me if I am mistaken, if the wiki-id User:Iqinn continued to have concerns over your closure, after asking for a fuller explanation, you would probably have told them they had the option of initiating a review at {{ drv}}?
As I see it, my options include:
FWIW, I feel the portion of this comment at User talk:Jimbo Wales "but continues pushing against policy makes a deletion impossible..." improperly implies bad faith on my part.
FWIW the wiki-id User:Iqinn did not inform me of the {{ afd}}.
Thanks! Geo Swan ( talk) 18:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt response. I've had much more evident WP:DUCK cases declined based on behavioral evidence before, so I just file them at WP:SPI now everytime. I'll run 'em by you first next time if you don't mind. I do find filing these reports something of a hassle.-- Atlan ( talk) 23:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
An additional account was just registered and made the same edit ( here). If you could save me the trouble of making another SPI case page that would be appreciated. Also, could that article be semi-protected? nableezy - 02:58, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:BanditKingsOfAncientChinaNESBoxart.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (4th nomination) is being reviewed at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_July_15#Al_Fand_training_camp.
Your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Fand training camp (3rd nomination) has been commented upon there. I thought I should let you know....
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 16:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there! Could you please do me a favour and move Shefqet Bej Vërlaci to Shefqet Vërlaci. It's not moving now. There is an agreement and consensus on this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albania#Article_names_with_no_titles. Thanks much! -- Sulmues ( talk) 18:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Greetings!
You recently blocked 64.255.164.0/25 three weeks ago, for disruptive behavior at WP:ANI. I wasn't aware of their comments, at the time they were made.
The IP represented themselves as defending me against Jimbo Wales. But I believe that the real intent of the comments was to use mockery to attack me, and their mention of Jimbo was merely a ploy to attract more attention to their mockery of my position. I probably don't need to say I did not regard Jimbo Wales comments on the {{ afd}} on Houston McCoy as abusive.
I write on controversial topics. This routinely triggers the attention of bad-faith challengers. About a dozen of my most persistent bad-faith challengers have ended up being permanently banned from the wikipedia -- but not for their personal attacks against me, but for simlar bad-faith behavior, elsewhere.
I have a long term challenger who I suspect drafted these repeated bad-faith comments.
If I am not mistaken, you are authorized to perform checkusers and sockpuppet investigations. Can I ask you what would happen to a named contributor if an investigation showed they had used 64.255.164.0/25 to try to avoid the consequences of personal attacks?
Is my suspicions that I recognize the style sufficient to justifiy a sockpuppet investigation? If so, how would you recommend I proceed?
Thanks! Geo Swan ( talk) 03:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
User:People bios suggests in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dr._Kenneth_K._Kim that he/she and another user are voting in the same AFD using the same computer. That sounds suspicious. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 15:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. I want to express my thanks for your help, on many occasions, with problem socks. I really appreciate your prompt and diligent effort and hard work. I am personally very reassured to know that admins like you are around. Take care and thanks again. Dr.K. λogos πraxis 15:47, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm wondering how I'd go about volunteering to assist as a clerk at SPI. Yworo ( talk) 13:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
You have it. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks
![]() | This user helped promote Jon Scheyer to good article status. |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 07:55, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
User:Jrfoldes seems to be getting ready to start his reverting again on the various You Can't Do That on Television articles. [24] I have left him a sternly worded warning, [25] but as he claimed in his unblocked that I was "harassing" him by not letting him do what he wants, I thought it might be helpful if someone else also tried having a word with him. He seems to be capable of good editing when he stays away from those articles, but he also does not seek to be capable of keeping himself away.-- AnmaFinotera ( talk ~ contribs) 22:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
-- Cailil talk 23:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rolando 2 logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
If this editor protests about the Sockpuppet block, I think it should be given pretty high consideration. While User:PtAuAg certainly passed my Duck test [I was the original person to file the report], the "Camel" guy doesn't share any discernible behavioral pattern, IMO. Thanks for any consideration. BigK HeX ( talk) 22:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering, could you undelete the page I created for "Treasury of New England Short Stories" and help me bring it up to standards? I feel that it need be included in Wikipedia because the collection itself is unique and is virtually unknown online. If you still disagree, would you at least send me the page in an email so I can print it off for my own use? I foolishly did not think to save a copy of the typed words and so would have to retype for use in my classroom. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jan293 ( talk • contribs) 00:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
CU doesn't reveal anything about the above, but [27] is interesting. If you or another clerk wants to look into it, there is probably enough there for a DUCK block. KnightLago ( talk) 02:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Could you speedy close the above AfD? Apparently this was nom'd previously 5 days ago and I just nom'd it again about an hour ago...my goof. Just need an admin closure. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
My experience is that any sort of web "show" or YouTube channel is A7-able, like Elevator filming (hobby). I worry about giving this thing seven days. (I am watching this page, so please reply here.) — Timneu22 · talk 19:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
He's continuing to add the content to Dragon Quest VI, or if not him, an IP address with a similar editing history is. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 12:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if you could spare time to take a look at this article, which is somewhat stalled at FAC. A few comments would be helpful, to get discussion going again. Brianboulton ( talk) 14:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Would it be possible to restore File:UnionManilaFC.png to replace a similar of lower quality. I was the creator and I also requested for it's deletion. I thought there was a problem with the file itself when I used it to edit Union F.C. when another user reverted my "good faith" edits even though I didn't vandalize or do anything wrong in my edits. So I went ahead and requested for its deletion. Thanks. Banana Fingers ( talk) 15:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Opened a new about him: [28] -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 16:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
hello, i have only one short qestion about this part, can i ad my post on the artikel what is in german? ( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexa_Internet)
this i think is also ok for me then when i can not post my artikel Olaf1969 ( talk) 16:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Earlier today, I received a
Google Alert that someone had created a page about me,
Blake Farenthold and you deleted it citing notability (A7). While I am uncomfortable arguing my own importance or significance, I _am_ the Republican nominee for United States Congress (see
Farenthold prevails in Republican runoff for U.S. House District 27 nomination). This nomination should qualify me for a page under the Politicians category (
Category:Politicians) as someone "associated with a party that has recently won elections, or is widely regarded as about to, as a candidate".
Obviously, as a person seeking public office, I would like to see an accurate Wikipeda page with my background and qualifications posted, but out of respect for established rules and objectivity considerations, I have not done one myself.
At the very least, I'd be interested in what the author was saying about me.
R. Blake Farenthold
Candidate, United States Congress
27th District of Texas
Could you check this edit and see if the links I put down at reliable and are FA quality, please? Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Enjoy your break, see ya on the other side of it. We will keep the Wiki chair warm for ya until you get back. :) Good luck with the move. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I saw in my watchlist that you had deleted an RFA of a user who has been blocked, User:Premier Shawn. That user has also participated in another RFA. I didn't want to revert it without checking if that is the right thing to do. Could you please advise? Thanks. Loves Macs (talk) 03:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello MuZemike. Premier Shawn ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, - Vianello ( Talk) 04:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I think we may have the same user here. Perhaps a checkuser is warranted? Enigma msg 01:56, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
I Write Like at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
MBelgrano (
talk)
17:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike – During this review you blocked YouAndMeBabyAintNothingButCamels ( talk · contribs) based on behavior. As the user has had an unblock request up for a good period of time, I've tried to look into this. The CU returned “possible/unclear” in relation to the main abusive sockpuppeter, and I can’t seem to find anything in common with any of the other socks. I can see that you’re offline, but if you happen to be lurking about, it would be helpful to get some more input here. I’ll send a poke to a few of the other people involved as well. Kuru (talk) 20:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by
Sasata (
submissions) has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants (
Sasata (
submissions),
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) and
TonyTheTiger (
submissions)) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by
Casliber (
submissions), who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the
WikiCup talk page.
Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.
Earlier this round, we said goodbye to
Hunter Kahn (
submissions), who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by
Suomi Finland 2009 (
submissions). We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn,
Fox and
The ed17
22:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rise2SaturnBoxart.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}
to your talk page.
Thank you.
DASHBot (
talk)
05:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
See you are all settled in enough to update Wikipedia. Hope you are all unpacked and moved into your new place and you have cable and internet a-workin'. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Our 2nd annual Wiki-Conference NYC has been confirmed for the weekend of August 28-29 at New York University.
There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session.
Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up
here for on-wiki notification. All are invited!
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
15:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
This ZjarriRrethues fellow reminds me very much of Sarandioti. SPI is here [29]. Cheers, Athenean ( talk) 23:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Can you take a look at the unblock request please? Based on the CU evidence not being 100%, I might suggest an unblock. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 08:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Another admin overturned Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Quintana (2nd nomination) by restoring Brian Quintana in less than a month with no noticeable appreciation. Could you take a look at the situation? ---- moreno oso ( talk) 20:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
An article that I created earlier today, The Paging Game, was just deleted by MuZemike as "Unambiguous copyright infringement". There was the start of a discussion about this on the Discussion page for the article, but that is now gone too. I don't agree that this page was "unambiguous copyright infringement" and presented my reasons as part of the discussion. I understand that the matter wasn't resolved, but I was surprised to see the article deleted without any further discussion or comment. I expected to have a little time to come to an agreement. Can I get an explanation for what happened here? Jeff Ogden ( talk) 22:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
MuZemike: I saw on this page that you proposed a lightning talk about the Statipedia proposal. I'm the main author of the proposal. I submitted to NYC meetup as a possible talk topic, though I'm not sure it suits. Is your lightning talk proposal a response to my submission? Or were you thinking independently of having a discussion about that? I'd love to discuss it whatever your thoughts are. Econterms ( talk) 00:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
It looks like the SPI has exonerated this user. There is currently an open unblock request on the user's talk page - perhaps you could take a look? Cheers. TN X Man 18:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
You closed this AfD last month but you only deleted one of the two nominated articles ? was this an oversight or dilibrate ?
Thanks
Codf1977 ( talk) 08:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike. I found your name on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HAl/Archive. I have tried pinging User:Hersfold but I see a note on their talk page that they are not very active at the moment, and have heard nothing back anyway. Problems seem to be re-occurring at Moonlight (runtime) involving some of the same IP addresses that were identified as socks of User:hAl back in January. Looking at the histories, I see that the IPs were blocked for two weeks then, and since then have resumed editing following the same interests and patterns as the original banned user. Is that normal practice when a user is indefinitely blocked, that they just continue as normal (but using their IP address) after a couple of weeks? I don't want to maintain an indefinite vendetta, but it appears that their controversial and unreasonable deletions are causing edit wars and bad feeling on that page, and possibly elsewhere if old habits are as expected. I'm trying to stem the edit wars and request some discussion, but this does seem wearisome after all the old hassles that led up to hAl's final block. Maybe you could have a look. -- Nigelj ( talk) 17:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi again. Sorry to go on, but try as I have to get them to discuss, both 130.57.22.201 and 70.226.165.186 have gone way beyond WP:3RR at Moonlight (runtime). I'm now sure neither of these are actually hAl, but they both need some action I think at the moment. -- Nigelj ( talk) 21:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
On a side note, there seems to be a smaller edit war over at Mono (software). Can you come and resovle this little dispute? Willimm ( talk) 15:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Brought up at SPI. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HAl. – MuZemike 17:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I got an e-mail from User:2007apm asking me to take a look at the block carried out following this SPI (February 2010). The initial e-mail was back in February 2010 and nothing was done then, but the user e-mailed again recently (August 2010) and I'd like to try and sort this out. Would you be able to take another look and see if you can double-check how strong the evidence is connecting the accounts? The dates of editing don't quite seem to match the usual pattern here as far as I can tell. I've asked User:Future Perfect at Sunrise to have a look as well (as he blocked most of the Emperordarius socks). You could both comment on his talk page where he has filed several unblock requests that were declined without considering whether the initial identification as a sock was correct or not. If there is evidence that shouldn't be discussed on-wiki (to avoid revealing how certain behavioural identifications are made) please feel free to e-mail me. Thanks. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Please note that this article was a spin off from Charismatic authority. It was originally very well sourced to reputable sources. Logically speaking any example that was not used by Weber himself cannot be used anymore in the article charismatic authority. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_charismatic_leaders_as_defined_by_Max_Weber's_classification_of_authority_(2nd_nomination) Andries ( talk) 20:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
You are mentioned (in a nice way). Keep up the good work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Toddst1_misconduct RIPGC ( talk) 04:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi MuZemike, I'm hoping to be able to talk about what happened with the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teach_For_Us . I was working with Cirt ( talk) and improving the article during the past week. I guess someone that wasn't supposed to edit things moved it around. I don't know that person. Is there anything else that you think needs to be improved on the page before it is restored? I'm relatively novice at this and need some direction if you think something should change. Thanks. Ageller ( talk) 01:03, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just wondering why you deleted my welcome page? -- MaxwellEdisonPhD ( talk) 00:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
I would consider, since you seem to be accumulating alot of talk page protections due to sockpuppetry, creating a talk page for anons and others and and leave this one permanently semi-protected. J.Delanoy (I do believe) does that and a couple other users, and it seems to work out well for them. If anyone breaks through, they are easy to fish out. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
As an admin, why don't you just protect your user page? I can't think of a time that even a confirmed editor has any business editing your user page.— Kww( talk) 19:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey Muze. Can you deleted {{ Futurama Barnstar}}? I replaced it with anotherone that actually has a picture on it. GamerPro64 ( talk) 19:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
It appears this user has made a reasonable unblock request. I would like to unblock them, but wanted to check with you (as the blocking admin) first. TN X Man 18:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Could you possibly have a look at this please? In addition to terrorism edits, he is now creating air crash articles, meaning the duck is quacking rather loudly. Thank you. O Fenian ( talk) 15:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I wanted to use the excellent early sourcing of this list to improve the article charismatic authority
I understand that there are problems with the subjective criteria for this list , but I continue to disagree completely that this was a synthesis of sources: we took great care to stay close to the sources, because the initial editor and I did not agree on anything.
It is not my intention to copy or merge the list into the article, but to provide attributed examples. Andries ( talk) 18:51, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I believe before protecting it, you should have removed PA. Thanks.-- Mbz1 ( talk) 20:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)